An awesome course!

Very Nice course

Good!

The answer to one quiz question is wrong. Someone had reported this months ago, but there hasn't been any feedback or update. Also, all assignments are peer-reviewed, and not everyone is willing to provide constructive feedback, so it's kinda hard to verify whether your code is really good or not. I wonder why can't they create a simple automatic grading system...Given that it is super easy to create test cases for these assignments.

Negatives:

Not an intermediate course, more like a beginner course for me. Too much background info which is not go related eg why functions, what are good properties of functions, this is too generic and beginner material

Examples are not good: bad variable and function names, non-practical or even confusing/misleading

Positives:

Important topics are covered, explainations are ok (but could be better)

The course is really good near perfect but there is to much errors and unclarity on exercises

Week 2 question 4 is false

Week 4 last exercise contain some errors when its says :

"The code contains an interface type called Animal, which is a struct containing three fields, all of which are strings."

Please correct this thank you

The videos are perfect!

The topic is good, however the videos really have this old-school touch- you know, the very reason you choose to go to Coursera and not back to some class bench. Evaluations would also benefit from a good review, too much frustating inconsistencies for my (and many people on the forums) taste.

Honestly, I'm very disappointed by the quality of assignments and quizzes. Also, this course explains too much basic programming paradigms even tho it suppose to be for the people who already into the programming and know basics. Many many mistakes and even false statements in the video

The reason I'm giving 3 stars is that there's no moderator who can help out with the course content. There are some problems with the content that other students are complaining about but no help to fix that problem.

The course itself is fine.

BUT:

1. A known mistake in a quiz - noone seem to care.

2. Forum is full of begging for reviews and contains no useful information.

3. Generally course seems to be abandoned by creators.

There were a few inaccuracies which might be confusing for newcomers to the language. It would be good if the instructor or someone else with editing permissions could take a look at the feedback and act on it.

An ok course. Lots of annoying typos in the slides, and the instructor seems to stumble over some of the explanation. In the end, it did teach me the basics of go functions and OO concepts.

The course material is good, and the lecturer as well. But there are too many technical mistakes within the course. Also, there is a need to beg for someone to review your work.

The examples in the video are not very practical, there are errors in the tests, and the exercises cannot create scenarios where the features evaluated make sense.

Content reasonably good. Some errors in quizes and assignments.

Forums unusable as everybody just posts requests to review their assignments.

3 years after, and the quizz still have errors... This lecture could have been more prepared, with better arguments, less digressions, etc.

Way too easy and way too little background information or depth, plus lack of real-world examples and a lot of inaccurate information.

Quizzes and assignments contain mistakes, which make it hard (and in some cases impossible) to make it right.

Easy examples selected while teaching the course - that makes It hard In the practical world.....

There are few places where the content of the slides is inconsistent with the lecture content

There are some errors in slides and exercise tests.

More in-dept teaching required

I liked Ian, and the videos were helpful and the materials covered what I thought was useful and needful information. I'm giving this course a lower score, however, because there are at least two problems in the module quiz and programming assignments. The wordings are ambiguous and in some cases contradictory leading to people struggling to figure out the right problem to solve. The course boards have a lot of questions and comments about these issues, and it looks like these issues have been there for a long time (> 6 months). Its sad because the issues could be readily fixed, but as others in the reviews have noted no one seems to try to fix these issues.

There are obvious errors like ">" instead of "<". The instructor is mentioning something different than what is on the slide. These are admittedly trivial errors but when you are trying to understand complex topic like "Interfaces" these errors make it that much more difficult. It would be helpful to have at least one example of a full program and walk to through step by step. When discussing concrete type and interface type, it would be helpful to have examples on the same slide. I was going to upgrade to fully paid subscription if I understood topic of "Interfaces" well. Unfortunately it did not meet my requirement.

A bit basic, I expected more content and more advanced topics on the second course of a specialization. What makes it the first course I give below a 3 is: Quizzes with several questions that have 0 correct answers, and haven't been fixed in over 2 years despite lots of people reporting it. So you have to get lucky with a guess or go back and brute forcing it over several attempts to get 100% on the quiz and course. Not what I expect when paying for a course.