Good

nice

Good

good

good

good

Good

good

Good

Good

good

Good

Good

good

good

nice

GOOD

good

a1

v

O

.

A

It was disappointing to see that time wasn't taken to fix and improve lectures where mistakes were made in the teachings. Although warning dialogues were displayed and the updated class materials were made available, the audio is still misleading. The transcripts also need to be cleaned up ("batch effects" transcribed as "batrifacts", etc.). It was also surprising to see the huge gaps in expected prior knowledge across subjects. For example, a multiple-choice question in one of the assignments required understanding the role of ribosomes in protein synthesis, but ribosomes were not covered in the lectures. This is high-school biology, so it was less of a shock compared to the questions around topics like Family Wise Error Rate, which was covered superficially at best in the lectures, with a teacher who was very difficult to follow (awkward phrasing, chaotic structure of courses, stuttering, lack of vocalization, would quickly discuss complex or advanced mathematical topics without explaining the basics, but spend a long time to wordy explanations of simple subjects that did not require dumbing down). The assignment questions on Family Wise Error Rate however, required a very good understanding, not just conceptually, but actually knowing how to apply the formulas and calculate values which was not taught at any point during the lecture. All in all the course has potential but it needs some cleanup, better visual supports for complex topics, more structured scripts/outlines for teachers not as comfortable speaking in front of the camera, and a better baseline for the expected level of prior knowledge and expertise from students (lots of time spent drilling topics from high-school biology, not nearly enough time dedicated to explaining college-level mathematics/statistics concepts and teaching how to practically apply statistical concepts, formulas, etc.).