Good

good

good

well

good

good

good

good

Good

good

fair

nice

good

Good

good

Nice

ok

NA

)

.

I agree with some of the reviews here. It's fantastic at the beginning of the course. Towards the end, unfortunately the professor's accent is heavy and sometimes difficult to understand. The subtitles don't help either because they were auto-generated. My brain had to take extra cognitive workload to decipher what was actually said before trying to understand the materials on the slides and everything else. I also didn't like the way index 0 and 1 is mixed in different lectures. Why shouldn't we stay consistent in pseudocode using index starting with either 0 or 1? The slides are confusing regarding this matter especially when you translate algorithms into code.

Nonetheless, I liked the assignments overall. The course's instructors included some of very interesting problems and indeed helped understand the lessons better. I also liked the course structure and the carefully prepared slides.

The lectures are fine and explain the concepts. The book that you buy with this course isn't really useful, its is largely a rehash of the questions, with very little other content. The issue I had was with the exercises. To get 100% you have to do all, which is fine, though a bit time consuming. The issue is the tester not showing the test case. Granted we should develop test cases, but using property based testing etc. is a whole other topic. It is a real waste of time to spend hours on something that turns out a trivial edge case. That a bit more information from the test case output/grader would have pointed out. The end result is fairly inefficient learning. I want to get a refresher on techniques. Fiddling try to find out what test case causes an issue sort of distracts from the core of the course, in my opinion.

This course is the first part of a specialization, and I was a beta tester when the course was practically nothing at all. Now that the instructors have filled it out a bit, it's revealed as what I could call "adequate". I would not be encouraged by what I have seen of this course's full content to undertake the specialization, although I'm sure that the dedicated student will find it challenging and thorough. My assessment is that there are better courses and course sequences on offer for the study of algorithms and algorithmic complexity that cover the material of this course. I have not done any evaluation of later courses in this specialization, but they might be better than this one. So, not exactly a thumbs-down from me, but IMO, you can do better.

Course is overall great but some cons as per me:

1) The instructor`s accent was hard to catch sometimes.

2) I know Discussion forums are for students and testing solutions is one of the most important part but after trying for so much time, there are times when one cant catch the failed test case and neither other students(atleast those who posted). In such cases there is practically no other way than to leave that assignment as it is. I just think Ta`s should be more involved in forums and should give some insights when some student has failed after so many attempts. As there are still posts with same doubts as mine which are unanswered from 2-3 months.In short forums should be as great as udemy`s forums.

The problem sets are great and probably worth the price, but the lectures become very hard to follow after week 3 and the discussion forums are very disorganized - it's hard to find useful information. Some of the lectures have slides available, some don't; some of the lectures have somewhat-useful subtitles/transcripts, others have incomprehensible garbled messes (I don't know if they're machine-generated or just transcribed by someone with no understanding of the material/vocabulary - logarithm != algorithm!).

I really like the problem sets, but some of the lectures are pretty rough, just a guy talking in front of some pseudocode for 10 minutes. The instructors seem friendly and engaging, though.