Aug 03, 2019
The course is too good in which I have learnt construction management technologies, contracts, bonds, activities involved in it and many more. Thankful for such good course made available for all.
Jan 15, 2018
I had a great time learning about Construction and Project Management, all the modules were awesome. My personal favorite: Tech Trends. I hope you learn as much as I did, totally recommend this.
교육 기관: Cory B•
Oct 05, 2019
Great course with attention to the details that matter.
교육 기관: Renata C d T•
Oct 14, 2019
It is a really good course, with a lot of subjects included, but maybe because of that, everything feels kind of shallow.
교육 기관: Rajan k•
Oct 16, 2019
It was really good .
교육 기관: Rick D•
Feb 09, 2017
I did not think the instructors were very engaging. For the most part they read from slide decks that were also on the screen. There should be more visuals and discussion about what it is like to work in construction management.
교육 기관: Taraka A S•
Nov 15, 2016
Good start with Fundamentals. Need to take more advanced courses to gain indepth knowledge.
교육 기관: amr s e•
Sep 08, 2017
i think it's a good course with many specialized people every one on it's field but that what prevent the course from being great some of them don't know how to teach
교육 기관: Tracey S•
Jan 05, 2017
This course offers valuable information on the different aspects of Construction Project Managment. The only critic I have is that the instructions/grading rubric for the assignments are terribly vague. The assignment starts with a simple example in the videos which the student can reasonably replicate and create their own version. The problem starts when you begin the peer-assignment grading and realize the grading points are painfully specific. Now you have to go back and re-do your homework assignment after you learned what was really expected from the student. This wouldn't be an issue except that your second draft may not get graded if all of the students are done grading. Plus it's annoying to have to re-do work that you could have done right the first time but the guidelines were unclear.
교육 기관: Farhan S•
Mar 20, 2017
Most of the courses/lectures seemed to be very basic Project Management principles. Some lectures did give a good background and high level understanding of Construction Project Management, but expected a bit more in depth info.
Last lesson/assignment required more research on my part as it required general construction knowledge. The reason I took to this course was to get a better, high-level understanding of construction project management and planning, however, the Job Logic assignment expected that I would know what all is involved in the technical workings in construction (i.e. excavation, prepping, waterproofing, etc.) in which I have no experience or knowledge. A 2-hour assignment took me more than 3 hours to complete.
교육 기관: Quentin M•
Mar 10, 2017
Overall it's good. Depending on the customer's level of experience in construction. Some of the classes are very basic knowledge. But the structure of the course is consistent.
교육 기관: Todor G•
Oct 06, 2019
The course was a bit too basic and some of the videos were too broad. Some had information which did not seem to contribute to the purpose of the course. Overall it is good course to listen over my free time and learn a few new things.
교육 기관: Brian R S•
Dec 11, 2016
The quizzes are not set up correctly and you get marked wrong when you put in the correct answers. It seems that the course was rushed and not properly tested before it accepted students. The content is good and that is why I gave it more than one star.
교육 기관: Joshua S•
Jun 06, 2018
The peer review projects very obviously require some sort of outside knowledge. There is nothing from the videos that gives you the tools to do the assignments satisfactorily. Additionally, the assignments don't always make sense. For one of the assignments, creating a job logic diagram, none of the criteria include creating a diagram that is logically consistent. So, when people decided to say that the ground floor logically preceded the building of a roof, rather than the columns on which the rood sits, I technically couldn't mark them down during the peer review. Meanwhile, because my WBS hadn't included details which were not mentioned at all in lecture, I couldn't receive full credit.
교육 기관: Christopher C•
Aug 02, 2018
Nothing about this course makes it interesting. If it was interesting, one would have the urge to return to continue with this course.
교육 기관: George A•
Sep 15, 2018
I thought the class did a good job of generally introducing the world of Construction Mgmt and I learned a lot. Using lecturers from the field made the lectures more interesting, however, it was apparent that the lecturers weren't trained in education or how to present information clearly to a class of students who are learning this material for the first time. The guest lecturers all used basic PPT presentations that weren't very engaging most of the time. I took the Construction Scheduling class simultaneously and that class was far more involved and varied in the way the information was prevented since the professor was actually an educator by trade. On top of that the homework assignment instructions differed from the rubrics we had to use to grade them, so in both cases I had to resubmit my assignment only AFTER seeing the rubric. Overall the core information was interesting, but it was presented so poorly that it made the class feel like an endless stream of trivia facts, further meaning that I might forget most of this info in the near future.
교육 기관: Shafeeq S•
Jan 10, 2019
Very very basics. Simple concepts are explained for infinite hour long sessions. Not at all engaging sessions.
교육 기관: Ahsanul K•
Oct 29, 2017
The instructor is not specific and too much filler sentence that are not important for the lecture
교육 기관: Jacqueline V L T•
Aug 12, 2017
It didnt cancel my subscription when i finished one of the courses. Also the content just wasn't that good.
교육 기관: Hugo V•
Aug 09, 2017
The content is overall rather thin and would be better supported with reading materials instead of all video lectures. The structure and level of detail was also rather odd with more details on bonds and surety than on actual project types and challenges.