na

na

ok

.

I believe that my initial submission of my final assignment was graded by a person who had a low level of English proficiency. COURSERA NEEDS TO INSTITUTE LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY Standards for students, whether it's for a course taught in English, Hindi, Japanese, Arabic, or any other language. The students should meet reasonable standards of language proficiency for the language the course is presented in.

I suspect this because I SAW A LOT OF VERY POOR EXAMPLES OF ENGLISH USAGE IN THE FORUMS of THIS COURSE. I also saw this in the final assignments of other students. If I am correct about that, that is unfair to everyone taking the course, as this course is presented ENTIRELY in English. I am GLAD that this course is available to students around the world, but they should have to demonstrate proficiency in the language in which the course is given.

If I were taking a course presented in Hindi (or ANY OTHER LANGUAGE OTHER THAN ENGLISH) and I wasn't proficient in Hindi, then how could I be expected to comprehend and accurately grade the work of a student who writes in higher-level Hindi than I could comprehend? It would be gravely unfair to that student if my poor comprehension of the language resulted in him getting a low grade.

The other possibility is that my original submission was simply graded by a lazy person who didn't want to take the time to read one of my lengthy answers. This is also not fair. Don't do this to your peers. This is serious. It's a graded course.

I have some suggestions for this course, but before that let me tell you the content was great so far. 1. Audio: The volume throughout the videos was not consistent, it could have been leveled properly. Some videos were having high background noise and hiss, you can clean the noise over there. 2. Unnecessary videos which can either be there in text form or if you have to present it in the videos only than instead of just reading the slides, a live person explaining them could've made much more sense. I am doing both Google and IBM, this seems to be more practical (relevant), detailed but presentation is poor. Some of the details are outdated.

I strongly advise anyone using Coursera to ALWAYS double-check your peer-reviewed finals. Both peer-reviewed finals I have completed, on the first round of "peer-review" have been incorrectly graded. The only reason I know this is because I double-checked my grades and peer reviews. BOTH TIMES, the initial "peer-reviewer" has incorrectly graded my final, and the only recourse I could take is to re-submit my final, not knowing if the next :peer-reviewer" would actually grade correctly, according to the rubric. Just saying, double check your final grades, and fight for the grade you know you deserve.

It was nice to learn more about what data analyst contains and the basics, but most of the interviews and that you get questions about what was said in those interviews should not be in the quizes in my opinion. Also that you have to review 2 of other assignments is also a big let down. I did not chose (pay for) this course to review others, but to learn more myself. If you want to review others it can be fine, but do not make it mandatory. I really hope the next course goes more into dept, start to do things ourselves and not to have to do peer reviews.

Lack of practice opportunities and a frustrating irregularity in volume of videos. I turn the volume up to accommodate a quiet speaker, and the next speaker is so loud that my speakers are clipping. Quality control here was lacking. Information presented was good, though sometimes it asks participants for specific information that we have not yet learned about. It's hard for me to talk about the specific strengths of a piece of software that I have never used before.

Very general overview for people early on in their career who are looking to gain conceptual knowledge of the field. Has very little actual information on producing visuals. Also there is no way to mark the course as complete if you are auditing, which is not fair. I thought the purchase option was to have a certificate to walk away with, not to hold you hostage after taking the entire course that you can't mark as complete.

Para ser un curso introductorio está bien, abarca el grán abanico de temas iniciales para el análisis de datos. Sin embargo, el bombardeo conceptual parece a veces innecesario y los ejemplos prácticos para el tema estadísitico insuficientes. En vez de listas interminables de tipos de elementos de datos, falta más ilustración de esos conceptos en el análisis real y práctico. Incluir laboratorios no estaría de más.

The course can be quite boring and is suited for people who truly do not have any exposure to data analytics. The general quizzes seemed like they weren't really touching upon important information, it doesn't seem relevant to memorize many different software names, for instance. In summary, an unnecessarily long intro to what data analytics is. If you know anything about the topic I'd recommend skipping this.

The course provides a lot of knowledge in regards to Data Analytics, but it is very fast paced and sometimes it feels really hard to keep up. My suggestions would be to present to overview first and then go in depth with the topic. Currently they are presenting each topic one by one, without giving a proper overview and it feels confusing, especially because I am not familiar with this field.

Useful introduction with overview of the field, valuable perspectives on data analytics as a skill/career. Discusses key terminology and commonly used software, apps, and other analytic tools.

Very passive learning experience. The only activity that requires more than memory recall occurs at the very end. Hope the next courses in this specialization are more inteactive.

This is a suitable introductory course, but some of the videos seemed excessively long for the relative depth of information provided. I really liked the viewpoints videos. The quizzes were often poor at testing actually knowledge and instead were more interested in testing memorization or ability to quote/look-up direct phrases from the course material.

There was a lot of useful information in this course, excatly what I would expect from the introduction. Yet, it wasn't really engaging. I would rather prefer to hear more real, living instructors with some charisma, not a synthethic voice all over. I liked the part where you examine others assignments and they examine yours, though.

i see in final peer assignments , though the answers are correct for some questions it was graded zero. so i kindly request course era to do a proof check before submitting the graded assignment to the canditate. if this thing goes on in coming courses too, there will be a huge affect on the final grade of the course.

I like the course, it's clear and like the visual audio. I gave 3 stars because you ask someone who is new to this class to review our assignment and this person didn't give me full grade for a question where I got all the answers right.

You need more people for viewpoints. For me same people are talking about same thing. And You should get a combination on both an instructor is teaching and also instructor is instructing through the presentation.

I was looking for more practical skills, I found I had to learn a lot of information for the weekly quizess that I forgot almost immediately after learning it becuase it seemed kind of irrelevant/theoretical.

I wish they had some flashcards to memorize the terms as you were taught them. There is also a lot of fluff that doesn't need to be there. This should take you 3 days working at 2 hours per day.

It felt like this part of the course was a lot of definitions, and explanation without any hands on activity that would help me grasp and understand these concepts a lot better.

excellent content but delivery can be improved. assignments should NOT be peer reviewed as some may not understand english and misgrade, which is very unfair

I would be glad for more "information heavy" and challenging introduction. But perhaps I am somewhat biased my background is in economics with math minor.

The course was informational, though the quizes were a bit too basic and answers were available in the transcript. It should have been a bit conceptual.