zz

no

:)

ok

🤣

:)

:)

a

.

g

.

.

T

.

5

G

.

.

g

.

V

The instructions on this course are unclear at times. It is very odd to me that there isn't an explanation that the first video in the lab sections is just to be watched and is not the actual lab. This is my first coursera class and I was following along with the video at first. It was also unclear when I was supposed to do what was shown in the video and when I was supposed to also complete the tasks on my own.

Week 4 was a complete nightmare of mis-matched versions between the course materials and every tools and website. Considering these were all IBM tools and this is an IBM course this seems particularly problematic. It did not endear me to wanting to choose IBM products from the many similar options. I spent, without exaggerations, 4x as much time trying to navigate where the tools were now located within the tabs and figuring out what was required because things were missing in the instructions. The peer reviewed project page was particularly terrible. It needs to be QC'd asap because there is just plain missing information.

I could not get a photo to embed within the Jupyter notebook no matter which method I tried. I do not know if this is because I did something wrong or if there is something I need to do specifically within Watson Studio, like add the photo as an asset, to make the photo display instead of just posting a link. In the assignments I reviewed they also only had links so I suspect it isn't possible to display an image. I lost at least 30 min to troubleshooting this. I know I could have just done another of the listed tasks, which I did, but I wanted to learn how to display a photo, and I couldn't. If it isn't possible to do something with the tools provided then don't list it as a task to perform.

For a newbie course this had a few assignments that had incorrect or incomplete instructions. In week three the assignment was to add a type component to the SPSS Modeler, the instructions in step 11 referred me to the box and mentioned the arrow, not the ellipsis on the right side of the box. I spent a great deal of time reviewing the instructions (like an hour or two) until I accidently clicked on it and found the options. In week four I again found myself spending a great deal of time on the final assignment, not because I did anything wrong, but because when I posted the link to submit the assignment, no one else could see my assignment, eventually I discovered the submission link does not clear out when I put a new one in it, so while I would post the link in the browser and could view my notebook, nobody else could see my work because the link was corrupted with multiple links. I spent a few days trying to figure that one out. Hopefully this feedback is helpful, I am learning a lot about Data Science tools.

It gives a comprehensive overview of tools for data science, with practical hands-on exercises to ensure you can apply what you have learnt from the course. It saves you a lot of efforts to search and gather so much information. I really appreciate the hands-on exercises that helps apply the head knowledge thus retain it.

However, some info is unnecessarily detailed and not very helpful for the learner, and some questions checking about such details is not a good design. If the learner doesn't need to use such commercial tools, they don't need to know that much about them, and they can't remember such details for long either, without actual usage of them.

Another drawback is that the contents are somewhat biased towards promoting IBM products, and then I was sometimes wondering how biased the other contents might be, when bombarded with a lot of commercial logos of the tools they introduced.

The only problem with this course is the "peer-review" section. It's mostly because students have no other moral obligation to properly follow the rubric when grading. I think it would be wise to make a mandatory "comment section" when grading other than the maximum number of points. This is because while something might be correct, the grader might not consider so and should explain why the rubric is not being followed. For example, something as simple as "in this part, you missed this" "should've included this" or something similar. That way we can ensure that the students KNOW what to modify next. TL;DR Good course, but improve the "peer-review" system so it's properly graded. The course is quite complete and helps you out on the basics of installing programs which in my opinion is not intuitive at all and it does help with a lot of practice.