Overall, this course fell short of its potential. With better organization and more engaging content, it could have been one of the most challenging and rewarding classes. As it stood, I made it through Module 6’s videos, then let the rest auto-play—frankly, the lectures mostly consisted of very dry lectures and mostly from reading a text, and I learned more by studying the reading materials on my own. I even ended up “brute-forcing” the participation quizzes to get through them. The workload was unevenly distributed. Early on, there were several diagram assignments, then almost a month of downtime—only to be hit at the end of the semester with a very demanding Assignment 3. That final push left little breathing room, and success felt dependant on the effort level of your teammates. I know many students enroll hoping to strengthen their system‐design skills, since that’s a common stumbling block in technical interviews. Yet the course offers only a single UML-diagram exercise—and as the professor himself admits, “system design can’t be taught; it must be learned by doing.” If that’s true, why aren’t there more hands-on design challenges? In my view, focusing on SOLID principles and introducing smaller, bi-weekly design tasks would yield far greater learning outcomes. As it is, most of us end up relying on self-study to bridge the gaps.