The grading system for p2p assignments is a bit confusing: it looks like it makes it easy to misclick the first question ("the program is written 3 pt" vs "the program compiles 5pt"), which people do quite often (e.g. they select 3pt instead of 5pt, and then select all the additional points that actually *require* running the program).

It would be great to instead have an automatic build system that checks that the .go file can be compiled.

It was a great course! Especially, after the test was submitted, it was a great learning experience due to the mechanism that students could check the code with each other. Unfortunately, before I submitted my test, I felt that I had less opportunity to learn how to share code tips within the coursera. I felt that it would be even better if the students could learn more from each other.

I have audited this course. The explanation is very crisp. All the concepts were covered clearly. Assignments are challenging and I found them interesting. Must take course for beginners. I have given 4* as I felt the author must have emphasised a little bit more on methods(at least introduction on their working) as some assignments required their understanding. I felt that to be a miss.

It is a very good course to pursue beginners, at the start I was scared that this course might be a little advance for me but the professor Ian Harris teaches so well that all the fundamentals of programming are covered very well. I am now enjoying Golang very much. A must-do course for anyone who has little knowledge of programming and wants to get started with Go.

Not enough direction for assignments. I believe there is ambiguity and it leaves peers to grade assignments incorrectly. For example, the 1st assignment says to show proof of compilation and that the program submission runs successfully. I did both in one-step using 'go run filename.go' and provided the screenshot, yet I had to re-submit my assignment.

The material presented is beginner-friendly. Concise and straight to the point.

The issue with the course is that assignments are easy, in my opinion. And there is a somewhat big waiting time for the peer review process to finish. Also, discussion forums are filled with requests for reviews, instead of questions related to the corresponding topics.

This course could really use a better testing regime (see the Odersky Scala class with fully automated test suites and submission). I also found some of the prompts to be a little to vague (in particular read.go should really show the actual file format as the part about the fields being 20 characters turns out to be a red herring).

The coarse gives an initial introduction to GO and some basic programming overview. I'd place it as a second year college coarse for computer science. A couple of rough spots on the assignments indicates that it hasn't been updated since originally created a few years ago. But - still useful.

Exercise descriptions could be a bit more detailed. E.g. oftentimes, the task description did not exclude some edge-cases that took quite some effort to implement, but in the peer-review process these edge-cases were usually not tested. Otherwise, great course!

The course is a pretty good beginners course. The assignment wordings could be better. Its vague at times. I would have loved to see the mentors chime in a little when there is confusion in the discussion board. I havent seen participation of mentors at all.

Course content is good and covered most of the points, only thing I felt was the compared to the questions asked in assessments the course content was fairly easy taught so needed pretty good amount of research to get things done else it was wonderful.

Professor is not active on forums and there are some mistakes in slides. The assignments are way too easy but good enough to get a hands on the language. They do make you look around on the internet for syntax. I'm pleased with the course.

Don't go enough deep on some topic like JSON where you can choose which field can be exported from a struct, or about tags, to make sure all the exported variables in JSON are lowercase as JSON don't like keys starting with capitals.

Clearer assignments would have made some things more straight forward. Some more coding examples during the courses would have been appreciated, now there is a bit too much of powerpoint. Otherwise great course and structure!

The course is quite short and informative, and quite fast-paced because of it. This is good. The downside is that in some of course tasks the description is quite misleading and there is no feedback from the creators.

This is a solid overview of Golang. I would recommend doing this alongside personal projects or other books. The assignments don't offer the complexity to really get into why one would use Go over any other language.

Peer review of assignments may be slow and not consistent. Reviewers also do not leave meaningful feedback. It would be much better to make automatic check of programming assignments.

The instructor is great! The course was a bit too basic in my opinion, and even though it targets experienced developers, some basic concepts were explained for too long.

Ok general introduction, some of the code was hard to follow along with because it wouldn't compile as typed, which was a bit confusing, but eventually figured it out.

Current version of Golang is 1.13. The section about project structure and workspace should be updated because now we can use Go module to manage source and packages.

The course as a beginner will be confused. If you don't have Prior Programming experience then it will be hard to understand the course. Otherwise a Great course.

As a experienced developer wanting to delve into Go, I found the content great. If the assignment descriptions were less ambiguous, this would be a 5 star.

It was a good course but I found out that at one place, syntax was wrong and for complete code I was forced to look up on the internet many times.

Needs updating. Should point to the Go Language's stdlib documentation. I liked how it kind of let you discover how to write the assignments.

Course is good. Peer reviews aren't great. You could have a bot do what other students do. I'd prefer someone experienced to mark my work.