Login | Register

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

August 15, 2020, 06:12:34 pm

Author Topic: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings  (Read 1207107 times)  Share 

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

honlyu

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 12
  • Respect: +1
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #795 on: February 23, 2020, 08:53:48 pm »
+5
Subject Code/Name: ACCT10002 Introductory Financial Accounting

Workload: one 2-hour lecture and one 1-hour tutorial per week

Assessment: Online quiz 1: 2%, Online quiz 2: 3%, Individual online assignment: 15%, Two random tutorial exercises: 2x3%=6%, Tutorial participation: 4%, Final exam: 70%

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture

Past exams available: Four past exams from 2017 to 2019 semester 1 were available, with detailed answers provided

Textbook Recommendation:  Like most other commerce subjects, lecture slides are well enough.

Lecturer(s): Warren Mckeown

Year & Semester of completion: 2019 semester 2

Rating: 4 out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: 92

Comments:
With more focus on comprehension, IFA requires much less rote learning than ARA. That being said, the time spent on this subject should be no less. But IFA is definitely far more enjoyable if you’re good with numbers.

Lectures:
The pace of lectures in this subject, like ARA, is rather slow. However, some decent effort is definitely needed in order to fully grasp the concepts and methods you learn. Warren managed to put everything across with great clarity and lecture slides were well structured. This should be a huge bonus for those torn by the ambiguities and contradictory concepts in ARA. And if you’re worrying about what topics are examinable and have no idea where to start your revision towards the end of the semester, Warren stated EXPLICITLY what would and would not be on the exam in the revision lecture. This was really helpful to me as the few most tedious topics were thrown out, which saved me heaps of time.

Tutorials:
IFA tutorials are, so to speak, not of much use. At least that’s the case with mine. There was a selection of exercises from the pre-tut question sheet to be finished before every tutorial, which my tutor never checked. Almost all questions were numerical, so you’re guaranteed to get them right as long as you’ve fully understood the lecture and haven’t made any careless mistakes. Tutorials were predominantly in the form of teamwork, in which you would discuss pre-tut questions with your teammates and sometimes write on the whiteboard. Usually too much time was assigned to every problem. Added to that my group always went through the question really fast as our answers were pretty much the same. So most of the time we were just chit chatting, waiting for other groups to finish. After that, my tutor did not provide explanations. Instead, she would ask every group to share their answers with the class. And the only thing you’ll get is just the final answers unless you ask for extra illustrations. What is more, at the end of every week, detailed solutions to all pre-tut questions would be provided, which rendered tutorials even more meaningless.

Online quizzes:
Make sure that you’re familiar with everything from relevant lectures before you click start, especially the second one. The first quiz (2%) was rather easy, in which I had plenty of time to check my answers against lecture slides. The second one (3%), however, was much harder. And I felt a bit pressed for time as I didn't do any revision before the quiz. But you shouldn’t worry too much about them. At the end of the day, they’re only worth 5% in total. It is also noteworthy that a few questions could be on non-examinable topics. In such cases, just follow what the lecturer says.

Online assignment:
This is a 15% individual assignment in which you’ll need to use an accounting app called Xero to record transactions from invoices provided and produce income statements and balance sheets. The assignment includes two parts. In the first part, everyone gets the same invoices, so you can compare answers with your mates to ensure you get full marks. Invoices in the second part would differ from person to person. If you’re majoring in accounting, I’d recommend you to take some time to figure out everything about the app because obviously you’ll encounter something similar in your future study. For those doing it as an elective, especially aspiring actuaries, which I myself am, a quick tip is to skip all formalities and focus on the numbers only. If you did that, the assignment would come off as much simpler.

Participation and random tutorial exercises:
Your participation mark should be a solid 4 out of 4 as long as you go to every tutorial. Random tutorial exercises are simply two questions picked from the textbook by the tutor and they should be a breeze compared with online quizzes. If you’re unsure about your answers, just double-check with your tutorial groupmates and then you’ll be well set for full marks.

Exam:
The exam is half theory and half practical. There are 200 marks on the exam paper, which is because Warren doesn’t want to give half marks (not really sure about that). In terms of difficulty, the exam was rather fair except a 20 mark question asking us to identify for ten scenarios related concepts and provide explanations. The real problem with the exam is time. I finished the exam only about 5 minutes early, which was the slowest among all subjects I did last semester. My advice for revision is to focus on past papers as they offer a lot of insight into the actual exam. If you scrutinise every one of them, you’ll notice some types of questions that appear quite frequently. Make sure you’re super familiar with them so that you can save some time to ponder on the harder questions in the exam.


Eric Patrick

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Respect: +2
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #796 on: February 23, 2020, 10:30:37 pm »
+4
Subject Code/Name: ECON10004 Introductory Microeconomics

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

Assessment: quiz 5%, assignment 1 10%, assignment 2 15%, tutorial attendance and participation 10%, final examination 60% (with hurdle)

Lectopia Enabled: Yes, and can be crucial to learn this subject well.

Past Exams Available: There are four past exam papers provided.

Textbook Recommendation: It is still not mandatory to purchase the textbook (like many other commerce subjects), but might be useful since some explanations in the lecture slides are not clear enough.

Lecturer(s): Tom Wilkening

Year & Semester of Completion: 2019 Semester 1

Rating: 3.0/5.0

Your Mark/Grade: 91

Comments:

1. Lecture
Overall, Tom is a good lecturer. There are two lecture streams in this semester with two different lecturers. Compared with the other lecturer whose lectures were regarded as the "most boring class for the entire semester" by one of my friends, Tom's lectures were more intellectually rich and entertaining. He would add some interesting cases inside the lecture slides instead of plainly talking about the theories and diagrams for the whole class. The problem is with Tom's pattern of speech. He frequently rushed in the lectures and could not make his pronunciation and expression clear whenever the lecture content was overloaded and/or time was limited. However, I would reckon that I was able to make sense of his logic when I spent some time listening to the recording. As long as you can get adapted to his way of teaching, listening to Tom's lectures should be a valuable experience.

2. Tutorial
My tutor for this subject is a bit incompetent (hence I cannot and do not want to remember his name). There were at least two times in the semester such that he forgot to bring the tutorial sheets to the class and aimlessly explained the questions on the whiteboard which made no sense at all! However, even though there was nothing to look at, he still required students to discuss the "questions" as a group and blamed us for not being passionate and participative. What the hell should we discuss about? Due to these facts, I did not go to two tutorials and lost 2 out of 10 for tutorial attendance and participation. I also found out that he sometimes failed to explain the questions accurately and even failed to recognise his mistake hence correct it. This can be really misleading since a lot of tutorial questions are highly related to exam questions with similar styles. For me, the tutorial sheets were not useful resources for preparing the final exam, and I did not perform well in the exam as a result. For students who have a nice tutor, tutorial for this subject can be vital such that you should prioritise the revision of tutorial questions rather than going through the lecture slides at first.

3. Assessments
For most (commerce) students, the microeconomics quiz is the first piece of assessment that you will have during the university career, thus this quiz may not be such straightforward as you think (like what we have prior to university). The quiz questions are mostly case-based, so you should not only familiarise yourself with the pertinent knowledge but also analyse the cases correctly to choose the right answers. There are eight questions in total with a 25 minute time limit; however, I reckon that this time limit is not as sufficient as you think, since some cases can be really tricky. Overall, it is hard to get all answers correct, but the average should not be very low; after all, this is a MCQ and you can discuss the questions with your fellow students - a good start point for university assessments.

The two individual assignments are my favourite part of this subject. Indeed, they are a bit time-consuming, especially when we need to use PowerPoint to draw the graphs (very inconvenient); but the reward for such effort is fascinating - both assignments were marked out of 60 and I have never seen any of my friends who got a grade below 52. The fact is that there are correct answers for each of the assignment questions (mostly calculation-based), so you can check your answers with others to make sure they are correct. There are also no formatting issues or any similar (horrible) requirements, so marks are awarded for correct answers only.

In terms of tutorial attendance and participation, I cannot give any recommendations since my tutor is awkward as mentioned above. Overall, this ought to be an easy mark to get.

The final exam for this subject is a perfect reflection of how you are going for the semester. Although the MCQ part of the final exam can still be tricky like the MCQ assessment, students may not struggle with the short- and long-answer questions, since every question should have appeared in the lecture slides. As long as you listen to each lecture carefully and understand the main topics, there is no excuse not to work out these final exam questions. This also helps us identify what to review in the SWOTVAC - we can mainly focus on the most important theory, diagram or model in each lecture since they are the only stuff that may appear in the final exam. Tutorial sheets and past exam questions are good resources in terms of exam preparation (though I did not go through them in detail), since what you see there should be what you will see in the exam.

A final point to make is about mathematical issues. Compared with macroeconomics that you will learn later, microeconomics focuses more on mathematical stuff, so make sure you are familiar with them and have a workable calculator in the final exam.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2020, 11:54:58 pm by Eric Patrick »

Eric Patrick

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Respect: +2
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #797 on: February 23, 2020, 11:48:36 pm »
+6
Subject Code/Name: FNCE10002 Principles of Finance

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

Assessment: online assessment 10%, tutorial attendance and participation 10%, mid-semester test 20%, final examination 60% (with hurdle)

Lectopia Enabled: Yes, and its usefulness may depend on different persons.

Past Exams Available: There are two sample exams but not quite helpful in indicating what will be expected in the exam.

Textbook Recommendation: The required textbook is highly recommended since most students have no finance background and the book makes the topics more understandable.

Lecturer(s): Asjeet Lamba

Year & Semester of Completion: 2019 Semester 1

Rating: 4.5/5.0

Your Mark/Grade: 93

Comments:

1. Lecture
The accent of the lecturer is strange - I have to acknowledge this fact at first. However, once you can focus on his expertise and professionalism, this will not be an issue anymore. The lecturer may not be such impassioned, but the lecture content is still intellectually abundant, and I really enjoy how dedicated Asjeet Lamba is when delivering the lectures. Each week's lecture slides should include roughly 60 pages with almost a quarter of them focusing on case studies. If you are not so eager to gain more finance knowledge (like me), you can definitely skip these cases since they are not examinable. On the other hand, if you want to broaden your horizon, try to listen to the lectures or the recordings carefully, otherwise it is hard to grasp the principles and theories underlying the cases. For the other knowledge, looking through the lecture slides may be enough, hence there is no need to listen to the lectures in great detail. The textbook is a good resource such that it gives a deeper explanation of some theories and calculations.

2. Tutorial
Cameron is the best tutor I have ever had, and I am looking forward to having him as my tutor for future subjects if possible. He can always focus on the main topics of each lecture but deviate from the lecturer's teaching style. For example, every week he would compile his own tutorial notes instead of following the lecturer's instruction on how to teach in the tutorial. His tutorial notes were highly condensed with every point focusing on HOW TO GET MORE MARKS. For all calculation-based questions, he would work out general formulas such that we can use directly to get the correct answer. For those theory-based questions, he would usually construct an answering structure guiding us how to explain the theories concisely but get the full marks. After reviewing his tutorial notes each week, the knowledge became quite straightforward, and overall POF is a very easy subject for me.

3. Assessments
The online assessment is very easy and almost every student can get a full mark. The questions were released a week before submission, and everyone would get exactly the same questions. In this case, we would have a week to work them out and compare our answers with others. As long as we are careful and do not forget to do it, how can we lose mark in this assessment?

Another generous mark comes from the tutorial assessment. What you need to do is going to the tutorial and submitting each week's pre-tutorial questions. So long as you have submitted enough of those questions, you can get a full mark! The quality of the work does not count, so literally you can just copy some stuff from the lecture slides and enjoy a full mark!

The mid-semester test is a bit tricky, and a large number of students do not perform well based on past experience. One thing you need to be careful with is the wording of the questions - the beginning year, ending year and amounts can be misleading and interfere with a correct calculation, and Asjeet likes to put redundant information into the questions to confuse us. Another thing relates to the formula sheet. Since there is a formula sheet for both the mid-semester and final exams, students may not be quite familiar with the formulas. Under the exam condition, some students struggle with which formula to use, since the formula's name is not provided and they have never looked at the formulas in detail (since they think they do not need to memorise). Students should also practise how to use the calculator efficiently, which can help them save a lot of time in the exam.

The final exam is fair enough with most questions focusing on calculations and a reasonable distribution of difficulty. Again, if you are familiar with the formula sheet and the operation of the calculator, you can easily get most calculations correct. The difficult point is with the MCQ part of the final exam, since many of the questions require a thorough understanding of the relevant theories. During the exam viewing session, I found that I had got five of those questions incorrect, since I did not review the theories at all. The sample exam papers are generally not useful, since the questions do not resemble the real exam questions, thus do not think you can perform well in the exam if you can get all sample questions correct.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2020, 11:54:30 pm by Eric Patrick »

hums_student

  • MOTM: SEP 18
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 363
  • Respect: +492
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #798 on: July 03, 2020, 12:53:27 pm »
+5
Subject Code/Name: HIST20013 The Holocaust and Genocide

Workload:  1 x 1.5 hr lectures and 1 x 1 hr tutorials a week

Assessment: 
   - 1,500 word primary document analysis (40%)
   - 2,500 word research essay (60%)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available:  N/A

Textbook Recommendation:  N/A

Lecturer(s):  Angel Alcalde

Year & Semester of completion:  2020 Semester 1

Rating:  4 out of 5

Your Mark/Grade:  H2A (76)

Comments:

First, just a disclaimer that I did this during the crazy online semester. That said, there weren't major differences - all assessments and content were the same - we did miss out on a visit to the university archives, so unfortunately I cannot review that part of the subject.

Content

The first part of the subject looks at theory. It covers the history of violence and genocide and the reasons behind why they take place, specifically political, cultural, economic, and even psychological factors. Different roles are also covered - victims, perpetrators, bystanders, witnesses, and "grey-zones".

The second part of the subject is on specific case studies. The major one is (obviously) the Holocaust. Other main examples include Armenia, Indonesia, and Cambodia. Lesser known cases  are covered briefly, as well as examples of mass killings which aren't fully recognised as genocides.

Assessments

Document analysis: 1,500 words worth 40%. You get a choice from 10 documents, most of which are in regards to the Holocaust. You have to analyse the document with reference to 1-2 themes using the document as evidence.

Research essay: 2,500 words worth 60%. You can choose from a list of prompts or make your own (though you must get approval). The prompts are broad and focus on the theoretical side of genocide studies, and you must refer to at least two case studies.

Final thoughts

I really enjoyed this subject and overall found the content to be interesting and engaging. History-wise, it doesn't go into any of the actual genocides in detail, not even for the Holocaust. It's a pretty great elective for international relations / anthropology students due to the heavy political and societal focus.
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: +492
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #799 on: July 03, 2020, 12:56:21 pm »
+5
Subject Code/Name: HIST20069 Modern European History

Workload:  1 x 1.5 hr lectures and 1 x 1 hr tutorials a week

Assessment: 
   - 1,500 word primary document analysis (40%)
   - 500 word tutorial journal (10%)
   - 2,000 word research essay (50%)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available:  N/A

Textbook Recommendation:  N/A

Lecturer(s):  Gregory Burgess

Year & Semester of completion:  2020 Semester 1

Rating:  2 out of 5

Your Mark/Grade:  H1 (80)

Comments:

Overall, I found this subject to be badly organised - and this was before the university even shifted to online learning (this was the Corona semester). My other complaint is that I found the content delivery to be on the dry side, even though 19th/20th century Europe is something I'm personally interested in.

Content

The subject begins with the French Revolution in 1789 and ends with the outbreak of WWI in 1914. The topics covered (in order) are:
   - French Revolution
   - Napoleonic Wars
   - Industrial Revolution
   - Revolutions of 1848
   - Nationalism
   - Developments in science and culture
   - Unification of Germany and Italy
   - Paris Commune
   - European imperialism
   - Outbreak of war
If you plan on studying European history any further, then the content would be highly useful.

Assessments

Document Analysis: 1,500 words worth 40%. You get a choice from 3 primary sources on a particular topic (in 2020, it was the Industrial Revolution) and respond to it like you would with any history source analysis.

Research Essay: 2,000 words worth 50%. There are roughly 10 topics to choose from covering all aspects of the subject. All of the topics were incredibly broad (for example - this was one of the prompts - 'Discuss the impact of the French Revolution in Europe').

Tutorial Journal/Presentation: 500 words worth 10%. Sorry, can't be of much help here. It was replaced with a discussion board post in our year due to online arrangements.

Final thoughts

I know I gave this unit a low rating, but I think with proper organisation, it can be a great subject. I just won the bad luck lottery - the subject coordinator actually just wanted to bloody retire but the university "forcibly delayed my plans" (actual quote from Greg) last minute so he was winging it from the start. That, in addition to moving online half way, made this subject one of the least enjoyable ones I've done so far. However, I still recommend this unit, especially to those wishing to study European history further, purely for the content.
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: +492
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #800 on: July 03, 2020, 12:59:34 pm »
+7
Subject Code/Name: ECOM20001 Econometrics 1 (Renamed - previously known as Introductory Econometrics)

Workload:  2 x 1 hr lectures and 1 x 1 hr tutorials a week

Assessment: 
   - 3 x Assignments (15% total)
   - Tutorial (5%)
   - Weekly Quiz (10% total)
   - Exam (70%)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available:  Yes, all exams from 2018 semester 1 are available, plus a sample exam.

Textbook Recommendation:  Introduction to Econometrics, 3rd edition by Stock and Watson. It's not really required, and if you must get a textbook, then any that covers regression would do.

Lecturer(s):  David Byrne

Year & Semester of completion:  2020 Semester 1

Rating:  5 out of 5

Your Mark/Grade:  H1 (95)

Comments:

If you are reading this, chances are you're trying to decide between Econometrics 1 and Quantitative Methods 2. I'll get to that at the end of the post. But first off, some disclaimers:

(i) I did this during the online semester, so our assessments were modified. I wrote this review without factoring in those changes to the best of my ability.

(ii) If you are noticing contradictions between my review and the previous two reviews in this thread, that is because this course was changed in 2018, but those reviews were from 2013 and 2017.

Content

This subject may as well be renamed Regression 101 because that's the entire subject. The first week covers probability and statistics revision from QM1, the rest of the subject is wholly regression based. The topics are:
   - Single linear regression
   - Multiple linear regression
   - Nonlinear regression
   - Time series regression
   - Regression application

Software

For this course, you must learn the programming language R (changed from the previous software Eviews). The additional packages used are 'AER', 'Stargazer', and 'ggplot2'.

Assessments

Assignments: 3 group assignments spread throughout the semester worth 5% each. The assignments all require R and you would need to also submit an index page with all your codes at the end of the assignment. They're mostly maths/computing questions without much writing involved.

Exam: worth 70% and is hurdle like all FBE subjects. The exam is 2 hours long - 10 MCQ (section 1), 3 short answer (section 2) and 3 extended response questions (section 3).
Section 1 - mostly theory based, with some maths
Section 2 - mostly maths based, usually with at least one proof question
Section 3 - maths/computing based, including writing R pseudocode.

Weekly Quiz: 12 quizzes in total. Your 10 highest ones are counted. Worth 10% total.

Tute participation: I mean, this is the easiest 5% you'll ever get. Don't take it for granted. In our year, since it was the *Covid* semester where everything was online, Dave put this 5% to an entire new assignment where we had to write a full report and create an econometric regression model to analyse the effect of easing social distancing restrictions on the spread of Corona. Pray that you don't get anything like that.

Econometrics 1 vs Quantitative Methods 2

Econometrics 1: Depth, quantitative, maths focus
Quantitative Methods 2: Breadth, qualitative, application focus

I highly recommend econ majors to do Econometrics 1 instead of QM2, as in 3rd year you MUST do at least one econometrics subject. If you did Econometrics 1, then the subjects you can choose from are:
   - ECOM30002 Econometrics 2
   - ECOM30003 Applied Econometrics Modelling
   - ECOM30004 Time Series Analysis and Forecasting

But if you did QM2, the only subjects you can do are:
   - ECOM30001 Basic Econometrics (which is essentially Econometrics 1)
   - ECOM30002 Econometrics 2 (but only if you got H2A or above in QM 2)

Final Thoughts

As an arts major with a weak maths background and no prior experience in computing, I went into this subject feeling really unsure of whether I made the right choice of picking this over the renowned WAM-booster QM2. Econometrics 1 is quite a jump from QM1, and the first few weeks were challenging. But by the second half of the semester it easily became my most enjoyable subject. I absolutely loved this subject and highly recommend it to all Commerce and Arts (Economics) students.
VCE: Literature, History, Politics, Chinese, Methods, Chemistry (98.35 ATAR)
UNI: Bachelor of Arts (Economics / Pols & Int'l History)

dahyun

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • that isn't dahyun!!!
  • Respect: +2
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #801 on: July 08, 2020, 09:28:52 pm »
+6
Subject Code/Name: ECON10004 Introductory Microeconomics 
Workload:  2 x 1 hr lectures and 1 x 1 hr tutorials per week.

Assessment: 
  • Multiple choice test (5% of total)
  • Written assignment 1 (15% of total)
  • Written assignment 2 (15% of total)
  • Final exam (60% of total)
Note that the final exam is a hurdle. (50%+ required on the final exam itself in order to pass the subject.)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available:  Yes, a selection of exams ranging back from 2016. (but not all exams from that period, e.g. 2016 semester 2 was not given, but semester 1 was.)

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

Lecturer(s): Professor Tom Wilkening and Jonathan Thong. Tom ran the afternoon stream of lectures, and Jonathan ran the morning stream of lectures. Both lecture streams occurred on Tuesdays and Thursdays. For this review, only Tom's lectures will be included, since I never went/viewed any of Jonathan's lectures.

Year & Semester of completion: 2020 Semester 1 Note that this semester was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Classes transitioned into online learning by the third week of semester.

Rating: 4/5

Your Mark/Grade: H2B :( choked on exam

Pre-requisites: Entry into Commerce, Biomedicine or Science degrees OR a study score of 25+ in Methods otherwise.

Comments: Some background about me: I did VCE Economics but it is not a pre-requisite for this subject (or any at unimelb). With that being said, it does help with understanding early concepts like opportunity cost, price elasticity of demand, demand/supply graphs but expect to go a lot in-depth and learn a lot of new things. I think those that did IB HL Economics will find this course pretty standard (...at least that's what my friend told me...)

 This subject is a compulsory subject for all commerce students, and a pass is required to successfully enroll in ECON10003 Introductory Macroeconomics (another compulsory BCom subject) and ECON20002 Intermediate Microeconomics. With that being said, you'll meet a whole range of people doing this from the arts faculty through the economics stream over there.

Lectures and content
The course itself is well designed and presented in an approachable manner, Tom's lectures often included various tidbits of useful information that didn't appear on the lecture slides. As noted by someone a while back here, Tom's engineering background means that his explanations of any equations here were easily understandable and basically just only told you the useful parts. With that being said, some people did complain about his intonation of his voice but honestly you get used to it. Lectures themselves included examples and definitions, but most of Tom's working out was done on a second projector, but he uploads those as well. Overall, the lectures were sufficient and sometimes entertaining! Both lecturers seem to do a great job.

Tutorials
Tutorials were fine, essentially you break off into small groups answering questions from the tutorial sheet given at the start of the session, and then collate answers while the tutor presents the correct answers. My tutor was pretty good and I am yet to have heard of a "bad" tutor from this semester. These people also mark your assignments and potentially the exam (unconfirmed) so it's always good to build a good relationship with them! Ironically, I almost never showed up to any tutorials after week 5 since I felt the tutorial videos made for international students with incompatible timezones were sufficient.

Assessments
Assessments wise, we had a multiple choice test (5%) consisting of 10 questions that occurred in week 4. This was pretty easy if you've kept up with the work and honestly if you did VCE Economics, you could answer like 8 of them right now...

The first written assignment (15%) occurred just before the mid-sem break, so around week 5. It is an application of the things you've learnt up to this point. It seems very daunting at first, but as you breakdown the questions themselves they get easier. We had around a month and a bit to complete it. I received a 48/50, my best mark in this subject.

The second written assignment (15%) occurred in around week 7-8, and was due around week 11. This is the same as assignment 1 but just on things learnt since assignment 1. This was easier than the first one, but I found myself getting lower on this than the first one. (It seemed like almost everyone else improved however.)

For the previous two assessments, it is highly recommended to consult the discussion boards, Cameron Low (I think he's like the head tutor? no clue) is an absolute saviour in this and in Principles of Finance (review soon hehe) as he answered basically every query anyone had. Definitely the reason why I got such a high mark in my assignments.

The final exam (70%) was of moderate difficulty. I am unsure as to what I got but I ran out of time and had to rush the questions. I think with proper study and doing past papers, you can easily get a 80+ in this exam and hence really, the subject itself.

Concluding remarks
Overall, this is a very well done subject despite the pandemic forcing online teaching. I think this subject would be a lot better if it weren't for the forced transition. Otherwise, a very good introduction to microeconomics and university schooling in general.


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

Commerce @ Unimelb

dahyun

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • that isn't dahyun!!!
  • Respect: +2
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #802 on: July 09, 2020, 02:23:00 pm »
+4
Subject Code/Name: ACCT10001 Accounting Reports and Analysis 

Workload:  1 x 2 hr lecture and 1 x 1 hr tutorials per week.

Assessment: 
  • Tutorial "participation" (4% of total)
  • Assessable tests (6% of total)
  • Written assignment 1 (10% of total)
  • Written assignment 2 (10% of total)
  • Final exam (70% of total)
Note that the final exam is a hurdle. (50%+ required on the final exam itself in order to pass the subject.)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available:  Yes, but only one was given which faithfully represented the final exam itself. More on that later.

Textbook Recommendation: Accounting: Business Reporting for Decision Making, 7th Edition by Birt, Chalmers, Maloney, Brooks, Oliver and Bond. I found the lecture slides sufficient enough but if you want to do more questions or have a deeper understanding, then get this book.

Lecturer(s): Noel Boys

Year & Semester of completion: 2020 Semester 1 Note that this semester was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Classes transitioned into online learning by the third week of semester.

Rating: 2/5

Your Mark/Grade: TBA

Pre-requisites: None...well entry into unimelb...

Comments: This is a compulsory subject for commerce students.
I have no prior experience in accounting but for those who do, Noel will quickly tell you that ARA is quite different and not "all black and white". With that being said, those who did do VCE Accounting or equivalent may have an easier time completing assignments. (balance sheet, cash flow statement etc.) This subject is pretty boring, despite Noel's attempts to spice things up.
 
Lectures and content
Personally I dislike having two hour lectures, but for the most part Noel does a great job at conveying information through. His usage of analogies will keep you awake (somehow tied in a fishbowl or something with accounting) throughout the lectures. His whole demanour is probably the reason why I even watched the lectures anyways...
Content wise, unless you somehow have a passion for accounting, this is a very boring and dull subject but I doubt this will change; maybe I just inherently hate accounting??? Regardless of my opinion, it is an important subject for all commerce students to do as it will offer a glimpse at how businesses record assets, liabilities, equities and more, along with introducing Excel who I feel will be along with me for the rest of my life... :)
Noel himself seemed a lot more pessimistic than usual this semester, but who wasn't. I think he was just about done by the final exam, his last rant is legendary haha...

Tutorials
Tutorials are essentially like any commerce tutorial - you get given questions and you answer them in groups. My tutor was good and my tutorial itself was good as well, so no complaints here. There is a tutorial participation mark (where you had to attend them) but that was waived, and instead it is expected that you complete the pre-tute quizzes (4%). These are pretty easy and honestly you could answer them with common sense half the time.

Assessments
Assessable tests are 4 glorified pre-tute quizzes that are in total worth 6% of the final grade. These have a timelimit of 3 days and are usually opened on Fridays and closed Sunday evening. These aren't hard, but I did miss on the very first one when the COVID-19 panic went super saiyan. But otherwise, pretty chill and as long as you keep up to date, you'll be fine with these.

Assignment 1 (10%): This introduced Excel and essentially is just filling in the Balance Sheet and the Income Statement. While the numbers and timelines are different per student, you could still cross-check with your mates so it shouldn't be too hard. Be careful that you read everything on the instructions sheet that comes with the assignment, as Noel wants your answers in a particular format. He makes a very big deal on this and it is kinda funny when he does go on his rants about students not reading the instructions properly.

Assignment 2 (10%) was formerly a group assignment but was changed to an individual assignment owing from the pandemic. This was just like assignment 1 but with a focus on ratio analysis and 12 multiple choice questions. For some reason, the only thing that was counted towards our final grade here was the 12 multiple choice. These were pretty easy and I got my best mark here (10/12).

Final exam (70%) was the source of most of the ARA controversy you may have seen on Reddit or Unimelb Love Letters, as it was significantly harder than any of the past exams given. While Noel did say that the past exams from previous semesters were not indicative of the actual exam, I don't think anyone was expecting how hard the exam was going to be. The one practice exam that he did give us was a lot easier and I suspect it was just for us to see how the exam was formatted. The final exam consisted of 81 questions, all of which were a mixture of multi-choice, drop-down, and calculations, and 4 unfilled statements. I have yet to meet anyone that got their statements to balance, but I'm sure there are a couple of people that did. I am worried about my mark here since while I did finish it, I don't think I did that well. I'm expecting a H2B/H3 here, but I'll be happy with a P.

Concluding remarks
I think this subject in this semester definitely soured the taste of accounting for all that did it, and despite Noel's best efforts to make this "fun", it is a very dull subject and his exam did not improve my opinion of accounting. It is a shame that we didn't get to see the funny Noel that people often talk about on here, but I hope my review of this subject is a minority from here on.

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

Commerce @ Unimelb

Endosymbiosis

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Respect: +3
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #803 on: July 09, 2020, 05:58:23 pm »
+3
Subject Code/Name: MAST10016 Mathematics for Biomedicine

Workload:  3x one hour lectures per week, 1x one hour practical class per week

Assessment:  Ten weekly written assignments (25%), an oral presentation (5%) and a final written examination (70%)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available:  One past paper is available, but no solutions were available (so frustrating).

Textbook Recommendation:  None. Everything you need to know is in the lectures.

Lecturer(s): James Osborne

Year & Semester of completion: 2020

Rating: 3/5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Having just completed VCE mathematical methods and under the belief that I could kiss maths goodbye forever, MAST10016 came and obliterated my fantasy of a maths-free uni experience. As a first-year core subject, if you are good at mathematics, this subject will not be hard to get a H1 in whatsoever, as long as you keep up to date with lectures and weekly exercise sheets. The nature of the maths is VERY different to what I experienced in VCE, with little to no calculus or complex problem-solving involved. The first week in our tutorial we did a little high-school maths revision exercise, as we begun practicing drawing simple hyperbolas and quadratics and solved some basic derivatives. Other than that, the only other cross-over from VCE is probability, which the entire subject is essentially centred around.

Three topics were explored: population genetics (finding the probability of an 'A' or 'a' allele), enzyme kinetics (investigating the rate of cellular reactions and the role of enzymes and inhibitors in these) and disease modelling (investigating how different types of diseases can be spread throughout the population). Whilst these topics sound quite interesting to a Biomedical student at a glance, as we delve deeper into each topic, personally I found them to be quite mundane and tedious. Whilst James is a knowledgeable, friendly and funny guy, I found that even by the second week, his explanations and derivations went in one ear and out the other - they were simply too hard to follow. If he had simply gotten to the point a lot quicker and emphasised that point, I would have found this subject much easier to follow. There were lectures, particularly towards the end of the course, that I could finish watching and simply have no clue what just happened.

I cannot emphasise enough how useful exercise sheets are. They are what I solely relied on to achieve a H1 in this subject. Because they are harder than tutorial sheets and exam questions, completing these sheets will give you an understanding of the subject that will allow you to complete the exam and assignments with little to no troubles. Sometimes a very similar question would appear on the exercise sheet and the weekly assignment and so you could just go through the workings from the exercise sheet to understand how to do the assignment question. For exam revision, I simply went back and redid all of the exercise sheets and identified all of my areas of weakness, which I found to be a useful method of studying, since there is only one practice exam with NO solutions  >:(

All in all, this subject will be pretty uninteresting and often painstaking unless you have a great fondness for maths. However, the actual content itself is not that hard so a nice WAM booster :)
VCE (2019): | Biology [50] | Chemistry [50] | Psychology [48] | English [45] |
ATAR: 99.40
2020-2022: Bachelor of Biomedicine, The University of Melbourne

tiredandstressed

  • Trailblazer
  • *
  • Posts: 47
  • Respect: +21
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #804 on: July 10, 2020, 06:37:20 pm »
+3
Subject Code/Name: MUSI20149 Music Psychology  

Workload:  No lectures, just watch videos online, there is a 2 hour seminar for discussion but it not compulsory to attend.

Assessment:  10 online weekly quizzes, consisting of four questions (open book, open time) (40%) and a 2000 word written assignment (60%)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available:  No exam, no sample essays were provided

Textbook Recommendation:  N/A

Lecturer(s): Many guest lectures but the coordinators are Dr Elly Scrine & Dr Katrina Skewes McFerran

Year & Semester of completion: 2020 Semester One

Rating:  2.5/5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments: If you’re looking for an easy H1 Music Psych ain’t it. Let me explain.
So yea Music Psych has little to no commitment hours, as long as you do the quiz (in which you have a week to do) that pretty much it for most of the semester. Keep in mind the quiz questions were sometimes ridiculous super broad, and you couldn’t choose between two answers, I guess they do try to make it difficult. Keep in mind each question is worth 1% so try to get as little wrong, and don’t forget to do the quiz because you then lose an easy 4%. So you might be thinking, the weekly quizzes are easy right, why such a low rating. Let’s discuss the essay.
This essay had the least amount of instructions, I legit had no idea what to write. Basically, every week you will go through  different topic, you can choose the topic (or two topics) you found the most interesting and choose this to be the centre of your essay. Based on the topic you chose in your introduction you must identify three key theorists and explain how their works have contributed to the research field in your topic. Then, in your body you must critically analyse three articles and evaluate their research design, research bias and their overall results. The introduction was super unclear I am still not sure if I even wrote what they wanted, the rubric required us to discuss quite a lot but I couldn’t fit it in the word count and just chose not to address the whole rubric. The body was actually interesting to write, each week Dr Kat critically evaluates two articles and she shows us the skills and approach we should take for the assignment, this was helpful. The conclusion required a discussion of future recommendations for any possible research.
My main complaint with the final essay was the lack of clarity we had on we were supposed to write (in the end, yes I did well). They changed the assignment to previous years and with such lack of clarity, I was so confused. I would encourage you to start your essay early (Week 10, because there is plenty of research you will need to do before you write).
Overall, a decent subject I have it little to no effort and still got a H1, it wasn’t easy the essay was stressful, but it does fulfil as a WAM booster.

« Last Edit: July 10, 2020, 09:01:03 pm by tiredandstressed »
2019: Bachelor of Biomedicine @ UoM

M909

  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 231
  • Respect: +45
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #805 on: July 11, 2020, 08:06:12 am »
+2
Subject Code/Name: ELEN90054 Probability and Random Models

Workload: 3× 1 hr lectures per week
1× 2hr Tutorial/Examples Class (Basically just another lecture dedicated to the lecturer doing problem booklet questions, but called a "tutorial" on the handbook/timetabling system. Also normally only went for 1hr)
1× 2hr Workshop

Assessment: 6× 5% Workshops (Basically assignments with a dedicated workshop session)
*2× 10% Tests
*1× 50% Exam

*NB: Usually it is one 10% mid semester test and a 60% exam with a hurdle, but the assessment structure was revised and the hurdle was removed this semester due to Covid-19

Lectopia Enabled: Yes with screen capture (obviously given the circumstances, but I believe they are also normally available for all lectures and the tutorial/examples class)

Past exams available: 3 with numerical solutions only, for both the final exam and mid-sem test

Textbook Recommendation: Probability and Stochastic Processes by Yates and Goodman is recommended and lectures use some examples from it, but it's really not necessary. Lectures and the problem booklet are enough.

Lecturer: Brian Krongold

Year & Semester of completion: 2020, Semester 1 (Online/Covid-19 Semester)

Rating:  5 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1 (86)

Comments: Having gotten a H3 in MAST20004/Probability in undergrad I was worried about this subject so decided to get it over with early on, but fortunately it turned out to be nothing to worry about. Some of the content can get a bit tricky, but overall if you persist and keep up with the problem booklet/lectures, the exam and test/s are mostly doable, at least with Brian taking the subject. Handbook provides a pretty good overview of the content so I won't re-list that here. Brian was also a really great lecturer who explained things in good detail and provided a few extra materials for harder concepts/questions.

My favourite part of this subject was probably the workshops. Despite the name, as mentioned above they were basically assignments which had a dedicated workshop where you'd normally get assigned a partner and start to work on it together (this didn't happen during this semester, but in normal circumstances I highly doubt you'd have enough time to finish it all in the session), then it'd be due a week or so later. They contained a mix of theoretical and MATLAB questions, the latter of which mainly involved setting up simulations. Most people doing this subject would be coming from the BSci Electrical Systems major where Engineering Computation/COMP20005 would have been compulsory, but if you were one of the few people like me who didn't come from the standard pathway, make sure your coding skills are up to scratch unless you want to be relying on a workshop partner. However, having fortunely done COMP20005 as a breadth in undergrad, a decent understanding of this subject would be more than sufficient for the skills required for the workshop MATLAB questions. The simulations meant that you could pretty much verify most your theoretical calculation answers, so while these workshops were usually pretty time consuming, getting full marks or close to it was very doable.

For weeks when there wasn't a workshop assignment, the timetabled workshop session pretty much became standard tutorials where you'd work on problem booklet questions and could ask the tutor for help which was quite helpful, especially before a test or the exam.
2015-2016: VCE
2017-2019: BCom (Economics) @ UniMelb
2020 -: MCEng (Electrical) @ UniMelb

jasoplum

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Respect: +1
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #806 on: July 11, 2020, 01:51:56 pm »
+4
Subject Code/Name: ENGR20004 Engineering Mechanics 

Workload:  3x1 hour lectures, 1x2 hour workshop per week

Assessment:  30% on 3-4 assignments, 15% on MST, 5% on weekly quizzes, 50% on final exam

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with lecture capture

Past exams available:  A couple available on the exam archive but none given. Note that different lectures = different style of questions.

Textbook Recommendation:  None prescribed, Meriam JL and Kraige LG, Engineering Mechanics : Dynamics 7th Edition and HGibbeler RC, Statistics and Mechanics of Materials 3rd Edition recommended on the website but I wouldn't say you need them. Questions for practice are from the textbooks anyways.

Lecturer(s): Christian Brandl for Statics/Solids, Bagus Nugroho for Dynamics

Year & Semester of completion: 2020, Semester 1

Rating:  3.5/5 online. 4/5 if in person.

Your Mark/Grade: 77 (H2A)

Comments:
Note that I took this subject during 2020 where everything's online so it may be a slightly different experience to what others might experience.

There's a lot to go over in this subject but like what you might've heard or seen, this is not an easy subject. It's difficult, no doubt. Maybe the most difficult in my undergrad so far. Yes the likelihood of someone failing isn't impossible. Yes people have dropped out or redone the subject. But don't let that scare you too much. It is possible to get through this subject, it is possible to do well and maybe even enjoy this subject.

CLASSES AND ASSESSMENTS
Lectures
The lectures are taught by Christian for Statics/Solids and Bagus for Dynamics, and are in a format where the first 2 essentially teach the week's content and the third lecture is reserved for examples about what the first 2 lectures teach. In online teaching, the first 2 are recorded and sent at the beginning of the week, and the 3rd is a webinar with the lecturer to ask questions. While you might think that this means there is not as much to learn, trust me when I say that this is a lot, and I mean a LOT of new concepts and content. Something I would recommend is just making sure you redo the questions from the lecture by yourself. It's easy to just go and say "yeah I get this" but until you actually do it, you won't fully understand it.

As for the lecturers I found both Christian and Bagus to be quite friendly and engaging (well at least as well as it could be in online only). I did find Christian's methods and explanations a bit confusing at times. Bagus I felt was better and more clear in his explanations and working out. He also felt really relatable as he would talk about his past experiences as a student and just occasional stories about him, which helped keep the engagement and just made the subject better in general. There were some people that found Bagus a bit confusing, but I would attribute that more to just the dynamics topic itself.

Just a note that the subject content and difficulty can vary between lecturers so you may get a different experience.

Workshops
The workshop structure contains a mixture of prac weeks and non prac weeks. In non-prac weeks, the workshops run similar to that of a 2 hour tutorial, going through assigned questions with your group (explained in a bit) for 2 hours and working together either on the whiteboard, or in the case of online, in breakout rooms. In prac weeks, the 2nd hour is spent instead on the actual prac, which is kind of similar to ESD2 in the way it runs. However, in online classes there is just generally no prac week, instead a video of the experiment which is more of a simulation is sent to be analysed as part of the assignment.

And here is where I emphasise the importance of finding a good group. This is the group you'll be working with for the entire sem, including every week in the workshops and also in all the assignments. I was lucky enough to get really good group that I could work with, and because of that I enjoyed doing the assessments even if some of it was long and tedious. The workshops and breakout rooms were also more enjoyable because of this. However, I can see both the assignments and workshops turning into more of a chore or obstacle simply by having a bad group.

Assessments
The assessments consist of 3-4 assignments worth a total of 30%, a mid-sem test worth 15%, weekly quizzes worth 5% and a final exam worth 50%.

The assignments are what you would expect in engineering and mainly consist of analysing the theoretical parts of a concept and then comparing that with the experimental results. They are a mixture of maths and deriving, problem solving using learnt content and analysis of the experiment with MATLAB. It should be noted that MATLAB is a key component, and can be 30-50% of the assignment, so make sure someone in your group is comfortable with using MATLAB. You have approximately 2 to 3 weeks to do each assignment. It's a decent amount of work so don't leave it till the last day with your group. If you're online, I would highly recommend going into group zoom calls with your group throughout the assignment instead of just texting each other, it just helps a lot with communication.

The mid-sem was quite difficult with little time to work through questions. The topics based off the statics/solids section and made by Christian (who does favour making more difficult questions). For online, it was split into 3 separate mid sems worth 5% each. As I'll discuss later however, it can vary quite a bit between lecturers so you might have a different questions.

The weekly quizzes are well just that, 5 questions each week totalling 0.5%  to basically "keep you engaged" in the subject. Some of these are more difficult than others but these questions are just off a textbook.

The final exam was more lenient in time than the mid sem but with a higher difficulty. I'll speak more about it in THE DIFFICULTY section.


CONTENT: STATICS/SOLIDS AND DYNAMICS
The subject is split into 2 sections, Statics/Solids and Dynamics. Statics/Solids are a follow up from ESD2 with an expansion of a lot of new content. The structure is as follows
   - Week 1: Revision of ESD2 stuff (FBD, Method of Joints)
   - Week 2: Method of Sections and Frames/Machines
   - Week 3: SFD (Shear Force Diagrams) and BMD (Bending Moment Diagrams)
   - Week 4/5: Stress, Strain and Poisson's Ratio
   - Week 6: Centroids and Area Moment of Inertia, Flexure/Beam Bending

In terms of learning and understanding the content, the statics and solids parts are mainly alright (Weeks 1-5). They are a slight increase in difficulty from the mechanics section of ESD2, but it's not large and much of it just comes from the fact that there is a lot of new content involved. Week 6 however, does dial up the difficulty quite a bit with a lot of new concepts being introduced. This is where some integration or deriving may be applied, and can be a struggle at first to understand and apply. However, it is still doable with time and there are resources both provided by the subject (short video explanations) and also you can easily find some explanations online as well. This part is mostly okay, but as I'll explain later can actually be quite difficult depending on the questions (in THE DIFFICULTY).

Dynamics is where the scary reputation of engineering mechanics comes from. Like statics/solids, dynamics introduces quite a lot of new concepts. However, these are definitely harder to wrap your head around and can be quite confusing at times. The applying of these concepts is main difficulty for this section. The structure for dynamics is
   - Week 7: Particle Kinematics and Coordinate Systems
   - Week 8: Particle Kinetics and Work/Energy
   - Week 9: Linear and Angular Impulse and Momentum
   - Week 10: Free Vibration and Rigid Body Motion: Relative Velocity
   - Week 11: Rigid Body Motion: Relative Acceleration, Instantaneous Centres, Equation of Motion
   - Week 12: Revision

Weeks 7-9 are generally ok with a bit of time to understand everything. Application and general problem solving are the hard part, and unfortunately simply doing more questions does not have that same effectiveness as something say in prereq math subjects (Calc 2, Linear Algebra, Eng Math), although doing questions of course does still help. However, the topics in week 10 and 11 are where you'll find the most confusion. A lot of this will not have been anything you've seen before, and the content can be hard to understand at times. But once again, the real difficulty lies in the application and problem solving aspect.

THE DIFFICULTY
And if you haven't noticed already, why engineering mechanics is so difficult is due to the application of these new equations and concepts that you learn, for statics and solids and especially for dynamics, NOT just the new concepts. Because of the high amount of new concepts, there are too many different types of questions that can be made and so many different ways to apply these concepts. Therefore at times, it can feel like there is a lack of a methodology or consistency when working through a problem. What I basically mean is that it won't be like say in ESD2 where if it asks to solve a truss system you automatically know the steps, method of joints -> find reaction forces -> FBD at each joint and use Fx, Fy, M = 0, at least not for much of it.  That's not to say that there is no pattern or method to approach a question, for a lot of it there is, even for the harder topics like rigid body motion. But as I'll explain below, the questions can be adjusted to vastly change the approach and the difficulty.

The thing is with eng mech, is that it has an extremely high skill ceiling. The questions can be made to be however difficult a lecturer wants it to be, and there is no better example of this than on the exam. Before the exam, the lecturers, Christian and Bagus, said that they did not use the past exams as a reference, and it showed. Bagus said that the exam questions were going to be doable as long as you studied, and similar to that of the examples and questions they gave in lectures. And for the dynamics questions with Bagus this was true, most of Bagus' part was doable and similar to the style of the lecture questions, with enough difficulty to be able to separate the cohort of students. However, Christian's questions were not consistent with this, and so what ended up on the exam was that pretty much ALL of the statics and solids parts were actually harder than the dynamics portion. In fact, the hardest question of 5 on the exam was based off weeks 1-3, the easiest topics in eng mech. What I'm trying to say is that how difficult the subject is can vary greatly with the lecturer so it's hard to know what to expect even by doing past exams, as each lecturer has a different approach and difficulty and chooses slightly different topics.

TIPS
Aside from making sure you get a good group, redoing the lecture questions and not falling behind (you will die if you fall behind), I don't really have other suggestions I can give. From my experience, other stuff like the quizzes can also help with studies and so can the tutorial worksheets (both the workshop ones and separate tute ones). I found part A of the tute worksheets to be good in difficulty and manageable whereas part B I struggled with at times particularly for some of the topics. A lot of part B was harder than the exam but remember the difficulty would vary with the lecturer. Overall, just study however you can and try to find a method that suits you.

FINAL WORDS
I guess to describe the role of the subject, it's best thought of as a stepping stone or a filter for future engineers. The problem solving and all those difficulties are what you would expect to have continuing forward, and for many this will be a good idea of whether or not you want to continue into engineering. I found the subject overall to be interesting at times, a good motivator and enjoyable. Other times I found it confusing, a demotivator and a source of stress. But ay, here I am, finishing this subject with no regrets and continuing in my journey to becoming an engineer. Like I said at the start, is this easy? No, definitely not. But is this doable? Yes it is. And can you find enjoyment in this subject? Through all of the confusion and difficulties, yes you actually can. This is one hell of a subject and I wish you good luck in getting to the other side!

M909

  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 231
  • Respect: +45
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #807 on: July 11, 2020, 11:38:56 pm »
+4
Subject Code/Name: ENGR90034 Creating Innovative Engineering

Workload: 1× 3 hr lecture per week (plus you'll probably have a whole lot of group meetings and interviews during the semester)

Assessment:
8× Reflections (750 word limit each), 22.5% (Hurdle)
7× Peer Responses, 13.5% (Hurdle)
Various group progress tasks, 10%
Personal Innovation Plan, 9%
Final Group Report, 35%
Participation (within your group in general, not strictly in lectures), 10%

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture, but there is an 80% attendance hurdle

Past exams available: N/A

Textbook Recommendation: Lots of readings, all of which will be posted to the LMS. Not really helpful for your overall project, but provides many genuinely useful advice/tips/strategies for your future career, and can also help boost your reflection/peer response/personal innovation plan marks.

Lecturer(s): Peter Cebon, Rowan Doyle, Jillian Kenny (one for each stream)

Year & Semester of completion: 2020, Semester 1 (Online/Covid-19 Semester)

Rating:  4.5 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: Low H1

Comments: This is a very unique and challenging subject, which is pretty much compulsory for engineering masters students who have done ESD1 and/or ESD2. Basically you will be allocated into teams based on your project preferences, and need to design a solution to a (real!) sponsor organisation's problem. After pre-research, you eventually go out and interview relevant people (which was a bit easier in the Covid semester as everything was over Zoom or Teams), and over many weeks eventually formulate a solution.
Initially I bushed this subject off as something to get over with, but began to enjoy this subject more as things progressed and the task became clearer. Overall, the phrase "you get out of it what you put into it" is pretty accurate for this subject. That being said, I was lucky to have a good group where most of us gave our best effort, and we actually collaborated (to a much better level than has occured in most my previous group assignments) and built on each other's ideas. I imagine it would have been very hard without this, and I definitely couldn't have done this project by myself.

Reflections occurred most weeks (usually unless other stuff was due) and required you to write about a CIE related experience of significance for you from the week. I found them quite difficult and time consuming, but if you engage with them they can be quite helpful on a personal level. To do well, you needed to really dig deep and look for the core reasons why you felt the way you did.
Once allocated into your teams, you will also be assigned to respond to one of your teammate's reflection each time there's a reflection due (you'll rotate and everyone will eventually respond to everyone). To do well in the response, you needed to add something onto your teammate's response and/or challenge their thinking in a supportive tone. My marks also seemed to increase when I suggested a relevant reading material.

The progress tasks weren't too bad, and seemed to be a good indication of how the team was progressing and/or if changes needed to be made. Putting together the final report wasn't as daunting as it initially seemed, as a lot of it was just rehashing what your team would most likely have been discussing for the past few weeks. Finally, the personal innovation plan allowed to draw on your experiences in the subject and bring in lecture/reading material to create a plan for your future career.
2015-2016: VCE
2017-2019: BCom (Economics) @ UniMelb
2020 -: MCEng (Electrical) @ UniMelb

lst1103

  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 59
  • Respect: +4
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #808 on: July 12, 2020, 04:09:54 pm »
+4
Subject Code/Name: ITAL10004 Italian 1

Workload:  Each week, there were two two-hour tutorials (a mouthful ahh), with no lectures! Very interactive sessions, though potentially to a lesser degree than they would have been on-campus—breakout rooms, whilst slightly traumatising, provided the opportunity for some peer-oriented collaboration and general discussion.

Assessment:  Because of the current state of the world, the assessments were reworked a little. 20%: four quizzes of varying length on Mindtap (all open-book and generous with regard to time restraints!); 20%: two written tasks, of approximately 250 words each; 30%: short oral conversation w. tutor towards the end of the semester; 30%: 90-minute exam (was completed on Canvas this semester, but probs an anomalous occasion).

Lectopia Enabled:  Not rlly applicable because we had tutorials only, but I'd assume that all lectures were recorded this semester, because we're living in the time of COVID.

Past exams available:  A sample exam was uploaded to Canvas two days before the actual exam—a little late but its structure and level of difficulty was actually akin to that of the real exam (something that I can't necessarily say for some other subjects !).

Textbook Recommendation:  Piazza 2019. Can't really proceed with the subject unless you have the textbook, as it was heavily relied upon throughout the semester. Also, you kinda need access to Mindtap, too, which you can obtain access to by purchasing the book x Mindtap bundle! Some of the assessment tasks were on Mindtap, and loots of the homework was the completion of Mindtap exercises.

Lecturer(s): N/A

Year & Semester of completion: 2020; S1

Rating:  4 of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments: Such a great subject, especially for those who're monolingual (me!) and are learning a language for the first time. Aside from the COVID disruption and the notion of the breakout room, I really enjoyed Italian 1. The Italian faculty is incredible, and so, SO understanding—Vita Giordano, the subject coordinator, gave me (and others, I think?) access to Mindtap free-of-charge because I stupidly bought the book only, rather than the Mindtap bundle, from Amazon (so maybe it wasn't so stupid??!). The emails sent by Vita and my tutor were always so jubilant, and such positivity was really encouraging during a difficult semester. My only qualms are regarding the online delivery of the subject, but that's not any fault of the Italian department. If I had have completed Italian 1 on-campus, I'm sure that I would have awarded it a 5! 

a819

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Respect: 0
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #809 on: July 12, 2020, 06:42:27 pm »
+3
Subject Code/Name: FOOD20003 Intro to Food Science & Human Nutrition

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

Assessment: Mid semester test 20%, 1000 word essay 20%, final exam 60%

Lectopia Enabled: Yes, with screen capture

Past exams available: No, but practice multiple choice and short answer questions provided (no solutions)

Textbook Recommendation: Understanding Nutrition: Australia & New Zealand edition by Eleanor Whitney. (I used an older edition of the textbook which was fine)

Lecturer(s):
Dr Ken Ng
Prof. Neil Mann 10/10
Dr Pange Zhang
Dr Sameera Sirisena
Dr Robyn Larsen
Dr Anita Lawrence
Dr Chiara Murgia

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 1, 2020

Rating: 3.5 out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments:
Please note that this subject was completed during the COVID lockdown period.

I recommend this subject to anyone who is interested in pursuing a major in either food science or human nutrition (or if you want a WAM booster). The subject was divided into two categories: Food Science (W2-5) and Human Nutrition (W1 and W5-12). The topics covered were:
Food science: carbohydrates, proteins and lipids
Human Nutrition: digestive system, carbs, water, minerals, proteins, vitamins, lipids, metabolism, energy balance, weight management and planning a healthy diet

The content is quite basic and easy to grasp, especially if you have a background in science or biomedicine. There was some overlap between food science and HN topics but I enjoyed the HN lectures more.
There were some issues with lecture recordings including audio issues and some lecturers went over time. I highly recommend completing the practice questions on canvas for revision. In saying this, some questions asked for specific numbers/ facts (eg: What percentage of Australian adults are underweight?) which won't we examined.

Textbook
The recommended textbook is necessary for this subject as the lecturers do not cover all the content in the lecture recordings. Also the multiple choice questions in the book were beneficial for revision as they were in collaboration with some of the lecturers according to Prof Mann.

Tutorials
There are 11 tutorials in total. While attendance was not compulsory, there is a hurdle requirement of 70%. Due to COVID restrictions, there was no ZOOM tutorial but instead we had to fill out a worksheet with practice questions. Feedback was provided to students who submitted their responses.
The food science tutorials/ worksheets involved simple calculations and answering questions based on readings.
The human nutrition worksheets included case studies and were pretty straight forward. The content covered in the tutorials (calculations) appeared on the final exam.

Assignment
The assignment was a 1000 word essay (/20) where we had to research a topic from the 6 provided. We were provided with an assignment rubric which detailed the topics, subheadings we could implement as well as formatting guidelines. Graphs and figures were also required in the essay. The essays were marked by associated tutors.

Mid-semester
The mid sem this year was completed as a canvas quiz in week 7. We has 1hr to complete 60 questions. The mid sem ONLY examined the food science components and associated readings and tutorials. Therefore, completing the readings is a must!

We weren't provided with past MST practice questions BUT the practice questions on canvas associated with each module was great for revision for both the MST and final exam. The mid sem was problematic as there were multiple incorrect questions in the test. Hence, students were awarded free marks. From memory ~ 60% of the cohort achieved an H1.

Exam
Worth 120 Marks
The final exam ONLY covered the Human Nutrition content. Students were provided with practice MCQ quiz and a document of practice part B questions (no solutions).

Part A: 48 MCQs 50 minutes
Was completed as canvas MCQ quiz similar to the MST. Style of questions was similar to the practice canvas questions and textbook questions.

Part B: 72 Marks 70 minutes
Included 10 questions with varying mark allocations. Prof Mann told us that the short answer exam this year was different to previous years as it included more case studies to prevent collusion and plagiarism. There was an issue with canvas during our exam which granted students and additional 25 minutes to complete the exam. However, I didn't complete the exam in time as some questions required you to explain detailed concepts with 2 marks lmao.
« Last Edit: July 12, 2020, 06:44:31 pm by a819 »