nice

GOOD

Good

GOOD

Good

Best

Good

Gud

...

ok

.

.

My rating is more like 3.5 stars, and my concerns are (also) around the peer review portion of this course. I personally "reviewed" several submissions that were clearly plagarized, and in one instance they were given to me back-to-back. Since these same people are responsible for reviewing my work, I am left not entirely sure if I am understanding the course material or just the recipient of a passing grade from someone who is trying to cut as many corners as possible to get to their certificate.

As a whole, I walked away from the course feeling relatively confident that I understood the material presented but if someone asked me whether or not they should take this course, it would come with several caveats.

I have mixed impressions about this particular class. It provides a good amount of information, however, I find the presentation of the topis not up to the standards of course 1 and 3. This one is very contrsating. Many definiotins are not clear or insuficient. Sometimes, the definitions change as you progress thought the course, sometimes even within the same video. This causes confusion. I beleive that the eleven question quizes conains a questions that is not covered in the class. I reviwed the vidoe and the transcript three times and I could not find an answer. I did not experience such an issue in courses 1 or 3. This peresentation and organization are not as solid as in corses 1 and 3.

Peer-reviewed graded assignments portion is flawed. Others and myself included, have had instances, where when submitting the assignment, someone "grades" it, by giving zero scores, but then leaving feedback, such as "great work" or "good project charter", etc., and then you don't pass the course because of this. Clearly there are people out there who either aren't paying attention to what they're clicking when grading, or purposefully sabatoging participant's scores.

Other than the flawed peer-graded assignment, the rest of the course itself was very helpful/insightful, and I thoroughly enjoyed this course.

The certificate aside, there's a lot of good stuff in here if you actually want to learn. It does seem that a lot of the participants are making minimum effort to speed run through it when it comes to peer assignments and group discussion which I find really discouraging. It devalues the certificate and makes me feel like perhaps I'm wasting my time. But like I say, if you want to get into the coursework it's really helpful. The only thin part of the course was in familiarity with tools. They basically give you a list of websites and say to check them out in your spare time.

I have many feelings about this course. I've learnt much but there were sooo much to learn just to pass modules. In 1 and 2 courses this was normal to find out the reading is kinda in the same topic we've just watched and its purpose was to fundamentalize your knowledge (or slightly expand it) but on that course readings were some completely new topics and then your knowledge of them were checked by quizes. Our instructor feels like she was reading all the time and doesn't have that flow. There were too much material and I think I didn't adopt my knowledge well.

I have completed all the study materials in advance but it is showing 97% for last 3 days and I could not move to next course. peer reveiw time line is showing as would be completed befor June 6.

I could not complete my course with my first payment as I was not well and made the second time payment. I have selected one month time to complete whereas last 3 days are wasted and still I dont know when 3rd part will enable or ask for next payment.

Courseera will give mail support for this kind of issues to understand where we are having constraints.

I am doing this certificate in conjunction with my work and I think it is ridiculous that the peer review assignments are required to complete the course. I am not going to do them because they are a waste of my time. I am already a manager and have real-world experience. I don't need some random person evaluating my work. If it keeps me from getting my official certificate, then so be it. So ridiculous. If they continue to be a requirement, I will take my money elsewhere.

Also, the videos in week 1 have terrible sound and should be fixed.

I enjoyed the course and it was a bit more challenging. However, I take issue with the peer-reviewed assignment. For example, I lost points for "Success Criteria" even though I submitted 4 measurable outcomes for determination of project success. I also lost point for deliverables even though I exceeded the required amount. Why? I cannot help but wonder if the language is an issue for some overseas reviewers. Also, if points are lost, I believe that specific feedback should be given. Otherwise, how will a student understand the mistake?

The portion on tools, how to use them, which tool is good for what type of project etc was incredibly rushed and one of the areas I was most looking forward to. I hope future iterations of this training flesh that part out a bit more. The training also relies on the presumption that everyone understands more complicated business titles and their nuances (e.g. web developer vs web designer), some more universal examples would be helpful for the graded assignments, or more explicit explanations about who does what.

The course material doesn't seem to follow best practices. When I was using Coursera AI to help me study for the Module 2 quiz, I had a question about project launch and landing. What I responded to AI was what the course said, AI told me that wasn't correct. When I took the quiz, I responded to one of the questions based on what AI told me and got the question wrong. I am trying to study to take the PMI-PMP. I thought this course would help but now I'm questioning its commitment to PMI best practices.

While this course does give basic info on how to get started, it is woefully inadequate on the details. What details it did go into, like Google Sheets, really aren't mission critical. I feel barely familiar with the basics, so my only recourse to spend more time on my own figuring it out. Maybe that’s part of their intent, but the course seemed built with the assumption it was giving a well rounded set of skills when it just just barley gave me enough to learn what questions to ask. 

Overall content was alright. What was frustrating was grading the project charter assignment, and receiving the grade from other students. There wasn't an "answer key" from which to reference so everyone graded on what they thought was the correct answer. And, my reviewer left scant feedback on why they thought my answer was incorrect.

Perhaps you can provide a higher grade for those giving meaningful feedback and have an answer key with full instruciton on how to give grades.

I think the content is very good but I dont like the peer reviewed aspect of the program. I understand that there arent enough people at Google to check over all of our work, but I dont like the idea that I pay for this program to have non-professionals like myself review my work and determine if I pass the course. The peer reviewed feedback and scores shouldn’t determine if you pass and get credit, it should only be to give you a sense of what others think of your work.