Mar 16, 2018
overall the good introductory course of python for data science but i feel it should have covered the basics in more details .specially for the ones who do not have any prior programming background .
Dec 10, 2017
Wow, this was amazing. Learned a lot (mostly thanks to stack overflow) but the course also opened my eyes to all the possibilities available out there and I feel like i'm only scratching the surface!
автор: Bart T C•
Aug 19, 2018
This course provides very little instruction. I really like learning by trial and error, and I think that is how coding is typically learned. Learning python from stack_exchange, however, is how I was already learning it, and I was doing fine. The whole problem of learning from stack exchange is that you don't know if you are doing things in the best possible way, which can be important for big datasets. There was no discussion of the best practices for complete an assignment, after it was turned in, and, in general, may functions were required to pass the course that were never discussed in the course. The entire weeks lecture could also be watched in about 30 minutes, which seems low to me. Most courses I have taken have at least three hours a week of lecture. I have friends who have taken this same course, and had a similar assessment.
автор: Carl G•
Apr 10, 2018
Not my style of course. Lectures is a mostly just a list of code snippets without any slides. Instead there is a background of 2 people just staring at their screens the whole time. Does not inspire one to enjoy Data Science as a field. Prefer a narrative explaining why and how with practical tips thrown in. Learning to code is more than just syntax. Good examples are the first chapter in Think Stats by Allen Downey and Andrew Ng's Machine Learning course. In this course the assignments took quite a bit of time to complete since lecture code snippets not very useful. Had to self-learn from web to complete assignments. Also took extra time by some trial and error to get right format of results. A more productive approach was assignments in A
Feb 10, 2020
Topics covered are interesting as next steps when you have some basic programming skills in Python. However, the introduction and explanation of new concepts feel very rushed; a one minute video on map(), then lambda with a quick exercise without further explanation, followed by list comprehension at the same pace. I often found myself stopping the videos and googling for further explanation to understand what is really going on. If instructors feel that such concepts should be familiar to someone participating in the course, then I'd recommend not covering them at all, rather than rapidly rushing through.
автор: Aaron B•
Mar 20, 2019
Really appreciate this course. Got me started in Python, Pandas, and Jupyter. First week felt like magic. I am giving it a low score because the assignment questions were so ambiguous that it required constant resubmits an scouring the forums. The ratio of learning of course content to required Stack Overflow internet research was way off balance.
I learned a lot but was extremely frustrated and burned a lot of time it what I felt was all the wrong places.
Still grateful for this opportunity. I think the questions can be better explained and tightened up.
автор: Daniel A•
Aug 20, 2018
This is not really a course. 2h of lectures in total. I have been in longer one-day university lectures. You have to attend other courses in order to be able to complete the assignments because 90% of what they ask is not in the lectures. This is a compilation of exercises, not a course.
On the other hand, the assignments and exercises are OK, that's why I gave it 2 stars.
автор: Carl M•
Nov 14, 2019
Poorly worded questions (that are mentioned throughout the discussion board), older version of pandas and the course resources don't help you with course. Get ready to 'learn' by looking in StackOverflow or reading the volumes upon volumes of python/pandas documentation. In other words, expect to spend 15 hours a week per week (obviously it will vary)
автор: Olena K•
Mar 28, 2019
The lectures are not good. They go too quickly. They're about 5 minutes long, but you have to stop every minute or 30 seconds and rewind to understand what the instructor is saying. He just goes way too fast, and it's very frustrating. Really ruins the experience.
автор: Yizi Z•
Nov 09, 2018
There is only few minutes taught video courses each week, although the reading materials and topics are quite interesting. The learning of python coding rely heavily on your own trial and error, which you could do even without this course.
автор: Chris L•
Dec 17, 2019
It never felt like the material was covered in enough depth to give me confidence in the ability to do the assignments.
автор: Lee S•
Dec 19, 2018
Starts off well, then escalates way too quickly. Assignment 4 is incredibly complex and has poor guidance notes.
автор: Georgios A•
Jan 07, 2019
Too difficult, poor connection between lectures and assignments
автор: Kannan S•
Nov 21, 2016
This is in fact the worst course so far. Mainly because of auto grader. Here are my reasons.
Actually I did not complete the course at all. But I suddenly got a message saying that I have completed the course. I was working on the first problem of the 4th assignment. I did a provisional submission to see if my answer was right. Auto grader reported the grade for the 3rd assignment and said that I have passed the course. Any submission I did after that was not graded at all.
The assignments are not very clear. Looks like I had a older version of the questions while others had a different version. I was stuck in a particular problem because auto grader did not give me a clear feedback as to why I was incorrect. I wasted too much time on this already.
The assignments require too much research outside what is covered in the videos. I don't feel that is right. The assignment requires that we research on Stack Overflow and Pandas documentation. I strongly feel that such activities should be performed only outside the course work when we try to solve real world problems. Course assignments should be reasonably given based only the materials covered in video. This was taking too much time.
The discussion forums are not giving clear hints. When we are stuck in a problem, we are not able to proceed further. I still son't know the answers for certain problems because the coordinators do not explain the answers well. When we complete assignments we don't get to see the instructor's solution.
The video instructions were too fast paced. The instructors do not pause and explain critical aspects of the code.
Overall I am very disappointed with this course. There are much better videos on Youtube and Lynda than this . I am sorry. I never thought it would be this bad. The first course on Python from University of Michigan was really very good.
автор: Joseph G•
Mar 03, 2018
Not sure whether this course is trying to reach data science or Python, but it does a poor job at both.
The class is a light-speed tour through NumPy and Pandas, definitely not for the neophyte Python developer (which I am not). There's 30-40 mins of lecture each week that's basically lightly narrated typing into a Jupyter notebook with only the slightest bit of additional explanation about what the instructor is doing, although the material covered is substantial. There's lot of important details that are glossed over -- forcing the student to pause the lecture and do offline research to understand what just happened.
Similarly, the assignments address and cover beyond the material covered, but the instruction is scarcely sufficient to understand the concepts required to complete them, so lots of Stack Overview and other research is required. And the automated grader, as expected, is completely literal so for complex problems, not much help in validating whether you're on the right track. Assignments take many multiples of the estimated time.
And because even for paying students (such as myself), you never get access to an answer key even after the assignment is due, you have no idea how closely your solution conformed to best practices, even if you arrived at the right answer. For coding, this makes all of the difference, particularly with large datasets that could consume considerable computing resources if not done correctly. I'm told this is because of potential cheating by learners.
How would I change this course? Simple: 3x more lecture material to actually explain what's going on, or down-scope the class so that the existing lecture time becomes adequate for the material.
автор: Hari B•
Apr 09, 2017
Very poor course, badly taught and terrible value for money. The lessons are brief beyond any form of reasonableness, the teacher seems completely unconnected with his students. There is no detail at all and no logical progression. I took and passed this course with a view to doing the specialisation but I'm not going to waste any more money on University of Michigan courses. I've found similar courses on other platforms which cover the same material. The assignments were awful, in some cases they covered material to be presented the following week, in others the questions were wrongly stated and did not match the output from the machine grading. The machine grading itself gave you no clue as to where you went wrong. I'm not talking about the odd question here or there, I'm talking about consistently throughout every assignment. I don't normally, in fact ever, leave bad reviews, I usually just chalk it up to experience and move on but in this case, the course was so bad, I had to say something. I've done two other courses on Coursera with Rice University and the difference to this course is huge, while I would wholeheartedly recommend the Rice Intro to Python courses, Don't do this course, it is not coherently presented or graded. The mentors in the forum tried their best but even they had to admit the grading system was riddled with errors. Absolute rubbish, avoid and spend your money elsewhere.
автор: Albi K•
Oct 30, 2019
I have just completed this course. I have learned quite a bit about the pandas library and that has nothing to do with this course.
The lectures seemed to be scripted; and extremely condensed. At best, they can be used as a sparse reference manual for some undefined subset of the pandas library.
The assignment 4 instructions encourage googling things. Basically "go forth and figure it out on your own" ... why would I need a full course for that piece of advice?
The autograder seems to forbid the usage of certain lines of code in Assignment 4. It will reject your answer and give you no feedback whatsoever with respect to the reasons why your answer was rejected.
As well, it has inconsistencies that will cost you time. The question on the recession_start() function will be graded as correct if recession_start() outputs a certain value, say x. Yet, in another question recession_start() is expected to output some other value y. Go figure. Not even a warning about it.
So, to sum up the salient points:
1. Autograder has holes.
2.Extremely condensed scripted lectures and sparsely sprinkled with practical advice.
3. Useful for letting you know that pandas exist.
автор: Vikram A•
Aug 08, 2017
This course is poorly done, and I'm sorry but in no way close to an intermediate level. Even knowing a fair amount of python, I struggled with learning from this course. I find it ironic that the teacher specializes in education and mostly sits in a chair and speaks code at you. There are very few visual aids to help.
Furthermore, individual topics are not broken down well, showing you how to develop a mastery over the fundamental data objects like a data frame before moving on to the next. Code that is demonstrated is typed out unreasonably fast, and very few examples are done on how to properly access the elements in different ways. The video where the grad student/post doc spits out code 3 lines a minutes made me laugh at how ridiculous it was as if it were an explanation.
I ended up very frustrated with this course, and I'm not convinced it's all me or my inability to learn. I suggest learning data science in python from another site, I'm already finding a different class much better and more understandable. Your mileage will obviously vary.
автор: Elanur S•
Nov 14, 2016
Total disaster. I payed 315euro for this course. Course started on 24/10/2016. I faced with technical difficulties till this weekend. I reported this problem already many times.. Finally this weekend the Jupiter notebook worked and I started the first assignment. I spent many hours but still couldn't get solve the assignment. I read discussions, write post.. Searched on Google.. Read lots of document. I still couldn't get what the correct answer is the assignment wants. I realized that it is impossible to pass this exam. In the lectures they don't mention anything which will help you to solve this time consuming assignment by the way.. After having this terrible course experience this weekend, today (14/11/2016) I decided to apply for refund. But guess what I says 14 days have passed so I cannot get refund!!!! Now I payyed 315 euro for nothing but disappointment!!!!
автор: Heide S•
Nov 12, 2016
besides the major technical issues and lack of information before the postponed start of the course and minor technical issues, the way of teaching is well adapted to on-site classes where you can sit in study groups solving the problems together; the given examples have partly little relevance and do not help to solve the assignments and according to the staff the best way to solve assignments is by using google (or stackoverflow or whatever) - really?! somehow it seems they just took an on-site course, played with some fancy technical solutions and call it now a MOOC... they seem not really aware of the fact that on-site teaching and MOOCs require completely different types of pedagogic methods
amazing how the same university can offer both the best MOOC (Dr. Chuck's) and one of the worst (this one)
автор: Onur E•
Jan 15, 2019
1)Auto grading for assignments worked on and off (mostly off). I spent far more time for the auto grading than the time I spent for actually doing the assignments and learning stuff. I considered quitting after the first week and had to really force myself to go on.
2) This course requires Python experience. This should be made more clear in the course description. I struggled a lot because I lacked Python experience.
3) The instructors have pacing issues - especially the teaching assistant. They rush the important points.
4) I think the difficulty level of the quizes and assignments is not encouraging learning. I considered quitting after the first week. I'd have easier and more motivating earlier quizes/assignments; then build up on them.
автор: Yuriy D•
Jan 05, 2020
Worse course ever. Materials don't provide enough information for performing assignments. Explanation is very short, general and isn't clear. Actually the course doesn't explain almost anything in Pandas structure, functions and approaches. As a software engineer I'm capable of solving complex problems. But here it's not about solving problems, it's about self studying and surfing Internet obtaining knowledge. What the course for?
Wrong column names, mistakes in formulas... Why the quality is so low?
I'm really disappointed spending time for it. Have to cancel it on the second week.
автор: Angelo C•
Feb 16, 2019
Lecturer just regurgitates code out loud (completely worthless). You can't get answers back without paying for the course (fine but it would have been nice to mention that up front in the audit) so you get little feedback as you might want it.
Many of the questions/code is impossible using only the python described in the course. I wanted to take this as a python refresher and it was a complete waste of time. The subject matter is perfect! But execution is abysmal.
автор: Chris S•
Feb 27, 2018
The background for the lectures was really distracting. You shouldn't have people in the background ever.
The lectures didn't provide the information needed to solve the assignments and the answers aren't given after the assignment is due. So the course doesn't really teach much by itself. You need to do a lot of extra googling on top of the lectures. In that case, you may as well do your own projects for free rather than $40/mo for inadequate lectures.
автор: Bakhtawar U R•
Feb 09, 2019
No or least support.
Course Quality is great but problems with grader will left you with wasting your expensive time.
Assignments are good but intend to go wayyy more beyond the scope and to learn from online materials though other sites.
Grading system is not easy. You have the right answer but you'll need to waist hours to produce specific string for your grader to be satisfied.
This i not an elegant learning process at all.
автор: Christel V•
Jun 30, 2017
Horrible course. The instructor is reading the course from a prompter. '95% of the time, you see the instructor reading from the prompter, and two people working in the background. When they actually show the code the instructor is talking about, it goes so fast that it's impossible to read the screen. The instructor provides no motivation or background to what he says. He just rattles off the words in a uni
автор: George N•
Mar 17, 2017
Instructor gives minimal examples and says "go look on stack overflow". Then he proceeds to assign problems that don't really cover what the slides, lectures, or examples were on. If I all I was trying to do was just read some docs and look on stack overflow I wouldn't need to take this course now would I?
Poorly translated and cryptic instructions for assembling furniture are better than what you get here.