Chevron Left
Voltar para Modelos Regressivos

Comentários e feedback de alunos de Modelos Regressivos da instituição Universidade Johns Hopkins

4.4
2,702 classificações
456 avaliações

Sobre o curso

Linear models, as their name implies, relates an outcome to a set of predictors of interest using linear assumptions. Regression models, a subset of linear models, are the most important statistical analysis tool in a data scientist’s toolkit. This course covers regression analysis, least squares and inference using regression models. Special cases of the regression model, ANOVA and ANCOVA will be covered as well. Analysis of residuals and variability will be investigated. The course will cover modern thinking on model selection and novel uses of regression models including scatterplot smoothing....

Melhores avaliações

KA

Dec 17, 2017

Excellent course that is jam-packed with useful material! It is quite challenging and gives a thorough grounding in how to approach the process of selecting a linear regression model for a data set.

BA

Feb 01, 2017

It really helped me to have a better understanding of these Regression Models. However, I've noticed that there is a video recording repeated: Week 3, Model Selection. Part 3 is included in Part 2.

Filtrar por:

351 — 375 de {totalReviews} Avaliações para o Modelos Regressivos

por Sandesh

Jun 25, 2019

For the content covered, I think the course does a good job exposing students to fundamental concepts while also highlighting how much more there is to research in order to gain a solid understanding of this subject matter. The course offers a good foundation, and I hope they come out with a more advanced version of this course for more guided exposure.

por Manuel E

Jul 03, 2019

Hard class, documentation could be better, but good content.

por Siying R

Aug 10, 2019

The lecture is pretty dry to me who had limited vocabulary in the field. It made me went out to find other easier lectures to help me understand. The lecture focus on explaining the basic concept of Regression Models and spend a big chunk of time to explain how the function works. I would prefer to have more time explaining what the numbers mean for the data. The questions in the quiz require us to understand the meaning of the data, so we know what function and number to apply. Maybe it is just me, finding it very challenging to see the connection between the lecture and the quiz.

por Yiyang Z

Aug 25, 2019

Very informative, but could be more interesting and concise.

por Raul M

Jan 16, 2019

This course should be targeted for Data Scientists, in my opinion it is more for statisticians.

Too much about the insight of statistics and some but not enough about how to use the statistic tools.

por Sarah R

Mar 20, 2016

The instructor is at time incomprehensible. It would be helpful to speak more slowly and pause more often. Otherwise he sounds like repeating something that he's so well memorized after many years of teaching.

por Marco A M A

May 09, 2016

This course is better than Statistical Inference, and I think it is as useful. Non credit excersise are still very good at helping with understanding in practice what is going on.

por Guilherme B D J

Aug 21, 2016

Given the importance of this subject, this course should have been split in two or more or have a longer duration to properly address subjects as GLM or model selection techniques.

por Gareth S

Jul 16, 2017

Expects a level of statistical knowledge already.

por Codrin K

Mar 28, 2018

To me, the approach was too much from the theory of statistics and its mathematical foundations; I would have appreciated a more applied approach for this course in the specialization. So starting from examples, questions anout data and then working towards theory instead of the other way around.

por Asif M A

Oct 23, 2016

I enjoyed the earlier courses more. I did not like the way the materials were provided. There were a lot of very complex ideas were presented, in a very concise and brief manner. Also, there should be more exercises to practice. May be its me, but, I guess, I might need more time to fully comprehend the materials.

por xuwei l

Sep 22, 2016

the lecture notes is a bit confusing

por Pepijn d G

May 23, 2016

The course is good. Unlike the previous courses I took in this track, there was almost no interaction in the forums and also no-one to give feedback. I wonder if there were any TA's present in this run.

por Erick J G L

Feb 01, 2018

Lots of room for improvement on this course, the teacher really seems like he cares but he is a really bad teacher nonetheless. The course material is incomplete and not properly structured. Basically read the book if you want to learn something, otherwise the videos don't really help.

Also, the course project is not worth it because you get no real feedback to compare your project to the ideal or at least expected answer. I would not recommend this course.

por Ahmad A

Nov 09, 2016

Requires much more than a month to digest the material and complete the assignments. A default/initial one-week offering is too tight unless you are only taking the course (not working). I know one can complete the course in more than a single round and I did that but I still don't think the expectations should be set for a single month.

Instruction (video content) can be much better, at least compared to a lot of other courses on Coursera.

por ANDREW L

Jan 27, 2016

Better than Stat Inference, and gave some reasonable intuition, but could be improved I think by focussing on more understanding and less maths and formulas. Some of it did seem to be - here' s a formula, plug the numbers in to get the quiz question right, whereas in reality (in the world of work) that question is completely unrealistic - you have raw data and you need to do the regression and understand what it means.

por VenusW

Jan 10, 2017

This course is great, instructor is good, however, the material of this course is not well organized, even the swirl practice is not put in the correct week, not in the same pace as the lectures. The quiz and project are far much easier than lecture content.

por Feng H

May 17, 2017

Not impressed. Dr. Caffo tried to use non-calculus, non-linear-algrebra ways to explain complex concepts and derivations. IMO, he should not have done that. It only made things more confusing. Also the final project is so unsatisfactory in that we were to analyze the data with 32 obs but 11 variables! How robust could it be? Was expecting something much more challenging than that.

por Normand D

Feb 01, 2016

As for the Statistical Inference course, this course is amazing but is presented in a more complex way than it should be. Once again the concepts are simple and the math not so hard, yet I had to do a lot of research outside the course to be able to understand these simple concepts and derive the not so hard mathematics.

Brian Caffo is clearly brilliant and, I would say, seem to be a good lad too, but something is missing. Too often the details are thrown at us without being properly framed in the context or without having the proper concept being introduced progressively.

I have a theory about teaching since I was 15, and so far it has proven to be true. Imagine that learning is about climbing a mountain in which tall steps have been carved. Each step is taller than the student. The teacher is somewhere higher than the students (not necessarily at the top, if there is such a thing).

The job of the teacher is to throw boxes (concepts) and balls (details) of different size, shape and colors. The job of the student is to catch these boxes and balls and to put the right balls in the right boxes in order to make a staircase out of it to climb (at least) one of the giant stair up.

A good teacher makes sure to throw the concepts first than the details and to clearly specify which balls go into which box, as well as which boxes go inside/over which other boxes.

But most teacher simply throw the balls and boxes in an not so well structured manner, so the poor students try to catch as many as he can, but also miss a lot of them. His hands can hold a limited amount of balls. If he doesn't have the right box to put them, he would either miss the next balls, or put the one he hold in his hand in the wrong box.

Bottom line, the best teachers are those who focus on the concepts (and context) and make sure that the concepts are well understood before introducing details to stuck in these concepts. From my experience our brain (or at least mine) better learn this way. It is as if our brain need first to establish a category-pattern (the concept/context) to which it will associate detail-patterns. But without a proper category-pattern, our brain is having a hard time to properly remember the detail-patterns or miss-associate them to the wrong category-pattern (which create even more confusion).

Hope it was helpful somehow...

por Andres C S

Mar 02, 2016

I think this course needs more emphasis on practical applications and less mathematical background.

por Janardhan K

Nov 16, 2017

The course was of average quality. It could have been better. Brian's slides in the video don't correspond 1-1 with the slides made available. The coverage and explanation of the material could have been better. The instructor's presentation could be more engaging (fewer 'ums' while talking). It was not immediately clear how to answer some questions on the Week 4 quiz, and also the course project, even after reviewing the material multiple times. One example: Brian says that the ANOVA test can only be used to compare models, when the model being compared has normally distributed residuals (using the Shapiro test). No advice is given about what to do if they are not normally distributed, which is what happened in the project.

por Hendrik F

Jan 17, 2016

I find it very tough to understand everything. Buying the course book helps to overcome this. You have to dedicate a lot of time.

por benjamin s

Jun 20, 2018

A good (although slightly frustrating) course, attempted once but had to come back after studying the material in class, quite a heavy course if you've not been taught regression before

por Rafal K

Feb 28, 2017

Many things are not clear enough in multivariable regression part.

por Lei M

Aug 23, 2017

Some of the materials are too much math for me.