This course provides a great introduction to requirements writing. I would recommend this to anyone who is new to writing requirements and needs to quickly understand how to write good requirements.
Admirably rigorous and thorough, this course is an excellent resource for advancing or refreshing skills and mindset when it comes to capturing & defining requirements.
創建者 Rob B•
An excellent course aligned to the INCOSE Requirements Writing Guide (advance / parallel reading advised). Authoritative tutor (chair of INCOSE Requirements Working Group). Course identifies, groups and addresses rules (for a given structured notation) in turn. Subject matter and questions do require close attention (particularly module 3). Coursera / materials provides great accessibility (multi-platform, multimedia, module quizzes etc). Module learning objectives not always clear / punctuated (visual / audio pause). Minor typos / ambiguity here and there. Real-world practise with varied people / scenarios will always be trickier but rules and prompts addressed in this course will certainly help your work in requirements specification and review. Will be recommending to colleagues!
· Well-written requirements are invariably difficult to read because we are not allowed common English language
· Preparation for end of course assessment helped by using module questions (same / very similar)
創建者 Soumyajit B•
Pros: A refreshing way to learn the not-so-enthusing field of requirement writing. This is definitely a much better way to start off requirement writing than trying to read long guides and standards on the same topic. The quizes make you think and that's the best way to learn.
Cons: The course is by no means complete and could have definitely packed in more material, like explaining more of the 40-odd rules as laid out by INCOSE. Most annoying though are the numerous 'bugs' in the weekly quizes which I can't figure out have not been weeded out yet given that the course has been around for some time.
創建者 Wagner S M•
The overall course is really good, but the problems with requirements statement are kind of too subjective. For example, "unnecessary precision" was being used for a missing tolerance in one of the exercises. I don't know if this was an error or the concepts are too subjective.
My suggestion would be to better define these concepts (maybe using requirements!) and also add an option for the student to provide feedback on each of the exercises. Like this we could point out when we disagree with the answer.
創建者 Adail M R•
This was a good overview of Requirements Writing, an important part of the Requirements Engineering discipline, which is a major component of Systems Engineering. I wish it was a bit more thorough and with more examples and practices, but very good anyway. I highly recommend it to technical writers, project managers, product managers, business analysts, and anyone who is involved somehow in the process of writing specifications.
創建者 Luke E•
Good summary of how not to write requirements. The content is a little dry but is clear enough. I find it a little annoying to remember specific terminology of why a requirement is not correct, when the semantics are very similar (e.g. conjunctions and logical conditions).
The course definitely reinforced my previous learning and would recommend to anyone who needs to write or review requirements as it is a bit of an art!
創建者 THOMAS J•
The lecture material is really fantastic for learning the fundamentals of requirements writing, but for a course about precise writing the quizzes are rife with ambiguities in terms which makes it impossible to avoid wrong answers even with a good understanding of the material. I would really appreciate harder questions rather than tricks.
創建者 Edward B•
Overall it's an informative and straightforward course. There are certain times where there are some overlap in the answers to questions which they don't cover explicitly in the lessons, however just going over the practice tests is very useful.
創建者 Lucy D•
Very well taught cause, and very useful. This will definitely help me be a better communicator. Course is difficult though, very intricate definitions and use of language.
創建者 TJM t W•
Week 3 was difficult still not completely grasp the difference between when it is a [logic condition] OR [incorrect conjuction].
For the rest a good course!
創建者 Hanish M•
The course was extremely informational and useful. I thank Coursera for providing me with Financial aid for this course.
創建者 Rajendra T•
Very short and to the point!
But I think other aspects of requirements writing could have been covered through course.
創建者 Max C•
Great content, multiple choice answers really limit the demonstration of the student's knowledge.
創建者 Franco S•
Very thorough course about the rules on how to write text-based requirements
創建者 Udochi E Q•
I found this course very helpful and practical
創建者 Edwin C v E•
The course is way too short. Less than 1 hour of video material (for the 4 weeks combined!) is far below average. The INCOSE writing guideline, which can be bought on the INCOSE webpage and which is listed as recommended reading, is more than enough for most people to grasp the concepts behind textual guidelines, and to write and review textual guidelines themselves. The INCOSE guideline even includes lots of examples. Pushing his own pricey book (which is not at all required to successfully pass the course) at the end of each and every video becomes fairly annoying after 2 or 3 videos and should have been left out completely.
Apart from these issues, the course content is good. It is based on the INCOSE writing guide (of which dr. Ryan was a co-creator) and ISO 29148. Solid and valuable material, but as stated above, the course is too pricey to make it worthwhile for some people.
創建者 Michael K•
Although I enjoyed the course, I found it to be only a superficial introduction to the subject. It took me 2 hours and 12 minutes (132 minutes) to finish this "5 weeks" course with 100% grade. After viewing the first lecture in audit mode, I was quite enthusiastic and directly purchased the certified course. However, now I feel like I didn't get much for my $49 when I compare this short course with other Coursera courses. Many of them would offer the amount of material shown here in their first week - while providing much more in-depth knowledge in the remaining 3-4 weeks.
創建者 James H•
The structure for the requirements that the course is trying to teach is good and logical. However the test information is very annoying. It seems to care too much about the naming the error in each requirement and never really asks you to fix the requirement. Who cares if the error is a passive voice or in the definite article, you need to be able to spot this an error and fix it. Re-structure the quizzes and tests - this course could be so much better.
創建者 Johannes W•
This course is good content-wise, but, and that is a big mistake, it is not self-paced! Heaps of unsolved problems regarding this in the discussion forum. You can only take a week's content at a time, and then have to wait for a week to work on the content of the next week! No chance of finishing this four hour-course on a day, as you would usually want to do it.
創建者 Arnau C•
Just OK. In my opinion, the answers are not clear: they are ambiguous.
創建者 SANJAY C•