Lot of working is required from our side. Not at all an introductory course! More like advanced level course. Requires lot of time, we have to find the documentation ourselves and ask question on stackoverflow. If you are looking for introductory course like Dr. Chucks courses I suggest not to take this course.

This course is really as good or as bad as you make it for yourself, since it is quite bare, more a sort scaffold for you to do your own learning and projects. This is arguably the best way to learn though, which is why I like it. But, it may be challenging for beginners to get the most out of it.

I think length of the tutorial should have been a little bit longer for extensive discussion. The professor should have used words which are most of the cases self-explained or easily understandable from the perspective of audience, so those were somewhat tougher to catch up with professor.

The last week assignment is easier and no strict rules to achieve. The majority will do the minimum to finish the course.

It would be more efficient to push all students to make hard plots in Matplotlib (interactive + animation) with strict rules.

This is not a level of an intermediate course!

The course is great and Mr Brooks is excellent is teaching the concepts. The assignments are fairly complex and they are not very well explained. I would like to see more input provided in the assignments and projects. Also, Iwhat books/websites can be referred for additional readings.

Decent overview but could have spend more time showing plotting techniques in more detail than showing what makes an appealing plot. Also The section on the back-end of MatPlotLib was more detailed than it needed to be for quick overview but not detailed enough to be very useful.

Video lectures could have been covered with more clarity as far as the difficulty of the assignments are concerned. All the assignments should not be peer-graded because most of the students are just reviewing the assignments just for the sake of progressing in the course.

The course has a lot of things, which are covered in short time, most of the time we have to look to other resources in order to complete assignments. If one is taking this course then they have to put their extra efforts. The best part is they provide a great references.

This course was disappointing compared to the first course in the series (Introduction to Data Science). If you enjoy reading academic papers and peer reviews then this course is for you. If you don't then just search the web for tutorials on Matplotlib and Seaborn.

Could do with some improvement, better examples for the more complicated graphs. Week 4's examples and explanations were not very good. I have not learnt how to use pandas well in plotting, and have not managed to complete any graphs with pandas and seaborn.

The first week is fantastic, I learned a lot, such as chart junk, ink. However, the content in the following weeks seems be really heavy and there is no a path to help us get over it. It seems we need have a lot previous knowledge to work well

Please unlock Week 2 ~ 4. I finished week 1 and had to wait 15 days so that I could do week 2 assignment. Is this kind of waste your time and money? I paid $49 just for waiting? 2 starts down for this. Otherwise, the materials so far are good.

The first week was interesting as it broke down the different layers that occur behind the scenes of matplotlib. The next couple of weeks felt a little shallow and rushed. Maybe we will explore more of the functionality in the later courses.

Not enough in-lesson quizzes and somewhat confusing presentation of what's going on under the hood of matplotlib. Way too many "go read this" segments that seemed mostly a waste of time. Outside of that, the lecture quality was very good.

The course goes really fast, and I think the tutorials on Matplotlib are really brief and should only be seen as an introduction to what we can do with it. In order to use Matplotlib effectively, we have to learn a lot from other sources.

the last 2 assignment has not clear instruction: i spent a lot of time just to understand what i will do. Also, i notice that many explanation were too poor: the sensation is that instructor just wanna rush those arguments.

I gave the feedback to the detailed survey by the University of Michigan. I enjoyed the course but I would like some more guided work before facing the assignments. I think the professors can elaborate better the course

The course is good. But the reference to Alberto Cairo's work doesn't help too much to enhance the quality of the course , since it's difficult to understand how he can compare journalism at Spain and at Venezuela.

I did not find this course particularly interesting. The concepts of interest were there but the supporting material I found inadequate. In addition the assignments were a bit vague.

An excellent course for learning plotting, but requires a very strong background in stats if you want to avoid being lead into mistakes in your thinking about how to evaluate data.

Excellent lectures. I believe the assignments should have been more specific to make students combine both lessons(1 & 2 ) so as to use all knowledge they acquired.

The course cover a wide range of topics. I wish the speed can be slower and lecturer can be more thorough. Assignment is confusing and difficult to understanding.

The coding assignments are much harder than the content taught in the course. Need to do a lot of self-learning and searching. I personally don't prefer this style

The teaching and assignments vary and it's bit difficult to understand the assignment questions because they are not clear. Although the concepts covered are good.

Materials, slides and videos were not adequate and didn't provide enough details.

There were many many typos and misleading syntax errors in lecture subtitles.