a

;

`

5

.

1

G

.

-

.

R

V

V

p

G

G

.

F

G

When I started this course, my only experience with HTML was <b> bold</b>, <i> italic</i>, and <u>underline</u>. After this course I have a much clearer understanding of what HTML is, and how it works, and I am able to now use it to a much greater extent than I was before.

The professor did an excellent job of explaining most things, but I did find that on occasion I had to stop the video and go back several times to understand what she'd said or to take notes, despite having slowed the video down as much as possible. (In my opinion, one should be able to slow the video down more than is currently possible, especially for those for whom English is not their native tongue.) With me, it wasn't that I didn't understand what she said so much as I didn't have time to take in what she meant before she'd gone on to something else.

I understand that Coursera is able to do what it does because of its method, which is basically independent study; one watches the videos, and reads whatever resources are listed, and goes on from there. If there is a question, it is not the professor in the videos that the question is asked of, but people hired as "teaching aides". These are the people (other than fellow students) who answer your questions, and they do not always answer in a 'timely' fashion. While this method works well for some people, I am quite sure there are others unable to learn with this method, especially if the subject turns out to be a more complicated, intensive one. Some people need to have a little more than just videos which they can only repeat over and over with the same information, hoping to learn something new from it.

The only other thing I have a problem with is the lack of oversight/security. There's no way of knowing if the person who 'earns' a certificate is the person they claim to be, or if they earned the scores given.

All in all, I think Coursera is a great tool, and well worth the low prices charged; I am sure there are plenty of courses still remaining (after the 'purge') that I would love to take.

The course was great. If you read all the information, watch the lectures, read up on the information again, including the small things that you didn't quite get, you are actually at the end of class ready to make a decent HTML5 webpage. The information Collen introduces for us is important and she is to the point. And as she stresses herself, it is important to play around with HTML while you are learning it. That said, there is a reason the class gets 4 and not more stars. There are spelling mistakes on the slides she uses. Some she mentions and others she does not. I don't mind a word or two being misspelled, but when code is missing it is a little more serious. Why? Because we write down the slides, and if we are not careful, and we don't remember everything after a long period away from HTML, those slides with HTML code where things are missing is not a helper. There is also some contradiction between what her slides say and the book she recommends. That one you will find out when you are taking a quiz and don't know the answer, because you have two authorities telling you conflicting information. The quizzes have some mistakes in them, which means if you are like me and want to get a 100% score, that test will have to taken a few times. I see students have reacted on this for at least a year, but this is not corrected. It might be difficult now that everything is in place and can't be changed, but one could certainly give a heads up notice. Point being, going over all the slides and all before the course was put online, was not done. The last part I want to mention is that the final project is too easy. Much more assignments could have been given in this part. I mean, we are here to learn. And the questions which are mostly yes and no questions your peers, which are correcting the final project can't detail, means you can pass with flying colors without knowing HTML very good. But all in all, it is definitely worth 4 stars.