UNSW Subject Reviews. (2 Viewers)

[kevinx2]

i hear u can do that course just overnight

i'm overloading as well

 

[missanonymous7]

Some of these are probably double-ups of previous reviews for these subjects, but whatever, here's a second opinion.

BABS1201 (Molecules, Cells and Genes)
Ease: 8/10 If you did HSC Bio, quite a lot of the lectures for this course basically build on the content you've previously learnt. Some of it can get a bit complicated, but if you concentrate and can grasp the main ideas, you'll be right. The assessments were also very very easy. The labs were also not too difficult, very relaxed.
Lecturer(s): 9/10 Pretty much all of the lecturers for this course were excellent, very easygoing, and explained things fairly clearly.
Interest: 8/10 I found most of it pretty interesting...however this could be because I'm a bit of a biology nerd. I did hear a few comments of "I'm SO over this", etc, when waiting for lectures to start.
Overall: 7/10 Ridiculously easy to get at least a pass in.

BIOS1301 (Ecology and Environmental Sustainability):
Ease: 6/10 I guess it's not actually very difficult, however there is a LOT of lecture material (4 hours of lectures per week) to remember, and a pretty nasty scientific report you have to write up about bugs living in leaf litter. The labs were incredibly draining, but thankfully they only go for five weeks of the semester. In fact I really hated those labs, come to think of it. Ugh.
Lecturer: 7/10 for one of them - he's a decent lecturer, and I guess it's not really his fault the course is so uninteresting, however he does seem overly fond of using Comic Sans almost exclusively in his lecture slides. 4/10 for the other lecturer, who (essentially) didn't provide lecture notes on WebCT, so you had to really try and concentrate on what he was actually saying, and write/type as quickly as possible to get all the important stuff down. Occasionally he comes out with some unexpectedly very dry-humoured remarks (he was the one who informed us that there are magic mushrooms growing on campus), which was about his only saving grace. There were also a lot of different guest lecturers who I can't really give a score for.
Interest: 3/10 The course content is unbelievably boring, and the course overall is amazingly disorganized. It's also depressing - "In this lecture, you're going to hear about how we've stuffed up the planet." "In this lecture, you're going to hear about how we've stuffed it up even more!" And so on.
Overall: 3/10 What a horrible subject.

(...wow, that turned into a bit of a vent, eh. Sorry )

ARTS1300 (Understanding Science, Technology and Society):
Ease: 8/10 Initially I thought this course would be tedious and boring, but it turned out to be pretty interesting. If you're interested in philosophy as well as science, this combines the two quite nicely. As long as you can grasp the key concepts - and you don't have to be a natural philosopher for this - the course overall isn't too hard.
Lecturer: 8/10 for the main lecturer, who I thought was excellent. 2/10 for the other lecturer, who was a pain in the arse.
Interest: 7/10 Some of it seemed like unecessary philosophical waffling on for no apparent purpose, but it was mostly interesting nonetheless.
Overall: 8/10

CHEM1011 (Fundamentals of Chemistry 1A):
Ease: 2/10 It's no secret that I hate chemistry. I mainly hate it because it is so hard. (For me, anyway.) There is a LOT of content to try and absorb and get your head around.
Lecturers: I really can't give an overall score for this, since we had...4? I think...different lecturers, whose lecturing/teaching ability varied greatly.
Interest: 1/10 Yeah. Not a fan of chem.
Overall: 2/10

 

[TehAzner]

URMUM101

Ease: 10/10
Interest: 2/10
Overall: 6/10

Bet the finals for that is pretty easy. Hope it isn't a Gen Ed subject, means us combined degree people can't enrol in it

 

[EdmondDW]

Some of these are probably double-ups of previous reviews for these subjects, but whatever, here's a second opinion.

BABS1201 (Molecules, Cells and Genes)
Ease: 8/10 If you did HSC Bio, quite a lot of the lectures for this course basically build on the content you've previously learnt. Some of it can get a bit complicated, but if you concentrate and can grasp the main ideas, you'll be right. The assessments were also very very easy. The labs were also not too difficult, very relaxed.
Lecturer(s): 9/10 Pretty much all of the lecturers for this course were excellent, very easygoing, and explained things fairly clearly.
Interest: 8/10 I found most of it pretty interesting...however this could be because I'm a bit of a biology nerd. I did hear a few comments of "I'm SO over this", etc, when waiting for lectures to start.
Overall: 7/10 Ridiculously easy to get at least a pass in.

BIOS1301 (Ecology and Environmental Sustainability):
Ease: 6/10 I guess it's not actually very difficult, however there is a LOT of lecture material (4 hours of lectures per week) to remember, and a pretty nasty scientific report you have to write up about bugs living in leaf litter. The labs were incredibly draining, but thankfully they only go for five weeks of the semester. In fact I really hated those labs, come to think of it. Ugh.
Lecturer: 7/10 for one of them - he's a decent lecturer, and I guess it's not really his fault the course is so uninteresting, however he does seem overly fond of using Comic Sans almost exclusively in his lecture slides. 4/10 for the other lecturer, who (essentially) didn't provide lecture notes on WebCT, so you had to really try and concentrate on what he was actually saying, and write/type as quickly as possible to get all the important stuff down. Occasionally he comes out with some unexpectedly very dry-humoured remarks (he was the one who informed us that there are magic mushrooms growing on campus), which was about his only saving grace. There were also a lot of different guest lecturers who I can't really give a score for.
Interest: 3/10 The course content is unbelievably boring, and the course overall is amazingly disorganized. It's also depressing - "In this lecture, you're going to hear about how we've stuffed up the planet." "In this lecture, you're going to hear about how we've stuffed it up even more!" And so on.
Overall: 3/10 What a horrible subject.

(...wow, that turned into a bit of a vent, eh. Sorry )

ARTS1300 (Understanding Science, Technology and Society):
Ease: 8/10 Initially I thought this course would be tedious and boring, but it turned out to be pretty interesting. If you're interested in philosophy as well as science, this combines the two quite nicely. As long as you can grasp the key concepts - and you don't have to be a natural philosopher for this - the course overall isn't too hard.
Lecturer: 8/10 for the main lecturer, who I thought was excellent. 2/10 for the other lecturer, who was a pain in the arse.
Interest: 7/10 Some of it seemed like unecessary philosophical waffling on for no apparent purpose, but it was mostly interesting nonetheless.
Overall: 8/10

CHEM1011 (Fundamentals of Chemistry 1A):
Ease: 2/10 It's no secret that I hate chemistry. I mainly hate it because it is so hard. (For me, anyway.) There is a LOT of content to try and absorb and get your head around.
Lecturers: I really can't give an overall score for this, since we had...4? I think...different lecturers, whose lecturing/teaching ability varied greatly.
Interest: 1/10 Yeah. Not a fan of chem.
Overall: 2/10

I agree with u for BIOS 1301...this is the shittest subject I have ever done in UNSW...very disorganised, boring and useless...Enrolling in it = wasting ur money~

 

[hollyy.]

I had Louis Yeung for QMA this semester. The lecture was only 1/4 full near the end, yet Louis Yeung thanked everyone for their patience and understanding... lol. The numbers started dwindling from week 3 onwards, PASS was more popular XD

ahhh louie, what the heck are you talking about?
i was a frequent at pass.
matrices were good tho

accounting = death. gunno fail, gormly was the best lecturer imo.

 

[lizey]

Gah, the internets just killed my long damn post about all the courses I've done. Instead I'll post the only course I seriously regretted taking
PHIL2020 Language and Meaning
Ease: 6/10
Lecturer: 3/10
Interest: 2/10
ETA: Whoops, forgot to comment on this one. Lecturer taught straight from the textbook. Some of the assessment (when I took it, anyway) was quizzes on lecture material: you definitely did not need to attend the lectures to do well on these. There was no iLecture - you'd just read the textbook.

and plug
ARTS1031 Literature in English: Early Modern to Modern
Ease: 6/10
Lecturer: 10/10
Interest: 9/10
I took it as the Canon of English Literature but apparently they're roughly the same. Be warned, though, Bill Walker will kick your ass if you show up late or talk during lecture.

 

[tommykins]

MATH1131
Ease: 9/10
Lecturer(s): 10/10 Norman Wildberger, 6/10 John Steele - Wildberger is great, plain and simple and pretty cool/funny guy. His youtube channel dealing with rational trigonometry is pretty interesting too. He makes it hard for me to believe that Pahor is the best algebra lecturer.
Interest: 8/10
Comments - If you've done 4unit in HSC (and got say, E4) then you will find this course a breeze. The only real addition is matrices, but even then they are nothing but simple arithmetic (thus far at least) and isn't really that hard. Algebra strand is easy. The calculus strand is alot more mind boggling seeing as it becomes very precise and vigorous with proofs and definitions (maybe it was just John Steele?), but if you just read it a few times its quite easy.
I recommend doing ALL your homework and attending ALL lectures, I personally preferred Wildberger seeing as he didn't do notes but actively involved every student by doing problems himself. That process of learning is more efficient imo than Steele's lecture notes which just lead ot the answer without working out.
DO NOT and I mean DO NOT ignore Maple, 8% bites you back in the ass.
Overall: 8/10

ENGG1000
Ease: 10/10
Lecturer(s): Doesn't matter.
Interest: 6/10

Comments - Pretty much a bludge subject, good way to make new friends and work in a team environment. Pretty hard to fail this course.
Overall 7/10

ENGG1811
Ease: 7/10
Lecturer(s): Whale and Asesh get probably 6/10 - Asesh was decent in the first few weeks with Excel and Access as he did show examples. However, his english is very hard to understand when he speaks a paragraph or more. Whale was pretty boring (but very down to earth, his lecture notes are funny) and provided examples but never really started from scratch.

If you've never had any background in programming - this will be abit difficult (especially the assignments) but if you attend ALL the labs and COMPLETE THEM ALL you WILL get decent at programming. The midsession is easy, assignment 1 is IMO harder than assignment 2.
Interest: 7/10


PHYS1121
Ease : 6/10
Lecturer(s) : Wolfe 6/10 Burton 7/10 - Wolfe knows his shit, he can solve alot of problems very easily, he's great for consultation or when youneed to ask him something after a lecture. But for his lectures itself - they're pretty bad seeing as he skips alot of working and his notes are borderline impossible to follow.

Burton makes notes from the book and has active quizzes for the lecture hall, however - doesn't really 'teach' you anything.

Comments - Get rid of your HSC physics knowledge. If you've never done physics - this course will be an utter bitch. THe course IS 95% mathematics. What's worse is that it is PROBLEM SOLVING. You can KNOW your formulas but if you don't know how to use them or WHY you're using them, you will not pass this course. Make notes, they help - derive every equation. Understand every concept and the conditions required for such a concept to be applicable. Luckily however, 40% of the course is labs + quizzes which are deadset easy. Labs you should be aiming 20%+/25% and quizzes 10%+/15, they can be done with a group of mates.

Be sure to practice and DO YOUR HOMEWORK SETS. THEY PROVIDE VALUABLE PRACTICE. Many students/friends of mine are alawyas behind in homework sets and are CLUELESS to the most simplest problems. Do your homework, make notes.

Lectures aren't necessary - this course is COMPLETELY possible to self teach.

 

[Casmira]

ooooh you're not going to like micro 2...

LOL that subject is a death sentence if you're like me and don't know calculus

 

[wordsmith]

Eh, it's 1am and I'm too lazy to review all my courses, but I feel I owe it to people to hear about SESC2001 if they haven't already.

Ease: 10/10 (I got a 96, a mate got a 97), and it's one of those courses where you can make up lost marks by doing extra weekly modules, which are just 5 short questions like "What makes anthrax so virulent?", the answers to which are all in the provided coursepack.

Lecturer: N/A - I wouldn't know as another bonus of this course was that it was offered as a Distance Education course in addition to on-campus attendance.

Interest: 8/10 - The 12 weekly answer tasks and a final essay can be knocked off in 48 hours and the content is relatively interesting while you read it if you're into Oil spills, asbestos, how anthrax functions, different types of cancer and the like. The electronic coursepack is hefty (400+ pages), but Ctrl+F makes the work a lot easier.

Overall: 10/10 - Thanks to this course I have a freaking 96 on my transcript now. If you're at uni in First Sem next year and have the option of an elective from the Science Faculty you should seriously look into this one as I cannot recommend it strongly enough.

 

[tommykins]

Time to get this rolling again since we've just finished -

MATH1231 -

Ease: 10/10
Lecturer(s): Peter Brown 10/10, Hendrik Grundling 6/10, Peter Blennerhassett 8/10 -

Peter Brown was our lecturer for algebra for around 2-3 weeks. Simply great, very engaging and does examples on the board with full explanation. Puts everything clear and concise. Get into his lectures if you can

Grundling - annoying nasal voice, he's good for the linear algebra bit until he hits proabbility in which any clear concise meaning flies out of the window. Doesn't explain things very well. Gets easily mad. However I'm sure if you pay attention, you'd understand SOME of it. His notes are neat but awful in the sense that they're too wordy

Blennerhassett - Despite everyone paying him out I reckon he's pretty good, has a few jokes that are a hit and miss but overall I had a good experience. Learnt things very well, although the calculus strand this sem was shit easy.

Interest: 7/10
Comments - Interest in this kinda died out due to probability and the repitition of the questions. I actually found 1B alot easier than 1A, hence the 10/10 ease instead of 9/10. The course aims at the theoretical side of algebra and the algorithmic side of calculus. That being said, the theory in the algebra strand is quite simple and straight forward, not hard as everyone makes it out to be. But you must understand your shit pretty well.

Calculus is just algorithms used for solving questions, the only possible hard thing would be Taylor Series manipulation. Definitely do ALL your homework (even more so than 1A) this time around, it will save your ass come study time for exams. Lectures, I don't believe is that necessary, whatever pleases you.

Maple is abit easier this time (or maybe I actually concentrated on it) but involves abit of programming which if you did ENGG1811 would be familiar (not easy) to you.

Overall - 8/10

MATS1101 -
Ease - Having done HSC chem, overall the ease is around 7-8/10
Lecturer - I only attended 2-3 lectures for materials, none for chem. Alan Crosky is alright, but abit confusing sometimes. Being in the Clancy Audotorium makes it annoying sometimes since he's so far away. He wastes too much time handing notes out rather than leavig it in a box at the front for students to get when entering.

Interest - 6-7/10
Everything in materials is pretty much a no brainer, except they go into more depth with it. you learn to appreciate the structure of materials and its physical properties. it's actually quite interesting if you sit down and read it. however, a shame in the course lies with crosky's obsession with providing random formulas and graphs that isn't tested in the exam. Overall, his communication with students is very good, answers questions promptly and clearly.

The group project could use abit of variety, it's quite boring writing more or less the same report every 3 weeks. Your group will heavily determine your mark, so hope you're in a good one. The labs are alright, abit boring though.

Chemistry strand is reviewing HSC chem, mainly the calculations. Organic chem has to do with the C-H groups and the rest involves industrial chem option (calculating K) and concentrations (c=n/v)

The chem labs are the worst part of this course. Not only are they long and tedious, you pretty much learn NOTHING off it. I got so tired of it I just copied answers after labs rather than do it myself and record results.

Overall - 6-7/10
It's an alright course, it was my elective and i took it just to see what it's like. if it's your elective, if you really want to do some other subject then i'd recommend going for the other one- this course is brutally average. THe tutorials for chem are ok but the online tutorials for materials help alot.

CVEN1300 -
Ease 8/10
Lecturer - 4/10 Wei Gao
I'm sure he knows his shit but just his accent makes everything so hard to understand sometimes (or most of the time). I only attended 2-3 lectures before I stopped going. He however communicates with students very well, handing out updates via email frequently.
Interest 9/10 -
Studying Civil Eng, I got a glimpse of what I'd be doing for the next few years, and I was dreading it at first. Hated learning moments, shear force and bending moment diagrams, and I pretty much cried at having to learn moment of inertia seeing as I saw bit of it in PHYS1121 and DESPISED IT.

But to my surprise the course is pretty bat shit easy. Analysis of trusses and frames are easy, vectors and point forces are also easy. SFD and BMD require abit of thinking but that's okay.
Moment of intertia is pretty algorithmic once you know what's required.

The dynamics part is reviewing PHYS1121 and HSC physics, not too hard.

However, to study for this and do well - DO YOUR TUTORIAL PROBLEMS. ALL OF IT. If you're struggling, do MORE from the textbook. DO NOT leave it to the last minute, the concepts will get your brain going mad.

Also, I believe only the statistics book is required for this course - don't need the dynamics.

Overall 8/10 -
Despite the concepts being easy and tutorial problems/quizzes being relatively easy, the final exam WILL test your understanding outside the tutorials. They require alot of innovation to solve. I enjoyed it, as it was a very simple course with simple requirements. Kinda hate the 5% hand in task though, with the amount of work required for that it should've been 10%.

GMAT1110
Ease - 8/10

Lecturer - Craig Roberts. Cool guy and jokes around alot, very entertaining but is a shit teacher. Doesn't teach very well at all and alot of what he says is missed on the lecture notes. However, communication is done frequently.

Interest - 3/10
Pracs were boring as shit, the course is so goddamn boring. I don't know how anyone can be studying Spatial and Information Systems, just so BORING. The tutorials are also pretty wtf since they don't explain shit on how to do te questions before hand and hence you come to the tutorial to DO the work, not to do any work you couldn't do beforehand.

Would've loved more resources too, just because the course website is simple and clean it shouldn't compensate for resources.

Overall 4/10 -
Once again, an elective. Definitely choose something else over this, it's a boring course which doesn't serve Craig Roberts' personality justice.

 

[missanonymous7]

BIOS1101 Evolutionary and Functional Bio
This course is generally split into three parts: a brief series of lectures about the history of life on Earth, then a lot of lectures about the biology of plants, and a lot of lectures about the biology of animals, in a sort of generalised 'overview' way.

Ease: 5/10 Despite usually being pretty decent at biology-related stuff, I found this course quite hard. Mainly because of the stunning amount of time spent studying plants, which in my opinion are the most boring living things on the planet. Assesments consist of tests - lots and lots of small 'pre-lab' tests. Unfortunately, they require you to memorise not just the fundamental concepts, but every single tiny little detail, which is why it's so difficult.
Lecturer(s): 10/10 for Mike Archer, he's fantastic. 2/10 for Adams, he's the exact opposite (you could put the Lectopia recordings of his lectures on a CD and sell them as a cure for insomnia). 6/10 for Rogers - her lecture slides were nice and clear and concise, but she ended up basically just reading them during lectures.
Interest: Depends on which part of the course, and personal opinion, I guess. Hard to give a score out of ten for this one.
Overall: 5/10

MATH1041 Stats for Life and Social Science
Statistics with a little bit of probability theory thrown in.

Ease: 8/10 I was pleasantly surprised - the handbook description for MATH1041 claims you need 'assumed knowledge of a mark of at least 60 in HSC Mathematics', and since I only took General Maths, I thought I'd struggle and only just scrape by in university-level stats. As it turns out, the handbook is LYING. You DO NOT need a HSC Mathematics background. Provided you attend every lecture, complete most of the tutorial questions, and just make sure you concentrate all through semester and do not fall behind - it's not a difficult course at all. (Except probability. That's confusing.)
Lecturer(s): 10/10 There are two lecturers throughout the entire semester, and both of them were excellent at explaining the concepts (well, they must've been excellent if someone like me was able to understand them), plus they were fairly easy to listen to. The lecture slides are also incredibly helpful and clear.
Interest: 6/10 Well, no one does statistics just for fun, do they?
Overall: 8/10

SCOM2021 Professional Science Communication
Instead of giving separate scores out of ten for SCOM2021, I will now sum up the entire course in two words:
Absolutely shithouse.
It's easy to get great marks, but believe me, it's so not worth the angst.
If I write too much more, I gurantee this will turn into the rant of the century. So if you'd like to know more about SCOM2021, or ANY of the science communication courses, please just send me a PM and I'll be more than happy to tell you all about it.

 

[MooshyMoosh]

MATH1041 Stats for Life and Social Science
Statistics with a little bit of probability theory thrown in.

Ease: 8/10 I was pleasantly surprised - the handbook description for MATH1041 claims you need 'assumed knowledge of a mark of at least 60 in HSC Mathematics', and since I only took General Maths, I thought I'd struggle and only just scrape by in university-level stats. As it turns out, the handbook is LYING. You DO NOT need a HSC Mathematics background. Provided you attend every lecture, complete most of the tutorial questions, and just make sure you concentrate all through semester and do not fall behind - it's not a difficult course at all. (Except probability. That's confusing.)
Lecturer(s): 10/10 There are two lecturers throughout the entire semester, and both of them were excellent at explaining the concepts (well, they must've been excellent if someone like me was able to understand them), plus they were fairly easy to listen to. The lecture slides are also incredibly helpful and clear.
Interest: 6/10 Well, no one does statistics just for fun, do they?
Overall: 8/10

Ohhh thank goodness... I was worried that I'd be in over my head for this subject next year. UNSW sure love making their subjects sound intimidating...

 

[chucknthem]

Time to get this rolling again since we've just finished -

MATH1231 -

Ease: 10/10
Lecturer(s): Peter Brown 10/10, Hendrik Grundling 6/10, Peter Blennerhassett 8/10 -

Peter Brown was our lecturer for algebra for around 2-3 weeks. Simply great, very engaging and does examples on the board with full explanation. Puts everything clear and concise. Get into his lectures if you can

<3 peter brown

 

[LordPc]

MATH1231 -

Ease: 8/10
Lecturer(s): Peter Brown 10/10, Hendrik Grundling 2/10, Peter Blennerhassett 8/10 -

Peter Brown: Tommy said it all. Excellent lecturer. Has a cool thing to hold his chalk so his hands dont get dirty.

Grundling: Explanations are poor. Would launch into an example of a concept before he properly explained the concept. Tommy said he "Gets easily mad". I disagree, he doesnt get mad enough. Every lecture there was serious chatter, never heard so much talking inside a lecture theatre before. He then says "Your being to loud" but 5 minutes later and everyone is talking again. Since he doesnt explain things well in the first place, this doesnt help. Did not like his notes.

Blennerhassett: Good lecturer. I abandoned the lecture notes this semester and found it much better. Explains things well, gives real world examples and sometimes he makes reference to some interesting concepts in 3rd/4th year math. Demands silence. When things get too loud and he tells everyone to shut up, things stay quiet. More of a dominating presence than Grundling. I've never had any other calculus lecturer so I cant really compare him to anyone else, but you could do a lot worse. (he can sometimes joke around too. once he went and sat in a seat and did the lecture there for about 5 minutes. the late comers couldnt see him among the crowd and were kind of freaked out. he was also the target of the dancing bears.)

Interest: 4/10
Not interesting at all. Calculus had some moments. algebra was just boring, a very "learn it, do it, forget it" course. there are easier ways to explain the solution to the monty hall problem.

I found maple a bit harder this semester. You definately need to do the practice questions. Some of the exam questions involve stuff that you dont encounter in the modules but are in the practice questions. You can wing it though, but its an easy 13+/15 if you just spend a few hours and do the practice questions.

Overall - 7/10

 

[Survivor39]

BIOS1101 Evolutionary and Functional Bio
Overall: 5/10

I guess the course hasn't improved since when I did it back in 2004 ...

 

[deadfishlol]

BIOC2201 - Principles of Molecular Biology (Adv)
Ease: 7/10 I'd personally recommend the advanced version if you are tossing up between this and the fundamentals version. Also easier than first semester biochemistry.
Lecturers: Anne Galea (8/10), Vincent Murray (7/10). Both decent lecurers, notes are detailed and easy to understand
Interest: 8/10 If you find DNA interesting, this is the course for you!
Overall: 8/10

CHEM2021 - Organic Chemistry
Ease: 4/10 This course is not for the faint-hearted. Expect to have first year chemistry concepts down pat if you want to have any hope of understanding the reactions in this course. Labs are also hellish compared to any biology lab, but quite rewarding.
Lecturers:
Gavin Edwards (-/10)...people seem to either love him or hate him, his 'style' of teaching (+ his antics) is a bit distracting at times but it did keep me somewhat interested.
Roger Read (8/10)
Interest: 7/10 If you liked and/or were good at organic/physical chemistry in first year you will most likely enjoy this course. If not, keep away.
Overall: 6/10

PHPH2201 - Physiology 1B
Ease: 6/10 Like 1A, a lot of content but assessments are pretty easy.
Lecturers: Lewis (8/10), Gibson (6/10), Boyce (8/10), Bertrand (7/10)
Interest: 6/10 Personally I found the topics more interesting than 1A.
Overall: 7/10

 

[Uncle]

MATH2089:
Ease: 9/10 - Statistics is fairly easy eventually gets more frustrating but numerical methods seems hard at first but it is actually easier than it looks. The lecture notes seem sophisticated and incredibly difficult, but the exam for the numerical methods strand isn't at all. The laboratory work for both strands are easy.
Lecturer(s): 5/10 - Kind of mediocre, the Numerical strand has lecturers with funny accents while the Statistics strand has a guy who just doesn't engage with the class too much.
Interest: 8/10 - Finally I can use Numerical Methods to solve pretty much all ODEs, PDEs and equations that have no analytical solutions. Take that MATH1231. Statistics seem mediocre but at least it's more problem solving based so it isn't as boring.
Overall: 7/10 - It's alright.

ELEC1111:
Ease: 4/10 - This subject is the reason why I didn't want to do Electrical Engineering. Thanks Transformers, Op Amps and Digital Logic. The notes for the telecommunications component were ambiguous.
Lecturer(s): 6/10 - Spooner seems cold and sadistic but he does explain his content very well and at least tells us how not to repeat mistakes of previous years. Skinner on the other hand, explained all he liked to but when it came to the exam, people had absolutely no idea.
Interest: 6/10 - At least I have some knowledge on electric circuits and not just materials, mechanics, etc. Labs are fun to a certain extent.
Overall: 7/10 - Quite an experience.

MMAN2600:
Ease: 2/10 - Except the internal flows topic where I have to analyse and derive everything from scratch, everything just takes a bit of time to study to understand.
Lecturer: 9/10 - Quite like Tracy and Gary, pretty cool guys. Need these kind of lecturers in a difficult course like this. Although Gary can be sneaky with his choice of questions for tests and exams.
Interest: 7/10 - At least now we aren't dealing with solid materials.
Overall: 7/10 - Intensive yet fulfilling learning.

ARTS1691
Ease: 5/10 - What?
Lecturer(s): 8/10 - Pretty cool guys.
Interest: 2/10 - Interest declined exponentially with time. From sociolinguistics to historical and universals.
Overall: 4/10 - Disappoint.

MATH1231 -

Ease: 10/10

lol

statistics book

yes only statics is needed.
dynamics and wei gao's lulz heavy accent isnt.

I pretty much cried at having to learn moment of inertia

enjoy mechanics of solids in future years

I only attended 2-3 lectures for materials, none for chem

The chem labs are the worst part of this course. Not only are they long and tedious, you pretty much learn NOTHING off it. I got so tired of it I just copied answers after labs rather than do it myself and record results.

.

 

[tommykins]

yeah i dno i found math1231 excrutiatingly easy. there were no hard concepts at all. shit like linear maps and subspaces/vector spaces were merely proving 1+1 = 2 most of the time.

lol, does moment of inertia become as algorithmic as the ones in cven1300? i dreaded it cause in saw it in phys1121 textbook and was like omfg wtfux but after doing it in cven1300 (technically second moment of inertia) it was pretty goddamn easy.

 

[missanonymous7]

I guess the course hasn't improved since when I did it back in 2004 ...

I guess not. I reckon with better lecturers for the plant and animal bio sections, it could've been really interesting (well, the animal bio part at least). Instead they turned it into rote-learning detailed facts and scientific terms...which just kills it. (The textbook was kinda interesting )

Oh, and another note to anyone else reading about BIOS1101 - when you finally manage to get through weeks and weeks of dull labs about plants, you have to do two complete animal dissections: a cane toad and a rat. The toad doesn't smell too bad. The rat definitely does. And both are pretty gross. (I can post pictures if you like!)

 

[veloc1ty]

PSYC1011
-- Overall: 8/10
-- Ease: 9/10 - Heavily subject to personal aptitude.
-- Interest: 7/10 - Another broad mixture of topics of varying interest.
-- Lecturers:
Cranney 7/10 - She knows what she's talking about but is unexciting.
Felmingham 6/10 - Tendency to say okay at the end of every sentence, okay?
Westbrook 2/10 - I skipped his entire lecture sequence for a reason.
Mitchell 10/10 - Very funny and interesting and easy to follow.
Spehar 8/10 - Quite interesting lectures and explanations.


MATH1041
-- Overall: 6/10
-- Ease: 7/10 - Doing any lab/tutorial work is a waste of time unless you desperately want an HD.
-- Interest: 5/10 - It's statistics.
-- Lecturers: 6/10 - By god, they try. They do try.


MGMT1001
-- Overall: 6/10
-- Ease: 8/10 - Fantastically easy concepts, but I found the marking was not generous.
-- Interest: 5/10 - It's management.
-- Lecturers: 1/10 - Don't feel guilty for skipping, it's all textbook-based.


ARTS1031 (Introduction to English Literature: Early Modern to Modern)
-- Overall: 8/10
-- Ease: 8/10 - Assessment consists of two essays and an exam which is three mini-essays.
-- Interest: 8/10 - Nothing is thrilling but it's consistently interesting.
-- Lecturers: 7/10 - Quite good but entirely skippable.