Very clear course, provides definitions and/or discussion of terms that at are useful for a clearer understanding of the ID process. Good continuity between topics and good use of diagrams.
I thoroughly enjoyed this course. It is well taught and well organised. The material provided a thorough overview of the field, and the readings were particularly fascinating and helpful.
創建者 Emmanuel F•
The lectures are great, although it could be suggested more practice exercises.
創建者 yara a h•
I benefited alot from this course. Very happy to have completed it.
創建者 David H•
I enjoyed the course and would love to download and take it again.
創建者 Dawn S•
Good course if you are looking for learning theory information.
創建者 Zeinab M•
Nice course with comprehensive details on instructional design
創建者 Keena P•
Very challenging but I would highly recommend this course!
創建者 Muhammad A•
at some point delivery was not easy to understand
創建者 Maricar Y C•
Great start to Instructional Designing career!
創建者 Amanda K•
Good overall, for a Foundations Course!
創建者 Benjamin W•
The course content material was very practical in that it allowed me to look at my subject matter and determine how I can actually design a course. The instructors were very knowledgeable, however, Mr. Huang was hard to follow at times. Teaching online is a very different environment from face-to-face. More dynamics and energy is needed to keep the learner's attention. I may suggest that more enthusiasm be generated when speaking in front of the camera. All other instructors were great. They came across the platform with much enthusiasm, practical knowledge, and most of all, experience in dealing with the course content was unveiled. With respect to peer reviews, I understand that online learners need to get involved by discussions, however, to have a peer review an assignment and base a final grade from a peer review is quite disturbing. I understand the large volume of students in the online environment, however, it is the instructor who should review the assignments and offer the grade. This course would benefit if there were a question and answering component that involved the instructors. I had questions regarding a module, but did not know who to contact to engage in a conversation. Yes, the discussion forums are present, but those were not avail. The discussion forums tend to lose value as no one is actually monitoring the discussions. I ask that the team review the discussion forums and devise a plan to actually review and respond to the learners. Thank you.
創建者 Kevin L•
The course had too much information for me to recall. Waiting for a peer to become available to review my assignment was also a time consuming process. The course is very thorough indeed, and whomever takes it will gain a deep understanding of the principles and basis of I.D. Be prepared to watch many videos, and be prepared for rigorous formative assessments. It is my belief that Week 4's summative assessment's question 5 is problematic, as many students have indicated. It really needs re-thinking, as I had to take the test more than 10 times just for the sake of that one question that I needed to get over the 80% pass threshold. In retrospect, am I happy about paying the $60 -odd Dollars to complete this certificated course, with the the name 'University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign' attached, and did I learn a lot? Yes. The value and knowledge gain was very good.
創建者 Josh P•
The reason why I don't give this course a 4 or 5 star review is because it seems the administrators/facilitators of this course haven't looked into and changed the issues that learners are identifying in the discussion forum with Week 4 quiz- particularly questions #3 and #5. Either the wrong answers were mistakenly checked as correct answers in the quiz builder, or the content does not line up correctly with the questions, because there are inconsistencies with the content and those quiz questions. I spent several hours re-attempting this quiz and became very confused with the content and also very frustrated. In the end, I had to search in the discussion forum for the correct answers that someone kindly provided, or else I would've spent multiple additional days re-taking this quiz until I passed by luck.
創建者 Ana C•
I enjoyed the course as a starting point, although some of the content seemed ambiguous and/or not clear which resulted in confusion when completing assignments. The assignments should be reviewed to match what the slides and lectures stated exactly. Also, I felt the need for slides with clear concept definitions and summaries at the end of each video. Videos could be a bit more lively as well to increase engagement. More practical examples would enrich the course even more. Overall, it was a good course for those looking for a starting point.
創建者 Judy O•
As a first time participant to both the institution and the course material I believe that the duration of course should be extended to 6 weeks. The course content was presented in a clear and precise manner by all lecturers however sometimes it was difficult to fully understand what they were trying to say.
In terms of examination result I would suggest that answers be given upon fully completing of the course. In this way the participants would have a better appreciation as to why some of the answers were incorrect
創建者 Maria Y•
This course delivers what it states - it gives you the basics of Instructional Design theories. But does it inspire you? No. Does it make you want to dive into the exciting waters of instructional design? No. Does it get you bored to death? Yes. Does it make you the happiest person in the world when it is finally over? Yes, it does! Nobody takes such seriously sounding course to have fun, yet, I believe, people who are experts in writing instructions should be more inspirational and learner oriented.
創建者 Canan M K K•
Thank you for this content. I gave three starts because I believe the course is very theory driven with very very little number of examples provided from real life. Either at each step or overall at the end; some real-life examples and case studies would be very helpful. Also; I wish the training itself followed the suggestions it is providing. I believe it could have been a much more engaging and interactive training with right balance of theory, examples and application.
創建者 Claire W•
After finishing it I feel that as a standalone course it really doesn't cover enough content to be a benefit. It doesn't finish at a natural pause in topics, but rather feels as if it ends while you are still partway through. As it is part of a mastertrack certificate, I guess it really only makes sense to do the course if you are planning to complete the whole certificate.
創建者 Lauren K•
The instructors weren't interesting to listen to. I expected better curriculum since the class is Instructional Design. The male teacher mumbled a lot so I'm very glad there was a transcript. It was a good course to get a small grasp of what ID is. I definitely will need to take more courses to actually learn more valuable information.
創建者 Kokeita M•
This is an efficient, convenient way to learn the Instructional Design Foundations and Applications. However, there is no interaction with any of the instructors. The course offers very little practice or ability to apply what you learn. If you enjoy watching videos and reading, this course is ideal for you!
創建者 Renee A•
This course is packed with information. It can be hard to digest in the format presented. Please note that many of the professors are skilled but have very thick accents and the transcripts are often inadequate to get the point across.
Really enjoyed the sessions with Grace especially. This was an interesting course considering that I am a Design Educator. I will be able to implement what I have learned in my teaching skills
創建者 Iulia K•
too much theory., while instructional design is all about practice. The course needs more examples and case studies. Also, the multiple choice tests need improvements
創建者 Doug B•
In general, I believe the course was very good and helpful to understanding instructional design. I appreciate the short and reasonable assignments and class length. The content was very interesting and encouraged me so much that I had considered more course work with Coursera and even with the University of Illinois Master Track program. Until week four! The final week culminated in fifteen retakes of the quiz and bought me to a significant level of frustration. I will use question two as an example; “Learning goals should…(Please check all that apply): 1) Focus on the big picture of knowledge gain, skill development and ability/attitude change, 2) Address a performance/learning problem directly, 3) Describe the problem and gap broadly so it can be flexible depending on strategy and the types of learning environment, 4) Describe what the learners will be able to do after instruction.” The detailed notes and my previous training background gave a level of confidence I would be able to answer correctly. I chose the first two responses: “Focus on the big picture of knowledge gain, skill development and ability/attitude change” and “address a performance/learning problem directly.” These two answers were clearly defined in part one video of week four. However, the question was marked wrong! I began to work all the options of answers to get the question correct and for fourteen tries I was still wrong. I did not ever select the last of the four answers since I knew that answer referred to learning objectives and not learning goals. In week four, part three beginning at the twentieth sentence of the video lecture, Professor states, “Learning objectives are the statements describing what learners will be able to do after the instruction.” However, the only way for me to receive a correct answer for this question was to include the fourth answer which is CLEARLY WRONG!! It is not part of the definition of learning goals as outlined in the course. SO FRUSTRATING. Not only would I continue taking the quiz every eight hours for the rest of my life, there is no way to resolve such an issue or opportunity to debate. Part of instructional design is to understand the end user experience and it would do the staff good to see things from the student perspective. My constructive criticism of the course continues with:
1. The above mentioned issue with quizzes having incorrect content, specifically week 4, question 2.
2. The quiz feedback is inaccurate and inadequate.
3. No resolution or ability to resolve questions of content. My effort to highlight this issue in the discussion help form went to never-never land.
4. Only peer feedback and no instruction participation. I had a peer review that accused me of plagiarism with no proof or specific feedback. She simply stated it looked like “it was copy and paste.” Absolutely false and infuriating. The course relies too heavily on peer feedback. There should be other forms of feedback.
5. The course does not complete the ADDIE design model. There could have been one module to summarize the remaining parts of the model after Analysis.
創建者 Nadiia B•
Overall, the course has a significant amount of useful information, BUT it is VERY POORLY DESIGNED, which is an unpleasant surprise since the course is about Instructional Design:
a) Using many different lecturers deprives the course of consistency because students have to adjust to each lecturer's style of talking and pronunciation.
b) Switching back and forth from lecturers to PowerPoints does not help to concentrate on the lectures.
c) Lectures that are longer than 15 minutes are very hard for students to keep their focuson.
Suggestions: make lectures shorter, have one, two at most, lecturers; have a lecturer view start and end the video, and have narrated PowerPoints in between.
a) Quizzes - different numbers of questions in each quiz and time sensitiveness in some quizzes bring chaos in the learning process; students have to guess their instructors' exact thoughts - the Week 4 quiz is especially poorly designed.
Suggestions: have the same number of questions for each quiz throughout the course; time all or do not do it at all; make the answers clear and easily derivable from course resources.
b) Written Assignments - grading through peer reviews is a nightmare, heavily based on a subjective point of view.
Suggestions: remove the grading portion from peer reviews and leave only the feedback comments required.
a) Weekly demand hours are unbalanced - one week is heavier than another which is not helpful for students to plan their learning time.
b) Reading rates are ridiculous: 10 minutes are given to read 12 pages of scholarly reading while in reality, it can take about an hour (undergrad - 11 pp/hour, grad - 13pp/hour)
Suggestions: Balance weekly demand hours and put in feasible reading rates.
I work as an Instructional Designer in a University, and if this course is well-designed, I would consider taking the suggested MasterTrack. But since this course was designed so poorly, it became an anti-advertisement for me about the University, which offered it, and Coursera platform as a whole.
The level of frustration I got from taking this course overpowered all of the useful knowledge that I acquired from it. I do not think I am going to take another course neither from the University of Illinois nor on Coursera platform in the near future.
I rate the course TWO out of FIVE and only for the useful theoretical information that has been presented in videos and readings.
創建者 Michael A U•
While the professors were knowledgable about instructional design, they failed to utilize that knowledge in designing the course. Poorly edited videos, basic quizzes that only assess a narrow range of information recall, a lack of academic rigor, and to be frank, poor MOOC design betrays the founding principles the course is attempting to teach us. I expect a lot more from an instructional design course, and it has seriously put me off of the University of Illinois as a choice for my Ph.D. in ID. My advice to the course creators is to practice what you preach.