1. Very good way of applying what was learnt in the courses done earlier.

2. Purge old submissions from 2015/2016

3. Content/Problem statement should be reviewed E.g Visitors to Boschtools website can now visit Grainger directly, without leaving the website.Similarly We are working on Bosch & Grainger using Display & Email in their strategy, whereas these seem to be least drivers of traffic to their websites.

4. Share what the client actually did – to see how far what was proposed , was used.

5. Mandate a document upload for assignments. I have flagged assignments that do not have the mandated attachments. Peer grading in this course boarders a sham here, with people openly asking for a full rating because they have done the same for your assessment.

6. Please Control plagiarizing- Initial Submission can be made using any file and then someone else’s work can be copied and the original submission , be edited back. I have seen many such cases

7. Need a Reference Response in Key areas, as peer grading does not highlight all the aspects that should be considered. Yes, protecting this content from plagiarizing, will be an issue. - Donot know if the answers we gave were generally in the correct direction or way off the mark

8. Module -5 could be scheduled earlier, as Research guides Actions

9.The Background/momentum built in week1 , is lost in rest of the weeks

I found the instructions cluttered and the client disappointing--for one, UofI advertises the capstone as an opportunity to work with Grainger/Bosch...if you took the capstone in 2016. Instead of laboring for an obsolete task, I think UofI would've done a better service for students by giving them the choice of client.

THIS COURSE HAS NOT BEEN UPDATED SINCE IT WAS FIRST SET UP