good

Nice

nice

good

nyc

it

not

ok

ok

ty

.

.

h

.

g

,

-

.

.

n

Overally this course was very informative and fun! It's unfortunate that a lot of people seem to not take the course seriously, though. I came across many incomplete assignments in the peer review sections. I also wish my peers gave me actual feedback rather than just "good job" or "nicely done." I'm here to learn and improve and I don't feel like the community is helping me do that.

I also think it would be helpful if there was one main scenario that the practice assignments focused on rather than going back and forth between the different examples (CoffeeHouse, dog walker app, pizza app, etc.). I think seeing how the different steps play out in order in one scenario would give us a better idea of how the process works. I like having the other examples for some variety, but I think they'd be better if they were used as extra practice for those of us who want to try applying what we've learned in different situations before applying it to our portfolio piece.

Extremely useful information; unfortunately, the quizzes are poorly-made. It seems like the designers of this course didn't think about the questions they were writing nor the potential answers they offer to test-takers. The "correct" answers are frequently very similar to "incorrect" answers, or even contradictory to information told in the course. There is also no way to see why you got an answer wrong sometimes. The course simply says, "please review video X to learn why you got this answer wrong." First of all, sometimes the answer I submitted was consistent with what is written verbatim in the material. Second, if watching a video allegedly failed to teach me something, how would watching it again clarify anything? It's ironic this course emphasizes the need for UX designers to be empathetic, because the test designers don't seem to have taken this concept to heart. It's genuinely baffling how bad they are given the quality of the rest of the course.