Good

GOOD

good

like

NAA

4.3

op

..

d

K

.

x

I

.

4

.

I am not satisfied with this course. The instructor doesn't seem to know what she is teaching. The annoying part is, as she talks she reads every word from the screen next to the camera. You can see her eyes rolling from left to right and her reading is poor and not fluent. She recorded the course unprepared. Sometimes she confuses the words. I think everyone can do that. I have seen online instructors who do not read text behind camera, they talk and code at the same time. Most of the time she recorded herself talking. I would not want to see her talking, I would want to see her screen, and some code as she explains. It would be better if she didn't show herself this much. it is hard to focus on what she is saying because you see the instructor sitting there and reading us the book or something.

In the past few years I have taken a number of HTML courses and I know the basics quite well. This is a 'beginner's course' but the final coding project was next to impossible to pass. There was a quiz that would allow you to pass the course without having your code correct. Although my code validated before I submitted it , I got it wrong on the quiz three times and it never did go through correctly!!. I did pass the course with a final grade of 94% but I don't feel confident in my coding ability at all. It would be fine if I had received some feedback showing where the problems were. Without it I have no idea what went wrong. Very frustrating.

I feel like this could be a good course if there was more cohesiveness. The instructor is great and i really do like her teaching style, but when teaching all of these new tags to absolute beginners, I feel like there needs to be a little more backstory and instruction. Most of all (especially for the final project), there needs to be some sort of thorough instruction on how to bring it all together. I did figure it out, but I did have to do it through outside sources, which I think defeats the purpose of this course. An absolute beginner knows nothing, and I don't feel like this course was for those with zero knowledge.

I would say a three, the reason is that It should of contained forms and a little more hands on training. Some examples of this would be to create some more small web pages, just to get the student more experienced in building pages and a couple of more peer reviews to get the students a bit more mastery of the subject. I think that it was great in that it started the students into learning how to check their work, to make sure it was accessible, and validation of the code. It was a good refresher and I am looking forward to the next class. Have a great day.

There are lots of typos in the course materials as well as and more critically in the final assignment review questions. For example, for Favorite Foods section, in order for the page to look right as expected by the instructor, you will need to use the unordered list. However, in the peer review criteria / question, it asks "was the ordered list used?" instead of "was the unordered list used?". Because of this incorrect peer assignment question, one of my reviewers took a point off. Please review your course materials and fix all typos!

While I was disappointed that HTML forms weren't discussed, this course provided very solid information. A lot of slide and code typos were distracting though and it felt like the instructor was talking less to me (and more reading from a hidden screen), which dampened the overall experience a bit. But the way the instructor explained the course material was very approachable and easy for a beginner like me to understand. After taking this course, I feel like I'm one step closer to thoroughly understanding HTML5.

Everytime the thing i hate about any course on coursera is the late peer review of the assignments. It takes too long to get your assignment reviewed. No matter how fast you complete your assignments, no matter how many assignment you review, in return you only have to wait for your own to get reviewed. Really it sucks. Sorry for such words but this is really frustrating.

Better there must be machine reviewing instead of humans review as there can be no one doing that particular course alongside you.

While the textbook used in this course provide a lot of useful background to the Internet, it's history and trends...etc All good knowledge. I am not sure it's the best teaching tool for this course. It lacks the structure to build up a solid foundation of HTML. If the course stops here, the text may be a good reference for students to explore on their own. With CSS and javascript later in the series, I felt a stronger (both in depth and coverage) HTML proficiency is needed.

The most weak part is automatical grading. When structure and semantics are essential, text inside tag is not, guessing if exists space between elements isn't acceptable as well. Also it's difficult to check when long code snippets should be pasted as plan text in short text field. Better to use file uploading with required snippet. For me also not enough accent was on html 5 features with dedicated examples how use new tags and attributes.