Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

October 24, 2019, 10:14:50 am

Author Topic: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings  (Read 1044475 times)  Share 

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

K3NUpdate

  • Victorian
  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 22
  • It's bigger on the inside!
  • Respect: +1
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #660 on: November 23, 2017, 04:14:11 pm »
+4
Subject Code/Name: INTS10001 International Politics

Workload:
•   2x 1 hour lectures (two sessions per lecture) per week
•   1x 1 hour tutorial per week (11 tutorials throughout the semester, with the first tutorial beginning in week 2)

Assessment:
•   750-word essay due mid-semester (20%)
•   1750-word essay due towards the end of semester (roughly week 9) (45%)
•   1500-word take-home exam during the examination period (35%)

Lectopia Enabled: Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available: Not sure, maybe?

Textbook Recommendation: John Baylis, Steve Smith and Patricia Owens (eds.), The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017). To make your life a little easier for this subject, I do recommend buying this textbook, mainly because most – if not all – of your required readings are from this book. The textbook also costs around $60-70 brand new, so I think it’s rather affordable compared to other uni textbook costs. Better yet, you can also get it second-hand for even cheaper!

Lecturer(s): Daniel McCarthy and Robyn Eckersley.

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 2, 2017.

Rating: 4/5

Your Mark/Grade: H2A

Comments:

Subject:
   As someone who has some interest in politics and needed an interesting breadth subject to do, I chose to do INTS10001 with the expectation that it would give me a well-rounded understanding of what International Relations is. That is, understanding the development of the field, the political theories, schools of thought and…well, all things politics.

I wasn’t disappointed.

   This subject would probably be best described as being an introduction to the field of International Relations. For those who have done VCE Global Politics during high school, you’ll likely find that the first half of this subject will be a very different beast. What I mean here is, a lot of the content in INTS10001 places emphasis on appreciating some of the history behind IR and developing a thorough understanding of the main competing political theories. While this may seem pointless at first, you’ll realise throughout the course of the semester that these theories are important frameworks to analyse the rationale and decision-making of state/non-state actors in contemporary IR, which is necessary for the second half of the subject.

   So, the subject kicks off with a brief overview of IR, where you’ll learn about the Hunter-Gatherer Bands, the feudal system in Europe and the Peace of Westphalia (1648). You’ll find that each event that is covered in INTS has its own significance in the development of our understanding of the modern state, and also the debates that may arise from it. This part of the subject will go on for 1-2 weeks.

   After covering the history, you’ll then start learning about all the main IR theories, such as realism, liberalism, neoliberalism, neoclassical realism, constructivism, Marxism, etc. Before learning the theories, however, you’ll learn about what anarchy is in the IR context (and no, the anarchy you’ll learn is not the anti-establishment firebrand kind!), and then proceed to learn how these theories go about explaining this.  You’ll also touch on ethics and cosmopolitanism. This’ll go on for 3-4ish weeks and may be quite a lot to take in. However, if you keep up-to-date with this part of the subject and understand each theory inside out and know how to compare/contrast them from others, you’ll find that your arguments in your essays will be so much more concise and watertight. Not only that, it’ll mean less work later when you’re doing your 45% essay and take-home exam!

   After learning about IR theories, you’ll (finally) be able to do some of the modern stuff, where you’ll learn about key international political issues like climate change, humanitarian intervention, refugees and so forth (yes VCE Global Politics 3&4 students, this is where your examples and knowledge will come in handy here). By this point it is an expectation that you’ll be able to apply the IR theories to the issues raised in these case studies and form an opinion based on the frameworks you use.

Lectures and Tutorials:
   In short, the lectures were very, very interesting. I found that Daniel was an engaging, thought-provoking lecturer who would interact with the student audience that attend the lectures and encourage questions, some discussion and debate around the concepts/rationale behind the political theories. He’d begin every lecture with a photo/image of an individual/place/object, which he uses as a way to set the scene for the topic he’ll be covering. The way he works in analogies and examples into his lectures in such a subtle manner that is, at the same time, unambiguous is quite something, really.

   Robyn was also a great lecturer who would deliver the content clearly and in a logical manner. At times it may be a little difficult to follow the point she tries to get across, however overall you can see that Robyn is very passionate in her work and in that sense, she also delivers an engaging lecture with a slightly different ‘flavour’ to it.

   As some reviewers may have commented earlier, your tutor will make or break the experience in this subject. However, I’ll also add that the people in your class and yourself also plays a part in that experience. What I mean here is, by starting up a discussion about some of the stuff covered in the lectures, you’ll find by the end of the tutorial there’ll be things you might’ve not thought of! 

   In addition to the above, do make sure you do the required readings, or at least be prepared to discuss the topic in the tutorials. Otherwise, it’ll be super awkward when the tutor asks you a question about your opinion on the topic!

Assessments:
   Overall, the assessments were self-explanatory and straightforward to do: a selection of essay questions where you’ll choose one to discuss/argue on. The exam was actually meant to be a sit-in exam initially, but it was decided it would become a take-home exam to be done in three days during the exam period.

        Now, to do well in the essays in general, the first thing is to be able to understand the IR theories comprehensively (as mentioned earlier). The second thing is to be able to bring your own examples into your discussion, and by using good examples and analysing them with IR theories you’ll find that your argument seems so much more convincing. At the same time, however, also be warned that a bad example or a questionable argument may also prove to be counterproductive and weaken your argument.

One more thing: Tutorial attendance is a hurdle requirement in this subject, where you need to turn up to at least 75% of the tutorials to pass the subject.  That works out to be 9 out of 11 tutorial sessions, so make sure you turn up to them!

Verdict:
   All in all, the subject definitely required a considerable amount of time and effort to do well, although in general I enjoyed International Politics. I wouldn’t recommend this subject for people who want a cruisy breadth subject to boost their WAM or are not interested in politics. It can be mind-boggling, especially when you reach the part in the subject where you tear down the IR theories and scrutinise them. I guess if you’re the sort of person who has a knack for philosophy, history and/or politics and needs an introductory subject into the world of International Relations, this subject might be the one for you.
« Last Edit: November 23, 2017, 10:12:44 pm by K3NUpdate »
2015: Mathematical Methods (CAS)
2016: English Language | Specialist Mathematics | Chemistry | Physics | Global Politics
2017-2019: Bachelor of Biomedicine (Neuroscience) @ The University of Melbourne

“The way I see it, every life is a pile of good things and bad things. The good things don’t always soften the bad things, but vice versa the bad things don’t always spoil the good things and make them unimportant.”

Rod

  • Victorian
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1727
  • The harder the battle, the sweeter the victory
  • Respect: +99
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #661 on: November 24, 2017, 12:15:00 am »
+6
PHRM30002 Drugs Affecting the Nervous System 

Workload: Three lectures per week – 36 in total. About six of these lectures were used as tutorials.

Assessment: Two online quizzes and a short assignment worth 10%. Mid-semester test worth 20%. Final exam worth 70%.

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available:  Yes, 2010, 2011 and 2012 available.

Textbook Recommendation: Lectures should be suffice.

Lecturer(s): James Ziogas, Phil Beart, Peter Crack, Michelle Hansen, Christine Wright, Cathy Laskar and a handful of others.

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 2, 2017.

Rating: 3.9 out of 5.

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments:

Okay, so I did this subject because I enjoyed second year pharmacology and I thought this would a good continuation/extension from last year. Overall, concepts were not overly difficult and the subject was not that content heavy so hard work should entail good grades.

The first twelve lectures were really boring. You learn about the different transmitters: glutamate, GABA, serotonin, catecholamines, neuropeptides etc, their targets, synthesis, breakdown, and mechanism of action, storage and so forth. Lecturers taking this lot were really dull and boring, e.g. James Ziogas and Phil Beart. David Hoyer had one of the most bizarre lecturing styles I’ve ever experienced in university, I did not get anything out of his serotonin lecture.

Good news is after this lot the subject gets amazing! A bunch of amazing and engaging lecturers come through (Crack, Hansen, Wright, Habgood, Laskar etc.). You’ll learn about the blood-brain-barrier, neurotoxins, pain (greatly extended from last year), anxiolytics, hypnotics, anti-depressants. For me, the best part of this lot was when we got to spend each lecture on one specific disease and learn about the disease in detail (like epilepsy, Parkinson’s, Schizophrenia, Alzheimer’s), what drugs work, what the effects are, what the implications are and what we need to do in the future to improve. For me this was the most interesting part of the course.

Study tips:

I made a long drug/transmitter/toxin table covering every single drug mentioned in the course. I would then use the lectures as a guide to how much detail I would need to know each drug. I made notes for each drug and then reviewed every now and then. I thought this was really effective, there were so many different drugs mentioned it would be too hard to cram all of them before the exam.

Despite the practice exams being really old, I would recommend doing one or two of them. The wording and types of exam questions that came up were similar to the past ones so it was good practice doing one past exam – it allowed me to know what to expect in the real thing and also how much I would have to write to get full marks.

Quizzes and assignment (10%):

The two quizzes (worth 2.5% each) are online and timed. The first one had twenty questions whereas the second one had ten. All questions are TRUE or FALSE format. This should be an easy 5%, the questions are not too bad. Get through the lectures before doing the quiz, have your lecture notes beside you, have Google open and try and find some buddies to help you out.

The assignment is just answering a past extended response question. I think Peter gave most people the full 5%. So just answer the question and use the feedback/tutorial as preparation for the exam as you will have to answer four extended response questions similar to this in the exam.

Mid-semester test (20%):

Very fair test, average was about 75%. Most of the questions are straightforward; some of them require some application and thinking that are meant to trip you. Prepare well for it and you should be okay.

Exam (70%):

I thought the exam was really fair – no questions designed to trip you, everything was recall. It rewarded students who have worked hard throughout the semester.

There were 40 multiple-choice questions and five-extended answer questions (20 marks each). You were required to answer only four extended questions. Some of the extended questions were in parts, whereas a couple just had one big question worth the full 20.

Use reading time to get through each of the extended questions and pick the four you want to do.

The multiple-choice questions were all straightforward, nothing to trip you up, similar, if not easier compared to the mid-semester test. However, there were about four questions from the addiction lectures (the last two lectures in the course) that I felt were weird. IDK if it was just me but the addiction lectures in the course were really abstract and I found the MCQ a bit hard to get my head around. Most of the MCQ were post-midsem lectures; there were about 2 repeat questions from the mid-semester test (like pretty much the same questions, but differently worded).

The four extended-response questions integrated different lectures from the course. We were required to recall content from different lectures and then integrate the content within the response. Aim to write concise, fully fleshed out paragraphs with diagrams as well. The diagrams are optional but Peter LOVES diagrams so including them will really help out with getting the full marks. I’m so shit at drawing and stuff yet I still included some diagrams that probably did not make sense lol but just wanted to show Peter I was listening throughout the course.

I aimed to write as much as I can for each of these questions while keeping in mind what the question was asking for. This was my first ‘’written’’ exam this year so I was stressed out a bit, but honestly it wasn’t that bad at all.

Overall:

Was a pretty decent subject! After the twelfth lecture most lecturers were good and the content was interesting. Assessment was fair throughout the course, nothing there to trip you. This is a subject that will reward hard-workers and also give them a good pharmacology background before they go into post-graduate study.

Feel free to send me a PM if you have any further questions, all the best!
2013-2014:| VCE
2015-2018:| Bachelor of Science (Neuroscience) @ UoM
2019-X:| Doctor of Dental Surgery (discontinued)
2019 -2021:| Master of Physiotherapy

M909

  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 216
  • Respect: +42
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #662 on: November 24, 2017, 01:55:18 pm »
+4
Subject Code/Name: ACCT10002 Introductory Financial Accounting

Workload: 
1 × 2hr lecture per week
1 × 1hr tutorial per week

Assessment:
Tutorial Participation (10%), composed of Attendance (2%), Participation (2%) and Tutorial Assignments (2 × 3%)
Assignments 2 × 7%
Online Quiz 6%
End of semester exam (3hr) 70%   

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture

Past exams available:  1 full exam with solutions, plus many other scattered questions with solutions

Textbook Recommendation: Financial Accounting, Reporting, Analysis and Decision Making, 5th ed, Carlon. Not really needed, but did provide a good review of everything. I’d recommend getting a cheap PDF from StudentVIP
 
Lecturer: Warren Mckeown

Year & Semester of completion: 2017, Semester 2

Rating:  4 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1 (80)

Comments: Overall, a pretty good continuation from ARA. The coursework is relatively straightforward once you get the hang of it, and this definitely felt like my easiest subject throughout the semester. That being said, you still need to work consistently to do well.
A lot of the content from the reporting side of ARA is carried over, but you go into more/specific details for some types of accounts on the different GPFS. You’re also introduced to journals and debits/credits in week 2, and these skills are used throughout the rest of the course. This is apparently revision for people who did VCE accounting. When I first read the relevant material this related to this I was very confused, but after doing some questions it became very straightforward. You then cover a bit of ratios/analysis, and finally GST.
Lectures:
Advertised time is 2hrs, but many finished within 1.5hrs :) Slides were a bit all over the place (especially compared to ARA), but contained everything you needed to know. Warren would provide a good explanation of things, and on most occasions worked examples/illustrations, which showed you exactly what/how to do the questions. Best to be there in person for the illustrations, as usually both projectors were used.
Tutorials:
I found all the tutors I met in this subject really dedicated and helpful. Tutorials were very useful. Concepts were first explained/reviewed, and then you’d discuss a worksheet previously given (you’re expected to attempt all questions, but this wasn’t really required, so it probably sufficed to just try all major questions). The full 4% for participation/attendance is easily obtainable if you make an effort to do just that. The assignments were also pretty straightforward, but make sure you read them carefully (I got an absolute shocker mark on the first because I didn’t read it properly).
Assignments:
Assignment 1 was the cause of a lot of annoyance and stress for many students. You had to manually journalise some transactions related to a fictional company, then create the trial balance and GPFS on excel. The actual work was straightforward, but it was a very tedious and time-consuming assignment.
Assignment 2 required you to do the same thing as the first (for the company’s next month), but specifically using accounting software. The Uni labs contain the software, but I was able to do it all at home by downloading an MYOB 30 day free trial (which worked out perfectly as they gave you less time than this to complete the assignment). Once you got the hang of it, it became much more enjoyable than the first.
Quiz:
Some practice quizzes of the same format are given, so best to at least try one before attempting. Pretty much that same thing as tutorial questions, just make sure you’re careful with reading the questions and inputting answers. 
Exam:
Was honestly a lot harder than I was expecting, so I’m glad I still studied for it like normal. There’ll be an approx. 50/50 mix of theory and practical/calculation questions, so make sure you know how to do everything (or as much as possible :P ). Still, there’ll always be a decent amount of stuff you’ve seen before.
« Last Edit: July 26, 2018, 04:41:43 pm by M909 »

Jasmine J

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Respect: 0
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #663 on: November 24, 2017, 11:58:23 pm »
+4
Subject Code/Name: CHEM10004 Chemistry 2

Workload:
3 × 1hr lecture per week
1 × 1hr tutorial per week
3 hour practical (6 experiments in total)

Assessment:
Practical 20%
Online Quiz (3 mid semester quizzes) 6%
End of semester exam (3hr) 74%   

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture

Past exams available:  Yes (usually the past 5 years) with solutions.
Textbook Recommendation: Lecture slides are sufficient but Chemistry3 2e by Burrows textbook is recommended
 
Lecturer:
Professor Richard O'Hair - Organic Chem (He's really good!)
Associate Professor Craig Hutton - Organic Chem
Professor Robert Lamb - Kinetics (He's awesome)
Dr Alessandro Soncini - Quantum Mechanics
Associate Professor Guy Jameson - Electrochemistry & Introduction to d-block chemistry
Dr Stephen Best - Coordination Chemistry and Transition-Metal Chemistry

Year & Semester of completion: 2017, Semester 2

Rating:  4 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1 (83)

Comments
Tips: Do your best for practical as the demonstrator seems to be more lenient in giving full marks for the prac report compared to in semester 1 chem 1.

Go to tutorials and get involved in answering the questions! My tutorial class group were pretty engaging and the tutor seems to like it that way. Plus, you'll learn more.

The extra help classes in Learning Centre are really useful and the tutors are more than happy to help you (Don't wait until swotvac cause there would be a lot of people getting last minute explanations from them)

Organic chemistry:
Prepare and organize your organic chem notes (reaction mechanism, reagents used and the products of the reaction).  It will be an advantage if you know your organic stuff really well since the exam tend to emphasize on this part (Khan academy videos helped me a lot in understanding this stuff although the lecturers were really good as well). Familiarize yourself with the mechanisms etc by doing lots of practices perhaps draw a good mind map for the reactions.

Quantum Mechanic,
Some might find it hard but you'll do alright if you have any background physic knowledge from year 12 etc. though there were a few new topics. Prof Alessandro is good in explaining this but keep in mind that he tend to go over them really fast.
Spoiler
Most of us did pretty bad in quantum mechanic mid semester quiz because we thought it would be quite simple
For kinetics, Prof Robert Lamb is a really cool guy and his lectures are pretty laid back and chill. He makes it easier to understand the concept with extra jokes aside. Content wise, kinetics is probably the easiest among the other topics.

For Electrochemistry, its pretty straightforward with some calculations needed, few of them were quite similar to year 12 chemistry chemical processes and the cells etc. The lectures were not the best of all but they were okay.

Inorganic Chemistry
Now, personally, everything was a rush. We were learning new stuff until the very last day of lecture in week 12. I still remember how some people nearby our seats in lectures sighed in disbelief a few times whenever new (and daunting) stuff being thrown at us. Don't get me wrong, Prof Stephen lectures were good and he made it really clear on what will and will not come out in the exam. I took his advise and re-watched the lecture capture again before finals and he was right; the stuff he emphasized on really did came out for the exam.

Overall, chemistry 2 is not as scary as it turns out to be. The topics we learnt for semester 2 and the way they were structured was coordinated quite well. However, you'll definitely come across a few people stating that chem 2 is one of the subject with relatively high failure rate but I feel like it's just an exaggeration if you set aside a good amount of time to revise everything. Just don't fall too far behind and you'll be fine! :)
« Last Edit: November 26, 2017, 01:53:04 pm by K888 »

abc12345j

  • Victorian
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
  • Respect: +43
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #664 on: November 25, 2017, 01:11:59 am »
+3
Subject Code/Name: PHYS20008 Human Physiology

Workload:  3x 1 hour lectures per week.
                           1x1 hour weekly 'workshop' (basically a lecture-style tutorial in which the lecturer would go through problem sets)

Assessment: PRS 5% (basically free marks for attending at least 50% of lectures)
                               CAL online quizzes 15%
                               2x mid semester tests 15% each
                               Final Exam 50%

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available:  Yes, we were given 2 past exams with answers (but not detailed solutions). There were also 6 past mid semester tests (3 each for MST 1 and MST 2) supplied with detailed solutions.

Textbook Recommendation:  Human Physiology: An integrated approach (Silverthorn). To be honest, I didn't really refer to this much as the lecture notes were fantastic.

Lecturer(s): Charles Sevigny (a living God), Valerian Zaitsev

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 2, 2017

Rating:  5 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments: This was probably the most enjoyable and intellectually stimulating subject that I studied this semester. Charles (who delivers all but two of the lectures) is probably the most engaging lecturer I have had so far at unimelb. He explains the content really well and he certainly makes you want to attend his lectures (which is helpful because this forms 5% of your assessment). I mainly took this subject because it is a prerequisite for graduate medicine, but nonetheless found the content fascinating, particularly when we were able to consider how multiple physiological systems interact with one another.

The topics covered in this subject include: neurophysiology, the cardiovascular system, the respiratory system, the renal system, glucose homeostasis and the reproductive system.

Assessment:
The PRS assessment (worth 5 %) is really quite straightforward. All you must do is use a 'clicker' (although they may replace these with handheld electronic devices next year) and answer multiple choice questions that Charles poses during the lectures. Even if you only answer one question and get it wrong, you still get full marks, so essentially this 5% can be achieved merely by rocking up to at least 50% of lectures.

The online CAL tasks (worth 15%), however, were a pain in the rear end. These were essentially weekly multiple choice quizzes (about 5-8 questions long) that tested your knowledge of the key concepts covered in the previous week's set of lectures. Many of these were by no means straightforward, so be sure to revise the content of the preceding week's lectures before you attempt them.

The two mid semester tests (each worth 15%) were held in weeks 6 and 11 respectively. They both consist entirely of multiple choice questions. I found the first mid sem (on neurophysiology, muscle types and the autonomic nervous system) to be quite challenging, while the second one (on cardiovascular system, respiratory system, renal system and glucose homeostasis) was comparatively a walk in the park. This is perhaps due to the fact that the MCQ questions in the first MST consisted mostly of questions which had many options (eg. A-Z), while the second MST only had MCQs which had 3 (or at the very most, 4) possible answers. The bottom line is don't be disheartened if you get a poor result in MST 1; I didn't perform very well, but ultimately recovered and got an H1 in the end.

The final exam (worth 50%) also consists entirely of MCQs. I thought the exam this Semester was *slightly* harder than the practice ones given to us, although all of the questions were doable and fair. In this sense, it is important to pay attention to detail; there are many 'trick' questions in this subject, so you must have a pretty solid understanding of the lecture content if you don't want to slip up on these. Physiology is about applying concepts to problems, and not merely memorising or rote learning bundles of info.

Another good tip; listen to what Charles emphasises in the lectures! For instance, an 'exception' to the rule that chloride channels are inhibitory appeared on one of the MSTs (after Charles had explained to us during the lectures how sometimes chloride channels could under some circumstances be excitatory). This finer detail didn't appear in the lecture notes, so be sure to write down and fully understand any nuances that he explains. 

All in all, this subject was fantastic. The content is fascinating, and there is definitely potential to do well if you dedicate study time toward understanding the key concepts and attempting practice problems. I would definitely recommend this subject to anyone interested in the human body, irrespective of wether they wish to do medicine or not.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2017, 01:52:33 pm by K888 »
ATAR: 99.40

VCE English (50)

alanyin1

  • Trailblazer
  • *
  • Posts: 27
  • Yay a friend coloured in my Elsa drawing :D
  • Respect: +5
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #665 on: November 25, 2017, 01:44:17 am »
+4
Subject Code/Name: ENGR10003 Engineering Systems Design 2

Workload:
-3 x 1hr lecture per week
-1 x 3hr workshop/tutorial per week (starts in week 3 - on average, they are ~2.5 hours)

Assessment:
Modules:
-Digital Systems: 3 written group assignments, 1 in-class test and team assessment during workshop (10%)
-Programming: 2 solo assignments, 1 in-class test and team assessment during workshop (10%)
-Mechanics: 3 written group assignments, 2 in-class tests and 2 team assessments during 2 different workshop sessions (10%)
-0.5% attendance mark AND ASSESSED PRE-PRAC for each workshop (total 5%)
-Online MC Practice Exam (5%)
-End of Semester Exam 3 hours long, 40 marks MC, 60 marks SA (60%)

Lectopia Enabled: Yes, with screen capture (the actual lectures are projected from iPad presentation to board)

Past exams available:
Yes, online graded practice exam that is fully MC. Also, several past exams were given online but they were only the Short Answer sections (I believe a change was made around 2011 which introduced the MC section). These however had no solutions, so you had to go to tutor sessions during SWOTVAC to obtain the answers. You can also browse the online ESD2-only forum for solutions from your peers.

Textbook Recommendation:
I bought the recommended textbook and used it infrequently. You definitely don't need to buy it. The lecture material is good enough for you to do well.

Lecturers(s):
Dr Gavin Buskes - Digital Systems
Assoc Prof Adrian Pearce - Programming
Professor Andrew Ooi - Mechanics

Year & Semester of completion: 2017 Semester 2

Rating: 4/5

Your Mark/Grade: H1 (87)

Comments:
I liked this subject, but I get the feeling that many people may also loathe the subejct. I didn't do ESD1 and there is virtually no content that carries over. I think the main reason why people didn't enjoy it is due to the Programming section, where they introduce you to MATLAB. Most people probably did not actively practise coding during the semester and found this component difficult. Coming in from Accelerated Mathematics 1 (MAST10008), where the subject taught MATLAB, I didn't find the MATLAB section too difficult. That being said, this subject teaches MATLAB on a more conceptual and holistic way. Those who enjoy programming/coding will tolerate and enjoy MATLAB.

Spoiler
Digital Systems: The subject started by introducing different number systems, such as binary, hex, octal and others. These were quite enjoyable and are easy marks on the exam. Eventually, we started learning Boolean algebra and logic gates, which form the core backbone of this component. Make sure you learn the logic gates proficiently so that you can construct the required circuit by yourself. During the assignments, you work in teams of 3 so it is easy to slack off a bit. Also, make sure that you remember the stuff you learn in this component or revise it thoroughly during SWOTVAC as it is quite early on and you will likely forget some of the details. Also, make sure you prepare thoroughly for each workshop session as cumulatively they are worth quite a bit. The combinational circuit design was probably the hardest part of the subject for me, as they gave some weird questions in previous exams that I found difficult. This can probably be overcome through more practice and preparation both during the semester and in SWOTVAC. Luckily, the actual drawing/coming up of the circuit was only worth 2 marks in this semester's exam.
TL;DR: Make sure you learn the logic gate and design stuff well enough to carry your team should you be assigned bad team members.

Spoiler
Programming: This section involved Assoc. Prof Pearce teaching us how to use MATLAB and different aspects of coding to consider when approaching programming problems. You are introduced to concepts such as loops (for, while), conditional statements(if-elseif-else), graphing in MATLAB and formatting these graphs etc. If you have any experience in programming whatsoever, you will likely enjoy this more than if you have no experience at all. The assignments were pretty good but some of them were time-consuming, mostly because you have to think of how to solve the problem and ensure that your method works consistently. The workshop quiz and assessment should be fairly do-able, and you just need to make sure that your methods work to obtain the marks. All-in-all, you need to actually practise MATLAB to do well in it. By that, I mean that you should do all the assignments by yourself, critically analyse your methods and compare them with others to see how they differ, and generally be confident enough so that you can write your code down by hand the first time (as in the exam - you are given a problem and you don't have access to MATLAB during the exam). This includes getting familiar with formatting in MATLAB.

Spoiler
Mechanics: Coming into uni from Spesh, Methods and Physics, I didn't find this section too hard. The lecturer Andrew Ooi is funny and engaging, and if you pay attention to the lectures and write good notes, you will do well in both the assignments and the exam. Also, this section requires that you be at least competent in MATLAB, as you use the software to solve problems given to you, generally by producing graphs of force and optimising values, or by using MATLAB as a calculator and to solve matrices. The group assignments during this section were probably the least enjoyable experience for me, as my team was kinda useless and I had to carry (think of 7pm -> 4am solo carrying lol), mostly because they weren't so good at MATLAB. My piece of advice is to learn MATLAB well so that you don't lose marks excessively here.

I didn't really do any 'textbook' questions in this subject during the semester, but I did try to make an effort to do the online MC questions as they were made available. Doing these will help you out in the online MC test worth 5%. All-in-all, I feel that if you write good notes, revise the Digital stuff and get on top of programming, with somewhat of a background into mechanics (i.e. spesh or physics), then you are set to do really well, and is a well-deserved H1 to obtain.

Spoiler
Final Exam: The exam wasn't too bad, 40 MC questions each worth 1 mark, then 3 Short Answer questions based on each major component (Digital, Programming, Mechanics) each worth 20 marks, and comprised of multiple parts (i.e. a) -> f) etc). The MC questions aren't too tricky and should take roughly a minute per question. The Short Answer questions can be tricky, particularly the Digital Systems aspect, but only the last 1 or 2 parts of it. It still asks for stuff like binary to decimal, hex to decimal, Boolean algebra and such. Therefore, the actual combinational circuit design would be worth at most like 3-4 marks. For Programming, you essentially want to be good enough to just freehand write your code and be able to tell whether it will work as you intend it to or not. These questions are relatively easier than the questions you'll tackle during the assignment, so be rest assured that if you know your stuff, you will do well. The Mechanics component isn't too tricky either. Think of it as slightly more complicated spesh stuff. Also, the last question involved differential equations but it wasn't hard - it was to do with exponentials and so on.

Overall, I did this subject as part of my Bio-Engineering major, and it was pretty decent. If you are given a good team, write good notes, prepare for each workshop in-class assessment and do well in the assignments, you will do well. The exam itself shouldn't be too bad as long as you prepare decently during SWOTVAC. That being said, although I enjoyed the subject, I will repeat my opener: many people may found this subject bothersome, especially those who have no background in programming whatsoever.
« Last Edit: November 25, 2017, 01:51:04 am by alanyin1 »
Melbourne High School (2013 - 2016)

2015: Biology [44]
2016: Chemistry [50], Methods [47], English [47], Spesh [43], Physics [43]

ATAR: 99.85

2017 - 2019: The University of Melbourne, Bachelor of Biomedicine: Bio-Engineering Major

Accepting a few more places for 3/4 Chem tuition at State or Box Hill libraries. PM me :)

abc12345j

  • Victorian
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
  • Respect: +43
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #666 on: November 25, 2017, 04:59:01 pm »
+3
Subject Code/Name: ANAT20006 Principles of Human Structure

Workload:  3 x 1 hour lectures per week
                           4 x 2 hour practicals throughout the semester (in weeks 5, 8, 10 and 12)

Assessment:  ADSL tasks (essentially weekly online quizzes worth 10%)
                                2 x 30 minute mid semester tests (worth 15% each)
                                Final exam (worth 60%)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available: No. We were only given a few sample questions (with no answers/solutions).

Textbook Recommendation:  General Anatomy: Principles and Applications (Eizenberg). I only used this textbook a few times to revise finer details. Gray's Anatomy was also recommended but I never bought it.
 
Lecturer(s): Junhua Xiao, Dagmar Wilhelm, Jason Ivanusic, Stuart Mazzone, Simon Murray and Varsha Pilbrow. 

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 2, 2017

Rating: 4 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments: I must say it took me a little while to warm to this subject. At times, the amount of content you are required to commit to memory seemed overwhelming, and much of the content covered in the lectures was run through quickly and glossed over (this was particularly the case with Dagmar's lectures on Embryology; she is a great lecturer, but she just goes too fast!). However, by the end of the subject I really came to appreciate how much I had learned about the human body, and was impressed with the way the subject utilised practicals to revise and solidify the concepts we had learned in lectures. If you dedicate time toward studying and memorising the structures, you should expect to do really well in this subject.

I found the practicals in this subject very useful. Essentially, you would be assigned a group and you would go around to visit 5 different stations (each with a different demonstrator) throughout the two hours. The demonstrator would show you specimen and the associated structures that were covered in the lectures, and would then quiz you on the concepts. Make sure you diligently take notes when in these pracs- I got a bit lazy and regretted it when it became time to revise. Also watch out for the things that the demonstrators emphasise (for instance, I remember the position of the pedicles and lamina in the vertebral column was alluded to by our demonstrator and sure enough 2-3 questions appeared on MST 2 about this concept).

Assessment:
The ADSL tasks are weekly online quizzes based on online 'modules'  and on the lecture content that you can attempt as many times as you wish. In essence, they are therefore free gimme marks- all you have to do is ensure that you remember to complete them! Also note that the modules sometimes extend beyond the lecture content and that this 'new' content is examinable. However, very few questions (if any) in the MST or on the final exam required knowledge that was beyond the scope of the lecture notes, so in all honesty if you know the lecture content back to front, you should be fine.   

The Mid Semester Tests are entirely multi-choice. But don't be fooled, as they often seek to test the finer details here (I under performed in these as I didn't commit to memory certain nuances). Your best bet is to be familiar with the lecture notes. There are no diagrams in these tests, but some of the MCQs do test your knowledge of the subtleties of human structure and the MSTs are therefore no walk in the park.

The final exam was, I thought, comparatively easier than the MSTs. It consists of three sections. The first section is essentially another 'mini' MST, as it is entirely multi choice and tests the content from the latter 1/3rd of the course (which wasn't tested in either MST). Section B consists of 4 'fill in the blanks' questions (each worth 10 marks) which I found quite straightforward- if you know your stuff (ie. know where things are located on a diagram, know basic definitions etc) then you should have no problem with these. Section C comprised 4 short answer type questions worth 15 marks each. This was the hardest section of the paper, as you were often required to label things on an empty diagram (i.e.. you really had to know your stuff and have committed it to memory), as well as answer questions pertaining to the course content. Again, expect the finer details to be tested here. I remember finding a question concerning the distinction between the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous system to be quite left of field (as it was only discussed in 15-30 minutes of one lecture). It was worth 15 marks, so if you hadn't revised those lecture notes thoroughly, you would have struggled with that question. The bottom line is that you must know the lecture notes and the course inside out.

Ultimately, this subject is about committing structures to memory and understanding the clinical significance of these (which is often emphasised in the lectures). In the end I came to enjoy the subject very much, and would definitely recommend it to anyone who is interested in the human body (in addition to those who wish to take it to fulfil a medicine prerequisite). One further thing to note is that some of the material we were given via the ADSL modules as well as in the practical notes was beyond the scope of the course and was not assessed in the MSTs or final exam. As I have said before, the foolproof key to this subject is understanding the lecture notes inside out.
 
« Last Edit: November 26, 2017, 01:52:01 pm by K888 »
ATAR: 99.40

VCE English (50)

Yi_Liu

  • Victorian
  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 6
  • Respect: +2
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #667 on: November 25, 2017, 07:44:46 pm »
+5
Subject Code/Name: CVEN30009 Structural Theory and Design 1

Workload: 
- 1x 1 hour lecture per week
- 1x 2 hour lecture per week
- 1x 2 hour tutorial per week
- 2 x 1 hour labs per semester

Assessment: 
1 x Home Lab (5%)- Group
2 x Design Assignments (10% and 5%)- Group
1 x GUNT Lab (5%)- Individual
1 x Techno Lab (5%)- Individual
3 hour end of sem exam (70%)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available:  Yes, all the way from 2010. All had solutions provided except for 2016

Textbook Recommendation:  None that I know of, but having a copy of the standards is useful.

Lecturer(s): Jonathan Tran, Philip Christopher, Ryan Hoult plus a range of guest lecturers

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 2, 2017

Rating:  4.5 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments: Probably my favourite subject this semester. ST&D1 may seem like a lot of work (especially if you don't keep up to date) but isn't actually that difficult given you put in enough effort. It is the first of a series of 3 ST&D subjects which continue into the Master of Engineering Civil and Structural streams,so most of the content is quite introductory in terms of complexity.  Much of the content covered aligns with AS 3600-2009 and AS 4100 so I would recommend getting a copy of them (if you haven't already from Materials). Barely any formulae are provided on the exam so there is A LOT to memorise and some of the formulae are extremely long and tedious. I would highly recommend learning how to derive them (derivations are all quite straightforward and definitely vital to grasping a better understanding of the subject) but memorise them as well to save time on the exam.

Lectures:
In total, every week had 3 hours worth of lectures. However, the last lecture was either a guest lecture or an assignment debrief so essentially you only had two lectures of content a week. This did cause the pace of lectures to be slightly rushed during a few weeks, but nothing too bad if you took some time to review them. The content from guest lecturers were assessed in the exam, but only 5 marks out of 120 were allocated to them. The lecture slides covering actual content are fairly complex and messy, so make sure you actually attend/watch the lectures.

The first week was taken by Jonathan and essentially just a review of the statics section from Engineering Mechanics so the content was assumed knowledge covered very quickly. The only minor extension was the introduction of a switch function which was extremely useful.

Weeks 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10 and 11 were taken by Philip who covered the bulk of the design section of the subject. The three major materials covered were timber, steel and reinforced concrete. Most of the content was heavily related to the two design assignments and a large chunk of the exam. However, design philosophy and method (week 5) and design detailing (week 6) weren't really assessed in the exam so you can probably skip over that during revision. Overall,  Philip explained the content very well and clearly. He was also very engaging and interactive, offering rewards such as pens and medals to students for answering questions. Only problem was that he made too many tangents during a few lectures which didn't leave enough time for the actual examinable content to be comprehensively covered.

Ryan took the lecture for the remaining few weeks which covered deflection, indeterminate beams and instability and elastic bending- this mainly related to the GUNT and techno labs.  Personally, I liked his way of teaching the most out of the three lecturers. Very clear and concise in explanations. He wasn't as engaging as Philip, but covered the content at a more comfortable pace.

Tutorials:
I found the tutorials quite useful, especially since the questions on the tute sheets were very similar to those asked in exams. Solutions were released at the end of each week so you didn't necessarily have to attend them. The tutors were also very helpful and willing to answer any questions you had regarding the content and assignments.

Assessment:
Of the 5 assignments, the home lab, GUNT lab and technolab were all easy marks. Practically everyone got the full 15%. The two design assignments required a lot more work (way more that the 15% they were worth) but I personally really enjoyed them. It was nice how they were related to the content and really assisted students in understanding the difficult formulae and concepts presented (unlike some second year subjects such as Earth). The lecturers and tutors were very lenient on the marking so almost everyone got close to full marks (if not more because there were bonus marks).

Now, the 70% exam daunted me initially but after doing all the practice exams, I had felt pretty confident. The questions asked in all 8 past exams didn't change much and they only took me one and a half hours to complete so I walked into my exam thinking I was going to ace this. Gosh I was wrong.  Unfortunately for us poor souls who took the subject in 2017, they decided to change the exam quite drastically and made it a lot more difficult. I hadn't expected some of the content to be assessed- they decided to include a hollow section instead of the I section students were more familiar with. The questions become more heavily worded and design based- it felt like I was doing a design assignment under exam conditions in a tight time frame. The paper was also error-riddled which made things a lot more difficult. I did manage to complete about 95% of the paper in the 3 hours given but was barely confident in my answers. Fortunately, the ST&D1 team scaled the marks so I still ended up doing pretty well. Pretty sure the exam in 2018 will be a lot more straightforward.

Overall:
Solid, well-taught, well constructed and well coordinated subject.You will find this subject rewarding if you enjoyed the statics part of Eng Mech and have an interest in structures. Definitely a good introduction into ST&D2 and ST&D3 and a key subject if you are looking to do Masters of Structural Eng (as well as Civil). Do be aware that this subject can be tough and a lot of content is covered. But you can do well if you keep up to date and put in enough effort (avoid cramming everything during swotvac).
« Last Edit: November 26, 2017, 07:30:20 pm by Yi_Liu »
2014: Completed VCE | ATAR: 98.25
2015-18: Bachelor of Science (Civil Systems) | H1 Average
2016-17: Exchange to Tsinghua University
2018-20: Master of Engineering

Feel free to PM me about Unimelb subjects :D.

abc12345j

  • Victorian
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
  • Respect: +43
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #668 on: November 26, 2017, 01:21:59 pm »
+3
Subject Code/Name: PSYC20007 Cognitive Psychology

Workload:  1 x 2 hour lecture per week
1 x 2 hour lab (tutorial) per fortnight

Assessment: 1500 word lab report (worth 40%)
group oral presentation (worth 10%)
final exam (worth 50%)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available: No. Some sample MCQs were provided.

Textbook Recommendation:  Cognitive Psychology (Goldstein). Rarely used it.

Lecturer(s): Meredith Mckague, Dan Little, Geoff Saw, Phillip Smith

Year/Semester of Completion: Semester 2, 2017

Rating: 5 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments: This is a fascinating and enjoyable subject. The lectures, which covered many interesting areas of cognitive psychology (such as memory, language, attention etc), were very well delivered. The content is probably more advanced and challenging than most psychology subjects, but if you are interested in and enjoy studying psychology, this shouldn't be too much of a concern.

The one gripe I have with the way this subject was run is the lab classes. There were only six of these throughout the semester and I felt that they were almost pointless to a degree. Lab 1 was an introduction to the course, while labs 2 and 3 were focussed on the lab report (obtaining data and then analysing it) and labs 5 and 6 were almost entirely taken up with listening to group oral presentations. The only lab in which we extended upon the lecture content was lab 4, in which we covered selective attention and inattentional blindness. To put it into perspective, only 2 out of 104 multi choice questions on the exam required knowledge from what we had learned during the lab classes. 

Assessment:
The lab report (worth 40%) is 1500 words, but the method section is already written up for you. This means you must only complete an introduction, abstract, results and a discussion. The lab report investigates the topic of line-up procedures, and whether the number of 'hits' (correct identification of a suspect) is increased/decreased if a witness has less time to make an identification. This really isn't too hard to get your head around, and the results are practically done for you if you follow the instructions given to you in the 3rd lab class. The one thing that I think brought me down to an extent was the requirement for APA formatting. The tutors are VERY picky about this, so I'd advise that you buy a textbook which outlines the APA conventions for a lab report so that you can perfectly adhere to this (anal and annoying!) format.

The group oral presentation (worth 10%) is held in either week 10 or 12. Essentially your group must investigate an issue that is pertinent to cognitive psychology (for instance we investigated the cognitive impacts of bilingualism) and give a 15 minute presentation in class. This really isn't a big deal, and I think the tutors are (in contrast with their lab report marking), very lax when it comes to marking these. I guess I was also lucky in the sense that I had a very diligent and studious group.

The final exam (worth 50%) is entirely multi-choice. There are 8 questions from each of the twelve lectures, plus 8 questions from the online Quantitative methods modules (which basically had the same amount of content as one statistics lecture). In comparison to the practice questions we were given, I felt that the exam was quite straightforward. This may be because I had revised more by the time I sat the actual exam, but I also think that the practice questions we were given to complete (which is a hurdle task by the way) were much harder than what appeared on the exam (especially the statistics/QM questions).

In summary, this subject was probably the best psychology subject I have taken at the university so far. The key to doing well is regularly revising the lecture notes and ensuring that you thoroughly understand the content.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2017, 01:51:35 pm by K888 »
ATAR: 99.40

VCE English (50)

abc12345j

  • Victorian
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
  • Respect: +43
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #669 on: November 26, 2017, 02:56:56 pm »
+4
Subject Code/Name: POLS20006 Contemporary Political Theory

Workload:  1 x 2 hour lecture per week (except weeks 9 and 12)
1 x 1 hour tutorial per week

Assessment: 2000 word research essay (worth 50%)
2000 word take home exam (worth 50%)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available:  No.

Textbook Recommendation:  None, weekly readings supplied online via the LMS

Lecturer(s): Ana Carballo, plus a variety of guest lecturers

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 2, 2017

Rating: 4 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H2A

Comments: This subject, as its name suggests, explores recent developments in the field of political theory. Many ideologies are discussed, including liberalism, cosmopolitanism, communitarianism, multiculturalism, post-structuralism/gender politics, post-colonialism and post-marxism. Additionally, topics such as the problematic aspects of democracy as a system of government, the role of religion in politics and environmental politics are also covered.

I must say that, despite my centre-right leaning political views, I enjoyed much of the content covered in this subject. The subject clearly has a left-leaning focus, and much of the content covered could be accurately termed 'identity politics'. However, I thoroughly enjoyed the debates we had in tutorials and critically engaging with the readings provided. While I disagreed with a lot of what the lecturers/tutors/authors of the readings had to say, I nonetheless thought it was great that this subject forced me to justify my own political views.

Regarding the assessment in this subject, you are given a choice out of 10 or 11 questions for the first (research) essay worth 50%. This shouldn't be too difficult, as you can seek your tutor's advice in the preliminary stages of your essay to check that your argument makes sense and that you are on the right track. You have six days to complete the take-home exam (which requires you to answer 4 short answer questions using ~500 words for each), and you are given a choice as to which questions you wish to complete. This allows you to largely avoid a particular topic that you may loathe (in my case, critical theory/post-marxism). All in all, the assessment for this subject isn't too dissimilar to that for most other politics subjects; you'll do fine if you can write a coherent essay that makes a clear argument.

I would definitely recommend this subject to anyone interested in politics/political theory (and who can tolerate its left-leaning bias!). However, if you are looking for a 'bludge' breadth subject, this is probably not one you should do, as the content discussed is quite conceptually difficult.
« Last Edit: November 27, 2017, 07:02:13 pm by abc12345j »
ATAR: 99.40

VCE English (50)

Yi_Liu

  • Victorian
  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 6
  • Respect: +2
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #670 on: November 26, 2017, 09:09:19 pm »
+4
Subject Code/Name: ENGR30002 Fluid Mechanics  

Workload:
- 3x 1 hour lectures per week
- 1x 1 hour tutorial per week
- 2x 2 hour labs per semester

Assessment: 
- 2x lab reports (10% each)
- 2x assignments (10% each)
- 3 hr end of year exam (60%)
- Optional quizzes (+1% if you passed them all)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture etc.

Past exams available:  Yes, from library website, without solutions

Textbook Recommendation:  None

Lecturer(s): Daniel Heath, Marco Ghisalberti

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 2, 2017

Rating:  4 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments:
Straight-forward, technical subject that I found to be easier than Engineering Mechanics (at least assignment wise) and very enjoyable. A small portion of the content in the first few weeks (hydrostatics, flow regimes) was touched upon in ESD1. Daniel and Marco have been teaching the subject since 2015 and have been a pretty good job. They have very different styles of teaching and who you prefer is up to personal preference. 
It is usually recommended for civil students to take the subject in semester 1 and chemical students to take it in semester 2. This is because Marco (who focuses in civil eng) takes the course for 9 week while Daniel (who focuses in chem eng) for 3 weeks in the first semester and this is reversed in semester 2. However, I took the subject as a civil student in semester 2 and didn't feel like I was at an disadvantage.

Lectures:
Daniel took the course for the first six weeks to cover hydrostatics, conservation of laws, pipe flow and pumps before Macro took it for the next three covering dimensionless parameters, open-channel flow and fluid forces on walls. Daniel then came back for the last three weeks to cover tank mixing, compressible flow and multi-dimensional flow (Navier Stokes Equations). As a mentioned, the way the two lecturers taught differed drastically. Daniel usually had very long and detailed lecture notes full of text. Marco's notes were much more concise and  only partially completed. He would complete them with the students during lectures (you would print his notes and bring them to class to write on, similar to calc 2). Personally I preferred Marco's teaching method (it's easier for me to learn by writing). I found Daniel's notes were more difficult to digest and I felt like he put too much attention on detail and missed highlighting key concepts. I would recommend taking more time to review Daniel's lectures. However, both lecturers delivered the content well and provided clear explanations.

One major complaint I had this semester was the pace of the lectures during the last two weeks which covered the topic of multidimensional flow. Being the last topic we covered and riddled with partial differentials, it was definitely one of the more challenging sections of the subject. Daniel's notes for this topic was 200 slides long and we only had about 4 or 5 lectures to cover everything so we literally flew through it and students were forced to do a lot of self learning. The equations which Daniel presented were also more complex than the ones Marco presented in semester 1 (he had them in less simplified forms).

Tutorials:
The tutorials weren't really necessary. You could definitely do well with just the tutorial sheets since solutions were released two week after the tute (or you can find them somewhere floating around online). Some of the tutorial questions were kind of challenging and not really related to content covered in lectures.

Laboratories:
The first lab covered fluid flow in a smooth pipe and second lab covered pumps. Both were very straightforward and you could probably finish up half an hour early. The lab reports were also quite easy and as long as you knew what was going on, could easily get above 18 out of 20.

Assignments:
The assignments were usually questions from past exams or something similar. They weren't very difficult as long as you kept up with the content. Definitely read the questions properly though to avoid losing easy marks.

Quizzes:
The quizzes were introduced as a trial since the fluid mech team want to roll them out as an official assessment component next year. For this semester, they were optional and you would get an extra 1% if you passed them. Unfortunately, they were a bit of a joke. Whoever wrote them seemed to have no idea what was covered in the lectures. The questions made no sense and were error riddled. I gave up wasting my time on them after a few weeks. I really do hope that they improve them for next year, especially if they do become part of the actual assessment.

Exam:
Unfortunately, no solutions were provided to the past exams for Fluid Mechanics.  However, I would definitely recommend doing them, at least the ones from 2015 onwards. Marco wrote 75% of the semester 1 exams and Daniel 25%. This was reversed in semester two. Daniel did let us see the solutions  to past papers during consultation given that we  had actually done them and just wanted to check our solutions. The exam for Fluid Mechanics was probably the one I was most worried about because I didn't really know what to expect. Fortunately, the paper this semester wasn't very difficult if you did your revision properly. It was very fair and written quite well, covering most of the key concepts from the lectures. Daniel mentioned during consultation that the paper wasn't hard but lengthy, but most of the cohort managed to finish up and leave early. Be aware that Daniel like to include theory questions in his exams is you're taking it in semester 2.

Overall:
Well-taught and well-coordinated subject that is very technical and enjoyable. Not too difficult to do well in given you keep up with the content. As with all other subject, I would not recommend cramming everything during swotvac as a large amount of content is covered.
2014: Completed VCE | ATAR: 98.25
2015-18: Bachelor of Science (Civil Systems) | H1 Average
2016-17: Exchange to Tsinghua University
2018-20: Master of Engineering

Feel free to PM me about Unimelb subjects :D.

Yacoubb

  • Victorian
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 216
  • Respect: +25
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #671 on: November 27, 2017, 06:34:30 pm »
+7
Major: Microbiology and Immunology   

First Year Subjects: 
- BIOL10004 Biology of Cells and Organisms
- BIOL10005 Genetics & the Evolution of Life
- CHEM10003 Chemistry 1
- CHEM10004 Chemistry 2
- PSYC10003 Mind, Brain and Behaviour 1
- PSYC10004 Mind, Brain and Behaviour 2
- UNIB10006 Critical Thinking with Data
- CULS10005 Media, Identity and the Everyday Life
First Year WAM = 83 (H1)

Second Year Subjects:
PHYS20008 Human Physiology
MIIM20001 Principles of Microbiology & Immunology - 90 (H1)
CCDP20001 Street Art
ANAT20006 Principles of Human Structure
PHYS20009 Research Based Physiology
MUSI20150 Music and Health
MIIM20002 Microbes, Infections and Responses - 84 (H1)
BCMB20002 Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
Second Year WAM = 86 (H1)

Third Year Subjects:
CORE SUBJECTS:
MIIM30011 Medical Microbiology: Bacteriology - 82 (H1)
MIIM30014 Medical Microbiology: Virology - 84 (H1)
MIIM30002 Principles of Immunology - 88 (H1)
MIIM30015 Techniques in Immunology - 87 (H1)
NON-CORE SUBJECTS:
MIIM30003 Medical and Applied Immunology
PHYS30005 Muscle and Exercise Physiology
MUSI20203 Peak Performance under Pressure
POPH20001 Genetics, Health and Society
Third Year WAM = 85 (H1)

Year of completion: 2017

Rating:  5 out of 5

Your Average Mark: 85 (H1)

Comments:
Let's face it - any time someone tells you they're thinking of a Micro/Immuno major, or as we like to call it, the 'MIIM major', at least one person in the room gasps. Arguably, it is one of the most challenging majors of the Human Biosciences, particularly due to the enormous amount of content and memory involved. In saying that however, if you do enjoy all things related to Microbiology and Immunology, I highly recommend this major, for reasons I will outline below. I thought I'd give a little background to how & why I decided to do a MIIM major (you'll find me referring to this major as MIIM throughout).

At the end of first year of Science, I was deadset on a Human Structures & Functions Major. Why? Because I want to do Med and it seems like the logical major to do. A lot of content covered in this major will reappear in Medicine, so why not get a head start on it all and get that knowledge under your belt? After second year Anatomy (ANAT20006), I was quite sure that although it was a pretty decent subject content/difficulty wise, it wasn't something that I was extremely passionate about. What really consolidated my passion for a MIIM major though, was actually sort of an accident. In second year, semester 1, I had Biochem, Anatomy and my breadth, Street Art, all set. All I needed was one more subject. I was quite unsure of what I wanted to do in my first semester, and ultimately gave in to doing Principles of Immunology and Microbiology (MIIM20001). It was my filler subject, and on my first lecture, I remembered justifying this preference based on the passion I had for the VERY little Immunology and Microbiology I had dabbled in during first year.

Doing this subject opened my eyes up to all things MIIM related, and I loved the subject so much that I prioritised it over all my other subjects. It wasn't all bliss, though - I would have anxiety attacks frequently just thinking about the amount of detail I needed to memorise everything in. I had never been in a situation where I had to memorise so much content, and I literally couldn't fathom how anyone could expect students to memorise so much. Nonetheless, my passion drove me to persevere, and it was my first subject I ever received in the 90s for. So, this led me to doing MIIM20002, the follow-up to MIIM20001, which was definitely a lot more focussed on the Microbiology aspect. By the end of semester 1, I was convinced I wanted to major in Immunology alone, but MIIM20002 changed my mind to doing a Microbiology and Immunology major (more on why I recommend this later).

Some FAQs:
1. Is there a lot of memory involved in a MIIM major?
Yes. Be prepared to memorise a LOT. The majority of this major is not application, but simply rote learning copious amounts of viral life cycles, cytokine functions, components of the complement cascade, the mechanisms of CRISPR, a gazillion different types of antibiotics. This is the point where I recommend that anyone who cannot memorise a lot of information steers away from this major. It can be an extreme turn-off, and extremely daunting having to memorise so much. I know a lot of my friends don't appreciate the MIIM major because they cannot see the relevance of memorising so much information. I would be lying if I didn't feel the same way sometimes. However, the content is so interesting that I believe it definitely outweighs the copious amounts of info you need to remember.

If however, you've got a good memory, the MIIM major is probably the most loyal major. Why? Because a lot of the times, the marks you gain are purely based on knowledge. If you know something, you get the mark. If you don't know it, you don't get the mark.

2. Is it easy to H1 subjects in the MIIM major?
This is a little subjective, and although I did achieve a H1 in all the MIIM major subjects, it was NOT easy. I don't think it is easy to H1 any subject (except for Music and Health and Peak Performance under Pressure - seriously guys these are the best subjects to do with a MIIM major because I don't even think they're legit subjects lol). Anyway, the reason I say it isn't easy to H1 MIIM subjects is because there is a lot of work and effort that needs to be put in to achieving that H1. If you are committed to memorising all the details, knowing many pathways, remembering lots of functions, etc., then you're definitely on your way to achieving a H1. If you aren't, then don't expect a H1.

3. Immunology, or Microbiology/Immunology major?
Okay so I kind of alluded to this above. After doing MIIM20001, I was convinced I wanted to do an Immunology major alone. I didn't really enjoy memorising all the different microbes and features of their life cycle at first. The reason for this was because of what I mentioned earlier - I never needed to do so much memory. However, when I did MIIM20002, I developed my memory skills, and I attribute my memory skills now to doing a MIIM major haha. Once I overcome my fear of memorising, which occurred at the end of semester 2, I considered my options. The best thing about a Micro/Immuno major over an Immuno major, is that it is really great to contextualise the Immunology you learn, to specific details about the different microbes. Personally, I loved Virology and Bacteriology in third year - they were so difficult with the amount I needed to memorise, and I would often be having anxiety attacks the morning of exams convinced I wouldn't remember everything. Nonetheless, I have completed them now and in hindsight, I think I achieved a H1 because they were SO interesting and fun to study. So, I think a MIIM major is so great purely because it allows you to explore the application of Immunology, and then contextualise it to Bacteriology and Virology, which provides you with an insight into the world of all things Bacteria and Viruses (Virology > Bacteriology by the way, just saying).

4. How is the MIIM Department?
Okay the MIIM department is the best department in the whole university. Across the three years of my degree, some of the departments have been so incompetent and I literally cannot fathom how they conduct themselves. Our results for a Muscle and Exercise Physiology MST were released 6 weeks after the test, and it was literally 40 multiple choice questions. Meanwhile, my Principles of Immunology MST results were released 2 days after the MST, and involved multiple choice and short answer. Yes yes, there are more people doing Phys than MIIM subjects. Yes yes, a department isn't good just because it gives results early. SO I'll go into more reasons why the department is great.
-- The MIIM department is always prepared to help. On so many occasions, people have been ill, received difficult information like not getting into Medicine, and the MIIM department does everything they can to help. I had a friend who was literally excused from a practical after finding out some difficult news, and the coordinator of the subject (Dr. Odilia Widjburg) made sure she was okay. They genuinely care for their students, and want them to do their very best.
-- The MIIM department is always prepared to provide feedback. There are consult sessions after all MSTs and they provide you with feedback to review your MSTs. This is something I didn't have access to in any other subjects I've done in my degree, and I found that they provided the opportunity to really engage with the lecturers, and develop a close relationship with them where they weren't so scary.
-- They actually listen to their students. If students find that there was something unclear in the lectures, they make the effort to actually clarify these things.

5. What are good subjects to do in addition to the core subjects?
Easy breadths. When I say easy, I mean easy going breadths with minimal work required. Some people may not necessarily agree with me on this one, but my personal opinion is that because the subjects in MIIM are so full-on, its great to have a reprieve by doing some decent subjects. I did 2 breadth subjects that were quite relaxed, and I found this helped me concentrate on my MIIM subjects to the best of my ability.

6. How do you memorise so much information?
I found that doing diagrams and flow charts definitely helped. The best approach to these subjects is to go over the lectures straight after sitting through them, because usually you consolidate about 70%, and get the overall big picture, and then spend time memorising the finer details. Acronyms are also your best friend - I found these so helpful on so many occasions and these will help you remember all the massive lists of information you can expect to be given for these subjects.

7. Is it a good major to do and follow up with Honours?
This is one of the most compelling reasons I recommend a MIIM major - there is SO much opportunity for Honours. I am going to do an Honours year next year, and I found that I was so in awe of the immense space for development because of the vastness of the space in the MIIM world. From Virology, to Bacteriology, to Immunology and Medical applications of all 3, there is something that is suited to your liking. The lecturers are also so great, and are part of the reason why these honours projects tend to be so compelling.

8. Techniques in Immuno or Micro?
- OKay so I did techniques in Immuno. It was a good subject; however, from what I have heard, and from what I have experienced, there is a lot more interesting content in Techniques in Microbiology. I cannot be the judge of this because I'd have to have done one, but in terms of Techniques in Immunology, this is probably the most application you'll do in the major because of the laboratory-basis of the subject.

All in all, doing a MIIM major has been the best decision I have made in my academic life thus far. It was not only interesting, but also such a great challenge, and although I've had so many moments doubting my capabilities, fearing not being able to remember everything, or just simply not being good enough, I have come out the other end proud of my achievements. The friendships I've formed, and the repertoire with the lecturers in this department, are all so dear to my heart. Highly recommend this major, and if anyone has any questions, please feel free to PM me!
2013-2014: VCE
2015-2017: BSc. at University of Melbourne. Majoring in Microbiology & Immunology.
2018: Honours - Restoring immunocompetency in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia
2019-2022: Doctor of Medicine (MD) at Deakin University

Completed VCE Biology in 2013 with a study score of 47. Offering tutoring in VCE Biology for 2020 in Geelong region! PM me for more details.

Boobah

  • Victorian
  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Respect: +1
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #672 on: November 30, 2017, 12:01:08 am »
+6
Subject Code/Name: BLAW10001 Principles of Business Law

Workload: 
1 × 2hr lecture per week
1 × Online Tutorial

Assessment:
2X 1 Hour Multi-Choice Test (2X10%=20%),
End of semester exam (3hr) 80%   

Lectopia Enabled:  The first hour only of the Thursday lecture was recorded- I beleive this was the first time the lectures for this subject had been recorded in any capacity.

Past exams available:  1 Practice exam with solutions

Textbook Recommendation: First Principles of Business Law, 10th Edition: You must buy the textbook. Test and Exam questions often directly refer to the text and lecture slides are summarised based on the assumption you have read the text.

Lecturer: Arlen Duke

Year & Semester of completion: 2017, Semester 2

Rating:  4.5 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1 (86)

Comments: Business Law is commonly perceived as a 'bludge' or an 'easy' subject. Largely due to the Multiple choice format and lack of tutorials. Whilst I would agree that the average time to be spent on BLAW to do well would be lower than other subjects, to do well requires a very thorough understanding of the course content and consistent work throughout the semester is required.

If English is not your first language, you may get caught out on the wording of the questions and specific legal terms. So unless you have a particular interest in this content, or you have to do it as part of your accounting major- don't do this subject. i.e don't do this subject for the sake that 'its easy and will boost my wam'.

The course is broken down into three key sections.

Section 1 is law making through courts and parliament as well as a general introduction to the legal system. For those who have done VCE Legal Studies, lots of revisited content here and the first test in week 4 can be easily nailed.

Section 2 involves 5 weeks on contract law, this information is very useful for day to day life in thinking about whether or not as an individual you are binding yourself to legal agreements. I found this very applicable to day-to-day life. This section was very dense content wise though so make sure you are on top of this for the second test.

Section 3 looks at Tort Law, the Australian Consumer law and Agency, again lots of new content each week but allows you to learn about a broad range of topics.

Lectures:
Arlen wrote very succinct lecture slides which enabled him to usually have the lectures done in about 1hr- 1hr 20 mins. This was nice however it meant a lot of the key learning had to be done in your own time from the textbook as I found the tests and exams tested the textbook content more than the lecture slides.
Arlen was a very engaging lecturer, his clarity and succinct teaching style was greatly appreciated by students.

Tutorials:
No tutorials in this subject. Just e-tutorials which I personally found useless and unnecessary. Before each test/exam workshops are held to go over the practice test questions. These would be good if you had issues understanding why you were wrong for a question, but I feel like you could have the same benefit by asking a friend.

Tests:
Test 1 focussed on really intricate details of the textbook for chapters 1 to 3. If you study hard possible to do very well.
Test 2 was much more difficult as it covered a very large amount of content and cases. My advice would be to stay on top of the content over these weeks to avoid starting from scratch with your revision a week out like I did.
 
Exam:
Pretty tough, a few obscure questions testing very specific details of the textbook. Definitely worth trying to fit as much on the cheetsheet as possible, because you never know what obscure point may be tested. Having a good set of case summaries is very helpful as well.

In summary, this subject was a very welcome change of pace from a first year of BCom filed with maths maths and more maths. Would happily recommend to other bcom students- but I also recommend doing this in second semester once you have settled into uni so you can really smash this subject.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2017, 12:34:43 am by K888 »

dddknight

  • Trailblazer
  • *
  • Posts: 26
  • Respect: +6
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #673 on: December 15, 2017, 01:07:18 am »
+5
Subject Code/Name: BCMB20003: Molecular Analysis of Cell Function  

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

Assessment:  2 x MSTS (10% each), 1 x online test (10%), final exam (70%!!!!)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture etc.

Past exams available:  Yes. 1

Textbook Recommendation:  Alberts et al Molecular Biology of the Cell, 6th edition, Garland Science (good for reinforcing concepts)

Lecturer(s): Heather Verkade, Terry Mulhern, Paul Gooley and Marie Bogoyevitch

Year & Semester of completion: 2017, Semester 2

Rating: 4.5 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments: Since the previous review of this subject is outdated, I thought I would write a more recent review of this subject. Compared to BCMB20002 and BCMB20005, this was a light subject in terms of the work demanded. The best way to describe this is to think of it as a sequel to BCMB20002. If u understood a majority of what BCMB20002 was saying, you'll find that grasping this subject is not too challenging.

Lectures: Compared to most subjects, this subject is special in that it only has 2 lectures per week. The first lecture of the week dealt mainly with the theory of biochem and molecular biology while the second lecture dealt with the techniques seen in the field. Our lectures were at times hard to understand at first but once you took time to go over them at home, they were pretty straightforward. I liked all of the lecturers and it was clear that all of them were very passionate about the topics they went through. Heather's summary questions are helpful as always and were good steering points when reviewing my notes. 

Tutorials: Perhaps this would have to be the most challenging portion of the subject. The first tutorial of the week dealt with questions that challenged you to think about how to deal with specific situations in the lab. During that one hour, I found myself struggling due to their unfamiliarity and how it was based on conceptual thinking rather than parroting information from your notes. The second tutorial of the week dealt mainly with questions on the assigned scientific paper of the week. These tutorials required you to have conceptual thinking and familiarity with the paper. Terry's tutorials were definitely the hardest to answer because as we all know, he expects us to know things in and out rather than just memorising. What makes these tutorials much harder is the fact that within the classroom, almost no one talks. Word of advice - do talk during these tutorials and with unfamiliar classmates, it makes the tutorials more interesting and less painful to go thru. Occasionally, we get mock tests over a topic that was recently completed and they were extremely helpful when you chose to study for it and do it in test conditions.

Assessment: The 2 msts are your standard BCMB20002 msts and I found them testing mainly slabs of information. They were pretty fair in their assessment. The online activity is an annotation of scientific papers in order to prep u for the tutorial. This assessment had its pros and cons. On one hand, it did try to engage u with the paper so that you weren't completely lost in tutorials and I have to say that this activity did train my analysis of graphs and figures and how to read a scientific paper more efficiently. However, there were times the papers were out of this world and had content I could not understand at all. Perusall makes an appraisal of the annotations to assign a grade out of 3. Problem is sometimes the annotations I felt were intelligent was seen as lacking in perusall's view. Other times, very insignificant comments with regards to the topic were seen as good to perusall. It's a mixed bag of good and bad and I do think it's hard to find that balance. The final exam was what I have to say is... manageable.. The final exam is 70% which is a huge chunk which makes me wonder what's the purpose of working so hard for the 30% assessment. Section A were MCQs while Section B were short answer questions. Within these questions, you had 50% conceptual based questions (tutorials) and the other half tested your theory. If you studied, you most likely will have a bit of time to spare to go thru any errors in your paper. Study thru your notes and the tutorial questions and it should be "manageable". I say this with quotation marks because I was sure I did poorly after the final exam but lo, and behold a miracle struck.

Overall: All I can say is that this is really a nice and chill subject. Things weren't going out of control in this subject and while 2 lectures couldn't be delivered, Heather could give us recordings from the previous years which weren't really big issues because they were uploaded quickly. I would recommend this to students who want to pursue a BCMB major or are just interested in the concepts dealt with in BCMB20002. It felt much lighter when BCMB20005 was completed as well. People interested in improving their scientific paper data analysis skills in science/biomed will find this subject very useful as well. P.S The only reason i put 4.5/5 is mainly because there was no welcome message during the first week :p Made the subject feel a bit strange and unsettling..

PM me if you have any other inquiries.
« Last Edit: December 15, 2017, 02:55:29 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

Yousha

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 8
  • Respect: +1
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #674 on: December 19, 2017, 07:24:55 pm »
+5
Subject Code/Name: From the Solar System to the Cosmos (PHYC10008) 

Workload:  3 1-hr lectures each week (Mon-Wed-Fri 9 am when I did it). 8 3-hr Workshops/practicals in the semester (marked).

Assessment:  25% Practicals, 15% Weekly Quizzes, 10%  30 min MST, 50% 2-hr Final exam

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture

Past exams available:  Yes.

Textbook Recommendation:  The Cosmic Perspective

Lecturer(s): Rachel Webster, Michelle, Jack Line

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 2, 2017

Rating:  5 Out of 5

Marks: 90 (H1) (Study a little more than I did and you'll definitely get around 95)

Science Credit: Yes

Available as a Breadth: Yes for Bachelor of Commerce, Arts, Music, Design and Environment.

Comments: I really liked this subject. The lecturers were great and the content was really interesting. If you have not read about, watched videos on or heard of the size of the universe, it will be a really humbling experience too. This is a very easy subject for both science and non science students, provided that you are good at understanding concepts and rely on that instead of rote learning. I think rote learners might do well in this subject too but I would not recommend that approach. Those who are scared of not having prior knowledge of physics and mathematics should not be worried since there are no complex calculations in this subject and all basic concepts that are required are taught in the lectures.

As the name suggests you will study the objects in the universe, how they formed, evolved and will continue to evolve (theories and evidence supporting these theories). The subject is well organised (unlike my review) and you will usually not feel rushed or lost during the semester.

Assessment
The weekly quizzes (10 in total) are fairly easy and scoring at least 10% (out of 15%) should be a piece of cake for everyone. The mid semester test was very easy too although my peers did not perform that well (median of 16 out of 25). The labs are easy to score in provided you put in the effort, prior reading is not a must to score well but I think that instead of wrapping it up in less than 2 hours each week, giving it the extra half hour will certainly help in both scoring better and understanding things. The final examination was again fairly easy and anyone who has attended the lectures will surely score well. Overall, it is a subject in which a little sincere effort can lead to a score in high 90s.

Note
I do realise that this is not an ideal review but writing reviews has never been my strong suit. Please be forgiving and do not lash out on technical mistakes since this is the first time I am reviewing a subject. If you have any suggestions to help me improve my review please do not hold back and feel free to send a DM if you want to know more about this subject. Thanks!
« Last Edit: January 22, 2018, 04:58:02 pm by Yousha »