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.
von Eric B•
The course provides good information and is a solid introduction into instructional design. However, some of the lecturers are quite stale and it's hard to keep focus, despite being interested in the topic. If the lessons and lecturers were more engaging, I'd leave a higher rating.
von 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
von 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
von 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.
von 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.
von 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.
von JAYSON M•
The content is great, although some of the lecturers could be more engaging.
Moving forward, perhaps the institution could make the quizzes/homework accessible to those who only availed of the free course. I completely understand the necessity of the 'paywall', but perhaps they could follow the model of some other Coursera offerings, where all the material is available for free but you have to pay for any certification--I feel that is a good way in the future. Thanks.
von Asmara M•
Although the course provides relevant information, it was extremely slow and wasn't engaging. I found it hard to pay attention to just videos being played the whole time.
von Priya M M•
The assessments were really very tough .
von Ridwan A•
Very poor lecture delivery. should have used proper english speakers
von Deleted A•
not the course I wanted