The first assignment was very confusing in terms of what was required, and it should be fixed.

Everything is great apart of the third week assignment. I guess it needs to be changed.

Gave basic introduction to design principles but the assignments were very engaging

The course overall was good but the assignment instructions were not clear enough

very good course! the final was much more logical than the first course

This course really helped me understand what to ask of my Design team!

Lectures are clear and extensively cited; assignments are interesting.

Informative course..Thank you professor and coursera.

Good explanation of few design ideas and technics.

Another very good class in this specialization.

Really good introduction to interactive design

good tips for testing experiments

Very interesting course

Interesting materials.

I like it!

This course as much content in it and it's difficult to have an holistic idea how it all fits together. Some videos are taught having the same problem like, for example, some tools/themes are presented without us knowing what they are for. E.g., Chi-squared test and null hypothesis. Only after a while we understand their use. This bring a lot of overhead to us who are learning.

Some videos seem to have been re-worked over time and present cuts or jumps.

As for assignments, they should be better worked because some questions are not clear or misleading regarding the criteria that you want to evaluate.

For example, I already reported that in Question 2. and 3. of the assignment for the 3rd week. The example you give is a short introduction with two problems: 1) "I did the website", which can make the participant not to be at ease to criticize and 2) we're no evaluating the participant performance but the website. Next, you ask us to rewrite the introduction, which we do with those two problems in mind. Now, when we do the peer review we realize that you're expecting for us to rate the new introduction based on having "early prototype" and "user feedback". The original problems just seem not to count. Only by chance you can eventually write the new introduction touching the points that count for grading.

I like the content of the course. I feel I have learned a lot, especially working with the Chi Squared test. However, there was an example that was not clear on week 3 – Comparing rates. The example refers to comparing two buttons in a home page in order to improve traffic. The data provided was confusing because the Instructor refers that 118 people sign up the “learn more” button over a week. He calculates the chi squared value with 118 sign-ups for the “learn more” button. Then he said that 119 people sign up over a week for the same button, and he calculates the chi square value with this data. My suggestion is to review that video. Thank you.

Definitely improved from the first course of this specification. Better feedback on errors regarding quizzes' questions and still really interesting assignments for peer review that help you to learn. Still missing a document or a file with all the notes that one can take away and use as a reference guide, hence only 3/5.

It was a good course overall, but some of the material was very complex and would require more than 3 weeks of study. I am not sure whether it will be useful in a real life, especially calculating Chi-squared and such. I also wish the professor would simplify the language in which he speaks in the lectures.

Important information presented in this course. My only feedback is that a little more background or a bit more explanation on the concepts of chi square, p-value and meaning of these should have been presented. These subjects felt rushed and not well presented.

The visual design teachings could have a few more exercises that teach color choice and more details about typography styles. For example, emotions can be communicated with colors ...

It started off very interesting. Then it kind of fell apart during the chi-sqaure part. Some of the examples feel a bit dated and could use a bit more modern design.

I didn't like the way contents were organized. It was too much information in a very short time.

Several errors in lecture and lack-luster assignments decreased my perception of value.

The third week assignment and cumulative quiz are divergent to the course content.