-

.

.

.

.

I

.

-

.

.

g

T

e

G

e

E

R

O

G

g

g

I

I

I'm doing this training for the second time, now as a beta-tester. Particular comments about lecture content, problems, etc. have been put in every lecture.

General comments, in short:

1) Related to the new platform and UI design:

_ It is cleaner and simpler than the previous one. I like it, BUT...

_ It lacks of some useful features: saving intermediate results in quizzes before submit them; calendar; limited number of subforums.

_ The most relevant flaw: there are not downloadable versions of lecture slides. Unacceptable! No way to check most of the links we saw in slides (URLs not visible).

_ Description and steps in course project appear "too packed" together. I prefer the former design.

2) Related to content:

_ The course is mainly for preparing students for the rest of data science specialization program. When you said "toolbox" you mean the concrete toolbox you will need to do the program. Some people expect to have a general introduction to data science but that is only a half of the content. I think this is clear enough in the presentation but for some reasons there are people in forums who protest the content, so maybe you should insist more in this fact.

_ I would like to suggest some kind of reorder of material: week 2 is all about installing a running tools and week 3 about key aspects of data analysis. Maybe you can split both types of content between wk2 and wk3 to make wk2 more appealing for not technical oriented students.

_ Git is a source of problems for a good portion of people. See my comments in lectures about how Git is explained.

So why not 5 *'s - because I could not give 4.93 *'s

What I found excellent and thus 5 *'s - *****

a) material

b) even the automaton of a voice - was not a deterrent but rather soothing - oh well tells you something about me!!!

c) Material is deceptively easy in the front end and gets progressively more difficult later

d) the references are well thought out even of the entry into Data science

e) The build up is very logical

f) Lots of thought has been put into the design by the team

What I found lacking and thus dinged a couple of points (perhaps too harshly)

1) The mini quizzes do not sufficiently force you to think about the material and thus easy to breeze thru to the next week - perhaps I am being too judgmental and it may improve in the next course of the specialization

2) I could not see an easy way to get the material to review when taking the test - most of the time I forced myself to not look at the material to test myself but the onus is on you

3) It should not be about getting some questions wrong but learn the material so that every question can be right (imparting knowledge vs getting a certificate with 80% pass - think how would we feel if this was a training for a neurosurgeon ;) ) - a suggestion would be to force the student to read the section that pertains to the incorrect answer and not allow the test to be taken again until that is accomplished - like in a class room setting.