I completed the entire course long back, but it shows I didn't complete the course.

Course Content: Does the course provide valuable, comprehensive, and respectful information on sexuality and disability? Is the material well-researched and inclusive? Clarity and Accessibility: Was the course easy to follow? Were the learning materials accessible for people with various disabilities? Did it cater to diverse learning needs? Engagement: Did the course offer opportunities for interaction, discussion, or feedback? Was it engaging and thought-provoking? Impact: Did the course increase your awareness or change your perspective on the topic? Depending on how well it meets these criteria, you can rate it. For example, if the course was well-structured, inclusive, and informative, a higher rating would be appropriate (4 stars or 5 stars). If the course had gaps in content, was hard to follow, or felt inadequate, a lower rating might be justified.

This course provided good information about sexuality and disability. I feel like I learned a lot about a topic I am unfamiliar with.

It was really cool to focus on one specific aspect of the disabled lives. It taught me a lot, and it was a really unique course.

concepts described in this module

Excellent awareness

Explendid.

very good

It is a great introduction to the world of sexuality in people with specific disabilities

This course requires significant updating. He pronounces disability names wrong repeatedly (spina bifida hurts every time). No one says differently abled anymore. The entire class focuses on sexuality and disability from a medical model perspective. The disability community has been using a social model for quite some time now, and the focus on diagnosis is unnecessary and not best practice anymore. Many more salient points about disability and sexuality have nothing to do with diagnosis, and are more engaging and impactful to a broader range of people. He also defines orientation and identity terms incorrectly.

Clearly not up to date on disability topics and narrow in his definitions and terminology.