September 27, 2020, 01:18:34 am

### AuthorTopic: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings  (Read 1223687 times) Tweet Share

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

#### Hydroxyl

• Trendsetter
• Posts: 115
• Today is the tomorrow you worried about yesterday.
• Respect: +8
##### Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #735 on: December 08, 2018, 03:55:52 pm »
+5
Subject Code/Name: ISLM10002 Islam in the Modern World

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

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

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

Past exams available:  N/A

Textbook Recommendation:  ISLM10002 Subject Reader - available from the Co-op for ~$43. Not really recommended, can do without it. Lecturer(s): Dr. Muhammad Kamal Year & Semester of completion: Semester 2, 2018 Rating: 4.9 out of 5 Your Mark/Grade: H1 (82) Comments: TL;DR - This subject is great overall - the workload is much lighter than your typical breadth subject and provides an interesting insight into how a religion, such as Islam, is coping with the challenges of modernity. Lectures: There were 12 lectures for the subject. These covered interesting topics, such as: Weeks 1-3: Historical Background Week 1: Belief and Practice in Islam Week 2: Origins and Developments: Islam, Muslim Empires, Movements and States Week 3: Issues in Islamic Legal Thought Weeks 4-5: Colonialism and the Muslim Response Week 4: Post-Caliphate Reformers Week 5: Contemporary Thinkers Weeks 6-12: Contemporary Issues - this is where the bulk of the subject lies, as the subject primarily deals with the religion and it's impacts in the modern world. Weeks 1-3 provide more of a background into the faith. Week 6: Mass Media Islam Week 7: The Status of Women and Human Rights Week 8: The Question of Palestine Week 9: Jihad and Militancy in the Muslim World Week 10: The Struggle for Democracy Week 11: Muslims in the West: The Case of Australia Week 12: Islam and the West: Where to from here? I found each lecture pretty interesting. My favourite for the subject was Week 7, which was about women's rights. I also chose this topic for my major Essay - as there were many avenues for discussion. It was also a topic that I found pretty easy to sustain a 2000+ word argument for. I found the lectures quite stimulating. It was more so conducted as a class, where we could stop and interrupt to add our own options. Dr Kamal was always happy to hear the points of views of the students and even called on us to question it. It is not that important to take that many notes from each lecture, however I would strongly advise taking detailed notes for the first 6 weeks as this comes up in the take home test. From memory, the take home test was due in Week 8, so two weeks to answer 5 questions with a paragraph each is totally reasonable. I found the marking to be quite harsh for this, with the overwhelming majority of students scoring a H2A for this assessment. I only barely managed a 16/20 (H1), but this only came after a review of my original work (15.5/20 - H2A). However, I think it's important not to stress if you do not receive that many marks for this, as it is only worst 20% of the subject. From Weeks 6-12, more of the material covered was for our own knowledge rather than the assessments. Some of the lectures ended early but there were many points of discussion regarding the different topics. You could chose to write anything that is mentioned in the lectures for your major essay, and I would recommend doing a topic that is based on the lectures. Why I stress this is because it is much easier to find resources that answer the topics and the points they need directly. I found all the answers to my major essay in the Subject Reader and was glad that I bought it as it helped push me over to the H1 mark. I would just like to stress that this subject takes a very academic focus, and is not a theology class, so to speak. Some information should be taken with a grain of salt, as it does not represent the ideology of some Muslims. In fact, a small amount of information is slightly incorrect and I would always recommend going back and fact checking some of the "facts" that Dr. Kamal states. He emphasises that it is just his opinion, and most should be regarded as such until checked with primary religious texts/sources. Tutorials The tutorial program links some of the discussions of the lectures with other theory and practice. I found the tutorials helpful in providing an alternate point of view, as you can learn a lot from other students and what they have to say (and consequently, use that in your essay OR assignments). It also provides a great opportunity to engage with your tutor and ask them questions about how they want the assignments to be written (as they are marking it). However, I found that there was only one tutor for the subject (Dr. Sirin Yasar). She was helpful in many aspects, but I found that sometimes the standard was quite high for our work and, as previously mentioned, it seemed like the entire tutorial class got H2A's for their assignments across the ball. However, I didn't find all the tutorials helpful. You need to go to at least 80% of them, so try and make use of them while you can. The best thing that came out of our tutorials was the friend groups that we formed ahah. Assessment As mentioned above, there are 3 assignments throughout the semester. Take Home Test (800 words) 20% Due Monday, Week 8 Journal Exercise (1,500 words) 30% Due Monday, Week 11 Major Essay (2,000 words) 50% Due Monday, Week 2 of Exams Assignment details are: Take Home Test (20%) Students will be assigned a series of five questions in week 6 of teaching period. Answers to be submitted in week 8. Mark: 16/20 (H1) Journal Exercise (30%) You must select three of the assigned weekly readings and for each reading write a 500 word reflective response. Mere summary of the reading will not receive a good mark. You are expected to discuss issues raised in the reading. If you feel it is appropriate you may also decide to critique (appraise) the reading. If you do please stick to the quality of the arguments and evidence offered by the author rather than addressing the writing style. Your focus must be on the reading you have chosen to respond to, but in order to deliver a high quality response you are advised to read around the subject dealt with, starting with the other readings linked to the week, both assigned and additional. It is recommended that you wait till after the relevant class discussion has taken place before completing a response in order to take advantage of insights generated by the class. It is also recommended that you do not attempt to complete your responses at the last minute but space them out through the semester. You can submit 2 responses of 750 words each (which is what I did). Mark: 23/30 (H2A) Major Essay (50%) Select one of the essay questions and write a 2000 word answer in essay format. An essay is an extended intellectual engagement with a particular question or topic. It must demonstrate not only an ability to write to an acceptable standard but, just as importantly, an ability to think to an acceptable standard. You are required to research the relevant issues, and to show evidence of that research in the form of appropriate reference and quotation. You are asked to query and evaluate all that you read and, through a critical engagement with it, develop your own opinions and ideas. These ideas must be argued and substantiated by rational means, and in a logical order. Your argument must have a clear structure. You will lose marks for errors in spelling or grammar. Your essay will be assessed on the following criteria: The quality of the research completed on your chosen topic The quality of the insights into your topic that you display The quality of the analytical and critical thinking you display The quality of the arguments you present and the evidence you use to defend them The originality of the insights and arguments that you display The quality of your writing style (the clarity and elegance with which you present material and arguments) Appropriate adherence to scholarly conventions Grammar and spelling. Mark: 42/50 (H1). Why the subject lost 0.1 of a mark is because there is no clear rubric as to what is actually expected of you and where you could lose marks. I found little to no comments and many ticks throughout my first assignment and lost 20% of the overall mark. What is also important to note is that Dr. Kamal gives the Major Essay topics in Week 3 of Semester, and it is due during the examination period. It is the first assignment you receive, so you may as well start working on it!! I had to do it in between my CHEM10004 (Chemistry 2) and PSYC10004 (Mind, Brain and Behaviour 2) exam, which only gave me 5 days to complete it all! It was stressful indeed. Interestingly, you receive the final assignment first, so finishing that and giving yourself a lot of time to practice is important. A note about scaling: Everyone in the subject received a 1 mark bonus added to our final grades, which could push change the overall letter grade. For me, my overall mark for the assignments was 81/100 which was then bumped up to 82 for the subject. Overall, a fantastic subject and an interesting breadth! This was my first breadth and I really enjoyed it. I would recommend that you do not slack off in the subject, especially with the assignments. It is not as easy as a H1 as one would like! But with a bit of effort and practice, you could definitely score highly Hydroxyl « Last Edit: July 21, 2019, 11:14:08 pm by Hydroxyl » 2016: Biology [41] | Further Mathematics [42] 2017: Chemistry [36] | Mathematical Methods [38] | English [44] | Psychology [50 + Premier's Award] ATAR: 98.25 2018 - 2020: Bachelor of Science (Psychology) — The University of Melbourne 2018: BIOL10004 | CHEM10003 | PHYC10005 | PSYC10003 | BIOL10005 | CHEM10004 | ISLM10002 | PSYC10004 2019: ISLM20003 | ARBC10005 | BCMB20002 | PSYC20006 | PSYC20008 | ANAT20006 | PHYS20008 | PSYC20007 2020: ISLM10003 | NEUR30003 | PSYC30013 | PSYC30014 | ANAT30008 | PSYC20009 | PSYC30020 | PSYC30021 ~ My Success is only from Allah ~ #### AlphaZero • MOTM: DEC 18 • Forum Obsessive • Posts: 350 • $\Gamma(z)\Gamma(1-z)=\frac{\pi}{\sin(\pi z)}$ • Respect: +154 ##### Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings « Reply #736 on: December 08, 2018, 09:57:45 pm » +6 Subject Code/Name: MAST10009 Accelerated Mathematics 2 Workload: Every week: > 4 hours of lectures (1 hour each) > 1 hour practice class Assessment: > 2 written assignments (10% total, equally weighted) > Mid-semester Test (10%) > Examination (80%) Lectopia Enabled: Yes, but only the lecture slides. The lecturer uses the whiteboard so it's best to attend. Past exams available: Yes, 10 available (2009 to 2018) plus many MAST10006 Calculus 2 and MAST20026 exams (see comments for explanation). Textbook Recommendation: None. The lecturer provides his own text guide, which is essential. It's available at the university Co-op Book Shop. Lecturer(s): Prof. Barry Hughes Year & Semester of completion: 2018 Semester 2 Rating: 4.5 out of 5 Your Mark/Grade: First Class Honours (H1) Comments: Important Notes: MAST10008 Accelerated Mathematics 2 is the second of two subjects in the first year accelerated mathematics stream. Taking both MAST10008 Accelerated Mathematics 1 and MAST10009 Accelerated Mathematics 2 is equivalent to taking the three subjects MAST10006 Calculus 2, MAST10007 Linear Algebra and MAST20026 Real Analysis. MAST10008 Accelerated Mathematics 2 covers all of MAST20026 Real Analysis, and the remaining parts, (which is pretty much all of) MAST10006 Calculus 2 (where the rest would have been covered in MAST10008 Accelerated Mathematics 1). The accelerated mathematics stream requires a minimum raw score of 38 in VCE Specialist Mathematics, or equivalent (roughly, top 13%). Just like MAST10008 Accelerated Mathematics 1, I thoroughly enjoyed this subject and was by far, my favourite subject of the semester. Students should be careful though. MAST10009 Accelerated Mathematics 2 is much more difficult in comparison to MAST10008 Accelerated Mathematics 1. This subject develops the theory behind many very important parts of mathematics in mostly chronological order. The content here is covered very quickly, and it is highly unlikely that at students will not digest everything upon first presentation. There are even comments about MAST10009 Accelerated Mathematics 2 being one of the hardest first year subjects due to its pace, and because it covers around 1.6 subjects worth of material. It will be very important that you stay on top of things and are studying regularly. This subject is very unforgiving if you fall behind even for strong mathematics students. That being said though, taking the subject is has been an amazing journey, and I strongly encourage students to take it if they are up for a rewarding challenge. Lectures: Barry is very interesting and delivers lectures very well. However, given the sheer amount of content that needs to be covered, sometimes, he necessarily needs to skip a few details, and so you have to teach yourself (as well as utilising consultation regularly). This is the only reason I didn't give this subject a 5 out of 5. Barry essentially uses lecture slides and walks you through the concepts. (All notes are in the text). He then does the examples on the whiteboards (which can sometimes be frustrating given the whiteboards are not recorded). You should take notes only on the examples. You can annotate your text if you like, but not much more is required. Your focus should be on listening and understanding what Barry is saying. Practice Classes (Tutorials): Tutorials were awesome, though since the questions are essentially from the text, if you are prepared, this class can be pointless. Nevertheless, it can be fruitful to answer questions again with a tutor watching your logic and reasoning so that they can make any necessary corrections. In this class, you complete a set list of questions in groups on the whiteboards. Selected hints / solutions are found at the back of the book, but you will find them useless if you don't understand the content in the first place. You should consult your tutor and/or utilise consultation hours should you need assistance. Assignments: All assignments are handwritten. The questions on the assignments are generally of high difficulty. Although it will seem like some are easy, do not be fooled. There are small nuances everywhere to catch those who are not focused. Like most mathematics at university level, assignment questions are not the same as exam questions, and so it's important that you do not start assignments the night before they are due. The questions are not necessarily straight forward and trust me, Barry will make sure you have thought about it for days before coming up with a solution. Mid-semester Test: The mid-semester test might just be the worst score you will ever get on a mathematics test. If you are not prepared, you will not score well at all. The test contains content from the first 20 lectures (or first 5 weeks) of the semester. It's 45 minutes long, and is generally around 40 marks. (40 marks in 45 minutes as opposed to 40 marks in 60 minutes in VCE). Examination: Worth 80%, this is a massive assessment. You have no calculator and no notes. Only a pen is required. The exam, unlike the mid-semester test, is much more straight forward if you have done the work prior to it. The exam is always designed so that it is relatively easy to pass, but hard to score well in (just like MAST10008 Accelerated Mathematics 1). Overall, I think MAST10009 Accelerated Mathematics 2 is a very rewarding subject if you put in the effort. It's also a subject that is really the turning point in most students' mathematics education. After completing the first year accelerated stream, students generally come out with a deeper appreciation for higher mathematics. « Last Edit: January 14, 2019, 10:27:29 pm by dantraicos » 2015$-$2017: VCE 2018$-$2021: Bachelor of Biomedicine and Mathematical Sciences Diploma, University of Melbourne #### abc12345j • Victorian • Forum Obsessive • Posts: 222 • Respect: +44 ##### Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings « Reply #737 on: January 15, 2019, 05:46:39 pm » +3 Subject Code/Name: BCMB30004 Cell Signalling and Neurochemistry Workload: 3 x 1 hour lectures per week, 1 x 1 hour tutorial per week, 1 x 2 hour computer laboratory (once early on in the semester) Assessment: 2 x Mid Semester tests (10% each), 1 x completion of the computer laboratory (5 % and basically a pass/fail hurdle), 1000 word assignment (20%) and Final exam (55%) Lectopia Enabled: Yes, with screen capture. Past exams available: Yes, there were two past exams provided (with solutions) Textbook Recommendation: No prescribed (essential) textbooks, but I found the recommended textbook (Cell Signalling: principles and mechanisms. By Lim, Meyer and Pawson) to be quite useful in clarifying key concepts. Lecturer(s): Heung-Chin Cheng, Justine Mintern, Marie Bogoyevitch, Ian Van Driel, Harshal Nandurkar & Carli Roulston Year & Semester of completion: 2018, Semester 2 Rating: 4.5 Out of 5 Your Mark/Grade: H1 Comments: This is an excellent subject which, although content-heavy, definitely complements a wide array of science majors such as Neuroscience, physiology, immunology and biochemistry. It delves into the nitty-gritty of various biochemical signalling cascades that occur in a multitude of contexts in the human body. Topics covered include signalling pathways for the innate immune response, glycogen metabolism and its regulation, post -translational modifications, protein ubiquitination and degradation, cell autophagy and neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinson's disease and Motor Neurone disease. I particularly enjoyed the occasions when this subject delved into highly topical and practical subject matter; for instance, the 'guest' lectures from Professor Nandurkar surrounding causes and treatments for chronic myeloid leukaemia were fascinating, as were Dr Roulston's lectures on the causes and prevention of strokes. In this sense, the highly applicable nature of this subject to many fields in the health sciences makes it a subject that is of incredible value for those looking to gain a deeper understanding of cell signalling before undertaking a postgraduate health sciences course. The assessment for this subject is relatively straightforward. The mid-semester tests each consist of 8 multiple choice questions (worth 80 marks), as well as a short-to-medium answer question worth 20 marks. Although these tests cover a lot of content, if you keep up to date with your study you shouldn't have many problems at all as most of the questions in my experience are easily doable if you have a solid understanding of the lecture notes. The computer lab at the start of the semester introduces you to 'Molsoft' software, which allows you to investigate protein structure and amino acid sequences in great detail. All you have to really do is turn up and follow instructions, and you should get an easy 5%. The assignment is based on one of three research topics (you get to choose which one you do), and is in an essay format. There is a one hour tutorial explaining your chosen topic and what you need to do to complete the 1000 word essay. While it seemed slightly daunting at first, the research here isn't too difficult as you can find most of the papers you need to cite via a google search. I chose Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (Motor Neurone Disease) as my topic, and we were given a research paper (in which an experiment was undertaken) to analyse as part of the assignment. The exam is probably the biggest hurdle that prevents students from doing well in this subject. There is a lot of content to revise, and many students simply aren't prepared for the sheer amount of detail that they require you to know. All content is assessable, and there are 10 multiple choice questions (worth 25% of the marks), while the rest (75%) comprises medium-answer questions. I found that the past exams were a decent guide as to the difficultly of the questions and level of detail they expect from you in your responses. Ultimately, I would definitely recommend this subject to anyone with a biochem-related major or who is looking to enter a health sciences course. This subject is highly applicable to a range of topical issues in medicine, and provides an in-depth understanding of many cell signalling process at the most fundamental level. « Last Edit: January 15, 2019, 05:50:06 pm by abc12345j » ATAR: 99.40 VCE English (50) #### abc12345j • Victorian • Forum Obsessive • Posts: 222 • Respect: +44 ##### Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings « Reply #738 on: January 15, 2019, 06:30:29 pm » +3 Subject Code/Name: POLS30019 Australian Foreign Policy Workload: 2 x 1 hour lectures per week, 1 x 1 hour tutorial per week Assessment: A 500 word report on a tutorial debate (10%), a 1500 word research essay (40%), a 2 hour final exam (50%) Lectopia Enabled: Yes, with screen capture. Past exams available: Yes, but the earliest one was from about 6 years ago so they weren't terribly relevant. Textbook Recommendation: All readings are provided via the LMS Lecturer(s): Allan Patience (also the tutor for all tutorials), Richard Tanter Year & Semester of completion: Semester 2, 2018 Rating: 5 Out of 5 Your Mark/Grade: H1 Comments: This was without a doubt the best politics subject that I studied at Melbourne Uni. The subject matter is very interesting and contemporary, and both of the lecturers (particularly Allan) are highly engaging presenters and experts in their field. The course, as its name suggests, looks at the world of international relations from the perspective of Australian foreign policy makers. Topics covered include Australia's military alliance with the US (ANZUS), our (historical and present) relationships with China, Japan and Indonesian, Nuclear proliferation, global challenges such as climate change, human rights and Australia's multilateral engagement. The weekly tutorials take the format of a debate, in which two students from the class are assigned a side (affirmative or negative) and must argue their case in front of the class on a particular topic (such as 'The ANZUS alliance is in Australia's national interest'), irrespective of their personal view on the topic. After the two students have presented their cases, discussion is then opened up to the rest of the class. In the week after your debate topic, you must write up a 500 word report on your case, the arguments that you presented, and those that were raised in opposition to your point of view, and explain how the resulting tutorial discussion changed or affirmed your point of view on the matter. These tutorial sessions were really enjoyable and a great exercise; Allan would always ask you probing questions and you really need to know your stuff to be able to justify your point of view. Although Allan has rather strong opinions on certain matters and is definitely 'left of centre' politically, he always gives all participants a fair hearing and welcomes contrary points of view and vigorous debate. In terms of the research essay component, you are given a list of potential essay topics from which you are to pick one. The task itself is pretty straightforward, and like most politics essays, so long as you make a clear argument that is supported by evidence (ie. the academic literature, including assigned readings), you should do well. The final exam is a two hour long sit down exam in the Royal Exhibition Building, and you must write two 1000 word essays in this period of time. One of the questions is compulsory (a very general essay question which asks you to discuss three major challenges facing Australian foreign policy makers), while the other question is specific to a topic covered in the lectures and readings (there were about 13 or 14 to choose from if I can recall correctly). This effectively means that you do not have to study every aspect of the course to be well-prepared for the exam; I would advise that you specialise your revision such that you know 3-5 topics back to front, which should be more than sufficient to cover all bases. As the exam is a sit-down, closed book exam, there is no need to reference any readings or literature- all that is required is that you answer the questions with a sophisticated argument. All in all, this subject was an absolutely pleasure to study. I cannot recommend it enough, particularly to anyone interested in Australian politics and foreign affairs. Although I completed this subject as a 'breadth' subject, I must warn you that it is not a 'bludge' subject where you can do little work and expect to receive an easy H1. If you do end up deciding to do it, prepare to work hard and critically engage with the material! ATAR: 99.40 VCE English (50) #### beaudityoucanbe • Adventurer • Posts: 5 • Respect: +1 ##### Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings « Reply #739 on: June 19, 2019, 12:00:26 am » +4 Subject Code/Name: ANCW30011 Underworld and Afterlife Workload: One 2 hour seminar per week and weekly 1-2.5 hour "lectures" (explained below) Assessment: 3 Forms of Assessment: 1) Document Analysis 500 words 15% due week 5 2) Research Essay 2000 words 45% Due Week 8 3) Take-Home Exam 1500 words 40% Due during the examination period (this semester was released 17th June 9am and due 18th June 11pm) Lectopia Enabled: No? There arent normal lectures, but weekly videos Past exams available: No, no exams were available but they are very simple questions and easy to write Textbook Recommendation: There is no text book, they release their own 'textbook' which has all the readings for the week (which is all on LMS) Lecturer(s): Parshia Year & Semester of completion: 2019 Semester 1 Rating: 4 out of 5 Your Mark/Grade: (Optional) Document Analysis H3, Research Essay H2B, Essay TBD Comments: Ok, so this is my very first review so bear with me... Plus I'm an accounting major so did this as a breadth **NOT AN EASY H1 IF YOU HAVE NO EXPERIENCE IN HISTORY ESSAY WRITING** Lectures: The lectures are recorded in multiple 20 minute sections with Partia delivering the material. The delivery was interesting and he had some very interesting points. These lectures provide the first step to understanding the material, its kinda of like giving you some background knowledge and he explores some key parts of the reading material (i watched the lectures and took notes, then read the material). Seminars: Every week, you really have to read all the prescribed materials otherwise you will be completely and utterly lost. The class is 100% discussion and you will be lost in it all if you haven't read the materials or watched the lectures. Writing down EVERYTHING can be incredibly helpful and will help a bit (not very much for me) for the first two assessments but is an incredible asset (yea i do accounting...) for the exam. The seminars can be look at great or a waste of time sometimes Partia will initially ask basic questions about the material to kick off our thinking then will bring out some 'complex' questions (still many are veeerrrryyyy simple) where you will discuss in a small group and then "present" back to the class. The class environment in this semester was incredible. I've never experienced this before in commerce subjects. Everyone on your table backs you up with your arguments if you struggle, even other tables will politely 'butt in' to add or dispute (then at the end kinda attacked you when you make some friends so it was great!). This can really get you thinking and analysing the texts but the second hour will get incredibly draining because the groups present the exact same info and will quickly get repetitive (a lot of us worked the first hour then did our own work in the second). Assessment: 1) Document Analysis: was based on one week, i think week 4? but was straight forward. I really struggled with the writing i think because i have never written anything like these before. 2) Research Essay: You're given 5 questions from the first half of the semester and write on one of them which are all based on one different week of the semester. I got a good grasp on the writing a few days before it was due so my first half was utter shit, then got really good, then i got drained from working on it for so long and it became shitty again. 3) Take Home Exam: Wow this was so easy (i am still waiting for my grade). It requires NO research and (I'm quoting from the LMS and Parshia) "it doesn't require original ideas". For week 7 onwards, i cannot stress how important it is to look ahead and choose 2, 3 even 4 weeks that you find most interesting and take FURIOUS notes throughout. I mean FURIOUS. Write absolutely every breath and every letter down. With the lectures, write it all down word for word. When you have the exam released COPY AND PASTE. I did absolutely no preparation for the exam and it was a breeze writing it because all the info i had for it was from discussion and lecture. You are expected to use primary sources and secondary sources from the LMS (everything you've already read). My favourite week was week 12 where you assess similarities in contemporary films and ancient myth (i found this incredibly interesting). I recommend reading the last week in advance, writing down the movies and watch them! It would definitely help as i haven't watched some of the movies i talked about so used knowledge from the lecture, seminar and readings. Overall, its a really interesting subject and I've learnt a lot of really interesting information. Its honestly a pointless subject (for me, but i can 100% see its merit if you're an arts student) but i am quite glad I've done it. It quickly turned from a joke subject to one that i actually wanted to do the work for 6/7/19 UPDATE - OVERALL 70% « Last Edit: July 06, 2019, 09:21:49 am by beaudityoucanbe » #### beaudityoucanbe • Adventurer • Posts: 5 • Respect: +1 ##### Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings « Reply #740 on: June 19, 2019, 12:33:40 am » +3 Subject Code/Name: ACCT10002 Introductory Financial Accounting Workload: One 2 Hour Lecture, One 1 Hour Tutorial Assessment: On-line Quiz (1) Individual 2% On-line Quiz (2) Individual 3% These are quite annoying. I did poorly on the second one because it was unclear ho to fill it out (to me at least). I never liked online quizzes and would've much preferred a 10% MST or a second assignment Practice Set Assignment Individual 15% I messed this up big time. I think a lot of students did. No explanation for how to use the accounting software (Xero) was provided, only like four 5-minute videos. I followed those and got it all wrong (ended up getting 7/15). Then when i frantically did it all manually, i got it all 100% correct which really hurt but i got some consolation knowing i messed up from the software not knowledge. Tutorial attendance/participation 4% Tutorial random exercises 2 x 3% =6% Tutorials are painful (explained later) End-of-semester exam 70% Lectopia Enabled: Yes, with everything recorded. Other lecturers wouldn't record the second screen and would draw on it or explain stuff but everything was recorded. Past exams available: Yes, 6 exams with solutions were provided! Textbook Recommendation: Recommended: Carlon, et al (2018), Financial Accounting- Reporting, Analysis and Decision Making, 6th Edition, Wiley. I didn't get it and don't feel very disadvantaged at all Lecturer(s): Warren McKeown - great lecturer. Knew he had to compete with Noelsy and was great. I enjoyed listening to his lectures Year & Semester of completion: 2019 Semester 1 Rating: 4.5 Out of 5 Comments: Overall its a repeat of IFA, with a lot of information repeated and with a little more detail Lectures: 5/5. Warren was great and his slides were awesome. Had perfect amount of info and can add dot points from what he says. The lectures were very robust and had so helpful. He explained everything very clearly. Tutorials: i absolutely dreaded them. My tutor struggled to get through the entire tutorial work and was very slow in getting through it. When he asked questions, NO ONE ANSWERED. 0 discussion was had, it got to the point where i grew so sick of it and was answering pretty much every single question which sped it up. I only showed up for the 10% and to get my answers and leave. The tutorials are released a week before and were quite helpful. I found them quite straightforward. I highly recommend doing it all and consolidating your knowledge from the answers and tiny discussion had in the class. There are a lot of questions but they are broken into 3 categories: "REQUIRED to be completed before tutorial", "SHOULD be completed" and "MAY be discussed". I just did them all The random exercises is just one question from one week of the tutorial so it isn't very hard to complete it and get a good mark for em. Should be a guaranteed 9% if not 10%. Week by Week Outline of Content Introduction, Conceptual Framework and External Reporting Double Entry Recording Accrual Accounting and Adjustments Inventories Receivables Non-Current Assets Liabilities Equities Share Issues/Changes in Equity Statement of Cash Flows Accounting for GST Course review and Revision questions #### M909 • Forum Obsessive • Posts: 232 • Respect: +45 ##### Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings « Reply #741 on: June 21, 2019, 03:06:26 pm » +4 Subject Code/Name: ECOM30001 Basic Econometrics Workload: 2 × 1 Hour Lecture per week, 1 × 1 Hour Tutorial per week Assessment: 2 × Group Assignments, 10% each 1 × Mid Semester 40 minute Multiple Choice Exam, 10% Tutorial Participation, 10% (5% Attendance, 5% attempting pre-tute work) 2 hour End of Semester Exam, 60% (Hurdle Requirement) NB: Lecture/tutorial content and assignments/exams are identical to the masters subject with the same name (ECOM90001), however masters students don't get tutorial participation marks and instead their exam is worth 70%. This subject and ECOM20001/Econometrics 1 are also a non-allowed subject pair. Lectopia Enabled: Yes, with screen capture, although I think in a lecture theatre with dual screens you may miss out on some of the stuff currently being projected. You'll have access to everything, but this may make the actual lecture a little less clear. Past exams available: 2018 final exam and practice questions for the final and mid sem exam provided, all with extensive solutions. 2016 past exam also available on library website, but no solutions. Textbook Recommendation: No mandatory requirements, but lectures reference Principles of Econometrics, 5th ed by Hill, Griffiths, and Lim. I was able to find the 4th ed online, and barely used it. A few others are also recommended in the subject guide, but it's all optional and buying any textbook is definitely not necessary. Lecturer(s): Andrew (Andy) Clarke Year & Semester of completion: Semester 1, 2019 Rating: 4 Out of 5 Your Mark/Grade: H1 (85) Comments: Overall I found this to be an interesting and well-organised subject. Some of the content was fairly difficult to grasp, but the assessment itself was not too bad at all, and mainly required knowledge/understanding of the various properties and procedures taught, and well as interpretations. It was often stressed in lectures that we don't need to reproduce the complex proofs and algebra presented, and that it was just there so we could see where things came from. R is the language used, which is a plus as this is one of the languages used more in the "real world". Downloading R studio (it's free ) is very recommended, if not vital. However, you're not expected to come up with your own code or anything, you'll pretty much just need to copy certain aspects from the lecture slides and/or tutes for the assignments (which can done in groups, but I'll assume no one who's taking the time to read subject recommendations wants to be "that person" who doesn't contribute ). Major topics were: -The Basic Linear Model (Statistical properties, hypothesis tests, model specification) -Dummy (Indicator) variables -Heteroskedasticity -Autocorrelation -Time Series -Stochastic Regressors (Issue of Cov(X,ε) ≠ 0) -Panel Data -Count Data -Binary Outcomes Lectures Involved being talked through the slides/theory, with examples that often included R output. Extra accompanying handwritten notes were also often used and posted to the LMS. Andrew was a great lecturer and explained things well, although (as is the case with most uni subjects) extra time is needed to review, process and understand everything. There was quite a lot to sort through in the lecture slides which made reviewing it a bit harder, but it wasn't a major issue. Tutorials Very R focused. You're given access to the questions and R script beforehand and expected to use the script to attempt to answer the questions, which the tutor will take the class through. Don't worry if you don't get everything before the tute. I openly admitted to my tutor I wasn't on top of everything in terms of understanding the tute stuff and still got full marks for attending all the tutes and trying the questions beforehand. My tutor explained things very well, sometimes even better than in lectures. I definitely got value from attending, beyond the 10% participation marks. However, given most of it was done on R, I felt most the tutorial questions weren't that helpful for exam revision. Note the first tute doesn't count towards your participation mark, and is pretty much an easy intro to R session, reviewing some basic statistical concepts you're expected to know like correlation and types of functions. Assignments Can be done in groups of 1-4 with people in your tutorial. Despite the horror stories you hear about group assignment, I honestly found doing it in a group helped with certain things I didn't understand yet, although everyone contributed fairly which isn't guaranteed to happen (But if your first group isn't good you don't have to work with them on the second assignment). Assignments were a bit more challenging than the exam IMO (although this may have been from my understanding during the semester vs during the final exam), and as mentioned above required you/your group to create your own R script, which must be added as an appendix to the assignment. That being said, marks were pretty good overall (From LMS, assignment 2 average was 30.73076/35, median was 31.00/35). Mid Semester Exam I expected this to be online since it was MC and so many other economics subjects do this, but it was treated as a formal mid sem in Wilson Hall under exam conditions. Focused on the 'Basic Linear Model' topics. Practice MC questions were provided, which were much harder than the actual test. 40 minutes was more than enough time to complete and check everything. I believe Andrew said the median was 10/12 and the mean was close to that too. Final Exam Focuses on the major topics listed above from Dummy Variables onwards. Apart from undertaking F- and t- hypothesis tests, the content from the mid semester exam is not directly examinable. As was the case with the mid sem, the practice questions provided were much more difficult and theoretical than the actual exam. The 2018 exam was a fair representation of what to expect. However, as stated on the LMS, exams solutions are intentionally far more extensive than what is needed for a "perfect answer". No real surprises on my exam. The focus is on understanding/explaining properties of the models/variables, the implications of violating the standard MR assumptions, basic calculations/interpretations and tests. R output is provided to answer questions, but everything you need from it is very straightforward (especially since you've seen it all semester). There is also a formula sheet (for the mid sem too), meaning you don't have to remember the exact detailed of formulae/models, although you still need to know how to use them. « Last Edit: July 03, 2019, 04:29:00 pm by M909 » 2015-2016: VCE 2017-2019: BCom (Economics) @ UniMelb 2020 -: MCEng (Electrical) @ UniMelb #### M909 • Forum Obsessive • Posts: 232 • Respect: +45 ##### Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings « Reply #742 on: June 23, 2019, 01:53:48 pm » +3 Subject Code/Name: PHYC10003 Physics 1 Workload: 3 × 1 Hour Lecture per week 1 × 1 Hour Problem Solving Class (Tutorial) per week 8 × 2.5 Hour Labs throughout the semester Assessment: 10 × Assessable Online Homework Tasks, 15% 8 × Labs incl Pre-lab work, 25% (80% Attendance and 50% Overall Result Hurdle Requirement) 3 Hour End of Semester Exam, 60% Lectopia Enabled: Yes, with screen capture Past exams available: Yes, past 11 years, all with solutions Textbook Recommendation: Prescribed text is Fundamentals of Physics, 11th ed by Halliday & Resnick. Can be easily found online. I used it a little bit at the start of semester and found it helpful, but got too busy to keep up at the end and feel (pre-mark release) I survived without it. A lab/logbook is necessary to purchase ($8 from a website linked on LMS before the semester started). The handbook is also available to purchase (Also \$8), but the entire content of the handbook can be found on the LMS so purchasing a hard copy is not vital.

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

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 1, 2019

Rating:  4 Out of 5

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

-Mechanics
-Waves and sound
-Optics
-Gravitation
-Special relativity

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

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

Labs
The total mark allocation is slightly complicated, but basically each of the labs is 3.125 marks (25/8). Of this, 20% (I.e. 0.625 marks) is from the pre-lab work. From this, half (0.3125 marks) is given for submitted the pre-lab questions on time (At least 10 min before the lab), and the other 0.3125 marks is from your actual answers. The pre-labs were 2-4 very basic questions, usually multiple choice, on the content of the prac and/or the basic physics theory behind it.

In the actual labs you'd work in groups of 2-3 to complete the experiment, collect results/data and write a report. Definitely read the pages in the handbook on the relevant lab before, but don't stress if you don't understand everything as your demonstrator will talk you through it at the start and show the group how everything works. The handbook also contains an example prac which you can base your report structure on, as well as what to do and key points to note down as you do each particular experiment.

As someone who struggled with the practical report writing side of science in high-school, it got easier as the semester progressed, even though I often felt like I was missing stuff and/or not doing it right. Also, half the marks were basically participation marks (For following safety procedures, working well as a team ect.), so if you turn up and do your best/engaged with it, you'll probably get a decent mark regardless. I thought I completely failed the first lab (I struggled with what to write, barely talked about the physics concepts, and my group got 30 m/s^2 something for Earth's gravity!  ) and ended up with 70% for the actual lab work (I.e. Not including the pre-lab stuff), which only improved from there. Prac content didn't always relate to what was currently being taught it lectures, but everything you needed to know is provided in the lab book and is fairly straightforward.

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

Exam
Follows a pretty standard structure from year to year, so having all those past exams available is very helpful (not that I had time to do most of them...). A formula sheet with most the stuff you need is provided. A major exception to this was the constant accelerations formulae from VCE + a few others - I derived and/or memorised the constant acceleration ones them and wrote them on my exam at the start which worked for me. Therefore, focus more on understanding what everything means and the actual physics definitions and explanations behind things (There are worded questions too). Fortunately not a hurdle which was a relief during the lead up to the exam, but the exams are honestly not too bad; 3 hours was also more than enough time.
« Last Edit: July 04, 2019, 03:39:24 pm by M909 »
2015-2016: VCE
2017-2019: BCom (Economics) @ UniMelb
2020 -: MCEng (Electrical) @ UniMelb

#### hums_student

• MOTM: SEP 18
• Forum Obsessive
• Posts: 363
• Respect: +493
##### Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #743 on: June 24, 2019, 12:42:10 pm »
+5
Subject Code/Name: MULT10018 Power (Arts Foundation)

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

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

Lectopia Enabled: Yes, with screen capture

Past exams available: Nope

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

Year & Semester of completion: 2019 Semester 1

Rating: 4 Out of 5

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

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

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

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

Lectures

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

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

Tutorials

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

Skills Workshops

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

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

Assessments

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

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

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

Final thoughts

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

In short, if you're into political and philosophical debates, or are aiming for law/politics, then Power is the one to go for.
« Last Edit: July 04, 2019, 11:03:17 pm by hums_student »
VCE: Literature, History, Politics, Chinese, Methods, Chemistry (98.35 ATAR)
UNI: Bachelor of Arts (Economics / Pols & Int'l History)

#### hums_student

• MOTM: SEP 18
• Forum Obsessive
• Posts: 363
• Respect: +493
##### Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #744 on: June 24, 2019, 12:58:42 pm »
+5
Subject Code/Name: HIST10012 The World Since World War II

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

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

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture

Past exams available: Nope

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

Lecturer(s): Hannah Loney

Year & Semester of completion: 2019 Semester 1

Rating: 5 Out of 5

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

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

Lectures

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

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

Tutorials

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

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

Assessments

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

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

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

Please remove if not allowed: In the spoiler tag I've put the 2019 exam topics to give a general idea of what to expect.
.
Spoiler
1. What was the most significant social transformation in the period from 1945 to the present, and why? What were its international implications?

2. What was the most significant political transformation in the period from 1945 to the present, and why? What were its international implications?

3. What was the most significant economic transformation in the period from 1945 to the present, and why? What were its international implications?

4. What was the most significant cultural transformation in the period from 1945 to the present, and why? What were its international implications?

5. What was the most significant turning point in the period from 1945 to the present, and why? What were its international implications?

Final thoughts

The World Since WWII is a brilliant and highly rewarding subject which really teaches you all about how our present world became the way it is. While it is a history subject, it is also highly political and I'd also recommend it for anyone wishing to major in politics / international relations. It was hands down the best subject I did in semester 1 (though as a history/politics nerd I might be biased), and in my honest opinion I'd really just recommend it to anyone and everyone.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2019, 06:12:29 pm by hums_student »
VCE: Literature, History, Politics, Chinese, Methods, Chemistry (98.35 ATAR)
UNI: Bachelor of Arts (Economics / Pols & Int'l History)

#### hums_student

• MOTM: SEP 18
• Forum Obsessive
• Posts: 363
• Respect: +493
##### Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #745 on: June 24, 2019, 01:33:37 pm »
+5
Subject Code/Name: ECON10004 Introductory Microeconomics

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

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

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture

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

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

Lecturer(s): Phil McCalman, Tom Wilkening

Year & Semester of completion: 2019 Semester 1

Rating: 2 Out of 5

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

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

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

Lectures

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

Tutorials

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

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

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

Assessments

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

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

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

Exam

The exam is worth 60% and you must pass the final exam to pass this subject. It's 2 hours, with 15 minutes reading time, and is split into 3 sections:
- Multiple choice (30 marks, 10 questions)
- Short answer (30 marks, 2 questions)
- Extended response (60 marks, 2 questions)

In 2019, two questions from MCQ were straight-up COPY AND PASTED from previous exams, so it's definitely worth doing as much practice exam questions as you can to prepare.

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

Final thoughts

Intro Microeconomics is not the most interesting subject. The content is intuitive but the maths is slightly more difficult. Don't collude too much on assignments as it'll backfire during the exam. It's probably one of the more useful breadth subjects, but the subject isn't a cruise.
« Last Edit: July 04, 2019, 11:02:08 pm by hums_student »
VCE: Literature, History, Politics, Chinese, Methods, Chemistry (98.35 ATAR)
UNI: Bachelor of Arts (Economics / Pols & Int'l History)

#### hums_student

• MOTM: SEP 18
• Forum Obsessive
• Posts: 363
• Respect: +493
##### Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #746 on: June 24, 2019, 02:31:29 pm »
+5
Subject Code/Name: ECON10005 Quantitative Methods 1

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

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

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture

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

Lecturer(s): John Shannon, Wasana Karunarathne

Year & Semester of completion: 2019 Semester 1

Rating: 3.5 Out of 5

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

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

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

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

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

Lectures

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

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

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

Tutorials

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

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

Assessments

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

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

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

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

Final exam

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

Final thoughts:

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

Finally, I thought I'd end this review with the lecturer John's favourite catchphrase:
"How do you avoid making mistakes? By never making a decision."
« Last Edit: July 04, 2019, 11:01:32 pm by hums_student »
VCE: Literature, History, Politics, Chinese, Methods, Chemistry (98.35 ATAR)
UNI: Bachelor of Arts (Economics / Pols & Int'l History)

#### Bunjil

• Posts: 10
• Respect: 0
##### Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #747 on: June 27, 2019, 11:13:22 am »
+3
Subject Code/Name: ANAT30007: Human Locomotor Systems

Workload:  3x 1 hr lectures a week and 11x 3hr pracs (no pracs in first week)

Assessment:  2x MSTs (10% each) Theory exam (40%) Practical Exam (40%)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture. Although it's useful to attend and Varsha generally brings in bones/models for her lectures and discusses them and these aren't on the lecture capture

Past exams available: No, Varsha uploads a few sample questions before each MST and before the prac exam

Textbook Recommendation:  Drake Et Al (2009) 'Grey's Anatomy for students' and Moore et al ' Clinically oriented anatomy'

Grey's is given for free on the LMS but didn't really use it or any other resources, lecture notes and Anatomedia are sufficient

Lecturer(s):

- A/Prof Stuart Mazzone - Neuroanatomy (3 lectures)
- Dr. Varsha Pilbrow -  Bones and muscles of arm, forearm, hand, hip/thigh, leg and foot. Shoulder Complex. Elbow complex, wrist and hand joints, hip and thigh joints, knee complex, foot and ankle joints. Evolutionary anatomy (16 lectures)
- A/Prof Quentin Fogg - Lumbar Spine and back,, cervical spine and neck, nerves/vessels of upper limb, nerves/vessels of lower limb, clinical anatomy of the back (7 lectures)

Clinical Lecturers
- A/Prof Martin Richardson - Surgical Repair of the Upper/Lower limb (2 lectures)
- Dr David Ackland - Bioengineering the musculoskeletal system (1 lecture)
- Dr Alex Rhodes: Imaging the Musculoskeletal system: Upper/Lower limb, back (3 lectures)
- Dr John Bui - Imaging the musculoskeletal system 1: principles (1 lecture)

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 1, 2019

Rating:  4.5/5

Thought I'd give a more updated review of this subject as a few things have changed since the last review not that long ago. Human locomotor systems is basically just a continuation of some of the 2nd year prequisite subject, but you go into a lot more detail. Before I say anything else my biggest warning about this subject is it can get full on. if you don't have a good memory DON'T do this subject as it's basically just rote memorising a lot of structures, their origin insertion and function, with a little bit of clinical signifiance. If this sounds boring or unappealing to you then turn away now because this subject won't be kind to you.

Basically, the lectures can be roughly broken into 5 topics - Neuroanatomy, back/neck, upper limb, lower limb and evolution. Throughout the semester you also receive clinical lecturers from actual clinicians/researches. These are themed generally on surgical approaches and radiology and clinical applications of the anatomy you learn. More on these later.

So you start the semester relatively easily with Stuart in neuroanatomy. This is basically just a continuation of the neuroanatomy covered in 2nd year but with a greater emphasis on the neural interface that enables us to locomote (aka move). The content is very interesting, and Stuart teaches it at an amazing pace and makes it pretty easy. As mentioned in previous reviews, if you're doing/ have done Principles of Neuroscience you'll be advantaged during this section as you do a whole lecture series on movement in principles. Questions for this section were fair and reasonable and nothing seemed untoward. A great start to the subject!

Next comes the back/neck with Quentin. The lecture on the back is extended from last year but the lecture on the neck is new (and imo a very confusing concept). Quentin is unfortunately the reason i deducted -0.5 for this subject as I found him a confusing and bad lecturer. Firstly instead of taking the time to review concepts before going into more difficult stuff he just says 'this should be familiar from last year' and then jumps into it. He also seems way more interested in anatomical research than teaching the content (he seriously spent 25 minutes talking about Pub Med in his back lecture...) and to cap it all off his lecture slides are just pictures with no headings/organisation and just jumps around so it's hard to follow. Quentin's one saving grace is his questions on assessment were generally fair and reasonable, just make sure you take the time to review your anatomy from 2nd year as its all assumed knowledge and he won't review it. Again in terms of content, the back lecture was fairly simple (know your structure of a vertebrae like the back of your hand, seriously) but the neck lecture was a nightmare for be as it was very confusing and poorly taught. Anatomedia and google in general are great resources to supplement your knowledge with these topics.

Following this, you move into the real meat of the subject with Varsha when she takes you through the upper and lower limbs. The limb lectures are generally broken down into bones/muscles of a region (e.g. arm/forearm) and joints (shoulder/elbow/hand/knee/hip/leg/ankle/foot). This section of the course is information rich, and probably the most overwhelming part for a lot of students. The content is very interesting and Varsha does a good job at bringing in a lot of clinical applications for the anatomy she teaches (e.g. about fractures of a bone and the implications this has on endangering nerves/vessels) - my advice would be to understand these clinical applications as a lot of them appear in MSTs! Expect to memorise ~ 100 different muscles, their origin, insertion action and nerve supply over the course of this section as well as many different ligaments, joint types and clinical applications during this section of the course. Even though this section is tough, Varsha has a way of making it seem bearable. She is a genuinely lovely human and it seems shes listened to past cohorts and has slowed down her speaking when delivering lectures. Her coordination is a real highlight of this subject, and I was surprised to hear that the coordination of this subject was critiqued in the past. Varsha was always very prompt in responding to emails, and kept us duly informed and was always receptive to us during the semester. As mentioned before, it's probably best to attend Varsha's lectures in person as she brings in bones/models and talks about them and you can get a bit lost if you're watching online as it isn't captured.

Quentin jumps in between the transition to upper and lower limb to deliver 4 lectures on nerves and vessels of the upper and lower limbs. Again, nothing changes here with respect to his previous lectures and I even think he replaced Jenny Hayes who used to teach this part... anyway the content here is not too hard and Quentin does present a nice table of the Nerves at the start of his lectures (memorise this!)

The final block of lectures are delivered by Varsha and cover evolutionary anatomy. This is either hit or miss depending on your interests, I personally found it very interesting and it was a nice way to end the semester. Varsha is clearly passionate about evolutionary skeletal biology as this is what her resarch is on. Nothing left of field here and the assessment questions were again fair.

Throughout the semester there are also external clinical lecturers delivered by clinicians and researchers. The topics of these are radiology, surgery and bioengineering the musculoskeletal system. These were interesting but it was hard to know what to take away from them (and this thought was definitely echoed by the cohort). Varsha stressed to 'know the anatomy' of the content rather than the details. There was quite a few hiccups from the radiology lectures as they were cancelled/moved around due to personal circumstances from the lecturer but Varsha was very prompt in letting us know and trying to fix it. The cliicians were very nice people and even offered for us to view them in surgery/ visit their research lab! My only piece of advice in terms of assessment would be to know the pros/cons of the imaging modalities and the radiology lectures well in general as these seemed to be the main clinical lectures emphasised on in assessment.

Now the part everybody's been waiting for - the practicals. The practicals in this subject are probably the best part of this subject and the amazing resources the university gives undergraduates the access to is a great privilege and really makes you feel like you've acquired a unique experience and knowledge. There are 11 practicals throughout the semester (none in the first week), and these can either be Workshops or dissections.

Workshops (5 of them) are generally done before dissections and are basically the exact same as 2nd year anatomy practicals. You're assigned to a group and rotate around 5 stations looking at prosections and discussing them with demonstrators. The demonstrators are clearly quite knowledgeable (and I believe they're all doctors/med students) but I found a lot of them quite hard to understand due to accents and their quiet voices. Sometimes these workshops can feel like a baptism by fire because of the vast amount of knowledge they expect, but Varsha stresses that the workshops and dissections are at a level above of the required knowledge of the subject. Demonstrators were happy to receive any questions and were generally quite helpful. Dissections (6 of them) are everybody's favourite and the reason most people do this subject. For 6 weeks you dissect the upper/lower limb muscles and joints (anterior/posterior) with each dissection broken up into a region that you get to do with a partner (e.g. muscles of the anterior forearm). These are overseen by demonstrators, who oversee 2 cadavers (So two groups). These are really brilliant and it's super helpful to see the anatomy in 3D and actually 'do' the cutting yourself to see what structures lie where. At the end of dissections, the demonstrators label structures with flags and ask you to identify them. Very helpful. You get a chill workshop on evolutionary anatomy at the end of semester where you look at skulls/ other parts of our ancestors/apes. Really cool and Varsha brings in some findings from her own research. Very interesting and a nice way to end the semester.

The two MSTs are pretty straightforward as long as you review your stuff and know it pretty well. The first MST covered Neuroanatomy, back/neck and upper limb whereas the second MST covered the lower limb.

There are two exams at the end of semester, a theoretical exam covering lecture content and a practical exam. The theoretical exam consists of 30 MCQ (10 of which were on evolutionary anatomy) and 6x long answer questions (15 marks each). Varsha let us know what topics the 6 long answer questions would be and this year they were neuroanatomy, upper limb, lower limb, back, nerves/vessels and evolutionary. Thought this exam was very reasonable and pretty fair. Hand hurt at the end though. The practical exam was a bit more difficult to prepare for. This was 100 MCQ with images of prosections/disections with various labels. Throughout the semester Varsha stressed that the practical exam would be more 'identify the functional relevance' rather than just identify but I found a lot of it was 'identify structure 1' lol. Easier than i was expecting but unsure of how I went

All in all, a really great, interesting and rewarding subject. The access the university gives you to cadavers is pretty much unparalleled and almost stands a standalone reason to do this subject. Be warned of the immense workload and memory-intensive content. Good luck!

#### Sutanrii

• Fresh Poster
• Posts: 3
• [Sleep Time] ∝ 1 / (1 + [# of Assignments]) ^ 2
• Respect: +2
##### Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #748 on: June 29, 2019, 04:04:50 am »
+3
Subject Code/Name: MAST10008 Accelerated Mathematics 1

Workload:  For each week: 4x 1-hour lecture, 1x 1-hour tutorial, 1x 1-hour lab

Assessment:  6 Assignments (3 Online, 3 Written, 15% total equally weighted), MATLAB Test (5%), 3-hour Final Exam (80%)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture (document camera)

Past exams available:  Yes, Final Exam 2009-2018. Short answers (excluding proofs) provided only for 2017 and 2018. As well as one practice MATLAB test.

Textbook Recommendation:  You're provided with a textbook (Elementary Linear Algebra, Applications Version (H. Anton and C. Rorres), 11th edition, Wiley, 2013.) and a problem booklet + short answers on the LMS. But tbh the lecture slides and the problem booklet are sufficient to prepare you for the exam.

Lecturer(s): Dr. Alexandru Ghitza

Year & Semester of completion: 2019 Sem 1

Rating: 5 out of 5

This subject covers the entire Linear Algebra, and a bit of Real Analysis (Introduction to Number Sets and Techniques of Mathematical Proofing) and Calculus 2 (Two-Variable Calculus). However, this subject will serve as an alternative subject to only Linear Algebra as a prerequisite. While the subject pace is fast as the content goes from week to week, I find the pace of each lecture to be pretty standard.

Lectures
Alex released the lecture slides every week on the LMS with empty spaces left for us to fill in as Alex wrote on them during the lectures. Everything that Alex wrote on the empty spaces was recorded with the doc camera so it isn't essential to attend the lecture in person.

Considering that Alex used to teach Calculus 1, I believe he's knowledgeable in explaining arcane mathematical terms to most of us that have just finished high school, and I do feel that he delivered the lectures with great clarity. He usually explained each concept slowly to make sure everyone understands. Moreover, I also find Alex's lecture to be enjoyable as he occasionally cracked some jokes. The atmosphere of the lecture overall is light-hearted. "Time flies when you're having fun" - Alexandru Ghitza 2019

I'd recommend doing the problem booklet after each lecture to reinforce the understanding of the concepts taught in lectures, which will be useful in the preparation for the final exam, especially since the exam is worth 80%.

Tutorials / Problem Solving
We received a tutesheet from our tutor, sit in groups of 3 or 4 and solve the problems on the whiteboard. The tutor will go around the class to check on our workings and give feedback. At the end of each tute, we received the solution to the problems, which would also be up on the LMS at the end of the week.

MATLAB / Practical
After the tute, we would walk with our tutor to the computer lab, where each of us was given a lab sheet. We'd then work on the lab sheet using MATLAB while exploring ways we can use MATLAB to solve numerous LinAlg problems. One thing to note about AM1's MATLAB test rather than LinAlg's is that there will be one extra question requiring us to write an 'm-file'. This can be either beneficial (for those with prior programming background) or hellish (for those who don't). But overall, I don't find the MATLAB test to be hard if you're familiar with MATLAB's functions and commands, even if you don't have a prior programming background.

Assignments
I find this aspect of this subject to be the hardest and the most stressful. In this semester, we have 3 online and 3 written assignments. The online assignments were a breeze as long as you understand the content. The written assignments especially the first one, however, are much harder. Often the questions will require you to ponder for quite some time before you'll have the slightest idea of how to start. My tips in doing these questions are to write down everything you know that is relevant to the question and work your way from there.

Final Exam
This will probably be the most daunting aspect of this subject for the cohort due to its weighting being 80%.

I think different people have different methods of studying for a maths exam, but I find grinding the past papers to be the most useful and efficient. I find the exam itself to be straightforward as most of the questions have a similar style as past exam papers and the problem booklet (which justifies my reasons for doing past papers and the problem booklet).

Conclusion
As part of the accelerated stream, this subject covers 4 lectures per week (instead of the typical Maths subject being 3). So in total, there will be 48 lectures throughout the semester. If you're considering whether to take this subject or LinAlg, I think it depends on how much you like Maths and how willing are you to dedicate one extra hour of lecture per week for this subject. Difficulty wise, this subject isn't much harder than LinAlg. We did cover the same topics and the exam questions I believe were similar. The difference in the difficulty would only come in the assignments and the MATLAB test.

The additional lecture per week and the additional contents from RA and Calc2, however, will require you to put more time into studying for this subject. But I don't find them to be particularly difficult compared to the LinAlg contents.

With that being said, I'd recommend this subject for those who enjoy maths and are up for a challenge. While this subject has a higher workload and requires additional effort, the satisfaction of completing this subject is rewarding. (If you're planning to take Accelerated Mathematics 2, I would highly, highly encourage you to take this subject).
« Last Edit: December 09, 2019, 02:57:59 am by Sutanrii »
University of Melbourne 2019-now: Bachelor of Science (Electrical Systems)
Higher School Certificate (HSC) 2018: Maths Extension 2, Maths Extension 1, Physics, Chemistry, SDD, ESL

#### M909

• Forum Obsessive
• Posts: 232
• Respect: +45
##### Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #749 on: July 02, 2019, 08:47:30 pm »
+1
Subject Code/Name: ECON30001 International Trade Policy

Workload:  2 × 1 hour lecture per week, 1 × 1 hour tutorial per week

Assessment:
2 × 50 minute within semester tests (At the approx 1/3 and 2/3 mark of the semester), 15% each
1 × 1000 word essay, 20%
2 hour end of semester exam, 50% (Hurdle)

Lecture Capture Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture, but did not capture extra writing on the white/blackboards

Past exams available: A sample exam with the same format as the final was provided with solutions. I was also able to get the 2017 and 2015 exams from the library website without solutions.

Textbook Recommendation:  Formal recommendation is International Trade, 2nd Edition by Robert C. Feenstra and Alan M. Taylor. Not at all compulsory and only recommended if you're really struggling with the maths/derivations in the lecture slides.

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 1, 2019

Rating: 4.5 Out of 5

Comments: Even though I'm writing this after finding out I somewhat bombed the exam (Got a H1 grade in both tests and the essay), I found taking this subject to be a really positive experience and have no regrets ,although I've already got the WAM needed for entry into the masters I want to do so long as I pass everything, so I'm probably currently a lot less stressed about marks than others... - Really well organised and interesting subject. Also, keep in mind that despite this being a "policy" subject, most the content was maths based, with not as much discussion on real world events as you might expect. That being said, you still get a great opportunity to apply the theory to the real world in the essay.

The first part (a bit over half) of the subject was pretty much all about the 3 major models covered, Ricardian, Specific Factors and Heckscher-Ohlin, with a few other concepts like terms of trades introduced. The second half of the subject involved smaller concepts/models covered at a quicker pace, such as Offshoring, the Increasing Returns to Scale model, Economic Geography, Import Tariffs, Politics and Trade and the Environment. Your knowledge of the prerequisite subject Inter Micro/ECON20002 is also very important so be sure to revise the major concepts like utility, comparative advantage, MRS, MRTS, PPF ect. if it's been a while.

Ultimately, if you enjoyed Inter Micro, was comfortable with the maths in it, and also have some interest in trade (even if it's just for a specific issue), I would highly recommend this subject.

Lectures
Pretty standard experience. Lecture slides contained the theory, explanations and examples/discussions. Reshad explained things well, and generally wrote a few things on the boards to help illustrate the content better. This was not captured, so in person attendance was required for the full experience, however you could get by without it.

Tutorials
While there were no participation marks and full solutions were released, I definitely got benefit from attending and found my tutor explained things really well. You get the tute questions beforehand, and will probably get the most out of the session trying them beforehand, but it's not the end of the world if you don't. The tute questions were not too difficult once you were on top of the content.

Tests
The assessable content for each test would be narrowed down to a set number of lectures/tutorials about a week before (basically just a range based on where we were at in the subject), and a practice test with solutions was also provided for the second test. This assessment was honestly very helpful for me personally, because when I was falling behind at the end of the semester the second test pretty much forced me to finally understand the Specific Factors and Heckscher-Ohlin model. Overall I found the tests to be very fair (Pretty much 70% or so on the basics, then the rest on harder extension type questions). Full questions/solutions were provided after each test was marked, as well as an extensive feedback report was outlining the mark distribution and common mistakes. Marks were also scaled if overall results were below the usual average (Everyone got +2/30 for the first test). The distributions for both were somewhat unusual, and had a peaks of around 25-30% of people getting H1s and another 25-30% of people getting Ps.

Essay
As mentioned above, this is the main opportunity to apply the content in this subject to the "real world". Although I'm not super political and mainly did this subject because I got the impression it'd be "mathsy", you can pick pretty much any trade topic of interest, so I was able to find something I was interested in and able to engage with. You're also able to complete this essay individually or in pairs.

You're asked to email your/your group's topic and what you intent to discuss to Reshad by the start of 6 week, and after that date he will begin to email replies assessing the suitability of the topic and making suggestions. I found his reply really helpful, and appreciate that he obviously put thought/research into his response. You're also provided with a rough template, example and detailed guide including a criteria, so there's plenty of great resources even if you're not entirely sure how to approach it. Research and referencing are required too, but most ITP students would have most likely already done OB, so the referencing wasn't too much of a learning curve.

Exam
Definitely a lot tougher than the overall standard of the tests, especially the extension type questions. There were still enough of the basics so that you'd comfortably pass the hurdle if could do the tutes (plus a 50% weighted exam is relatively low), but expect a fair amount of new/challenge questions to pop up. There were also some worded questions (mainly based on the models), as well as references to theorems from lectures you needed to know.
« Last Edit: July 02, 2019, 08:51:16 pm by M909 »
2015-2016: VCE
2017-2019: BCom (Economics) @ UniMelb
2020 -: MCEng (Electrical) @ UniMelb