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.
Jun 24, 2019
Learned a bit on go syntax and how polymorphism works.\n\nThanks the instructor. Good learning experience overall.
por Roberto L•
Oct 23, 2018
Error in question of quiz for week 3
por Hongyi L•
Oct 28, 2018
The course given by Ian is great. But I wish there would be a TA in future.
por Luiz C•
Nov 08, 2018
Course is concise, though going through some advances concepts of functional programming. Presentation is ok. Examples and Final Exercises could be more interesting/challening
por Seyed M H M•
Oct 01, 2018
Good course . again few error on quiz and materials
por Alec J•
May 21, 2019
I'll say again what I said regarding the first course in this series. The teacher is good, and the material is valuable, but the fact that students have to grade each others' work is ridiculous, and actually kind of angering, if I'm honest. Why would you trust me to grade someone else's work, while I'm learning it at the same time they are? Who knows? Maybe I'm an idiot. Even if I'm bright and hard-working, I won't have the same insight as an instructor would, looking at the same material. This is pedagogically difficult to justify, and I can only believe that it's meant to shield the instructor from the drudgery of the task.
por Maxim C•
Jun 28, 2019
Still there are errors in the tests
por Alexander B•
Sep 07, 2019
An awesome course!
por Edward H•
Mar 20, 2019
The programming assignment workload is reasonable, but there is little support and discussion to support a newbie programmer. Also I believe a graphic display of user input and the program outputs would be much easier to understand. Reading off the instructions are too open to interpretation.
There is also the grading scheme is not fine-grained enough. It could utilized better to provide a more structured approach to a solution.
loop (1 mark)
use of map ( 1 mark)
user of slice ( 1 mark)
So there will be 10 chcekpoints to verify and validate.
Using 2 points as aggregate scores, did not help to achieve that goal. It penalised students excessively in my opinins.
por 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.
por Vsevolod V•
Mar 09, 2019
Quizzes and assignments contain mistakes, which make it hard (and in some cases impossible) to make it right.
por 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.
por 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.
por 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)
por 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.
por Serge T•
Mar 25, 2019
quite a lot of mistakes in study materials and tests
por 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.
por Justin L•
May 23, 2019
some homework questions are wrong
por 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.
por 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.
por 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.