Great lectures, great teacher!

I would have given 5 stars but for the problems in the exercises / grader. Some problems that are know for weeks or even months are not resolved. This causes many wasted hours for many hundreds of students. Please solve this and make it a 5 star course.

Many thanks to Andrew Ng and the mentors!

Issues with assignments. Took more than 4 hours to figure out the problem.

Too many thing introduced in programming assignments without explanation. Why the high dropout values? Why sometimes one dropout layer, sometimes two? Many things are just given as a formula, and not explained in a way that would let me make my own network for my own problem.

Quite a few bugs or abstractions in this course, in comparison to the others the projects feel a bit rushed and pushed together. Andrews's explanations and video lectures were still great though.

The scope of this course was highly relevant to me, but unfortunately many of the class materials were broken or otherwise incorrect, making some ungraded portions of the assignments difficult or impossible to achieve. Activity on the discussion boards indicates many people have tripped over this for at least the better part of a year, but no corrections have been made. This was quite frustrating and wasted a good amount of my time.

Works as a primer. Assignments aren't that great.

I feel this course is not as carefully designed as previous courses

The course was great, as ever. But some of the programming exercises were very frustrating. Oscillating from very easy to very difficult, with some unclear (and sometimes erroneous) instructions. I felt this was in sharp contrast with the previous 4 courses of this specialisation, for which the course and exercises were perfect.

The course content and Andrew Ng are great. The submission process of the assignments is absolutely dreadful. You might get 0 points for correct answers or not, depeding on...well, I have no idea on what. Maybe it's Jupyter Notebook, maybe it's Keras or maybe it's something else. But you must have good search engine skills, since you will most likely spend a lot of time in searching the discussion forum for answers.

Codes are not explained. Some codes files are given

To be completely honest, I loved Dr. Andrew's method of teaching. But the assignments just flew over my head because I didn't have enough hours of practice of Keras under my belt. I know Keras is there to make things easy but it's very difficult to just trying to pass the grader. To goal of assignments was fantastic, I mean, generating music, etc. sounds really amazing but I feel that if there was some more time given to make us better in Keras and other technicalities then I would've loved this course much more!

fairly more complex and deeper as previous courses. Nice ex. however.

I gave 5 stars to other courses in this series but this one doesn't deserve 5 stars. There were many typos and bugs in the assignments compared to the other courses of the specialization.

very basic ..would have wanted much advance level .

Courses had some issues with the grader, and there were some instances where the expected output in the assignment didn't match the actual output, despite it being correct.

See forums for a range of complaints on the matter.

Quite a lot of bugs in the first week examples. It took me too much time until I browsed the discussion forums.

I took this course after a long pause after I finished the first 3 courses. I would NOT recommend doing it that way. As a result, I felt rusty on some of the coding practices.

I think the course gives great introductory information on RNNs and LSTMs. The first two weeks of the course are spot on. However, I think the third week is lacking. I had hard time making a connection between the lecture material and the assignments.

Esperaba que los ejemplos fueran de otra forma

Really interesting course with fascinating applications. However, in terms of difficulty, it is a significant step up from all the previous courses. A lot of time is spent figuring out the syntax even though the concepts are crystal clear. ( Probably as it is a collaboration with NVIDIA). The programming assignments could be improved.

This felt the the least prepared and organized course of the series, unfortunately.

The lecture was great but the errors in the programming assignment (especially in formal-typed formulas) really wasted a lot of time and make me confusing at first.

Toward the end of the specialization, there seemed to be a noticeable drop in both the quality of instruction and the programming assignments. Course 5 on sequence models was much more "hand wavy" than Course 4 on convolution models. At the end of Course 5, I'm still not sure if I learned anything meaningful other than filling in a few blank lines of code to complete the assignment. There was much less intuition provided about the nature of recurrent nets, and then translating that to code was foggy. More attention needs to be paid to how and what the framework is actually doing, not just giving hints at filling the blanks.

Finally, the grader especially in week 3 caused me many, many hours of wasted time and frustration chasing phantom problems in the notebook. Coursera and/or deeplearning.ai does not pay much attention if any to solving the grader or other systemic problems.

Would like to learn a bit on how back-prop works when using attention.

This course gives a nice overview of sequence models. If it is true that I do not have an engineering background, I felt it got sometimes a little bit too abstract as compared to other courses of the specialisation. However, I recommend it.

The course was especially interesting in week 2 and 3, but the assignments for week 1 were confusing and sometimes it was hard to follow where the logic was coming from.