Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

October 24, 2019, 11:04:37 am

Author Topic: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings  (Read 1044502 times)  Share 

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Hehetymen

  • Victorian
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 300
  • Respect: +28
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #330 on: July 04, 2014, 11:59:42 am »
+4
Subject Code/Name: BIOM30002: Biomedicine: Molecules to Malady

Workload: Three 1-hour lectures per week plus two 1-hour tutorials per semester. Note the tutorials weren't really used and when they were used were used similarly to the second year biomed tutes (basically an extra lecture slot).

Assessment:  2x 45min intra-semester tests (20% each) at around weeks 6 and 10 (2 maladies per test); 3 hr written examination in the final examination period (60%)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture

Past exams available:  No but they give you sample SAQ and multi choice questions.

Textbook Recommendation:  None.

Lecturer(s): Helen Cain, Fred Hollande, Dick Strugnell, Louise Adams, and pretty sure some more.

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 1 2014

Rating: 5/5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments: I found the subject really enjoyable. The 6 maladies are all interesting and there are overlaps so the modules tie together. Not much to say since all biomeds have to do this. You might find some modules easier than others depending on your major. I did BCMB last year and found that helped with stuff like Wnt signalling for the bone stuff. The second year MCB subject also helped for this subject.

anniejoy

  • Victorian
  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 1
  • Respect: +2
  • School: University of Melbourne
  • School Grad Year: 2015
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #331 on: July 04, 2014, 12:06:50 pm »
+7
Subject Code/Name: FOOD20003 Food Chemistry, Biology and Nutrition

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

Assessment:  4 x online quizzes (each 5%), 1000 word research essay (20%), 3hr final exam (60%)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture

Past exams available:  No.  A handful of sample questions were provided to illustrate exam format and question style.

Textbook Recommendation:  Understanding Nutrition: Australia & New Zealand edition by Eleanor Whitney
This book was a prescribed textbook when I started this subject, although it has since been taken off the handbook. Not required but helpful for quiz revision (more details in comments below).

Lecturer(s): Dr Ken Ng, Dr Anneline Padayachee

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 1, 2014

Rating:  4 out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments: This was overall quite an enjoyable and practically applicable subject, and to be honest, the easiest I've ever done at this uni. It's hard to believe it's a level 2 subject, and I'd describe it as year 11 biology (difficulty, not content) with a bit of (simple!) first year chemistry.

The lectures cover the following content (roughly - I tried to remember the best I can, but the order of/amount of time dedicated to each topic might be slightly off or change from year to year):
(KN = Ken Ng, AP =  Anneline Padayachee)

*Digestive Physiology (1hr) KN
Carbohydrates (5hr) KN
Lipids (6hr) AP
Proteins (4hr) AP
How to Research (1hr) - guest lecture by Lindy Cochrane in preparation for the 20% essay assignment
*Polyphenols (1hr) AP
*Supplements (1hr) AP
*Water (1hr) AP
*Digestive Health (1hr) AP
Water-soluble Viatmins (3hr) KN
Fat-soluble Vitamins (2hr) KN
Major Minerals (1hr) KN
Trace Minerals (3hr) KN
Student-led questions/exam format (1hr) KN (2hr) AP

Carbohydrates, lipids and proteins cover structure/properties, digestion/absorption, metabolism and relevant health implications (e.g. diabetes, obesity, protein-energy malnutrition). With regards to metabolism, there is no memorisation of complex biochemical pathways or molecules. We just needed to remember some key steps (mainly glucose, pyruvate and acetyl coA) and which nutrients fed into which pathway. Vitamins and minerals cover each specific vitamin/mineral and their roles, recommended intake, deficiency (and toxicity, if applicable) symptoms. Interspersed between these core topics are a number of special topics (marked with asterisks *) which are mainly for interest, and are assessed in the final exam but not in the quizzes.

The quizzes assess carbs, lipids, proteins and vitamins/minerals, respectively (each quiz is 40 MCQs in 60min) . They are straightforward factual recall, except for a couple of calculation questions in the protein quiz based on dietary intake and calories (if I remember correctly). All the content are taken almost directly out of the textbook. Some details tested are not explicitly covered in the lectures (although there aren't too many). So I'd recommend at least borrowing a copy to read over while revising for quizzes (if you don't, you'll still do fine, don't worry).

The tutorials are not compulsory but are good revision and I'd recommend going to them. Our tutor informed us that on average, 70-80% of exam questions were directly taken or adapted from the tutorial questions (although I'm sure this is true most years, it wasn't the case in our year - see below). Powerpoint slides from tutorials are posted on the LMS, but sometimes they tend to be 'skeletons' of the answers which are explained more fully in the actual tutorials. My tutor was lovely and approachable and always welcomed questions. Plus, the 20% essay assignment is marked entirely by the tutors, and they tell us exactly what they expect from us.

The assignment was a 1000 word research essay on the topic of edible insects (write a proposal arguing that insects should be deliberately added to bread sold in Australia - not for real, of course). Lindy Cochrane and the tutors were quite helpful. This wasn't a particularly difficult assignment overall, but probably the hardest part of this subject, and do be prepared to spend a good amount of time researching if you want to do well.

The exam this year was 36 multiple choice questions, which is very unusual for this subject. I've been told it's usually a mix of short and long answer questions, so our year was probably easier than usual (hence we didn't get any tutorial-style questions). Our exam, whilst more difficult than the quizzes, was really not too bad as long as you absorbed the lecture contents. There were a few tricky questions, but that is to be expect. Many people finished within an hour.

I gave this subject a 4 instead of 5, because at times it felt like the lecturers were not as well organised as they could have been (e.g. numerous typos on lecture slides and exam) but they were clearly passionate about nutrition, so it was overall enjoyable. I'd recommend this subject to anyone who is interested in nutrition and its health application. If you are entering this subject wanting to do some hardcore biochemistry, this subject is probably not for you (I've heard BCMB20003 is quite good, though.)
« Last Edit: July 04, 2014, 04:58:54 pm by anniejoy »
Bachelor of Biomedicine - Class of 2015
University of Melbourne

ATAR: 99.55 (completed VCE: 2012)
(Raw scores) English: 50 Chemistry: 44 Biology: 42 Chinese SLA: 41 Physics: 41 Methods: 40

chair

  • Victorian
  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 23
  • Respect: +13
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #332 on: July 04, 2014, 05:55:06 pm »
+9
Subject Code/Name: MGMT20001: Organisational Behaviour

Workload:  1 x 2hr Lecture; 1 x 1hr Tutorial

Assessment:  10% Individual Assignment; 30% Group Assignment; 10% Tutorial Participation; 50% 2hr Exam

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, without screen capture

Past exams available: No.  There a sample exam

Textbook Recommendation: Didnít buy it, didnít need it

Lecturer(s): Graham Sewell and Zelinna Pablo

Year & Semester of completion: 2014, Semester 1

Rating: 1.5 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments:

This subject is not great. Itís not horrible, but itís not amazing either.

The lectures drag on. Even sitting in the front, I found myself drifting in and out of focus during lectures.

Content:

The first 6 weeks are micro topics, topics that talk about OB on a smaller scale. The last 6 weeks are on macro topics, ones that talk about OB on a larger scale. Simple enough, really. You donít really need to know that much about the distinction between the two. Each lecture covers one topic and youíre introduced to various theories that come under that topic.


Assessments:

Tutorials are pretty pointless, if it werenít for the participation marks, I wouldíve been seriously questioning whether or not to show up. Make sure youíre engaging with the discussions in tutorials and answering questions, because Iím quite sure the tutors mark participation pretty harshly; so establish a good rapport with them. Shouldnít be too hard since a lot of people spend the tutorial disengaged and bored. For the macro portion, you spend the time applying the theory you learnt to a case youíre given. Pay attention to these cases, because these are the cases they choose from to put on the exam

The 10% assignment was fairly straightforward. They do a workshop where they explain basic research skills, but they do break down the question a little bit, so I wouldnít call it a complete waste of time. Just make sure you define your concepts and explain anything within the definition clearly.

The 30% group assignment was a colossal stress-inducing ordeal. You were given a case and a theory; and you had to analyse, using the theory, why the case experienced the failures they did and then provide a set of recommendations based on your analysis. Get it started early, and at the beginning have one person who is on top of things to properly read and understand what the task is asking of the group - most people wonít, considering the amount of reading you have to do thatís directly relevant to the assignment. So have said person, probably the assigned leader, get a thorough understanding of the topic and the case youíre applying the theory to and set out a structure for the assignment. Then get them to explain to the rest of the group what the actual assignment is and then start delegating tasks. The sheer amount of horror stories of all-nighters and MIA/incompetent team members I heard about were really high, so get the organising all done early to avoid this kind of drama.


Exam:

The exam consists of 4 questions. One on a micro OB topic and 3 on a macro OB topic. The micro OB topic question gives you a topic from the micro OB topics youíve learnt about and apply it to your experience when working on the group assignment. The 3 questions on macro OB all come under a single topic that you cover in one of the weeks and they give a case that youíve covered in a tutorial (they provide the case in the exam so donít stress about memorising it, but be familiar with it at the very least because you donít want to be spending your reading time freaking about the case). Note that the combinations of cases and macro topics that have been already covered during tutorials are not examinable.

There are no surprises on the exam. They provide you with all the possible combinations of cases and topics that could be covered in the macro portion and all the possible topics that could be cover in the micro portion. They even remove one case and one topic from the macro portion, and one micro topic during the last week.

I wouldnít advise writing up every single possible response, rather have a solid understanding of each concept and each case and if you have time write up rough plans in the lead up to the exam. Within the exam, it really is a race against the clock, once writing time starts, youíre going to be writing the entire time. Make sure your responses donít talk about the theory and then use an example to show how the theory relates to the case, rather you want to be providing certain instances that occurred and then analyse that event with the theory that youíre asked to use. Itís helpful, and advisable, to first define key concepts when writing a response, so that way when you reach your analysis youíre not bogged down by having to define the concepts you talk about and you can keep the up the momentum in your analysis.


Opinion:

I really didnít enjoy this subject very much, however, if youíre a commerce student there really isnít much of a point in this review considering itís a compulsory subject. However, if youíre considering doing this for breadth, I wouldnít recommend it.

chair

  • Victorian
  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 23
  • Respect: +13
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #333 on: July 04, 2014, 05:55:35 pm »
+8
Subject Code/Name: ECON20003: Quantitative Methods 2

Workload:  2 x 1hr Lectures; 1 x 1hr Tutorial

Assessment:  5% Mid-Semester online test; 15% of Assignments (There are 3 and they take the best 2); 10% Tutorial Participation; 70% 2hr Exam

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture

Past exams available:  No.  There was a sample exam with solutions, though

Textbook Recommendation:  Retained from QM1, but I didnít end up using it.

Lecturer(s): Joe Hirschberg

Year & Semester of completion: 2014, Semester 1

Rating: 3.5 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments: This subject isnít bad. Itís a lot less mathsy than its level 1 counterpart for sure. It focusses a lot more on the application of tests (such as whether or not the difference between two means is significant, whether or not to use median or mean in these tests, what kind of regression to use, application ARIMA). It also relies on using E-views.

Online Test (MCQ):
This wasnít really done very well, I think the questions for this test in particular are recycled and it really does test you on your understanding of the theory. Since itís a multiple choice test, some of the questions do require you to have a very detailed understanding of the theory, which I donít think really reflects the aim of the course, however it only accounts for 5%.

Assignments:
There were 3 assignments that were all marked out of 5. They took the best 2 of these and then they scaled them so that they contributed a maximum of 15% of our mark. So if you got full marks on the first 2 assignments, then you could skip the last one. We were encouraged to work with others, but you couldnít hand in the same assignment. Essentially just make sure you have the same E-views output as everyone else.

Participation:
I think so long as you do your pre-tute homework and you show up to all the tutes you should get full marks. So these really are given to you, you really donít want to be losing these.

Exam:
Youíre gonna be writing the entire time, a mark of the exam was equal to a mark toward your final grade. 25 marks were allocated for definitions (stating your understanding of/defining concepts ie. What is the ACF), 25 marks were allocated for answering questions about what test should be used given a certain situation (ie. Binomial Regression, ARIMA, Parametric Test of the MeanÖ). Then there are 2x 10 mark questions where you are given E-views output and you have to answer questions about interpreting the data and drawing conclusions.

Opinion:
This subject is quite reasonable, although I did have a bit of a feeling that I wasnít sure what I needed to know, and I wasnít sure if what I knew was sufficient.

ChickenCh0wM1en

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 772
  • Respect: +101
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #334 on: July 04, 2014, 06:25:06 pm »
+9
Subject Code/Name: BCMB20002 Biochemistry and Molecular Biology

Workload: 3X1 hour lectures + 1 hour tutorials placed every fortnight I think?

Assessment:  2X10% MSTs, 10% CALs/quizzes, 70% exam

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes. Tutorials are also recorded.
 
Past exams available: Yes, however some material is not relevant. There are papers from 2009-2012.

Textbook Recommendation:  Recommended is Lehninger's Principles of Biochemistry . I never needed to use it. Lecture notes were sufficient.

Lecturer(s):
Paul Gooley lectures 1-6 on amino acids and protein structure (primary, secondary, tertiary).
Alana Mitchell lectures 7-10 on quaternary structure, kinetics (MM kinetics, allosteric regulation etc)
Irene Stanley lectures 11-23 on molecular biology (DNA RNA structure, DNA replication, RNA synthesis, Protein synthesis, Lac Operon etc)
Paul Gleeson lectures 24-27 on lipids, membrane proteins and carbohydrates.
Terry Mulhern lectures 28-33 on metabolism (Glycolysis, Fates of Pyruvate, TCA cycle, Electron transport chain, Glycogenolysis, Glycogenesis, Cori Cycle and more)

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 1, 2014.

Rating:  4.25 out of 5

Your Mark/Grade:

Comments:
I thought this subject was great to be honest. I hated it throughout the semester and I endlessly complained about how difficult and crap this subject was but in hindsight, I was just a little sook. This subject is all about memorising. You don't really need to understand any proper concepts but just memorise slabs of info, text, diagrams etc.

I thoroughly enjoyed the content presented by Paul Gooley, Paul Gleeson and Terry Mulhern. All lecturers explained their content very clearly but some parts were just horrifically mind numbingly boring (like most of molecular biology - don't kill me guys! It's just my opinion LOL). Protein structure was very interesting for me. Even though everyone hated it, I really enjoyed memorising the metabolic pathways and all the amino acids and compounds etc. My favorite lecturer was Paul Gleeson as I found the content he presented was soooooooooooooooooooooooooo goood and engaging. Maybe it was cause he does look like Chuck Norris LOOOOOOOOL

I highly commend the lecturers organisation as emails with questions to them were responded to very quickly. I cannot thank Irene for clearing up many questions I bombarded her with throughout the semester.
On another note of organisation and efficiency, we had ~650 students in BCMB in semester 1 and for both mid semester tests, the results were out in less than 1/2 a week which is rather amazing. This is in contrast to cell biology who had 1/5 the amount of students and took ~2-4 weeks for results of intra-semester tests to be released. Maybe the marking system prioritises marking on the number of students? I dunno.

Even though there are quite a few reviews for BCMB here on AN, I felt I needed to write one since the assessment has changed from past years. Previously the CALs were weighted as 20% with 1 MST (10%) but this year they changed it to 2X10% MSTs which made it I dare say more difficult for the cohort this year. The CALs were free marks, but the MSTs you had to know your shit really well.

The exam is pretty hard and is different to past exam papers. For example, for the kinetics section, all the questions in our exam were written responses whereas the past exam papers were all in the form of multiple choice questions. As to no suprise, many students struggled with Alana's questions.

All in all, even though some bits were so crap/dull/boring, the subject is immaculately organised and efficient and some parts of the subject are just so fascinating.

PM me if you have any questions.
« Last Edit: June 26, 2015, 03:04:27 pm by ChickenCh0wM1en »
BSc (2015), MD1 (2016)
Tutoring in 2016: http://www.tutorfinder.com.au/tutors/detail.php?TutorID=78301
Chuck a PM if interested :)

Available for tutoring on the summer holidays for university subjects or VCe.
Also tutoring for the Melbourne uni MMIs (medical/physiotherapy interviews)

Please don't PM me for lecture slides or recordings. I don't have them anymore.

e^1

  • Victorian
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 222
  • Respect: +25
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #335 on: July 04, 2014, 09:14:21 pm »
+9
Subject Code/Name: UNIB10011 Poetics of the Body 1

Workload: A 2 hour lecture and 1 hour seminar/tutorial per week at Southbank campus.

Assessment:  30% group presentation, 30% journal, 40% on a weekend seminar/project

Lectopia Enabled:  No

Past exams available:  There are no exams for this subject

Textbook Recommendation: A reader for this subject, which was cheap (at least for this semester). You may be able to view it for free from the LMS.

Lecturer(s): David Shea, and speakers from various fields

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 1, 2014

Rating:  3.75/5

Your Mark/Grade: H2A

Comments:
Seminar and lecture:
This subject is basically discussing the various viewpoints of the human body (physical, scientifically, metaphorically etc) without the many details. It was quite a nice break from the other science subjects, and it doesn't take much of your time. Overall I felt it was an easy subject which did not bore.

David Shea is a composer, and is quite friendly and talkative. Unfortunately for me, I am the somewhat opposite of that so hahaha. At least for me, he made the content (which was already interesting) more enjoyable with that attitude. As the primary speaker for the seminar, he'll broadly talk about psychoanalysis, music, religions etc... and how it relates to the human body. There is a lot of 'holisticness' that he talks about quite a bit, believing that different but separate departments will achieve more by working together.

As for the 2 hour lecture, you will get various speakers coming from different fields. For me, I had one talk about neuroplasticity, Daoism, epigenetics, even video games. Listening to various recent discoveries was a nice refresher from the bland content of Linear Algebra. I am not sure about this, but the speakers you get may vary next semester so I won't really write about it in detail.

Assessments:
As part of the assessment, you will need to write a weekly journal about a lecture & seminar you went to (no Lectopia, but it wouldn't work for this subject imo). For me, I wrote on the experiences I had that week and tried to find revelations that connected with science (computer/math in particular). As the handbook mentions, it does not have to be an essay, and you could do it in a scrapbook or even map your thoughts on tissue papers (David Shea might mention it again)! There is no strict format you have to adhere to, just as long as it reflects on your experiences for that subject. On another note, it would seem prudent that you do them every week... It can be messy remembering everything and writing it on the last few days (like I did).

The group presentation component will start on the later weeks of the semester... you simply collaborate and present at least (I think) a 15-20 minute presentation on a topic which is relevant to the subject (prosthetics, human senses, about a weekend project etc...). You get a week to work on it, including the 3-hour contact hours you get per week. If you wanted to you could group up with others and do it earlier, but for us someone had this great idea and that made things easier. I should add that it does not have to be a Powerpoint presentation, and you could make it as creative as you like.

Lastly, you can choose one or more projects that you partake on a weekend. You may decide to go to more than one weekend project, but you only need to go on one. This is the practical component of this assessment. After that you will need to write an essay (the theoretical component) about your weekend experience. This will probably vary next semester, but I chose to go on a drawing weekend seminar, starting from drawing straight lines to models with charcoal. There were also other interesting ones, including a meditation session and the pointless weekend 'wandering' of the city (by David).


All in all although I felt this subject was not difficult (could say it was more relaxing), it brought some pretty interesting concepts and research.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2014, 07:34:44 pm by e^1 »

slacker

  • Victorian
  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Respect: +2
  • School: University of Melbourne
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #336 on: July 06, 2014, 10:25:26 pm »
+9
Subject Code/Name: PHYC10005 Physics 1: Fundamentals

Workload:  3 lectures per week, 1 tutorial per week, 8 x 3hour long practicals, 10 x Weekly online assignments

Assessment:  Weekly Assignments worth 15%, Practicals worth 25% and Exam worth 60%.

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes

Past exams available:  Yes, quite a lot of them however, no full solutions, especially for the ones before 2011.

Textbook Recommendation:  R Knight, B Jones and S Field, College Physics: A Strategic Approach- Essential!

Year & Semester of completion: 2014 Semester 1

Rating:  1.5/5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments:
Content - Apparently it is similar to the VCE year 12 physics course and probably similar to the IB physics course too. Topics included Mechanics, Waves and sound, and Optics.
Assignments - Easy with the help of google
Practicals - Easy if you read the textbook before hand and ask the demonstrator for help as much as possible.
Exam - Difficult. About the difficulty of those weekly problems from the tutorials.
My Experience
I chose this subject without much thought. I chose physics for my IB course but dropped it within the first 6 weeks because I just couldn't understand physics and found it extremely boring but I somehow decided to do physics fundementals in hopes to gain some basics. As expected, my thoughts on the subject still hasn't changed, I stopped going to lectures after the first 3 lectures and never went back to the tutorials after the first one. All the physics I learnt for the whole semester was from the practicals (I had to read about them in the textbook before hand). The so-called assignments are sets of online questions from this site called 'mastering-physics' which you can pretty much just google to find the answers. So basically, I wasted the whole semester not learning anything although I gained nearly full marks for my internal assessments. (And so when exams came, I was so screwed it wasn't funny  >:()

About 19 days before my physics exam, I finally stopped procrastinating and started by counting the number of freaking topics from the textbooks we had supposedly studied and OH MY! there were so many that I panicked and cried (I know, its my own fault, no ones to blame for my laziness...) There were about 16 relevant chapters from the textbook that I had to cover in the 18 days I had left. Everyday I would read the whole chapter and do most of the end of chapter questions (about 80 per day...crazy, I know) until the last few days where I starting giving up and only did the 'suggested-problems' listed on the LMS. Despite the study, on the last day when I did past papers I still couldn't do like nearly half of the questions.

On D-DAY I went into the exhibition theatre barely prepared having only just learnt the content in like 2 weeks and a bit. The exam had the same format as it did in all the previous years with most of the topics covered. There were about 20% explanation questions which were similar to the ones in past papers but only 'explanation required' was shown in all of the past papers :(. But I guess I managed to pick up most of my marks here because I used my pro-bullshitting skills for these. You just have to find an equation from the list of formulas provided and use it to explain the effect or whatever. I attempted most of the questions (about 80%) even if an answer couldn't be found and left the exam an hour early.

In the end, I received an H1 for my grade but this is definitely a fluke. This subject is not for those who like to slack off like me. If you do slack off, you will have a terrible life in the month leading up to the physics exam (I had a few mental breakdowns while studying for physics and my other subjects - Bio, Chem and Jap5). My tip for those who decide to challenge this subject is to practice application questions and conceptual questions regularly, use the textbook instead of wasting time listening to the lecturers - you can find answers to them by googling the name of the textbook, and finally start studying early ;D
« Last Edit: July 06, 2014, 10:39:02 pm by slacker »

bonappler

  • Victorian
  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 58
  • Respect: +3
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #337 on: July 07, 2014, 07:56:59 pm »
+7
Subject Code/Name: CWRI10001 Creative Writing: Ideas and Practice 
Workload:  One weekly lecture (1 hour) and one weekly workshop (2 hours)

Assessment:  Three assessments throughout the semester totalling 4000 words including three major assignments. Firstly 30 to 40 lines of poetry equivalent to 1000 words. A piece of non-fiction equal to 1500 words and a piece of creative fiction equating 1500 words. These assessments are worth 30% each and 10% is attendance. Note: You cannot miss more than two workshops or you fail the subject!

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture

Past exams available:  No exam

Textbook Recommendation:  Seriously, I have no idea whether there was a textbook and frankly there is no way in hell that I would of needed it. There is a subject reader though which you MUST buy.

Lecturer(s): Dr Grant Caldwell, also a plethora of guest lecturers

Year & Semester of completion: 2014 Semester 1

Rating:  4 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: 77% H2A

Comments: I'll be honest, the main reason I wanted to do this subject was for the girls. Seriously, it's pretty pathetic looking back but I really wanted to meet some of these so-called 'Arts' girls. Let's just say Arts girls are not the most normal human beings you will come across but I digress (and I'm sorry if that offended anyone ;p). I remember the first workshop I attended, it was a sunny day and there were some nice people in the room. That was until they started talking.

Being a more mathematically minded person I was instantly put off by how open the discussion was. In all honesty the workshops were just a long conversation about random things, from coffee to recreational drugs (seriously), they were quite an eye-opening venture. My tutor was what some would call, 'adorkable,' I kind of imagined all the woman tutors to be like this and she was great fun to talk to and really intelligent. Not in the sense that she could ace an exam but her wisdom knew no bounds. In terms of the subject, yes, it is seriously laid back and on top of that there is no exam! I would not say the three assessments are a breeze. Our tutor told us that we should have a draft that was double the word limit and then cut it back so it would just be under (drafts have to be handed in as well).

I'll be honest and say that I only went to three or four lectures and when I did go I would be on Reddit most of the time. Some of the lectures I went to though seemed to be quite interesting and the lecturers would try to be funny and get really obnoxious laughs from the hipster students (of which there are enough to fill a country in this subject).

There is also a reader and you are allocated long passages to read weekly. I didn't really do it and got through the workshop by keeping quiet (usually the tutor begins the workshop asking about how the lecture was and/or if anyone had any comments on that weeks reading).

All in all, I enjoyed the subject and if you are looking for something different go for it! I may be a bit lenient giving it a 4/5 but I think it was nice to have a break from my intense Maths and Science subjects and go and have my mind blown by conversations about life, the universe and everything.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2014, 07:59:46 pm by bonappler »

chair

  • Victorian
  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 23
  • Respect: +13
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #338 on: July 09, 2014, 02:04:42 pm »
+7
Subject Code/Name: ECON20002: Intermediate Microeconomics

Workload:  2 x 1hr Lectures; 1 x 1hr Tutorial

Assessment:  1 x 10% Online Test; 2 x 10% Assignments; 10% Tutorial Participation; 60% 2 hr Exam

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture

Past exams available:  One was provided with solutions

Textbook Recommendation:  There is one, didnít need it

Lecturer(s): Reshad Ahsan

Year & Semester of completion: 2014, Semester 1

Rating: 4 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments:

Lectures: The lecture slides are structured quite well and logically, however, the lectures are presented in such a way that you really donít need to attend - simply streaming them online is sufficient. The content is interesting enough, you start off learning about consumer theory (indifference curves, budget constraints etc.) and then onto producer theory. For some weird reason there is a quick divergence to General Equilibrium. Then Monopolies, and Oligopolies are covered, which includes some aspects of game theory.

Tutorials: I think how these are presented depend on the tutor, so I wonít say too much about that. Much like intro micro, intro macro and QM 1, there are pink and blue sheets.

Online Test: Worth 10%. Not sure how I felt about this test. Standard multiple choice test, no practice test was given, but we were told which weeks of content would be directly relevant.

Assignments: Your pretty standard 10% assignment, you apply the models you learnt in lectures to situations. The only annoying thing about these were that for some reason Reshad refused to disclose how many marks each question was worth, he didnít even say what the assignment is out of so it made determining the amount of detail required for each part of the question extremely difficult. Especially the questions that asked us to discuss the intuition of a model, or to explain why a certain situation was the way it was. These are optional group assignments (similar to the group assignments of QM 1), where you could work in groups of up to 5 (or maybe 4, canít quite remember). I preferred to work alone, because it forced me to learn the theory myself and prevents me from relying on other people to do a difficult question.

Tutorial Participation: 5% is based of attendance and 5% is based of actual contributions made in class.

Exam: 10 Multiple Choice Questions and 4 Short Answer Questions that require you to use the models in class to answer questions - Similar to the tute questions.

Opinion: Itís a good subject, I highly recommend it. Itís compulsory for an economics major, but if youíre doing it as an elective or breadth, I think itís a great subject to do.

ChickenCh0wM1en

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 772
  • Respect: +101
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #339 on: July 09, 2014, 08:35:43 pm »
+7
Subject Code/Name: Principles of Human Structure - ANAT20006 

Workload: 3X 1 hour lectures, 4X 2 hour practicals + ADSLs (self-directed)

Assessment: 10% ADSL quizzes (8X1.25%), 2X15% MSTs, 60% final semester exam

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes

Past exams available:  None, no sample example provided. (last lecture goes through the format of the exam though)
 
Textbook Recommendation:  Eizenberg N, Briggs C et al: General Anatomy: Principles & Applications, McGraw-Hill 2007, Drake RL et al: Grayís Anatomy for Students, Elsevier, 2010. To be honest, textbook isn't necessary. I never used them. I was constantly googling questions and diagrams for extra clarification if need be though.

Lecturer(s):  Dr. Pilbrow, Dr. Kitchener, A/Prof Anderson, Dr. Murray, Dr. Xiao, Dr. Ivanusic,  (from first to last lecturer)
 This is quoted from REBORN but I have taken out some stuff and paraphased what will be covered.
Lecture 1: Introduction. Know your terminology. What's a coronal plane? Supine? Pronate? Rotation?
Lecture 2: Human Form & Function. General introduction - just appreciate the lecture. Principles such as the germ layers are covered in more detail in embryology lectures.
Lectures 3-5: Nervous System.
Lectures 6,7,9 - Embryology.
Lecture 8 - Skin.
Lecture 10 - Skeletal system.
Lecture 11 - Articular system.
Lecture 12 -  Muscles.
Lecture 13 - Vascular system.
Lecture 14 - Vertebral column & back.
Lecture 15 - this is the MST. Examines Lectures 1-13..... the average was ~21/30.
Lecture 16-22: Upper & Lower Limb.
Lecture 23: Principles of Viscera. An important yet easy lecture. Jason is a funny guy and his lecture slides are reasonable - not too much content, not too less.
Lecture 24: Upper respiratory tract. Jason does a good job of cramming in a lot of content here. This is much more expanded in 3rd year. He shows a video and keeps it entertaining.
From lecture 25 Junhao takes over from here until the last 2 lectures.
Lecture 29 is MST 2 covering from Lecture 14-28.
Lecture 31,32: Back to Jason for female and male reproductive systems.
Lecture 33 - Exam Format discussed

Year & Semester of completion: Sem 1, 2014

Rating:  3.8 Out of 5

Comments:
Since I'm bloody bored on holidays and got nothing to do, I might as well be somewhat productive and write this review.
I had a love and hate relationship with anatomy this semester. I initially wanted to do a double major in anatomy with physiology but coming out of this subject I'm not so sure. I found the coordination of the anatomy department to be rather immaculate. Lectures were well presented and lecturers were adept with delivering the content to students. I didn't physically attend any of the anatomy lectures but I listened to a majority of them and still did decently in the
I personally enjoyed the parts where we learnt about the nervous system (Dr. Kitchener) and Dr. Xiao's lectures except the bloody inguinal canal and all that >_>

I'll keep this review rather lean since REBORN did a crazy in depth review but the reason why I didn't enjoy this subject as much because as others like El2012 have said there are little/no preparation materials for the final exam. Thus, many students including I were rather lost on what was important and what was unimportant.

The MSTs weren't too difficult (MCQ not that hard) and the avg for MST 1, 2 was 21/30 and 24/30 respectively with many more students scoring 100% in the 2nd MST. There are no trick questions from the lecturers which was a good aspect of the subject. In saying so, I felt the exam content which was assessed was rather stupid to be honest. Out of the 4X15 mark written answer questions (120 mark exam comprising of 60 marks mcq, 60 marks written answer), I recall 3 of the 4 questions being from the last 1/3 of the course. Before I even start on how this would have given those who crammed the last part of the couse the few days before or whatever an advantage, I felt this exam was assessed what students accumulated in the short term rather than consistent work throughout the semester. I say this because there was NO QUESTIONS on the nervous system , NO questions on the brachial plexus [EDIT: actually 1 mcq on it but 1/120? O_O] or lumbosacral plexus. Sorry to offend anyone who worked really hard for ANAT20006 but that's my impression of the exam we had.

ADSL worksheets are pretty lengthy so don't make the same mistake I made and actually do them! I just did the quizzes like 10X until I got 100% cause I'm friggen lazy. Make sure for the exam that you really know your ADSL diagrams and lecture diagrams as any of these can pop up. ADSL questions can be quite good practice I guess but you can neglect some of the really obscure questions in the worksheets as it is very unlikely it will be asked.

Practicals were cool, you get to see prosections and all but the smell is pretty bad. I felt sick not from the dead bodies but from the smell of the formalderhyde and ethanol etc. I found that some practicals were good but some were rather poor. You're allocated to a group and have 20 minutes each at 5 stations. In this time, the demonstrator (can be really good which makes the prac so much more worthwhile or can be total crap) goes over the stuff you should know and ask questions and this is a time where you can get your questions answered. Most of the demonstrators are med students but I felt sometimes they went into too much depth and the group was left feeling very puzzled.

But yeh, I felt this subject was quite well coordinated but I don't think it was my cup of tea.
BSc (2015), MD1 (2016)
Tutoring in 2016: http://www.tutorfinder.com.au/tutors/detail.php?TutorID=78301
Chuck a PM if interested :)

Available for tutoring on the summer holidays for university subjects or VCe.
Also tutoring for the Melbourne uni MMIs (medical/physiotherapy interviews)

Please don't PM me for lecture slides or recordings. I don't have them anymore.

anazergal

  • Victorian
  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 23
  • Respect: +6
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #340 on: July 10, 2014, 10:00:08 pm »
+8
Subject Code/Name: LING30012 Language and Identity

Workload: 2 x 1 hour lectures and 1 x 1 hour tutorial per week. No tutorials in the first and last week of semester.

Assessment:

Assignment 1 (50%): We first had to interview someone, preferably with a different a linguistic and cultural background. Then, focusing on language and language use, we had to identify two or more discourses that impacted on this personís subjectivity, and how it parallels or contrasts with our own experiences. 2000 words, due mid-semester.

Assignment 2 (50%): We had to analyse a short spoken text involving public interaction among two or more participants using Critical Discourse Analysis and Conversational Analysis, as well as evaluate them as methodologies for examining identities in discourse. 2000 words, due end-semester.

Lectopia Enabled: Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available: NA.

Textbook Recommendation: No textbook. Readings were provided on the LMS as pdf documents.

Lecturer(s): Tim McNamara

Year & Semester of completion: 2014, Semester 1

Rating: 5 of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments: This subject focuses on how individuals are constructed and represented as subjects of discourse, using the perspectives of thinkers like Foucault, Marx, Butler, Hegel, Fanon, Derrida, etc. With an emphasis on language, it covers topics like gender (particularly masculinity), sexuality (particularly homosexuality), the Orient (particularly anti-Semitism), everyday sexism, language socialisation, as well as some methods of analysing identities (eg. Critical Discourse Analysis, Conversational Analysis...). As trite as it sounds, it changed how I viewed myself (both in terms of what I am and what I am not) and offered me a wider perspective on historical events like the Holocaust, social issues like homophobia and racism, and even politics (Abbott's interviews were academically scrutinised and his responses found lacking, I'm sorry to say). As a subject on identity, it naturally got very personal (in a good way!) with Tim supplementing the lecture content with examples from his own life, and with the tutorial discussions often featuring our own opinions and experiences (which was great, coming from an extremely culturally diverse class). There was a lot of freedom given with the assignments too, so you could really take it in a direction you were interested in and write it to the best of your understanding.

tl;dr: content was great, staff were great, classmates were great, 10/10 would recommend.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2014, 10:11:19 pm by anazergal »

spalvains

  • Victorian
  • Trailblazer
  • *
  • Posts: 48
  • Respect: +12
  • School Grad Year: 2011
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #341 on: July 10, 2014, 10:32:59 pm »
+7
Subject Code/Name: MUSI10211 / MUSI20188 / MUSI30237 - Music Theatre: Singing Rock Musicals

Workload:  1x 3 hour class each week, made up of a 1 hour lecture and 2 hour rehearsal time.

Assessment:  It depends on the level you take the subject at.
  • Level 1 is a learning log (25%), weekly 5-question online MCQ test (30%) and participation (45%)
  • Level 2 is a learning log (25%), song analysis (15%), weekly 5-question online MCQ test (30%) and participation (30%)
  • Level 3 is a research assignment (40%), weekly 5-question online MCQ test (30%) and participation (30%)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, audio only, and only the lecture portion of the class is recorded.

Past exams available:  There is no exam for this class, only a performance (yay!)

Textbook Recommendation:  No textbook. You get to borrow a book containing the music for each song that must be returned after the final performance.

Lecturer(s): Trevor Jones

Year & Semester of completion: Sem 1, 2014

Rating:  5/5

Your Mark/Grade: H2A

Comments: If you're looking for an easy breadth, you're reading the right review. Seriously, during the first class the lecturer, Trevor, literally said the words "this is the easiest class you will ever take", and he's right.

Throughout the semester we learned the words to a few songs from different 'popular' rock musicals. They were:
  • No One Mourns the Wicked - Wicked
  • We Go Together - Grease
  • The Song of Purple Summer - Spring Awakening
  • The Colour Purple - The Colour Purple
  • En Washington Heights - Washington Heights
  • The Temple - Jesus Christ Superstar
  • Seasons of Love - Rent
  • The Flesh Failures/Let the Sun Shine In - Hair
We also have a lecture each week that relates to an area of rock musicals - for example, Disney broadway shows, or the jukebox musical. The weekly online quiz relates to the lecture (but honestly, Wikipedia is your friend here). The lecture is usually in the second hour of the class, so we don't end up with a huge chunk of rehearsal time.

No prior knowledge of musicals or music reading is needed, although being able to read music did come in handy. Also, and I know this can be really important to some people, but you never have to sing solo ever if you don't want to. We do end up adding a bit of choreography, but it's usually standing in place, it's just that where you stand may change between songs (except for the Grease song, expect to do some hand-jive for that one).

The three levels of this subject are all in the same class, they only differ in what assessments they take. I took this subject at level 2, so I can only comment on the level 1 and 2 assessments. They really were easy. The learning log was a first-person recount of how my ability to perform 2 of the songs increased over the semester (vocal techniques, choreography, etc). The song analysis was just a referenced paper about one of the songs and its historical context, context within the musical, lyric meaning etc. I knocked both these out in an afternoon (and trust me, they were terrible) and scored close to a H1, so a decent effort would get you a H1 for sure.

Honestly, Trevor is such a great teacher, he catered the lectures to everyone who didn't know anything, but went deep enough into the background of the musicals in the lecture each week that everyone went away having learnt something. More people should take this class! Unfortunately it is in Southbank, but it's an easy tram ride away. Also, there's no exam (!!!), instead a performance is in week 12 where you can invite friends/family (or no one, like me, since I couldn't trust my boyfriend not to record me doing the hand-jive to use as blackmail later). The assessment tasks were due around then too.
2011: VCE
2012-2014: BSc (Cell and Developmental Biology) - Animal Cell Biology specialisation
2015-2016: Masters in Laboratory Medicine

watto_22

  • Victorian
  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 155
  • Respect: +7
  • School Grad Year: 2012
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #342 on: July 10, 2014, 11:42:32 pm »
+3
Subject Code/Name: FREN10006/20001/30003 - French 5 

Workload:  2 x 2 hr Tutorials per week

Assessment:  Two written tests in class (travail ťcrit sur table) - 15% each (the second test is replaced by a 500 word reflection task in French for those enrolled in 20001 or 30003); a debate (dťbat) in a small group - 20%; an oral presentation (exposť) in pairs - 20%; final exam (examen finale) - 30%

Lectopia Enabled:  N/A as there are only tutorials

Past exams available:  No

Textbook Recommendation: Mai 68 racontť ŗ ceux qui ne l'ont pas vťcu - Patrick Rotman. A good monolingual (yep, French only) dictionary for during semester, plus a bilingual one for the final exam.

Lecturer(s) (ie tutors): Various

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 1, 2014

Your mark: 81 (H1)

Rating:  4/5 (some faulty heaters and long tutes)

Comments: After liking French at high school, I was excited to see what French was like at uni. I really enjoyed French 5 too.
My favourite part of this subject was the class atmosphere. Some were doing French as their major, others as part of a Diploma, others as breadth. The mix of first- to third-years also changed things up for the better. For me, this was a big change from more quiet tutes and I really enjoyed it.

It is important to mention that the whole subject was taught in French (I heard my tutor say about 3 sentences in English for the whole semester!) Certainly this was a big step up from Year 12, but it was a welcome challenge. After all, how better to improve your conversation skills.

The two sections of the course - the Algerian War & the events of May 1968 - were really like doing a history subject, just in another language. Hence the homework was often to read a chapter from a novel, which was certainly difficult and time-consuming. There were also a heap of resources on the LMS giving further details of those times, which we were encouraged to get through but I wonder if how many people actually did. These were all really useful though when it came to assessments, with the debate and exposť and half of the exam purely testing what you had been studying.

The other assessments - the written tests and the other half of the exam - weren't so easy to study for, which for me meant a whole lot less stress. The main skill was the resumť, or summarising a text, which should be comfortable enough after a few practice ones.

Certainly you could spend a huge amount of time on this subject: learning all the new vocabulary and phrases from your tutes, doing all the prereading, writing practice resumťs and essays. Additionally, the periodical assessments meant that you always had something to be doing for French, but equally this meant that the final exam (only worth 30%) is a whole lot less daunting.
So as claireb wrote in her review (Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings), French 5 is certainly not a good choice if you're after an easy breadth. However if you've enjoyed studying French in the past then I would absolutely advise picking up French 5.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2014, 11:50:51 pm by watto_22 »
2014-2016: BBiomed @ UniMelb
VCE: Chemistry, English, French, Latin, Methods, Psych

86

  • Victorian
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 468
  • Respect: +96
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #343 on: July 11, 2014, 08:16:03 pm »
+3
Subject Code/Name: CVEN30008 Risk Analysis

Workload: 2x50 minute lectures + 1x50 minute tutorial per week

Assessment: Qualitative Risk Group Assignment 15%, Quantitative Risk Group Assignment 15%, Tutorial Attendance 10%, 2 hour Exam 60%

Lectopia Enabled: Yes, with screen capture

Past exams available: No

Textbook Recommendation: None

Lecturer(s): Lihai Zhang (Subject coordinator) and guest lecturers from several engineering firms (5 from memory)

Year & Semester of completion: 2014 Sem 1

Rating:  4 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H2A

Comments: Probably the easiest engineering/science/maths subject you can find at level 3 (and also has no prerequisites or required background knowledge). Even first year maths is harder than this subject. Having said that, industry-related content is genuinely interesting and valuable for getting a foot in the door for industry work potential. Pretty much everything is summed up quite well in this previous review, but I will add:

- The actual course content ends in week 7 or 8 (I don't remember); that's where the guest lecturers come in to deliver their talks. It may be tempting to skip these lectures but I highly recommend going, and talking to the guest lecturer(s) after. I cannot stress the latter enough. If you're pursuing engineering and are looking for some possible work experience placements, this subject is a goldmine for that. Lihai Zhang brings in key people from project managers to even managing directors of engineering firms to give these talks, you can imagine what a waste of an opportunity it would be not to talk to these guys and try and form some valuable industry relationships/connections.

- Tutorials are extremely helpful if you don't turn up to lectures. They cover everything for that week. As the previous reviewer said, it's like a review lecture of the week's content. Tutorials also account for a free 10%, so why not?

- Study up on the technical bits of the qualitative (wordy) parts of the course. They are guaranteed to turn up on the exam and you will be required to explain procedures and so on in considerable detail.

- Tutorial sheets and examples from the lecture notes are more than enough to prepare for the exam
Science, Melbourne University.

86

  • Victorian
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 468
  • Respect: +96
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #344 on: July 11, 2014, 09:03:13 pm »
+5
Subject Code/Name: FLTV10010 Making Movies 1

Workload:  1x 2 hour lecture at Southbank Campus

Assessment:  Visual sequence of 10 images due in week 6 (50%), 1000 word director's statement due week 12 (30%), weekly quiz (4 questions, 20%)

Lectopia Enabled:  Audio only

Past exams available:  No exam in this subject

Textbook Recommendation:  Fuckall

Lecturer(s): Jonathan auf der Heide and guest lecturers weeks 8-11

Year & Semester of completion: 2014 Sem 1

Rating: 2 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments:

If you want a H1 with little to no effort, you've come to the right place. You turn up, listen to Jonathan go on about how he's awkward with his friends and family because he borrowed money from them to make his film but he didn't turn enough of a profit to pay them back (he does this quite often and won't shut up about it), then watch snippets of films and listen to Jonathan talk about them and how it relates to his own film.

I'm not sure what goes on in the second hour of the lectures because I never stayed that long. There is an 80% minimum requirement of attendance to lectures despite you not needing to actually listen to the lecture to do the quiz (more on that in a bit), so I recommend you turn up for the first 10 lectures then skip the last two as it's a pain in the arse travelling to the Southbank Campus and back just for the one lecture. I also recommend you sit at the very front row so you get the attendance sheet first so you can sign it off and be on your way. The people who sit at the back tend to have to stay back after the lecture to sign their name off apparently.

As for the content itself, it's fascinating at best. I wouldn't say it's boring at all but to be honest I could have read up all about it on Wikipedia myself. The movies Johnathan takes samples from are actually pretty good so the lecture serves as a good place for you to find movies to watch.

The weekly quiz is ridiculously easy. I didn't turn up for more than an hour of each lecture and never listened to the recordings and didn't drop any marks allocated for it. You can easily Google/Wikipedia the answers, it shouldn't take more than 5 minutes for each quiz. It's a free 20%.

The assessment tasks are the most difficult part of the subject relative to everything else, but in itself is not hard either. The visual sequence will take the most amount of time coming up with the idea, not so much doing the work itself. The director's statement is a simple matter of meeting the specified criteria by writing a paragraph about each element they ask you to elaborate on. For both assessment tasks there are samples from previous semesters on the LMS for which you can directly use as a template to score highly. Beware they do include one sample director's statement that's absolutely horrible and a complete joke (I assume it scored poorly) - don't use that for ideas/inspiration unless you want an idea of how not to complete the task.

In conclusion, I only did this subject because it was easy, required minimum contact hours, counted as a breadth subject and I needed a H1 to boost my WAM (weighted average mean). There's no point in doing this subject if you're the kind who actually wants something useful out of your breadth subjects.
Science, Melbourne University.