
Ask HN: What makes an online course amazing? - dewy
For those of you who have taken online classes (MOOCs, at college, etc.), what have been the things that made the best classes stand out? (Or conversely, what made the bad ones bad?)<p>Why I&#x27;m asking: I teach a college data science 101 class with at least 1 section online every semester (and will now be switching to all online for at least the next month - thanks, coronavirus...). At the same time, I&#x27;m in the process of redesigning the course, and making new teaching materials and assignments.<p>I&#x27;ve taken completed several amazing MOOCs in the past (e.g. Princeton&#x27;s Algorithms I &amp; II, Stanford&#x27;s Machine Learning), as well as abandoned many more that were simply terrible, so I am no stranger to the online student experience, and I know the things that made certain courses amazing for me personally (e.g. great videos, and well integrated assignments with automated feedback). However, every learner is different, and I would love to hear different perspectives so that I can better redesign my own course.<p>Was it something about the videos? The assignments? The structure? The instructor? Or something else? Thanks!
======
ivan_ah
For me the biggest game-changer for online video lectures has been this Chrome
plugin that allows for fine-grained control of video speed:
[https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/video-speed-
contro...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/video-speed-
controller/nffaoalbilbmmfgbnbgppjihopabppdk?hl=en)

If you have control over the courseware platform used for your course, make
sure it uses a compatible video player based on html5 video and not some
custom implementation (very rare).

In case video speed controls is not available on your courseware, you can pre-
process videos to speed them up to 1.5x using this script (save as
`fastervid.sh` and run on video lectures before uploading)

    
    
        #!/bin/bash
        if [ -z $1 ]; then
          echo "usage $0 input_video.mp4"
          exit -1
        fi
    
        echo "Converting $1 to 1.5x speed..."
        ffmpeg -i "$1"  -filter_complex "[0:v]setpts=0.6666666666666*PTS[v];[0:a]atempo=1.5[a]" -map "[v]" -map "[a]" "tmp-$1"
    
        echo "Delaying audio of $1 by 60ms"
        ffmpeg -i "tmp-$1" -itsoffset 0.06 -i "tmp-$1" -map "0:0" -map "1:1" -acodec copy -vcodec copy  "faster-$1"
    
        # cleanup temp file
        rm "tmp-$1"

~~~
ivan_ah
Completely unrelated to the video speedup hacks, but also in the vein of
getting a lot of information across faster, one thing you can do for your
courses would be to create Concept Maps.

The CmapTools software is very good for this:
[https://cmap.ihmc.us/cmaptools/](https://cmap.ihmc.us/cmaptools/)

Overall I find concept maps on of the best tools to show an overview of the
course (macro maps) or topic (zoomed in maps). As a teacher with extra context
about data science you can easily put together something like this for your
course that will show learners what there is to learn and allow them to keep
track of their progress (e.g. wow when we started all these words were unknown
to me, but now I know about 70% of the words on this map already).

I have heard teachers use CmapTools in more active way (asking learners
produce concept maps individually or collaboratively), but don't have
experience with that myself.

A paper about concept maps:
[https://cmap.ihmc.us/docs/pdf/TheoryUnderlyingConceptMaps.pd...](https://cmap.ihmc.us/docs/pdf/TheoryUnderlyingConceptMaps.pdf)

And an example of the concept maps I use in my books:
[https://minireference.com/static/tutorials/conceptmap.pdf](https://minireference.com/static/tutorials/conceptmap.pdf)

~~~
boneitis
More in this vein, it genuinely floors me that UML-like diagrams (used very
loosely and without strictness) aren't more of a thing.

There are so many walls of text out there going over a system's flow that
could be expressed in just a couple paragraphs and a companion sequence
diagram.

------
ricklamers
It might not be the most useful answer given the context of your question. But
in my experience the thing that made the best courses stand out were the depth
of understanding of the instructor and their basic didactic skills. Are they
able to explain the concepts clearly to a novice student? Are they able to
structure the course into a logical progression of topics?

To me, what I consider to be secondary aspects such as interactive quizzes or
homework assignments never really made a difference. One thing I noticed that
really did not work well for me was asking quiz questions in between that did
not require understanding just memorization of what was just said 30 seconds
ago. It's like you're checking if they're paying attention v.s. are grasping
underlying concepts.

I would recommend you check out CS50 by David Malan (if you haven't already)
as it's somewhat of a gold standard for MOOCs in my book.

Good luck with your MOOC! The world needs more of them, make sure you make
them as publicly accessible as possible.

~~~
madhadron
> One thing I noticed that really did not work well for me was asking quiz
> questions in between that did not require understanding just memorization of
> what was just said 30 seconds ago.

Be careful of saying what works well versus what doesn't work well based on
perception. I pretty much always use this kind of inline question in lectures,
usually gauged to require the student to make a single deductive step from the
material just presented. And they all look at me like I'm an idiot for
expecting something that simple...except that then some of them get it wrong
and have to reintegrate the knowledge, and the number of queries after the
fact from misunderstandings of the material went down dramatically when I
started doing it.

So I actually tell the students up front that this seems absurd, but play
along, because it really does help the integration of knowledge.

------
superasn
My answer is very general and I only have experience taking a lot of online
courses via sites like udemy but the key factor that makes any course stand
out is practical real life examples. It makes everything super interesting and
you learn a lot more quickly.

Also I've seen that a bit of humor does wonders for learning. Recently did an
online course called StatQuest with Josh Starmer(1). I never knew stats / ml
could be made this interesting.

(1)
[https://www.youtube.com/user/joshstarmer](https://www.youtube.com/user/joshstarmer)

~~~
newsbinator
Perhaps an unpopular opinion, but I feel humor detracts from a course most of
the time. It's like breaking the 4th wall in cinema: you can do it, and some
people do it to great effect, but as a rule you probably shouldn't.

Dan Ariely is unusually gifted, so his humor works.

For the vast majority of courses, I prefer when they stick closely to the
material, so I can watch it at 1.7x or 2x without breaking stride.

------
baron816
You should keep in mind the key difference between your offering run of the
mill MOOCs--you're students have to complete your course if they want to
maintain their GPAs and graduate.

This should substantially change how you teach your class. A normal MOOC has
to make learning "easy" so that students keep coming back. Unfortunately, when
learning is "easy" it doesn't stick very well.

Effective learning needs to be challenging and force students to dig deep and
think critically about what you're teaching them. If you give out hints or
shortcuts, they'll probably like you more, but they're not going to build the
deep understanding they need to succeed in further courses and in their
career. If you're good at making them think critically, the whole learning
process will feel hard for them, possibly as if they aren't learning anything,
and they might resent you for that. So it's good that they're stuck with you.
Do the right thing and make sure they're really understanding the material and
not just memorizing formulas and patterns.

------
ramesh1994
I've taken Georgia Tech's OMSCS program. What really sets this apart is the
active feedback on assignments / course interaction from Professors and TAs in
Piazza.

Current online courses have really watered down content and zero/terrible ways
of evaluating the material.

Things that I like too see in an online course:

\- Keep assignments on a regular basis (on par with your campus schedule).
Quizzes are great to keep them engaged but do not use them to replace regular
assignments.

\- Design them to be auto-graded as much as possible. Bonus points if there
was some way the students can evaluate their solution locally.

\- Something like Piazza/Forum setup to answer student questions and have an
appropriate number of TAs.

\- Post all the resources used in the videos to be accessible for later
reference (slides and links).

If you're recording content for future offerings, ensure that the content is
consistently updated to stay relevant.

------
closeparen
To the extent that students are writing code: a high quality "autograder" test
suite. A tight feedback loop on the correctness of your work/understanding is
the most powerful learning aid I've ever encountered.

Although it's a step on the right direction, I'm not a fan of Coursera's
"upload a zip file and wait 10 minutes" approach: even that much delay means
you've lost your mental "working set" by the time feedback comes. My college
professors would give those to us as Make targets in the project scaffolds,
which made it closer to "TDD."

In a similar vein, thoughtfully designed interactive environments with good
difficulty progression, like Micro-corruption [0]. It's easy to imagine
something like this for data science (here's an RStudio workbench and a
dataset, go find the needle in the haystack, etc).

[0] [https://microcorruption.com/login](https://microcorruption.com/login)

------
optimaton
All of the following in one website or tool/sw:

1/ Interactive tutorials and quiz format like brilliant.org

2/ A Wikipedia like comprehensive wiki embeded with course website for all
kinds of reference.

3/ An online community — could be a piazza/forum.

4/ A github like service integrated with course site specifically for that
course where students can submit their projects and be evaluated by other
forum members/mentors etc.

------
Dowwie
Dan Ariely's MOOC on Irrational Behavior (coursera) remains my favorite online
course and one of the best overall.

The content was engaging. It included guest talks. The course didn't shy from
hard work, including dozens of required and recommended papers. The curated
papers were my favorite part. The course exposed me to an entire ecosystem
that I was unaware of. Too many MOOCs are watered down but this one was just
right.

My best advice is to create a course that management will resent open sourcing
because it is so valuable. Demand autonomy and use it create a legacy.

------
tokipin
The biggest issue I've seen in online courses is production values. In fact I
think crap production values and the lack of a quality bar is why platforms
like Coursera have done poorly compared to their potential.

The most obvious issue is usually microphone quality. It's baffling that
people spend so much effort developing a course and multiply that effort by a
shit microphone. If you aren't willing to spend/get money for a good
microphone, your philosophy on what is important for online teaching may have
some blind spots IMO.

------
maher_au
I have developed a collaborative learning framework to support the development
of learning experiences. The 4 key phases are

1\. Resource curation 2\. Guided active retrieval practice (questions, tasks,
self assessment and feedback) 3\. Collaborative experiences (professional
examples, tadks and feedback) 4\. Reflection and connection. (Connecting this
learning to what has happened before or is likely to happen next

I will get the chapter (With evidence) up on a preprint server shortly -likely
the end of the month. If you want the model - dm me on Twitter @maher_au

------
aryzach
Appropriate assignments. For me, that often makes or breaks a MOOC. I want to
be stumped in an intellectual way, but not a cryptic way. I don't want to feel
like I'm just trying to decode the professors cryptic problem. I want to feel
like it's a genuine hurdle to learn the content well, yet still accessible,
and definitely not busy work.

Good example: write an interpreter for the given (made up and simple)
programming language. We had to figure out how to implement certain language
features such as clojures.

Bad example: in networking course, we had to recall details about certain
protocols, and do calculations. While this might be useful to know how to do
in practice, it didn't contribute anything to my understanding, and it just
always felt like tedious busy work, and lacked projects that contributed to
the course goals.

I don't know data science, but here's a project I've heard of: Somebody's
hobby was disc golf. Discs come with ratings on them (I'm assuming things like
curve and distance). They created a controlled experiment to take various data
points from many discs, and compare them to their stated ratings, and apply a
bunch of data science-y things to the data.

Edit: I'd add some type of reference resources like a wiki, and ideally some
auto-grader that gives feedback if possible (like what tests failed)

~~~
jplayer01
What MOOC did you take where you had to write an interpreter?

~~~
aryzach
[https://www.coursera.org/learn/programming-languages-
part-b](https://www.coursera.org/learn/programming-languages-part-b)

This is Part B, but there's also parts A and C. While I recommend the whole
course, you don't need to take it all if you just want the interpreter
project.

The networking course was discontinued, but these are the videos:
[https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEAYkSg4uSQ2dr0XO_Nwa...](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEAYkSg4uSQ2dr0XO_Nwa5OcdEcaaELSG)

The videos aren't terrible, but the homework was worthless.

~~~
jplayer01
Thank you.

------
samvher
I was going to say that all my favorite courses were kind of unique, and
didn't share any particular characteristics, but writing this comment I found
they actually all share excellent problem sets and an engaging instructor.
Having taken ~25-30 online courses, the ones that stood out were:

\- Discrete Optimization (Coursera/Melbourne university, Pascal van
Hentenryck): had competitive optimization assignments and course leaderboards.
The professor oozed enthousiasm and the nature of the assignments was great
for the competitive setup (many different approaches possible, and there were
always problems which you would not be able to solve to optimality).

\- Microeconomics (EdX/MIT, Jonathan Gruber): very good assignments that made
you discover things yourself. Professor presented with a lot of humor and this
course was clearly refined over many iterations on campus. Lectures were
actually recorded in a classroom setting so not tuned for MOOC delivery at
all.

Honorable mentions for Computer Graphics (EdX/UC San Diego, Ravi Ramamoorthi,
perfect pacing and balanced, broad set of assignments) and Underactuated
Robotics (EdX/MIT, Russ Tedrake, fascinating material and challenging, elegant
assignments).

------
leggomylibro
Hands-on, practical examples. If a class only includes video explanations and
some quizzes on what was said in the lectures, I usually forget the subject
matter quickly. The best MOOCs that I've taken are the ones that have periodic
"lab" assignments which ask me to think and apply the subject matter in ways
that the lectures may not have explained in precise detail.

Without naming names, here are two examples:

I once took a MOOC about "bare-metal" microcontroller programming which didn't
include any microcontroller coding. Useless.

I once took a MOOC about digital circuit design which used an in-browser
circuit simulator for problem sets and labs. Extremely helpful.

I feel sort of cheated when I work through an online course, only to find out
that it would have worked just as well if it were a series of YouTube videos.

For college-level data structures, maybe you could ask students to implement
their favorite DS from a set of tricky ones? You could write automated tests
to verify them so grading is easier for you and development is easier for
them.

------
wespiser_2018
I've taken almost 10 MOOCs and 5 courses in GT's OMSCS program, spanning from
a member of Ng's first ML course, to a currently lackluster offering I'm
taking for credit.

To take a step back, I think what makes a course great is just its ability to
transfer knowledge to students and to spark curiosity (further learning after
course finishes). Usually, when you take a course in person, the folks
teaching the class have ample opportunity to ensure that transfer is
happening, in online courses, the onus is really on the student.

Thus, in an online course, you need to provide clear learning goals, for
instance, "dynamic programming", a set of lectures that teaches those
concepts, then homework or project based work that directly refers to what has
been said in the lectures. Decide what your resources are, say, a book, your
videos, and a few homework assignments, then try to have the resources build
off each other, and make sure information is available in multiple places.
Sometimes with difficult concepts, you need things explained twice, from two
different sources!

The next aspect of a great course is the fostering of a learning community.
Make sure the students have a place where they can engage (slack, discord, et
cetera) and ask questions. Having students make a social connection has been
shown to increase their outcomes in online learning, and for me, the early
Coursera courses were amazing for this.

Finally, there is the aspect of of running the course. Some students don't do
well learning online, and I some of this can be explained by the loss of human
to human contact and relationship building and mentoring that can help
struggling students during in person office hours. A percentage of students
truly rely on this, and there is no online alternative. If you don't grok them
pythonz, data science can be a nightmare (R 4 lyfe!!!).

Someone much smarted than me figured out you need 3 things to learn: time
invested, a consistent environment, and feedback. Make sure you have enough
TAs to actually give student feedback, or figure out an autograder for
problems of varying difficulty.

------
xyg
I would say these aspects are important:

An instructor's understanding of the topic he or she is teaching. It is hard
to describe but the vision and the depth are just different. In some
occasions, I find that it is my preparation prevents me from fully
understanding what the instructors are seeing.

An instructor's passion for the topic, which brings moments for learners to
feel "this is fascinating /amazing /cool /interesting. I have never thought
about that". It seems that passion cannot be faked or manipulated, which means
one cannot be prepared to demonstrate passion when teaching a course.

Teaching and presentation skills, can be trained.

Visualization and other technicals, can always be improved.

------
uinerimak
One of the things I like in courses is that fact I can know who's studying
with me and in few cases I actually became friend with one or two people.

Also in online courses it's an important factor that not many e-learning sites
fully understand the potential

------
sriram_malhar
Exercises and frequent quizzes. Passive learning is not learning.

~~~
kylebenzle
Agree with frequent tests. Also live video as much as possible.

------
Eridrus
This might not really translate to you since the context I have taken online
courses in is that I have wanted to learn more so that I could be a more
effective software engineer. So I'm looking for things that show applications
quickly.

Courses I've gotten a lot out of: Andrew Ng's ML course and Yaser Abu-
Mostafa's learning from data course.

In both courses I really felt like I was learning something meaningful. I very
clearly remember how mind blowing it was to me that you could turn complex
high level tasks into curve fitting. I excitedly told a colleague of this
thing I had learned about called linear regression who turned out to be
surprised I had not taken a statistics class. Same thing for generalization
bounds & VC dimension in Yaser's class.

I don't know if this can really be generalized to all courses since it might
just be matching students to courses that make sense to them, but the worst
line in a MOOC is "Well, this is boring, but you're just going to have to
grind through it so that we can solve problems later". Shout out to the Convex
Optimization MOOC I dropped.

For Data Science 101 this should be easy. Find some problems that students
could imagine wanting to work on and use those problems to drive what you talk
about.

Also, a pet peeve of mine is courses trying to make me do math by hand. I am
100% going to ask a math package to do an integral for me every time this
happens. Sure, somebody has to know all the math deeply, but it's not me.

So I guess the main takeaway here is that you need to understand your
audience. What is appropriate for me is probably not appropriate for 1st
semester college kids.

------
quickthrower2
I don’t want amazing. I want efficient! Teach me at a speed not to slow and
not too fast. Cover the correct topics.

A course with missable sections would be good so that if you already know ES6
you don’t need to listen through it on every JS course. Cheat sheets might
help with this too.

I don’t care much for a super interesting voice as long as it’s a reasonable
voice (not monotonous or unclear) and I can learn the thing.

------
jerome-jh
Having taken a number of MOOCs, I would say, for the videos:

\- the speaker must be standing

\- the tone should be light, not necessarily funny, but definitely not always
the same

\- there should be illustrations

\- anecdotes, personal notes, interviews: maybe not at every video but at
least one per chapter.

\- videos should last less than 15min.

The talk must not aim to be exhaustive. Students will master the material
through provided readings, exercises or quizzes. Some may only watch the
videos, others will do the full course.

You will probably not have the time to prepare quality videos before the
COVID-19 outbreak, so you may limit yourself to an introductory video for
every chapter. You may also provide the solution for a couple of exercises in
a video on the model of Kahn academy.

You should watch the making-of at the end of "Mindshift" on Coursera, by
Barbara Oakley.

Note that "Introduction to logic" on Coursera has no videos but provides great
tools and both funny and serious exercises.

 _Bad videos may spoil the course by making your students bored before they
even start learning. So insist on quality, not quantity._

~~~
ldenoue
Why does it feel important to you that the speaker be standing?

~~~
toomuchtodo
Standing uses body language to convey authority and confidence when
presenting. I’d theorize this helps the consumer of educational content in
being engaged, which is more difficult when watching videos versus being
present during an in person lecture.

~~~
ldenoue
but if the teacher is fully shown, or perhaps the upper body (in Japanese
culture, people like to see the upper body during webcam sessions, not just
the head), then it would still convey authority and confidence while watching
the video?

Authority seems to come in part from the actual height difference, so that
could be lost if the student watches a video... But standing still gives other
benefits, see [https://www.genardmethod.com/blog/bid/161977/Sitting-or-
Stan...](https://www.genardmethod.com/blog/bid/161977/Sitting-or-Standing-
Which-Makes-for-More-Effective-Presentations)

------
jplayer01
I'm curious about why people aren't naming any courses that exemplify the good
or bad things they're mentioning.

------
dominotw
MOOC's are super boring for people who don't like watching videos.

I really hope somone builds a mooc on top of something like leetcode.com .
Start with easy problems see how far you get, get a hint, if you can't then
watch a video of concept you are missing and so on.

~~~
diehunde
I used to love watching video but since I started reading more books I just
can't watch for more than 5 minutes. Recently I discover educative.io which is
like reading articles. It's great if you don't like watching videos and want
to learn software engineering stuff.

------
elliekelly
It’s not easy for me to explain (and I would imagine not easy to create in
lesson plans) but I think it’s something Colt Steele consistently does well in
his Web Dev Bootcamp on Udemy.

Here’s my best effort at articulating his teaching style: He walks students
directly into the mistakes they’re going to make and then helps guide them
out. Most instructors will teach the concept and leave it to students to avoid
making mistakes. I learn a lot a better when I know what mistakes to look out
for _and_ what to do when I’ve encountered one. But more importantly, I feel
like I’ve really mastered the material when I’m confident that I can get
myself out of any mess I can get myself into.

~~~
abdullahkhalids
Can you give a specific example of this technique?

------
ailun
Check out David Joyner’s work at Georgia Tech:

[http://lucylabs.gatech.edu/](http://lucylabs.gatech.edu/)

One of the keys for me is how I get feedback. Multiple choice quizzes can be
well-designed. Most are not. But they scale well.

Personally I like very challenging assignments, but with very lenient grading
and partial credit, with lots of detailed feedback from the grader.

If you’re teaching a college course, maybe you have enough TAs to make that
happen. You’ll see some of Dr. Joyner’s work is on scaling grading systems and
feedback.

------
decentralised
In my formal education days, I was perma-frustrated that none of my teachers
had achieved anything impressive with their work (apart from being published),
and I often felt like I was being handed out second-hand knowledge to
regurgitate during the exams... and I had to get a job to pay for that level
of education!

To me what's really good about MOOCs is that I can have access to some of the
best content and teachers from MIT, etc all from the comfort of my living
room.

------
mgozaydin
Cost of a 3-credit course f2f ar Stanford is $ 5.000. But the real cost of an
online course ( same course ) , is less than $ 10 . I tell them sell it at $
100 . But there is a dilemna . How come the same thing is $ 5000 and $ 100 .
Even the one for $ 100 is better . Solve the equation . I say make a
consortium of online degree programs . Provide degrees from consortium . Any
idea .

------
hither2
2 cents:

I think the internet is the best way to distribute information, but for me one
of the worst places to learn.

If the learning is solely done via the computer I will fail to even get near
to completing the course (self-study, no pressure). But by using pens, paper,
books etc, my ability gets to a normal level.

So, encourage them to behave close to the way they do in your classes.

------
j45
I'm a technologist in Education. This frightens a lot of educators who are
pretenders in Academia trying to lead technology development.

Supporting instructors, and instruction directly has been my main area of
focus for the past year, in addition to being directly involved in developing
online education platforms for the past 20 years in K-12, Academia and
Industry.

I'm not sure if you have a tech background, but making sure you have competent
technology advisement at all stages is quickly emerging as a key
differentiator. If decision makers in academia haven't had technical literacy
to make technical decisions, it shouldn't be a surprise if the experiences are
not engaging, because they aren't leveraging digital interactions for what
they're capable of, and instead only what a limited non-technical academic
background can imagine.

Important:

\- Not taking the lecture format classroom of the past 100 years and putting
it online in video. MOOCs are handicapped before they even begin, quite often.
Sure, great instructors who can explain well are good, but they are the
exception, and not the norm. Another key problem remains.. god help you if you
have to change the video. The key I focus on is how students are experiencing
MOOCs as being the main lens. Academic institutions can have a hard time
letting the frame go to be student centric instead of instruction-centric.
Online education shouldn't be rooted in the practice of distance education
(correspondence, textbooks, phone calls)

\- The baseline of the student is that they are far more digitally literate
and competent than the institutions they are walking to and most often more
than their instructors.

\- Much of the Academic online education world is designed and anchored in a
past of a web browser on a desktop.. by educators who do not have competency
in the possibilities or capabilities of tech.

\- When it comes to making digitally engaging learning experiences, first you
have to consider if academics rarely learn how to teach, let alone digitally.

\- I would seriously pay attention to how students are interacting and
studying digitally and focus far less on the existing taxonomies and
nomenclature as it does not relate well to self-directed learning.

\- The Copernican view of curriculum being the sacred cow of Academia is
rooted in Math not changing much in a few hundred years, and generally the
rate of change in curriculum being slow. In the real world, Academia is
quickly reaching a point where they cannot update fast enough to keep pace
with the change in the world, and the gap between students and entering a job
is increasing.

\- Again, see what students are doing to stay relevant - it's not always
formal education.

\- Learning how to learn is a course I reference early and often to all sides
as the key skill being missed.

~~~
kingludite
In work and learning I keep getting back to an analogy with a trainer and an
athlete. People have been training for a long time. The goal is to excel,
constantly improve and ideally become the best. The job of the trainer is to
monitor if the athlete is working hard enough to improve while not overdoing
it. If recovery takes to long the gains will be smaller. One might even get
injured. Every type of training has clear goals one of which is the duration
of the challenge. A work day is usually 8 hours not a 30 min race to the end.
It seems to me a huge challenge to do this remotely. It seems the camera
shouldn't be pointed at the teacher but at the student.

------
pezo1919
To me it's giving the right intuition and perspectives. I don't really care
about the "raw" material/math, it comes only after good visualization based
intuition.

------
mgozaydin
admi,nistrators . Page design is real bad . Make it attractive .

