MBLG1001 or MBLG1901? (1 Viewer)

[vemanjj]

Can I please have an overview of these courses. I have to do 4 science units in year one of B sci and arts and Im doing psych1001 and 1002 and human biology so i need something to do in semester 2 and these are the only courses that slightly interest me. I would appreciate an overview. Like is it hard? I have the prerequisites for MBLG1901 but is it all theory about experiments? And do you learn about the same things? Thanks, much appreciated.

 

[study-freak]

MBLG1001 and 1901 share a large proportion of the course(s) and the differences are that:

in MBLG1901, you get like 13?ish separate lectures from normal MBLG students where you learn about experiments that led to the discovery of proteins and DNA structure and so on. That is not to say that you only learn about theories of experiments, but that is indeed the main theme that is added onto the normal MBLG topics (and to fit them in, luckily some of the (useless?) details in MBLG1001 are removed!) But some 1901-exclusive topics are also theoretical so you get a mix of both more advanced theories and experimental stuff.
And don't worry about those things in 1001 but not in 1901 because you will get separate final exam papers and you will only be examined on things from common and advanced lecture slides.

In regard to exams, I found MBLG1901 exam actually EASIER than MBLG1001 exam (2010). I ofc didn't do both exams but I've asked my friends from 1001 what questions they've got and the gist is that in 1001, they tested you more on difficult-to-remember details, while 1901 replaces some of them by contents from advanced lectures and in 2010, they were one adv theory question (which was more meaningful a question than pathetic details question in 1001) and more on experiments which are mostly give-away questions if you crammed them!
And another thing: only the short answers sections vary between the two exams. I think you still get the same set of MC questions.

In regard to labs, 1901 is the way to go. It's because you actually get some space in labs if you do 1901! 1001 labs are so packed with people and aren't the best lab learning environments. The downfall is that you get to write more reports and they are marked more harshly than normal ones. But there's scaling anyway so I don't think it matters much!


P.S. whoops, forgot to talk about whether it's hard.
It's said to be the most infamous 1st year science course, but the (in)fame really only arises from the amount of content in the course and long labs. Individual concepts/facts are not very hard, but there are lots of them.

 

[Becky222]

I did MBLG1001 in first year and MBLG2071 in second year because it was a requirement for my degree. Definitely my least favourite subjects, very difficult and tedious 5 hour labs every fortnight. If you can avoid it i would! I think lots of people do it not realising what they are getting themselves into. Oh and did i mention there is a five hour prac exam at the end of MBLG1001! Nightmare

 

[shakky]

I did MBLG1001 in first year and MBLG2071 in second year because it was a requirement for my degree. Definitely my least favourite subjects, very difficult and tedious 5 hour labs every fortnight. If you can avoid it i would! I think lots of people do it not realising what they are getting themselves into. Oh and did i mention there is a five hour prac exam at the end of MBLG1001! Nightmare

Hey Becky, do you need MBLG1001 for intermediate physiology? I'm just planning to do only int. physiology, and the handbook says that MBLG is recommended to continue into senior physiology. Would you recommend I do it anyway, or just avoid it and do something easier like living systems?

 

[study-freak]

Hey Becky, do you need MBLG1001 for intermediate physiology? I'm just planning to do only int. physiology, and the handbook says that MBLG is recommended to continue into senior physiology. Would you recommend I do it anyway, or just avoid it and do something easier like living systems?

If it says recommended, it's only recommended. You don't need it, but it's good to do. and if it's recommended for senior physiology, then obviously it's only recommended for intermediate physiology as well.

and btw, whether MBLG is hard or not depends on the person. E.g. I didn't find it that hard. Chem was far more difficult imo.
You will have to do it to see if it's actually hard for you.

but generally agreed that labs are indeed tedious - 5 hrs... (though you rarely fill up that time! 5 hrs means that's the maximum you will ever stay for)

 

[shakky]

If it says recommended, it's only recommended. You don't need it, but it's good to do. and if it's recommended for senior physiology, then obviously it's only recommended for intermediate physiology as well.

and btw, whether MBLG is hard or not depends on the person. E.g. I didn't find it that hard. Chem was far more difficult imo.
You will have to do it to see if it's actually hard for you.

but generally agreed that labs are indeed tedious - 5 hrs... (though you rarely fill up that time! 5 hrs means that's the maximum you will ever stay for)

Thanks Man. I might stick with it then.

 

[Becky222]

Honestly i see almost no connection between MBLG1001 or MBLG2071 and physiology. If its recommended its up to you. As pointed out above it does depend on the person but i know the majority of people find it challenging. When i did MBLG1001 there was a rumour going around that said it was one of the most failed first year subjects and whether its true or not i wouldn't be surprised. In saying that its taught well and if you are interested in it then definitely go for it

 

[Riproot]

Honestly i see almost no connection between MBLG1001 or MBLG2071 and physiology. If its recommended its up to you. As pointed out above it does depend on the person but i know the majority of people find it challenging. When i did MBLG1001 there was a rumour going around that said it was one of the most failed first year subjects and whether its true or not i wouldn't be surprised. In saying that its taught well and if you are interested in it then definitely go for it

yeah, ~44% fail MBLG1X01 and ~45% fail CHEM1X01. lol

 

[Obvious]

yeah, ~44% fail MBLG1X01 and ~45% fail CHEM1X01. lol

Source? I don't think anybody in my lab is going to get less than a D at this point. It's really a lot less difficult than people make it out to be. The only challenge is overcoming the tedium of doing the work/studying.

 

[Riproot]

Source? I don't think anybody in my lab is going to get less than a D at this point. It's really a lot less difficult than people make it out to be. The only challenge is overcoming the tedium of doing the work/studying.

Dale said at the beginning of the course "we fail just a few less people than first semester chemistry" and they had on one of their sheet thingies how many people pass the course. But maybe I read it wrong and it's actually like 25%

*shrugs*

But also, I know A LOT of people that just don't do any work at all (me). lol

 

[Nummchucks]

Are we allowed 15 min breaks like in human biology?

 

[someth1ng]

yeah, ~44% fail MBLG1X01 and ~45% fail CHEM1X01. lol

I don't think that one is true - I'd say it's more around ~6%.

In 2011, 215 passed the CHEM1901 exam out of 219 students sitting the exam - that's like ~2% failure rate.
In 2012, 243 passed the CHEM1901 exam out of 246 students sitting the exam - that's like ~2% failure rate.

In 2011, 462 passed the CHEM1101 exam out of 521 students sitting the exam - that's like ~8% failure rate.
In 2012, 714 passed the CHEM1101 exam out of 776 students sitting the exam - that's like ~8% failure rate.

In 2011, 406 passed the CHEM1001 exam out of 503 students sitting the exam - that's like ~19% failure rate.
In 2012, 421 passed the CHEM1001 exam out of 487 students sitting the exam - that's like ~14% failure rate.

I don't really see these values resulting in ~40+% failure rate, even 20% - not that many people skip exams.

 

[miscmantheman]

yeah, ~44% fail MBLG1X01 and ~45% fail CHEM1X01. lol

Haha wow, did you pull that statistic out of your arse or what? I demoed MBLG1 last year and had two kids fail the practical portion, and that was because they were possibly the laziest students I've ever had.

 

[Riproot]

I don't think that one is true - I'd say it's more around ~6%.

In 2011, 215 passed the CHEM1901 exam out of 219 students sitting the exam - that's like ~2% failure rate.
In 2012, 243 passed the CHEM1901 exam out of 246 students sitting the exam - that's like ~2% failure rate.

In 2011, 462 passed the CHEM1101 exam out of 521 students sitting the exam - that's like ~8% failure rate.
In 2012, 714 passed the CHEM1101 exam out of 776 students sitting the exam - that's like ~8% failure rate.

In 2011, 406 passed the CHEM1001 exam out of 503 students sitting the exam - that's like ~19% failure rate.
In 2012, 421 passed the CHEM1001 exam out of 487 students sitting the exam - that's like ~14% failure rate.

I don't really see these values resulting in ~40+% failure rate, even 20% - not that many people skip exams.

I had just heard it as a rumour, so like it wasn't definitive.

Haha wow, did you pull that statistic out of your arse or what? I demoed MBLG1 last year and had two kids fail the practical portion, and that was because they were possibly the laziest students I've ever had.

I had just heard it as a rumour, so like it wasn't definitive.

Lol, people wouldn't usually fail on the practical portion. The prac exam marking was too generous for that. I got like a high credit of something for that and I went out the night before ^_^

 

[ADrew]

Guys, chemistry concepts arent that hard, just extremeley boring.

 

[someth1ng]

I had just heard it as a rumour, so like it wasn't definitive.

It is quite definitive - they release statistics on their website. By the way, of the pass students, that includes ones that sat the supplementary and passed.

For example, there's CHEM1901 stats (number of students sitting the test) and you can find the number of students that passed using the exam stats:
http://firstyear.chem.usyd.edu.au/chem1901/exam_statistics.shtml
http://firstyear.chem.usyd.edu.au/Pastexams/chem1901.shtml

Realistically, if you pass the finals, you probably passed the other stuff too so the overall pass rate might be ~5% for CHEM1901 - max.

So yeah, no. It's not a rumour.

 

[Riproot]

It is quite definitive - they release statistics on their website. By the way, of the pass students, that includes ones that sat the supplementary and passed.

For example, there's CHEM1901 stats (number of students sitting the test) and you can find the number of students that passed using the exam stats:
http://firstyear.chem.usyd.edu.au/chem1901/exam_statistics.shtml
http://firstyear.chem.usyd.edu.au/Pastexams/chem1901.shtml

Realistically, if you pass the finals, you probably passed the other stuff too so the overall pass rate might be ~5% for CHEM1901 - max.

So yeah, no. It's not a rumour.

i meant my one, not yours

Obvi
Lol

 

[someth1ng]

i meant my one, not yours

Obvi
Lol

Oh, right LOL. To be honest, I don't think MBLG1001 has a high failure rate as the rumour says it does - probably like 10%, 20% max.

 

[Riproot]

Oh, right LOL. To be honest, I don't think MBLG1001 has a high failure rate as the rumour says it does - probably like 10%, 20% max.

well, Dale (the coordinator) said it was 1% less than Semester 1 (maybe 2?) chemistry
So that's around 20%.

 

[someth1ng]

What do you mean? Semester 1 chemistry never is over 15% for regular/advanced?