FREE lectures this July. Places booking out fast. HSC: book here. VCE: book here.

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

June 26, 2019, 04:47:42 am

Author Topic: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings  (Read 991998 times)  Share 

1 Member and 7 Guests are viewing this topic.

dddknight

  • Trailblazer
  • *
  • Posts: 26
  • Respect: +6
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #735 on: December 05, 2018, 05:03:05 pm »
+5
Subject Code/Name: BCMB30001 Protein Structure and Function 

Workload:  3x 1hr lectures, 1x 1hr tutorial (sometimes), 1 computer practical session

Assessment: 5% computer tutorial worksheet, 20% assignment, 2x 10% MSTs, 55% final exam

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture etc.

Past exams available:  Yes. Plenty

Textbook Recommendation:  Mike Williamson “How proteins work?” 2012 Garland Science (A pretty good book for certain sections of the course)

Lecturer(s): Paul Gooley, Mike Griffin, Danny Hatters, Isabelle Rouiller and Gavin Reid

Year & Semester of completion: 2018 Sem 2

Rating:  3.8 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments:
Let me first say that the review given by vox nihili is pretty good already. I write this review just because there have been slight changes in the course in terms of who's lecturing and the assessment. As the previous review pointed out, each module has its own seperate distinct elements that don't connect with each other too well. Having gone through functional genomics, you'd think that this subject would be manageable but this subject is a beast on its own. The content of each lecture is pretty hard to grasp so don't feel too sad if you didn't understand it when you left the lecture. In fact, don't be too sad if you don't even attend the lectures. When I attended the lectures in week 10, there were less than 10 students coming in a class of about 100. This subject expands on the content covered in the 1st few weeks of 2nd yr biochem covered by Paul (in 1st sem) and Terry (in 2nd Sem). This includes the primary, secondary, tertiary structures of proteins and all the beta hairpins and folding principles covered. It's a tough subject and I feel it's necessary to go through each lecturer just as vox nihili has. However, you do get a sense of special knowledge as mentioned and it's nice to see the various techniques used to study proteins. It's also noteworthy that I felt knowledge of chemistry (Equilibrium including Gibbs and kinetics principles) and a bit of physics helped in doing this subject.

Paul - So nothing has really changed much from what the previous reviewer has stated. Paul is an NMR expert and it can be pretty hard to understand the principles of NMR. However that's okay. My advice is to not get too bogged down by the principles but focus more on how to interpret the results of NMR data. In my opinion, it felt Paul was a bit too intellectual in his lectures and it was hard to really grasp what he was saying. Sometimes, you should really just read his slides first and then think about what he's saying. It also helps if you try and find the actual published paper he uses in lectures to understand the results. My final advice to those doing this subject is NMR cannot determine structure by itself. You need some structure template to work with in order to gain information about the structure dynamics. This section was hard to follow but it's amazing what we can really do to understand proteins.

Mike - Most of my friends found that he was pretty dry to listen to. His focus was mainly on structures found by X-ray crystallography and SAXs as well as principles on enzymes. A bit of physics would be useful as he goes through constructive and destructive interference using X-rays on proteins. Perhaps what makes Mike's content hard is that the 3 topics mentioned above don't have much link with one another making it hard to review.

Danny - Danny focuses mainly on folding principles and how we can observe them through FRET and stopped flow experiments. If you've went through molecular analysis of cell function, you'll see that this is an expansion of the content. As mentioned, Danny is more focused on seeing whether you can apply these concepts into biological experiments which is great. He wants you to apply knowledge and not simply regurgitate. In doing his exam questions, they feel like questions that you would see in the lab subject. He's one of the nicest lectures out of all of them and you can tell that he does his best in giving you the best learning experience.

Isabelle - Unfortunately, this was the year Terry was replaced. Now this is good and bad. This was good because we wouldn't have to go through his really difficult exam questions and this was bad because we didn't get to see his fun lectures. Isabelle is an expert in cryo-EM and it makes sense to include her because this is one of the leading technologies now used to visualise proteins. However, what makes her lectures poor, and I have nothing against it, is that her french accent was strong and made the lectures difficult to follow. BUT! You can tell from her lecturing style that she tries her best to educate. This is shown by how detailed her slides are and everytime the lectures ended early, she would always give time to go through her review questions and provide answers to them. While I didn't attend her tutorial (and i wish I did), she apparently used Legos in order to try and build structures of proteins and I really wish I came for that! Her content went focused on cryo-EM, structures of motor proteins like dynein and kinesin as well as signalling proteins (huge advantage if u did BCMB30004).

Gavin - Now Gavin is apparently one of the leading experts in Mass Spectrometry in Australia. Unfortunately, his lectures were not great. The flow of his lectures were so poorly connected making it hard to follow. In addition, if you were watching him on lecture capture, he doesn't use the pointer as with other lecturers making it difficult to follow. The saving grace of Gavin is that his questions are basically the same every year so there is really no surprise when you do his questions in the exam.

Now each lecturer has their flaws but in my opinion, when you sit down and stop complaining, you'll see that the techniques used to study proteins are pretty amazing. It highlights how much we've really progressed with biochemistry and the papers each lecturer have highlighted have shown us what we've been able to determine. And it's pretty cool. While the content of this subject is hard to grasp, I think it's so much better than what you've learnt in functional genomics. It's a special knowledge that informs you what have we done to understand biology and it is really the foundations of drug design.

Tutorials- Honestly, I felt like these were sort of a waste of time and didn't attend most of them. Perhaps the most necessary tutorial to attend was the PyMol tutorial because it gives you the necessary skills necessary for the assignments. The tutorials given by Paul were pretty helpful in getting your mind thinking about how NMR works and what questions to expect. Danny does hold an interactive session on a paper where you'll input answers on your phone. I honestly wish the tutorials would switch to this direction. If I'm not wrong, some tutorials did involve people working in groups (not too sure) and it may be helpful for those who enjoy that.

Assessment
Computer lab - In comparison to BCMB30002, this was poorly conducted. During the prac, no effort was made to use the microphone or the main computer. So we were pretty much left to do our own thing based on written instructions and we could ask Paul and Mike for help if needed. The focus of the assignment was to get used to PyMol and write figure legends. Honestly the latter wasn't an issue because these are the same figure legends you would write in 2nd year techniques. There were issues imo in understanding questions but you could just ask help from Paul. The assessment isn't too strict and you would get at least 4/5 for this assessment.

Assignment - The assignment is a bit more straightforward in this subject and you'll be asked to answer a few questions. Each lecturer has their own assignment with their own set of questions. You'll be asked to use PyMol to create a figure they want and write a figure legend. Honestly, it's hard to say whether this was an easy assignment or not. I remembered overthinking a lot for this assignment and found it a pain because Gavin made our questions so vague. Perhaps what helped most was that piazza was setup so we could ask questions to clarify with one another the meaning of some questions. In terms of grade dist, me and my friends did very well so I can't really say whether this was easy or not.

MSTs - Honestly, I find these tests a huge pain and they were also held on the day of my Adv tech pracs. The MCQs were written in such a way that penalized you so harshly. Those who have done PHYS20008 would know how this feels. You'd be given a series of statements and you'd be asked to choose the option with the correct combination of statements. It's a huge pain because there were moments I was penalized for missing 1 fact out of the 4. I could not score a H1 for either MST because of this. The good thing about these MSTs is that they each only contribute 10% so managing a pass doesn't create too much damage. Consider these MSTs like concept checks to see whether you're progressing and catching up with the content. They don't really measure how well you do in this subject. Oh and there is no SAQ section anymore.

Exams - This has been changed to 2 hours. It comprises of both an MCQ and SAQ section. Our exam was held in the 1st week of the exam period. It was a real pain because we only had 2 weeks to go through Gavin's poor lectures and review everything that we went through already. Initially, the preparation may feel like a pain especially when you have to go learn some intricate details but I think what helps in this preparation the most are the past exam papers given in the library. You'll see that the questions given are somewhat similar and it gives you an idea what each lecturer wants to ask. Surprisingly, I didn't really have an issue with time just like BCMB30002. Some people did so I may not be the best example. All of the questions are very fair here unlike the MSTs. My advice is writing more does not always equate to more marks. You may just be wasting time and losing marks in other sections. Just be relevant. To be honest, I feel like they should've included questions where they would ask which techniques would be appropriate to probe certain experimental questions. It would be the best way to examine if you really understand what each technique can do.

Overall, the subject is hard. If you're doing advanced techniques in molecular science, you pretty much will have a tough sem. Definitely hard but the content is pretty interesting to learn. In entering a BCMB major, I always wanted to see chemistry being applied in biological contexts. While I didn't get to see too much of that, this subject was closest thing to it. It was great seeing principles of equilibrium, spontaneity and polarity being applied to understand proteins. I don't give this subject a too high rating because I feel like the content can be disengaging for so many people in this subject. One could sense this when you compare lecture attendance on the 1st day to last day. Unfortunately, it's a must for those wanting to do a BCMB major which is very restricting. As I said with Adv Techniques, if you managed to go through this subject and appreciated everything taught, give yourself a pat on the back, you survived what i think is the 2nd hardest subject of Biochemistry.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2018, 05:13:58 pm by dddknight »
BSci @ Unimelb (2016-2018)
Year I: BCMB20002 BIOL10004 BIOL10005 CHEM10009 HPSC10001 MAST10010 PHYC10005 UNIB10006
Year II: ANAT20006 BCMB20002 BCMB20003 CLAS10004 FOOD20003 MUSI20150 PHRM20001 PHYS20008
Year III: BCMB30001 BCMB30002 BCMB30004 BCMB30010 NEUR30002 NEUR30003 PSYC10003 SCIE20001

Hydroxyl

  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 105
  • Today is the tomorrow you worried about yesterday.
  • Respect: +8
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #736 on: December 08, 2018, 03:55:52 pm »
+5
Subject Code/Name: ISLM10002 Islam in the Modern World

Workload: 1 x 1.5 hr lecture & 1 x 1 hr tutorial per week (2.5 hours per week)

Assessment: 1 x 800 word Take Home Test (worth 20%), 1 x 1500 word Journal Exercise (worth 30%) and 1 x 2000 word Major Essay (worth 50%)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with lecture capture. We were told that there was no lecture capture by the lecturer, but the link was found by visiting echo360 and going through other subjects. The Lecture Capture Link was added to the LMS later.

Past exams available:  N/A

Textbook Recommendation:  ISLM10002 Subject Reader - available from the Co-op for ~$43. Not really recommended, can do without it.

Lecturer(s): Dr. Muhammad Kamal

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 2, 2018

Rating:  4.9 out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: 82 (H1)

Comments: TL;DR - This subject is great overall - the workload is much lighter than your typical breadth subject and provides an interesting insight into how a religion, such as Islam, is coping with the challenges of modernity.

Lectures:

There were 12 lectures for the subject. These covered interesting topics, such as:

Weeks 1-3: Historical Background

Week 1: Belief and Practice in Islam
Week 2: Origins and Developments: Islam, Muslim Empires, Movements and States
Week 3: Issues in Islamic Legal Thought

Weeks 4-5: Colonialism and the Muslim Response

Week 4: Post-Caliphate Reformers
Week 5: Contemporary Thinkers

Weeks 6-12: Contemporary Issues - this is where the bulk of the subject lies, as the subject primarily deals with the religion and it's impacts in the modern world. Weeks 1-3 provide more of a background into the faith.

Week 6: Mass Media Islam
Week 7: The Status of Women and Human Rights
Week 8: The Question of Palestine
Week 9: Jihad and Militancy in the Muslim World
Week 10: The Struggle for Democracy
Week 11: Muslims in the West: The Case of Australia
Week 12: Islam and the West: Where to from here?

I found each lecture pretty interesting. My favourite for the subject was Week 7, which was about women's rights. I also chose this topic for my major Essay - as there were many avenues for discussion. It was also a topic that I found pretty easy to sustain a 2000+ word argument for.

I found the lectures quite stimulating. It was more so conducted as a class, where we could stop and interrupt to add our own options. Dr Kamal was always happy to hear the points of views of the students and even called on us to question it. It is not that important to take that many notes from each lecture, however I would strongly advise taking detailed notes for the first 6 weeks as this comes up in the take home test. From memory, the take home test was due in Week 8, so two weeks to answer 5 questions with a paragraph each is totally reasonable. I found the marking to be quite harsh for this, with the overwhelming majority of students scoring a H2A for this assessment. I only barely managed a 16/20 (H1), but this only came after a review of my original work (15.5/20 - H2A). However, I think it's important not to stress if you do not receive that many marks for this, as it is only worst 20% of the subject.

From Weeks 6-12, more of the material covered was for our own knowledge rather than the assessments. Some of the lectures ended early but there were many points of discussion regarding the different topics. You could chose to write anything that is mentioned in the lectures for your major essay, and I would recommend doing a topic that is based on the lectures. Why I stress this is because it is much easier to find resources that answer the topics and the points they need directly. I found all the answers to my major essay in the Subject Reader and was glad that I bought it as it helped push me over to the H1 mark.

I would just like to stress that this subject takes a very academic focus, and is not a theology class, so to speak. Some information should be taken with a grain of salt, as it does not represent the ideology of some Muslims. In fact, a small amount of information is slightly incorrect and I would always recommend going back and fact checking some of the "facts" that Dr. Kamal states. He emphasises that it is just his opinion, and most should be regarded as such until checked with primary religious texts/sources.

Tutorials

The tutorial program links some of the discussions of the lectures with other theory and practice. I found the tutorials helpful in providing an alternate point of view, as you can learn a lot from other students and what they have to say (and consequently, use that in your essay OR assignments). It also provides a great opportunity to engage with your tutor and ask them questions about how they want the assignments to be written (as they are marking it). However, I found that there was only one tutor for the subject (Dr. Sirin Yasar). She was helpful in many aspects, but I found that sometimes the standard was quite high for our work and, as previously mentioned, it seemed like the entire tutorial class got H2A's for their assignments across the ball. However, I didn't find all the tutorials helpful. You need to go to at least 80% of them, so try and make use of them while you can. The best thing that came out of our tutorials was the friend groups that we formed ahah.

Assessment

As mentioned above, there are 3 assignments throughout the semester.

Take Home Test (800 words)                              20%   Due Monday, Week 8
Journal Exercise (1,500  words)                         30%   Due Monday, Week 11
Major Essay (2,000  words)                                50%   Due Monday, Week 2 of Exams

Assignment details are:

Take Home Test (20%)

Students will be assigned a series of five questions in week 6 of teaching period. Answers to be submitted in week 8. Mark: 16/20 (H1)

Journal Exercise (30%)
You must select three of the assigned weekly readings and for each reading write a 500 word reflective response.  Mere summary of the reading will not receive a good mark. You are expected to discuss issues raised in the reading. If you feel it is appropriate you may also decide to critique (appraise) the reading. If you do please stick to the quality of the arguments and evidence offered by the author rather than addressing the writing style. Your focus must be on the reading you have chosen to respond to, but in order to deliver a high quality response you are advised to read around the subject dealt with, starting with the other readings linked to the week, both assigned and additional. It is recommended that you wait till after the relevant class discussion has taken place before completing a response in order to take advantage of insights generated by the class. It is also recommended that you do not attempt to complete your responses at the last minute but space them out through the semester. You can submit 2 responses of 750 words each (which is what I did). Mark: 23/30 (H2A)

Major Essay (50%)
Select one of the essay questions and write a 2000 word answer in essay format.
An essay is an extended intellectual engagement with a particular question or topic. It must demonstrate not only an ability to write to an acceptable standard but, just as importantly, an ability to think to an acceptable standard. You are required to research the relevant issues, and to show evidence of that research in the form of appropriate reference and quotation. You are asked to query and evaluate all that you read and, through a critical engagement with it, develop your own opinions and ideas. These ideas must be argued and substantiated by rational means, and in a logical order. Your argument must have a clear structure. You will lose marks for errors in spelling or grammar.
Your essay will be assessed on the following criteria:
The quality of the research completed on your chosen topic
The quality of the insights into your topic that you display
The quality of the analytical and critical thinking you display
The quality of the arguments you present and the evidence you use to defend them
The originality of the insights and arguments that you display
The quality of your writing style (the clarity and elegance with which you present material and arguments)
Appropriate adherence to scholarly conventions
Grammar and spelling.
Mark: 42/50 (H1).

Why the subject lost 0.1 of a mark is because there is no clear rubric as to what is actually expected of you and where you could lose marks. I found little to no comments and many ticks throughout my first assignment and lost 20% of the overall mark.

What is also important to note is that Dr. Kamal gives the Major Essay topics in Week 3 of Semester, and it is due during the examination period. It is the first assignment you receive, so you may as well start working on it!! I had to do it in between my CHEM10004 (Chemistry 2) and PSYC10004 (Mind, Brain and Behaviour 2) exam, which only gave me 5 days to complete it all! It was stressful indeed. Interestingly, you receive the final assignment first, so finishing that and giving yourself a lot of time to practice is important.

A note about scaling:
Everyone in the subject received a 1 mark bonus added to our final grades, which could push change the overall letter grade. For me, my overall mark for the assignments was 81/100 which was then bumped up to 82 for the subject.

Overall, a fantastic subject and an interesting breadth! This was my first breadth and I really enjoyed it. I would recommend that you do not slack off in the subject, especially with the assignments. It is not as easy as a H1 as one would like! But with a bit of effort and practice, you could definitely score highly :D

Hydroxyl


« Last Edit: December 09, 2018, 12:51:24 pm by Hydroxyl »
2016: Biology [41] | Further Mathematics [42]
2017: Chemistry [36] | Mathematical Methods [38] | English [44] | Psychology [50 + Premier's Award]
ATAR: 98.25
2018 - 2020: Bachelor of Science (Psychology) — The University of Melbourne
2018: BIOL10004 | CHEM10003 | PHYC10005 | PSYC10003 | BIOL10005 | CHEM10004 | ISLM10002 | PSYC10004
2019: ISLM20003 | ARBC10005 | BCMB20002 | PSYC20006 | PSYC20008 | ANAT20006 | PHYS20008 | PSYC20007
2020: EDUC10057 | NEUR30003 | PSYC30013 | PSYC30014 | PHYS30001 | PSYC20009 | PSYC30020 | PSYC30021
~ Whoever Strives Shall Achieve ~

AlphaZero

  • MOTM: DEC 18
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 272
  • \[\int_a^b f(x)\,\text{d}x=F(b)-F(a)\]
  • Respect: +116
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #737 on: December 08, 2018, 09:57:45 pm »
+5
Subject Code/Name: MAST10009 Accelerated Mathematics 2

Workload:
Every week:
> 4 hours of lectures (1 hour each)
> 1 hour practice class

Assessment:
> 2 written assignments (10% total, equally weighted)
> Mid-semester Test (10%)
> Examination (80%)

Lectopia Enabled:
Yes, but only the lecture slides. The lecturer uses the whiteboard so it's best to attend.

Past exams available:
Yes, 10 available (2009 to 2018) plus many MAST10006 Calculus 2 and MAST20026 exams (see comments for explanation).

Textbook Recommendation:
None. The lecturer provides his own text guide, which is essential. It's available at the university Co-op Book Shop.

Lecturer(s):
Prof. Barry Hughes

Year & Semester of completion:
2018 Semester 2

Rating:
4.5 out of 5

Your Mark/Grade:
First Class Honours (H1)

Comments:
Important Notes: MAST10008 Accelerated Mathematics 2 is the second of two subjects in the first year accelerated mathematics stream. Taking both MAST10008 Accelerated Mathematics 1 and MAST10009 Accelerated Mathematics 2 is equivalent to taking the three subjects MAST10006 Calculus 2, MAST10007 Linear Algebra and MAST20026 Real Analysis. MAST10008 Accelerated Mathematics 2 covers all of MAST20026 Real Analysis, and the remaining parts, (which is pretty much all of) MAST10006 Calculus 2 (where the rest would have been covered in MAST10008 Accelerated Mathematics 1). The accelerated mathematics stream requires a minimum raw score of 38 in VCE Specialist Mathematics, or equivalent (roughly, top 13%).

Just like MAST10008 Accelerated Mathematics 1, I thoroughly enjoyed this subject and was by far, my favourite subject of the semester. Students should be careful though. MAST10009 Accelerated Mathematics 2 is much more difficult in comparison to MAST10008 Accelerated Mathematics 1. This subject develops the theory behind many very important parts of mathematics in mostly chronological order. The content here is covered very quickly, and it is highly unlikely that at students will not digest everything upon first presentation. There are even comments about MAST10009 Accelerated Mathematics 2 being one of the hardest first year subjects due to its pace, and because it covers around 1.6 subjects worth of material. It will be very important that you stay on top of things and are studying regularly. This subject is very unforgiving if you fall behind even for strong mathematics students. That being said though, taking the subject is has been an amazing journey, and I strongly encourage students to take it if they are up for a rewarding challenge.

Lectures:
Barry is very interesting and delivers lectures very well. However, given the sheer amount of content that needs to be covered, sometimes, he necessarily needs to skip a few details, and so you have to teach yourself (as well as utilising consultation regularly). This is the only reason I didn't give this subject a 5 out of 5. Barry essentially uses lecture slides and walks you through the concepts. (All notes are in the text). He then does the examples on the whiteboards (which can sometimes be frustrating given the whiteboards are not recorded). You should take notes only on the examples. You can annotate your text if you like, but not much more is required. Your focus should be on listening and understanding what Barry is saying.

Practice Classes (Tutorials):
Tutorials were awesome, though since the questions are essentially from the text, if you are prepared, this class can be pointless. Nevertheless, it can be fruitful to answer questions again with a tutor watching your logic and reasoning so that they can make any necessary corrections. In this class, you complete a set list of questions in groups on the whiteboards. Selected hints / solutions are found at the back of the book, but you will find them useless if you don't understand the content in the first place. You should consult your tutor and/or utilise consultation hours should you need assistance.

Assignments:
All assignments are handwritten. The questions on the assignments are generally of high difficulty. Although it will seem like some are easy, do not be fooled. There are small nuances everywhere to catch those who are not focused. Like most mathematics at university level, assignment questions are not the same as exam questions, and so it's important that you do not start assignments the night before they are due. The questions are not necessarily straight forward and trust me, Barry will make sure you have thought about it for days before coming up with a solution.

Mid-semester Test: The mid-semester test might just be the worst score you will ever get on a mathematics test. If you are not prepared, you will not score well at all. The test contains content from the first 20 lectures (or first 5 weeks) of the semester. It's 45 minutes long, and is generally around 40 marks. (40 marks in 45 minutes as opposed to 40 marks in 60 minutes in VCE).

Examination:
Worth 80%, this is a massive assessment. You have no calculator and no notes. Only a pen is required. The exam, unlike the mid-semester test, is much more straight forward if you have done the work prior to it. The exam is always designed so that it is relatively easy to pass, but hard to score well in (just like MAST10008 Accelerated Mathematics 1).

Overall, I think MAST10009 Accelerated Mathematics 2 is a very rewarding subject if you put in the effort. It's also a subject that is really the turning point in most students' mathematics education. After completing the first year accelerated stream, students generally come out with a deeper appreciation for higher mathematics.
« Last Edit: January 14, 2019, 10:27:29 pm by dantraicos »
2015\(-\)2017:  VCE
2018\(-\)2021:  Bachelor of Biomedicine and Concurrent Diploma in Mathematical Sciences, University of Melbourne


abc12345j

  • Victorian
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 221
  • Respect: +43
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #738 on: January 15, 2019, 05:46:39 pm »
+3
Subject Code/Name: BCMB30004 Cell Signalling and Neurochemistry

Workload:  3 x 1 hour lectures per week, 1 x 1 hour tutorial per week, 1 x 2 hour computer laboratory (once early on in the semester)

Assessment:  2 x Mid Semester tests (10% each), 1 x completion of the computer laboratory (5 % and basically a pass/fail hurdle), 1000 word assignment (20%) and Final exam (55%)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available:  Yes, there were two past exams provided (with solutions)

Textbook Recommendation:  No prescribed (essential) textbooks, but I found the recommended textbook (Cell Signalling: principles and mechanisms. By Lim, Meyer and Pawson) to be quite useful in clarifying key concepts.

Lecturer(s): Heung-Chin Cheng, Justine Mintern, Marie Bogoyevitch, Ian Van Driel, Harshal Nandurkar & Carli Roulston

Year & Semester of completion: 2018, Semester 2

Rating: 4.5 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments: This is an excellent subject which, although content-heavy, definitely complements a wide array of science majors such as Neuroscience, physiology, immunology and biochemistry. It delves into the nitty-gritty of various biochemical signalling cascades that occur in a multitude of contexts in the human body. Topics covered include signalling pathways for the innate immune response, glycogen metabolism and its regulation, post -translational modifications, protein ubiquitination and degradation, cell autophagy and neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinson's disease and Motor Neurone disease. I particularly enjoyed the occasions when this subject delved into highly topical and practical subject matter; for instance, the 'guest' lectures from Professor Nandurkar surrounding causes and treatments for chronic myeloid leukaemia were fascinating, as were Dr Roulston's lectures on the causes and prevention of strokes. In this sense, the highly applicable nature of this subject to many fields in the health sciences makes it a subject that is of incredible value for those looking to gain a deeper understanding of cell signalling before undertaking a postgraduate health sciences course.     

The assessment for this subject is relatively straightforward. The mid-semester tests each consist of 8 multiple choice questions (worth 80 marks), as well as a short-to-medium answer question worth 20 marks. Although these tests cover a lot of content, if you keep up to date with your study you shouldn't have many problems at all as most of the questions in my experience are easily doable if you have a solid understanding of the lecture notes. The computer lab at the start of the semester introduces you to 'Molsoft' software, which allows you to investigate protein structure and amino acid sequences in great detail. All you have to really do is turn up and follow instructions, and you should get an easy 5%. The assignment is based on one of three research topics (you get to choose which one you do), and is in an essay format. There is a one hour tutorial explaining your chosen topic and what you need to do to complete the 1000 word essay. While it seemed slightly daunting at first, the research here isn't too difficult as you can find most of the papers you need to cite via a google search. I chose Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (Motor Neurone Disease) as my topic, and we were given a research paper (in which an experiment was undertaken) to analyse as part of the assignment. The exam is probably the biggest hurdle that prevents students from doing well in this subject. There is a lot of content to revise, and many students simply aren't prepared for the sheer amount of detail that they require you to know. All content is assessable, and there are 10 multiple choice questions (worth 25% of the marks), while the rest (75%) comprises medium-answer questions. I found that the past exams were a decent guide as to the difficultly of the questions and level of detail they expect from you in your responses.

Ultimately, I would definitely recommend this subject to anyone with a biochem-related major or who is looking to enter a health sciences course. This subject is highly applicable to a range of topical issues in medicine, and provides an in-depth understanding of many cell signalling process at the most fundamental level.
« Last Edit: January 15, 2019, 05:50:06 pm by abc12345j »

abc12345j

  • Victorian
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 221
  • Respect: +43
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #739 on: January 15, 2019, 06:30:29 pm »
+3
Subject Code/Name: POLS30019 Australian Foreign Policy 

Workload:  2 x 1 hour lectures per week, 1 x 1 hour tutorial per week

Assessment:  A 500 word report on a tutorial debate (10%), a 1500 word research essay (40%), a 2 hour final exam (50%)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available:  Yes, but the earliest one was from about 6 years ago so they weren't terribly relevant.

Textbook Recommendation:  All readings are provided via the LMS

Lecturer(s): Allan Patience (also the tutor for all tutorials), Richard Tanter

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 2, 2018

Rating: 5 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments: This was without a doubt the best politics subject that I studied at Melbourne Uni. The subject matter is very interesting and contemporary, and both of the lecturers (particularly Allan) are highly engaging presenters and experts in their field. The course, as its name suggests, looks at the world of international relations from the perspective of Australian foreign policy makers. Topics covered include Australia's military alliance with the US (ANZUS), our (historical and present) relationships with China, Japan and Indonesian, Nuclear proliferation, global challenges such as climate change, human rights and Australia's multilateral engagement.

The weekly tutorials take the format of a debate, in which two students from the class are assigned a side (affirmative or negative) and must argue their case in front of the class on a particular topic (such as 'The ANZUS alliance is in Australia's national interest'), irrespective of their personal view on the topic. After the two students have presented their cases, discussion is then opened up to the rest of the class. In the week after your debate topic, you must write up a 500 word report on your case, the arguments that you presented, and those that were raised in opposition to your point of view, and explain how the resulting tutorial discussion changed or affirmed your point of view on the matter. These tutorial sessions were really enjoyable and a great exercise; Allan would always ask you probing questions and you really need to know your stuff to be able to justify your point of view. Although Allan has rather strong opinions on certain matters and is definitely 'left of centre' politically, he always gives all participants a fair hearing and welcomes contrary points of view and vigorous debate.

In terms of the research essay component, you are given a list of potential essay topics from which you are to pick one. The task itself is pretty straightforward, and like most politics essays, so long as you make a clear argument that is supported by evidence (ie. the academic literature, including assigned readings), you should do well. The final exam is a two hour long sit down exam in the Royal Exhibition Building, and you must write two 1000 word essays in this period of time. One of the questions is compulsory (a very general essay question which asks you to discuss three major challenges facing Australian foreign policy makers), while the other question is specific to a topic covered in the lectures and readings (there were about 13 or 14 to choose from if I can recall correctly). This effectively means that you do not have to study every aspect of the course to be well-prepared for the exam; I would advise that you specialise your revision such that you know 3-5 topics back to front, which should be more than sufficient to cover all bases. As the exam is a sit-down, closed book exam, there is no need to reference any readings or literature- all that is required is that you answer the questions with a sophisticated argument.

All in all, this subject was an absolutely pleasure to study. I cannot recommend it enough, particularly to anyone interested in Australian politics and foreign affairs. Although I completed this subject as a 'breadth' subject, I must warn you that it is not a 'bludge' subject where you can do little work and expect to receive an easy H1. If you do end up deciding to do it, prepare to work hard and critically engage with the material!

beaudityoucanbe

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Respect: +1
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #740 on: June 19, 2019, 12:00:26 am »
+4
Subject Code/Name: ANCW30011 Underworld and Afterlife

Workload:  One 2 hour seminar per week and weekly 1-2.5 hour "lectures" (explained below)

Assessment:  3 Forms of Assessment:
1) Document Analysis 500 words 15% due week 5
2) Research Essay 2000 words 45% Due Week 8
3) Take-Home Exam 1500 words 40% Due during the examination period (this semester was released 17th June 9am and due 18th June 11pm)

Lectopia Enabled:  No? There arent normal lectures, but weekly videos

Past exams available:  No, no exams were available but they are very simple questions and easy to write

Textbook Recommendation:  There is no text book, they release their own 'textbook' which has all the readings for the week (which is all on LMS)

Lecturer(s): Parshia

Year & Semester of completion: 2019 Semester 1

Rating:  4 out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: (Optional) Document Analysis H3, Research Essay H2B, Essay TBD

Comments: Ok, so this is my very first review so bear with me... Plus I'm an accounting major so did this as a breadth
**NOT AN EASY H1 IF YOU HAVE NO EXPERIENCE IN HISTORY ESSAY WRITING**

Lectures:   The lectures are recorded in multiple 20 minute sections with Partia delivering the material. The delivery was interesting and he had some very interesting points. These lectures provide the first step to understanding the material, its kinda of like giving you some background knowledge and he explores some key parts of the reading material (i watched the lectures and took notes, then read the material).

Seminars: Every week, you really have to read all the prescribed materials otherwise you will be completely and utterly lost. The class is 100% discussion and you will be lost in it all if you haven't read the materials or watched the lectures. Writing down EVERYTHING can be incredibly helpful and will help a bit (not very much for me) for the first two assessments but is an incredible asset (yea i do accounting...) for the exam. The seminars can be look at great or a waste of time sometimes
Partia will initially ask basic questions about the material to kick off our thinking then will bring out some 'complex' questions (still many are veeerrrryyyy simple) where you will discuss in a small group and then "present" back to the class. The class environment in this semester was incredible. I've never experienced this before in commerce subjects. Everyone on your table backs you up with your arguments if you struggle, even other tables will politely 'butt in' to add or dispute (then at the end kinda attacked you when you make some friends so it was great!).
This can really get you thinking and analysing the texts but the second hour will get incredibly draining because the groups present the exact same info and will quickly get repetitive (a lot of us worked the first hour then did our own work in the second).

Assessment:
1) Document Analysis: was based on one week, i think week 4? but was straight forward. I really struggled with the writing i think because i have never written anything like these before.
2) Research Essay: You're given 5 questions from the first half of the semester and write on one of them which are all based on one different week of the semester. I got a good grasp on the writing a few days before it was due so my first half was utter shit, then got really good, then i got drained from working on it for so long and it became shitty again.
3) Take Home Exam: Wow this was so easy (i am still waiting for my grade). It requires NO research and (I'm quoting from the LMS and Parshia) "it doesn't require original ideas". For week 7 onwards, i cannot stress how important it is to look ahead and choose 2, 3 even 4 weeks that you find most interesting and take FURIOUS notes throughout. I mean FURIOUS. Write absolutely every breath and every letter down. With the lectures, write it all down word for word. When you have the exam released COPY AND PASTE. I did absolutely no preparation for the exam and it was a breeze writing it because all the info i had for it was from discussion and lecture. You are expected to use primary sources and secondary sources from the LMS (everything you've already read). My favourite week was week 12 where you assess similarities in contemporary films and ancient myth (i found this incredibly interesting). I recommend reading the last week in advance, writing down the movies and watch them! It would definitely help as i haven't watched some of the movies i talked about so used knowledge from the lecture, seminar and readings.

Overall, its a really interesting subject and I've learnt a lot of really interesting information. Its honestly a pointless subject (for me, but i can 100% see its merit if you're an arts student) but i am quite glad I've done it. It quickly turned from a joke subject to one that i actually wanted to do the work for

beaudityoucanbe

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Respect: +1
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #741 on: June 19, 2019, 12:33:40 am »
+3
Subject Code/Name: ACCT10002 Introductory Financial Accounting 

Workload:  One 2 Hour Lecture, One 1 Hour Tutorial

Assessment: 
On-line Quiz (1)   Individual   2%
On-line Quiz (2)   Individual   3%

These are quite annoying. I did poorly on the second one because it was unclear ho to fill it out (to me at least). I never liked online quizzes and would've much preferred a 10% MST or a second assignment

Practice Set Assignment   Individual   15%
I messed this up big time. I think a lot of students did. No explanation for how to use the accounting software (Xero) was provided, only like four 5-minute videos. I followed those and got it all wrong (ended up getting 7/15). Then when i frantically did it all manually, i got it all 100% correct which really hurt but i got some consolation knowing i messed up from the software not knowledge.
 
Tutorial attendance/participation   4%
Tutorial random exercises   2 x 3% =6%

Tutorials are painful (explained later)

End-of-semester exam   70%

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with everything recorded. Other lecturers wouldn't record the second screen and would draw on it or explain stuff but everything was recorded.

Past exams available:  Yes, 6 exams with solutions were provided!

Textbook Recommendation:  Recommended: Carlon, et al (2018), Financial Accounting- Reporting, Analysis and Decision Making, 6th Edition, Wiley.
I didn't get it and don't feel very disadvantaged at all

Lecturer(s): Warren McKeown - great lecturer. Knew he had to compete with Noelsy and was great. I enjoyed listening to his lectures

Year & Semester of completion: 2019 Semester 1

Rating:  4.5 Out of 5

Comments:   Overall its a repeat of IFA, with a lot of information repeated and with a little more detail
 
Lectures: 5/5. Warren was great and his slides were awesome. Had perfect amount of info and can add dot points from what he says. The lectures were very robust and had so helpful. He explained everything very clearly.

Tutorials: i absolutely dreaded them. My tutor struggled to get through the entire tutorial work and was very slow in getting through it. When he asked questions, NO ONE ANSWERED. 0 discussion was had, it got to the point where i grew so sick of it and was answering pretty much every single question which sped it up. I only showed up for the 10% and to get my answers and leave.
The tutorials are released a week before and were quite helpful. I found them quite straightforward. I highly recommend doing it all and consolidating your knowledge from the answers and tiny discussion had in the class. There are a lot of questions but they are broken into 3 categories: "REQUIRED to be completed before tutorial", "SHOULD be completed" and "MAY be discussed". I just did them all
The random exercises is just one question from one week of the tutorial so it isn't very hard to complete it and get a good mark for em.  Should be a guaranteed 9% if not 10%.


Week by Week Outline of Content
Introduction, Conceptual Framework and External Reporting
Double Entry Recording
Accrual Accounting and Adjustments
Inventories
Receivables
Non-Current Assets
Liabilities
Equities
Share Issues/Changes in Equity
Statement of Cash Flows
Accounting for GST
Course review and Revision questions

M909

  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 202
  • Conformed to The Melbourne Model
  • Respect: +41
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #742 on: June 21, 2019, 03:06:26 pm »
+4
Subject Code/Name: ECOM30001 Basic Econometrics

Workload: 2 ื 1 Hour Lecture per week, 1 ื 1 Hour Tutorial per week

Assessment:
2 ื Group Assignments, 10% each
1 ื Mid Semester 40 minute Multiple Choice Exam, 10%
Tutorial Participation, 10% (5% Attendance, 5% attempting pre-tute work)
2 hour End of Semester Exam, 60% (Hurdle Requirement)

NB: Lecture/tutorial content and assignments/exams are identical to the masters subject with the same name (ECOM90001), however masters students don't get tutorial participation marks and instead their exam is worth 70%. This subject and ECOM20001/Econometrics 1 are also a non-allowed subject pair. 

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture, although I think in a lecture theatre with dual screens you may miss out on some of the stuff currently being projected. You'll have access to everything, but this may make the actual lecture a little less clear.

Past exams available:  2018 final exam and practice questions for the final and mid sem exam provided, all with extensive solutions. 2016 past exam also available on library website, but no solutions.

Textbook Recommendation: No mandatory requirements, but lectures reference Principles of Econometrics, 5th ed by Hill, Griffiths, and Lim. I was able to find the 4th ed online, and barely used it. A few others are also recommended in the subject guide, but it's all optional and buying any textbook is definitely not necessary.

Lecturer(s): Andrew (Andy) Clarke

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 1, 2019

Rating: 4 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: Pending

Comments: Overall I found this to be an interesting and well-organised subject. Some of the content was fairly difficult to grasp, but the assessment itself was not too bad at all, and mainly required knowledge/understanding of the various properties and procedures taught, and well as interpretations. It was often stressed in lectures that we don't need to reproduce the complex proofs and algebra presented, and that it was just there so we could see where things came from. R is the language used, which is a plus as this is one of the languages used more in the "real world". Downloading R studio (it's free :) ) is very recommended, if not vital. However, you're not expected to come up with your own code or anything, you'll pretty much just need to copy certain aspects from the lecture slides and/or tutes for the assignments (which can done in groups, but I'll assume no one who's taking the time to read subject recommendations wants to be "that person" who doesn't contribute :P ).

Major topics were:
-The Basic Linear Model (Statistical properties, hypothesis tests, model specification)
-Dummy (Indicator) variables
-Heteroskedasticity
-Autocorrelation
-Time Series
-Stochastic Regressors (Issue of Cov(X,ε) ≠ 0)
-Panel Data
-Count Data
-Binary Outcomes

Lectures
Involved being talked through the slides/theory, with examples that often included R output. Extra accompanying handwritten notes were also often used and posted to the LMS. Andrew was a great lecturer and explained things well, although (as is the case with most uni subjects) extra time is needed to review, process and understand everything. There was quite a lot to sort through in the lecture slides which made reviewing it a bit harder, but it wasn't a major issue.

Tutorials
Very R focused. You're given access to the questions and R script beforehand and expected to use the script to attempt to answer the questions, which the tutor will take the class through. Don't worry if you don't get everything before the tute. I openly admitted to my tutor I wasn't on top of everything in terms of understanding the tute stuff and still got full marks for attending all the tutes and trying the questions beforehand. My tutor explained things very well, sometimes even better than in lectures. I definitely got value from attending, beyond the 10% participation marks. However, given most of it was done on R, I felt most the tutorial questions weren't that helpful for exam revision.
Note the first tute doesn't count towards your participation mark, and is pretty much an easy intro to R session, reviewing some basic statistical concepts you're expected to know like correlation and types of functions.

Assignments
Can be done in groups of 1-4 with people in your tutorial. Despite the horror stories you hear about group assignment, I honestly found doing it in a group helped with certain things I didn't understand yet, although everyone contributed fairly which isn't guaranteed to happen (But if your first group isn't good you don't have to work with them on the second assignment). Assignments were a bit more challenging than the exam IMO (although this may have been from my understanding during the semester vs during the final exam), and as mentioned above required you/your group to create your own R script, which must be added as an appendix to the assignment. That being said, marks were pretty good overall (From LMS, assignment 2 average was 30.73076/35, median was 31.00/35).

Mid Semester Exam
I expected this to be online since it was MC and so many other economics subjects do this, but it was treated as a formal mid sem in Wilson Hall under exam conditions. Focused on the 'Basic Linear Model' topics. Practice MC questions were provided, which were much harder than the actual test. 40 minutes was more than enough time to complete and check everything. I believe Andrew said the median was 10/12 and the mean was close to that too.

Final Exam
Focuses on the major topics listed above from Dummy Variables onwards. Apart from undertaking F- and t- hypothesis tests, the content from the mid semester exam is not directly examinable. As was the case with the mid sem, the practice questions provided were much more difficult and theoretical than the actual exam. The 2018 exam was a fair representation of what to expect. However, as stated on the LMS, exams solutions are intentionally far more extensive than what is needed for a "perfect answer".
No real surprises on my exam. The focus is on understanding/explaining properties of the models/variables, the implications of violating the standard MR assumptions, basic calculations/interpretations and tests. R output is provided to answer questions, but everything you need from it is very straightforward (especially since you've seen it all semester). There is also a formula sheet (for the mid sem too), meaning you don't have to remember the exact detailed of formulae/models, although you still need to know how to use them.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2019, 01:57:37 pm by M909 »
2015-2016: VCE

2017: BCom (Actuarial Studies Economics) @ UniMelb

Goal
2020: Master of Engineering (Electrical) @ UniMelb

M909

  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 202
  • Conformed to The Melbourne Model
  • Respect: +41
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #743 on: June 23, 2019, 01:53:48 pm »
+2
Subject Code/Name: PHYC10003 Physics 1

Workload:
3 ื 1 Hour Lecture per week
1 ื 1 Hour Problem Solving Class (Tutorial) per week
8 ื 2.5 Hour Labs throughout the semester

Assessment:
10 ื Assessable Online Homework Tasks, 15%
8 ื Labs incl Pre-lab work, 25% (80% Attendance and 50% Overall Result Hurdle Requirement)
3 Hour End of Semester Exam, 60%

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture

Past exams available:  Yes, past 11 years, all with solutions

Textbook Recommendation:  Prescribed text is Fundamentals of Physics, 11th ed by Halliday & Resnick. Can be easily found online. I used it a little bit at the start of semester and found it helpful, but got too busy to keep up at the end and feel (pre-mark release) I survived without it.
A lab/logbook is necessary to purchase ($8 from a website linked on LMS before the semester started). The handbook is also available to purchase (Also $8), but the entire content of the handbook can be found on the LMS so purchasing a hard copy is not vital.

Lecturers: Dr Philip Urquijo (Week 1-4), Prof Harry Quiney (Week 5-6), Prof Geoff Taylor (Week 7-12)

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 1, 2019

Rating:  4 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: Pending

Comments: I really enjoyed this subject, though there are definitely many who don't. I did VCE Physics in 2016 so my knowledge was probably a little rusty compared to most of my peers. During the semester there were times I felt it'd be easier if my knowledge was fresh, but I think by the end I had caught up through the subject's coursework and it wouldn't have really made a difference. The content extends upon some of the topics taught in VCE, and also introduces some new stuff, particularly rotational motion, friction, special relativity (unless that was your chosen area of study in VCE) and optics.

Major topics were (more info in handbook):
-Mechanics
-Waves and sound
-Optics
-Gravitation
-Special relativity

Lectures
Such parts were definitely more useful than others... I'd recommended current students to just do what works for them in terms of watching/attending lectures. There were also demonstrations in lectures which could be helpful in aiding/applying your understanding (but not vital), which can't really be visualised by using the lecture capture. I felt the main takeaway would be the formulae, examples and basic definitions and concepts. Quite a lot of content in total, so falling too behind  on the content in the slides isn't advisable.

Problem Solving Classes/Tutorials
Basically the same deal as a maths practical/tute. You get into groups and work together on the whiteboards on the handbook questions, while the tutor walks around and helps out. Trying the questions beforehand is recommended, and you'll probably get more out of the class if you do. Basic answers can be found in the handbook, then more in depth solutions are put on the LMS at the end of the week. That being said, I still gained from attending (both when I was up to date and doing the work beforehand, and when I was behind), but I don't think skipping a few hurt me too badly.

Labs
The total mark allocation is slightly complicated, but basically each of the labs is 3.125 marks (25/8). Of this, 20% (I.e. 0.625 marks) is from the pre-lab work. From this, half (0.3125 marks) is given for submitted the pre-lab questions on time (At least 10 min before the lab), and the other 0.3125 marks is from your actual answers. The pre-labs were 2-4 very basic questions, usually multiple choice, on the content of the prac and/or the basic physics theory behind it.
In the actual labs you'd work in groups of 2-3 to complete the experiment, collect results/data and write a report. Definitely read the pages in the handbook on the relevant lab before, but don't stress if you don't understand everything as your demonstrator will talk you through it at the start and show the group how everything works. The handbook also contains an example prac which you can base your report structure on, as well as what to do and key points to note down as you do each particular experiment. As someone who struggled with the practical report writing side of science in high-school, it got easier as the semester progressed, even though I often felt like I was missing stuff and/or not doing it right. Also, half the marks were basically participation marks (For following safety procedures, working well as a team ect.), so if you turn up and do your best/engaged with it, you'll probably get a decent mark regardless. I thought I completely failed the first lab (I struggled with what to write, barely talked about the physics concepts, and my group got 30 m/s^2 something for Earth's gravity!  :o) and ended up with 70% for the actual lab work (I.e. Not including the pre-lab stuff), which only improved from there. Prac content didn't always relate to what was currently being taught it lectures, but everything you needed to know and fairly straightforward.

Homework Assignments
Done through WileyPLUS, with access through the LMS (no extra purchases required :))). Some easy stuff and some very difficult stuff that was beyond the exam standard. 3 attempts for each question which also helped. I found them to be a good way to help me get my head around the lecture content and keep up to date.

Exam
Follows a pretty standard structure from year to year, so having all those past exams available is very helpful (not that I had time to do most of them...). A formula sheet with most the stuff you need is provided. A major exception to this was the constant accelerations formulae from VCE + a few others - I derived and/or memorised the constant acceleration ones them and wrote them on my exam at the start which worked for me. Therefore, focus more on understanding what everything means and the actual physics definitions and explanations behind things (There are worded questions too). Fortunately not a hurdle which was a relief during the lead up to the exam, but the exams are honestly not too bad; 3 hours was also more than enough time.
2015-2016: VCE

2017: BCom (Actuarial Studies Economics) @ UniMelb

Goal
2020: Master of Engineering (Electrical) @ UniMelb

hums_student

  • MOTM: SEP 18
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 304
  • Respect: +406
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #744 on: June 24, 2019, 12:42:10 pm »
+4
Subject Code/Name: MULT10018 Power (Arts Foundation)

Workload:
   • Lectures: 2 x 1 hr per week
   • Tutorials: 1 x 1 hr per week (except week 1)
   • Workshops: 1 x 2 hr per week (for 3 weeks)

Assessment:
   1. Annotated Bibliography: 500 words (15%)
   2. Research Essay: 2,000 words (45%)
   3. Take-home Exam: 1,500 words (40%)

Lectopia Enabled: Yes, with screen capture

Past exams available: Nope

Textbook Recommendation: All required readings are made available on the LMS for free, including the Arts Foundation Reading Pack.

Lecturer(s): Andrew Dawson BEST LECTURER EVER, Mediya Rangi, + 3 guest lecturers

Year & Semester of completion: 2019 Semester 1

Rating: 4 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: Pending

Comments:

Power is one of the 6 Arts Foundation subjects (Power, Reason, Language, Representation, Identity, Aboriginalities). It's the most political out of the six, and is highly recommended for politics / int'l relations / sociology / anthropology (the main lecturer, Andrew Dawson, is from the anthropology department). The general consensus is that students who choose Power are either (i) Aiming for Law; or (ii) Hoping to lead a Marxist revolution against the state in a few years' time.

Power introduces students to the philosophical and sociological aspects of political thought, specifically Marxism. It looks at how power is exercised, accepted, and challenged. Key thinkers include Karl Marx DUH, Max Weber, Michel Foucault, & Erving Goffman.

All Arts Foundation subjects also integrate 3 different disciplines from the Bachelor of Arts into its content. For Power, these are Political Science, Gender Studies, and Geography.

I went into this subject expecting the worst, as AF is generally seen as a waste of time. Despite that, I loved Power, and while I disagreed with the Marxist content, I found it to be incredibly intellectually stimulating.

Lectures

If you've read my university journal, you might know about my man crush on Professor Andrew Dawson, the main lecturer. He is an absolute legend. Even if you don't do Power, his lectures are worth going to anyway. Andy was very engaging and you can sense his enthusiasm from a mile away. I gave Power a really high rating, and it's all because of him. Sit at the front row for maximum enjoyment.

Lectures for weeks 1-4, delivered by Andy, looks at Rationalism, Capitalism, & Nationalism. Weeks 5-10 are delivered by guest lecturers, looking at State and Power (Political Science); Sex and Power (Gender Studies); & Space and Power (Geography). Finally, in weeks 11-12 Andy and Mediya comes back to bring everything full circle.

Tutorials

Maybe it was just me, but I found tutes to be a waste of time. We mainly just answered questions from the subject guide. My tutor was Charity - she was very knowledgeable on the subject, and very helpful if you approached her individually, but in terms of collective discussion tasks, hers weren't the best.

Skills Workshops

For all BA students, you're required to attend 3 x 2hr workshops. Pro-tip: Put them in the first 3 weeks of the semester, as that's before assignments start coming. I had left mine to weeks 7-9, in which case they became redundant.

Skills workshops are a waste of time, sadly 100% attendance is required to pass.

Assessments

Assignment 1 is a 500 word annotated bibliography and it's said to be the easiest you'll ever get. You're given a list of prompts and is required to analyse 3 different types of sources which relate to your choice of prompt, and to comment on their relevance, currency, reliability, etc.

Assignment 2 is a 2000 word research essay. The prompts are the same ones from assignment 1, so you can start this very early on. You're required to go into detail about your topic - the more depth, the better.

The final exam is the exact opposite. Instead of depth, you're required to show the breadth of your knowledge. The exam has a very short time limit. In 2019, we got the prompt at 9am Tuesday, and had to submit it by 5pm Thursday - so we had about 1.5 days to write it.

Final thoughts

Power is definitely one of the better AF subjects. While I wouldn't have done it had they been optional, I'm glad it was what I went with. As a History & Economics major, this subject somewhat clashed with the content (particularly Economics), but I learnt quite a lot from this and engaged in a number of very thought-provoking discussions.

In short, if you're into political and philosophical debates, or are aiming for law/politics, then Power is the one to go for.
« Last Edit: June 24, 2019, 12:46:37 pm by hums_student »
"You know what I consider the worst disability of all? Procrastination and laziness."
.
VCE (ATAR: 98.35)  –  Literature, History, Politics, Chinese, Methods, Chemistry
UniMelb  –  B Arts (History & Economics) / M Teaching

hums_student

  • MOTM: SEP 18
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 304
  • Respect: +406
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #745 on: June 24, 2019, 12:58:42 pm »
+4
Subject Code/Name: HIST10012 The World Since World War II

Workload:
   • Lectures: 2 x 1 hour per week
   • Tutorials: 1 x 1 hour per week (except week 1)

Assessment:
   1. Primary Source Analysis: 500 words (20%)
   2. Research Essay: 2,000 words (50%)
   3. Take-home Exam: 2 x 750 words (30%)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture

Past exams available: Nope

Textbook Recommendation: Required & recommended readings can all be found on LMS. There is no official textbook, though I recommend The Global Cold War by Odd Arne Westad

Lecturer(s): Hannah Loney

Year & Semester of completion: 2019 Semester 1

Rating: 5 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: Pending

Comments:

The World Since WWII covers all major int'l events from 1945 (VE/VJ) to 2001 (9/11). Background knowledge of WWII is useful, but not necessary.

Initially, it starts off as history, but progresses into politics as the events get more recent. Key topics includes decolonisation, proxy warfare, Stalinisation, nuclear warfare, neoliberalism, globalisation, human rights, counterculture, political Islam.

Lectures

It's incredibly content-heavy, and Hannah moves through at supersonic speed. To put things into perspective, the entirety of the Vietnam War and the Korean War, including background and aftermath, are covered in 50-minute lectures. You're required to teach yourself the more in-depth content through the weekly readings.

Hannah is very engaging and clear in the way she presents the content. She also talks incredibly fast so RIP to anyone taking notes by hand. A large number of sources (both primary & secondary) are cited in her lecture slides. Make note of all of them! They will be useful for the final exam.

Tutorials

My tutor was Michael, though I also went to Toby's tutes. Michael was fun and engaging, and covered many useful background info, but tute discussions lacked depth. Toby was more on the serious side but goes in-depth with discussion and offers a lot of different perspectives. Michael focuses more on the background of the events while Toby looks more at its implications. Michael was philosophical while Toby was more political. On the whole, I thought both were great, but preferred Toby's.

I really recommend going to extra tutes ran by different tutors to get a variety of views. Yes, it does mean an extra contact hour or two, but it helps a lot with...

Assessments

Assignment 1 is a 500-word primary source analysis on one of the two readings for week 1, which are the Long Telegram and the Novikov Telegram. You're required to talk about its reliability and historical context, and most importantly, form an overall contention.

Assignment 2, the 2,000-word research essay, contributes the most to your grade. You're given a choice of prompts covering every single lecture topic, from which you must choose one. Topics can be niche or broad, and there's a good variety so you're guaranteed to find one you like more than the rest.

The exam comprises of 2 essays, 750 words each, where you're required to answer the prompt while tying together all 12 weeks of content. No additional research is required, you only need to use the readings and the sources cited in Hannah's lectures.

I don't actually know if this is allowed - please remove it if it's not - but in the spoiler tag I've put the exams topic we did in 2019 to give a general idea of what topics to expect.
Spoiler
1. What was the most significant social transformation in the period from 1945 to the present, and why? What were its international implications? 
 
2. What was the most significant political transformation in the period from 1945 to the present, and why? What were its international implications?
 
3. What was the most significant economic transformation in the period from 1945 to the present, and why? What were its international implications?
 
4. What was the most significant cultural transformation in the period from 1945 to the present, and why? What were its international implications?
 
5. What was the most significant turning point in the period from 1945 to the present, and why? What were its international implications?

Final thoughts

The World Since WWII is a brilliant and highly rewarding subject which really teaches you all about how our present world became the way it is. While it is a history subject, it is also highly political and I'd also recommend it for anyone wishing to major in politics / international relations. It was hands down the best subject I did in semester 1 (though as a history/politics nerd I might be biased), and in my honest opinion I'd really just recommend it to anyone and everyone.
« Last Edit: June 24, 2019, 01:01:19 pm by hums_student »
"You know what I consider the worst disability of all? Procrastination and laziness."
.
VCE (ATAR: 98.35)  –  Literature, History, Politics, Chinese, Methods, Chemistry
UniMelb  –  B Arts (History & Economics) / M Teaching

hums_student

  • MOTM: SEP 18
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 304
  • Respect: +406
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #746 on: June 24, 2019, 01:33:37 pm »
+4
Subject Code/Name: ECON10004 Introductory Microeconomics

Workload:
   • Lectures: 2 x 1 hr per week
   • Tutorials: 1 x 1 hr per week

Assessment:
   1. Online multiple choice test (5%)
   2. Assignment 1: 750 words (10%)
   3. Assignment 2: 1,250 words (15%)
   4. Tutorial participation (10%)
   5. Final Exam (60%) - hurdle

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture

Past exams available: Plenty in the library, many more posted on LMS during SWOTVAC, though not all are completely relevant as the course content was changed for 2019.

Textbook Recommendation: 
Principles of Microeconomics by Joshua Gans, Stephen King, Gregory Mankiw, Martin Byford. The newest edition is 7th ed, but any would do (I got by with 3rd ed.)
Case studies and Applications by Jeff Borland (not really needed)

Lecturer(s): Phil McCalman, Tom Wilkening

Year & Semester of completion: 2019 Semester 1

Rating: 2 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: Pending

Comments:

Intro Microeconomics is compulsory for all economics majors, as well as all 1st-year commerce students in general. It also seems to be one of the most popular choice for breadth, though these poor unfortunate souls usually begin wishing they did beer tasting instead by week 3.

The subject covers four main topics, which are:
   1. Competitive markets
   2. Welfare + government intervention
   3. Theory of the firm
   4. Game theory

Some of the content repeats VCE Economics, however as someone who didn't do 3/4, I found it relatively easy to catch up. The content is quite intuitive and isn't overly difficult, though the same cannot be said about the maths.

Lectures

Micro has two lecturers: Tom, who in the first lecture, prepared 23 slides of legit content written in Times New Roman; and Phil, who had 13 'Welcome to Commerce' slides written in Comic Sans. Phil was more engaging, but he also had a tendency to use PhD-level jargon despite having other choices of vocab available. On the other hand, Tom kept things clear, simple, and straight-to-the-point. I personally preferred Phil, but I was one of the few who did.

Tutorials

I have a bunch of grievances regarding tutes. For every tute we had a sheet of in-tutorial work, where we were supposed to attempt the questions ourselves before the tutor goes through answers. These were horribly organised. We either got so little questions that class ended half an hour early, OR we got so many tasks that the tutor literally whizzed through the answers at the speed of light without explaining what was really going on as there wasn't enough time. Also, answers for tute worksheets were never made available to students, not even before the exam.

In 2019, the commerce department introduced 'Tophat', an online platform used to mark tutorial attendance and to set pre-tutorial work. The app costs money, but has free access zones in the Baillieu Library, FBE Building, and the Spot. Don't buy it as it's a waste of money.

My tutor was Farzana. Despite being somewhat hard to understand due to her accent, I thought she was a great tutor.

Assessments

The first assessment is an online MCQ test. There were 8 questions and weighed 5% of the final grade. While it's not worth much, it's a good revision of the first weeks and it's a good opportunity to fill any gaps before moving on later weeks.

Assignment 1 is worth 10% and covers equilibrium, elasticity, taxes and welfare. The most important thing is to keep in mind the word limit when writing, because it's only 750 words but there's quite a lot of explanations involved.

Assignment 2 is worth 15% and covers theory of the firm and price discrimination. Assignment 2 was much harder than the first one, and a lot of people lost marks for simply not handing it up on time because they underestimated how much work was required.

Exam

The exam is worth 60% and you must pass the final exam to pass this subject. It's 2 hours, with 15 minutes reading time, and is split into 3 sections:
   - Multiple choice (30 marks, 10 questions)
   - Short answer (30 marks, 2 questions)
   - Extended response (60 marks, 2 questions)
   
In 2019, two questions from MCQ were straight-up COPY AND PASTED from previous exams, so it's definitely worth doing as much practice exam questions as you can to prepare.

IMO 2 hours was just enough to complete the exam so you must be really good with time management in order to finish the paper. The exam was insanely hard, meanwhile students tend to collude on assignments, hence most of us weren't prepared on answering exam-style questions individually under timed conditions.

Final thoughts

Intro Microeconomics is not the most interesting subject. The content is intuitive but the maths is slightly more difficult. Don't collude too much on assignments as it'll backfire during the exam. It's probably one of the more useful breadth subjects, but the subject isn't a cruise.
"You know what I consider the worst disability of all? Procrastination and laziness."
.
VCE (ATAR: 98.35)  –  Literature, History, Politics, Chinese, Methods, Chemistry
UniMelb  –  B Arts (History & Economics) / M Teaching

hums_student

  • MOTM: SEP 18
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 304
  • Respect: +406
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #747 on: June 24, 2019, 02:31:29 pm »
+4
Subject Code/Name: ECON10005 Quantitative Methods 1

Workload:
   • Lectures: 2 x 1 hr per week
   • Tutorials: 1 x 1 hr per week

Assessment:
   1. 2 x Mid-semester tests (7.5% each)
   2. 2 x Assignments (7.5% each)
   3. Tutorial attendance (10%)
   4. Final exam (60%) - hurdle

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture

Past exams available: A lot of past exams in the library, plenty more posted on LMS.

Textbook Recommendation: Principles of Business Statistics by any author is adequate.

Lecturer(s): John Shannon, Wasana Karunarathne

Year & Semester of completion: 2019 Semester 1

Rating: 3.5 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: Pending

Comments:

There are already a number of reviews for QM1, but I thought I’d offer the perspective of a mathematically inept arts major who did it as breadth:

QM1 has a nasty reputation and it’s notorious for being one the hardest subjects you’ll ever do. It allegedly has a 30~40% fail rate, and is compulsory for BCom students.

Despite that, QM wasn’t as bad as what people make it out to be. It started off dull, but got better and better, even (dare I say) fun. A lot of concepts, particularly for excel, were also applicable to real life.

QM's difficulty is exaggerated as it's straightforward as long as you do the work. Having only done methods in VCE (which was my worst subject),it was overwhelming at first. But the learning modules gives you plenty of practice and it was easy to catch up.

Key topics in QM1 include: probability, data analysis, statistical inference, hypothesis testing, confidence intervals, and linear regression.

Lectures

They weren't the most interesting, and a lot of the earlier ones were also confusing. John was very monotone. Zoning out (or falling asleep) in lectures was easy - I had a friend who showed up to the lectures just to use John's voice as a lullaby.

BUT, they got better in the later weeks for hypothesis testing & confidence intervals. This might just be my own opinion though as I personally prefer statistics. In the final weeks everything came together and the content went from disjointed to complementary topics.

In the final 2 lectures, John went through a practice exam. The structure of the exam was changed recently and is very different from past exams, so the last lectures are definitely worth going to.

Tutorials

It's essential to do the pre-tute work on LMS, or you'll be incredibly lost. (Also, you should be doing them anyway as they contribute to your final mark). I found the tutes really helpful in consolidating concepts and topics. Go into tutes with questions on your mind so you can follow along and fill the gaps in your knowledge.

I had Adam as my tutor. He seemed half-asleep most of the time BUT when it came to explaining concepts he was amazing, very clear and made things very straightforward. Also, he's a pretty chill dude.

Assessments

There are 2 assignments, each weighing 7.5%. Both are group work but you can do them individually too. I did assignment 1 in a group, but assignment 2 by myself.

The reason: everyone did their fair share of work for assignment 1, and so I didn't bother learning the parts that weren't assigned to me. This backfired later on as I couldn't keep up, so I went solo for assignment 2. While the workload was insane (it was designed for 4 people), it pushed me to really understand all the concepts. I got a lower mark from doing it by myself, but it also helped me have a stronger grasp of the content overall.

I'd recommend doing both assignments individually if you can. If you must work in a group, attempt all questions by yourself anyway.

The two midsems both weigh 7.5%. Midsem 1 focuses on data analysis and probability, while midsem 2 looks at hypothesis testing. The best way to study for them is to work through all learning module exercises on LMS.

Final exam

The structure of the final exam changed this year. Instead of MCQs, you get three extended response questions (split into smaller parts). Q1 (32 marks) looks at probability and data analysis; Q2 (40 marks) mimics Midsem 2 and includes multiple hypothesis testing questions; finally, Q3 (30 marks) looks at regression, with a few confidence intervals thrown in there.

Final thoughts:

In a nutshell, QM is far better than what most people make it out to be. It was an intimidating subject at first but as long as you stay on top of your work, it's not too scary. I even found this subject enjoyable in later weeks, even though maths is far from my strength. Overall, I liked QM1 — it's not an easy subject, but I think it's worth the workload.

Finally, I thought I'd end this review with the lecturer John's favourite catchphrase:
"How do you avoid making mistakes? By never making a decision."
"You know what I consider the worst disability of all? Procrastination and laziness."
.
VCE (ATAR: 98.35)  –  Literature, History, Politics, Chinese, Methods, Chemistry
UniMelb  –  B Arts (History & Economics) / M Teaching