- 16 reviews
- 16 completed
The worst MOOC I've ever taken. There's so much wrong with this course that I'm just going to give a list. *Videos not edited properly, outtakes left in. *Videos artificially 12-15 minutes each, whether they need to be or not. *No lecture slides, in-video slides, graphics or any learning tools what-so-ever *No in-video quizzes *No video subtitles *No video lengths *Videos in the wrong order *Poor, muffled audio *Worst speaking professor I've ever heard. speaksinonelongcontinuousmanner that makes it incredible difficult to stay focused or parse ideas in lectures. Uses "ummm" and other sound effect frequently to string sentences together. Has an incredibly dry and flat speech vocalization. Doesn't matter how interesting the material may sound on paper, it's delivered horribly in voice. *No peer review assignments *No final *Quiz contains only five of the least critical and basic questions you can imagine. *Students have no opportunity to critically test their understanding of the material. *Opens up his first lecture by saying how it won't measure up to an offline course. This gives you a clear impression exactly how this course is going to go (and it does go). *Staff replies became increasingly sparse as the course went on. No replies to the fact that no one was receiving their certificates over a month after the course had finished. *Course was delayed almost a year to 'get stuff ready for the Coursera platform,' and this is what is produced. Bottom line. Avoid this course like the plague. However, consider other courses from this university. This one is the unfortunate exception.
As others said, a really fun course. Only downside is that it's a very casual course. One final quiz at the end of course, which is a compilation of the in- lecture quiz questions. In other words, it didn't feel up to the difficulty of an actual university film course. No writing, essays, etc. Nonetheless, I still learned many things. Learned about the transitions from silent to sound films, B&W; to color, and the different color technologies of the 30s-50s. And learned about how all of these technologies were used as creative tools by the filmmakers. You'll watch a variety of films in this course. The course load is 5-6 hours a week, but that's with watching two movies and two half-hour lectures...plus any rewatching/extra study you may do. So it's really only fun study, at least it was for me.
This course is about Innovation System (IS) studies and their relation to China. The first week introduces Science & Technology (S&T;) paths, the second week Research & Development (R&D;) processes, and the third ISs. The course begins with a historical look at things, then moves closer to contemporary studies of government policies, firms, and economies, and how all these things are interrelated with ISs and China. It's a short course, 3-weeks. However, material is dense. I feel it should have been expanded to at least a 5-week course. The course rests of three, short peer review assignments. I would have liked some quizzes too, because without them I don't feel like I was really challenged to understand the material as much as I would have liked (or been expected) to. The videos usually include one in-video quiz question at the end. But let me reemphasize that: one question...for an entire video. It's not adequate. Esp. for an entire 25-30 minute video where half-a-dozen new concepts or ideas are introduced. However, most bothersome is that the lecture notes are BEHIND the lecturer. Accompanied with the fact that the lecturer is always moving around, often you can't even see the lecture notes! How could they make such a blunder?! Here's to hoping that they fix this major oversight in the follow-up courses. Another problem is the audio. It's not normalized. So when the lecturer tilts his head to look at his iPad his voice becomes dramatically louder as it gets closer to his shirt mic. You have been warned. Finally, thelectureroftenspeakstooquickly. I hope he slows down a bit for his audience. There seem to be parts II and III of this course coming up. We'll have to see how those go.
I didn't spend much time on the forums, so I didn't become wrapped up in the forum arguments that some of the other reviewers seemed to have been. I enjoyed this course very much. There was a great guest lecturer about fiber. Miss Ferraro had a funny stilted way of talking. One of the other reviewers said it was because she was using a teleprompter. I guess that makes sense, but I wasn't thinking about the reason 'for' her speaking that much. Anyway, the peer assignments were the most time consuming thing in the course, with the final one requiring you to make a recipe and analyze its health benefits (you had to post pictures of it too). One bad thing was that much of the course felt like a laundry list of different organizations eating charts they created, and Miss Ferraro was just going through them all. There was a lot of research data interspersed, but sometimes it wasn't enough between all the eating charts. It's a very heavy data driven course, and Miss Ferraro gracefully avoids falling into the many controversial health areas -- although the forum was full of these!!! Recommended course. Learned a lot.
Okay, after the first couple of weeks the material became very interesting, esp. when Prof. Adelstein started reviewing the evolution of law ideas through historical court cases. I loved this stuff. But Mr. Adelstein is the most long-winded lecturer I've ever heard. Like...really long. Also, the lecture audio was very bad. His voice would go in-and-out between quiet/loud, was semi-muffled, and more. I had to turn the volume up pretty loud to catch everything. But if you can get accustomed to these, then it's an excellent course. I've learned so many cool new things that I didn't know, and I really liked listening to the court cases. I suppose it's because they're each like a story tied together into one larger story. How will it end? Well, you'll have to listen. P.S. I've enjoyed all of Wesleyan's courses so far.
As much as the professor tried to emphasise being clear about thoughts and ideas, I found many of his ideas unclear. In other words, he wasn't consistent with his usage. He tries to gives examples, be clear, and break things down, but then at other times he doesn't (or if he is, he isn't doing it very well). This inconsistency lost me more than a few times. I had to rewind several videos to try and untangle what he was trying to say, what assumptions he was making, etc. The most difficult sections I found to be the middle lectures about proofs. For example, at one time he said that there aren't exact 'proof' formulas you can use, but then later will say "and since I am using so-and-so type of proof, I need to do this." Things like this just compound. He could do a much better job at first outlining the various proof types, moving more in depth into the structure(s) of each, then finally broadening each type of proof. Another annoying part is that the week's lectures are only released half-way through the week with the assignment due less than a week later. It gives a shortened time to study and can be a problem for the many different schedules that people have. He should release all the material at the beginning of the week or extend the assignment due dates. Also, people can make their own decisions about how to study once the material is out, the professor shouldn't be making these decisions for them. The course is admirable in scope, but there are still a lot of problems. It's like a snake eating its own tail with all the pedagogy ideas their trying to implement. Because of this, the course could have been a medium difficulty, but turns unnecessarily into a hard one. However, the course did have one of the best Certificate of Completions, describing in great detail what we studied in the course. I'd like to contrast this to other courses, which often give a vague description on the Certificate of Completion and usually not useful if you want to present it to other people so they can see what you did in the course.
HANDS DOWN BEST COURSE ON COURSERA. . . . . . . . . (P.S. "Underwater Basketweaving" was an April Fools' course added by Coursera.)
Needs a lot of work. Each week had a topic presented by an instructor. However, most topics were given only a cursory overview. Lectures very short, and content not up to university standards. There were also a painful number of sharp camera cuts, all of the sudden zooming in, then out, off-center, and so on. Probably the most 'philosophically deep' week was the discussion on miracles and then the 'philosophy of science' week. Then there was that professor who dressed up as Doctor Who...painful... I wish the course had required some short writing assignments to help the students internalize the terms and concepts. I didn't leave with a high impression of University of Edinburgh, esp. combined with the "Introduction to Critical Thinking" course.
Inconsistent teaching objectives, many typos in quizzes, entire course rests on 5, 3-question problem quizzes, bad teacher. Overall, wouldn't recommend taking courses from this teacher. As for the what I learned... I did enhance my engineering foundation skills, so was happy about this. I'm now taking another MOOC engineering course and can say that this course helped prepare me for that.
As another reviewer said, there's a lot of material, which can feel overwhelming. It's a very technical course, getting into network algorithms and data capacity/delay/signal equations. However, the lectures are a pleasure to listen to because the lecturer is very good. I'd want to take more courses from him. The course goes more into the theoretical foundations of networking and how it evolved. So if you have a Cisco or networking certification(s), this course will be much different than the way you're normally used to looking at things. I can't imagine taking this course without any networking/IT background. The weekly quizzes are difficult. They test your conceptual understanding. If you watched the lectures and took time to understand/internalize the concepts, you should pass. The two tests review the quiz material. Some community concerns weren't addressed by the staff in the forums. I'm not sure what that was about.
This is a very fun course, with lots of cool historic videos about the internet that the professor collected over the years. The only problem is that many of the guest lectures are often talking way over the head of the content in the course. I think many people without a lot of internet/programming/computer experience were lost in these. Otherwise, it's a fun course. It would be interesting to see a more advanced version of this course.
Everyone should take this course, or a course like it. I found the ideas in this course incredibly enlightening to my understanding of the environment and our place in it. There were so many new ideas in this course, it's pretty amazing. Tragedy of the commons, Malthusian collapse, demographic transitions, insolation and weather vs. climate systems, energy conservation/displacement, virtual water, agricultural water efficiency/contamination/limits, types of environmental policies throughout the world and their impacts, etc. However, the lecturer can often be biased, making many prescriptive assertions; the video background pictures can often cause a strain because they're not distinguished enough from the lecturer; some of the quiz questions can be poorly worded; and last, but not least, is the overcomplicated way in which the course is organized. Otherwise, it's a very insightful course -- answering a lot of questions I had and providing insight into many I never knew about.
It's a nice course. The professor has a somewhat geeky humor encased in his interest for his subject. I like how he taught the material like a story, sometimes finding interesting/fun side-stories to put into the larger picture. I also really liked how the professor seemed to be keeping us up-to-date with the recent understanding(s) of historical events and would often talk about how the views on certain aspects changed between scholars over time. I learned exactly what I hope I would from the course, and then a few additional surprises. Recommended.
Very easy course, but also informative. There were some minor errors in the lectures, but the professor corrected them as he went. Professor was involved in the forums. You learn about N. American energy usage data/statistics, and the different forms of energy and their corresponding technologies. "Global Sustainable Energy: Past, Present and Future" is an excellent complimentary course.
Pretty terrible course, not up to a college level standard. Incredibly short, weekly course load -- less than 10-minutes of primary lectures a week. Claimed that some assignments weren't necessary for passing, but in fact they did affect the passing grade. Some lecturers didn't follow the lessons they were teaching (such as, being objective, non-emotional when evaluating claims, etc.).
It's a heavy course for anyone who hasn't had previous experience in this area (me). The first two weeks or so reviews the entire human female reproductive system, including all the hormones and physio-chemical reactions. It was my first time learning about these things, so it was very difficult and I had to study extra hard. After that, the rest of course will repeatedly use the hormonal knowledge you gained in the beginning when talking about the various contraceptive methods. It also gets into global and community issues involving family planning services. The peer assignments were helpful for learning to apply the information we learned. The other students made me feel welcome in this course. I learned a lot.