Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

October 15, 2019, 05:23:12 am

Author Topic: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings  (Read 1041140 times)  Share 

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

StarWave

  • Victorian
  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 11
  • Respect: +4
  • School: Melbourne High School
  • School Grad Year: 2012
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #510 on: November 16, 2015, 08:40:43 pm »
+4
Subject Code/Name: ACCT30004 Auditing and Assurance Services

Workload:  1 x 2 hour lecture per week, 1 x 1 hour tutorial (starting in week 2) per week

Assessment: 15% mid-semester test, 15% group assignment, 70% final exam (hurdle requirement)

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes with screen capture

Past exams available:  2 past exams available. One (2010 exam) had feedback sheets identifying areas where students had the most amount of trouble. The other exam (2014 exam) had no feedback sheet available (had to attend a consult for suggested solutions).

Textbook Recommendation:  Leung, P, Coram, P, Cooper, B, Richardson, P (2015), Modern Auditing & Assurance Services, 6th Ed, John Wiley, Qld. I never bought or read the textbook so I'm not sure how useful it was. I recommend at least getting access to a copy in the library though (and taking pictures) since the weekly tutorial questions came straight from the textbook.

Lecturer(s): Trevor Tonkin

Year & Semester of completion: 2015, Semester 2

Rating:  3.5 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: TBA

Comments: This subject was much better than I expected actually. Back in first year I had a terrible feeling that this subject would be similar to the first year accounting subject "Accounting Processes and Analysis", a subject which I found incredibly dry and boring. Luckily Auditing and Assurance Services wasn't as boring as I thought it would be. Trevor is a fantastic engaging lecturer, and I found him to be quite passionate about the subject, and he seemed fairly approachable if any students required extra help understanding some of the concepts we learned in class.

I would recommend that students taking this subject attend lectures because Trevor utilised the blackboard in my lecture theatre quite frequently to draw timelines and other diagrams to assist in his explanations of certain concepts in class. The tutorials for this subject were also quite well run. Each week a list of discussion questions from the textbook were posted on the LMS. I highly advise students to at least read and attempt the questions before the tutorial each week so that you are aware of what was being discussed in class. I found the classes to be rather "full on", meaning that there was very little time for tutors to summarise tutorial questions (which should've been attempted anyway beforehand). I'm not sure how useful the textbook was, but as I've written above, I advise students to get access to a copy of the book in the commerce library and take some photos since preparing for the tutorials is essential to getting a decent mark in the subject (in my opinion). You might also have noticed that this accounting subject doesn't award any marks for tutorial participation, which is a change from the majority of accounting subjects in the major. However I still believe that speaking up in class is a good idea since you can bounce your ideas off your classmates and get a better learning experience in this manner. Tutorial solutions were available after each class but they are of limited usefulness since Trevor and the tutors always emphasised that the process rather than the final answer was the most important thing in the subject.

As for the assessment, the mid-semester test wasn't too difficult. As long as you revise your concepts and the "nitty-gritty stuff" as my tutor put it, it should be fairly straightforward. The mid-semester test only covered weeks 1 to 5, and it had a particular focus upon ethics and the legal liability of the auditor. The group assignment had to be completed in groups of 3 or 4 (no exceptions), so if you don't know anyone else taking the subject, I advise you to make friends in it as soon as possible. The assignment itself seemed harshly marked to me, since the average mark was 10/15. For my assignment we had to prepare an audit assessment report addressing the key areas of concern based off a case study given to us. A lot of referencing is required in relation to the auditing standards for the assignment so it's advisable that you pay attention to the section numbers in classes.

Lastly the final exam was a bit tricky in my opinion. There are 8 short answer questions worth 100 marks in total. All of them are aimed at testing different areas of the course. Each of them had a lot of reading since they were basically mini-case studies, so it's best if you read the question first, and then brainstorm possible answers before actually writing out your final answer in the exam. I adopted that technique during the exam and I finished with a bit of time to spare, so there's no real need to rush yourself if you plan and pace yourself properly.

Overall this subject was better than I was expecting. Coming off the dry Accounting Processes and Analysis subject, I was fairly surprised to see that Auditing as a whole be more applicable and practical.
VCE (2011-2012): 96.25
B. Comm. at UoM: 2013-2015

Stick

  • Victorian
  • ATAR Notes Legend
  • *******
  • Posts: 3777
  • Sticky. :P
  • Respect: +461
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #511 on: November 17, 2015, 04:50:07 pm »
+3
Subject Code/Name: GENE20002: Genes and Genomes

Workload:

Contact Hours: 3 x one hour lectures per week, 1 x one hour problem class per week.
Total Time Commitment: Estimated total time commitment of 170 hours

Assessment: A written class test held mid-semester (10%); two online assigments of equal value during the semester (15% in total); a 2-hour written examination in the examination period (75%)

Lectopia Enabled: Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available: Yes, the 2006, 2008 and 2010 exams are provided for revision of both the mid-semester test and the final exam.

Textbook Recommendation: A J Griffiths et al, Introduction to Genetic Analysis, 10th Ed. W H Freeman and Co.

I had it from GENE20001 Principles of Genetics but didn't use it this semester. However, I know that it relates to GENE20002 a lot better than GENE20001. It's not that difficult to "find" (*cough*) so it might be worth having.

For John's lectures there are often short handouts that he likes you to read. I didn't read them. :P

Lecturer(s):

Weeks 1-4, 10: Assoc Prof Meryl Davis - Molecular genetics
Weeks 5-6, 8-9, 11: Dr John Golz - Genomics
Week 12: Prof Phil Batterham (guest lecturer)

Problem-solving class teacher: Stephen Hardy

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 2 2015

Rating: 3.5/5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments:

I'm trying not to sound corrupted here, but I swear this is the easiest subject I've done at university to date (and for those who have taken GENE20001 will know, that's saying something). It's so easy I almost feel like it's a cause for concern. The key reason I found it easier than GENE20001 is that there's little maths involved; it's mainly a subject about understanding the theory, so as long as you get it the assessment is largely a matter of recall rather than trying to avoid silly careless mistakes. In addition to those looking for lighter workloads or a boost to their university results, I'd say that this subject is suitable to anyone from a non Science/Biomedicine degree looking to continue with a biology-related breadth. GENE20001 is not a prerequisite (or even recommended, for that matter) and while there is a small degree of overlap, anything relevant from GENE20001 that comes up in GENE20002 is explained again.

I took this subject after having taken BIOM20001 Molecular and Cellular Biomedicine (and GENE20001), having decided that genetics was something I didn't mind and wanting to explore it a little bit more to see if it was something I wanted to major in. BIOM20001 and GENE20001 (along with a biomedical practical subject - I took MIIM20002 Microbes, Infections and Responses) covered me in terms of prerequisites but I thought that GENE20002 would allow me to complete the picture a little bit better. I also had a feeling it would be relatively light (and I can say now that it certainly is) and that I could manage it in place of a breadth subject this semester. There was a notable overlap in content from BIOM20001, although at no point did I feel it was so significant that I felt pointless doing this subject. Often this subject went into more detail, or explained the concept better than it was in BIOM20001 (e.g. Hox genes). However, there were one or two things (e.g. lac operon) that I felt were better explained in BIOM20001. It's taken me a while, but this semester was the stage where I finally found genetics boring (this is something a lot of people realise sooner, so sorry for being late to the party :P ) so I've opted for another major, but I guess I'm glad I did this subject nonetheless.

As a second year Biomedicine student, it was odd for me to take this subject - as far as I was aware there were only three others in the same position taking this subject; their reasons being either the lighter workload or the likely boost to their GPA. Otherwise, the rest of the cohort mainly consisted of second year Science students intending to major in Genetics. The genetics cohort starts to become rather cohesive - almost like the Biomedicine cohort - due to the fact that the major requires three genetics subjects (for Science students, anyway) at second year level, with most also taking the three second year biochemistry subjects on offer.

I'll take a moment to discuss the lectures themselves. Meryl and John are the only lecturers in this subject, and they take exactly half of the lectures each. Meryl's lectures centre around the molecular aspect of genetics, in particular DNA replication, mutation and repair and gene expression. These lectures actually have a strong biochemical focus to them (although the biochemistry is kept very simple) and there is emphasis on contrasting between prokaryotes and eukaryotes. Meryl was not a bad lecturer, but there was often little to discuss in each class so it often felt as if the pace was slow (and we still finished most lectures early). For example, the notes were generally short in length and each slide only had a handful of information on them (and you didn't have to write a lot down). I don't think Meryl was particularly computer-savvy, so writing sort of appears rather randomly on the slides lol (in addition to a number of funny computer-related issues this year, which I won't go into now for the sake of trying to keep this brief). Overall, the content in this section of the course is simple and shouldn't be troubling to understand.

On the other hand, I felt John was a better lecturer but his lectures were more confusing - and I have a feeling he made the content sound more confusing than what it really was. John's lectures focus on the genomics side of things, so you'll look at general features of prokaryotic and eukaryotic genomes, as well as a six lecture block on the approach to characterising a genome (this part of the course was especially confusing). Towards the end of semester, he also discussed the genetics behind development. In a sense, John's lectures were more "proper" but I found the genomics element confusing and boring, so I ended up preferring Meryl largely out of her content (which actually was somewhat interesting).

Prof Phil Batterham from GENE20001 was invited in week 12 to give a small lecture series on whatever he wanted, so we had some rather random (but interesting) lectures on the history of genetics, and the human microbiome (a nice link to MIIM20002 - actually there were a number of links throughout the subject that made things a tad easier). There was a bit of confusion as to whether or not these lectures were examinable given they had little to do with the lecture content covered in this subject - we were told in a fairly typical fashion that everything is examinable but nothing from these lectures came up on the exam. :P Hence, sit back and enjoy these lectures (or don't go to them at all, if you like to live on the dangerous side XD).

One nasty habit the genetics team has is over-teaching the content during lectures and then not reflecting any of its difficulty in the assessment. This subject is no different. In Meryl's lectures, you spend a lot of time going through the details of various biochemical processes relating to genes - which could actually make this subject rather challenging - that never comes up in assessment again. John's lecture content in general was rather complex, but somehow the questions were all very straightforward, almost to the point where it seemed like his detailed lectures were pointless. As someone whose motivation for taking this subject included a lighter workload I wasn't complaining during the semester, but I kind of feel for those who were genuinely interested and passionate in genetics because the assessment kind of cheated them out of being able to show off their knowledge. While the lectures themselves were mostly fine, this is the biggest reason for the score I have awarded for this subject.

As in GENE20001, weekly problem-solving classes were taken by Stephen Hardy. Thankfully this semester the cohort size was much smaller compared to GENE20001, so these classes felt a lot more like tutorials. Due to timetabling I opted for the less popular problem-solving class, which only had about 25 other students in it, so the atmosphere was a lot more conducive to learning than it was last semester. Given the nature of this subject, the term "problem-solving" feels a little bit redundant, although in genetics I like how the focus isn't on pure recall but rather applying your knowledge to various observations. Nonetheless, I found these problem-solving classes useful in supplementing the lectures and guiding my study in terms of what I needed to know. Unlike last semester, I felt like the problem-solving classes complemented the lectures, rather than dominating them, which was a positive. Stephen was a good teacher although he often took too long explaining (relatively basic) things, causing us to often run out of time.

During the semester there are two assignments to be completed, each one worth 7.5% of your grade. The first assignment is an absolute joke. Sorry, but I'm calling it for what it is. It relates to Meryl's block of lectures and involves reading a scientific article and answering ten multiple choice questions via an LMS quiz. The article, questions and options were all provided before the LMS test opened, so all you had to do was read the article and find the answers to the questions, and submit them when you were ready. In total, the assignment took me 45 minutes because I actually read the article (it was only eight pages long) - having discussed it with some others it seems like most instead chose to just ctrl+F their way through (and still did fine). The irony is that the average for this assignment was 6.5/10 - it turns out many couldn't be bothered reading the article and so chose to guess some questions. <_< In addition, some students refused to submit their student declaration for the assessment on the LMS, automatically awarding them a zero. Just don't get me started.

The second assignment, on the other hand, has got to be the most difficult assessment task I have ever done at university. Relating to John's content, it involves using a gene sequencing program on the computers in the genetics laboratory to manipulate provided data and again determine answers to ten multiple choice questions which would later be submitted via the LMS (again, the questions and possible options were provided beforehand). John seemed to assume we were all experts in genetic sequencing programs or something - I spent six hours in the laboratory trying to find my way, and came close a number of times to quitting in frustration. In the end I managed to get ten answers but I was so fed up I had a feeling some of them were wrong (a feeling which turned out to be correct). John was available from time to time for help, so I deliberately went to the lab when he was there, but feedback was vague and rather pointless. My advice is to try and navigate to program before one of the sessions that John is around, so that when he's there you know exactly what help you need and what you need to ask. I think part of the problem was that I didn't want to be annoying and ask him how to do everything every five minutes (and I doubt he would have done that anyway). In some backwards fashion, averages for this assignment were higher compared to the first one. :S

The other key assessment during the mid-semester test, held in week 7. It covered lectures 1-18, contained 40 multiple choice questions and was of 45 minutes duration. The lectures in the same week as the mid-semester test (and the problem-solving class, for that matter) were all review lectures, making this test much easier to study for (although this really wasn't necessary). The lecturers relied on us sending in questions to go through during these review classes, but understandably few had any problems so they were very short in duration. For revision, it is recommended to go through the relevant parts of the past exams available - we were told that the questions asked would mainly be recall rather than application so don't waste time revising the application questions. I didn't study much for this test due to other assessments in other subjects and still did really well largely out of the fact that genetics subjects don't seem to delve into a lot of detail when it comes to their questions. In addition, a very large number of questions were recycled from both the past exams and problem-solving worksheets. The problem-solving class in the next week was used for feedback - on the whole I thought the cohort would do better but the average was 28/40.

The final exam is two hours in duration and is worth 75% of your grade. It is all multiple choice, so in effect the entire subject is assessed via multiple choice. The 2006, 2008 and 2010 exams were obviously slightly out of date, but the exam was still similar enough. It consisted of 40 two-mark questions and 8 five-mark application style questions (i.e. 120 marks in total). Once again, there was a large degree of recycling - even some of the questions you saw on the mid-semester test will appear on the exam. I finished the 2 mark questions in 45 minutes, leaving 75 minutes for just eight multiple choice questions. In the end, I spent a lot of time on these final questions just to make absolutely sure that I wasn't getting anything wrong, but I was still done with 30 minutes left and had the chance to re-check the paper in its entirety. Many people chose to leave the exam early. There were one or two questions involving very basic calculations so a scientific calculator was permitted in the exam. Again, the exam failed to examine in detail the content covered in the lectures and so was relatively easy to complete. A review lecture was held in SWOTVAC in preparation for this exam, and in addition to the available past exams and the problem-solving class worksheets, will adequately prepare you.

tl;dr

This subject wasn't a bad one, but in their approach I feel as if the genetics team have deprived students from a more intellectually challenging and stimulating opportunity. In a sense, they've set the expectation low, which seems to encourage students to try less and so the results are low, despite the fact that nothing is that difficult to complete. With relatively straightforward content, simple and recycled questions and easy assessment only done via multiple choice, I start to understand the notion of people selecting genetics subjects as GPA boosters. It's a bit of a shame really, because the lecture content itself was respectable, and I appreciate how we're encouraged to think as geneticists by applying our knowledge to problems. I echo my sentiments at the start of the review that this subject is suitable for anyone looking for an easy ride. That's all I have to say for now, so I wish you the best of luck in taking this subject (although you probably won't need it if you turn up to lectures and do what's expected of you).
« Last Edit: November 25, 2015, 11:14:19 am by Stick »
2017-2020: Doctor of Medicine - The University of Melbourne
2014-2016: Bachelor of Biomedicine - The University of Melbourne

CossieG

  • Victorian
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 202
  • Respect: +14
  • School Grad Year: 2013
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #512 on: November 17, 2015, 11:19:53 pm »
+6
Subject Code/Name: SWEN20003 Object Oriented Software Development 

Workload:  2 x 1-hour lectures, 1 x 2-hour tutorial/lab

Assessment: 

  • Project 1: 8%
  • Project 2: 22% broken into two parts
  • Midsemester test: 10%
  • Final exam: 60%

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available:  Just one "sample" exam, with no solutions. I didn't  do it.

Textbook Recommendation: 

I used Absolute Java, Walter Savitch, 3rd edition and found it very useful.

Lecturer(s): Shanika Karunasekera.

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 2, 2015

Rating:  4.5/5

Your Mark/Grade: TBA

Comments:

When Civil Engineers design a bridge, they ensure that the chance of it collapsing is as close to zero as possible. But how many times have you had to force-close an application, or have had to restart your OS? If Civil Engineers can design bridges that don't collapse, why can't we design software that doesn't collapse? In a nutshell, this is the problem that "software engineering" tries to address, and this subject will be your first door into the wonderful world of software engineering. Strap in, and be prepared to shift into 2nd gear, because this subject is NOT like your first year COMP subjects. Computing and Software Systems majors are required to complete this subject.

Topics covered

The topics are loosely thrown into the following main topics:

  • The Java language and all it's intricacies
  • The concept of "object oriented programming" (OOP) and it's main features
  • Introduction to software engineering: development frameworks and design patterns

The subject begins by teaching you the Java language with the assumption that you know C. Their syntax is quite similar, but Java is NOTHING like C (there's no pointers, so you can let out a sigh of relief). Java, in all its glory, is a very nice programming language. Java is fun. You will grow to love Java. The amount of included libraries is absolutely phenomenal, and that's only the standard ones. There are also tonnes of third party libraries out there on the internet. I won't say much about this part of the course, it's your basic "lets all hold hands and learn a programming language" that you would be very familiar with from first year.

Next, the subject moves into teaching you about the object oriented design paradigm and it's main features: encapsulation, inheritance, and polymorphism. You will learn about the differences between object oriented and procedural programming languages (such as C).  You will also learn how the features of OOP promote good code design, and how to use them to write well-designed code. In this part of the course you really need to keep an open mind and really think hard about what they're teaching you, some things might (will) not be immediately obvious.

The final part of the course will introduce you to software engineering, where design is king. You are introduced to the concept of design patterns and development frameworks (the latter which you would have already used in the projects), as well as UML modelling. I stress that this is only an introduction, and there are many many more things that are yet to be covered, which you will learn in your final year subjects. This part of the course is pretty chill, and doesn't require much work. But you should think about how the design patterns they introduce could be used in practice, they will appear on the exam, and you don't want to be surprised.

Assessment

Overall, assessment in this subject is pretty fair.

The projects are a huge step up from first year stuff, and you're expected to have a well designed application, rather than an application that merely "does the job". This semester we were required to write a 2D top-down racing game where you race against 3 AI controlled opponents, with the help of the Swing 2D game library. I believe last semester's project was a 2D top-down RPG. I would have preferred to have done the RPG but alas, we can't have it all. The two projects build on each other. In project 1 you write the basic engine, and in project 2 you design and implement the full game using your engine from project 2. The projects are very challenging, but also extremely fun and rewarding.

The exam was very fair. With no surprises or so-called challenge questions. If you kept up during semester and did your best at cramming everything the night before, you should be fine.

Closing thoughts

A very good subject, with fair assessment and good content. If you like programming, you will like this subject. But, you need to work a lot harder than first year, and put more thought into your code design before actually implementing it.
2013: English | Math Methods | Chemistry | Physics | Psychology |
2014 - 2017: Bachelor of Science at UoM (Computing and Software Systems)

Quote from: Tupac Shakur
The only thing that comes to a sleeping man is dreams.

StarWave

  • Victorian
  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 11
  • Respect: +4
  • School: Melbourne High School
  • School Grad Year: 2012
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #513 on: November 18, 2015, 01:39:13 am »
+3
Subject Code/Name: UNIB30005 Living Longer: A Global Diagnosis 

Workload: 1 x 2 hour lecture per week, 1 x 1 hour tutorial per week (starts in week 2 and ends in week 10, but this might change in future years)

Assessment: Quite a few assessment tasks make up your final mark
15% wiki
20% weekly blog entries
15% tutorial attendance and participation
50% final essay

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, but audio only

Past exams available: N/A, no exam in this subject

Textbook Recommendation: James C Riley (2001) Rising Life Expectancy: a global history (Cambridge University Press). Not sure how useful this book was. I never bought it, and I never read a copy from the library.

Lecturer(s): Glenn Trembath, along with weekly guest lecturers.

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 2, 2015

Rating:  4.5 out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments: Overall this subject was a solid choice for students looking for an "easy" breadth. However if you are not confident in your writing skills I don't think this breadth would be the best choice, since 85% of your final mark came from your essay writing skills in one form or another.

There have been a couple of reviews on this subject already so I'll stick to the key points. The tutorial participation (15%) is supposed to be 10% for attending the tutorial (they take attendance) and then 5% from your contributions in class. However in the tutorials I don't think that they really checked who said what, or who contributed the most, so this is an easy 15% straight up provided you attend all the tutorials you are enrolled into (they are really strict about this).

The weekly blogs (20%) were pretty relaxing for me to write. They enforced a strict 300 word limit (don't go over this or they'll immediately dock marks), and each blog was worth 2 marks. There were 10 blogs to write in the semester, and each blog was meant to cover the previous week's material (e.g. Week 3 blog covered Week 2 lectures and the tutorial). As long as you make some connection with the topic discussed in the first half of the lectures (I didn't find the guest lecturers to be very relevant for the course), and you make a few critical comments and come to a conclusion, you can easily get 2/2 for your blogs (and hence 20/20 overall for this piece of assessment).

The wiki summaries (15%) basically consisted of you choosing ONE week only, and then finding and summarising an article relating to that topic on the LMS. The article cannot be from the weekly readings, so some research is required. For me, this exercise was also quite straightforward, since it was basically like writing an extended blog. They enforced a strict 500 word limit on the wikis, so try to keep within this to avoid losing marks for no reason. In the relevant tutorial you were also expected to present your findings. However the presentation isn't formal at all, as you just sit at your spot and basically summarise your summary in 30 seconds or less, so don't get too worried about this.

The last piece of assessment was the massive 50% essay. I found that it takes at least a week to write a good essay to the standards that they expected of you, so plan accordingly for this. For the research topic, you can basically choose whatever you want. The subject coordinators provided a list of topics on the LMS for you to choose from, which was what I did. However, if you choose your own topic you must run it by your tutor first to ensure that it is appropriate. Try to have a large number of references, I recommend at least 10 at the bare minimum, and closer to 15 is ideal. There was a strict 2000 word limit for this essay, and once again, any breaches of the word limit resulted in marks being lost (excluding references).

Overall this subject was a fairly relaxed breadth. I attended all the lectures, but although I found them to be quite interesting, they weren't all that useful in hindsight. Tutorials themselves were fairly laid back, and I found the discussions to be quite interesting, as students from many disciplines took this as their breadth subject, so we got a lot of different viewpoints. I'd recommend this as a breadth subject for anyone who is reasonably confident in their writing skills, due to its relatively low time commitment.
VCE (2011-2012): 96.25
B. Comm. at UoM: 2013-2015

StarWave

  • Victorian
  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 11
  • Respect: +4
  • School: Melbourne High School
  • School Grad Year: 2012
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #514 on: November 18, 2015, 02:00:40 am »
+7
Subject Code/Name: FNCE30007: Derivative Securities 

Workload: 1 x 2 hour weekly lecture, 1 x 1 hour weekly tutorial

Assessment: 25% mid-semester test, 75% final exam

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available: No past exam, but one sample exam (of sorts) filled with the types of questions you could expect in the final.

Textbook Recommendation: Fundamentals of Futures and Options Markets (PNIE) 8th ed, Hull. I didn't buy it, nor did I read a copy from the library, so I cannot say how useful it is. I will say that my tutor recommended that you read it for its chapter on "The Greeks", so make of that what you will.

Lecturer(s): Ali Akyol

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 1, 2015

Rating: 4 out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H2A

Comments: I realise that I am posting this review a semester late. However the contents of the course are still very fresh in my mind, and I noticed that there is only one other review of this subject so far, so I wanted to share my experiences with it.

This subject is often described as the hardest subject in the finance major, and rightfully so. Right from week 1, you are bombarded with so much information and content that it's very difficult to keep track of it all. Luckily I had a few friends in the year level above me, so I already knew of the subjects reputation. I highly recommend any future students to summarise their class notes each week from lectures and tutorials, as it makes revising for the final exam a (relative) walk in the park.

The mid-semester test for my cohort was fairly simple and straightforward, and the average was 15 or 16 out of 20 from memory. I expected the final exam to be very difficult as a result. sheepgomoo has already summarised the content of the exam, so I'll just offer my views on it. Yes, I found the exam to be fairly difficult. However I didn't think it was as difficult as it could have been, so I was happy with that. To prepare for the exam, doing the practice exam and tutorial questions is required at the bare minimum. Although my exam had a couple of challenging theory questions, the majority of the exam was based off practical application of the concepts that we learned in class. Hence, practice is essential to getting a good mark in this subject. If you bought the textbook, doing the questions in that as well wouldn't be a bad idea.

For the classes themselves, I found them to be very useful in understanding the content. I also agree that your tutor can determine if you will understand the week's concepts or not. Since this subject does not take attendance, you can easily hop around between classes to determine the best tutor for you. I recommend doing this in the early weeks of the course so when it gets to more difficult weeks, you are already attending a class where the tutor teaches in a way which suits you the best.

The lectures were great, and I highly recommend that you make an effort to attend all of them in person. Failing this, Ali released lecture recordings with lecture capture, which was fairly useful during swotvac (I rewatched them to try and understand some of the more complicated concepts we learned in class). I heard that the lecturer in the second semester, Jonathan Dark, doesn't release lecture recordings either, so once again, make of that what you will.

Overall, this was a fairly decent subject. I'm not a particularly strong maths student, so I admit that the thought of doing this subject was terrifying. However I managed to come through with a decent mark, so it's not totally hopeless if you aren't the best at maths like I am. I will say once again though that this subject is very content heavy, and it is NOT an open book exam (unfortunately), so making a good set of notes throughout the semester can really assist you in both learning and retaining the content. The course also builds exponentially on earlier week's material, so be sure to master the early weeks. I recommend taking a day out during the mid-semester break to really master the material in the first few weeks of class (if you're taking it in semester one that is). However this subject really wasn't as terrifying as some people made it out to be. Yes, it definitely was difficult, but with a bit of discipline and hard work you can definitely get a decent mark for this subject.
VCE (2011-2012): 96.25
B. Comm. at UoM: 2013-2015

spectroscopy

  • National Moderator
  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1962
  • Respect: +355
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #515 on: November 18, 2015, 06:31:34 am »
+5
Subject Code/Name: Principles of Management

Workload: 1 x 2 hour lecture  + 1 x 1 hour tute (no mandatory attendance and lectures are recorded)

Assessment:  One individual assignment (10%), One group assignment (30%), Final exam (60%)

Lectopia Enabled:  yeah

Past exams available:  absolutely 0 and the tutes were a different style to the exam as well

Textbook Recommendation:  Samson, S. & Daft, R.L. (2015). Management (Asia Pacific 5th edition). CENGAGE Learning. - I didn't buy it but i borrowed it at a few points and its a pretty good textbook

Year & Semester of completion: Semester 2, 2015

Rating: I mean if you like management and liked business management in vce this is probably a 4.5/5

Your Mark/Grade: N/A

Comments:

TL:DR if you liked vce business management this subject is literally bus man 2.0. If you are a generally switched on person you shouldn't find the subject too difficult. It's absolutely NOT an easy breadth/commerce subject because although you might think some of the stuff is logical, you actually do need to study for it and there are specific things you have to know and mention to get good marks.


PRO TIP: The lectures were cool and fun in the sense that they lecturers told us awesome stories and had interesting stuff to say (they were interesting people!) but dont underestimate how good the textbook is for this subject LOL the textbook is absolutely mental in terms of how well it can explain things and i definitely recommend getting it if you are serious about doing well in this subject.

There's no past review on this subject so I'll run through the stuff you learn. You start of learning about different theories of management and the different perspectives of it that have evolved over time. Then each week you learn a new management topic from scratch and about the different theories of each topic eg; theories of leadership, what motivates workers, human resource management, how to strategically plan etc. It sounds kind of logical and alot of people stopped going to lectures because they felt like they could deduce what is being taught but in actuality alot of empirical research went into the theories that we studied and alot of quantitative evidence is there to support/debunk theories. Some lad who is just going to write "yea it is good 2 plan bcoz then u can b prepared for the future" is not going to get the same marks as someone who can mention the keywords, relevant studies to back up their idea, draw diagrams, mention and discuss the use of different matrices etc. The content is a little dry for most but if you are interested its definitely cool stuff. Especially if you like psych as well. Basically if you liked psych and bus man in vce and want to mix the two you should do this subject.

It's gonna sound weird but this is the most international subject I've done so far. My tute literally had 2 local students including me with the other 20 being international and I promise you this isn't an exaggeration. Every time the lecturer asked the audience a question the person answering would clearly be an international student. So if you want to meet people on exchange and from different countries this is an absolutely great subject and you can also make pretty decent friends in this subject too. The only problem is sometimes there is a communication barrier in the group work and assignments. If you are a commerce kid however seeing a group of students doing an assignment and speaking to each other in chinese will not be a new occurence.

Lectures:
These were ok. You go through the stuff and learn it but they are very long and the content is kinda dry. They are still mostly worth it though for the anecdotal stories the lecturers tell but dont fret if you miss a lecture, just use the textbook to revise it. Also the lectures were late in the day and I just think overall it was a recipe for people to be tired and sleepy and to not go. If the lectures were in 2 one hour blocks, and werent at like 3 pm or whatever it was (and they gave us practice exams) I would've given the subject a 5. Overall, the lecturers are really good teachers and pretty nice people and the course is quite clear in the content that is taught and examinable.

Tutes:
Tutes were good. Haven't heard many complaints about them. The kids who complained about them stopped going because there is no hurdle requirement. The tutors are all crazy smart and very helpful. They are also very patient with the fobby kids who rock up to the tutorial completely cooked. Mad props to the tutors.
Basically what happens is the tutor will run through the content for the past week, answer any questions, then make the tute complete a task then share their answers. If you do the work and can mention the buzzwords and theories the tutors will be so happy because i swear most of the kids do not know what is going on and answer the questions that the tutor doesnt even ask. Its actually pretty funny when the tutor says to a kid "so how should nestle in the aforementioned scenario act?" and the kid confers with his classmates in a different language for 30 seconds then with a straight face says "i think apple is the good company and google". There were a few occasions like this where the rest of the class would either slam their face into the desk or start losing it and laugh out loud. The tutors were so patient with it all though. If you dont understand the question, apple is the answer.
 
Assignments:
These are pretty fair assignments. You definitely need to know the content, the theories, and the buzzwords to do well. One is a 1000 word assignment on an article about a company and you have to talk about its relation to a management concept or something rather. For alot of people it will be their first experience with legit academic sources and referencing because all the articles had to be peer reviewed. Alot of kids messed up because they used case studies which were not okay as it had to be an article. The second assignment was a group assignment on the GFC. Pretty straight forward with google and with studying, and it is also a good assignment to bring your general knowledge on what really happened in the GFC up to scratch. It was basically just sub prime loans being defaulted on and the subsequent glut of housing dropped the value of homes. Be careful who is in your group in the assignment, I definitely dont recommend having a full 4 because more people means more communication errors. I had 3 and everyone was good so I can't complain but ive definitely heard horror stories.
 
Exam:
There were no practice exams but it was basically what the lecturer said it would be. They just gave you 6 questions about different areas of the course and asked you to answer 4 of the 6 in essay format. Nothing we didn't expect and it was generally pretty fair. Good fair exam overall.


Conculusion:
All said I'm giving it a 4.5/5 for a few reasons;
 - The subject is run very well, with great communication from staff to students
 - The teaching staff were the bees knees
 - Assessment was very fair.
 - All content taught very well.
 - No mandatory attendance
but: - no practice exams and 2 hour lectures in the afternoon with only 1 stream made clashes/being tired inevitable

good subject overall, shoutout to the lecturers who made it very fun and interesting
« Last Edit: November 18, 2015, 07:53:52 pm by spectroscopy »

sheepgomoo

  • Victorian
  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 147
  • pbbbbbttt
  • Respect: +21
  • School Grad Year: 2012
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #516 on: November 20, 2015, 01:28:33 pm »
+7
Subject Code/Name: FNCE30001 Investments

Workload:  1x2hr Lecture, 1x1hr Tute
   
Assessment:  20% Mid-sem test, 10% Tutorial work (see below), 70% 3hr Final exam.

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available:  Yes, 1 exam and extra questions.

Textbook Recommendation: Principles of Investments, Bodie et al, McGraw Hill Irwin, 2013. Didnít buy it; donít know how useful it is. Donít need it for the weekly tute qs. 
 
Lecturer(s): Juan Sotes-Paladino

Year & Semester of completion: 2015 Sem 2

Rating: 2 Out of 5

Comments:

Content:

***Please note, different lecturers take Sem 1 vs Sem 2 Investments, so some of these comments may not be applicable to your experiences :D

This course is an extension of some of the Business Finance topics, mainly regarding the equity and debt decisions individual investors take. Because of this, the first few topics regarding the formation of the CAPM will be familiar.

I personally didnít particularly like Juanís way of lecturing. There are a lot of mathematical proofs, and in class he just pointed to them on the slides using the laser pointer to explain them. I wouldíve preferred if he wrote them out (like my DS lecturer did). The point is; if youíre not great at maths, youíre going to have to spend a lot more time understanding the proofs, which are indeed important because most of the theory questions are based off of them.

Btw, lecture recordings are sufficient.

Mid-sem Test: As usual for finance subjects, the mid sem is a 1hr test taken during the lecture stream youíre enrolled in. ie. I would suggest picking the Thursday stream over the Tuesday one so you have more time to study :P. The majority of the test itself is relatively straight forward, but there are a few curveballs. My tips are: do the practice questions, understand the theory/proofs (but donít spend time memorising stuff, because itís multiple choiceÖ they give you the answers!), and keep an eye on the online tutor if you need help. Redoing the tute work isnít exceptionally helpful, but you can if you have the time.

Tutorials: The 10% from tutorials comes from handing up attempted ďPart BĒ questions to your tutor every week. Donít panic because most of these werenít super hard, nor long (usually 1 or 2 questions, takes around 30mins if you already understand the content, closer to 1hr if not). In addition to these, I suggest doing the questions that arenít asterisked (*), as the solutions to these are only discussed and given out in tutes. Overall, tutes were really important in consolidating the content (probably more important than lecturesÖ), so make sure you ask questions if you donít understand anything!

Exam: Consists of Part A: Multiple Choice and Part B: Short Answer. Thankfully the exam focuses more on the second half of the course, but there is still a question or two on the first few topics. Probably close to an overall mix of 30% theory and 70% calculation qs.

Tips? Do the practice questions, the overly easy practice exam (which does not reflect the exam at all, imo ~_~), redo tute qs, and go through the formula sheet to make sure you understand what each formula is and when theyíre to be used. Also, something you really need to nail down flat is arbitrage. Annoyingly enough, its not covered that much in lectures or tutes, and I found that I had to rely on my prior DS knowledge, but do your best to understand how to exploit the various arbitrage situations.

Overall: DS is often coined the hardest finance subject, but after doing Investments I honestly think Investments is the hardest, due to the in-depth understanding of the models/proofs that is required.

sheepgomoo

  • Victorian
  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 147
  • pbbbbbttt
  • Respect: +21
  • School Grad Year: 2012
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #517 on: November 20, 2015, 01:29:29 pm »
+5
Subject Code/Name: ECON20005 Competition and Strategy

Workload:  2x1hr Lectures, 1x1hr Tute

Assessment:  2x7.5% Assignments, 10% Tutorial participation (homework), 5% Tutorial attendance, 70% 2hr+15mins Final Exam

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available: Yes, but from an outdated course.

Textbook Recommendation: None. Readings drawn from multiple textbooks that youíre expected to borrow from the library. 

Lecturer(s): Harry Clarke

Year & Semester of completion: 2015 Sem 2

Rating: 1 Out of 5

Comments:

Content:
I, and countless others, fell into the trap that is this subject, after hearing about it being described as a super easy bludge subject from our friends. Honestly it isnít their fault because the whole course was rewritten by the current lecturer; this sem being the first time heís taken the subject.

The course covers a large span of topics regarding how businesses should make various strategic decisions to maximise their payoffs. Sound familiar? The first part of the course is all about game theory (as explored in intro micro), so the first three weeks are quite chill. But then it gets super difficult, with lots of theories and models and no more payoff diagrams.

Although Harryís slides are quite comprehensive, it is a good idea to listen to his lectures because sometimes he emphasises things that I feel tended to pop up on assignments/exam. Lecture recordings are sufficient.

One of the tutors, Daniel, posts up guides to certain topics that are very helpful for understanding (especially the maths).

Assignments: The first assignment mainly focused on application of models, with questions such as explain situations where game theory have applied to you, or apply the co-opetition model to an industry. The second assignment was more really hard mathematical games that I believe were beyond the scope of the course (and what was taught), but donít fuss too much over it because its worth 7.5% :P.

Tutorials: Tutors did random homework checks that contributed to the 10% participation/homework mark. There was also a 5% tutorial attendance mark. Some weeks had really long and complicated (and again, slightly beyond the course) questions, and some weeks were short and easy, which annoyed me. As to whether it helped understanding the material? Depends on your tutor, but I feel like the tute qs only covered about 20% of the content from the lectures, so not really.

Exam: Due to high request, Harry put up an exhaustive list of things we needed to know for the exam. There were 168 dotpoints Ė exhaustive indeed! However, it actually did cut down the content by a lot and most of the exam questions were linked to the knowledge required by the list, thankfully. There were some that were quite specific that werenít on the list, but if you had an overall grasp of the content you were able to at least write a few lines.

The exam format was a little strangeÖ sort of just three sentence questions that were in a seemingly random order, ranging from 3-6 marks each. The course had quite a large mix of quantitative examples and qualitative explanations, but the exam focused more on theory Ė probably 30% quantitative and 70% qualitative.

To prepare for the examÖ study the exhaustive list Harry gives? Understand the main concepts. The online tutor (Harry himself) isnít very helpful, because Harry flat out refused to answer questions like ďwill we be required to understand ____ in detail?Ē, but its still helpful to see the questions people ask and how Harry responds. Practice exams/more extensive calculation practice questions useless.

Overall: For a year 2 subject, the difficulty level considering the number of topics and depth of content was too high. If youíre considering taking this subject, Iíd think twice. Honestly I think how well you do depends on how lucky you areÖ ie. if Harry tests what you

sheepgomoo

  • Victorian
  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 147
  • pbbbbbttt
  • Respect: +21
  • School Grad Year: 2012
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #518 on: November 20, 2015, 01:30:29 pm »
+6
Subject Code/Name: ACCT30002 Enterprise Performance Management

Workload:  1x1.5hr Lecture, 1x1.5hr Workshop

Assessment:  8% Tutorial participation, 12% Group assignment, 10% Midsem test, 70% 3hr+30mins Final Exam

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available: Yes, 1 exam, and additional practice questions. No solutions apart from a few sample answers to specific qs provided.

Textbook Recommendation: None. Readings not super important, apart from the first Flamholtz article that is discussed in tutorials anyway.

Lecturer(s): Albie Brooks

Year & Semester of completion: 2015 Sem 2

Rating: 3.5 Out of 5

Comments:

Content:
Another management accounting subject. However, this one is different in that it gives us the already completed accounting information and asks what decisions should managers make? In many ways, this subject is like the accounting version of OB.

Albie looks like a mad scientist (amirite?)! He is quite different, not only in looks, but also in teaching style, to the other accounting lecturers (although theyíre all great friends; Iíve seen them dining together at books n bites before!). He is engaging to listen to, and isnít fussed about teaching the formal content slide by slide, telling us to just read it when weíre home; instead focusing on the practical application of the content. This is fine because the content isnít that hard in the first place.

Mid Sem Test: Two questions based on articles/cases, and one pure calculation question. Focuses on the first 3 topics, which is quite restrictive, so there isnít that much to study for: memorise the content, and know how to apply it. The articles/cases are released the weekend before the test, so brainstorm questions that may be asked. The tests werenít marked that harshly, but lots of people lost marks on calculations because there are no consequentials Ė make sure you know the formulae!

Assignment: In groups of on average 4 that donít have to be from the same tute. Focuses on the 5th and 6th topic Ė Balanced scorecards and reward systems. It was a relatively straightforward assignment, but was marked quite harshly. Theyíre looking for depth of understanding, and how much analysis youíve put into your scorecard. The word count is a bitch. It really forces you to be succinct.

Workshops: Workshops start in the first week. Theres 8% /participation/ up for grabs, meaning just attending wonít get you marks. Make sure you answer enough questions such that your tutor knows your name.

Youíve got a pick of 3 tutors. Honestly, I donít think it matters who you get because the content is not hard, but there are definitely some tutors that are better than others. Regardless, show up, engage with the content, contribute to the conversation, and youíll be fine.

The tute work is mostly practical applications, so expect case studies and articles. Make sure you glance over the questions before the tute, because itíll help you absorb the most important things people say. Its useless mindlessly writing everything down.

Exam: Yup, 30mins reading time, in which you can annotate as well! Use reading time wisely and think through the structure of your answer. Calculations are not directly tested, but you can use them to bolster your arguments.

In the last lecture, Albie goes through the exam structure, listing the most relevant topics of each question. However, this doesnít mean you can totally ignore the other topics, because theyíre all linked. Youíll write better answers if you link them together. Albie also posts up a practice exam and practice questions, and a few sample answers. From these, you really get a feel for what questions will be asked. Donít expect solutions from the consults. Instead, go with a prepared answer and the tutors/Albie will give feedback.

All in all, Albie said ďthere are no surprisesĒ, which was completely true, so the exam isnít super hard if you apply the theory to the case.

Overall: Very well structured subject. I personally didnít enjoy it that much because Iím not much of a practical application person, but itís a very well coordinated subject that is possible to do very well in.

sheepgomoo

  • Victorian
  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 147
  • pbbbbbttt
  • Respect: +21
  • School Grad Year: 2012
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #519 on: November 20, 2015, 01:31:14 pm »
+6
Subject Code/Name: ACCT30004 Auditing and Assurance Services

Workload:  1x2hr Lecture, 1x1hr Tute

Assessment:  15% Group Assignment, 15% Midsem Test, 70% 3hr+15mins Final Exam

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture.

Past exams available:  Yes, 3 exams, but only one provided with very general tips, ie. no solutions.

Textbook Recommendation: Modern Auditing & Assurance Services, 6th ed. Leung. Required for tute qs, and important for the midsem, but not overly helpful otherwise. If you do end up buying it, the 5th ed is sufficient (only outdated for the last two topics, which are covered very well in lectures/tutes anyway).

Lecturer(s): Trevor Tonkin

Year & Semester of completion: 2015 Sem 2

Rating: 4 Out of 5

Comments:

Content: The last accounting subject Ė and rightfully so! Auditing really builds on past accounting subjects, including ARA, IFA1, IFA2, APA (and even a bit of BLAW!). Trevor does suggest brushing up on previous accounting knowledge before the exam, and there are often questions that relate specifically to certain debits and credits (IFA1/2), ratios (ARA) and information systems (APA).

Trevor is aware of these ATARnotes subject reviews, and I donít know if heíll ever see this but *waves. You can tell that Trevor is very familiar with auditing, being a veteran auditor himself. However, his lectures are quite dry, as the content isnít all that hard. That being said though, he does sometimes scribble stuff on the blackboard, which does assist understanding. He also did a mini review lecture to help identify the links between the topics, which is fundamental for the exam. He really sets you up to know the required content, and thus if you need help, he is very willing to assist anyone who cares to ask.

A flaw I think though is that he often uses complicated language (in lectures and exams qs), which is often fundamental to understanding the question, that international students find difficult to understand. If English is a weakness of yours, dictionaries are your friend! There is enough time to use it, donít worry. 

Midsem Test: I think it was around 40qs for 15%? The average was 30/40. What made it harder than usual was the inclusion of questions testing really specific things that werenít necessarily mentioned in the lectures. This made reading the textbook essential to getting full marks. Thankfully, you donít really need the textbook for the rest of the course. Be careful of the wording of the question, and of the answers. Redoing tute qs wasnít very helpful.

Assignment: Completed in groups of strictly 3 or 4 people, not necessarily from your tute. Make sure you read the questions carefully and use accounting standards to understand what is required. I donít think the word count was that constraining, but overall the assignments were marked quite harshly, average being 11/15. It is possible to start (and finish) the assignment quite early on, as the content required has all been learnt when its released (I think).

Tutorials: Tute qs are drawn from the newest version (6th ed) of the textbook. If you donít want to buy it, just borrow from the library and take photos. Although there arenít any tute marks, attendance is almost essential Ė if you donít go, you really wonít know how to answer the questions. Tutes are all about application of the theory learnt in lectures.

I didnít prepare beforehand for the tutorials, but make sure you read the questions so you understand the key points being raised. The online solutions posted on the LMS are far less detailed than the content you get from going to a tute. Some tutors go indepth into the theory, whilst some focus on the ideal, solid answer, so Iíve known some people to go to two tutes to get a reinforced understanding.

Exam: Through the practice exams, you get a feel for what kind of questions youíll get. Dare I say that in many ways, I think the exam is easier than the actual lecture content. Lectures cover a lot of specific content, but to answer the exam qs, you really just need bits from each topic. Itís identifying which bits, why, and how they apply to the specific scenario that is the difficult part. Thankfully, Trevor provides tables to help you structure your answer that youíll get used to when preparing with the practice papers.

To prepare, know the core concepts loosely. I usually write out an overall course summary, but found that it wasnít that helpful for this subject. Redoing the tute work and discussing the practice exams with friends was way more effective (because Trevor did not give exam solutions, although I think they discussed key points you should address in the exam consults). As discussed above, do brush up on your previous accounting knowledge! I think Trevor enjoys chucking at least one ďcurveballĒ question in the exam that requires previous understanding.

Overall: I surprisingly enjoyed auditing more than I expected. Understand the content (the main bits you need), and just be smart at how you apply it.

Well, thatís me signing off on the last subject review Iíll ever do for my undergrad. Hopefully they were helpful, and if you have any questions donít hesitate to PM me! 

Bacondoesnotcausecancer

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 7
  • Respect: +6
  • School: St Patrick's
  • School Grad Year: 2012
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #520 on: November 21, 2015, 09:26:09 pm »
+3
Subject Code/Name: EDUC30070: Applying Coaching Science

Workload:  1 x 1hr lecture per week. 1 x 2hr tutorial/practical per week.

Assessment:  30% Case Study: Leadership in sport 1200 words due week 6.
30% Critical review of 3 articles (400 words each) 1200 words total due week 11.
40% Case study 1500 words due end of semester.

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture but it might change due to poor attendance.

Past exams available:  N/A

Textbook Recommendation:  I don't think you need a text book, the one that is recommended is Sports coaching: General principles manual is only like $35 so i guess it wouldn't hurt to get it, but you don't really need it.

Lecturer(s): Mel Nash, Maree Ellul, Andrew Slyfield.

Year & Semester of completion: 2015, S2.

Rating:  4 out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1 87

Comments:
This subject is an extension of the first year sports coaching subject, which you need to have done as a pre-requisite. The subject is split into 3 four week blocks, with Mel lecturing on Leadership, Team dynamics, and Nutrition. Maree lectures on Physiology, and Andrew lectures on Skill acquisition and some Sports Psychology. We had about 7 practical sessions throughout the semester which ran instead of the tute, and these were without a doubt the most enjoyable part of the subject. Unlike the practicals in the first year subject, there is no assessment where you have to coach a session. They are used to apply the theory that we learn in the lectures. So for Mel's block we played games and tasks that focussed on leadership and team cohesion. For Maree's pracs we participated in some fitness testing and learned some ways to train for different sports at different times of the season training different energy systems which was pretty good. For Andrew's pracs as we were applying skills, tactics and strategies, we played a heap of ball games, so these were really fun.
The other 5 tutorials we went over more theory and talked about the assessments so they were really important to attend, as they cover more of the lecture material in more detail.

I really enjoyed this subject and it was a great way to finish the degree, the workload wasn't too hard at all, and the pracs were so fun. It's a bit like physical education at school. The lecturers are all really good, and great to listen to.

The assessments may seem pretty easy and straightforward, but make sure you ask questions and really understand it before you start it because you can pick up a few good tips from the lecturers, and if you leave it to the last minute you may actually find them confusing. But once you know what you're doing and do some readings its more about getting the right material in the essays more so than writing style and ability.

The first assessment you chose a scenario where there is a team that has lost leadership or team cohesion and you have to apply theory and personal coaching experience to create a solution.
The second assessment asks you to find three articles on nutrition, physiology, and psychology that relate to your particular sport and summarise them and critically review them. It's a little bit tricky as you only have 400 words for each one.
The final assessment you have to choose a scenario where an athlete has either or a combination of a physiological, psychological, or nutritional problem and you have to create a periodised training program and action plan to get them over these issues.

If you enjoyed sports coaching in first year, you are going to really enjoy this subject, however there aren't many that do it, only had about 25-30 in the class, so that makes it a bit more fun too. Again a great subject from the Education faculty. Lecturers are really good, very helpful and approachable to ask questions.

Bacondoesnotcausecancer

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 7
  • Respect: +6
  • School: St Patrick's
  • School Grad Year: 2012
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #521 on: November 21, 2015, 09:53:19 pm »
+3
Subject Code/Name: EDUC10051: Sports Coaching: Theory and Practice

Workload:  1 x 1hr Lecture per week, 1 x 2hr practical per week.

Assessment:  3 x online quizzes 25% all up.
1 x Coaching practical (in pairs, 10 minutes each) 25% all up (part of it is assessed on your actual coaching demonstration, but most of it is from your self reflection of how it went).
1 x Case study due end of semester 50%
Hurdle requirements are reading circles and online certificate of Beginning Coaching Principles.

Lectopia Enabled:  Only if you have a clash, pretty strict on attendance at lectures.

Past exams available:  N/A, some samples may be provided e.g. risk assessment for coaching practical.

Textbook Recommendation:  The stuff covered in the reading circles will be the bulk of the stuff you reference in the final essay, and are where you find a lot of the answers to quizzes.

Lecturer(s): Mel Nash, Anna Krohn, Some guest lecturers.

Year & Semester of completion: 2015, S1

Rating: 4.5 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1 91

Comments: Great subject, not too challenging and thats why heaps of people do it. Start off in the first few weeks learning how to run a coaching session, risk assessment, types of drills, coaching philosophy and coaching pedagogy. So some tutes at the start of semester go into this theory and are really good for learning the content of the lectures. Then you have a practical session which is run by one of your tutors to demonstrate to you how to run a session and some tips for what you need to do.
The coaching sessions you run are spread out over 4 weeks, so if you aren't coaching your session you are being coached, most people choose ball sports so its great. And the good part about this coaching is that most of it is basic stuff and for beginners so even if you've never given sport a try before you will be able to do it, and probably really enjoy it.
Tips for the Coaching practical would be to make it simple and do it well, don't make it too complex because many people may not have played the sport you are coaching or might not know it well, so if you do really complex drills it may not work that well.
Sometimes when you pair up you might not get to do your own sport because there might not be enough people, or your sport is too hard to organise. I ended up just running a 10 minutes warm up and that counted as coaching.
Also, even though playing games is really fun, it is hard to teach everyone the skills, and rules and then integrate into a game in 10 or 20 minutes, you are better off just teaching one skill from a sport and then applying it to different drills. e.g. stationary passing, passing on the move, passing to a moving target. You can make drills into games like races repeating the same skill, but trying to make an actual game of your sport is unrealistic.
The final few weeks you go into a bit of sports psychology, motivation, and how to create a Meso plan to set you up for the final assignment. So you end up recapping a lot of the course from the whole semester to integrate into the last assignment, e.g. pedagogy, training methods, meso plans, individual session plans. And then providing evidence to support your Meso plan and the drills and type of coaching styles you are using to address a case study scenario. These final couple of tutes are really helpful and shouldn't be missed.

Quizzes are long and tedious to find the exact answer, but you should be able to get at least 80% on them from just looking or using google, then if you want to get full marks for them you will take ages trying to read through the readings and getting the right answers.

For the coaching practical the bulk of the marks are in the self reflection/SWOT analysis. Just be really critical of yourself and the marker will have no choice but to give you a good mark.

In the final assignment some parts may not have a word count, e.g. the Meso plan, and session plans so you can make them really detailed. you might even be able to find online some plans that match your sport and situation so you will be able to go off them.

Overall a really good subject, good for people who enjoy coaching and playing sport. But also really good for people who want to give it a go. Not too stressful and a bit more of a relaxing subject compared to the rest of your subjects though out the semester.

Bacondoesnotcausecancer

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 7
  • Respect: +6
  • School: St Patrick's
  • School Grad Year: 2012
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #522 on: November 21, 2015, 10:53:51 pm »
+6
Subject Code/Name: MIIM30016: Techniques in Microbiology 

Workload:  1 x 1hr Lecture your tutorial per week. 1 x 1hr Debrief session per week. 1x 3hr Practical per week.

Assessment:  2 x 5min Oral reports (done in pairs) worth 12.5% each.
2 x 1300 word written reports 12.5% each.
Satisfactory completion of a lab notebook (hurdle requirement).
1 x 2hr End of semester written exam 50%.

Lectopia Enabled:  Only about 3 lectures for the course, and the important ones will be provided for revision.

Past exams available:  No. Some sample questions to show exam style.

Textbook Recommendation:  N/A, you just need to buy the subject manual, everything else is provided to you.

Lecturer(s): Karena Waller

Year & Semester of completion: 2015, S1

Rating: 4.5 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1 80

Comments: Originally I saw this subject as a chore, I never liked Practical classes that I had had before, they were always assessed, rushed, and were never relaxed and enjoyable. However this subject was nothing I previously thought, and ended up being one of my favourite subjects for the year.
There are 5 practical classes throughout the semester spread over two weeks, with the other two weeks left over for assessment in the oral presentations.

You get split up into prac groups of 8 or 10 and are paired up with your prac partner on the first day and for the rest of the semester depending on where you sit on the first day. Each group rotates through the 5 pracs in different order.
Prac topics covered were; norovirus infection of macrophages, regulation of virulence with Citrobacter rodentium, EPEC effects on the host immune response (big focus in NF-kB pathway), HIV control of envelope expression by regulatory proteins Tat and Rev, and Bioinformatics by analysing the sequence of a mutant Mycobacterium tuberculosis strain.

For each prac you start off the week with a 1 hour introduction tutorial, where you are shown the rationale for the prac, and some detail about the bacterium or virus you are studying. You are provided with research articles that you should read to help you understand the molecular detail. Then you will have the first 3 hour prac for that topic, with a 1 hour tutorial session the following day, which also gets you ready for the rest of the prac the following week. Then in the second week of the block you will have a 1 hour session on either the journal club, or research ethics sessions, or sessions to help ask questions and be ready for the upcoming oral presentation or written report. Then you will have another 3 hour prac session, followed by a 1 hour debrief session the following day.

The prac demonstrators and tutors are really great, they help you understand the pracs so well and go into a lot of detail. You can ask a question at any time, and they really want to help you get it. For most things, the demonstrator shows you how to do the practical technique, then you and your partner do it. Whilst you are waiting for experiments to occur, or machines to work, you take down notes on the prac topic, and are given demonstrations for what you do next. It is done very efficiently and most of the time you will finish the practical sessions earlier than the 3 hour time slot. I wasn't sure I would enjoy having to do pracs every week, but I loved them in this subject, you actually got to do everything yourself and were given really good in-depth explanations by your demonstrators.

The note taking hurdle requirement isn't really hard, you only take notes down while you are in the prac sessions or tutorials, but you just have to make sure you stick in any handouts, or results, and show calculations you use. The idea of the prac journal is so that if another person picked it up they could follow your notes and do the prac. Additionally this prac book will be a great asset for you when you are studying for your exams, so try to keep it neat!

You will find that some prac demonstrators are better than others, or you like some more than others, but overall they all do well over enough to ensure you are well prepared for the orals and reports. However a lot of the onus is on you to ask questions and speak up if you don't get something. Because a lot of the people in your prac group are probably thinking the same thing.

The oral presentations are not marked harshly at all, everyone gets good marks, many over 80%. And the great thing is in this subject, is that you have 2 orals, so generally you will improve for your second one with the feedback from the first. In the orals you are paired up, so you might want to meet up with your partner to prepare, they look much better when you do, as opposed to doing it separately or over Facebook. For the oral, one person introduces the theory and experimental procedure for the prac, and the other explains the results and conclusions. Then for another 5 minutes you have question time where both of you are asked to answer questions, then students who are watching can ask questions. These aren't something to stress about, and the demonstrators usually give you good questions. For the next oral you and your partner alternate, and so the person who discussed results will next discuss the intro and vice versa.

The written reports are probably harder to do than the orals. You have to write the whole thing, not like in MIIM20002 where you have a template. But you are given 1300 words which is plenty to get all the relevant stuff down. You are guided through how to write these reports, and you will probably make a few mistakes on the first one, but this will really help you improve for the second one.

In the end you end up being assessed on 4 out of the 5 pracs either through an oral presentation or written report, however which ones may change, for example i didn't have to do an oral or written report on the bioinformatics prac which was lucky because i found that one pretty hard. However others will be assessed on this.

Journal clubs go through a research essay, and it is really picked apart by the lecturer for you to understand. Some of the techniques that we didn't do in our practicals were highlighted in this lecture, and you are expected to know them because they are assessed on the exam.

So when you end up preparing for the end of semester exam, you will usually be in a good position. You would have been assessed on 4 out of the 6 components, and you really do go into a lot of detail with some of the pracs, so you will know it well. There are 6 essay questions on the end of semester exam, one for each prac and a final one for the Journal club. You will already have really good summaries of each practical from your notebook, so this ends up being a great study tool. Also during each practical session you answer questions about each prac, which are really important to know thoroughly. They really set your understanding for the subject, and the ideas of these questions will come up in the exam.
The exam isn't too difficult, and you should be able to smash it out if you covered everything in your study. However for me I struggled a bit with the Bioinformatics question on the exam, which makes sense because i never really got it. So just make sure you never day dream during the semester, and try to understand all of your pracs while you are there doing it.

Much of the pathways that you cover in-depth in this subject actually come up in a lot of the other subjects of a microbiology major, so this subject gives you a bit of an advantage over others who don't do this subject.

Overall i really enjoyed this subject in the end, even though I thought it would be a struggle. It is compulsory for the Microbiology major so you might as well make the most of it. Its not as daunting as you may think, just show up for every class during the semester and really concentrate in them and ask heaps of questions and you should do well.

QUADRATUS

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 20
  • The Conqueror
  • Respect: +1
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #523 on: November 22, 2015, 10:29:19 pm »
+2
Subject Code/Name: ENGR20004 Engineering Mechanics 

Workload:
3 1hr lectures per week
1 2hr workshop per weed
total: 5hrs per week
 
Assessment:

2 mid semester tests - 15% (7.5% each)
Weekly Online Quizzes (pre workshop) - 5%
4 Assignments - 30% (7.5% each)
Final Exam - 50%

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture

Past exams available:  Yes, about 2 of them, solutions are not provided but

Textbook Recommendation:  Nope

Lecturer(s):: Dr. David Ackland

Year & Semester of completion: 2015 Semester 1

Rating:  3.5 Out of 5

Your Mark/Grade: H1

Comments:
This is the prerequisite subject for Mechanical, Civil and Electrical Engineering, so chances are that if youre doing any engineering discipline apart from Chemical and Biomedical, you will be doing this subject.
This subject is divided into 2 categories:
1. Statics
2. Dynamics

This subject is seriously heavy on the content, it requires a constant and thorough amount of work just to keep up, so dont expect to be bludging around and getting lucky at all.

Lectures: the lectures only teach us the bare minimum of  the content, the first few weeks are relatively easy and are basically a follow through of the mechanics content in ESD2. But from week 3 onwards, the content starts to get quite difficult and the pacing of the subject gets faster and faster.
Rocking up to lectures isnt really helping you in learning the content and it is strongly advised to look through the content at the end of the week to understand and keep up from whats taught.

Overall, the lectures arent really that helpful, they only involve one or two of the worked examples and they are perhaps  the easiest examples you can ever encounter, which wont really be asked on the exam.The questions in the statics component can vary significantly so again, the lectures were the worst part of the subject.

Workshops: The 2hr workshops are usually divided into 2 parts, the first hour involves going through weekly workshop questions that are given, and the next part is usually an experiment that  is related to the assignments.
The workshops are seriously helpful, because the tutors go through the ridiiculously hard tutorial questions in a detailed manner and gives us a thorough insight of the content.
while the weekly questions have full worked solutions provided, the solutions only give us a small explanation on whats really done and are really vague which is why i really recommend everyone to pay full attention and take down notes on the first part of the tute.

Workshop question sheets are divided into 2 parts, the first part are doable questions and require some sort of understanding of the content but the second part is what really gets you thinking. and are almost impossible to do after week 4.

Workshop prelabs are also recommended to be done before every workshop and they get you ready for  whats coming.

Mid sems:
The first mid sem is on the statics component till week 7. This mid sem was pretty hard, but thankfully they scaled everyones marks up by 8 because of how bad everyone else did.

because of this, the second mid sem on dynamics was made quite easy and with only some amount of work, and basic understanding, it was quite easy to achieve a mark over 80.

Assignments:
They were a big nuisance of this subject. While the practical component was nothing special, and the MATLAB coding was relatively  simple. The assignment questions were really time consuming and a bit of a pain to do.
what made it worse is that each of the assignment were to be done in a report format and with a limit of only 10 pages, which made things even worse.
They are group assignments are you get to form your group of 3 in the first workshop,
Having a good group is very important if you want to do well on assignments

Final Exam:
I was expecting the absolute worse for this exam, and with my average being quite bad before the exams, I had to put in a shit ton of work during SWOTVAC. Expecting the worse helped out, and attempt to work on any of the sample exams, mid sems or workshops questions to get you ready.
The exam itself wasnt too bad, we had to only do 5 questions out of 6 (meaning you can leave out one topic thats not your best,) this helped out, plus the 3 hour time on the exam helped out alot in going through your work and correcting any mistakes that you made.
I  strongly suggest you all to stay all the way till 3 hrs, i know most people who wanted to leave early and because of this, their final mark wasnt anywhere near they expected.


Conclusion:
Overall, this subject is quite interesting and gives a fundamental understanding of mechanical and structural engineering. There is alot of effort required in this subject, and the content can get really difficult but if you go through every single resource that they have provided, then you will recieve a decent enough mark. 
« Last Edit: November 22, 2015, 10:31:16 pm by QUADRATUS »

user999

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 2
  • Respect: +2
  • School: Unknown
  • School Grad Year: 2012
Re: University of Melbourne - Subject Reviews & Ratings
« Reply #524 on: November 25, 2015, 01:43:24 pm »
+8
Subject Code/Name: MAST30012 Discrete Mathematics

Workload:  3x1hr Lecture, 1x1hr Tute
   
Assessment: 20% assignments (3 assignments), 80% final exam

Lectopia Enabled:  Yes, with screen capture. Iwan did sometimes write on the board, which wasn't captured. When he did write on the board, I could sometimes guess what he wrote and sometimes I couldn't. Most of the time, what was written on the board wasn't too important. He really only wrote on the board to clarify certain points in the lecture slides.

Past exams available:  Yes, four past exams and their solutions were uploaded to LMS in week 12. 

Textbook Recommendation: Can't remember. Note: you don't need a textbook to do well. The slides provided combined with some googling is definitely sufficient for understanding the material.
 
Lecturer(s): Iwan Jensen

Year & Semester of completion: 2015 Sem 2

Rating: 5 Out of 5

Comments: This subject was really well organised. Each week, partially completed lecture slides were uploaded to LMS. The gaps were to be filled in during lectures. (Iwan lectures with his fully completed slides.) At the end of the week or the week after, completed lecture slides were uploaded to LMS. His slides were very clear, in my opinion. All the tutorial questions were uploaded at the beginning of the semester. In the tutorial I was in, we worked on the tutorial questions at our desk and asked questions if we needed help. Sometimes the tutor would tell everyone to listen so that he could talk about a key point to a tricky question. I expect that the other tutors ran their tutorials the same way. Answers to tutorial questions were uploaded to LMS a week after the tutorial or at the end of the week, my memory is a bit fuzzy on when exactly it was uploaded. The exam was very fair and tested whether you knew the material. Past exams were very helpful for preparing for the exam. While doing past papers, keep in mind that permutation conventions used in the subject can change between lecturers and so it can vary from year to year depending on who's teaching the course. During office hours, Iwan was very helpful and was very patient. Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed this subject.

Content: Addition principle, multiplication principle, pigeonhole principle, inclusion/exclusion principle, multinomials, dots and walls (a.k.a. stars and bars), Ramsey numbers, parity, Sperner's lemma, Stirling numbers of the second kind, lattice paths, ballot paths, binomial paths, Dyke paths, standard Young tableaux, Catalan numbers and what things they can count (e.g. number of binary trees with exactly n nodes), bijections between things that Catalan numbers count, Motzkin numbers and Motzkin paths, generating functions, functional equations, permutations, 15-puzzle (using permutations as in group theory) to analyse whether a configuration of a 15-puzzle is solvable (i.e. does there exist a sequence of moves such that the puzzle reads "1, 2, 3, ..., 15, no tile"?), designs (includes Steiner triple systems), Hadamard matrices and how they relate to square designs, Rubik's cube. I've probably left out some stuff.
« Last Edit: November 25, 2015, 03:17:29 pm by user999 »