Nov 23, 2018
Very nice course, it gives good understanding of OOP features of Go. I liked a lot course's assignments also. Thanks, Pr. Ian Harris !
Aug 02, 2019
cool stuff,\n\nhelped to get a good overview of how go is different but still basically the same as most other languages.
创建者 David L•
Jun 16, 2019
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
Important topics are covered, explainations are ok (but could be better)
创建者 Sylvain T•
May 14, 2019
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.
创建者 Terence S•
May 19, 2019
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.
创建者 Phil H•
Jul 10, 2019
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.
创建者 Aleksandar N•
Dec 19, 2019
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.
创建者 Armin K•
Mar 13, 2019
Way too easy and way too little background information or depth, plus lack of real-world examples and a lot of inaccurate information.
创建者 Vsevolod V•
Mar 09, 2019
Quizzes and assignments contain mistakes, which make it hard (and in some cases impossible) to make it right.
创建者 Sachin T•
Jul 20, 2019
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.
创建者 Joseph F•
May 29, 2019
Peer-reviewed assignments are problematic and frustrating. I would never pay for a course that didn't have a TF/TA or Professor grading the assignments. Students can't possibly make judgement calls on code; else the code becomes very narrow and cookie-cutter.
创建者 Heiko H•
Jan 02, 2020
A broken assigment for more then 1 mon and no one likes to fix this.
All assigments are very hard to understand.
创建者 Serge T•
Mar 25, 2019
quite a lot of mistakes in study materials and tests
创建者 Justin L•
May 23, 2019
some homework questions are wrong
创建者 Yogesh M•
Sep 24, 2019
Too many errors in the content
创建者 Pavel P•
Dec 25, 2018
For some reason, I'm not able to put rating to my current course, so I'll put it here:
this course is not worth of 50 bucks a month - tl;dr - you are getting misleading information, you won't get any support, you may dream about course affiliates to be around to help you or others. You can do better googling "what is golang about" and you'll get it faster and less expensive.
The most insignificant thing at first - prof Harris talks about the GO lang which is fine, then he browses to some side facts which are not always true - well, it may lead to lower trust in this teacher. But - as I said - it's a small thing - you can still fact check every his statement.
Bigger problem are the materials - slides are often showing code that is wrong (cannot be compiled even), assignments are full of misleading information or even it happens that the scoring cheatsheet is misleading - e.g. - give 5 pts if everything is OK, give 3 pts if "more than one" requirements were not met - so what should I do when I have exactly one problem facing?
And the last - I would say the biggest problem - is this one. You are paying for this course, right? You are paying more than you are giving for some "all access" to all courses somewhere else. So you would expect some value for this. Well.... Wrong. This course (and its discussion threads, assignments, whatever) are not being reviewed by authors of this course, they are just not responding to you questions, notes, comments. It's the SAP (shut-up and pay) way. Instead of presence of some some responsible people - you are just left to your peers in the class (they may be none - regardless those fancy statements that you have to finish your assignment by "12/34 to be reviewed" - you'll be waiting weeks and weeks and paying and paying). Do you feel the difference? Instead having someone good that you could discuss your solution with, you may end up with someone that doesn't have a clue what he/her is doing and you depend on his/her decisions - if you are lucky enough and there's at least someone doing the same course as you.
So - you are paying not a little amount for slides, that can be found anywhere on the internet, for videos with a person, his statements could be anytime easily disputed and for putting 0+ people together, you are a fool.
创建者 Ardavan I•
Oct 30, 2019
This course is the only talks and powerpoint slides, there is absolutely no code, monitor screen sharing, etc.
The courses talk about fundamentals and computer science stories. The entire specialization focus is less than 50% on the Go language itself. No Go mod, No libraries, No coding...
For instance, The professor is about to explain a new thing and suddenly remember forgot to mention something before so he jumps to the missing point and then jumps back to continue. HARD to follow up...
The quizzes have many typos/duplicates. That makes you fail!
Overall strongly I do NOT suggest to waste your money or time on this specialization on Coursera.
创建者 Flavio S T•
Apr 22, 2019
The course is extremely basic, not very complete, and full of errors that are being dragged through multiple months, the errors have been flagged on the forums, and they are never fixed. The grading is made by peer review - which could be a good thing, but the rubric for grading are could be completely automated, and it isn't.
创建者 Gaurav H•
Oct 23, 2019
Course is more theoretical than practical not worthy at all.