Chevron Left
Volver a Global Warming I: The Science and Modeling of Climate Change

Opiniones y comentarios de aprendices correspondientes a Global Warming I: The Science and Modeling of Climate Change por parte de Universidad de Chicago

4.6
estrellas
294 calificaciones
118 reseña

Acerca del Curso

This class describes the science of global warming and the forecast for humans’ impact on Earth’s climate. Intended for an audience without much scientific background but a healthy sense of curiosity, the class brings together insights and perspectives from physics, chemistry, biology, earth and atmospheric sciences, and even some economics—all based on a foundation of simple mathematics (algebra)....

Principales reseñas

SL
5 de oct. de 2016

A great introductory course into Global Warming as well as modelling which gives you a better insight into what is actually happening with our planet. Started another course and it all fits in.

RC
26 de jun. de 2020

A detailed and really knowledgable course. The course structure and the knowledge shared by Prof. David made learning simple and interesting. The assignments are also very well structured.

Filtrar por:

101 - 115 de 115 revisiones para Global Warming I: The Science and Modeling of Climate Change

por Smail K

26 de nov. de 2017

Overall this is a good course. The drawbacks are that there are problems with week formulations of some questions. There is no support from course creators.

por Julie M

23 de feb. de 2018

Good course! in hindsight i wish i bought the book at the beginning/there were some written summaries/pdfs of the key points.

por Carlos V

29 de may. de 2017

Great content and very good teacher! I dont give it 5 stars because there is no teaching staff support at all.

por Jerry M

29 de nov. de 2017

1.Course lectures = very good. Occasionally too brief; more detail should be provided.

por Shahzad S

12 de oct. de 2017

I appreciate the coursera .

por Richard Z

15 de sep. de 2019

An overall good course.

por Randy K K

10 de sep. de 2017

Great course!

por Priscila F d S

14 de jul. de 2018

Very good!

por William L

3 de feb. de 2016

This course is addressing a critical subject matter. The material is great. I love the math.

But these are my personal metrics: A 4-star course has a high level of student collaboration and teaching staff participation, a 5-star course has very responsive teaching staff. I love learning the material but the learning environment is disappointing.

As the course progresses to the later weeks, the inconsistency between quizzes and lectures grows. Not greatly but enough to frustrate. Some quiz questions, with multiple choice options with only one correct answer, will not accept any answer. There are a few questions which are not covered in the video lecture (or covered in later weeks). Some answers can be found in the book (but the book supposedly is not required). Some answers can be googled but the answers vary wildly between sources.

Mathematical Thinking from Stanford is the gold standard.

por Adam H

27 de mar. de 2017

It is a good course & I am grateful for any one you puts effort into making education available. The -2 stars is due to complete absence of moderators leading to a defunct discussion. Also be aware that there are a lot of peer graded assignments. Which I think work well, but do mean more work than a lot of courses. In addition you must pass all tasks, which meant I actually failed the course by getting the second top mark you can get on the last assignment despite passing all the others (a fair bit of work put in),

por Brian W

5 de may. de 2017

The course was a broad overview to different areas of climate science. At the end I understood a little more deeply the mechanics of global warming, but some things could have gone in more depth. I found the quantity of assignments/quizzes to be a bit unmanageable even though some were very short. I really liked the explainer assignments. When I first saw them i thought they were going to be a bit much, but actually they were extremely helpful as they forced me to process the information learned week to week.

por Katarina T

15 de jun. de 2017

The course was much more difficult than I imagined - it required more time than the explanation suggested. For me personally, the theoretical part was often not enough to go through tests with ease. The most frustrating part was the last assignment - the scoring was not well designed (you need 9 and 10 to pass, but can get either 7 or 10). On the other hand, the course was interesting and I learned a lot. With a little improvement, it would earn 5 stars.

por Kathy H

22 de mar. de 2016

The material is very interesting. There a a huge number of quizzes over poorly explained (or not at all explained) models, which would still be an interesting challenge if the models themselves had better explanations. This has been the most frustrating Coursera class I have taken, not because of the subject difficulty, but because of the lack of adequate resources for working with the models.

por Shanta P

8 de may. de 2020

The course tutor's explanations were very poor with lots of the physics justified with incomplete or partial explanations (ie lots of arm waving etc). The diagrams and graphs were hand-drawn and were of very poor explanatory quality - no indication of what the axes referred to, for example. As a result I found myself having to look up subjects referred to in lectures in the web. I found that web material was far superior and of greater depth (try NOAA for one). If you have reasonable knowledge of maths and physics (even high school level) this course is a waste of time. Half way through I dropped this course out of frustration and found a far superior MOOC from Univ of Bergen.

por Julia H

13 de jun. de 2020

There is no support outside of discussion forum/others taking the class. Simulation modules are difficult and glitchy. Again without proper support or direction, these are far too difficult to understand to complete assignments. The lectures are interesting and informative however, the quizzes were often not covered in the discussions.