Subject Reviews (with PDF compilation) (2 Viewers)

[jayadore]

Re: Subject Reviews (PDF updated 17/01/09)

JCTC2606 The Holocaust: History and Aftermath
Ease: 7/10
I would give this a 9/10 but there's a bunch of extensive reading material to get through if you want to do well. If you're interested and have the time, it shouldn't be a problem. You also won't need to attend the lectures (I'll elaborate on that in the next paragraph).

Lecturer: 8/10
Konrad Kwiet is amazing. Nicest lecturer ever. Having said that, his lecturing style sucks. He drones on a lot and if you don't follow closely, you'll get lost. A lot of worksheets/overheads. He has also somewhat mastered technology. Responds really quickly to emails and gives extensions really easily. Also, don't worry about attending the lectures (unless its out of interest), just DO YOUR READINGS. The outline also gives you all the assignment questions in advance so you can literally complete this course in the first two weeks of the semester and hand them in.

Interest: 5/10
I covered a lot of the material in other classes, so nothing amazing. Good first person sources though and Konrad played some good documentaries. Don't be silly and enroll in the class if you don't care for the Holocaust obviously.

Overall 7/10
It's probably best to have some background knowledge before taking this class. A lot of students carry over from previous Holocaust subjects or the Middle East subject with Dirk Moses (that I also did).


ENGL2659 The 18th Century: Scandal & Sociability
Ease: 5/10
Assignments are straightforward. You have two essays and three online discussion posts. The only reason this gets a 5 is because the material you have to get through is utter shit. Do not do this subject if you can't stand reading 18th century text about women written by men with stupid unexplainable excessive use of capitals. If you do take this class, just remember, all the reading material is available online as an e-book. Don't waste your time and money buying them.

Lecturer: 9/10
Nicola Parsons is wonderful and nice. Individual comments. Posts up powerpoints AND notes. Easy to follow lecturing style. She did get a bit lazy near the end of the semester where she just lumped everything all the notes from various weeks together and posted it in one go though. That was annoying.

Interest: 1/10.
Apologies in advance to everyone who enjoys this course/material. As I said, the whole course is reading about women who have been protrayed by men through their writing about their scandalous lives and how a real lady should really act. Otherwise you looked at the guy who wrote the dictionary. That was bullshit. The only interesting part was the beginning of the course where you looked at Habermas and the public sphere - and even then, the reading was confusing.

Overall: 6/10
Nicola Parsons is the only saving grace to for this class.

EDSE2001 Crafts Knowledge and Professional Practices I
Ease: 10/10
Easy as pie. Do your readings. Attend the lecturers. Contribute to class discussions like you've always done in education subjects. 40% practice lesson assignment is easy if you know how to deal with classes from previous experience. Don't sweat it, if you put effort into it, you'll do fine. The portfolio is a lot of work, but easy since it's a reflection. Watch the word count though.

Lecturer: 8/10
Love Kelly Freebody and Michael Anderson. Dorothy (can't remember her last name) is the other lecturer and she's crap. She was also my tutor and was totally unclear in terms of assignment guidelines etc. She's nice... just useless. I'm not sure about the lecturers (if they were any).

Interest: 10/10.
You only do this subject if you're going to teach it so you really do have be interested. Having that said, Kelly and Anderson do try hard to make the class interesting.

Overall 8/10
I speak very highly for this class. Hope you like it if you're doing 2nd year education!



I'll review EDUF2007 after my exam for it. Although I doubt it'll get a good rating. That class sucks really hard.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

Re: Subject Reviews (PDF updated 17/01/09)

zionist claptrap has no place in australian universities

 

[therealist]

Re: Subject Reviews (PDF updated 17/01/09)

can anyone who has done ECMT1020 in the past 3 years confirm whether the final exams are similar (in questions, not the number values) to the pre-2006 ones posted on blackboard?

 

[Resident]

Re: Subject Reviews (PDF updated 17/01/09)

ANAT2009 - Comparative primate anatomy
Ease: 7/10 The subject matter is quite simple with only a few concepts underpinning everything. That being said there are around 600 muscles/bones/features you are expected to know and be able to identity on wet specimens (cadavers). So if you struggle with nomenclature this might not be for you.

Lecturer: 7/10
Unit coordinator is Denis Dillon who delivers around 25% of the lectures, good lecturer and is a forensic osteology guru (she is frequently called away when police/airforce etc discover skeletal remains. Most of the lecturers are by Richard Ward slightly eccentric and a little too fond of acronyms but good lecture style. One lecture of delivered by Kevin Keay (head of department).

Interest: 9/10
I was really disinterested in the primate part of the course but ended up loving it. Usyd has an extensive collection in the Shellshear museum of skeletal and fossil remains not to mention the wet specimens and Wilson museum. Unit has really well done tutorials/prac classes once a week.

Overall: 8/10
Interested in musculoskeletal anatomy? Then this is the unit for you; really enjoyable class, great lectures, well run department. Can be also be done in first year (Bsc) if you choose your units right.


ANAT2010 - Concepts in neuroanatomy
Ease: 6/10
Assessment items are quite straightforward however it does require are reasonable amount of work. Concepts are not difficult to follow, basic neurophysiology, psychology etc. As with ANAT2009 there are a large number of structures, tracts and landmarks you are required to learn and understand the function of.

Lecturer: 6/10
Numerous lectures covering the different topics. Karen Cullen is the unit coordinator and is...strange but approachable. Karen and Vladimir Balcar both delivered reasonable lectures but some of the post docs were a little bored and it showed.

Interest: 8/10.
As with ANAT2009 there are once weekly tutorial/prac classes with wet specimens which are really enjoyable. Large list of essay topics covering all the research topics currently going in the department (and marked by the researcher accordingly).

Overall: 7/10
Really good course let down in some ways by a slightly insane unit coordinator. Classes are generally quite large too as this is a prerequisite for most of the further neuroscience units.

 

[spence]

Re: Subject Reviews (PDF updated 17/01/09)

PSYC1002
Ease: 7/10
Fairly straightforward assessments, very similar to PSYC1001. 10% is basically given to you again, in research participation and online quizzes. There's also a report worth 25%, and a multiple choice final worth 65%. None of the content is especially challenging.
Lecturers: 8/10
A bit of a mixed bag, but they're mostly very good, and as a whole I think they're better than in first semester.
Interest: 9/10
Cognitive processes had a lot of interesting stuff in it, and Caleb's a really good lecturer.
Learning and motivation was also really good, both interesting and pretty easy to understand, and can't really complain with Ben's lecturing.
I was expecting mental abilities to be really boring, the idea didn't interest me at all, but it was actually probably my favourite topic, I found it really interesting, and Leo was great.
Perception was probably the hardest, but was also really interesting.
Emotion was alright, nothing special though.
And human development was pretty boring imo, and the lecturer wasn't that good either.
Overall: 8/10
I enjoyed it

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

Re: Subject Reviews (PDF updated 17/01/09)

In senior chemistry labs, each of which runs for half a semester on a certain number of afternoons depending on how many subjects you're taking, you are placed in a lab independant of the subject attempted...

Senior Chemistry Laboratory: PHYSICAL/THEORETICAL

Ease: 2/10
Too much maths, not enough information available, references are unhelpful. This all combines to make for a painful, laboured lab semester. If you like PT labs maybe you'll enjoy it. I did not.
Interest: 1/10
You do a half hour of an experiment and then spend 7 hours in a computer room churning through the data that you obtained. Then you write a dull little report and move on to the next one. I did mine on building and characterising a solar cell. Which meant stick two pieces of glass together and then write long reports on how nitrogen can stick to titanium, or how chlorophyll absorbs light. Nothing interesting about it.
Demonstrators: 1/10
Very unhelpful. After our semester was over we were told the lot of 'em were sent to a demonstrator training program.
Involvement: 4/10
You'll have something to do most of the time and the time allotted is a little bit sparse. But what you are doing is boring.
Overall: 1/10
A shitstain on senior chemistry.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

Re: Subject Reviews (PDF updated 17/01/09)

In senior chemistry labs, each of which runs for half a semester on a certain number of afternoons depending on how many subjects you're taking, you are placed in a lab independant of the subject attempted.

In the second half of semester 2 you are allocated to a laboratory of your choice in one of three disciplines: Organic, Inorganic, or Physical/Theoretical. I chose Organic...

Senior Chemistry Laboratory: ORGANIC WORKSHOP

Ease: 5/10
The experiments are not easy - whereas organic experiments throughout undergrad chemistry labs are chosen for their ease, these ones required a bit more patience, technique and understanding. The experiments also didn't always work or go anywhere near close to completion, which offers a challenge. The apparatus's used are complex and a thorough understanding of organic spectra is needed to elucidate the structures of the molecules you make. Lab report questions are not easy and need a lot of time to be spent on them. Having said all that, I got first in the whole year woop woop!
Interest: 10/10
All the experiments looked great, but I only got to do three. Nevertheless, all three I attempted (more later) were a lot of fun and the reports were interesting, even if a bit too challenging, to write up. This stuff is essential organic chemistry so if you like organic chem you'll be on easy street.
Demonstrators: 10/10
Great batch. The organic demonstrators from first semester must have been sent on their way and replaced because these guys were all very helpful, very enthusiastic, very relaxed and awesome all around. Trent was the best demo we had, but the others were all pretty good: Althea (very nice), Sam (hilarious and he encouraged us to smell the chemicals which meant i wasn't expecting pyridine to smell quite so bad), and Fargol (also very nice and helpful). There were others on the days I was not in the lab but I don't know much about 'em.
Involvement: 10/10
Always something to do and always a fair amount of thought required. You'll be running around like a mad chook for the first few weeks but by the end I felt as if I had a pretty good command of organic chemistry apparatus's.
Overall: 10/10
I enjoyed them heaps. Basically it runs like this:

Weeks 1-2: A compulsory experiment in purifying a mystery compound, working out what the compound is through spectra, and then performing experiments on the compound to verify it. I got a phenol/ketone so I verified it through making a benzoate ester and a phenylhydrazone. None of these experiments worked particularly well.

Weeks 3-6: You choose some experiments based on how many subjects you're attempting. The experiments offered are:

Natural Product Isolation - You're given pepper, tomato and nutmeg and you have to isolate a natural product and then find out what it is via analysis of spectra. Very hard spectra but its rewarding. I did this one. A pretty hard column is required too.

Synthesis of Azulene - A blue hydrocarbon! Essential organic chemistry here with a range of pretty neat reactions. An overnight reflux and a simple column are the hardest parts. After that you have to thoroughly explain the mechanisms of all steps, stereochemisty included. I did this one.

Synthesis of Hexaphenylbenzene - Melting point of over 400C! More essential organic chem but on a very, very micro scale. I did part of this for fun. The questions are easy from what I gathered.

Stereoselective Syntheses - You make things that have a certain stereochemical outcome then you perform your own HNMR analysis to find out which stereoisomer you made. The questions looked incredibly hard for this one so I didn't attempt it. It also looked a bit boring imo.

One Pot Reactions - Messy, essential organic chemistry. You do some neat one pot reactions (like the Mannich reaction) so the prac work is easy. But theres some computer modelling to be done afterwards and the questions looked pretty hard.

So yeah, a lot of fun but pretty involved and more difficult than previous organic chemistry sessions.

 

[dafs2]

Re: Subject Reviews (PDF updated 17/01/09)

ECOP1001 Economics as a Social Science

Ease: 7/10. The material is covered very nicely, lectures are worth attending (although the textbook is pretty much a hard copy of them). The readings were quite reasonable in terms of content and size.

Lecturer: 10/10. Frank Stilwell lives up to his reputation. Truly the best lecturer I’ve had at USYD so far. He’s witty, funny and his lectures are excellent in regards to the material he covers and the style it is presented it. Even worth going to at 5pm.

Interest: 7/10. Not a big fan of economics-related things, but I chose this as I need to do ECOP as a minor for my degree. However, Frank made the subject quite entertaining.

Overall: 8/10. Interesting content, good readings and a wonderful lecturer.

ECOP1004: Economy & Society

Ease: 8.5/10
If you’ve done ECOP1001, this won’t be difficult at all. It draws upon a Neoclassical understanding of the economy, while looking at the interrelationship of economy and many other social components (institutions, class, gender etc). The size of the readings were actually shockingly small, however this was the first year that this unit has ever been offered so, it was probably a test-run – future classes of ECOP1004 probably won’t have this luxury.
Lecturer: 9/10
Damien Cahill was a very nice guy who was quite passionate about teaching his students – he’d always have Youtube videos ready to demonstrate what he was talking about, used group exercises sometimes to break up the pattern of boring, typical lectures and was always ready to talk to students if they needed help.
Interest: 7/10
Some weeks had interesting topics, but some were quite dull for me – ie Australian Labour Markets, Emissions Trading etc.
Overall: 8/10
Not much to complain about here – good lecturer, easy readings and digestible amounts of lecture content.

GRMN1111: Junior German 1
Ease: 8/10
I was about to drop this course after the first week – the initial grammar lessons can be very scary, especially if you have never learnt another language in such a structured method. However, stick with the course, be dedicated with your learning and it’ll be easy.
Lecturer: 7/10
Andrea Bandhauer was an intimidating woman, however she became much more nicer in GRMN1122 (review below). Nevertheless, she was only like this during her lectures because it was her teaching method (I assume) to scare students into learning something – and there’s nothing like public shaming in front a whole lecture to make you remember something.
Interest: 9/10
My tutors were wonderful and the class was so fun! Learning how to speak German and utilise it was very rewarding.
Overall: 9/10
Highly recommended.

GRMN1122: Junior German 2
Ease: 9/10
After finishing GRMN1111, this unit seems unbelievably ‘easy’ – and it is! Once you get through the first round of grammar from the previous unit, it becomes much more easier. However, you need to ensure you keep practicing your new grammar and vocabulary each week for this to happen.
Lecturer: 8/10
The same lecturer from GRMN1111- the head of the German Department, Andrea Bandhauer. I think she was much more nicer this semester because we weren’t absolute beginner idiots anymore. The bottom line was that she was effective in her teaching.
Interest: 9/10
German was by far the most fun, engaging and rewarding unit to complete. The tutorial sizes for GRMN1122 are quite small so you actually do get to know your fellow classmates and the tutors were very fun and friendly. It’s only difficult if you don’t keep up with the work and feel completely lost all the time.
Overall: 9/10
Highly recommended.

GCST2610: Intimacy, Love and Friendship
Ease: 7/10
Most people laugh at the name of ‘Intimacy, Love and Friendship’, although it is not as easy to study as it sounds. Some of the readings were quite dense, thick and really required complete attention to understand. The course goes into much deeper topics than the UOS title suggests.
Lecturer: 6/10
She was kind of … off-topic sometimes and was quite eccentric. Sometimes, it seemed like the material presented had nothing to do with the course, although she’d later surprise us by tying it to major course concepts. This is a woman who showed us scenes of ‘Sex and The City’ – the movie and blasted Barry Manilow in the General Lecture Theatre. Believe it or not, it actually had links to the course topic.

Interest: 6/10
The course is divided into three components as its UOS title suggests, and I found intimacy and love to be the most interesting. The best part of the course was a student-run lecture on the concept of love – and it was by far the most compelling, engaging and challenging thing I have seen in a lecture so far at USYD.

Overall: 7/10
Assessment structure was good (there’s a 50% essay instead of an exam, so make sure you go to the lectures/ weekly online reflections were fairly easy at only 100 words), content was fairly interesting and readings were well proportioned.

 

[dafs2]

Re: Subject Reviews (PDF updated 17/01/09)

GOVT1105 : Geopolitics
Ease: 5/10
The only topic I really found interesting was the Rise of China… everything else was kind of dull and I fell asleep many times during the 2-hour lectures. Some people loved it and found it very engaging – lots of tutorial arguments over things such as the War on Terrorism, the positives/negatives of Nationalism and globalisation. Some of the lecture content also didn’t seem well linked to the actual concept of geopolitics. The exam consists of an entire section on very specific parts of the reader (which is massive in content) so yes, you’ll actually have to do them. I truly hated the reader – I did do my notes every week on them, but by the time I had to read them, it was just all so dull and boring, it didn’t absorb in my mind at all.
Lecturers: 5/10
Previous GOVT1105 reviews have stated that Diarmuid tends to mumble and drift off a lot…. I can confirm that. However, he wasn’t that bad and got through the material in a structured way. Next year’s (2010) GOVT unit have a different lecturer though.
Interest: 3/10
I liked the Rise of China and that was all. Enough said.
Overall: 3/10
It wouldn’t have been that bad of a subject if it wasn’t for the sheer massive size of the reading content. Just another topic for GOVT major students to go through. I wouldn’t have done this unit if I wasn’t forced to.

GOVT1101: Australian Politics
Ease: 8/10
If you love Australian politics already, this won’t be of much difficulty for you. The assignment structure was done very nicely – a bunch of small assignments which led up to the major 40% essay, so we received feedback for development on the way while receiving marks for things such as essay plans. The exam was excellent in regards to its structure – 20 questions of a maximum 100 (or 150?) word limit. The questions were quite easy if you had turned up to the lectures and done the readings, which were one chapter of a textbook per week.
Lecturers: 8/10
Rodney Smith structured the content very well and was prepared with the content.
Interest: 7/10
Although I fell asleep in many lectures, it was an engaging and interesting unit with an excellent assignment structure, especially for first-year students.
Overall: 8/10
Good lecturer, content wasn’t difficult and well-structured assessments.

 

[danz90]

Re: Subject Reviews (PDF updated 17/01/09)

PHAR1822 Physical Pharmaceutics and Formulation A

Ease: 8/10
The concepts were a little difficult (its a 2nd year subject put into 1st year), but I got the hang of it towards the end.

Lecturers: 8/10
Paul Young is OK I guess, he is quite good at explaining things.

Interest: 10/10
Has to be my favourite subject this semester.. the labs were good, and just enjoyed the subject structure and content overall.

Overall: 9/10
Favourite subject this semester, has a fair and non-intense assessment structure. I guess I only disliked the maths component. .


PHAR1821 Social Pharmacy

Ease: 9/10
Mainly required a lot of memorising. Lecture content was mainly psychology-based.

Lecturers: 9.5/10
Lorraine Smith was really good, I enjoyed her lecturing.

Interest: 7/10
I personally don't really find much interest in psychology... BUT the self-management, chronic illness stream was definitely quite interesting.

Overall: 8/10
I'd say I enjoyed this subject.. but at times the content dragged.


MBLG1001 Molecular Biology & Genetics (Intro)

Ease: 6/10
Generally difficult subject, heaps of concepts to understand. Hated genetics.

Lecturers: 8/10
Dale Hancock was pretty good, but Gareth Denyer had to be the best. Bruce Lyon spoke very fast and sometimes couldn't hear him properly.

Interest: 7/10
Hated genetics, always have. The whole DNA/Proteome part draggged, but was OK.

Overall: 7/10
I can't say I ENJOYED this subject too much. The 5hr labs were really exhausting, content dragged a fair bit, and don't think many others fancied it either.


CHEM1612 Chemistry B (Pharmacy)

Ease: 7.5/10
The final exam was really tricky and had unexpected questions. The subject had a lot of content which wasn't cruising stuff.

Lecturers: 8/10
Ron Clarke was really good at explaining things, and his notes were great. Toby Hudson was OK for teaching the course for the first time, but could polish up on his lecturing skills.

Interest: 7/10
Alot of thermodynamics and inorganic chem, not exactly my thing.. But there were quite a few topics that overlapped with PHAR1822, so it helped there.

Overall: 8/10
Once again, excellent organisation by Adam Bridgeman in First Year Chem, but the course didn't really interest me as much as organic chem in CHEM1611.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

Re: Subject Reviews (PDF updated 17/01/09)

ron clarke is a very nice man, but he is by far the worst chemistry lecturer i've had - worse than beattie.

 

[spence]

Re: Subject Reviews (PDF updated 17/01/09)

PHIL1012 Introductory Logic

Ease: 8/10
Personally I found it pretty easy, although lots of people struggled. Assessments were basic, two assignments worth 25% each, and a final worth 50%. Some of the questions were challenging, but were doable if you understood the content.

Lecturer: 7/10
Nick Smith is a good lecturer. Although he isn't particularly entertaining, he explains things very well. He also photocopied his textbook and had it distributed as a reader, rather than making us buy the actual book.
Unfortunately, my tutor was terrible. He often contradicted himself, confusing everyone. He often seemed like he had no idea what was happening.

Interest: 8/10
A lot more interesting than I was expecting, I really enjoyed it.

Overall: 7/10
Very good course, slightly let down by my tutor. Would recommend it.

 

[flaganarchy]

Re: Subject Reviews (PDF updated 17/01/09)

PSYC1002- Introduction to Psych 2

Ease - 5/10 - pretty difficult content, not as interesting as last sem so its harder to stay on top of it all... i guess if you do the work you are alright though.

Lecturer - 5/10 - some were really good (eg. Calab), some were horrible (eg. human dev person).

Interest - 8/10 - interesting content generally... but some of it does get dry at times.

Overall - 6/10 - its not really an easy subject... i don't know it was ok.



PHIL1013- Society, Self and Knowledge

Ease - 7/10 - lots of ready and pretty weird content

Lecturer- 4/10 - pretty horrible to be honest

Interest - 7/10 - if you like academic wanky stuff its pretty cool

Overall - 6/10- decent

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

Re: Subject Reviews (PDF updated 17/01/09)

wow if i was questioning my enrolment in PHIL1013 that'd sure help me out!

 

[Kujah]

Re: Subject Reviews (PDF updated 17/01/09)

JCTC2606 The Holocaust: History and Aftermath

Ease: 7.5/10
A lot of readings, but that depends if you really want to engage in tutorial discussions. If you can simply do your essays and your presentation during your given week, you should be fine. I'd probably even say there'd be no need to attend the lectures themselves.

Lecturer: 7/10
Konrad is a great and nice guy all round. Perhaps too nice. But his lecturing style was quite unsatisfactory, as he had the habit of triggering a mass exodus of students half way through his lecture. However, his performance in tutorials is a bit better, with a lower of number of students.

Interest: 7/10
If you're interested in the Holocaust, this would be the unit for you. Though, it can be quite tedious at times.

Overall 7/10
Would probably do it again - it was almost a bludge subject.

 

[spence]

Re: Subject Reviews (PDF updated 17/01/09)

PHIL2642 Critical Thinking

Ease: 8/10
I found the content all very easy to understand, and all the assessments were very reasonable. Assessment is a midsem exam, which I found really easy, but apparently a lot of people failed; an essay, and a final exam, which was very similar to previous years (about 20% was word for word from past exams).

Lecturer: 9/10
Luke Russell is a great lecturer, explains things really well, and made his lectures interesting and funny. Also had a really good tutor

Interest: 8/10
There's a lot of interesting content, and there were really interesting essay topics to choose from (conspiracy theories, intelligent design, etc.)

Overall: 8/10
Enjoyable course, also pretty easy

 

[ddtng]

Re: Subject Reviews (PDF updated 17/01/09)

There seems to be a lack of geos or envi on here. Not worth the effort going through every one I've done, as I don't think many people here have any interest in it at all, but there is one unit that doesn't appear to have much going for it, but always end up with a reasonable amount of students, out of nowhere.

ENVI2112 Atmospheric Processes and Climate

Ease: 6/10
Ease in lectures: don't turn up. Honestly. You'll never get anything more out the lectures than what is already on the lecture slides, which are over 60 slides in length, and which rarely get covered properly in class because of their length anyways. All of it originated from the textbook, so naturally if you get the textbook and use it then you are set. Ease in assessments: you will be annoyed to no end by numerous pointless 5% assignments, often asking you to perform menial tasks, such as calculating a yearly average of coral transport observations, and then writing a page of what you think this means. In addition to this, there is a field trip report poster, a seminar presentation, and two WebCT quizzes. These are the things that will take your time, and they have a fair amount of difficulty, especially the quizzes. The exam is very straightforward, but writing essay length questions quickly may come as a shock to those without a first year geos background.

Lecturer: 3/10
You'll see in the very first lecture that lectures are nothing special. Those who did GEOS1001 will know the main lecturer, and seen her style before: boring, sleep-inducing, then ultimately rushed when time runs out. For the most part, simply reads off the notes but occasionally does provide some extra points. For some weeks in the second half of semester, PhD students take over outlining their research. Don't expect them to be brilliant, though it is a welcome change.

Interest: 6/10
Understandably, this unit would seem like an interesting one for those with some inkling of interest in climate change, given the sheer lack of units covering climate science. The first part of the unit, which covers historical climate change across a number of time scales, is ultimately the core of the unit, but very full on and can be offputting to those coming from simply a chemistry or physics background. Those who did first year geos units would be served well here, despite the prereqs for this unit being chem or phys, as this unit is a taught in the vein of other geos units. The unit goes downhill in the second half, where topics range from projected future climate change to climate modelling to coral reefs to politics of climate change. It is a mess. The lecture on political response to climate change is simply regurgitation of the IPCC and Garnaut reports, don't expect any enlightening discussion. The field trip, a two hour stroll through a research station at Chowder Bay, Mosman, has absolutely no relevance to the course.

Overall: 5/10
This unit could've been a lot better. A potentially interesting and highly relevant unit is let down by poor lecturing, a haphazard assessment program, a pointless field trip and a lack of a focus in the second half of the lectures. I don't regret doing the subject, as I managed to bash a good mark out of it, but it's only my sheer interest in the topic area that outweighed these things.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

Re: Subject Reviews (PDF updated 17/01/09)

hey dude, have you done many of the second year geos subjects? specifically the ones geography oriented?

any tips? i've got 1 unit of junior geology and 1 unit of junior geography to toy with.

 

[ddtng]

Re: Subject Reviews (PDF updated 17/01/09)

By to toy with you mean you've done it, or are yet to do?

The choice of 2nd year geos subs would depend on whether you're human or physical geog oriented. I found geos2113 to be pretty worthwhile, and it actually turned me from a mostly human geographer to a physical geographer, even though it's very unconventional. Geos2121 has a kickarse field trip, as does geos2115 (though I didn't do that one). The others would be interesting if you're necessarily into those areas.

I thought you were more of a chemist though.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

Re: Subject Reviews (PDF updated 17/01/09)

i have done them
im definately gonna do that urban geography one. what ones did you find most enjoyable?

and yeah chem is my major but i need to do a few earth/environmental science ones to satisfy the teaching requirements for a postgrad mteach.