Login | Register
Enrol now for our new online tutoring program. Learn from the best tutors. Get amazing results. Learn more.

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

February 27, 2021, 06:34:31 pm

Author Topic: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings  (Read 1287420 times)  Share 

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.


  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Respect: 0
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #825 on: December 05, 2020, 03:34:42 pm »
Subject Code/Name: MAST30028 Numerical Methods & Scientific Computing 

Workload:  two 1 hour lectures and one 2 hour lab class a week

Assessment:  two assignments worth 20% each and final exam worth 60%

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture etc.

Past exams available:  Yes, 2 past exams available

Textbook Recommendation:  Moler Numerical Computing with Matlab

Lecturer(s): Hailong Guo

Year & Semester of completion: 2020 sem2

Rating: 3.5

Your Mark/Grade: 83


Overall the lectures were very dry and it was rather difficult to learn anything from watching them the first time around. They contained a lot of non-important excess information that only really served to obfuscate what is actually important and make it harder to understand what was going on. The lecturers were only useful to me after having read the relevant textbook chapters and having spent a considerable amount of time attempting the assignment questions.

The lecturer was also quite dry in his delivery and wasn't able to intonate his voice in a way that emphasised what was important in the lectures which further complicated things.

Due to this I relied quite heavily on the textbook, which luckily is quite well written.

The exam was a bit of a curveball, the theory behind each of the questions in the exam was essentially the same as what was done in the past exams but the approach required and way the questions were asked were very different from the past exams.

There's another reply about this subject this semester I would like to address because I don't entirely agree with it:

The assignments were a bit heavy but they did a fantastic job at teaching the content, and they were worth 20% each so I feel like that justifies the time that was required to complete them.

Outputting everything in the right format and putting everything together was a bit tedious so I agree on that part, but it's also sort of just what creating a report entails and is a skill and of itself. It's also the exact sort of thing required in a lot of jobs anyway so   

I also disagree entirely that Matlab isn't a good language, I think it's a fantastic language. It's easy to use, has a really nice dynamic environment, has just the right amount of syntax so that programming doesn't take forever and it's really clear what everything is doing, is really fast and also has plenty of ready functions available without having to import a whole bunch of stuff like in python.

I agree that some of the questions were a bit vague but honestly all you had to do was go to the labs or consultation and ask about it he would spend as much time explaining and clarifying it to you as was needed.

One thing I took particular notice of is that the commenter criticised the marking for requiring the use of vectorisation (rather than a bunch of for loops and if statements):
Vectorisation makes the program FAR faster and also condenses what would otherwise at times take 5-10+ lines of code and a large amount of effort into a single, easily understood line of code.
That's a pretty basic concept and important lesson that strikes at the heart of what you want to accomplish in programming and numerical computing.

Overall I'd sum it up at crappy teaching, great subject.


  • Trailblazer
  • *
  • Posts: 39
  • Respect: +18
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #826 on: December 06, 2020, 01:27:05 pm »
Subject Code/Name: ECON20005 Competition and Strategy

Workload:  Weekly 2 x 1 hour lectures,  1 x 1 hour tutorial

Assessment:  3 x 10% assignments, 70% exam (Assignment style)
Final mark = max {assignments + exam weighted, exam only}

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, Pre-recorded, no live zoom chat. High quality recordings though, he uses OBS, facecam and edits his vids!

Past exams available:  Plenty of materials

Textbook Recommendation:  "A. Dixit and S. Skeath, Games of Strategy, fifth edition W.W. Norton and Company. This textbook, while useful for all students, is not strictly required for the subject." - subject guide (I didn't use)

Daniel made plenty of supplementary materials like exercises (I didn't use them either)

Lecturer(s): Dr. Jun Xiao

Year & Semester of completion: 2020 Sem 2 (Corona Time!)

Rating:  5 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments: It was great. My best breadth. Content is shallow and math is basic but very fun to learn. It's even easier if you remember content from intro micro such as Nash Equilibirium, monopolies and welfare.

Just wanted to update from the previous review that Jun and Daniel are still teaching 4 years later and are both still incredible. Worth doing as a breadth/elective for any student who is interested in game theory concepts.

Content is almost the same as the last review, week 12 is different from what I see.

I copped a H1 from doing assignments well and watching lectures (lol). I watched the appropriate recorded tutorials uploaded by Daniel before each assignment. Killing the assignments (i.e. understanding the concepts) set you up for the exam quite well as they were in the same format.

For more stuff on content read: https://atarnotes.com/forum/index.php?topic=43031.msg921945#msg921945

The hardest questions of assignments/exams are based on some of the games learnt in lectures but with a mild extension to the rules. If you were comfortable doing 1st year math, then this will also be pretty good. Otherwise it's not too bad with some practice. A lot of questions were just resolving the exact game from the lectures with different numbers.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2020, 01:32:47 pm by stevenhuyn »


  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Respect: 0
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #827 on: December 09, 2020, 05:03:59 pm »
Subject Code/Name: BCMB20002: Biochemistry and Molecular Biology

Workload:  1 modules/week (11 total) ~ 10-12 short videos per module + 1 tutorial/per week

Assessment:  11xweekly quizzes 1% each; 2xMST 15% each; 3x assignments 3% each; exam 50%

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with/without screen capture etc.

Past exams available:  Yes, answers on MCQ sections

Textbook Recommendation:  Nelson and Cox, Lehninger Principles of Biochemistry, 7th edn. 2017 IS RECOMMENDED BUT NOT NEEDED

Lecturer(s): Prof. Terry Mulhern and Prof. Heather Verkade

Year & Semester of completion: Sem 1 2020

Rating:  6 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: 86

Comments: I decided to do a review of this subject because the previous ones are quite old and the structure was changed. It used to be 3 lectures a week, but now its short videos that you can watch as you wish and 1 tutorial a week in which the lecturer goes through questions (usually PollEv style) about the module from the previous week and gives you a chance to ask questions and all that. I personally think the new version is perfect. The videos range from 10-12 per week and go from 3-12 min. The videos are extremely well made and both Terry and Heather are terrific lecturers.

The content ranges from pH and basic chemistry to protein structure, enzymes kinetics, metabolism and regulation (taught by Terry) to the more molecular side i.e. transcription, translation, laboratory techniques, etc (taught by Heather). It is quite content heavy, but its also very easy to keep up with the content, especially with the short videos.

The assessment is also very helpful in keeping you up to date. 1 short quiz every week worth 1% that helps you consolidate your learning of the week's module (and you get 3 tries so its pretty much a free 11%) plus 3 super easy assignments worth 3% each. The MSTs are fully MCQ and can be a bit tricky. Terry particularly likes to test your understanding of his content not just rote learning, but don't let that deter you, his explanations are amazing and make it very easy to study. Final Exam is 50% and is part MCQ (which is pretty much the same as MST), part SAQ which is pretty much the same sort of questions as the assignments, albeit a bit harder.

This is the subject that made me wanna major in Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. Cannot recommend it enough. Especially if you're doing something bioscience related. Absolutely loved it. One of my favourite subjects of all time.


  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Respect: 0
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #828 on: December 10, 2020, 01:15:21 am »
Subject Code/Name: ECON10004 Introductory Microeconomics 

Workload:  Weekly: 2 x 1 hour lectures, 1 x 1 hour tutorial

- Weekly multiple choice quizzes (10%)
- MST (5%)
- Assignment 1 (10%)
- Assignment 2 (15%)
- Exam (60% hurdle)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available:  Yes. Since this was Jeff's first semester teaching Intro Micro again, he provided us with past exams that he wrote (2011 and 2014 I believe..?, as well as a 2020 mock exam). They were all pretty much the same structure as the actual exam so I'd recommend paying particular attention to these, or at least read through the sample answers during SWOTVAC so you know what kind of answers they're looking for. (I didn't really look through these until the night before the exam oops)

Textbook Recommendation:  Didn't bother looking at the recommended texts beyond week 2, don't feel like I missed out on much.

Lecturer(s): Jeff Borland - I really enjoyed Jeff's lectures this semester. They were well-structured, clear and concise, and he provided just enough examples to get the point across without boring you. I'd recommend printing out the slides before the lecture, having a flick through and taking notes of anything that doesn't make sense to you and paying particular attention to those parts during the lecture. I'd then make summary notes at the end of each week to solidify my understanding (but I'm sure most people could get by with just annotated lecture slides). I found that drawing graphs to understand cause and effect really helped too.

Year & Semester of completion: 2020 Semester 2

Rating:  4.5 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: 91 (H1)

Assessment Advice:
- Weekly multiple choice quizzes (10%), of which your top 7 scores are averaged to make up 10% of your grade. (Note that since this was done during one of the COVID semesters so tutorial attendance was waived and we just had to do the pre-tutorial quizzes, pretty much a free 10% since we were allowed 2 attempts at each quiz)
-MST (5%) is a 10 mark MCQ quiz. This is probably the easiest to score well in, as the questions are basically the same as those in the weekly pre-tute quizzes with a few numbers or words switched out. If you pay attention to the weekly quiz feedback, you should be able to score high in this one.
- Assignment 1 (10%): 1000 words, fairly straight forward, we just had to answer questions on the first area of study (supply/demand, market equilibrium, international trade). If you spend a couple of hours on this it should be fairly easy to get 9 or 10%. One piece of advice for all assessments, USE GRAPHS!!
- Assignment 2 (15%): 1500 words, again very similar to assignment 1, but this time with 1100 words to answer questions, and a 400 word case study (which is pretty easy to get marks on, I waffled quite a bit here). This assignment was largely focused on the second area of study (theory of the firm, price discrimination, marginal cost/marginal revenue), but also included some stuff on market failure.
- Exam (60% hurdle): Straightforward, no hidden surprises exam. Section A consisted of 10 multiple choice questions, section B consisted of 3 short answer questions and section 3 included 3 sections of questions more similar to that of the assignments. Though the exam itself is not difficult, I'd recommend really making use of graphs to show your thinking, planning your time out well and working fast, as I ran out of time at the end and struggled to upload all my graphs (online exams amirite).

The three main areas of study for this subjects are: Weeks 1-4 Market Outcomes in Perfectly Competitive Markets, Weeks 5-9 Theory of the firm and managerial economics, Weeks 10-11 Game theory and Week 12 Exam Revision. For lecture 24, Jeff asks students to email him for any topics they want him to go over so I'd recommend making use of this as he further explains the requested topics here.

As a first year with no background in economics at all, this ended up being my favourite subject this semester. Jeff kept his lectures short enough as to not be overly time consuming or boring, and really kept us in the loop via LMS announcements. He was also pretty quick to reply to emails too so I'd recommend emailing him or your tutor if you're unsure about anything. As for tutorials, I attended them for the first 5 or so weeks but quickly found them to be useless. The tutorial worksheets are actually VERY useful for exam revision (basically the same format as sections B and C of the exam) but I ended up just doing them in my own time and checking the solutions at the end of the week, as the tutor's explanations were hard to understand and ended up just confusing me. Overall a great subject, I'd say I recommend it to all but it's a Comm core so y'know :P
« Last Edit: December 10, 2020, 02:15:24 am by c.lim37 »


  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 143
  • Respect: +26
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #829 on: December 12, 2020, 11:40:07 pm »
Subject Code/Name: MAST20018 Discrete Maths and Operations Research 

Workload: 1 hour tutorial, lectures were a mess

Assessment: Exam worth 80%, Assessments were also an unpredictable mess

Past exams available:  Yes, about 5, solutions were not really provided

Textbook Recommendation:  Linear & Integer Optimization by Sierksma for the OR part, but not required and not really necessary

Lecturer(s): Alysson Costa

Year & Semester of completion: 2020 Semester 2

Rating:  1.5/5

Mark/Grade: 90 H1


The lecturer and subject coordinator this year was new, and without going into too much detail, kinda messed up the whole subject experience. Lectures were frequently a mess, assessment requirements and weighting changing on a daily basis, foisting unwanted software and platforms on us and just created an all-round complete mess and chaos on a daily basis. At least tutorials were good though.

The Operations Research side of the subject was interesting and enjoyable, but the Discrete Maths portion was a hodge-podge of subjects, that whilst sometimes interesting felt a little out of place on a uni curriculum and honestly a little pointless. Overall, the subject honestly ended up as a bit of a failure this semester, which is disappointing as it had some potential.
2020 - Bachelor of Science, The University of Melbourne

2019: UMEP Mathematics Extension [First Class Honours (H1)], English [44], Specialist [42 ~ 52], Algorithmics (HESS)
ATAR: 99.50
2018: Physics [46 ~ 48], Methods [41 ~ 46]


  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 143
  • Respect: +26
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #830 on: December 13, 2020, 12:07:55 am »
Subject Code/Name: MAST20026 Real Analysis

Workload: 3x1hr Lectures, 2x1hr tutorial

Assessment: 5 Assignments, worth 4% each, Exam, worth 80%

Past exams available: Yes, 5 with solutions

Textbook Recommendation:  None required, but I found Understanding Analysis by Abbott helpful

Lecturer(s): Paul Norbury

Year & Semester of completion: 2020 Semester 2

Rating: 3/5

Your Mark/Grade: 80 H1


Overall, I kinda felt this subject was a bit boring, and I didn't find Paul to be the best lecturer; a bit too reserved and often pulled things from nowhere in his proofs without bothering to explain them. It wasn't a terrible subject, and I found it got more interesting after Calculus (Differentiation, Riemann Integration, Series and Taylor Series) was introduced, but I didn't particularly enjoy this subject and hence engaged poorly with it, and so my marks also suffered for it.

I must admit that I did practically none of the Problem Book questions for this subject, which was probably a mistake, but I just wasn't particularly engaged in this subject. Unlike other maths subjects, there are two tutorials each week, but I honestly didn't find them to be particularly useful and hence skipped a number of them towards the end of the year.

IMO there was way too much time spent on basic Mathematical Logic (~first 4 weeks), where that time could've been better spent on later parts of the subject or simply fleshing things out better.  For example, there was a ridiculously inordinate amount of time spent on truth tables, yet Taylor series were extremely rushed and crammed in at the end.

Assignments often had a mix of some very easy proof questions, and some very hard questions. The tutors generally gave marks for trying to sketch a proof though, even if not completely correct. The exam this year was a lot more 'creative' in the style of its questions, probably to compensate for COVID and online exams. There must've been some scaling of this subject to compensate for the exam difficulty imo.

Also note that, from next year, there will be a new Advanced version of this subject on offer.
2020 - Bachelor of Science, The University of Melbourne

2019: UMEP Mathematics Extension [First Class Honours (H1)], English [44], Specialist [42 ~ 52], Algorithmics (HESS)
ATAR: 99.50
2018: Physics [46 ~ 48], Methods [41 ~ 46]


  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 143
  • Respect: +26
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #831 on: December 13, 2020, 12:43:51 am »
Subject Code/Name: LING10001 The Secret Life of Language 

Workload: 2x1hr lectures, 1x1hr tutorial

Assessment:  3 Problem Solving Assignments worth 50%, 1 2-hour Exam worth 50%

Past exams available:  1 Sample exam (NOT representative of the final exam at all)

Textbook Recommendation: An Introduction to Language by Fromkin (9th AU Edition) - I found readings to be helpful, but there weren't super necessary

Lecturer(s): Peter Hurst

Year & Semester of completion: 2020 Semester 2

Rating:  5/5

Your Mark/Grade: 90 H1


I absolutely loved this subject! I've always wanted to study Linguistics at Uni, and this subject was a wonderful introduction to it. It was impeccably organised and coordinated, the teaching staff were incredible (shout-out to Peter for awesome lectures, and to Nick for super fun tutorials - Nick's solo singing at the end of each tutorial was a true highlight  :) )

Tutorials this semester were very cramped, having 30 students and 1 tutor, which was not fair on either the students or the tutor. However, I found that everyone worked really well together in the breakout rooms. 'Reading Groups' were also made available, which to me was new coming from Science, but I definitely benefited from them and made a good friend from it too!

The assignments took some work, but with time and effort they were fine. They tested linguistic reasoning, knowledge and application in a Problem-solving or structured argumentation context.

The content was super interesting, I personally enjoyed Syntax & Morphology and the smaller topics like Language & the Brain, Language Variation, and First & Second Language Variation. Semantics & Pragmatics were the most wishy-washy of the lot, and felt like it belonged in a Philosophy class more. I personally found Phonetics, Phonology to be trickier (but completely doable with effort), as I'm not a natural auditory learner.

Overall, I thought this subject was pretty straightforward, super enjoyable and interesting, well coordinated, and I'd definitely recommend it to anyone interested in Linguistics!
2020 - Bachelor of Science, The University of Melbourne

2019: UMEP Mathematics Extension [First Class Honours (H1)], English [44], Specialist [42 ~ 52], Algorithmics (HESS)
ATAR: 99.50
2018: Physics [46 ~ 48], Methods [41 ~ 46]


  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 143
  • Respect: +26
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #832 on: December 13, 2020, 12:56:30 am »
Subject Code/Name: MAST20004 Probability 

Workload: 3x1hr Lecture, 1x2hr Tutorial

Assessment:  4x5% Assignments, 3hr 80% Exam

Past exams available:  Yes, many, and with solutions

Textbook Recommendation: Fundamentals of Probability by Saeed Ghahramani recommended. Personally I did not find it useful, and I think the lecture slides and lectures are plenty sufficient.

Lecturer(s): Xi Geng

Year & Semester of completion: 2020 Semester 2

Rating:  5/5

Your Mark/Grade: 95 H1


Xi was an absolutely amazing lecturer, coordinator, and warm and genuine human-being. His assignments were often extremely challenging, but I gained a lot from them. He focused on building up a rigorous intuition of the subject from scratch, and developed the subject in a fantastic manner whilst providing useful resources and lecture-by-lecture supplementary notes. My tutor was also excellent, very engaged, passionate and knowledgeable, and we often spent a large amount of the class chatting about further Probability. Stochastic processes was very interesting, itís a shame we didnít go into more detail, but Stochastic Modelling is more the subject for that.

Overall, Probability was an immensely interesting and satisfying subject that Iím incredibly glad I took. The exam was very fair and straightforward with Xi, with no surprises. Each of the topics covered in Probability are quite interesting, and the subject definitely does have quite a rapid pace, so it's important to keep up to date (although I admit I did almost none of the Problem Book for the subject). Probability is a wonderful subject, and in my opinion, far less difficult than the reputation it has acquired.
2020 - Bachelor of Science, The University of Melbourne

2019: UMEP Mathematics Extension [First Class Honours (H1)], English [44], Specialist [42 ~ 52], Algorithmics (HESS)
ATAR: 99.50
2018: Physics [46 ~ 48], Methods [41 ~ 46]


  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Respect: 0
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #833 on: December 24, 2020, 09:17:28 pm »
Subject Code/Name: MAST30022 Decision Making

Workload:  3x 1hr Lecture, 1x 1hr Tutorial

Assessment:  4x assignments spread evenly since week 3, worth 5% each; final exam, worth 80%

Lectopia Enabled:  Y

Past exams available:  Yes, at least from 2016 and onwards

Textbook Recommendation:  No need

Lecturer(s): Mark Fackerll

Year & Semester of completion: 2020s2

Rating:  4.5 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H2


I found that there isn't even a single review for this subject so I thought I make one, it will be quick;

First of all, this subject centered around game theory, and it is probably the most interesting
3rd year MAST subject in my opinion.

Assignments and lectures:
Unlike many other MAST3xxxx subjects, the assignments are very
approacheable, if you watch the lecture closely you shouldn't have any problem to score well,
it is kind of Calc2 style "do what I do" but there are more to it.The only more difficult part
of this subject is towards the end, the "dynamic programming" section, yes, you heard it right,
it's  almost mean the same as the term you heard from Computer Science: an algorithm that look back its past,
and do something about it. AND it is just like dynamic programming in CS, it can be pretty hard;

The exam is very fair, and it is just like assignment questions, very approachable but it can be hard to finish everything
on time, so be sure to practice a lot. Notes were not allowed previously, but this year, 2020s2, has been an exception,
so this actually makes this year a bit easier.

Now personally, I like this subject, like a lot, partly because it feels like I actually learnt something that is quite useful,
game theory can be easily applied to real life situations so that you will make more sensible, more rational decisions.
Finally, there is a "sequal" to this subject taught by Mark Fackrell as well, MAST90137 Mathematical Game Theory,
and I am very looking forward to that(if I am able to do it, that is).


  • MOTM: DEC 20
  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 199
  • pretty without the r (he/him)
  • Respect: +128
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #834 on: January 08, 2021, 06:52:46 pm »

Workload: 6x 1 hour lectures per week (usually, 2 x 2 hour lectures + 2 x 1 hour lecture)
4 x 2 hour anatomy practicals (optional- but is now introduced in assessment, so I recommend attending)
Physiology practical (since this was completed online in 2020 I am not sure how many hours it would be on-campus but I would say ~2-3 hours)

Assessment:  Significant changes to assessment this year, this was planned prior COVID-19, but COVID-19 definitely did ignite the changes in the assessment and they are detailed below.
5 x in-semester progressive assessments tasks as end-of-block quizzes (5 x 4% each to total 20%)
1 x mid semester test in week 6- blocks 1-3 are assessed (10%)
1 x physiology assignment submitted at the end of week 10 (15% split into 10% group report based of experiments & data viewed online + 5% individual MCQ quiz)
Anatomical practical test in week 12- workshops 1-3 are assessed (15%)
1 x 2 hour exam (40%)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes (but online semester)

Past exams available:  We did not receive any past exams (the 2010-12 exams were available on the library website)

Textbook Recommendation:  Prescribed texts
Eizenberg, N., C. Briggs, C. Adams & G. Ahern.
General Anatomy: Principles and Applications.
Sydney: McGraw-Hill, 2007. Principles Of Human Anatomy And Physiology 2nd Asia-Pacific Edition Gerard J Tortora - Wiley Direct
I didnít read much of the readings XD

Block 1: Foundations
L2: Important principles of body structure and function- David Alan Williams
L3: Drugs - what do you need to know & why- Alistair Stewart
L4: Embryological Origins I- Dagmar Wilhelm
L5: Embryological Origins II- Dagmar Wilhelm
L6: Q&A Foundations Block
Block 2: Neuromuscular
L7: Nervous System and Nerves I- Stuart Mazzone
L8: Nervous System and nerves II- Stuart Mazzone
L9: Neurophysiology I- Yossi Ranther
L10: Neurophysiology II- Yossi Ranther
L11: Neurophysiology III- David Alan Williams
L12: Anatomical principles - muscular system- Michelle Rank
L13: Skeletal Muscle function I- Gordon Lynch
L14: Skeletal Muscle function II- Gordon Lynch
L15: Skeletal Muscle function III- David Alan Williams & Yossi Ranther
L16: Bioengineering - Bionics I- guest lecturers
L17: Bioengineering - Bionics II- guest lecturers
L18: Q&A Neuromuscular Block

Block 3: Musculoskeletal
L19: Anatomical principles - skeletal system & bone- Michelle Rank
L20: Anatomical principles - articular systems- Michelle Rank
L21: Vertebral column & back- Charlotte Clark
L22: Upper limb I- Charlotte Clark
L23: Upper limb II- Charlotte Clark
L24: Vertebral column and back Q&A- Charlotte Clark
L25: Upper limb live Q& A- Charlotte Clark
L26: Lower limb I- Charlotte Clark
L27: Lower limb II- Charlotte Clark
L28: Lower limb live Q & A- Charlotte Clark
Block 4: Cardiorespiratory
L29: Anatomical Principles - vascular system/vessels- Michelle Rank
L30: Principles of viscera- Jason Ivanusic
L31: Cardiovascular system I- Michelle Rank
L32: Cardiovascular system II- Michelle Rank
L34: Cardiovascular Physiology I- Yossi Ranther
L35: Cardiovascular Physiology II- Yossi Ranther
L36: Cardiovascular Physiology III- Yossi Ranther
L37: Cardiovascular Physiology IV- David Alan Williams & Yossi Ranther
L38: Cardiovascular Physiology V- David Alan Williams & Yossi Ranther
L39: Thoracic walls and diaphragm- Michelle Rank
L40: Upper respiratory tract- Jason Ivanusic
L41: Lower respiratory tract- Michelle Rank
L43: Respiratory Physiology I- David Alan Williams
L44: Respiratory Physiology II- David Alan Williams
L45: Respiratory Physiology III- David Alan Williams
Block 5: Guts & Gonads
L46: Female and Male Reproductive System I- Dagmar Wilhelm
L47: Female and Male Reproductive System II- Dagmar Wilhelm
L49: Reproductive Physiology I- Kristina Anevska
L50: Reproductive Physiology II- Kristina Anevska
L51: Gastrointestinal tract Anatomy I- Michelle Rank
L52: Gastrointestinal tract Anatomy II- Michelle Rank
L53: GI Anatomy + GI Live Q & A webinar- Michelle Rank
L54: Urinary Tract Anatomy- Rex Barton-Smith
L55: Gastrointestinal Physiology I- Joel Bornstein
L56: Gastrointestinal Physiology II- Joel Bornstein
L57: Renal Physiology I- Stephen Harp
L58: Renal Physiology II- Stephen Harp
L59: Renal Physiology III- Stephen Harp
L60: Renal Physiology IV- Stephen Harp
Block 6: Therapeutics
L61: Drugs in Clinical Practice- Paul Soeding
L62: How drugs work: the receptors and agonists I- Alistair Stewart
L63: How drugs work: the receptors and agonists II- Alistair Stewart
L64: Autonomic pharmacology: receptors in practice- Makhala Khammy
L65: How drugs really work- Graham Mackay
L66: Drug absorption, distribution & elimination- Michael Lew
L67: Toxicology, adverse effects and tolerability- Michael Lew
L68: Drug discovery- Alistair Stewart
L69: Clinical evaluation of drugs- Neil Crompton
L70: New drugs for COVID-19: what could possibly go wrong? I- Alistair Stewart
L71: New drugs for COVID-19: what could possibly go wrong? II- Alistair Stewart

Year & Semester of completion: 2020 Semester 2
*Note: since I completed this subject in the online COVID-19 semester some of my comments may not be applicable

Rating: 4 out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1


This subject has experienced significant changes in assessment, there has been a shift from a final high stake assessment to more progressive assessments with a final low stake assessment, many of us endorsed this change and it was much needed after the hell of MCB. These changes were planned prior COVID-19.

The subject is divided into six blocks which are foundations, neuromuscular, musculoskeletal, cardiorespiratory, guts & gonads and therapeutics. With exception of musculoskeletal & therapeutics each blocks covered the relevant anatomy of that topic, then the corresponding physiology, the pharmacology component is taught in the end. Therefore, in contrast to MCB, in HSF it was a lot easier to examine the interrelationships between the different disciplines. Michelle was the best lecturer and broke down and taught anatomy very well.

The foundations block as the name suggests is the background of each discipline you will examine the principles of feedback loops (physiology), principles of drug action (pharmacology) and embryonic origins, only the embryonic origins was examined in the MST, there is no quiz for block 1 so it starts of very breezy, the content here is setting the foundations for your further studies, the foundation blocks lasts for a week.

Block 2 is neuromuscular and it lasts for two weeks, you will delve deeply in to the anatomy of the brain and spinal cord and learning about the basis of the neural networks of the CNS & PNS then you will explore neurophysiology whereby action potential, neurotransmitter release and electrical excitation is covered. Yossi does a good job in breaking down this topic, it starts of challenging but once you get your head around it is actually pretty good, you will notice they always ask similar questions (e.g. if the intracellular concentration of K+ increases, what will happen to resting membrane potential, they will just change the ion or concentration to vary question) once you understand the principle of equilibrium it makes sense. If you struggle with this topic this of the cell as a box and ions are coming in and out (either by leak channels or voltage gated channels, and you will need to determine what will happened to resting membrane potential when certain concentrations are altered). Then you will look at the principles of muscle anatomy and the process of muscle contraction in the neuromuscular junction this was also well taught.
Best way to go about this topic is to make summary notes on the processes and memorise, ANKI will also be your best friend.

Block 3 is musculoskeletal this is completely anatomy based; Michelle covers the principles of anatomical structures and then Charlotte will delve deeply into back & vertical column, upper limb and lower limb. Learning about the anatomy was a lot of fun because we could see the muscles and feel the bones and be like (ohh thatís my radius, but my biceps brachi are kinda small XD). However, this year they decided to teach back & vertical column, upper limb and lower limb by online modules instead of fast-paced lectures (and again this was planned prior COVID) tbh I actually prefer that compared to lectures because I could go ay my own pace and I felt like I was actually learning better this way, but there was a major issue with the modules and that was that each module was allocated 2 lecture sessions (i.e. the modules were expected to take two hours of time) however many of us took a lot more than that, labelling each structure on your own takes time and the allocated time was not enough and many of us ended falling behind in the course. So although I liked the module I felt like being allocated only two hour wasnít an accurate representation of the time required to view the content, after each module a live Q&A was done where we could ask questions directly to Charlotte and she would provide feedback from a quiz done after the module. Overall, the musculoskeletal block is taught well, but like I said many of us fell behind and it didnít help that the MST was the week after musculoskeletal finished, so many of us didnít start the week 6 content since we were catching up lower limb right before the MST ^_^

Block 4 is cardiorespiratory where you will explore the anatomy & physiology of the heart and lungs and how they interact with each other. It beings with looking at the anatomical principles of vessels and viscera, then the anatomy of the heart specially looking and the significance of its structure (pericardium) and then looking at the greater vessels, Michelle teaches the anatomy of heart really well and I enjoy this lecture series. Next you will look at cardiac physiology, the content was really interesting we learnt about what a heartbeat actually is, how blood is circulated, the cardiac action potential and how the ECG measures heart rate. However, Yossi didnít teach this very well it was information overload his slides were quite bare but he a lot to say, to overcome this a transcript was provided which was super helpful since we didnít have to pause the lecture every three seconds to get everything down, since the transcript was provided. Interrelating the anatomy & physiology of the heart was not difficult since both lectures will mention the opposite discipline in their explanations which was nice.

Block 5 is guts and gonads- a creative name whereby you will delve deeply into the anatomy and physiology of the reproductive, digestive and urinary system. The anatomy section was taught very well, and dare I say the best, Michelle breaks down abdominal walls and the digestive tract very well, it was clear she was passionate about this area of anatomy and I can confirm you will not struggle memorising the anatomy and she does a good job ringing in your brain, there was also an additional webinar that gave us a preview of what to expect in the anatomy practical test (I will discuss this later). Moving on to physiology reproductive physiology was the easiest to gauge with, Kristina although monotone was good at getting her message across (basically it is all hormonal regulation and feedback systems). Moving on to gastrointestinal physiology, this was easily the worst taught topic with many of us very confused with the lectures series the day before the final exam ^__^. The lecturer was unengaging, and with no learning outcomes it was hard to determine what the point of his lectures were (his slides were content heavy). So here is my advice this is what you need to know
-   The enzymes/ locations involved in the digestion of proteins, fats and carbohydrates (and be able to compare and contrast- a summary table is a good way to do this)
-   The steps of digestion going from the mouth to the anus (what digestive process occur in each organ, and the consequences if one organ does not function correctly)
-   Strong understanding of the physiology behind important processes such as; chewing, chemical digestion, vomiting and defecation
Finally, we finish physiology with renal physiology (remember the loop of Henle, yes sheís back) Stephenís slides were a lot more basic, and he emphaises that understanding the principles of filtration was all that was needed to do well in the exam. Renal physiology took a few times to get my head around, but apply it to you own life (e.g. what the colour of your pee means) did help in understanding the concepts. My tips for this section is have a diagram of the loop of Henle and write down the steps (like a flowchart) of what is absorbed/ secreted and at which limb, as well as other physiological processes.

Block 6 is therapeutics, and is solely pharmacology and keeping a glossary list and drug table will be helpful in your studies. You should be able to explain the following
Agonist, antagonist, selectivity, specificity, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, affinity, KA and KD, EC50, potency, efficacy, bioavailability, volume of distribution, clearance, half-life, different phases of a clinical trial.
As well as the name, receptor, and mode of action of the 30+ drugs covered in the lectures (PM ME IF YOU WOULD LIKE A DRUG SUMMARY TABLE)

The progressive quizzes, were as what you expected, one after each block (expect foundations) mostly MCQs/ EMQs (with the exception of the musculoskeletal block with a 6 mark extended response question).
The quizzes were fair, there were some issues with sone technical errors but otherwise they were fine.

The MST was online this semester; the average score being 85% with a mode of 39/40. As you can see the cohort scored very well on the MST, and this is due to the online nature of the assessment, being open-book most of the anatomy questions were straight-forward the physiology questions however really did test your conceptual understanding of the theory covered in weeks 1-6. If the MST is closed book I would recommending, revising using anki and study groups & for physiology getting a blank piece of paper and writing a feedback system / process without notes are good ways to revise.

The physiology assignment was conducted quite poorly online, obviously there was not much they could have done but my experience was quite poor. We just watched videos of how to use the equipment, results that we had to interpret and answer a series of questions (often long extended response questions) all questions were assigned a number of marks so thatís how you should guide the length of your response. The report is completed as a group, so divided the questions and then cross-check your memberís response. The individual quiz was a simple 10 MCQ on the coronary vessels (not covered in lectures) the virtual heart was kinda cool, but the assessment was not challenging.

The anatomy practical test was interesting, all MCQs with a pictures from the online anatomy workshops. The anatomy workshops all covered the anatomy covered in the lectures you go through stations of different features of certain anatomical systems (a demonstrator will guide you through structures and often ask you questions to identify a structure/function). The anatomy workshops online were conducted well, the demonstrators were nice and answered all questions. The anatomy practical tests, is explained in the GIT bonus workshop, whereby all the questions include a cadaveric diagram questions will ask you to identify structure, function but go beyond that and asks questions on relationships with other structures, some question pointed to structure X and asked what nerve innervates it. Michelle explains that the anatomy workshops learning outcomes should be used as a checklist of what is to be examined on the final test, and I agree the tests was fair and the learning outcomes were a good guide on what to expect. Only workshops 1-3 are assessed on the practical test, workshop 4 is examined in the exam.

The final exam:
The exam was split in 2 x 20% 1 hour exams (due to online nature of assessment- and were scheduled on two different dates, a week apart)
The first exam was an integrated short answer exam, it consists of anatomy and physiology questions from Block 5 and (10 marks for each discipline) and then followed by 2x integrated 20 marks questions integrating the three disciplines (anatomy, physiology and pharmacology)  therefore it is important that upon completing block 6 you create flowcharts/mindmaps/links of how therapeutics links with physiology which links with anatomy, the questions were fair and one of them was predictable my main tip for revising is making your own integrated questions based of the interrelationships you have created.
The second exam was a multiple choice exam of 60 questions covering all blocks (but with a greater emphasises on block 5 & 6) with a smaller exam not everything was examined so as long as you cover all groups (especially blocks 5 & 6) you should be fine!

Final comments:
The coordination of the subject was not perfect, there were some gaps in communication but the coordinators are very active on piazza and I encourage you all to be active on piazza ask questions (you will find that you will get to the point where they will say ďwe donít knowĒ- highlighting what little we know about the human body) but helping others is a great way of learning (itís all anom so no one will know if you get the question wrong). HSF was a great subject I enjoyed learning the content, the lectures although not perfect did a sufficient subject in teaching us, motivating me to major in Physiology. HSF is defs the better of the two second year cores.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2021, 06:54:46 pm by tiredandstressed »
VCE '17-'18
2017: Biology, Psychology
2018: English, HHD, Chemistry, Methods
2019-21: Bachelor of Biomedicine (Physiology) @ UoM
My guides:
A quick guide to language and argument analysis
HHD sample questions
HHD 2019 Comprehensive examiner report analysis


  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 6
  • that isn't dahyun!!!
  • Respect: +2
Subject Code/Name: MGMT20001 - Organisational Behaviour

Workload:  1x 1 hr lecture, 2x 1 hr tutorial per week.

  • Tutorial participation (6% of total)
  • Pre-tutorial questions (4% of total)
  • Written assignment 1 (10% of total)
  • Written assignment 2 (30% of total)
  • Final exam (50% of total)
Note that the final exam is a hurdle. (50%+ required on the final exam itself in order to pass the subject.)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture. Lectures were all pre-recorded (i.e. no live lectures)

Past exams available:  Only one past exam (presumably from last year), as well as a new sample exam made especially for this summer term. More on that later :)

Textbook Recommendation: Principles of Microeconomics, 7th edition by Gans, King, Byford and Mankiw, and Microeconomics: Case Studies and Applications, 4th edition by Borland. The first textbook is highly useful and is used for module readings. The second is to give you a taste of the applications of things you've learned over the course of the subject, so feel free to skip on this. With that being said, they do give out chapter references for reading in modules for those inclined. 

Lecturer(s): Joeri Mol.

Year & Semester of completion: 2021 Summer term. Note that this subject was held completely online - including the exam.

Rating: 3.5/5

Your Mark/Grade: TBA :) Exam completed almost two weeks ago though

Pre-requisites: NONE

Comments: This subject is compulsory for all commerce students, and the nature of the subject (essay/word-based subjects + a dreaded group report) makes OB one of the most infamous subjects in all of the university...or maybe just amongst commerce students but I'm sure if you have any commerce friends they'll be sure to tell you all about how they *love* the subject! Hence it made sense to me to complete this subject over the summer, even though I think I'm okay at essay writing...but man I am glad I did it over summer :)

Lectures and content
Joeri is one of the more interactive lecturers that I've had, with his amazing life experience anecdotes appearing once in a while. I bring this up since this was my favourite part of the subject. Really though, Joeri's lectures were enjoyable and perhaps my favourite in all of uni right now...he was that good!
Content wise, it is a bit dry and shallow for my taste - albeit this may be the goal of the subject: to introduce behavioual terms to us commerce students and learn how to interact with others in the workplace! Still though, don't expect anything revolutionary - a lot of it is just common sense labelled with jargon. There are some interesting tidbits here and there, and applying it to case studies can be fun, but mostly this subject's content is pretty disjointed and boring. Don't expect to get anything revolutionary from this subject is really what I'm saying.
The most important part to focus is on the last 5 topics of the subject - these are the 'macro' topics (micro for the first few) - they make up 75% of the final exam, where one of them will be applied to one of the five case studies.

The tutorials in this subject featured a 6% participation mark (0.6% per tutorial) and a 4% pre-tute mark (0.4% per pre-tute). Pre-tutes were actually very helpful, especially in the second-half of the course where you learn about macro topics (which make up 75% of the final exam). Tutorials themselves were alright - worked in groups to answer tutorial questions, and present any findings to the rest of the tutorial. My tutor often enjoyed going on with her little soliloquy but I didn't really pay too much attention. Just complete pre-tutes since they're always useful and turn up to tutes for questions and the important 0.6%!

The first individual assignment comes almost immediately when you start the course (at least in summer) and consists of applying topics learnt in the first few weeks to a case study. In my case, it was to do with the Victorian Government's handling of COVID-19. This was to be done in a report style. This wasn't too hard but as my first paper at university it was a new and a bit of a daunting experience, but the co-ordinators held a quick tutorial on how to write a research paper to a university level in the first week.

The second assignment is a bit different compared to the ones future and past students may do - for me, this was a similar report to assignment 1 (individual) with another case study with new topics learnt. However, for future students, the second assignment is actually a group assignment. See other reviews for...reviews of this part since I didn't do it. Unfortunately, I think 2021 summer term may be the last time the group assignment is removed. It does make sense as for why there is a group assignment in this subject (which is all about working in teams...).

This leads onto the exam - the exam is usually made up of one question regarding your group assignment, and the other questions about one macro topic and one case study. These were all long-answer based. I felt quite prepared for the subject, given that Joeri does let you know what combinations are not on the exam. Be prepared to write a lot, but time shouldn't be an issue if you had prepared some notes for the cases beforehand.

Concluding remarks
Wasn't as bad as I thought, but I'm happy to have got it out of the way and I can't recommend this as a breadth...good luck to all those doing it!

2018: Religion & Society, Vietnamese SL
2019: Literature, Methods, Specialist, Computing: Software Development, Economics, MUEP Mathematics (RIP)
ATAR: 90.7

Commerce @ Unimelb