Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

October 22, 2019, 02:02:50 am

Author Topic: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings  (Read 1043733 times)  Share 

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

90+FTW

  • Guest
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #345 on: July 18, 2014, 09:47:53 pm »
+6
Subject Code/Name: CLAS10006 Latin 1

Workload: A 1-hour lecture and three hours of tutorials per week for 12 weeks. Total Time Commitment: 96 hours over the semester including class time

Assessment:
1. In class vocabulary and morphology tests every single week
2. Exercises due every second week.
3. Two hour exam (no cheat sheet)

Prescribed Textbook: 
- Classical Latin: An Introductory Course (JC McKeown) Hacket Publishing Company, Inc.
- Classical Latin: An Introductory Course,Workbook (JC McKeown) Hacket Publishing Company, Inc.

Lecturer(s): Dr. Sonya Wurster (AMAZING LECTURER)

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 1, 2014

Rating:  5/5

Your Mark/Grade: 98 (H1)

Comments:
I’m going to be honest. Latin is an INCREDIBLY demanding subject. If you want to do well, be prepared to put in the hard yards. More importantly, remind yourself that “there’s a reason Latin is one of hardest languages to learn.” Do not delude yourself into thinking it’s easy, once you’re grounded in this mentality; it’s likely that you’ll crash - I know many that did. Please, make it easy for yourself and study. With that said, Latin is also an incredible language to learn :D

Admittedly, I picked up Latin for legal reasons. However, I quickly found myself falling in love with its beauty. I became OBBSESSED with Latin (I still am) and worked diligently throughout the semester, night and day. There is TON of memorization involved but you also need to be able to logically think.  What do I mean by this? Latin is a mathematical, inflected language; its structure is very flexible.  In English we rely on our sentence structure to derive meaning. In Latin…not so much.
For example, you could write the sentence “The boys give roses to the girls” in Latin as:

“pueri rosas puellis dant” (tradional structure)
or
“puellis dant pueri rosas”
or
“dant pueri puellis rosas.”

...and they all mean the same thing. This structure can vary even more and go on for 12 lines. Punctuation becomes a luxury. You have to be able to piece it all together by relying mainly on the cases and verbs.  Translating a sentence is similar to solving a puzzle under pressure. It is an exercise in logical thinking. But this good!!! Those who study Latin score significantly higher than others in many academic areas.

READ: http://www.bolchazy.com/Assets/Bolchazy/extras/LatinAdvantageandSATscores.pdf

Don’t be deterred by its difficulty. The benefits far outweigh the cons (if you consider “difficulty” a con). I recommend it to anyone and everyone. I will definitely be continuing with Latin for as long as humanly possible.

Besides, Latin is an awesome thing to brag about XD


I should probably add that the author of the textbook is obsessed with pigs. My personal favourites:

"Oh, how I love my pig!"
"My pig has a beautiful face."
"I will marry my pig." (advocating bestiality)
"Can the pig read a book?" (Latin. Asking the difficult questions)
"My pig is more handsome than your horse."
"The pig has been loved."
"The pig throws itself into the river" (suicidal pigs)
"The pig does not love me anymore."




« Last Edit: July 21, 2014, 11:41:43 pm by 90+FTW »

Ballerina

  • well butter my bottom and call me a biscuit
  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 557
  • Riefe Sie dr Polizei!
  • Respect: +169
  • School: University of Melbourne
  • School Grad Year: 2015
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #346 on: July 19, 2014, 09:09:02 pm »
+15
Subject Code/Name: DASC20012: Comparative Nutrition and Digestion  ☁ ☂ 

Workload:  2 lectures a week, a 2 hour non-compulsory tutorial every fortnight starting after a month or so after subject commencement.

❥I only attended one tutorial the entire semester. They take place at a computer lab and are aimed at helping you with the assignments, which are completed in Excel and Word. I found the assignments clearly explained during lectures, ergo didn't really require the tutorials.

Assessment:  Two-hour written final examination (50%). Computer simulation and written assessment of 2000 words equivalent (50%) (with 3 stage assessment strategy, submission at week 4 (10%), week 7 (15%) and week 12 (25%)).

❥Many past examination papers are available at the library and on the LMS. They recycle most of the questions. So if you enter the exam after answering the past examination papers, you will have most of the exam completed. The exam is comprised of short answer questions and long answer questions, no multiple choice questions. However, you can choose your own long answer questions; 5 out of 9 potential questions maybe, which makes it much easier.

❥The assignments were primarily nutritional information, metabolism, weight gain/loss etc calculations on Excel, and essay-style answers to questions about the content in the lectures and assignments. Assuming your answers are thorough, they should not present a problem.

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available:  So many. No practice exams, but the past exams available in the same current format and most of the same assessable content in current use go back several years.

Textbook Recommendation:  No textbook is prescribed.

❥ Introduction to Human Nutrition by Wiley is casually recommended if you want to flesh out some concepts, but it is not assessable and I never referred to it. You can find a copy online through Google.

Lecturer(s): Kristy DiGiacomo.

❥This was her first year teaching this class; in previous years it was Frank Something. I took a gamble as I wasn't sure what to expect with new coordination. She turned out to be fantastic. Her style is very practical and straight-forward. The lecture material she publishes is comprehensive, which means you aren't left racing to make notes to fill in gaps during the lecture, and you don't need to refer to other sources much to understand them. She also is very clear about what content is examinable and what is unnecessary to revise and only included for the sake of clarification. For example, she is clear about in-depth lectures regarding microbiology and biophysics/biochemistry being far less important than feeding techniques, understanding the differences in physiology between animals, and knowledge of optimal and suboptimal nutrition.

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 1, 2014.

Rating:  5 out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: 99

Comments:

❥Although the subject is a Bachelor of Science credit, it is formally a Bachelor of Agriculture subject (DASC) and the majority of students were enrolled in a Bachelor of Agriculture. While some of the content clearly overlapped with other Bachelor of Agriculture subjects and practicals, I hadn't taken a B.Ag subject before and still didn't appear to be missing much background knowledge. Coming from a Bachelor of Science did not seem to be a disadvantage.

❥My perspective is biased because I am smitten with nutrition, but I found this class fantastic. All other level 2 nutrition subjects are more focused on food chemistry, so I chose this class hoping it would be focused on applied nutrition. It is. It is very practical and prefers to deal with facts over theory, applications in the real world, and takes a very generalized look at digestion, physiology, anatomy, microbiology, chemistry, energetics, feeding techniques, malnutrition, vitamins, minerals, proteins, carbohydrates, lipids...

❥The material is also varied because it is 'comparative' nutrition and digestion. Half of the semester examines the digestion, nutritional requirements and idiosyncrasies of different animals, including domestic pets, farm animals, and humans. Kristy tried to cater to the BSc students who were interested in human nutrition by supplying a handful of lectures focused on human nutrition, but it is a B.Ag subject. Therefore, expect topics such as the advantages of feeding legumes over hay, how to increase weight gain for meat production, how to increase animal reproduction through nutrition for faster meat production, and husbandry (cultivating animals and crops for profit) to arise frequently! The lecturer's personal research also focuses on lactation among dairy cows. So ruminants, the microbiology of cow stomachs, and lactation processes are also a large part of the course. I found it interesting, but it's not for everyone. For those who would find agricultural processes and animal studies uninteresting, and would prefer to concentrate exclusively on humans, look toward the subjects offered in the Food Science major under the BSc instead.

❥That said, this subject was a welcome break from my other science credits. Science credits can deal with very abstract concepts, where it's difficult to relate the knowledge you are learning with tangible results and any relevance with day-to-day life. I'm not sure how much meaning can be extracted from what I learn of the lateral ventricles contained with the interventricular foramen in other subjects. However, this subject outlines exceedingly more straight-forward ideas that you can easily connect to the world and yourself. I have definitely thought more about what I'm eating and what happens to/in my body when I make food choices, and have a greater understanding of where food comes from and how it came to be when I'm grocery shopping. I also have improved what and how I feed pets. In other words, I use the information from this subject. I can't do anything with information on lipid bilayers of oligodendrocyte cell membranes from other subjects, other than increase my GPA.

❥Another way it diverges from my other science subjects is its small class size. I'm not sure if it is the same for all B.Ag subjects, but the lecture theatre was a quarter or less the area space of lecture theatres for other subjects, and generally half-filled. The small class size was intimate, cosy, and less distracting. It also enabled students to obtain far more time with the lecturer, who is always open to questions, assignment help, and exam revision assistance. The environment is also less...competitive? than many of my other subjects. Some of my subjects are strict in marking and contain students who appear to be under a lot of pressure. The lecturer for this subject does not stress about minor errors, is easy-going about deadlines and the atmosphere is relaxed.

❥This subject does not have any laboratory work, is not a prerequisite for any B.Sc subjects as far as I know, and only has some content overlap with B.Sc subjects such as Human Physiology and Principles of Human Structure. It will not be helpful if you are applying for UROP or already have a study plan overflowing with compulsory prerequisites for third year. I would recommend it for those who are seeking a fairly laid-back and interesting subject, or are searching for supplementary support regarding their knowledge of nutrition and animals.

❥The best part is that none of the 3 people who turn up for lectures mind if you eat chocolate and drink full fat caramel mochas while the lecturer discusses the obesity epidemic in Western society. And when you eat gummy bears for breakfast, you can use the assignments to calculate the fact you just had 120% of your recommended fat intake in one meal.

(personal information removed, 3/2/17)
« Last Edit: February 03, 2017, 08:33:56 am by Russ »

qqla

  • Victorian
  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 52
  • Respect: +20
  • School: Melbourne High School
  • School Grad Year: 2012
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #347 on: July 21, 2014, 06:02:42 pm »
+7
Good to see some more commerce subject reviews being posted up. This semester I’ve slacked off VERY hard, so my reviews might not be useful for the particular hard-working kids out there.

Subject Code/Name: MGMT20001 Organisational Behaviour 

Year & Semester of completion: 2014, Semester 1

Rating: 3 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments:

OB is tricky. Not because of the subject matter, or effort required to order to come out scoring flying colours, but in order to fully ‘juke’ and ‘conquer’ the marking scheme. I’ve heard of many bright students (we’re talking straight H1 averages here) fall sub-70 or stuck in the 70-80 zone in their attempts to tackle this subject.

Firstly, the content is very interesting. It takes on a slightly psychological perspective, as you work through a cross-cut of interesting topics such as Culture, Power, Behaviours and such in the respective Macro and Micro proportion of the course. All the weeks are rather enjoyable, and lectures (although a large chunk is pointless) actually provoke some thinking as the theories trickle into your mind. Although I didn’t do any readings (and I strongly recommend against), I’d imagine they would be worthwhile if you were planning on continuing onto further Management studies – they probably create the backbone of context that underpin higher-level studies.

The lecturers: Graham and Selina are good, effective and concise lecturers. They do go off-topic at times, but for good reason. Tutorials are run by competent tutors, but they can be a tad biased especially with regards to the 10% participation mark. Despite most of the tutors preaching that ‘quality contribution > quantity’, if you raise your hand a solid twice a lesson to pipe in, you should be set for a 9+, regardless of how stupid or pointless your contribution is.

The downfall of OB is assessment. It’s common knowledge that management subjects are difficult subjects to mark, and strict criteria pretty much limits any ‘off-pack’ or ‘indie’ interpretations. So you have to take what you receive as gospel, and be very very selective with the way you control and write your answers in both assignments and the exam.

The first assignment is straightforward, but it does help to source a copy of the textbook to aid your writing. A lot of emphasis is put on correct referencing, so make sure this isn’t compromised when you’re writing. 10%, but I’d say 90% of students hover around the 65-75 mark grade for it.

The team assignment is a bit of a nightmare. You’ve probably heard of countless horror stories of students completely disappearing overseas, or just slacking off hard during crunch time. It really isn’t too bad, but do be wary that you stick strictly to the criteria and don’t deviate from the questions posed at hand, which is the key factor in dropping marks. Do try find a competent bunch of kids to work with, but make sure you don’t get a bunch of kids that are either crazy obsessed with success, or tooooo lazy.

Don’t try go off on your own tangent and make profound discoveries into OB; you’ll only be setting yourself up for disaster. ‘Stick to the status quo’ (aka. Criteria and question sheet), and you’ll be set for another 70+. It’s very difficult to score a H1 or above for this assignment, so just focus on having a moderately strong assignment (don’t ‘over-dedicate’ time to this assignment, you’ll fall flat on your face like my group), as once again, everything is going to hover around the 65-75 mark.

Onto the exam. I personally disliked the exam format A LOT. There is a big luck factor that comes with studying for the OB exam. You pretty much only get a cross-section of 2 weeks that are examined in detail for the exam. Even though the lecturers stressed on the importance of holistic learning, and putting everything together, having an exam that really only touches on two weeks is poor. Therefore, cramming for this subject actually works wonders. You don’t really need to study till the final weeks of the semester.

Although it’s only supposed to be around 55% percent of your score, excelling in this exam is the ONLY way to get H1. Perfect, concise, and straightforward answers will put you on sail to the H1. Don’t deviate and spiral off into your little world of OB.
For non-commerce students, OB should be an enjoyable breadth to take even if you possess little to no commerce background. I suggest commerce students to take on OB when they are in need of a rather cruisey 3rd/4th subject in second year.

OB is good fun, but don’t let marking be the bitch it can turn out to be. Treat OB well, and it will treat you right.

« Last Edit: July 21, 2014, 06:06:45 pm by qqla »

qqla

  • Victorian
  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 52
  • Respect: +20
  • School: Melbourne High School
  • School Grad Year: 2012
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #348 on: July 21, 2014, 06:41:35 pm »
+5
Subject Code/Name: BLAW 20001 Corporate Law 

Year & Semester of completion: 2014, Semester 1

Rating: 5 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments:

Corporate Law is an excellent subject. I agree with pretty much all that is said in ‘jtvg’s’ review.

Firstly, don’t believe the hype over how it’s supposed to be the hardest level-2 subject. The resource network is literally setting yourself up for success. There is no bullshit readings or fluff that needs to be read. Corporate Law demands you to appreciate what’s being taught. Thankfully, most of the content is rather interesting but some bits are still dry. This is probably to be expected of any law subject.  Also, this is aided by the fact that the Exam is open book. You need to know your theory inside out, but this doesn't mean you memorise case after case (as the case for PBL) or brute-force your way through the subject through pages on pages of notes. Instead, you need to actually understand (!) what's being taught.

So why is it so good after all? Assessment is entirely on point. This is how a subject should be done. The assignment successfully ticks its two main objectives: to practice legal writing for the exam, and also foster an indepth understanding of the Act and knowledge/cases that make up the very backbone of Corporate Law. I believe in previous years, this was an optional assignment, but since it’s compulsory, it’s great in both allowing you to kick yourself into actually studying and also understanding the ideal way to write for tutorials and exams.

The 75/25 split between the exam and assignment is fair. The exam is difficult to score well in, but there are plenty of practice questions, exams, that tutors and Helen walk you through (but note: not spoonfeed you with suggested answers). Helen drops a fair amount of excellent tips and has a pretty long trail of hints scattered for what to expect for the actual exam.

Helen is a no-fuss lecturer that is very, very good at what she does. As for most commerce lectures. Go at your own discretion. The recordings are a great substitute to the real thing, and it was pretty funny listening to Helen rage at noisy students while I was studying during SWOTVAC lol. So I don’t think it’d hurt to ‘not go’, but do make sure you catch up on them in your spare time. There is considerable ground that is covered, but the ‘wake-up’ lectures in weeks 8 and I think 5 are very good reminders to get your shit together.

For the select few that choose to cram the entire course in SWOTVAC and are in need of the fools guide to excel in this subject:
•   Listen to the lectures and take notes.
•   Readings: I’m a bit divided on this since I stopped reading the textbook after Week 1, but if you have time, do read these. I did read some of the cases during SWOTVAC, which I highly recommend. And don’t be stupid, get the newest edition.
•   Don’t be like me: Go to your tutes! As sad as this sounds, I suggest you pretend there’s a tutorial prep mark or something so that it FORCES you into going. Since it isn’t marked, it’s very easy to fall into the trap of sleeping in.

Sometimes I wish that I failed Corp Law so that I could retake it. Why? Because it was far too late when I realised that I had missed out on a truly exceptional subject by not attending any lectures or tutorials. Oops.
« Last Edit: July 21, 2014, 06:48:46 pm by qqla »

vox nihili

  • National Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *****
  • Posts: 5289
  • Respect: +1367
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #349 on: July 21, 2014, 08:39:27 pm »
+8
Subject Code/Name: CLAS10022 Intensive Ancient Greek 1 

Workload:  2 x 2 hour seminar four days a week

Assessment:  Daily tests 10%, daily homework 30%, 2 x 1 hour test 60%

Lectopia Enabled:  No.

Past exams available:  None

Textbook Recommendation:  Introduction to Ancient Greek: A literary approach

Lecturer(s): Leanne McNamara

Year & Semester of completion: 2014 Winter

Rating:  2 out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1 (88)

Comments: I haven't rated this subject well because I didn't enjoy it. My rating isn't a reflection on the way the subject was conducted or coordinated. In reality, this was a really well organised subject and especially so given the fact that it's an intensive. Leanne was lovely; she was always available for help and on many occasions tried to bribe us with chocolate (not complaining! :)).

Personally, I love learning languages. I find them fascinating and really love the feeling of being able to communicate in another language. Ancient Greek robs you of that feeling in many ways. This is not really a course in learning a language. It really is a test of how much you can remember. The work is unashamedly just memory work. You quite literally just have to remember tables of conjugations and declensions each day. This, I loved when learning other languages, because grammar was in many ways a key to new things, a key to a higher amount of communication. It didn't feel like that at all with Ancient Greek.

Each day, you go to class. Leanne explains some concepts normally to do with syntax. These are actually ok. I quite enjoyed that element because the grammar is kind of nifty. Then she'll move on to whatever endings we had to learn and would quite literally just read through a table of noun endings. That would be your work for the night, remembering that table. Understandably, some people are really motivated and find the energy to keep doing this. That was the case with me for the early part of the course, but it gets to a point when it starts to feel like you've lost purpose. All you use your knowledge for is to translate sentences, all of which are relatively boring. Eg: οἱ θεοι φερουσι τα δορα τοις παιδιοις "the gods bring gifts to the people". The book also has a nasty habit of putting in grammar and phrases into the translations that you haven't encountered before. So that means that you actually rely on your teacher to do the translation for you at times. You never really use what you've learned to make anything of your own though. Once in a blue moon you are asked to translate something into Greek, but it never really feels like you own the language.

All in all, this was a well coordinated course. I'm glad of the experience because now I feel like I better understand why people are so turned off learning classical languages. Classical languages are wonderful and truly are very interesting. Classicists just seem to have an arrogant hang up about the way it should be taught. Indeed, the book actually brags about how much rote there is to learn. This kind of stubborn persistence with arcane learning methods that have been proven 1000 times over makes the experience of learning a classical language too daunting and has largely resulted in a lack of enthusiasm for learning them. There really ought to be no difference, or at least only minimal differences, between how one learns a classical language and a modern language. I did not enjoy learning Ancient Greek for these reasons. I really don't mind learning grammar and I've always found it very easy to learn (sorry arrogant). This felt like it had no point though. There was no interaction, no creativity, just reading sentence after sentence.

So I'll leave you with a passage of the crap that appeared on our homework:

τοῦ δὲ νῦν ἐν τῷ νῦν οὐκ ἔστι μνήμη, καθάπερ εἴρηται καὶ πρότερον, ἀλλὰ τοῦ μὲν παρόντος αἴσθησις, τοῦ δὲ μέλλοντος ἐλπίς, τοῦ δὲ γενομένου μνήμη. διὸ μετὰ χρόνου πᾶσα μνήμη. ὥσθ' ὅσα χρόνου αἰσθάνεται, ταῦτα μόνα τῶν ζῴων μνημονεύει, καὶ τούτῳ ᾧ αἰσθάνεται

Quote
As already observed, there is no such thing as memory of the present while present, for the present is object only of perception, and the future, of expectation, but the object of memory is the past. All memory, therefore, implies a time elapsed; consequently only those animals which perceive time remember, and the organ whereby they perceive time is also that whereby they remember.


« Last Edit: August 02, 2014, 01:41:39 pm by Mr. T-Rav »
MED INTERVIEW TUTORING PM to secure your place early, as they fill up quickly!

Join ATARNotes Footy Tipping

2013-15: BBioMed (Biochemistry and Molecular Biology), UniMelb
2016-20: MD, UniMelb
2019: MPH, UniMelb
Year I: BIOL10002 BIOL10003 CHEM10006 MAST10011 MAST10016 PHYC10007 SPAN10001 SPAN10002
Year II: BCMB20005 BIOM20001 BIOM20002 CLAS10022 GENE20001 SPAN20020 SPAN30014
Year III: BCBM30001 BCMB30002 BCMB30010 BIOM30001 BIOM30002 PHRM30008

jtvg

  • Victorian
  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 66
  • Respect: +10
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #350 on: July 22, 2014, 12:06:06 am »
+6
Subject Code/Name: ECON20003: Quantitative Methods 2

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

Assessment:  5% Mid-Semester Test (Online); 15% Assignments (2 best of 3); 10% Tutorial Participation; 70% 2-hr Exam

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture

Past exams available:  There is a mock final exam with solutions. Also, tutorial questions are past exam questions.

Textbook Recommendation:  Business Statistics (QM1 book - not relevant)

Lecturer(s): Joe Hirschberg

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 1 2014

Rating: 2.5 out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments:
The content of QM2 spans a good range of topics, from parametric and non-parametric tests to linear regressions, logit models, forecasting, and ARIMA. This subject gives you a very good overview of different statistical techniques and emphasises when to use it and how to use it (at least on E-Views). This subject focuses less on calculations and more on analysis and interpretation of results - and I actually like it that way. Some people dislike the fact that sometimes 'there is no one right answer' despite it being a quantitative subject, but being an accounting & finance major has probably increased my comfortability with vagueness.

What I really really dislike about this subject is that I felt like I was in a computer class during tutorials. I was just being taught to click some buttons, type in some numbers, produce some charts, etc. The most 'analysis' we do during tutorials were just 'interpretation' of the results. In the end, we don't get to sit in front of the computer during exams like we did in all tutorials. This contributed to the students' feeling of unpreparedness. Also, unfortunately, QM2 lectures fail to give us adequate knowledge to prepare us for our assessments. There's always the feeling that you don't know enough, or worse, that you don't know anything at all. During SWOTVAC and consults, you can pretty much feel/see/hear that everyone's pretty tense and confused and bursting with questions that should've been answered had Joe (and other tutors) been clear in teaching the content. I cannot remember how many emails I've sent to my tutor, or how many questions I've submitted on the Online Tutor, during my revision. Probably the reason I got H1 is because I did some intense self-study sessions to help me get prepared, because unfortunately, the lectures and the tutorials did not.

To get full marks on participation, attend tutorials and always do Part A (pre-tutorial questions). Trust me, tutorial marks will SAVE you (friend got 48; had he been present to even a few more tutorials he could've probably passed). The mid-semester test should be a piece of cake - just have your notes handy and you'll be fine. For the assignments, do the first 2. Some people go off thinking they can always do the last one, but BOOM the last one's pretty hard to ace. So do the first 2, so you don't feel pressured to do the last one (still do it, though). It's pretty easy to get a perfect mark for the assignments as long as the answers do not deviate that much - they're pretty lenient in marking assignments. It's nice to compare your E-Views output with that of your friends just to be sure.

Read all lecture notes (also, listen to the lecture recordings) and study them by heart. Memorisation won't work (well, I guess it will, to an extent). Attend consults, and abuse the OLT!The bottom line is just be sure to know the definition of terms, the difference of one technique to the other, when to use a certain technique, which technique to use in various situations, and interpret E-Views results.

Overall, this subject is quite chill. Just don't leave everything to the last minute. It's up to you if you ditch lectures. But attend your tutorials and do your pre-tutes. Submit Assignments 1 and 2. Ace the mid-semester test - that 5% is still gonna be helpful. H1 is hard to achieve, but it's possible..

WhoBannedMe

  • Victorian
  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Respect: +1
  • School: THS
  • School Grad Year: 2012
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #351 on: July 22, 2014, 10:04:08 am »
+3
Subject Code/Name: BIOL10004 Biology of Cells and Organisms 

Year & Semester of completion: 2014 sem 1

Rating:  4.5 Out of 5 (b/c of Pracs 4 and 5)

Your Mark/Grade: H1 (88)

Comments: The other reviews are great but I just want to highlight some important bits for those who haven't done biology before. I didn't do any VCE biology before this subject and was REALLY uneasy about it.

The bio dept counteracts this by releasing "biobytes", short videos on topics that will be covered. These are REALLY GOOD, make sure you watch them and understand everything, namely the names/shapes/function of the organelles in eukaryotes and the processes of Respiration and Photosynthesis.

With respect to tutorials/pracs and workshops, what ever the tutors highlight in workshops is REALLY important and they do a good job of covering them. For tutes/pracs make sure you complete the pre-prac test and the post-prac test. In terms of in-prac assessment:

Prac 1 & 2: [I can't draw so I did horrible in these]
 - Drawing of cells including labels and heading (Use the apendix to help with the format).
 - Multiple choice question(s) at the end of the prac. When the tutors speak make sure you listen! Whatever   they're rambling on about usually ends up as the MCQ.

Prac 3:
 - Graph and short answer question at the end of the prac.

Prac 4:
 - A "point at the structure of the heart" and MCQ on the structues in the heart.
Loved this prac as we cut open an animal heart (Make sure you memorize the structures) so fun!

Prac 5:
 - All MCQ at the end of the prac.
This prac was also enjoyable, cutting open a mouse and identifying the components of the digestive system.

Top Tip: Don't feel unmotivated if you start off on a bad foot, my Prac 1 result was 5.5/10.
 
The other posts pretty much covered everything else.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2014, 11:32:15 am by alondouek »

qqla

  • Victorian
  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 52
  • Respect: +20
  • School: Melbourne High School
  • School Grad Year: 2012
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #352 on: July 23, 2014, 03:42:01 pm »
+3
Subject Code/Name: ECON20003: Quantitative Methods 2

Year & Semester of completion: 2014, Semester 1

Rating:  4/5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments:

QM2, although not as good as its previous QM1 counterpart with Pottenger, is a good subject.

The content revolves mostly around the Regression weeks explored in QM1, and pretty much cuts most of the calculation-work out, in favour of data interpretation. For those who aren't so good at Maths, from what I've heard, QM2 is a lot more forgiving on paper than its Econometrics equivalent. Hirschberg asserts that Eviews is king in this subject, and you can bet on there being at least 50% of both lectures and tutorials revolving around the excavation of data from eviews.

jtvg's review of QM2 paints the image that the resources provided are lacking in both relevance and adequacy. Personally, I don't think this was so much the case.

Lectures were delivered very well by Hirschberg, he explains key concepts successfully and works through many proofs with much detail, typically working through real-life economic data provided by sources such as the ABS (eg. household gambling expenditure). Although one could argue that perhaps only a few slides every lecture were essential to actual preparation for the exam, on the whole they are excellent: they easily replace the chunky QM1 textbook that 'can' be reused for QM2, but you don't really need to do readings from that textbook. I started to attend less and less towards the business end of the semester, but the lecture slides were written in a fashion that could allow even the biggest drop-kick (hi) catchup.

Of course, there is your average Eviews 'filler' slide kind of similar to a bloody Gamefaqs walkthrough, but if a student is able to find those 'key slides' (which is normally towards the summary side of the lecture), they're pretty much set on approaching any question that the tutorial or exam may throw at them. It's really just a matter of studying smart, and not brute-forcing your way through countless practice questions and lecture slides.

Assignments are well put together as well. All the questions you receive are indirectly related to what you might expect on the exam, bar the odd Eviews generation of results. QM2 also allows you to take the best 2 out of 3 assignments, although personally I reckon you should do all of them so you don't have gaps in understanding (skipping the Regression assignment was a mistake!). Last assignment is arguably the most important - it's entirely exam revision and potential question material for at least a quarter of the final exam.

Indeed, jtvg is pretty spot-on about tutorials. Tutorials are not spectacular. In fact, they are poor.

Perhaps I didn't get the most enthusiastic tutor on the block but in-class discussions left much to be desired. You can't really blame the department for this, if you set up a computer lab with a dozen students, you're bound to get an increasing amount of kids swivelling away on spin-chairs as the tutor works through some of the more boring stuff: eg. How to spit out Eviews results. As a result of this, I'd say that at least 50-60% of tutorials are completely useless. Interpretation and grasp of the concepts are most important, the eviews stuff is good to know but by no means essential.

On pre-tute work: This work is absolutely piss easy, and takes less than 10 minutes every week provided you have a copy of Eviews (legally or illegally) at home or access to from uni. Do NOT fall back on these marks. I lost 5 marks from my final score just because I was too lazy to rock up to tutorials, and simply show the tutor some half-assed work. Don't be that student. You don't even need to participate during tutorials or be focused at all. Just do the stupid prep work to score the easiest 10% you'll ever get at Unimelb.

The exam is not difficult but does require you to know your stuff inside out. During SWOTVAC, do consult past assignment solutions and study the Sample Exams solution in depth - these are paramount for success. Mid-sem multiple choice testis a joke. Overall, this subject is a lot more forgiving on the marking side of things, I'd say it's a lot more difficult to fail QM2 than it is to fail QM1 (which I almost did lol) simply because the system's been set up to allow pretty much everyone to pass. There isn't even a hurdle for the exam. So there really isn't any excuse to do very poorly in this subject: no dodgy marking schemes or pointless lectures to blame, the stuff provided is practically spoon-feeding you to prepare in the best manner possible.

From all my mates doing Bcom: they don't really rave about QM2, but don't complain about it much either. I don't blame them though, the 'Pottenger fan club' led by 'Myron Z Gainez' (very good read of a QM1 review) probably doesn't compromise for complete loyalty to its lecturer for QM1..
« Last Edit: July 23, 2014, 03:47:25 pm by qqla »

qqla

  • Victorian
  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 52
  • Respect: +20
  • School: Melbourne High School
  • School Grad Year: 2012
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #353 on: July 23, 2014, 04:24:27 pm »
+7
Subject Code/Name: ACCT20001 Cost Management 

Workload:  Standard mix of a 2hr lecture and 1hr tute

Assessment:  Tute participation 10%, Midsem 20%, Exam 70%

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, slides are recorded

Past exams available:  Just the one sample exam with basic solutions

Textbook Recommendation:  Just get the textbook: Author is Bhimani and get the green covered edition (I believe it's either 4th or 5th)

Lecturer(s): Kelsey Dworkis

Year & Semester of completion: 2014, Semester 1

Rating:  2.5/5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments:

Before I say anything, I have to admit that I might seem like a bit of an 'accounting hater', my past reviews for unimelb accounting subjects have called most subjects lousy lol. I actually enjoy accounting, but I dislike bits and pieces about how these subjects are taught.

Anyway, Cost Management follows the trend of most accounting subjects: it's another mixed bag. The content by nature is very dry. You can't really blame anyone for this. You will be working through concepts such as different costing mechanisms, and how to calculate budget overhead variances and such. This isn't its main problem though.

I had mixed feelings about the lectures. Kelsey is actually a fantastic lecturer, but I had the slightest feeling that most of the slides were recycled from previous years. She actually communicates the concepts quite well, even though some of the examples left a bit to be desired: in both complexity and relevance. For lack of better word, the slides were very basic. We'll look past the lectures though they're meant to be basic so that every single person in the theatre leaves with some sort of understanding. So on the whole, lectures are fine. But here is the worst problem of the subject. You will be pointed towards the textbook as your bible of knowledge for furthering knowledge, closing theory gaps and consolidating understanding. kelsey y u do dis

Firstly, this is lazy teaching. Although the textbook is written rather well, there are many bits that aren't relevant to ACCT20001, and I say ACCT20001 because you have different names of systems from Great Britain floating around that can sometimes confuse you. This isn't that much of an issue, but when you have tutorials that are pretty much ENTIRELY focused on mastery of the textbook questions, you're in for trouble. Why? Exam questions will boggle you and be written in a style that is very different to what you might expect from all the tute work you did. Thus, tutorials suffer greatly. Although the tutor in charge likes to babble on about how tutorials were 'supposed' to inspire great discussion, I'm sure that most if not all tutors were just working through a solution pack and delivering mini-lectures, or rather, 'doing the homework' by themselves onto the whiteboard.  Do you learn anything from copy pasting solutions onto the board? I don't know. Lazy, lazy, lazy.

And finally, the stress over tutorial preparation. I feel sorry for the kids in my class that actually had a LOT of decent contributions in class, but would fall down in the 'homework' department as they might've forgotten to bring the work in. Cost Management is hella anal about this. Tute prep for this class is summed up as such: Do your homework, and raise your hand like a robot to spit out copy pasted figures and numbers and cruise your way towards a 10%. Actually raise some good talking points but don't do your homework? gg

The mid-semester test is one of the first instances where you will realise how textbook based this subject really is. You'll get a bunch of multiple-choice questions that are rather well written, but lack similarity to what you've been learning in tutorials. The sample test provided this year was very similar to the actual test that I sat, but again, I found myself questioning 'what do I need to study?'. You can do all the readings and practice questions from the textbook that you like, but still fall short of an excellent mark if you fail to pinpoint those areas that are sketchy by nature: eg. Week 1: Planning and Control is a very subjective field that is difficult to fairly assign multiple choice questions to.

However, it is the exam that will bite you in the ass. It's a three hour slogfest, and I found myself absolutely clueless during SWOTVAC over what to study. Normally, I'd shoot straight towards lecture slides, but these were too basic. Tutorial questions were lacking relevance, they were often 40 min questions that beared little similarity to the ones in the sample exam. Readings? Modern and contemporary questions around areas such as ABC costing weren't terrifically covered.

It's simple really. Create ORIGINAL tutorials (this means, adapt 'take-home' questions, not prescribe textbook question after question) so that this opens the channels for quality discussion in tutorials and you have yourselves, a near perfect subject. The subject coordinators love to emphasise how our understanding for theory needs to be holistic, but how can you do this if the practical is completely isolated topics? Thus, the luck factor comes back into play. If you put your eggs into certain baskets, you might do better than the kid that studies very hard for every nook and cranny of the subject.

So Cost kind of sucks in this way. If you're that kid that likes the traditional textbook-crunching way of tackling a subject; this subject is for you. Unfortunately, it was 2edgy4me.


« Last Edit: July 23, 2014, 04:29:47 pm by qqla »

Belgarion

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 541
  • Respect: +18
  • School: BB College
  • School Grad Year: 2012
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #354 on: August 02, 2014, 08:10:55 pm »
+4
Subject Code/Name: MGMT20011 Business Negotiations - Winter Intensive 

Workload:  4 lectures and 2 tutorials a day for 5 days

Assessment:  Class Participation 10%
Participation in negotiation simulations in class 25%
Individual reflective essay based on negotiation simulation
(completed during intensive week and in-class) 15%
Take home exam 50%

Lectopia Enabled:  No

Past exams available:  No but a few sample question were given

Textbook Recommendation:  Lewicki, R, J., Saunders, D, M., and Barry B. (2011). Essentials of Negotiation, 5th edition. In my opinion, you must have the textbook and i will explain why. Luckily it is easily found on the net.

Lecturer(s): Peter Gahan

Year & Semester of completion: July 2014

Rating:  4.5 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments:

Being an intensive subject, it can drag on a bit at times. It involves back to back tutorials and lectures. We started at 9 am everyday, had a lunch break for an hour at 12:30 and then continued and finished around 4-5 pm everyday. We were given a bunch of pre-readings before the week had begun on top of the textbook readings. Honestly, i did all the pre-readings and found that they were not that helpful. I did not do the prescribed textbook reading as they basically prescribed the whole book (and i never read the textbook anyway. ;D)

Lectures
I have to say that this is the best subject i have done at university so far. Peter is a fantastic lecturer and quite easy to follow. We learnt a variety of topics such as: communication, differing negotiation styles and different types of negotiation. The only problem i had with the lectures were that i found it hard to apply it to the assessment at times. The content could get a little dry but i found it interesting overall. Everyday Peter lined up a guest lecturer (although one cancelled), normally an individual who is an expert in negotiations, such as an AFL player manager. I liked the real life perspectives they offered and the experiences they shared.

Tutorials
Tutorials consisted of various 'negotiation simulations'. I found the tutorials one of the best parts of the course. By negotiation simulation, they basically mean little games. The simulations often involved things like negotiating over a used car or an international negotiation between 2 countries. It often involved working with little groups within your tutorial so you got to know everyone really well. Normally the tutor would just oversee things and give a debrief at the end. Time flew in the tutorials as we all had so much fun

Assessment
The 10% for class participation is just for showing up to the tutorials (so show up to all of them and you are guaranteed at least 10% already).

 The participation in the simulations just involves having fun and practicing your debating skills. It helps to apply what you have learnt as well, but they are mostly common sense. Comparing my mark for this to others, i found that those of us who scored highly were the ones who contributed to class discussions during the debriefing at the end which involves having participated in the negotiations. All you have to say is something like how the negotiation went, what you think, etc. It was not hard at all. They will give you a rubric before the week starts based on the marking for this, but really it is up to the tutor's opinion and as long as you have contributed, you will get the marks.

Now the essay i found was the most difficult piece of assessment, but that is not saying much. It involved a negotiation simulation on the last day followed by an essay write up in class. They gave us a marking criteria beforehand for what should be included in the essay and you just had to follow it. They give plenty of time to write it and most people finished early.

Finally, the exam (i use the term loosely). The take home exam is released the week after the subject is finished. It is available for 2 days. It consists of 50 multiple choice questions worth 0.5 marks each and 10 short answer questions worth 2.5 marks each. All the answers to these questions can be found in the textbook. With the multiple choice questions, most of them involved exact wording form the textbook. The first 25 mc questions involved A-E answers while the second half were true/false questions. The answers for the short answer questions could also be easily found in the textbook (except for 2 questions, one involving you talking about what you learnt the most throughout the week and another based on a movie we watched during a lecture)

Overall i found this a fun and not too challenging subject. if you have any questions, feel free to pm me.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2014, 02:06:29 pm by Belgarion »
Bachelor of Biomedicine III @ UniMelb
Major: Cell and Developmental Biology

86

  • Victorian
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 468
  • Respect: +96
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #355 on: August 07, 2014, 07:58:50 pm »
+5
Subject Code/Name: MGMT20011 Business Negotiations 

Workload:  4 lectures and 2 tutorials a day for 5 days

Assessment: 
Tutorial attendance 10%
Participation in negotiation simulations in class 25%
Individual reflective essay based on negotiation simulation (completed during intensive week and in-class) 15%
Take home exam 50%

Lectopia Enabled:  No

Past exams available:  No but you wouldn't need them if they existed anyway

Textbook Recommendation:  Lewicki, R, J., Saunders, D, M., and Barry B. (2011). Essentials of Negotiation, 5th edition

Lecturer(s): Peter Gahan

Year & Semester of completion: July 2014

Rating: 2 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments:

If you're looking for the easiest and quickest H1 possible, Business Negotiations is for you. This subject is so easy it's not even funny. You go through all the lectures and tutorials in 5 days, Monday to Friday. Classes run 9-5 with an hour break from 12:30-1:30pm. You do 2 lectures and 2 tutorials per day. They persistently stress that you do the pre-readings before you begin the subject as you will struggle otherwise, which is a load of bull by the way. While some of the readings are interesting, they are absolutely not necessary to do well in the subject, and the exam does not assess them specifically.

First and foremost, if I were running the subject I would rename it to 'Principles of Business Negotiation' because honestly, this whole subject taught us about negotiation, not how to negotiate.

Lectures
Lectures were incredibly boring (save the fact that Peter Gahan had a sense of humor but that's about it), and not needed to do well in the exam or even needed to have an idea of what to do in the tutorials. The good thing was that the lectures were a summary of all the pre-readings so if you can't be bothered reading all that crap just read the lecture notes and save yourself some time. The lectures were an absolute drainer! Thank goodness Peter plays a healthy amount of entertaining video clips throughout the lectures to break the otherwise dry content. On some days he also plays full films which you can skip and just watch at home after. There were also guest lectures in which one ditched at the last minute and the rest were boring anyway (feel free to go home when it's their turn to deliver their lecture)

Content wise the subject and lectures didn't provide too many in-depth skills and knowledge. If you possess common sense, you will do well.

Tutorials
Tutorials were almost completely unrelated to lectures which rendered them practically useless. I found that the tutorials were an absolute waste of time, unnecessary and did not further my understanding of the concepts covered in lectures. You could have done none of the pre-readings, attended no lectures and still do well in the tutorials because honestly, all the exercises (they call them "negotiation simulations" but not be fooled by the name) they gave were nothing more than shabby negotiation situations ripped off the internet and filled to the brim with loopholes and technical fallacies that required nothing but common sense to do well in. The tutorials had a poor focus and sense of direction because of this. Many people ended up negotiating things that were simply not considered in the problem sheet.

Assessment
For the 25% allocated to class participation, as long as you talked a lot and looked like you knew what you were talking about (either through enthusiasm or hand movements and not laughing), you'd score highly in it. The 25% is all about participation and trying, and not really about applying ideas from lectures.

The exam (would you believe it) was the easiest part of the course in my opinion. In addition to being a takehome exam where you're given 2 days to do it, all of the questions were copied word-for-word from the textbook. (you can find the textbook online BTW, no need to waste money buying a copy) If you know how to use the SEARCH feature on your computer or laptop, you'll find answers to 95% of the questions in the textbook alone.

Conclusion
Business Negotiations is a joke of a subject. I wouldn't even consider it a real subject. In a normal 12-week semester, the course content would probably end by week 3. Tutorials were useless and the exam was a complete joke. You could have received the exam without doing any of the readings, attending any lectures or tutes and still do well because it's all ripped word-for-word from the textbook anyway. As I said in the opening paragraph, if you want a quick and dirty H1, you've found the right subject. The only real selling point of Business Negotiations is that it runs in July and can be completely in a very very short time frame, on top of being easy.

The reasoning behind my rating comes down to the poorly thought-out and poorly executed tutorials and lack of sense of direction that the subject seemed to suffer from. The tutorials seemed to be strung together loosely a week before the subject was set to commence, however the lecture notes were quite good in their summation of the readings.
Science, Melbourne University.

liuyang721

  • Victorian
  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Respect: +1
  • School: University of Melboune
  • School Grad Year: 2015
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #356 on: August 19, 2014, 04:31:45 pm »
+5
Subject Code/Name: ECOM40006/ECOM90013 Econometric Techniques

Workload: 2 1.5-hour lectures and a 1 hours of tutorial per week for 12 weeks. Total Time Commitment: 48 hours over the semester including class time

Assessment:
1. 3 Written Assignments (25%)
2. Tutorial Preparation and Attendance (5%)
3. Two hour exam (70%)

Prescribed Textbook: 
NO, some optional readings

Lecturer(s): Dr. Song Yong

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 1, 2014

Lectopia: Yes

Rating:  3/5

Your Mark/Grade: 75 (H2A)

Comments:

Lecture:
Although the subject offer lectopia, still need to attend the lecture since Yong's handwritten notes sometimes is not captured.
The subject is hard and really require a lot time to study.

Tutorial:
Charlie the tutor is a nice guy and you just turn up will get the 5%.

Assessments:
The 3 assignments are generally ok, except the second one has a lot of matrix things in it. Generally everyone got 23/25 for the three assignments.

Exam:
The exam is very difficult. It was 3 hours in 2013 and before, but Yong cut to 2 hours. 2013 and before had 4 questions but the 2014 paper had 5. No one is able to finish the exam and the average grade for the exam is less than 30/70.

Overall:
The subject scale up a lot and the average is around 73 according to the lecturer. It is best to have some linear algebra and stochastic process knowledge before attempt this subject.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2014, 09:28:19 pm by liuyang721 »
2013-2015 || Master of Accounting, University of Melbourne
2010-2012 || Bachelor of Science (Genetics Major), University of Melbourne
2009 VCE ENTER: 93.35 || ESL, Mathematical Methods (CAS), Specialist Mathematics, Physics, Biology, Chemistry & Chinese as FL

mahler004

  • Victorian
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 492
  • Respect: +64
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #357 on: October 22, 2014, 11:05:19 pm »
+16
Major: Biochemistry and Molecular Biology

First Year Subjects: 
  • Chemistry 1 and 2 (or the biomed version)
  • First year biology is 'highly recommended' but it's not a formal prereq - in all honesty, you can get away with not doing it if you've done high school biology, but it doesn't hurt to do it.

Second Year Subjects:
  • BCMB20002 - Biochemistry and Molecular Biology (or MCB)
  • BCMB20005 - Techniques in Molecular Science
  • BCMB20003 - Biochemical Regulation of Cell Function (not a prereq for anything in third year, but strongly recommended)

Third Year Subjects: 
  • All three of:
    • BCMB30001 - Protein Structure and Function
    • BCBM30002 - Functional Genomics and Bioinformatics
    • BCMB30010 - Advanced Techniques in Molecular Science (note - a quota subject)
  • Plus any of the following:
    • BCMB30011 - Metabolism and Nutrition
    • BCMB30003 - Molecular Aspects of Cell Biology
    • BCMB30004 - Cell Signalling and Neurochemistry
    • BIOM30003 - Biomedical Science Research Project
    • Any third year level subject from one of the following majors: Cell and Developmental Biology, Chemistry, Genetics, Human Structure and Function, Microbiology, Infection and Immunology, Neuroscience, Pathology, Pharmacology, Physiology, Plant Science, Science Informatics, Zoology.

This major is available for both Biomedicine and Science.

Year of completion: 2014

Comments:

Right, let's get the 2014 semester 2 subject reviews started. I obviously haven't completed my major yet, but barring any disasters over the next week and a half, I should be able to complete the major at the end of the semester. I'm giving myself a night off to relax (read - procrastinate) prior to getting stuck into hardcore study for my two exams over the next fortnight.

Reviewing a major is a funny thing, and your experiences with the major will largely depend on if you actually enjoy the content in question - I love biochemistry (hope I don't sound too tacky!) so I'm obviously going to enjoy learning about it. This is why I haven't attached a score to the major, as your enjoyment of the major will largely depend on your interest. The quality of the teaching staff is consistently high (especially in the prac subjects,) and I can honestly say I've never had a lecturer I'd consider 'bad' in any of my biochemistry subjects. The only complaints I have about the subjects are relatively minor - I loathed the small (7.5%) mid semester tests as I generally feel the effort required to do well is not adequately rewarded (a larger mark - even 10% would be more ideal.) In third year (unlike second year,) the 'theory' subjects have a written component (assignment or the like) which consists of 15% of the final mark. On the whole, the subjects are well taught and fairly assessed.

As the name suggests, the major devotes about half of it's time to biochemistry and half to molecular biology. In third year, the subject BCMB30001 largely deals with 'biochemistry' (with a strong structural biology focus,) and the subject BCMB30002 deals with 'molecular biology.' The distinction between the two isn't clear, and isn't really worth dwelling on. Unfortunately, if you like one of the two a lot, you'll have to do the other, although I don't see that as a downside. There's very little (in my opinion, too little) chemistry in biochemistry - for third year, only a little bit of thermodynamics is really needed, and there's very little hardcore organic and inorganic chemistry. Generally, the content in third year builds on the content presented in second year biochemistry although there's less of a focus on rote memorisation (that's definitely not to say no memorisation is needed,) and more of a focus on experimental techniques (more on this in a moment.) If you liked second year biochemistry, chances are you'll like third year biochemistry.

You have to do a third year prac subject (Advanced Techniques in Molecular Science) which is a fantastic subject and a great deal of fun (as my subject review reflects.) I can say it's been the best subject I've done in my degree. There's also an opportunity to do a third year research project (BIOM30003,) in the department. If you're going to do this, get in early. Spots fill up rapidly, especially for popular projects.

Biochemistry as a major has a heavy focus on experimental techniques, every subject in third year will devote a substantial amount of lecture time (say 20%) to techniques, and will expect you to know them well, and apply them in an exam. This differs from other majors in my experience, and can be a major sticking point for many students. I actually see this as a major plus in the major - the techniques that are taught are key techniques, and allow you to properly engage with the scientific literature.

Generally, people do a biochemistry major for one of three reasons:
  • They want to get into med/vet/dent/(insert health science postgrad here)
  • They want to do health/biomedical research
  • They need to major in something

I'd estimate there's a split about equally between the three, with maybe a slight bias towards the premeds. As you all know, any major is good to be a premed, just choose something that will get that mega GPA but still provide a good fallback. Biochem is an excellent major for doing research - as I've indicated, there's a strong focus on research in third year, and if your grades are good enough (H2A average or thereabouts,) it's a great department to do Honours in (which is my plan next year.) It's probably one of the better majors if you want to do typical 'wet' lab work (along with MIIM/straight chemistry.)

On the whole, I've really enjoyed my biochemistry major. It's a strongly recommended major if you're looking to do postgraduate life science research, or just want to learn more about biochemistry.

Note - regarding subject choices. In first year, you don't have to do biology, but it's a 'strongly recommended' prereq for BCMB20002. You can probably get away with not doing it if you did biology in year 12, but it doesn't hurt to do it. In second year, the subject BCMB20003 isn't a prereq for any third year subjects, but it introduces a lot of concepts that come up in third year, and generally eases the transition. It's perfectly possible to go well in third year having not done it, but it definitely helps.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2014, 11:36:06 pm by mahler004 »
BSc (Hons) 2015 Melbourne

PhD 2016-??? Melbourne

I want to be an architect.

ChickenCh0wM1en

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 772
  • Respect: +101
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #358 on: October 24, 2014, 09:54:36 pm »
+8
Subject Code/Name: EDUC10051 Sports Coaching: Theory and Practice 

Workload:  1 X 1hr weekly lecture, 1 X 2hr tutorial/practical per week

Assessment: 
- On-line tests related to readings (25 per cent) bi-weekly - 3 X 5% MCQ quizzes + 10% coaching certificate
- Coaching unit and rational (50 per cent) (exam period)
- Presentation (25 per cent) (mid semester) - A coaching session that runs for 10-15min per person

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture etc.

Past exams available:  N/A but sample assessments given

Textbook Recommendation:  Readings are provided on LMS

Lecturer(s): Many lecturers

Year & Semester of completion: 2014 Sem 2

Rating:  3.8 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: (Optional) - Not out yet

Comments:

A very bludge breadth but quite enjoyable. Didn't attend any lectures and the coordinator and staff became progressively disappointed/upset with the appalling lecture attendance rates across the cohort

First 3 tutorials you have will be at the education buildings where you go over the weekly readings with your "reading circles" AKA reading groups of ~5-6 people. Then the next 2 tutorials/practicals you have will be at the uni sport stadium where you actually get to play some sport - It's pretty much like a PE class :) You kind of forget how fun PE was back in the day- the practicals were good to take mind off things esp with uni. Also if you take this subject try to contribute as much as you can in these 2 practicals as it will give you a good idea of how to run your own coaching session.

In week 6 you will have the normal tutorial at the education building where you will be grouped up into sport groups for the coaching session (e.g. for us it was Basketball week 7, netball week 8, soccer week 9, AFL week 10).

So from week 7-10 you will be running OR participating in the coaching sessions. I coached soccer but I didn't do as well as I would have liked for it. Just make sure you try be as active and encouraging as possible - for some it came naturally since they naturally coach/referee sports. I on the other hand, haven't really played sport since year 10 LOL. I also felt the marks were pretty harsh or maybe it was just my tutor. I recall people who previously took it got 90+ for the coaching practicals...

Quizzes will be 5% each and are MCQ based. They shouldn't be too inaccessible if you have done your readings. It's hard to bluff these because even though the readings are on the LMS, they are scanned as a pdf so you can't really Ctrl+F to search for relevant keywords. You have 1 week from the day of opening to complete the quiz.

The good thing about part of this assessment is that you get 10% for a coaching certificate - free marks :DDDD

As for the essay I haven't really started but I definitely should. It revolves around developing a coaching program for an individual or group spanning 6 weeks. You will need to include your aims for them and what coaching philosophies you have and what styles you have. As to how hard it is to score H1 for the essay let alone the subject, I will update this soon ;)

I gave this subject a 3.8 for the reason that more than often I was doing doing assessments/tasks not because I really enjoyed them (c.f. pharmacology) but because it was a hurdle requirement or assessed. What was also a little bit of a letdown was that my tutor never responded to emails despite knowing our group emailed her to ask questions/help. The coordinator didn't want to be contacted by email and only wanted to chat about assessments or other matters in person after the lecture. Whether the lecturers/tutors who respond/contact via email are the minority or vice versa is another matter but from my experience so far, most staff I contacted from other subjects are very open to chatting/answering questions by email.
« Last Edit: October 24, 2014, 09:56:56 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.

ChickenCh0wM1en

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 772
  • Respect: +101
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #359 on: October 24, 2014, 10:23:18 pm »
+10
Subject Code/Name: PHRM20001 Pharmacology: How Drugs Work 

Workload:  3 X 1hr lecture, 5 X 1hr "special" topic lectures across the semester, 4 X 1 hr tutorials

Assessment: 
Continuing assessment of practical and computer-aided learning work during the semester (20%) - 10% pracs, 10% Self-directed learning tasks (SDLs)
Mid-semester assessment (20%) - MST test of 30 MCQ, 10 SAQ
A 2-hour written examination in the examination period (60%) - 60 MCQ + 6 SAQ where you pick 5 (I think)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture etc.

Past exams available:  Yes, quite a few I think.

Textbook Recommendation:  Don't need one but if you're super keen then can't go wrong with Rang & Dale

Lecturer(s):
N.B: stolen from Nubs
•   Jane Bourke
•   Graham Mackay
•   David Newgreen
•   Tony Hughes
•   Christine Wright
•   Alastair Stewart
•   Peter Crack
•   Catherine Laska
•   Michelle Hansen
•   James Ziogas
•   John Fitzgerald
•   Ken Winkel
•   Michael Lew

Year & Semester of completion: 2014 sem 2

Rating:  4.5 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: (Optional) Not out yet

Comments:

Like others have echoed, this subject has probably been one of the most well taught and interesting subjects I have taken to date. The cohesion between the content is rather amazing and so interwoven. I'm still ~3-4 weeks behind in lectures and when I mean behind I mean actually committing the content to memory rather than just a simple glance of the lecture slides. As of now, my favorite lectures were on the autonomic nervous system (Graham), Tony's lectures on pharmacokinetics, drugs for the cardiovascular system (Christine), Jane's lecture on drugs in sport and also the immunopharmacology lecture (Alistair). Kind of sad that Jane moved to Monash as I heard she used to lecture a larger portion for pharm - she was really funny and I felt she explained the concepts really well. I didn't really enjoy the toxins lecture - the stuff to me was mindnumbingly boring and the slides were just utter crap.
You are expected to memorise many of the drugs - sometimes it is just the name but sometimes you need to memorise the mechanism of action and side effects etc.

Tutes I would say are important to attend as they don't release answers for the SAQ - pretty bad for me because I didn't go to any :'(

You have 2 practicals for the semester (6% and 4% respectively)- 1st prac the assessment is based off a worksheet you hand up. I initially scored pretty bad for this but luckily I recognised that they made an error (missed a graph) in marking which lifted my mark :) 2nd prac assessment is based off an online quiz - make sure you take notes here because you will not be able to answer the online quiz without them.. I'm not really a practical kind of guy so I was initially really crapping myself about this section of the subject but in reality it isn't as bad as chem or bio pracs omg... Nevertheless, I wouldn't say I particularly enjoyed the practicals either which is making me question whether a pharmacology major for me is something I should pursue.

The 3 SDLs (4%, 4%, 2% distribution respectively) are rather tedious but free marks. Beware they take marks off for pretty minute things and for not being specific enough. You should probably aim to get at least 80% of the 10% (>8/10) here.

The MST is 20% so study hard for it. From my recollection there weren't many trick questions but make sure that you literally know everything as they can test you on anything. I walked out with people around me claiming how "easy" the MST was - average was 28/40 -> 70%.

As for the exam - I can't really comment at the moment but will probably edit later. The exam will be virtually identical in format/structure as the MST so get familiar with it - it's a pretty standard structure/format anyway.

Overall, I thought this subject was great and if there was no pharmacology practical core subject I would've 100% decided on my major already :P Unfortunately, that is not the case.
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.