There were some typographical errors andsome links didn't work.

This review is for several things:

Content 3 stars: sparse. The videos merely grazed the content. The readings were good, albeit a bit dated. Some of the videos and readings seemed to be filler. They were only vaguely referred to and had no real impact on the 2 question quizzes. Which, c'mon- there are three documents to read in one section and then give a 2 question quiz?

Instructor 5 stars: Very educational and is obviously an expert. I enjoyed the real life examples and his ability to make very good connections between experience and content. I would love to see another course with more content and where this Professor could really shine with more screen time. It was also very cool that the instructor and the interpreter were introduced. Very cool.

Certificate 0 stars, but not the Professors fault: Oh have mercy. I worked harder to just get a certificate for this course, then I actually worked on the course. First, I had to verify my account. What the H, Houston? This is a MOOC. THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE are taking these things. They are by no stretch high stakes testing. So, simmer down on your verification BS. Finally, after 4 photos, I send off my drivers license, which I am not happy about. And then downloading it was impossible. Utterly impossible. I had to screen shot the certificate to submit it for PD.

Review: What is happening with this formatting? Why am I all bundled up here in the middle? Get it together Coursera.

I expected a more in depth exploration of the topics and while the resource materials were more thorough, I would have loved to have gained that information from Professor Brittan. I loved his personal story presentations and just wished the lessons were longer overall!

It also would have been more helpful if the voice over interpretations were recorded asynchronously so the interpreter would have time to more thoroughly relate the signs. So often we only got paraphrases of what was being said. I think it would be more helpful to new learners to be able to associate signs with words and notice speech patterns, but that's hard to do if the interpreter doesn't speak along with the signs consistently.

The quizzes and final were not prepared well. Questions and answers are not clear and force the learner to rely on guessing than real knowledge.

The information was very good, but there were inconsistencies in the material here and there and absolutely no way for the discussion board to be useful for a class that has appeared over so many years. Mistakes in the material (quizzes and final) were never addressed it seems from other commenters.

That being said, I really enjoyed hearing the from the professor regarding the culture and perspectives of deaf individuals. I do not personally know anyone who is deaf so being aware of the culture was an improbability for me. I am now able to think more wholly about the issues deaf individuals have to navigate in my hearing world. Thank you for this course and hope that more people consider taking ASL courses to become more involved with the Deaf culture and its people.

This is fairly appropriate for hearing people who want to learn about the deaf culture and a very basic history of American deafness. The course itself felt kind of lacking, and the reading materials seem a little dated; having said that, ASL is still a very quiet culture in America (from a hearing person's POV). I did enjoy it, and would recommend it, but I hope there are more in-depth options available in the near future. The more we know, the more likely we are to accept and appreciate and learn how to communicate with this culture.

The final exam had several errors in it. One question had the question listed and the first choice was the same question. Two questions out of the 15 were the same.

I felt that the course was disorganized, was poorly structured and was more confusing than it needed to be. I think that the creators of this course need to go back "to the drawing board" before other people waste their time taking the course.

I didn't like some of the translation of the instructor's signs, there were mistakes. Plus the instructor oversimplified a lot of the instruction as I'm deaf myself so it just felt inconsistent with the general deaf community that I've experienced. He has somewhat of a bias.

The format was difficult to follow. Instead of so many short videos they should be combined for better flow of ideas. There were some technical difficulties with the class. Some links were not available.

Because I was interested in the topic and had researched it before, very little of the content was new to me. I would love a level II course in the same topic!

I would love to see an expanded version of this course with longer lecture, more reading materials, actual homework assignments, etc.

Teaches a lot about American Deaf culture. Very brief videos and easy test.

I don't understand the design of this course. Tiny lectures that were often 1 minute or less, and each segment began and ended with the University's intro and outro. It makes for a very disjointed and tedious learning experience. Also, no topic was explored in any sort of depth. Much more information was gleaned from the assigned readings and youtube videos. As someone with experience in designing online learning modules, the flaws in this course's execution alone make me glad I didn't pay to take it.

The fact that the lectures are conducted solely in ASL is what drew me to the course in the first place. I'm a new ASL/Deaf Studies/Interpreter Studies student, and who better to lecture on this subject than a Deaf professor in his own language? Although the lectures were jarringly short, the professor's expressiveness and passion for the subject comes through clearly in his signing. I barely know ASL, however, I think it's safe to say that his interpreter did him a disservice. The interpreter is monotone, conveying neither the emotion the professor communicates, nor the sophistication of the ideas presented. The interpreter doesn't sound confident in what he's saying and often stumbles over his words. (Weren't they able to re-record or edit the VO track?) If you watch the 2-hour long video that is part of the week 6 lecture with Mark Drolsbaugh, THAT is what great interpretation sounds like.

Overall, although I think it's a great accomplishment and opportunity to have a course taught in ASL by a Deaf professor, it suffers too much from poor, fragmented lecture design, making it frustrating to complete. For hearing students, the interpretation significantly detracts from the lessons.

This course was a huge disappointment for me. The good thing about it is that it is fully in ASL and tries to make a broad lookout on the life of deaf Americans... The downsides, though, are plenty. Overall, I don't feel like I received a complete overview: rather a number of separate pieces of information (legal, societal etc.) that do not clearly link together. Some topics take long to be discussed (e.g. labels) but leave me without a clear understanding of what names are (im)proper saying that it is all very personal. Yet, the test presses me to decide between rights and wrongs. The physiological side of deafness (e.g. why and how it occurs, why hearing parents can have a deaf child etc.) is left out, although it would be helpful in setting the scene. The tests are poorly made: the weekly quizzes have hardly any relation to the videos, and the final one boasts two exactly similar questions, one missing answer option (the question phrase is there instead), and overall copies weekly quizzes apart for a couple of new questions. Sadly, I would only recommend the course to people who have next to no understanding of the deaf world, otherwise they may be bored and confused.

This was an ok class as someone who has next to no knowledge on ASL or deaf culture. I mainly only took this class since I'll be taking a summer ASL class and wanted to get some basic fore-knowledge to prepare myself. I was a little disappointed at how basic the information was as it didn't even seem connected. But the snippets I did learn at least piqued my interest to learn more.

I've taken a few beginning ASL courses, so this was supposed to be a refresher for me and a chance to delve deeper into Deaf culture and not just ASL. Unfortunately, the content was so short (about 1-3 minute videos, including intro). The course didn't cover anything new for me or even go as in-depth as my other ASL courses.

interesting for learning about the deaf culture but I was hoping to learn more about the language and how to use it (the gestures)

Not really as in depth as I had hoped for. Also, the intro music for the videos is EXTREMELY irritating.

Too short or simply? A demo version only? Twice two same question in test, really?

The quizzes contained typos & mistakes, as well as "answers" which contradicted what the lecturer said in the videos. The videos themselves were often without any real information, and difficult to follow. Sometimes a video would be only 30 seconds long, and contain 10 seconds of musical introduction, and then one single sentence from the lecturer. [musical intro] "Now we're going to talk about ______" [end of video]

The real guts of the course are in the homework assignments, which are videos & readings. THESE were helpful and informative. I learned from these, but ultimately found the main points of the course difficult to follow.

It was unsettling to me that the Instructor communicated that he was apartment shopping with his girlfriend. That goes against my morals, that a couple live together without being married. Also, he [the instructor] seemed to be an unkempt person. These things were distracting for me as a learner, and I didn't appreciate them. I did appreciate some of the additional resource material. Thank you,Mrs. Walz

translator for the course doesn't translate correctly. It's actually bad I would not recommend if you want to actually learn sign and community.