Chevron Left
Back to Applied Text Mining in Python

Learner Reviews & Feedback for Applied Text Mining in Python by University of Michigan

4.2
1,978 ratings
380 reviews

About the Course

This course will introduce the learner to text mining and text manipulation basics. The course begins with an understanding of how text is handled by python, the structure of text both to the machine and to humans, and an overview of the nltk framework for manipulating text. The second week focuses on common manipulation needs, including regular expressions (searching for text), cleaning text, and preparing text for use by machine learning processes. The third week will apply basic natural language processing methods to text, and demonstrate how text classification is accomplished. The final week will explore more advanced methods for detecting the topics in documents and grouping them by similarity (topic modelling). This course should be taken after: Introduction to Data Science in Python, Applied Plotting, Charting & Data Representation in Python, and Applied Machine Learning in Python....

Top reviews

GK

May 04, 2019

Lectures are very good with a perfect explanation. More than lectures I liked the assignment questions. They are worth doing. You will get to know the basic foundation of text mining. :-)

BK

Jun 26, 2018

Would love to see these courses have more practice questions in each weeks lesson. Would be helpful for repetition sake, and learning vs only doing each question once in the assignments.

Filter by:

351 - 373 of 373 Reviews for Applied Text Mining in Python

By Sourav P

Dec 09, 2018

I was not satisfied

By christopher h

Nov 18, 2017

Compared to other courses in the Applied Machine Learning focus, this is so far the worst. The content and quality are poor. The lecturer is too slow and fails to prepare the student for the assignments. First week is very basic and ends with an assignment in regex. There's plenty of regex resources out there. 2nd week moves forward but finalizes in an assignment that involves concepts not covered in the lecture (ngrams). Weeks 3 and 4 contain too many errors in the lecture and autograder (use of AUC, finding minimum of a sparse array). UofM should rebuild this course.

By Mark R

Sep 21, 2017

Interesting topic, but a really poor course with barely any content.

Around an hour or less of lectures a week.

I've taken a lot of MOOC's on Coursera and other platforms and this one is poor

By Luis d l O

Nov 20, 2017

Too simple. Few information and content, and extremely simple (though with a lot of problems) assignments.

By Markus M

Sep 24, 2017

One of the worst courses I have ever attended. The subject is treated on the surface.

The exercises are sometimes not covered in the lectures. The auto-grader is badly configured.

It was annoying and frustrating to do the exercises. Sometimes an untold oderering of the results was expected. Sometimes an untold normalization has to be done.

By Xing W

Oct 28, 2017

The video is still in python 2. Very limited instructions.

By Vladimir V

Aug 14, 2017

A complete waste of time. You are better off Googling the concepts as the explanations are absolutely inadequate. The homework is nice and challenging but the material covered in the lectures does not prepare you to complete it. You are pretty much on your own. Too bad that you need to take this course to complete the specialization. Definitely not worth the $80. Very disappointed!!!!

By J W

Mar 11, 2018

I am an experienced online course learner, both with MOOC's and online courses through accredited universities. Unfortunately, in it's current form, this has been one of the worst classes I have ever taken. While it does have some interesting content, the delivery is sometimes wandering and more of a high level overview than a concrete, here's-how-you-do-it, practical class. The assignments also suffer from ambiguity and sometimes outright forgetting of explicit instructions. Moreover, workbook-type examples are often lacking. Although I'm very disappointed in the execution of this class, there is potential if these problems are addressed.

As an aside, after completing this class, I find it hard to believe that almost half the reviewers gave this class five stars. There are some fundamental problems here, and I almost gave up completing the rest of the series because of this one course.

.

By Emil K

Feb 12, 2018

Instructions in programming assignments are misleading or poorly worded. This is an issue with every module of this specialization but Text Mining has been spectacularily bad. You need to spend hours browsing the discussion group just to figure out what is expected. Mentors are doing a great job explaining in the forum, but there is no feedback loop - the instructions are never corrected. Sometimes you see a forum post about a misleading or simply wrong instruction, that is dated 6 months ago, and the instruction still hasn't been corrected. It's like no-one cares. I feel like 70% of the time I spent on this course wasn't learning Text Mining, it was dealing with ambiguous instructions or autograder issues.

By Gregory B

Dec 22, 2017

I hope that the author of this course is fired. I had hoped for more review and exercises on topics such as sentiment and topic analysis, things that are PRACTICAL. Instead the focus was on things like document path similarity, part-of-speech tagging, and counting words in spam vs. ham documents. Adding to the frustration is the autograder, and the arcane formats for submitting answers. Wish that I could give this less than 1 star, it definitely earned it.

By RAUL E G

Apr 13, 2018

The professor needs to prepare students better for exams and assigments. Too few lectures.

By Will W

Aug 23, 2017

Honestly, I was pretty disappointed in this course. Assignments consistently took much longer than indicated, in large part because of recurrent problems with the autograder and unspecified requirements in assignment instructions.

By Nathan R

Oct 17, 2017

The professor is wooden. The quizzes are ridiculously easy. The programming assignments nearly impossible. Beware the hidden workings of the auto-grader. If you're very lucky, one of the other students will prompt the TAs to action in the forums. This is, by far, the worst course in this specialization.

By Christopher I

Mar 14, 2018

The lectures for this course are terribly uninspired, giving very little useful information--the vast majority of it is the professor talking about obvious aspects of language at a very high and useless level. The autograder is frequently breaking for very minor things (such as returning numpy.float instead of float), the questions on the assignments are often misleading, poorly worded, vague, or just generally not very helpful. All in all, this was one of the worst MOOCs I have ever taken, though the Coursera bar is pretty low. It does make me wonder why I bother to pay at all--oh right, Coursera now makes not paying a major inconvenience to course progression.

By Eduardo C F

Feb 23, 2018

I was under the impression that the course is incomplete, especially week 4, which has no notebook examples of the theory presented. I needed to look at other sites for basic information. I could only complete the exercises because they are easy, otherwise, with the code presented during the course, I would not have been able to. I suggest strengthening the example code in python (see week 3, good code)

By Elliot B

Mar 03, 2018

I found this course quite confusing and often unrelated between video lectures and assignments. The lectures maybe covered an assignment in broad strokes but to actually answer any of the questions needed extension research from the student. I felt like I was teaching myself the base content. At that point, what is the point of the lecture videos if they provide no value. I almost stopped my subscription and gave up on the data analysis specialization based on the quality of this specific course. Previous courses in the specialisation did provide useful information in lectures which was then extended upon in the assignments. This method of teaching something in the lectures then building on finessed usage in the assignments is a much better approached.

By Mahmoud

Apr 29, 2019

the worst ever I took here in Coursera

By Jose Á P L

Mar 23, 2019

Este curso no vale para nada, por favor no lo hagais!!!

By Dario M

Jul 19, 2019

The difficulty of the assignments is in no way related to the simpleness of the lectures.

By Nicholas P

Jul 31, 2019

Unless the instructional staff updates the programming assignments to reflect updates in packages and ensures they can run without additions, do not take this course. It is a terrible reflection on the University of Michigan.

By Prykhodko D

Aug 10, 2019

The course is a joke. Its outdated and not supported, you literally need to spend hours to try and figure and emulate versions used by autograder and even the file structure for files used by default is not accurate and you get file read errors on predefined by them functions on their own virtual environment and need to fix these for them!!! The virtual machine env provided is super slow so need to use your own. Very bad user experience and horrible use of time!

By Justin M

Sep 14, 2019

Videos are so high-level that they don't help at all understanding the necessary code. Assignments have spelling errors and ambiguity. Week 4 is missing the sample code notebook. I eventually found the sample code notebook in the forums, but this was a big cause of frustrations as I had zero context for how to do the assignment.

By Dr. D W

Aug 27, 2019

What a horrible course. Especially the assignments are such an unbelievable waste of time. Instead of focusing on important concepts and applications, one has to spend hours one "pleasing the autograder" by renaming columns and reading the discussion pages for the correct interpretation of all the ambiguously formulated questions. Very sad! Would be good for everyone if this was removed from the (otherwise great) series "Applied Data Science in Python".