Profile

Magd profile image

Magd

Student

  • 10 reviews
  • 9 completed
Content 
Instructor 
Provider 
I enjoyed this course and learned so much! The quality of the videos and materials in general was fantastic. It was easy to believe that she was sitting just in front of you, talking to you. I only wished she spoke a tiny bit slower, because it was difficult to make notes and listen at the same time. I loved the fact that all the material in the course was based on research. I particularly enjoyed that the HEAS element was introduced to the course - emphasizing that there are various approaches and that sometimes fighting your body too much makes it difficult to keep healthy. Peer assessments were definitely a bright spot, even though they were very time- consuming. I would like to congratulate the University of California, San Francisco, and Katie Ferraro - it was a fantastic course and I would gladly attend another one of theirs.
Content 
Instructor 
Provider 
It was definitely one of the nicest courses here on Coursera. It was basic, at times even too basic, but the technical quality of the videos, the mode of presentation and everything was just superb. What scared me was the fact that the organizers thought such basic of basic courses is necessary at all - I've been eating home-cooked meals ever since I remember and the thought that adults might need such basic information as to how to do a smoothie or a stew is just making me enter into panic mode - how bad the cooking and eating habits in the US must be to justify the level of this course. Scary thought, and the cultural difference and distance is showing... The main take-away message, "cooking is so easy" is really scary, when you put it in such context... I gave a lot of stars to this course - because as for its intended purpose - encourage people who hasn't been eager to cook at home to do so because it's not difficult, it does great. Actually, I even had a feeling that the course videos could make a fantastic ad-replacement in public television - the videos were a professional example of kitchen/cooking tv and would fit right in between other, longer shows. However, I believe that it could be improved by giving some more input into nutrition and especially nutrition for children. There is lots and lots information about adult nutrition everywhere, but the child nutrition information that is around is often tainted with folk legends or cultural traditions, and it is difficult to know which is tainted, and which is reliable. I think a course with more technical information and a course that would emphasize going out and experimenting more on your own would be much appreciated - I completed the course with a feeling that it didn't do much for my home-cooking, as I knew most of the recipes or some variations of them, and the course failed to direct me into new things, or new directions.
Content 
Instructor 
Provider 
Fantastic course. As the name says - it's the basics, the fundamentals, but they are presented thoroughly, with ample examples, so that even a total lay person in terms of microeconomics will enjoy the knowledge and the course. This is my second course from University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and I'll definitely continue to take part in the courses organized by that university, because the videos are prepared in such a way that it's a pleasure to watch and a pleasure to learn. I believe the course team did a fantastic job.
Content 
Instructor 
Provider 
A complete waste of time - I expected something more than a sophisticated grammar lecture - which, to top it all up, focused on US English and had automatically graded tasks, which took solely US English into account. While I understand that the course is taught by an American university, and as such naturally leans towards the American style of writing, it was not stated clearly in the course description AND, as the course is offered to the entire global English-speaking community, failing to acknowledge the sheer amount of 'Englishes' out there, is a gigantormous mistake. Teaching English as Second/Foreign language in the majority of the world focuses on British English, not on American English, with the AmE spelling presented usually as a curiosity, not as a solid thorough course. I'm not saying that the professors should include each and every type of English one can think of, but lack of acknowledgement of British English at all is a big mistake. I didn't want to lose marks because I've been using the British English for over 20 years - it's close to impossible (and pointless) to force myself to change it for the purpose of one five-week-long course. I wish it was clearly stated on the course description page from the beginning, I wouldn't get my hopes up so much.
Content 
Instructor 
Provider 
I can't make up my mind about this course. On one hand, the material was presented in a clear way, with lots of examples and that was good, but I felt it was very chaotic. I feel that the lecturer was not able to show to us what was actually the overall thought behind this course - other than presenting us with a set of legal notions. Each week was pretty separate from another week and it was difficult to understand what was the purpose of the entire course. Right now, after I completed all the work and went over the passing threshold, I feel like I learnt a few notions, but I have no idea how they do tie in with the US law and American thinking about property. I guess what I'm trying to say is that what was missing from the course was more context, in which the individual principles might be applied. Not case studies or examples of cases that are relevant for the given notion, but a more general context. What I didn't like was the fact that the professor spoke too slowly - the sentences were long and sometimes before the professor managed to get to the end of the sentence, you forgot what was the beginning of the sentence. I think the videos were definitely too long. You could very easily cut the length of the videos in half while presenting exactly the same amount of information and knowledge. A lot of information in the lecture was redundant - it's not lecture hall, where once a sentence is spoken, it's gone, and the lecturer has to repeat certain information in various ways, so that the students grasp the concepts. In a course like this, it's sufficient to repeat a given information once, at most twice - you can always rewind the video or take a look at the transcript, so overloading the lectures with repetitive and redundant information is really unnecessary.
Content 
Instructor 
Provider 
It was a fantastic course. A thorough presentation of the main concepts and ideas behind gamification and what I liked best - the lecturer did not avoid pointing out controversial matters and remembered to indicate potential problems in applying the principles. All in all - it was time very well spent.
Content 
Instructor 
Provider 
I went over the pass score, so I decided now's the time to evaluate the course. In general, the quality of the course is very poor. First of all, the videos. The presentations themselves weren't that bad, but the voice quality accompanying the presentations was abysmal. It was very difficult to understand what the instructor was saying, because the voice was metallic and scratchy. The problem continued despite numerous complaints from the students in the course, we're now past week 8 and every single video we were presented with after week 1 had that problem. I suspect that the voice was recorded by reading aloud a prepared text, therefore some sentences were read out very quickly, some were interrupted by mispronounced or mistaken words, there were some pauses in weird and unexpected places, etc. It was difficult to follow. Second, the assignments. The mind map, while being a valuable and worthy idea on its own, turned out to be a very big disappointment. The assessment criteria for the mind map were botched, to say the least, so it was very, very difficult to get a good grade. The instructions for this assignment were not clear, and moreover - they were changed in the interim, without any formal announcement. The only place it was mentioned was somewhere in one of the thousands of threads in the discussion forums. Third, the staff was very slow to respond to any problems concerning the course. When an incorrect video was uploaded for week 6 on Monday, the proper one was uploaded five days later. There were no slides from the lectures available, the subtitles were also full of mistakes and therefore not very user-friendly. Fourth, the material was presented in a chaotic manner. Syllabus was saying one thing, the contents of the materials - another. The week that was supposed to be about minerals, was about water. There were terms used in the lectures, which were not explained. Very often the instructor jumped from one topic to another, making it difficult to follow her reasoning. All in all, the course did not meet my expectations at all. I learned much more in the course that ran simultaneously, entitled "Nutrition for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention" by UCSF.
Content 
Instructor 
Provider 
I expected this course not to be of much use to me as it was to be US-centric, but I didn't anticipate that it will be as much US-centric as it was. People from outside of US - beware, you won't learn anything useful beyond the first week. The videos were a mistake - presentations with the voice recording added. The lectures were evidently recorded by reading them out from a prepared text - as a result the lecturer was speaking far too fast and was making mistakes that can happen when reading out loud, but not when you are talking to your students. The quality of the voice recordings themselves wasn't too good as well. The course could be improved by shifting from presenting strictly US-centric information to presenting general principles and directions of financial planning in general. It was done pretty well with calculating net worth or investments, but not at all in other topics. I would like to see more encouragement to critical thinking about finances and raising awareness in general. Or, if all else fails and you don't want all of that - change the name of the course to 'US-centric personal financial planning'. The videos are also a thing with loads of room for improvement. The only thing that kept me going with this course was treating it as a cultural course for a me as an ESL student. I didn't pay attention to much detail, I tried to grasp general ideas and reasoning. It worked this way for me - but I doubt that it was the intention behind the course.
Content 
Instructor 
Provider 
I loved the quality of the videos - they gave the impression that you were sitting just there, in front of the professor, and that's the thing that I loved almost the most. I liked the fact that the professor was showing us sample IUDs, I even liked the fact that she hesitated while speaking and repeated herself - it's what made the lectures authentic and natural, because that's how lecturers speak. What I didn't realize from the start was the fact that there will be so much emphasis on counselling, but after some thought I came to conclusion that it's just a way to put the knowledge into practice - and it definitely helped me remember the things we were taught. I believe that it would be useful to introduce more cultural concepts - i.e. more cultural background, and not only for the US. It was all shown beautifully in the first week and then somehow the cultural component was almost lost. And the potential is definitely there! In general, the course was great, definitely one of the best I've taken so far.
Content 
Instructor 
Provider 
Fantastic course. It was the first Coursera course for me and it set very high standards that I refer to when taking and assessing other courses. I liked the fact that there were various ways to complete the course. The quality of the videos was fantastic - clear voice, the professor was talking to us as if we were just next to him, in a lecture hall. I also loved the fact that the textbook could be downloaded to Kindle and read off-screen. As regards improvements, I believe that more consideration should be given as regards the forums badge - the information about the details came late. There is definitely a room for improvement as regards the forums - they are huge, fast and simply impossible to follow on a regular basis. Thank you, professor Tomkin, for a great and mind-opening course, I hope that there will be other courses here on Coursera that you will be conducting, as it was a real pleasure.