• Congratulations to the Class of 2024 on your results!
    Let us know how you went here
    Got a question about your uni preferences? Ask us here

Subject Reviews (with PDF compilation) (1 Viewer)

Hatake88

Active Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2012
Messages
196
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
Hopefully someone will add this to to PDF. Did all of these subjects in 2013.

ECON1001
Ease: 6/10 - I struggled with this course (credit average) even though I did pretty well in economics back in high school. If I had to compare the two, economics in high school relied more on memorization while ECON1001 focuses mainly on graphs and calculations. There is still some crossover between the two but it isn't a huge (dis)advantage by any means.

How easy is the course? Well, half of the cohort failed our mid semester exam. The raw marks for the final exams were also similar in that half of us would have failed if the marks weren't adjusted. Thankfully, the marks were changed and the average is around 65 but still. Changing the marks doesn't lower the actual difficulty of the course material.

Tip: The mass tutorials they hold before an exam is a 'must-go'. You get immediate support and the tutors there really do help clear up important theories.

Lecturer: 4/10 - At first, you would think the lecturer is rather nice as he keeps on asking if people had questions. In truth, all the answers for his questions are identical: "stop being lazy and go listen to the lecture recording." Well, that's helpful...especially since most students asked legitimate questions like "can you please elaborate on X in game theory?" rather than "when's the next exam?". But no. We receive almost 0 support from him. Furthermore, he has the tendency to leave very important lecture slides blank. His theory is that, if you don't bother to come to lectures (and thus fill the slides out then), then you don't deserve to get good marks (or in some cases even pass- see above). According to him, he would even take down the lecture recordings if he had the choice as he thinks it promotes "laziness". As someone who went to most of his lectures and ALL the tutorials, I found his attitude pretty insulting as its almost like he is assuming we're all lazy. Also, the one lecture I missed, I missed because I was sick. And while I was sick, I still had to phone up my friends and croak to them if they would please scan me the graphs so I can fill stuff in. Not happy. At all.

Apart from all this though, the lecturer actually goes at a decent pace and doesn't cram 100 slides into a 2 hour lecture. He would actually be a 7/10 if he gave up his attitude.

Interest: 8/10 - surprisingly this course is actually pretty interesting. If only the lecturer changed and the examined material was a little easier (because what's the point if you are going to +15 to everyone's mark in the end?), then I would highly recommend this course.

Overall: 5/10

EDIT: Just forgot to say that the lecturer in the second semester isn't the same as the first (i.e. not as prissy). If so, then I'd say the "overall" mark rises to a 6.5.
 
Last edited:

Hatake88

Active Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2012
Messages
196
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
ECON1002

Ease: 7/10. Marks are not scaled this time around. However, if you go to the lectures and the tutorials, you will almost be guaranteed a credit. The average for the course is, you guessed it, a credit.

Lecturer: 7/10. There are 2 lecturers- one Indian guy and the course coordinator who is Greek. Both are good in that they provide clear instruction and solid lecture slides. If I had to choose though, I'd go with the coordinator simply because he incorporated more graphs and statistical information which is more applicable to the 'real world' and made the course that little bit more interesting. Meanwhile, the indian lecturer had a more textbook approach. Overall though, you can't really go wrong.

Interest: 7/10. I didn't find it as interesting as microeconomics. Things were rather dull and straight forward at the start of the course but it picked up towards the end when we got to the Cobb-Douglas/Solow Swan function.

Overall: 7/10
 

Hatake88

Active Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2012
Messages
196
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
PSYC1001
Ease: 8/10. Getting a good mark is simple but not easy. On one hand, all you need to do is volunteer for experiments, do the quizzes (unlimited trials so there is no excuse for bad marks) and memorize everything in the lecture slides. This way, you'll almost be guaranteed a D if not more. On the other, lecture slides are often 60+ slides long for one lecture and you get three lectures a week. And there is around twelve teaching weeks in a semester. So yeah, if you leave all the memorising to the last week, have fun staying up till 3am.

Lecturer: 6-9/10. Depends on which lecturer you are talking about as the course covers six sub-topics (e.g. statistics, social learning, human development, forensic science) and they are all taught by different people. Overall, the quality isn't too bad though- sure, you've got those who like to read off from the lecture slides (e.g. the human development lecturer) but the slides are actually quite informative/interesting which makes lectures tolerable. Then, you've got lecturers like Lisa who are absolutely amazing. You laugh your head off and somehow you still end up getting 19/20 for her section (social learning). Highly recommend her.

Interest: 8.5/10. Very interesting. There is a bit for everyone out there. The tutorials are also more engaging than most though I found my class to be quite quiet.

Overall: 8/10
 

passionxmusic

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2009
Messages
1,040
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
ANAT2008 – Introduction to Histology:
Like BIOL1003, you touch upon many different organ systems but at the microscopic level rather than the anatomical level. The unit requires an objectification to classification style of learning eg. bile is made by a specialised cell in the liver – hepatocytes. The final theory examination and theory quizzes are also objectification to classification tests similar to multiple choice except for the multiple correct classifications. The practical requires more in depth understanding and memorising as many of the organs seem to be quite similar except for the specialised cells eg. small intestine and large intestine. The final practical exam occurs in two parts and you will be required to analyse some slides under a microscope or recognise their EM images on a computer*. This unit is highly recommended for those wishing to undertake HSTO units in 3rd Year.
[Ease: 6/10 | Interest: 7/10 | Lecturer: 7/10 | Overall: 6.5/10]

ANAT2009 – Comparative Primate Anatomy:
This is a medical science and history unit in one. The human anatomy will be compared to the chimpanzee anatomy/casts during practicals. It is important that you understand why the human and chimpanzee anatomy are either very similar or entirely different (eg. our hands are used for manipulation whereas the chimpanzee is for brachiating) and there are numerous casts for you to examine during practicals. ANAT2009 is a very interesting unit and is recommended if you plan on doing the general ANAT units in 3rd Year. You will also be given a chance to watch documentaries on human evolution outside classes which can be used in your essays. There are only two quizzes worth 10% in this unit so it is best you try to maximise all marks as the final exam worth 90% can either be easy or very difficult*.
[Ease: 6/10 | Interest: 9/10 | Lecturer: 9/10 | Overall: 8/10]

* Assessments may vary over the years.
 

Amleops

Perpetual Student
Joined
Aug 23, 2011
Messages
811
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
ECOP1001 - Economics as a Social Science

Ease: (9/10)
This course is very well structured and easy to follow, regardless of your background in economics, and it’s easy enough if you do the weekly readings to participate in tutorial discussion and understand what is going on. Assessment wise it was pretty straight forward too; the three take home assessments (two mini essays and one essay) were all easy to understand and plan, as most of the questions were on pretty general topics that left it open to interpretation. For the final exam, in the end we were actually given the questions before we sat the exam, so it was pretty easy to study for. I guess there’s a risk of getting complacent with this subject, but really, if you did well in HSC English or any other essay writing subjects it shouldn’t be too much of a step up. Just make sure you write essays the way they want you to and you’ll be fine.

Lecturer/Tutor: Thomas Barnes (9/10)
I did this subject through summer school and had a cohort of about 20 people; so naturally, it made it a bit easier to learn in a more intimate environment where everyone knows your name. But even besides that, Thomas Barnes was a great lecturer, his slides and lectures couldn’t have explained the concepts any better, and he made an effort to get everyone involved in discussions. If I had any criticism at all, it’s that his handwriting, particularly in regards to feedback on assignments, is at times a little hard to read, but really it’s nothing in the scheme of things. He really made the subject worthwhile for me. We also had Emeritus Professor Frank Stilwell deliver one lecture, he’s a legend within the political economy department and I can understand why; he really knows his stuff, and he has a very engaging lecture style. Unfortunately he’s retired so future cohorts may not see as much of him anymore.

Interest: (8/10)
Personally I found the course very interesting, and it was a great introduction to heterodox economics. It gets you to really challenge your assumptions of all the things mainstream economists take for granted, and provides you with some viable alternatives. I think there’s quite a few preconceptions of the department from outsiders, believing them all to be Marxists and radical leftists and what not, and yes, even though Marxism is one of the schools you will study, there are four others you will look at as well (Classical, Neoclassical, Institutional and Keynesian) which all vary in their underlying political philosophies. All this subject really teaches you to do is consider the economy from many different perspectives, and when you end up studying the schools and all its different features it does end up becoming quite interesting, leaving the door open for some stimulating debates.

Overall: (8.5/10)
I really only took this subject as a way to keep my brain engaged over the holidays, but this subject has definitely made me consider the possibility of pursuing further study in political economy. The Political Economy Department at Sydney is very unique, and it is a type of learning experience you won’t get at many other universities. I would highly recommend this subject to anybody, especially if you are studying mainstream economics, as this unit would complement it well.
 

someth1ng

Retired Nov '14
Joined
Sep 18, 2010
Messages
5,558
Location
Adelaide, Australia
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
Uni Grad
2021
CHEM2404
Ease: 7
It's not a particularly hard course but since it's very poorly taught with mostly content that seems quite random, it can seem very hard. The first topic involves forensic chemistry, some techniques used to detect substances and things like that - what you'd expect, really. The second topic is environmental chemistry in terms of soil and water solutions - this is probably the hardest part since it's really poorly taught but the concepts are quite tough to understand. The last section involves atmospheric chemistry and green chemistry - green chemistry is a bit different to environmental chemistry since green chemistry is more about improving processes to have a smaller environmental impact - this part of the course is quite easy and you should really be able to do most of it with first year chemistry knowledge, though, there is still some new content like the 12 principles of green chemistry. Finally, if you do core chemistry, you can really excel in the labs - I got 17/20, 19/20, 19/20, 19/20 and 20/20 for my lab reports which was considered pretty darn good - ALWAYS read comments you get and improve from them, that's how you do well in the labs - also note that the labs start when the other labs end so you'll just have 1 lab each week for the whole semester if you do both chemistry courses.
Lecturer: 3
Overall, lectures in this course were quite bad. Anthony Masters (first) was pretty average, nothing outstanding and I felt that it was quite boring but he wasn't the worst lecturer of the bunch. James Beattie (second) is a really smart guy but he's a bad lecturer because he is extremely difficult to understand - he doesn't speak clearly so you really need to put in a lot of effort to understand what he's saying and even then, it's hard. Peter Harrowell (last) is a decent lecturer and taught the best section - I'd say he's the best lecturer of these three but he isn't as good as the lecturers in the core chemistry classes - Peter also kicked me out of a lecture once but no big deal, kind of my fault, I guess.
Interest: 6
I mean, I like it because it was chemistry but the way the course was structured, run, and taught, wasn't appealing to me. There could a many improvements that could be made. If teaching was improved, I could imagine this course being much, much better. Atmospheric chemistry, for me, was really nice because I'm also doing an Environmental Studies major so it matches up but obviously, not many people will be like me and find that it's not extremely relevant.
Overall: 5
Overall, definitely not what I'd call a good course but it could've been much, much worse. I would like to be improved teaching which is drastically make the course more interesting. My recommendation is to not expect a pleasant course - basically noone actually likes the course.
Mark: 87

CHEM2915
Ease: 9
There are a couple of difficult concepts but a LOT to remember, particularly in organic chemistry where there's a tonne of reactions to know - personally, I spend hours remember what the reactions were - one tip to remember is that the oxygen on the carbonyl is almost always protonated first which allows all kinds of reactions to occur. http://www.masterorganicchemistry.com/ is an awesome resource that you can use - it will seriously help you do well. Also, in recent years, the subject has been progressively been dumbed down and this year's exam was ridiculously easy. I don't think the subject is hard at all but there is a lot of memory work to do and some conceptual understanding but you don't need to be a prodigy to excel. The course involves 2 topics of organic chemistry (one is aromatic and carbonyl chemistry, the other is more general organic chemistry) and 1 topic of physical chemistry (spectroscopy). As for SSP, it seriously advanced material and you won't understand it so you don't really get much out of it. Personally, I think I'd be better off with tutorials instead of SSP seminars as to not impede my learning.
Lecturer: 9
Lecturers in this course were fantastic. Peter Rutledge (first, 10/10) is my all-time favourite, his lectures are consistently clear and easy to understand and he is willing to spend time after lectures talking about issues that you might have. He's also quite quick with help if you email him. Rob Baker (8/10) is the "weakest" lecturer of this group but he's still very good - though, my criticism is that he should use actual slides and not just sheets - I'd prefer if they gave us copies to slides with curly arrows included, that would really help learning so you know for sure what is correct and what isn't. Adam Bridgeman (10/10) is really, really good - personally, I think Peter gets the edge over him but he's still exceptional and dedicated to teaching which is a huge plus. He seems to actually care about his students and that's what makes him a great teacher.
Interest: 10
I really like chemistry, in general and this course was fully of organic chemistry (my favourite) so I really enjoyed it), the physical chemistry, surprisingly, was quite good - even for a non-physical chemistry person like me.
Overall: 10
Good course, if you're interested in chemistry, I highly recommend this course - it's well run and if you put some effort in, you can do very well.
Mark: 86

GEOS2115
Ease: 7
Not an incredibly hard course but since I didn't really have any knowledge outside in first year first semester (GEOS1001), I really didn't have any prior knowledge of the stuff being taught. It's not that hard but there can be a lot of content in this course to remember, particularly for the essays in the final exam which can be quite difficult if you don't know a whole lot about what is taught. I highly recommend turning up to ALL lectures. The labs can be a bit challenging, particularly the Atlantis project but once you understand how to use the programs, it's quite straight forward. The PETM one is really easy as all of the information you need is on the Carleton College website (where they link you to) and you can just cite everything they use for virtually full marks.
Lecturer: 9
All of the lecturers were incredible - I thoroughly enjoyed every lecture, even if the content was new or difficult for me to grasp. All lecturers were clear, organised and taught the content in a way that even someone without background could understand. The issue which took 1 mark off was that the lecture recording didn't show the slides so they were hard to follow but if you attended them (which I did), you would have absolutely no problems.
Interest: 9
This course gives quite a well-rounded teaching of oceans, coasts and climate change as you would expect. I really couldn't ask for more. What more is there to say? The title of the course sets you up quite well and the description is decent.
Overall: 8
Overall, this was a really good course - much better than GEOS1001. This subject singlehandedly got me interested in actually majoring in Environmental Studies. I highly recommend this course.
Mark: 71

HPSC2100
Ease: 9
There's nothing inherently hard in the course, at all - marks you lose are almost purely of shitty marking/dumb assessments and retarded quizzes. Period.
Lecturer: 0
Ofer Gal is a really bad lecturer that's hard to understand. He doesn't record lectures and doesn't put out lecture slides - just some random notes (that aren't bad). Thought, Laura was a good tutor and kept things interesting - she also gave good advice and talked a tiny bit about what it was like in America but mostly on the actual content (history of science).
Interest: 1
Seriously, it's a boring subject - if you want to learn history of science, buy a book on it and save the $700 that you're about to waste. The way it's lectured is EXCRUCIATING.
Overall: 2
My recommendation is to completely avoid this subject, no worth your money or time.
Mark: 58
 
Last edited:

passionxmusic

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2009
Messages
1,040
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
ANAT3007 - Visceral Anatomy
This unit entails the study of the different organ systems within the human body (but not in great detail). The lectures follow the same structure set out in the course book you buy which contains both theory and practical material. You will get a chance to apply your theory knowledge in the practicals and also have the opportunity to interpret CTs, X-Rays and at times MRIs.
(Ease: 7/10 | Interest: 7/10 | Lecturer: 8/10 | Overall: 7.5/10)
* Some lectures were poorly constructed.

WRIT2002 - Advanced Writing and Rhetoric
A step up from WRIT1XXXs. A unit that is bent on refining your skills in writing by applying rhetoric use at a more advanced level. The lectures are constructed to act as mini tutorials in the space of an hour where you are placed in a group to discuss the relevant issues of rhetoric etc. in accordance to the topic of the day.
(Ease: 9/10 | Interest: 5/10 | Lecturer: 10/10 | Overall: 9.5/10)
* This unit was made interesting thanks to LHS. :p

SCLG2603 - Sociology of Health and Illness
The lectures were interesting and it was made better by the fact that there are students from diverse faculties sharing their thoughts on the current sociological theories and biological theories which structure how medicine is perceived and engaged with in today's society. There are three main assessments: a minor essay, a debate (in the last three weeks of semester) and a final essay due in the last week of semester.
(Ease: 7/10 | Interest: 8/10 | Lecturer: 9/10 | Overall: 8/10)

KOCR2600 - Introduction to Indigenous Studies
This unit explores the histories of the colonial impact in Australia and how culture was preserved through the years. The lectures are engaging as on numerous occasions there will be guest lecturers and documentaries to watch and interpret to emphasise the theory component. There are two essays and a group presentation to complete in this unit.
(Ease: 8/10 | Interest: 8/10 | Lecturer: 10/10 | Overall: 9/10)
 
Last edited:

Blue Suede

a bedroom philosopher
Joined
Feb 28, 2010
Messages
2,016
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2019
HPSC2100
Ease: 9
There's nothing inherently hard in the course, at all - marks you lose are almost purely of shitty marking/dumb assessments and retarded quizzes. Period.
Lecturer: 0
Ofer Gal is a really bad lecturer that's hard to understand. He doesn't record lectures and doesn't put out lecture slides - just some random notes (that aren't bad). Thought, Laura was a good tutor and kept things interesting - she also gave good advice and talked a tiny bit about what it was like in America but mostly on the actual content (history of science).
Interest: 1
Seriously, it's a boring subject - if you want to learn history of science, buy a book on it and save the $700 that you're about to waste. The way it's lectured is EXCRUCIATING.
Overall: 2
My recommendation is to completely avoid this subject, no worth your money or time.
Mark: 58
Not sounding bitter at all m8.


For peeps interested in this course who are put off by this review, I'd like you to note that the way assessments are done for this course is that only your best marks are counted, so you do actually get time to receive feedback and improve.
 

someth1ng

Retired Nov '14
Joined
Sep 18, 2010
Messages
5,558
Location
Adelaide, Australia
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
Uni Grad
2021
Of what is counted, top 6 of 12 "questions" that you make up, top 3 of 4 quizzes and all of your essays count. Even with that said, the assessments are an academic disgrace - particularly the questions that you ask.
 

flashyGoldFish

Active Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2013
Messages
465
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
It seems to be a subject people either really enjoy or really hate. For me personally, I loved Ofer's craziness and rants about everything. I found him a very engaging and enjoyable lecturer was is very passionate about his subject. I havent come across enough lecturers at uni who convey their passion for their subject in their lecturing style. Its too often that monotonous tone. I loved that the assessment structure was so lenient and the work was so spread out over semester (rather than having 2-3 big assessments). I thought it was a great subject. That said I did do pretty well.
 

Blue Suede

a bedroom philosopher
Joined
Feb 28, 2010
Messages
2,016
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2019
Of what is counted, top 6 of 12 "questions" that you make up, top 3 of 4 quizzes and all of your essays count. Even with that said, the assessments are an academic disgrace - particularly the questions that you ask.
I think you maybe missed the point of the questions? (many people do) He's trying to get you to engage with the different type of analysis. Something that you'll find if you pursue HPS further is that it's often less important writing up a summary of an article, and more important asking questions of it. It's developing a great skill for further research.



Glad to hear you enjoyed it Flashy :)
 
Last edited:

ww0811

Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2011
Messages
48
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
MATH1001
Ease: 8/10 (4U STUDENT) 7/10 (3U STUDENT) combination of complex number, graph calculus, limits, Taylor polynomial *(questions that distinguish HD and D students)
Lecturer: Di Warren 11/10 (MUST GO to her MATH1005 second semester!!!), Holger Dullin & Daniel Hauer (5/10) (bad)
Interest: 7/10
Overall: 7.5/10 Try to maximise your quiz and assignment marks and do all the past exam papers.

Math1002
Ease: 8/10 loved vector and hated matrix, If you like it, you will find it so easy!
Lecturer: Bob Crossman (5/10, bad, but his lecture questions are very exam typical, unlike the textbook style dry questions, he made final exam quesitons I think... , Andrew Crisp (10/10, perfect), Zhou Zhang (7/10)
Interest: 8/10
Overall 8/10 Try to maximise your quiz and assignment marks and do all the past exam papers!!!

Chem1101
Ease: 7/10 Similar content to HSC chemistry, lots of topics, please study consistently! Very organised course.
Lecturer: Kaitlin Beare,Elizabeth New (10/10), Peter Harrowell (9/10, i like him while everyone hate him, good lecture notes), Ron Clarke (5/10)
Interest: 8/10 different topics bring your specific interest to second year chemistry
Overall: 8/10 PLEASE do all the past papers!!!
BIOL1003
Ease: 6/10 bad course, too many contents!!!! Lab quiz hard, hard marking on report, case study presentation (Group slacking off), final exam 75 MCQs (please do the CONNECT quiz online, its in the final exam!!!)
Lecturer: Osu Lilje (8/10, great but her voice....), Murray Thomson (10/10), others were horrible.
Interest: 8/10, interesting course, good for second year anatomy and physiology
Overall: 7/10 50% final, 50% internal assessment, if you messed up in internal, there is a chance in final!!!, so please do CONNECT REVISION quiz!!!!
PYSC1001
Ease: 6/10 loved forensic psychology and social psychology, neuroscience (feel like doing BIOL1003), others.....
Lecturer: Lisa ZADRO (11/10), Caleb Owens (7/10), CELINE VAN GOLDE (9/10), others (5/10), Nico.....(0/10)
Interest: 9/10 for social psychology, 8/10 neuroscience+forensic, 6/10 science statistics, development, 0/10 personality.
Overal: 6.5/10 Pass is survival!
 

someth1ng

Retired Nov '14
Joined
Sep 18, 2010
Messages
5,558
Location
Adelaide, Australia
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
Uni Grad
2021
Yeah, Di Warren is an exceptional lecturer - easily the best in the whole department. Honestly, out of all the lecturers I saw in maths, she was the only good one.
 

flashyGoldFish

Active Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2013
Messages
465
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
Yeah, Di Warren is an exceptional lecturer - easily the best in the whole department. Honestly, out of all the lecturers I saw in maths, she was the only good one.
Maybe its because when I had her lectures, I had them at 8am but I remember he being pretty boring and pretty slow.Always had microphone problems as well
 

someth1ng

Retired Nov '14
Joined
Sep 18, 2010
Messages
5,558
Location
Adelaide, Australia
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
Uni Grad
2021
This is a review from a friend of mine...

CHEM2911 Molecular Reactivity & Spectroscopy Adv
Ease: 7
Nothing particularly difficult, just a huge amount of content so it is pretty hard to keep up with it all and remember anything. Labs were also fairly easy and while the reports were daunting at first, if you read the feedback you should end up getting close to 20/20 by the end of them. But they are definitely very time consuming and it was a relief when labs finished and I no longer needed to complete any reports.
Lecturer: 8
Peter Rutledge (9/10) was really good, extremely helpful, explained everything well and had a really well structured course. Not sure who the 8 am lecturer was but we had him for 1 tute. Hopefully he teaches his lectures better than his tutes because he was the worst tutor I’ve had for any subject at uni. Rob Baker (6/10) wasn’t bad but definitely worse than the other two lecturers. Didn’t explain stuff as well as he could’ve and often was not very clear. I listened to some 8 am lecture recordings and Kate Joliffe was much better at explaining the content and she was really helpful during the tute. Adam Bridgeman (9/10) was pretty good and always extremely helpful however he lost the god-like status he had in my mind from my experience of him last year. Whilst on the whole I rated him the same as Peter Rutledge, I don’t think he is as good at explaining the content. The 8 am lecturer seemed quite good.
Interest: 7
Interesting course covering both physical and organic chemistry but focusing strongly on organic. Didn’t like the labs and reports and learnt very little from them. I thought there was a good range of content which ensured studying for the final exam wasn’t monotonous and I did enjoy learning the content.
Overall: 8
It can be tough because there’s so much content and it sucks if you’re in the 8 am lecture stream. Labs aren’t particularly fun but made easier if you’re with friends. If you keep up with the content you’ll be fine but don’t expect to be able to learn everything in the week before the exam, especially if like me you didn’t pay attention in first year. My quiz marks weren’t particularly flash but still I managed to do well because I did try and keep up the content as best as I could. For people doing SSP, just turn up to the tutes, they make learning so much easier. If future exams are as easy as this year’s, you can fairly easily pass this course even though there’s a lot of content. People taking this course are fortunate enough to have some of the best lecturers even though Tim Schmidt no longer takes the course and it was thanks to them I achieved my mark. If only all subjects had lecturers of the same calibre.
Mark: 80


PHSI2005 Integrated Physiology A
Ease: 7
A lot of content but like with any of the medical sciences, nothing complicated, you just need to try and memorise everything. The things you need to learn are largely logical so as long as you bother to try and understand them, trying to memorising everything is made much easier. Review lectures at the end of each topichelp to make things easier. It helps to have subjects that link in such as pharmacology and immunology which mean there’s less content to learn.
Lecturer: 7
Prof. Max Bennett (5/10) took CNS and was extremely old school, no lecture notes put online. He gave time to copy down the diagram from the lecture slides and then he would talk and if you wrote notes when he talked, he’d stop and tell you to stop writing. He only allowed you to write when he dictated notes to the lecture. Extremely smart guy and has an interesting history, some of which he’ll go on about during the lecture. He’s been teaching the course for 46 years and from what I can tell still teaches the same way he did 46 years ago. Bill Phillips (7/10) took neurophysiology and was a good lecturer. His learning objectives were provided in the form of questions you could answer and gave you a good idea of what you did and did not know. People liked AtomuSawatari (6/10) who took muscle physiology however I felt he made things a bit more complicated than necessary. Stuart Fraser (8/10) took haematology and made his lectures pretty interesting. Sharon Herkes (7/10) took the CV system and covered the content really well. It really helps if you memorise the Wiggers diagram the first time it’s covered. David Allen (7/10) took exercise physiology and his lectures were a welcome relief in pace from Sharon’s.
tl;dr They were all good on the whole.
Interest: 9
A subject that I’m quite interested in though my level of interest varies from topic to topic and people I know had similar experiences to me.
Overall: 8
There’s a lot of content so make sure you keep up with it. At least 25% fail the midsem quiz every year (higher in previous years) but I didn’t find it particularly difficult. Simply people don’t bother putting any effort in and think they can cruise through it like first year subjects. Our tutor described MBLG as a good warm up in terms of how much content is covered. A tough course but quite interesting. I could’ve done better if I’d put in more consistent work and tried harder but I found getting into the 75+ range is significantly harder than any of my first year subjects.
Mark: 71


PCOL2011 Pharmacology Fundamentals
Ease: 5
It’s one of the medical sciences so you know there’s a lot of content and a huge amount that needs to be rote-learnt. Unless you bother to do the prereadings before the lecture, you will have no idea what the lecturer is going on about for the first topic because none of the terminology is familiar. Even then you still will be lost because so many new terms are used and either never introduced or just briefly mentioned. 4th module is made easier if you’re doing 2nd year chemistry but a strong knowledge of first year organic will suffice. I felt the final exam wasn’t too bad. You’re given a choice between 2 modules for each module which makes it a lot easier. MC in the exam was much easier than the quizzes which was a welcome relief. The lab reports were marked extremely harshly. Reports and presentations for tutes were far easier but annoyingly some tutors marked easier than others. I felt this it was at least on par with MBLG in terms of difficulty.
Lecturer: 6
Maybe Wallace theatre didn’t help me but I felt the lecturers and the way their lecture slides to be poor. Brent McPharland (5/10) struggled to finish his lectures on time and rambled a lot (though his ramblings included tips on studying). Michael Murray (5/10) was just boring. Not attending his lectures and instead playing them back at a faster speed makes him more bearable. I’d even consider giving him a 6 or 7 if his lectures were at that speed. Not sure if it was him or the atmosphere in Wallace that put me to sleep. Slade Matthews (7/10) was a good lecturer but the fact he was using someone else’s lecture notes (who was on maternity leave) meant he was not as good as he could have been. To the other lecturer’s credit, I felt she had the best lecture notes out of all PCOL lectures and it’s a shame she wasn’t there. Tina Hinton (7/10) took experimental pharmacology lectures and while she is a good lecturer, she seemed very unorganised. Rachael Codd (5/10) took the 4th module and was simply dry and unengaging. I felt like I got very little from allthe lecturers which discouraged me from attending lectures.
Interest: ?
Maybe it was largely to do with how the subject was taught and the fact you have no idea what is going on for so much of it but it made me wonder if it’s such a good idea to major in this subject. Interest may have been higher if I’d put in more effort throughout the semester since I would have understood the lecturers better. Don’t feel comfortable giving this a rating but it would definitely be in the range of 5-7.
Overall: 6
Doing physiology and chemistry will help with the 3rd and 4th modules respectively but the focus in PCOL is on knowing drugs. These subjects aid in understanding the basics so you’re less caught up in understanding these relatively basic concepts and can focus on understanding the later lectures. The assessments were marked quite harshly (harder than PHSI) and this was the first subject in uni in which I’ve been dragged down by my assessment marks. Will reserve my judgement on this subject area until after I’ve done PCOL2012.
Mark: 67


WRIT1000 Writing: Style and Method
Ease: 10
Easiest subject I have done by far, can be a bit boring at times. Great WAM booster. If you bother to turn up to tutorials, complete the online tasks and make sure there are no stupid mistakes like grammatical and referencing errors in your assignments, you should easily get a distinction. Helps that in arts you only lose 2% for each day the assignment is submitted late.
Lecturer: 8
Lindsay was a good lecturer.
Interest: 6
Many find this subject dry and extremely boring and the tutorials largely are despite Janice’s energy and desire to make the tutorial engaging. If you have a slight interest in the arts, especially philosophy, the lectures can be interesting though I often didn’t bother to turn up and don’t feel I was negatively affected by a lack of attendance. If you want, just listen to the recording on 1.5x speed. Still, I did find the subject somewhat interesting on the whole.
Overall: 8
Course was a bit disorganised because it was the first time Lindsay was running it which was frustrating however people in the future shouldn’t have this problem. The tutor pretty much told the tute what she wanted you to include in your essay. Just remember to reference the course reader, lecture notes or links to articles from the notes. Read your feedback and act on it, it helped me increase my marks by 20 marks from my first assignment to the final essay.
Mark: 89
 

aj12

New Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2014
Messages
10
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
MATH1001
Ease: 9/10
Easy course. But then again I did 4u.
Lecturer: 8/10
I had Di Warren who was a very good lecturer, although I only attended a couple of lectures.
Interest: 7/10
It’s calculus. I liked it better than my other maths unit, but still…it’s just calculus.
Overall: 8/10
Not hard to get good marks if you do well in quizzes, etc. Probs much higher chance of doing VERY well if you take the advanced/ssp version.
Mark: 78


MATH1002
Ease: 7/10
The exam was much, much harder (proofs, much more abstract, etc.) than MATH1001. Quizzes etc. are easy.
Lecturer:
Crossman: 3/10. Horrible lecturer. Can’t understand a word he says because he mumbles and breathes really heavily (sorry, but it’s probably because he is really obese). He wasted so much time in the lectures telling people off and his handwriting is illegible.
Crisp: 8/10. Not in his stream, but used his lecture notes, which were very helpful. Unfortunately, he does seem to make a lot of mistakes during the lectures (going on about something for ~10 min and then crossing it all out and apologising, starting over).
Interest: 5/10
Pretty boring. It’s about like matrices and other calculation-type things.
Overall: 6/10
It’s not bad…but I just don’t like this type of maths and some of the lecturers were really bad.
Mark: 76


PSYC1001
Ease: 8/10
PSYC1001 makes it extremely clear how to get good marks. If you do the research participation and get full marks on the quizzes, you should have no problem getting a D or above. I personally failed the assignment, which I found difficult because there isn’t much guidance/explanation as to what to do…+ I just suck at essays.
Lecturers: 6/10
Social: 10/10
Forensic: 7/10. Really boring but at least she was on topic.
Science/stats: 6/10. Okay lecturer, although many people say that he is condescending and arrogant. Personally, I found him a bit annoying but not too bad. Not much of what he says is examinable (mainly because he gives a lot of examples, details you don’t need to know). Very little content to know for exam.
Neuroscience: 10/10
Personality: 1/10. Don’t go to lectures..it’s a complete waste of time. Just memorise bolded terms in slides.
Human development: 7/10. Similar to forensic.
Interest: 6/10.
Liked 2 sections. Was okay with 2. Hated 2.
Overall: 7/10
Mark: 78


BIOL1993
Ease: 6/10
I didn’t do HSC Biology and had never written a science report before.
Lecturers: 7/10
Interest: 8.5/10
I enjoyed the human bio part, but found the labs tedious and boring. I would really only recommend SSP bio to someone who loved laboratory work, and wanted to major in BIOLOGY (not physiology/anatomy/etc.) and perhaps become a professional scientist.
Overall: 7.5/10
Pretty disorganised. There was a time when the lecturer actually didn’t even show up. It is a bit unclear what is actually examinable. The exam itself was not horrible, but I found it quite challenging. Overall, I’m pretty happy with my mark and I definitely learned A LOT, but I really should have taken normal biology considering my background.
Mark: 73

CHEM1901
Ease: 7/10
Exam was very difficult, but everything else (40%) was easy marks.
Lecturers:
Toby: 8/10
Chris: 7/10
Interest: 8/10
I like theory and problem-solving, but having to memorise the applications was tedious (e.g. different types of batteries, metallurgy, etc.)
Overall: 7.5/10
Mark: 75

****In reading this, keep in mind that I only studied the night before for every exam, so you (future student haha) will probably do better than I did.
 

Amleops

Perpetual Student
Joined
Aug 23, 2011
Messages
811
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
CHNS1101 - Chinese 1A (For Beginners)

Ease: (6/10)

It's not a particularly difficult subject, but it isn't particularly easy either. Those of you who can speak other Asian languages would probably have a small advantage, but that's not to say those without it can't do well. The most challenging aspect of the content for most (non-Asian) people would probably be learning all the characters. Especially for me, who did this unit in Winter School, there was scarce time to remember a decent amount of information. In the end I did do pretty well, and while I'd have to do another Chinese unit during the normal semester to compare, I would think doing this unit during the standard semester would be easier, so many of you may be better off than I was. Assessment wise you will have a number of tasks which test your reading, speaking, listening and writing, none of which exceed a 20% weighting. While the final exam was a little more difficult than usual, the assessment tasks are generally fair and serve as a great method of self-evaluation. Just make sure you keep up with each lessons material and don't fall behind.

Lecturer/Tutor: Jiefen Li (8/10)

The fact that she was teaching a class of about 16 students was probably responsible for the better and more personable learning experience, but aside from that, Jiefen was a great teacher. She was able to introduce and explain the content pretty well, and she was quite approachable if you had any issues. I'm not quite sure if her lecture slides and resources were actually made and compiled by her seeing as she is normally a tutor, but in any case they were well organised and she utilised them well. Being a native Chinese speaker she did have an accent, and there have also been particular instances where I have had to double take when she repeats the phrase 那个 in between sentences (if you want to know why watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTk2WkRMLzg), but otherwise she is easy enough to understand, and I can't really fault her.

Interest: (10/10)

I've always wanted to learn a second language, and I was instantly drawn to Chinese for its usefulness and extra challenge it offered in comparison to many alphabetic European languages. For me, my keen interest in the subject was enough to more than make up for the already few criticisms I had with this course. Despite this being an introductory subject, which presumably focuses on basic knowledge, I found all the features and intricacies of the language studied in this course to be very interesting. In terms of the unit content, it revolves around textbook lessons on greetings, family, dates/time, hobbies, and visiting friends. In addition to this you also have a running "mini-drama" series composed by the Chinese department which further extends your knowledge of vocabulary and everyday speech. Both of these resources were a pleasure to study and learn from. On the whole this subject is probably one of my favourites done to date, plus I must say it has been quite satisfying walking around the university the past few weeks and being able to understand a word here and there of what international students are saying :).

Overall: (9/10)

I was very impressed with this course. Whether you are wanting to learn a new language, or just need to take an elective to fill space, I would definitely recommend this unit. There is a lot of work involved; studying any language at an introductory level at university is very intensive. Plus with Chinese, not only do you have to learn all the vocabulary, grammar and expressions, but you also have to learn characters by copying them into your workbook every week about 30-40 times each. That's not to say the workload is not manageable (I managed and I was doing 13 weeks worth of work in 13 days), but don't expect to do this unit and be able to coast through. You will have to put in the work, but I can guarantee you that at least the work is fun :). Mandarin Chinese is a great language to learn, and you've got nothing to lose by choosing this unit.
 

sarahinspirit

New Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2014
Messages
2
Gender
Female
HSC
2013
the following subjects were taken in 2014, semester 1:


MATH1901

Ease: 8/10

The first parts of the subject (complex numbers, injective and bijective functions, limits) are generally easier to grasp than later topics. A part that most students struggled with was the epsilon-delta definition of limits (future students BEWARE!); I only managed to partially grasp the concept after several consultations with the lecturer and my tutor. Other than that, if you consistently keep up with the lectures and tutes, and clarify your doubts before they snowball into an endless list of questions, you should be fine.

Assessments: the quizzes are much easier than the finals since the better-mark principle is used to calculate your final score, try to grab as many marks as you can for the quizzes and the assignment. It won't put as much pressure on you for the finals. Personally, I couldn't finish the final exam (left around 1-1.5 questions blank) so time management is really important. Don't spend too long on the multiple choice part! Another tip is to rigorously complete past exam papers (time yourself if you need to) and the online quizzes posted on the math website (these will help with the multiple choice component).

Lecturer: Dr James Parkinson 10/10

A great lecturer - his lecture notes are clear and concise, and he is really good at explaining new concepts in an interesting manner. His proofs of theorems are really clear too (even at 8am in the morning), which definitely help when you're revising/studying for the subject. He's also really friendly and approachable, so don't hesitate to ask questions after lectures/at his consultations.

Interest: 7/10

Most topics/theorems were exiting to learn (eg L'Hopital's Rule, directional derivatives) while some proofs were somewhat dry/did not make much sense to me. If you're having problems understanding the proofs, attend a consultation.

Overall: 8/10

The lecturer made the content interesting to learn, and it was pretty cool seeing the linkages between math concepts. If you consistently work hard in tutes and complete the tute sheets (i didn't do the questions with **, they were too difficult), you should be alright.

MATH1902

Ease: 6.5/10

This course started off easy (vectors), but its difficulty increased exponentially (haha). Once you get the hang of matrices, they are easier to tackle and questions (the basic questions) are generally kind of standard. The worst topics were eigenvalues and eigenvectors and markov processes. The lecturer didn't explain these clearly in the lectures, and it is imperative to clear all your questions on this topic asap especially since there is very little time to do so. The textbook is therefore really important for this subject (written by david easdown who is awesome). There was 1 entire question on the eigenshit in the exam and it was awful :( Although I attended consultations, I never really grasped the abovementioned concepts and had to resort to rote learning eigen questions from past papers. I didn't bother about markov processes.

Assessments: Same format as MATH1901, study hard for the quizzes and put a decent amount of effort into the assignment and you'll be ok. The last question of the final exam was difficult and there is always at least 1 part of 1 question in the entire paper that is of a very different style to usual questions (aka never seen before and very difficult).

Lecturer: Assos. Prof. Holger Dullin 6.75/10

Lecturing was slightly above average for the first part of the course, but it was problematic for the second half (esp the eigen topics). It also didn't help that people at the back kept talking loudly, making it difficult to hear him at times. Precious lecture time was also consistently wasted because the lecturer had to keep telling people to shut up, causing him to rush through the remaining content in the last 10 minutes :/

On a positive note, the lecturer is generally approachable and friendly, and is willing to answer questions after lectures/during consultations.

Interest: 6.5/10

Not as interesting as MATH1901, but its not too bad. 3-D vectors were somewhat interesting.

Overall: 7/10

Not my favourite subject in the semester, but its mostly manageable. Pay attention in the lectures and tutes and do the tute sheets (again, ** questions are only for the brave-hearted) and you should get at least a credit.

BIOL1001

Ease: 9/10

This subject was one of my favourite subjects this semester!! The way in which the assessments are set out is advantageous to hard working/consistent students because there are many components. In each component, it is relatively easy to do well provided you put in a decent amount of effort, and ask for feedback (where applicable). Components like lab book marking and submitting the draft photosynthesis paper are a great way to secure marks in the course. The enzyme short communication and the final photosynthesis report are challenging, but with enough time and using the resources available, especially the piazza forum (extremely helpful because you'll get a reply to any question really quickly), it is very possible to do well for both. Given that the final exam was 38%, it is also possible to pass the course before you take the final exam, which takes off a lot of pressure during finals.

Quizzes: the quizzes in BIOL1001 are efficiently marked, they are all multiple choice questions with no negative marking and you'll get your marks the same day you take the quiz. PeerWise is a great platform to prepare for all multiple choice quizzes/components in the entire course.

A lot of students were worried about the negative marking in finals, but really, negative marking will help you unless you didn't study at all for the course. The only way you'll get a negative mark for a multiple choice question is if you pick the completely wrong answer. Picking a partially correct answer may give you 0.5 marks instead of 0, so negative marking is not an issue if you attend the lectures/listen to the lecture recordings, and make an effort to study for BIOL1001.

Lecturers:

Dr Danny Liu: 15/10

Danny is hands down the best lecturer I've had in usyd so far. His lectures are absolutely engaging and fun (you will never regret attending his lectures) and he uses socrative during his lectures to ask questions throughout the lecture, making sure you understand key concepts before moving on. He also comes up with distinctive analogies for important concepts which makes content so easy to remember. Revision during stuvac was a breeze. He's also really friendly, approachable and always willing to help - you can find him around carslaw level 5 and basically ask him anything related to the course/related to studying biology in uni. His lecture notes are equally awesome!! Danny teaches the topics on cellular biology and population genetics.

Prof. Ben Oldroyd: 8/10

A very knowledgeable lecturer, he lectures the topics on genetics, and is generally very clear in his delivery of lecture content.

Prof. Madeleine Beekman: 8/10

A lecturer very passionate about biology. I find her lectures interesting and informative, and I especially loved her last lecture about tasmanian devils. Her lectures mostly take the form of a narrative storytelling style, which makes content easy to remember as well. She teaches the topics on evolution and biodiversity.

Dr Nate Lo: 9/10

An extremely engaging lecturer. He only lectured for 2 weeks, on phylogenetics. He uses great examples in lectures that definitely help with understanding the terms related to the topic.


Interest: 10/10

There was never a boring moment in this course, everything was interesting and a joy to learn :) I took this subject just to fill up my study load for semester 1, but now I'm really keen to pursue biology in second and third year. Awesome subject, highly recommended!!

Overall: 10/10

A enjoyable subject from start to end. The course is also very well-organised and there are various ways to clarify your doubts/seek help, from posting on Piazza, to arranging consultations with lecturers. Moreover, revision lectures are organised throughout the course to help with consolidating knowledge and there are plenty of opportunities to learn from other students' questions! Lab pracs are 3 hours long but they usually end early and time flies during the pracs anyway :) I cannot recommend this subject enough!!

PSYC1001

Ease: 6/10

The amount of content is massive, if you don't consistently keep up with the content, stuvac will be a nightmare. There are 6 components in total D: On the other hand, the online quizzes are an easy way to get marks - unlimited attempts. The 5 hours of research participation is also an easy way to grab 5% of the total marks for the course. The final exam was a pain to sit through, felt like 10 years of my life had passed when the paper ended :/ Additionally, the essay assignment was difficult to complete because there was no way you could get feedback on your written drafts. Everything had to be done verbally. Unlike BIOL1001, there weren't many platforms available if you needed help.

Lecturers:

Dr Caleb Owens (Science and Stats): 8.5/10

For some reason, many students don't really like his lecturing style, but I found it rather engaging. Plenty of examples and analogies used in his lectures, which are important for the final exam. This was, imo, one of the clearest components of psyc1001 in terms of content and what we were expected to know. The final exam for this component had no surprises.

Dr Lisa Zadro (Social Psych): 15/10

An outstanding lecturer (as many would agree). Dr Z is lively and energetic during her lectures, and if you make the effort to rock up to her lectures, you will be prepared for the exam (many analogies and examples were given in the lectures). Content was delivered in such a unique and interesting way, studying for her component is much easier than the others (you will remember most of the theories and examples just by turning up to lectures). No surprises from this component in the final exam. This is the component most students excel in (with many scoring full marks or close to full marks).

Celine Van Golde (Forensic Psych): 6/10

I found it difficult to stay awake during the forensic psych lectures, as she just reads off the lecture slides (which are not uploaded prior to the lecture). However, on a positive note, everything you need to know for this component is on the lecture slides, just study for them and you should do well for this component.

Dr Ian Johnston (Neuroscience): 9.5/10

Yet another great lecturer in this course. He prepares key questions for each topic, making it easy to study for neuroscience. As long as you can answer all the key questions, you are set. However, there are many scientific names/terms to remember in this component, so start revising early or you'll get confused between terms. Ian is also very approachable, so if you have any questions, don't hesitate!

Dr Niko Tiliopoulos (Personality): 7/10

I personally found this component to be the most challenging due to its abstract nature. Nothing made much sense to me so I had to rely on rote learning to get through this part. Niko is an eccentric lecturer and he is definitely engaging, but I found the content difficult to understand. My performance on his component was the worst out of the 6 :( Tip: remember all the names of the different scientists on the last slide of each of the lecture slides, they will come in handy in the final exam.

Dr Micah Goldwater (Developmental Psych): 6/10

This component was very similar to forensic psych in terms of delivery, except that more videos were shown during lectures, which were helpful in consolidating information.

Interest: started off as 8/10, dropped to 6/10 by the end of the semester

The crazy load of content made the subject a pain to get through. By the end of the semester, this was the subject I liked the least out of all my other subjects.

Overall: 6.5/10

Not a great subject, although it is certainly one of the most popular subjects taken in first year (>2000 students).

CLAW1001

Ease: 9/10

A very structured unit, it was clear what you had to do for each component. The tutorial questions were very useful in practising the IPAAC format of writing, and the tutors were all knowledgeable and helpful (especially Josh and Mikaela). Everything might seem fuzzy, abstract and confusing in the first 2 weeks, but it WILL get better, don't worry. As always, do the tutes. These are extremely important for this unit because some tute questions were adapted from past papers. I suggest writing out the answers to the tute questions in the IPAAC format before the tute and getting feedback from the tutor after the tute, so that by the time the mid sem exam comes up, you would have had a ton of practice on the IPAAC style of writing, which is very advantageous. Also, exams are open book! :) half the exam lies in the preparation of your own notes to take into the exam, don't rely on the textbook and lecture notes because there won't be time to flip through the lecture notes/textbook trying to find what you are looking for in the exams.

Lecturer: Giuseppe Carabetta 15/10

You won't regret attending his lectures, but remember not to text/play/fiddle with your phone/laptop during the lectures - Giuseppe is very particular about this. A few lectures were also given by the tutors, standouts were Josh and Mikaela.

Interest: 10/10

A standout subject!! The relevance of this subject is very clear in everyday life (eg consumer rights, the sale of goods act, negligence etc), and overall, the content of the subject is fun to learn, especially the cases!! :)

Overall: 10/10

Never regretted taking this subject for one moment. This is a subject that requires continued effort to put the pieces together, but once you do, the open book mid-sem and finals will be a breeze.








hope these reviews were helpful, took me more than 3 hours to write lol (partly because of procrastination)
 
Last edited:

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top