Not very well maintained over time. Small errors here and there that make it an unnecessary challenge to complete the course.

Good experience of coding But the videos are too fast to understand overall good course

I woud prefer a course with more hours, to have the codes explained in a detailed pace.

Courses 1 to 4 of this were very well made and structured. This one not so much.

T

h

e

t

o

p

i

c

i

s

i

n

t

e

r

s

t

i

n

g

b

u

t

t

h

e

g

r

a

d

i

n

g

a

n

d

h

a

n

d

i

n

g

in of the assignement is terrible.

The content is good, the way the training organized needs to be improved.

watch out for the the last course!!

rest is totally amazing!!

Explanation was not so good like other courses

Bad assignment arrangements and design

not as good as the previous courses.

Not much Detailed

its a bit fast

thanks

;

I am tempted to rate this course with one stars, but I am giving two because the instructor does seem sincere and very knowledgeable, and quite nice, and there is good content shared on the imaging libraries used/covered. Overall, however, the course leaves a lot to be desired, and is leading me to disenroll in the specialization altogether. Let me clarify, the instructor is a fine communicator, he just doesn't give enough background to efficiently do the assignment (I am, in fairness, speaking only on the first one, though other reviewers mainly have issues with the subsequent assignments). This is unfortunate, as I completed all four other/previous courses in this specialization to get to this point, and they, unlike this one, were so excellent, truly some of the very best courses I have ever taken, anywhere, and a top notch introduction to Python. Why this last/fifth course is in here, I do not know, and I HIGHLY recommend the University of Michigan and/or Coursera to remove it, or radically overhaul it. I have two degrees from the University of Michigan (College of Engineering and Ross School of Business), and this is easily the worst course (and the ONLY less than desirable course) I have ever taken at the university. The reason for the low rating is that the pedagogy followed is radically unlike the previous four courses, and it does not lend itself to having enough of a foundation to complete the assignment. The student is left to flounder on their own and figure it all out. There is something to be said for that, at some level, but not to the extent that is required in this course. An ideal course should challenge a student enough, but also be doable, and a straightforward application of learnings. This course does not have enough of those connections, in my opinion or experience. Others may differ. This course is NOT horrible, and for extra precocious Python programmers and people who don't mind spending inordinate and perhaps inappropriate amounts of time poring over imaging library documentation, this course was perhaps a pleasant experience (I did have some fun trying to figure it out, and was close, but didn't feel I had the grounding or ability needed to push it further to completion). For the rest of us, though, it can be deeply frustrating, and I noticed a large number of the other reviews bear that out. I really do not want to throw a course under the bus, and there is much potential here, if it is improved. However, for now, for me and others, I have chosen to not continue the course, and therefore will be unlikely to ever finish this specialization and will now be pursuing other options for continued Python learning, rather than my alma mater and Coursera, to my deep disappointment, and the loss of one more learner for Coursera and UM (and I wonder if there are many others, based on reviews). I do hope people in leadership over this course offering read and take seriously these reviews.

This course (and specialization as a whole) would deserve a five-star, excluding the last course tutored by Brooks. Oney and Resnick has provided a wonderful learning experience where the material and difficulty progressed as it supposed to be, assignment has been really informative where students can apply what they have learned from the material given by Oney and Resnick. However, the last course tutored by Brooks has just really been too compact and too brief while the assignments demanded something extraordinarily difficult. Presentation about Python library given by Brooks is very short and progressed too fast, to the point that learner cannot even grasp the ins and outs of the library itself. It progressed from A to Z really quickly, and learner missed the opportunity to get to know with the library on step-by-step basis, as what Oney and Resnick has done. To put it briefly, the last course would be nice, given that a step-by-step and thorough guide is given for learner, and where learner are also introduced to the Python library step-by-step. But given that the course progressed way too fast, this course fall outside my expectation. It has taken my time, and honestly I would prefer to waste my time to learn other course, which of course I didnt because I tried to finish the course.

On course deign: this course was arranged in a way that is so different from the previous 4 courses of this specialisation. I am using a 11" Mac, and in the lecture video, code blocks would not zoomed, and if I turned on subtitles, that area would cover what the instructor was coding, that has really caused me a headache, and when the instructor was demonstrating, it like he was just following a fixed speed to read out a script, but not really showing how to code... then what's the point of setting up this video lecture? I could have just read the Jupyter module.. And for the "setting up Jupyter Notebook" video, the instructions are not applicable to my machine and the terminal commands were only shown on the video. I do appreciate the doing the projects and how they took us to a greater knowledge depth and a more real-world situation, I just hope they could have planned the communications in a more mindful way. I know technical issues are related to other dependencies, which is somehow more understandable, but I think the course staff should really focus on improving the overall content design and presentation.

I took this class because it was part of the Python 3 specialization (the last course actually).

The main advantage of the course is the introduction to Jupyter Notebooks. A big plus for me.

But the content is very (too) specific and quite in contrast with the broader applications of the 1st 4 classes in the specialization cycle. And if the idea was to deepdive in a real world application, I get it, but then it would probably have needed to be something a bit more interesting and useful (like pyplot or django).

Finally, and that's the big drawback, the end project was a nightmare, an absolute waste of time. The Coursera platform could simply not handle the required homework. It would run slow (if ever), not accept anything but the raw code (all messed up). The forum is crammed with people asking for a review of their submission, without proper moderation, drowning the more interesting content.

Fortunately I found a work around by running everything locally and posting the Notebook on my own site. But there should have been much better coordination between UMich and Coursera on the submission format.

Although the course had very interesting material, the projects were much more difficult than the previous courses. The lectures were quick and confusing and did not provide enough information to complete the assignments. The project files were huge and took between 15 minutes and over an hour for each run of the assignment. Smaller project files could have been used to accomplish the same goals. If this was not the last course in the specialization, I would have given up just because how long to took to run the project files.

Not terrible, but enrolling in this course is a bit like gambling: either you win a lot, or you lose a lot. The assignments are VERY hard, in relation to the other assignments in the Specialization, and since they only allow you to input one file as a submission you have to run TWO huge programs on zipfiles, instead of just being able to run on one zipfile, and then do the other zipfile later. But, as I said, if you ARE able to do the course, you will gain a lot of experience. Choose wisely.

I Think this course is not for beginners,besides i'am a beginner i had very tough time to solve the assignments and the instructor had taught so fast like newsreader.

if you really want to learn the pillow,tesseract and opencv don't take this course.This instructor had another course applied data science with python.

Finally as a beginner i felt very challenged and i've done some digging on the modules and the libraries on my own and solved the problems

Not very relevant to the use of Python especially in the context of finishing up a specialization. The other courses are excellent and this good if the reason you are learning python is to do OCR or ultimately computer vision. Would have been better if the 'exploration of libraries' and research were applied to multiple domain areas of python use such as mashups, workflow orchestration, data analysis, etc....

This course was the final course of the Python 3 Programming Specialisation and it was a frustrating experience overall. Compared to the first four parts (which were great experiences), this one doesn't fit in at all. It's a bit mind blowing how different it is from the first 4 parts actually.

The subject is interesting though.

the lectures are virtually useless as they do not add information to the stuff provided in the notebooks. the in-person explanations are hard to follow because the lecturer talks about code in terminals for consecutive minutes without showing any sort of code on screen. the final project submission format was a nightmare.

The course did not meet my expectations. Sometimes it was boring enough. Sometimes it was annoying, especially the tips for the first part of the project. They are so confusing that it's better not to watch them at all. But if you get through this, you can learn something new too.