This course contained useful information, but I disliked the corny, jokey style in which it was presented.
The quiz questions and answer choices were confusing and frustrating. I especially disliked the obscure cultural references, such as television shows or internet memes. There were also numerous typographical errors and grammar errors.
A good point was that numerous real-world examples were presented. A bad point was that several annoying, silly, and unrealistic toy examples were presented.
The content was useful, but I wonder how useful it would be to someone who has no prior statistical or report-reading experience. For example, some students may have never seen a p-value before, and the explanation provided may have been insufficient for them.
I also strongly object to the use of the term "hard variable" to describe a variable that is clinically important.
"Hard variables" are those that are quantified and objectively measured. "Hard data" are data that take on quantitative values, and this is not restricted to births and deaths.
"Quality of life" is often subjective, not objective, so I do not consider it to be a "hard variable", even though it is clinically important.
I am glad I took the course because the content of the course is important.
However, I did not enjoy taking the course. It left me with an unpleasant, frustrated feeling of belittlement. The professor seemed to speak to the students as if they were young children. I was puzzled at why the professor apparently did not take the material seriously.