Thanks! :)

Good

good

Good

good

good

I loved the foundational elements taught in this course. I looked up the instructors Ted Talk and she really seems to enjoy this stuff. This was my first cyber security class and I'll always have an appreciation for it. I definitely reccomend it for the concepts alone.

However, There are three things that I think could improve the course.

1) Update materials. I know that most of this stuff is foundational but some of the stuff like "https" is now a standard when browsing the web. Also, while the phone usage for the web was pretty small back in the early 2010s, it is massive now.

2) Include the readings in the quiz more often. while some concepts of the quizes were there, it needs to be a little clearer what the readings are there for. Are they reccommended or will they be part of the course?

3) Find a way to make the class more interactive. The hall of fame / peer review stuff falls out by the third week.

This course does not cover a lot of content and has more connection do design and HCI rather than security. There is no support in discussions, no discussions. There is only one assignment and it says in the instructions you will be able to upload a screenshot. Apparently that feature was forgotten because you can’t, you need to use an outside service and paste a link. There are words in reading that were supposed to be URLs but don’t work (like it says “click here” but “here” is not a link). The course feels sloppy and not very useful.

confusing, low quality of video discussions, low quality of presenters on the felling they are not prepared to discuss in the panel. low quality of quiz with question not covered. asked to read a very long paper about SSL that is a research of a class study not relevant for the informative intent of the course. took me too much time for me to read and I gave up the SSL paper.

Contents seems repeatative . Also When you already discussing the PDF contents in video lecture, I don't see asking to complete PDF reading before video lecture. I have spent reading the doc and felt I could complete the course much faster if i could skip reading some big PDFs. Otherwise it is good.

There are some questions that can be debated for clarity. Example: A company creates a password V^$5t.b2. Is this easy to crack no. But the question ALSO says it's given to the employee on a piece of paper. Is this easy? Yes, there's paper laying around with passwords on them.

The course is so old. Even the concept is still the same, the versions of applications that takes part in the videos are really old. The versions of gmail that took part in some week's lecture seems at least 3-4 years old.

Well prepared and interesting lectures. However, for a intermediate course, I've expected more comprehensive content. Let's see what the next courses for the cybersecurity specialization have to offer.

The course described the topics very well. Very easy to understand the defferent meanings. The material is from 6-7 years ago and should be updated.

Videos with guest speakers were unhelpful. Also, quizzes were not accurate and poorly written questions.

OK, but not really in-depth. Still has useful pointers, but they could be summarized on an A4 sheet.

The course was really good when played at 1.5x speed, at the normal pace it was really too slow.

Good course, but not really what I expected.

All materials are common things and knowledge.

Some good info, but the course needs to be updated to correct long known mistakes.

Content was a little boring. Secondly, Voice quality wasn't up to the mark.

Needs more content ; present course repeats

information, too often

The content is good, It partially outdated being made in ~2013

A very generic intro to UX course rather than cybersecurity

need to use more graphical and visual explanations

Very little useful information