4025808
Well-Known Member
MATH3161: Optimization
Ease: 8/10. It’s pretty much like a combination of the first few weeks of MATH2011 and MATH2501. You don’t get tested on any Jordan forms/Cayley Hamilton theorem, stokes theorem, Fourier series, etc. None of the latter stuff pops up for this course – it’s really only the intro stuff that pops up. All you really need to know is how to find gradient, find a hessian matrix, and all of the linear algebra up to and including eigenvalues. The downside is that there are a lot of formulae you have to memorize (and this screwed me over in one of the tests). Also if you’re the sort of person who tends to make a lot of silly mistakes, be prepared to lose a crap tonne of marks.
Content: 8/10. The content is easy – you don’t actually need to understand it, but you only need to know how to apply it. Try to do some of the questions without solutions and try to study a lot especially before finals and class test 2 – there’s a lot more content you need to digest and a lot of people flop out for those two exams.
Lecturer: 4/10 – Jeya Jeyakumar – Boring lecturer tbh. Keeps making us copy a lot of stuff during lectures. There’s this motto about him, it’s basically him saying “keep writin’ or die tryin’”. I also felt as if he didn’t explain himself well in the lectures (or maybe it’s his accent that’s keeping him down?).
Tutor: Jeya Jeyakumar – well same rating as above. Tbh you do not need to go to the tutorials for this course seeing as he publishes the solutions to the tute problems afterward anyway.
Overall: 7/10 – It’s a course that is somewhat okay. It’s arguably one of the easiest third year MATH courses to take, but it may not be so true seeing as all the ACTL and stats kids are taking it to try and boost their wams. An upside of this course is that there are past papers for it (FTW, and even repeated questions too
). The downside – lots of content and lots of algebra (+ mistakes to be made). Also no scaling for this course so you pretty much get your raw mark.
PHYS1121: Physics 1A
Ease: 4/10. Physics is basically mindfuck. If you learned how to do 4U Mechanics properly, then you’ll have a very good advantage in this subject. However be prepared to be destroyed by thermodynamics and gravitational (and kinetic energy) sections of the course as they are pretty hard to do well in. The quizzes are mindfuck as well – get the textbook and the corresponding solutions because they will help you greatly with the quiz (as well as understanding how to do the questions and not just getting answers).
Content: 8/10 – hard but somewhat interesting. First few weeks were piss because it was a revision of 2U and 3U maths all over. When it got to the third week it was forces – so if you did 4U mechanics you have it quite good. Everything else is quite new so make sure you study for that thoroughly.
Lecturer: Joe Wolfe – 4/10. Boring. Has a sense of humor but can’t explain shit properly. Liz Angstmann – 6/10 – she’s decent but I didn’t find her interesting. Rob Wittenmyer – 8/10 – he has a really great sense of humour and is definitely an interesting person. He explains concepts quite well in general (although some stuff isn’t too good).
Lab: 8/10 Had Charley, Tim, Elliot and Anh – They were quite good overall. The only problem is that we have to wait for so long to have lab demonstrators to try and help us out. Apart from that no problems.
Overall: 7/10. Make sure you do past papers and know how to answer the questions they give you. If you do that then you’re guaranteed a pass for the final. If you score at least 35/40 internally, then you can score yourself at least a credit for this subject. Apart from that, nice final this year – Q1 only required 3U maths knowledge. Q5 was fucking hilarious because of the Justin Bieber question – props to Rob for writing that and making my day
PTRL2010: Business Practices in the Petroleum Industry
(Think this is the first PTRL2010 review posted here)
Ease: 8/10 – it’s pretty much a mix of business studies, ACCT1501, MGMT1001 and some 2nd or 3rd year management course combined together with a petroleum engineering focus.
Content: 3/10. So much bullshit in this course. If you didn’t do accounting in high school or if you didn’t take ACCT1501 then you would have been screwed over because the accounting in this course was explained very terribly – not enough examples to go about and not enough material to study from. Also you learn petroleum law, CSG reserves, environmental protection, petroleum licences. They’re pretty dry and it’s not very well taught in general.
Lecturer: Had a mix of lecturers:
Guy Allinson was our main one. 2/10. Bloody hell. 8am starts is fucking hell. At 8:10 onwards he doesn’t allow you into the lecture. Whilst a lot of the stuff he can explain well, it can be flawed at times (he thinks of things in a very simple way, so you can imagine a lot of flaws there. E.g. comparing forging a signature in a classroom and forging a signature for an oil contract – it’s actually what he did). Also the main reason for such a rating is that he freaken has no humanity what so ever, i.e. unapproachable, can’t take shit from others, not open to consultation, not replying to emails, rude, very angry attitude, always tries to think of the negatives of others, etc.
Jill Sweatman was one of the main guest lecturers – 3/10. Didn’t really like what she was teaching – wasn’t really relevant and it was stuff that I knew of already. Also she seemed very patronizing and rather irritating imo as she forced us to listen to her.
Bun Hung – 7/10. Had him for petroleum law. He’s a bit quiet but he can really engage with the audience – it’s a nice contrast compared with Guy Allinson – at least he isn’t “old fashioned”. Also doesn’t care if you come in late, so as long as you are quiet. Would want to have him again as a lecturer.
Rachel Braikenridge – 6/10. She tried her best to explain accounting stuff though tbh a lot of the stuff wasn’t solidly explained. Not bad as a lecturer otherwise.
There were other guest lecturers but I’ve only had one lesson with them.
Tutor: N/A
Overall: 1/10. Very poorly organized course, possibly one of the dodgiest courses I have ever seen. Whilst I understand that such a subject is necessary, it needs a COMPLETE overhaul. And if anyone is thinking of taking this course as a gen-ed or a free elective, do not even consider it – step well away from it. 8am starts are painful enough but to have a crap lecturer(s) is the worst experience you can have. No transparency what so ever as you do not find out what your marks are during the semester (which actually makes us wonder what he does with it). Also I’m not even sure if Guy will end up marking the final – he’s probably going to make up the marks on the basis of whether if he likes you or not.
Ease: 8/10. It’s pretty much like a combination of the first few weeks of MATH2011 and MATH2501. You don’t get tested on any Jordan forms/Cayley Hamilton theorem, stokes theorem, Fourier series, etc. None of the latter stuff pops up for this course – it’s really only the intro stuff that pops up. All you really need to know is how to find gradient, find a hessian matrix, and all of the linear algebra up to and including eigenvalues. The downside is that there are a lot of formulae you have to memorize (and this screwed me over in one of the tests). Also if you’re the sort of person who tends to make a lot of silly mistakes, be prepared to lose a crap tonne of marks.
Content: 8/10. The content is easy – you don’t actually need to understand it, but you only need to know how to apply it. Try to do some of the questions without solutions and try to study a lot especially before finals and class test 2 – there’s a lot more content you need to digest and a lot of people flop out for those two exams.
Lecturer: 4/10 – Jeya Jeyakumar – Boring lecturer tbh. Keeps making us copy a lot of stuff during lectures. There’s this motto about him, it’s basically him saying “keep writin’ or die tryin’”. I also felt as if he didn’t explain himself well in the lectures (or maybe it’s his accent that’s keeping him down?).
Tutor: Jeya Jeyakumar – well same rating as above. Tbh you do not need to go to the tutorials for this course seeing as he publishes the solutions to the tute problems afterward anyway.
Overall: 7/10 – It’s a course that is somewhat okay. It’s arguably one of the easiest third year MATH courses to take, but it may not be so true seeing as all the ACTL and stats kids are taking it to try and boost their wams. An upside of this course is that there are past papers for it (FTW, and even repeated questions too
). The downside – lots of content and lots of algebra (+ mistakes to be made). Also no scaling for this course so you pretty much get your raw mark.PHYS1121: Physics 1A
Ease: 4/10. Physics is basically mindfuck. If you learned how to do 4U Mechanics properly, then you’ll have a very good advantage in this subject. However be prepared to be destroyed by thermodynamics and gravitational (and kinetic energy) sections of the course as they are pretty hard to do well in. The quizzes are mindfuck as well – get the textbook and the corresponding solutions because they will help you greatly with the quiz (as well as understanding how to do the questions and not just getting answers).
Content: 8/10 – hard but somewhat interesting. First few weeks were piss because it was a revision of 2U and 3U maths all over. When it got to the third week it was forces – so if you did 4U mechanics you have it quite good. Everything else is quite new so make sure you study for that thoroughly.
Lecturer: Joe Wolfe – 4/10. Boring. Has a sense of humor but can’t explain shit properly. Liz Angstmann – 6/10 – she’s decent but I didn’t find her interesting. Rob Wittenmyer – 8/10 – he has a really great sense of humour and is definitely an interesting person. He explains concepts quite well in general (although some stuff isn’t too good).
Lab: 8/10 Had Charley, Tim, Elliot and Anh – They were quite good overall. The only problem is that we have to wait for so long to have lab demonstrators to try and help us out. Apart from that no problems.
Overall: 7/10. Make sure you do past papers and know how to answer the questions they give you. If you do that then you’re guaranteed a pass for the final. If you score at least 35/40 internally, then you can score yourself at least a credit for this subject. Apart from that, nice final this year – Q1 only required 3U maths knowledge. Q5 was fucking hilarious because of the Justin Bieber question – props to Rob for writing that and making my day
PTRL2010: Business Practices in the Petroleum Industry
(Think this is the first PTRL2010 review posted here)
Ease: 8/10 – it’s pretty much a mix of business studies, ACCT1501, MGMT1001 and some 2nd or 3rd year management course combined together with a petroleum engineering focus.
Content: 3/10. So much bullshit in this course. If you didn’t do accounting in high school or if you didn’t take ACCT1501 then you would have been screwed over because the accounting in this course was explained very terribly – not enough examples to go about and not enough material to study from. Also you learn petroleum law, CSG reserves, environmental protection, petroleum licences. They’re pretty dry and it’s not very well taught in general.
Lecturer: Had a mix of lecturers:
Guy Allinson was our main one. 2/10. Bloody hell. 8am starts is fucking hell. At 8:10 onwards he doesn’t allow you into the lecture. Whilst a lot of the stuff he can explain well, it can be flawed at times (he thinks of things in a very simple way, so you can imagine a lot of flaws there. E.g. comparing forging a signature in a classroom and forging a signature for an oil contract – it’s actually what he did). Also the main reason for such a rating is that he freaken has no humanity what so ever, i.e. unapproachable, can’t take shit from others, not open to consultation, not replying to emails, rude, very angry attitude, always tries to think of the negatives of others, etc.
Jill Sweatman was one of the main guest lecturers – 3/10. Didn’t really like what she was teaching – wasn’t really relevant and it was stuff that I knew of already. Also she seemed very patronizing and rather irritating imo as she forced us to listen to her.
Bun Hung – 7/10. Had him for petroleum law. He’s a bit quiet but he can really engage with the audience – it’s a nice contrast compared with Guy Allinson – at least he isn’t “old fashioned”. Also doesn’t care if you come in late, so as long as you are quiet. Would want to have him again as a lecturer.
Rachel Braikenridge – 6/10. She tried her best to explain accounting stuff though tbh a lot of the stuff wasn’t solidly explained. Not bad as a lecturer otherwise.
There were other guest lecturers but I’ve only had one lesson with them.
Tutor: N/A
Overall: 1/10. Very poorly organized course, possibly one of the dodgiest courses I have ever seen. Whilst I understand that such a subject is necessary, it needs a COMPLETE overhaul. And if anyone is thinking of taking this course as a gen-ed or a free elective, do not even consider it – step well away from it. 8am starts are painful enough but to have a crap lecturer(s) is the worst experience you can have. No transparency what so ever as you do not find out what your marks are during the semester (which actually makes us wonder what he does with it). Also I’m not even sure if Guy will end up marking the final – he’s probably going to make up the marks on the basis of whether if he likes you or not.
Last edited:
