Page 3 of 24 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 590
Like Tree25Likes

Thread: Subject Reviews (with PDF compilation)

  1. #51
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    HSC
    2003
    Gender
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    479
    Rep Power
    11

    Re: Subject Reviews - UPDATED WITH .PDF on first post

    CLAW 3202 is much better imo. It's much easier, 20% of your marks are from handing in tute answers over the semester, so you get to choose when to hand things in. No mid semester, and the group assignment is with 5 people so it isn't very taxing (no pun intended). Content wise I'd prefer 3202 again. You cover topics including international taxation and international tax agreements (what the assignment was on actually), taxation of dividends under imputation, avoidance (again), employee share schemes, losses etc.

    You only cover in depth what you have to, like 2 topics for the final so you don't have to study a lot of stuff in the end. But yeah it's better, open book and more legislation based (hardly any cases at all) than 3201. So if you're looking for a filler i'd give it a go (only one extra text book needed), it's also probably a good step towards tax in accounting (know Deloittes girls etc who have done it).

  2. #52
    Executive Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    HSC
    N/A
    Gender
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,148
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: Subject Reviews - UPDATED WITH .PDF on first post

    Is Fin A hard because u had to memorise lots/lots of readings
    or because it is abstract?

    Will it be based on the financial accounting concepts learned in the first half of ACCT 1B?

  3. #53
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    HSC
    2005
    Gender
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    382
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: Subject Reviews - UPDATED WITH .PDF on first post

    ECON1002- Introductory Macroeconomics
    Ease 8/10: It's not very difficult. You need to be able to understand and apply models, and refer to them in the use of macroeconomic policy.. cause of issue, ways to correct it. There are two in- class tests each 4-weeks of the semester that examine immediately relevant content. The final exam focuses most on everything that hasn't been tested in the in- class tests, which was really good. Alot of the difficult concepts from the opening weeks did not appear in the final exam, at all.
    Lecture 9/10: I had Matthew Smith. He's really good. He's quite intelligent and explains things very well, beyond the provided lecture slides.
    Interest 8/10
    Overall 9/10: The only stupid thing about this subject was that the recommended core text, that was purchased by almost everyone, was close to useless. I used the course reader more often, and had to access other books. The lecturer actually advised us for one topic NOT to refer to the text book. The tutors for the subject are okay, and the assessment structure has an actual focus on tutorials themselves (individual and group presentations, participation and attendence mark) unlike econ1001.

    ECMT1020- Business and Economic Statistics B
    Ease 7/10: It's about the same difficulty as ecmt1010. You learn multiple regression, and use more distributions (like chi squared, t, f,... you barely use z-stat and normal). There are random topics that seem completely useless, like learning how to work with matrices. There are stupid quizzes worth only 5%, a relatively easy mid- semester test, and an assignment involving regression, with heaaaps of data. The exam is just a repeat of previous exams' questions. It is exactly the same- do them, and you will be completely prepared.
    Lecturers 8/10: John Goodhew is very friendly and polite- even to the people that are constantly rude to him in lectures with their talking. He goes very very fast though sometimes through the content. Though he provides handouts, we were always writing fast to get everything down without being able to listen properly to his explanation.
    Interest 7/10
    Overall 8/10

    GOVT1202- World Politics
    Ease 7/10: I found the assessment essays to be particularly difficult. It takes a long time to actually figure out what you're arguing, in relation to political theory. The exam was multiple choice based entirely on the concepts of the readings. If you actually have time to study the readings that much, you will do well in the exam. Because I didn't have time to do that.. my HD mark fell to a final mark of C. It was very difficult in this subject, more than any other for me, to balance the challenging assignments with the completion of course work.
    Lecturers 9/10: I was one of the few people that liked Gil Merom. It's very difficult to follow what he's saying initially, not at all because of his accent, but just his style of speaking. Like out of nowhere he'll say something like "and secondly!" when there wasn't even a first point. But once you get it, he has alot to say and there's alot for you to write.
    Interest 10/10: Such political theory is very important for senior govt units.
    Overall 9/10: Though it was hard, I enjoyed it.

    ECOP1003- International Economy and Finance
    Easy 9/10: It's very broad. You can talk about anything that has to do with 'international economy and finance'. There's little analysis of the international situation in political economy terms. There's a stupid tutorial presentation (based on the certain week's readings.. you're not expected to go any further than that in research), a stupid essay with very general questions, and an even stupider exam.
    Lecturers 6/10: As much as Bill Dunn seemed a nice person, he came to lectures unprepared and talked about nothing. Really nothing.. he would speak sooo generally. It was painful listening to him trying to make a point. The lecture slides were a few random points that seemed only helpful in guiding him in his talk. I remember a few times students asking him questions, and he'd ask the rest of the class if anyone knew the answer, or the 'specifics' of what he himself was talking about. I still can't believe it.
    Interest 9/10: International trade, development objectives.. it's interesting.
    Overall 6/10: The readings provided were absolutely irrelevant. Some just detailed historical events, like the development of imperialism or the world trade organisation that didn't really critically analyse anything at all. The tutorial questions were also very broad.. and it was impossible to answer them with the content of tutorial readings or the lectures. Stuff like 'can the WTO achieve a fair trade regime?' or 'who cares about the exchange rate?' Though my tutor was really good, and brought forward new questions and sort of guided us through discussion. The final exam was absolutely ridiculous. One of the questions was 'Is financial globalisation reversible?'. How the fk could anyone reasonably answer that?? If you have room for a spare subject, like i did, before you can start senior units in areas that you want to continue, do not choose this subject. Though the content is interesting and relevant to economics+business etc.. the course structure and teaching is horrible.

  4. #54
    -_- _dhj_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    HSC
    2005
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,571
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: Subject Reviews - UPDATED WITH .PDF on first post

    ACCT1001 - Accounting IA
    Ease: 7
    Lecturer: 7
    Interest: 3
    Overall: 5

    ACCT1002 - Accounting IB
    Ease: 7.5
    Lecturer: 6
    Interest: 3.5
    Overall: 5

    INFS1000 - Business Information Systems Foundations
    Ease: 9
    Lecturer: 6
    Interest: 2
    Overall: 6

    ECMT1010 - Business and Economic Statistics A
    Ease: 6
    Lecturer: 0.5
    Interest: 3
    Overall: 3

    LAWS1006 - Foundations of Law
    Ease: 8
    Lecturer: 9.5
    Interest: 7
    Overall: 8

    ECON1002 - Introductory Macroeconomics
    Ease: 8
    Lecturer: 5
    Interest: 8
    Overall: 7.5

    ECON1001 - Introductory Microeconomics
    Ease: 6.5
    Lecturer: 5.5
    Interest: 5
    Overall: 6

    LAWS1008 - Legal Research
    Ease: 10
    Lecturer: 6
    Interest: 5
    Overall: 7

    LAWS1010 - Torts
    Ease: 7.5
    Lecturer:9.5
    Interest: 9.5
    Overall: 9
    Last edited by _dhj_; 28 Dec 2006 at 1:57 PM.
    BCom/LLB @ USyd
    - For relaxing times, make it Suntory time.

  5. #55
    P vs NP
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    HSC
    2004
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,982
    Rep Power
    11

    Re: Subject Reviews - UPDATED WITH .PDF on first post

    Quote Originally Posted by Tennille
    CHEM2402/2912/2916: Chemical Structure and Stability
    ...

    The lecturers...well no one that actually stands out. If you guys have James Beattie, good luck trying to unerstand him. He mumbles.

    The labs are horrible, as they are in first year. There are organic and physical labs. The organic labs aren't too bad, but the physical ones are shocking. You have to hand in your report by 5 pm that afternoon! You will have one lab each week, including weeks 1 and 13, which will run for 4 hours.
    I have to agree the lecturers are a joke, but Prof Warr is up there as one of the great lecturers. Maybe you didn't get enough exposure in the lectures, but from SSP we knew he would be great from the first seminar. Otherwise it's a circus out there, with James "dead shit" Beattie, Peter "9 boards" Lay and Toby "etymology/a word a day" Hudson.

    The physical labs aren't bad. In fact, the physical labs were great. It's only due at 5pm because the questions were ridiculously easy, and with some careful planning you could easily finish the day by 3pm, and the same couldn't be said for organics. Not to mention the marks from physical were significantly higher than organics.

    Oh, and there are 8 labs, not one lab each. You've got lab either week 1-8, or 6-13.

  6. #56
    ... tennille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    HSC
    2004
    Gender
    Female
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    3,548
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: Subject Reviews - UPDATED WITH .PDF on first post

    I was actually referring to the lecturers overall. But I agree that Prof. Warr was good.

    My bad about the labs. I forgot I did two chem subjects, meaning I had labs from weeks 1-13.

  7. #57
    What?! manifestation's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    HSC
    2005
    Gender
    Female
    Location
    Far, far, far, far ,far away...
    Posts
    596
    Rep Power
    10

    Talking Re: Subject Reviews - UPDATED WITH .PDF on first post

    CLAW 1001 - Commercial Transactions
    Ease 7/10: The research assessments are really good, with plenty of time and topics that have plenty to research. Some ppl (like me mates) found the amount of topics to understand were too many, especially when we only spent one lecture per topic. There's not much reading...but if you wanna do well read up on extra material as much as you can. The exam is long answer/essay type questions...That, in my opinion is much harder than the written assessment/tutorial work.
    Lectur/ers 9/10: Giuseppe is awesome! But does go really fast through the material. Lectures are never boring. But the only thing that is totally crap is the lecture notes....WAY to brief...it's like one word per slide...shhheeesh!
    Interest 9/10: It's only interesting when u read up on the latest developments and attend G's lectures.
    Overall 9/10: Thought it was relatively easy and interesting. But note...some of the tutors are crap as!

    SLSS 1002 - Law as a language, culture and performance
    Ease 9/10: It's easy...don't need to attend lectures...tutorials are a complete waste of time cause the assessments and tutorials don't even overlap. There's no exam just two HUGE essays. Which are also easy, just got to do the reading.
    Lecture/ers 3/10: Omg...just crap! Lectures and Rebecca are just boring; with nothing you don't already know. Only thing interesting/weird is when she mentions her beloved Buffy and how she's a huge fan...other than that don't bother with lectures.
    Interest 3/10: Its boring. Tutorials 'can' make the subject interesting when/if ppl debate.
    Overall 4/10: Only did the subject because it was mandatory...otherwise would never do it or recommend doing it.

    WORK 1003 – Work and organizational studies
    Ease 7/10: It's pretty good...a lot of it is today’s work and employment situation. Assessments are pretty dodgy but, they don’t look at the practical side more theoretical. Exam is only worth 30% and to me seemed like the easiest part of the course.
    Lecture/ers 6/10: Marian is alright, her lectures are more reading off her lecture slide note things which she posted up anyway. Tutorials are good, better than lectures, you learn more and if you get ppl who actually talk in ur tute you will have some decent debates. There is way tooooo much reading for this subject and a lot of it is just irrelevant. U have to be selective with the reading and not read the huge chunks of the text book. Even just reading the summary is good enough lol.
    Interest 5/10: You learn about current issues so it’s kinda interesting.
    Overall 5/10: its not that hard to get a good mark for this subject, just need to attend tutorials. Good for learning the fundamentals of employment and industrial relations
    B Arts and Sciences 3rd year @ Usyd
    >.<

    "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and it may be necessary from time to time to give a stupid or misinformed beholder a black eye." - Miss Piggy

  8. #58
    Nightman stazi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    HSC
    2004
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    14,125
    Rep Power
    20

    Re: Subject Reviews

    Time for some more reviews:

    MKTG3121 - Advertising: Creative Principles

    Ease: 8/10 - There is nothing too difficult in this unit of study. However, we never received any marks back for ANYTHING. The final exam was very simple to do.

    Lecturer: 7/10 - Paul Priday is brilliant. He's had a lot of industry experience and this will show. However, he doesn't really stick to his lecture outlines. He likes to drift off and prefers to show off various ads he likes, rather than teach the things in the syllabus. He also sucks at computers and has trouble putting up most things on blackboard. Nonetheless, he's a fascinating lecturer that kept me enthralled.

    Interest: 9/10 - Whilst some people may not like Paul's style, I loved it. It led to some interesting course content that has even inspired me to research some of his concepts and theories further. His exploration of advertising historically is especially of interest, as he tries to explain how people's perceptions of the world shaped marketing and advertising. You also get to see some boobs in this course sexy time!

    Overall: 9/10 - I loved this subject. I was enthralled during lectures, and the assignments were practical. The tutor was also fantastic, although she said she won't teach again, as she earns 50 times as much doing consultancy work. poo. However, ask Paul what day Karem teaches, and avoid it. I had Karem for 1001, and feel that he would be horrible for this subject (I mean, the man is an accounting major).

  9. #59
    Ancient Orator
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    HSC
    N/A
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    5,716
    Rep Power
    14

    Re: Subject Reviews

    WOOT, new opinions on the way...

    firstly, beattie mumbles, true... but he's a good lecturer... he will teach you guys kinetics, and hell, that's HELL of a course... =(

    MKTG1001 marketing principle

    ease 5/10 - rather hard i think
    lecturer 9/10 - paul henry is good, robyn is a LEGEND!!!!
    interest 10/10 definitely fun
    overal 9/10 despite the shitty result...

    INFS1000 information system

    ease 2/10 very un good stuff
    lecturer 3/10 sorry, though they try to lecture well, the stuff being taught are just too abstract to be understood by human
    interest 4/10 - ok, it's useful... tha'ts about it
    overal 2/10 - if you understand what's being said the first time around, i'd buy you a cookie

    CHEM3911 organic structure and reactivity

    ease 10/10 for content 4/10 for exam <- everyone does well... so if you make a silly mistake, you are gone...
    lecturer 10/10... mal's just gold... i wanna be just like him *sighs dreamily
    interest 10/10 organic person... what can you say =p
    overal 9.9/10

    CHEM3913 catalysis and sustainable process
    ease 3/10 <-- rather hard... polymer + sustainable part
    lecturer 10/10 bob gilbert + tony master are LEGENDS!!
    interest 8/10 quite interesting... though none the less hard
    overal 9/10

    incidentally, i was actually 3 min late to catalysis exam *blushes*

    CHEM3914 metal complexes

    ease 8/10, it's hard, but lecturers are super... trevor is legend of legend... AND iam in his honour group this year!!! YAY!!!
    lecturer 10/10
    interest 10/10 interesting stuff... esp heavy metal poisoning etc... metal complex is interesting too... tho james beattie's kinetics is hell'ish (not the lecturer... the difficulty)
    overal 9/10

    CHEM 3915 medicinal chem

    ease 8/10 not too hard... lots to remember though
    lecturer 8/10 peter rutledge is a nice lecturer... if you can stand his ireland 5 min each lecture
    interest 10/10 can't argue with organic =D
    overal 9/10


    ECMT 1020 bus stat B

    ease 9/10 easy stuff... though had no idea how come i got only a D...
    lecturer 10/10 GOODHEW is a LEGEND!!!! tutor ain't the best, but hey! can't wish for all good things eh?!
    interest 9/10 will probably do a ecmt + finc major
    overal 9/10
    DUCKIE IS REBORN!!!!! only 3 wks too earlie =S

    "I am willing to give up any thing for you... even maths!!!!" - anonymous
    "Don't cry because it ended; smile because it happened." - anonymous

  10. #60
    Nightman stazi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    HSC
    2004
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    14,125
    Rep Power
    20

    Re: Subject Reviews

    what did you get in mktg1001 (mark-wise). I love how we're polar oposites. I found ECMT1010 to be amazingly hard, you found it easy. I found MKTG1001 to be very easy, you thought otherwise

  11. #61
    Ancient Orator
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    HSC
    N/A
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    5,716
    Rep Power
    14

    Re: Subject Reviews

    Quote Originally Posted by stazi
    what did you get in mktg1001 (mark-wise). I love how we're polar oposites. I found ECMT1010 to be amazingly hard, you found it easy. I found MKTG1001 to be very easy, you thought otherwise
    something gay... 69 or something... CR...

    screwed the final exam, screwed the kfc vs wellbeing essay... but pwned the presentation... still did shit... sigh...
    DUCKIE IS REBORN!!!!! only 3 wks too earlie =S

    "I am willing to give up any thing for you... even maths!!!!" - anonymous
    "Don't cry because it ended; smile because it happened." - anonymous

  12. #62
    msh
    msh is offline
    Junior Member msh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    HSC
    2004
    Gender
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    133
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: Subject Reviews - UPDATED WITH .PDF on first post

    oooh i like this thread
    thanks to everyone whos sahring opinions~ i was curious to know

  13. #63
    ... tennille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    HSC
    2004
    Gender
    Female
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    3,548
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: Subject Reviews

    Quote Originally Posted by xiao1985
    CHEM 3915 medicinal chem

    ease 8/10 not too hard... lots to remember though
    lecturer 8/10 peter rutledge is a nice lecturer... if you can stand his ireland 5 min each lecture
    interest 10/10 can't argue with organic =D
    overal 9/10
    I agree that Rutledge is awesome. He showed us pictures of New Zealand.

  14. #64
    Hello! Sparcod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    HSC
    2006
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Suburbia
    Posts
    2,087
    Rep Power
    11

    Re: Subject Reviews

    Interesting thread. Had no problems finding reviews about my subjects. They seem o.k

  15. #65
    Nightman stazi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    HSC
    2004
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    14,125
    Rep Power
    20

    Re: Subject Reviews

    what do people think of CLAW1002?

  16. #66
    Banned Nebuchanezzar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    HSC
    2005
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Camden
    Posts
    7,555
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Subject Reviews

    EDUF 1018 - Education, Teachers and Teaching

    Ease: 9/10 - It wasn't a hard subject at all. Lectures and readings provide more than enough information for each topic, and the structure of seminars (speech/tutor summary) summarises each subject in quite a good manner. The only time someone wouldn't find the material easy, I imagine, would be if they had zero interest in the subject matter.

    Lecturer: 8/10 - Depends. Lesley Scanlon was a fantastic lecturer who articulated everything in an interesting and concise manner, and Robyn Ewing (curriculum/knowledge) was able to do the same, albeit in a much nicer tone. The men who took the teaching technologies and empathy related classes were quite good too. Other than that though, there really weren't any lecturers to write home about. Quite frankly, other than the ones mentioned the lecturers were really quite shit. Sometimes this was dependant on the subject matter (aboriginal teaching), other times the lecturer was just horrible (hidden curriculum). It's a good thing that Lesley and Robyn took most of the lectures

    Interest: 9.5/10 - I found most of the subject matter quite relevant, thus interesting. The material was far more tailored to suit first year interests and needs than any UNSW course was. In other words, putting education students into the fram of mind of being a teacher is by far more important than just launching them right into it, ala' UNSW. Regardless, the course was aimed at getting students to get into the teachers frame of mind. I feel that this was acheived for the students who would naturally have an interest in the matter. Those who were not interested, might do well to get out of teaching? Then again, maybe I've just been brainwashed by Lesley.

    Overall: 9/10 - Course would have got a complete 10/10 if it had have been not so obviously oriented towards the arts students. Maybe just a little on the educational psychology side of things would have made the course a little better...maybe. None the less, a relevant, interesting and quite fun course. Peaks were the seminar discussions and the lectures of Lesley, troughs were the lecturers who took only one lecture and then moved on.

  17. #67
    Nightman stazi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    HSC
    2004
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    14,125
    Rep Power
    20

    Re: Subject Reviews

    Could I just ask that people refrain from submitting their reviews until after the final exam. This affects the Ease rating.

  18. #68
    jhakka
    Guest

    Re: Subject Reviews

    Quote Originally Posted by Nebuchanezzar
    EDUF 1018 - Education, Teachers and Teaching

    Ease: 9/10 - It wasn't a hard subject at all. Lectures and readings provide more than enough information for each topic, and the structure of seminars (speech/tutor summary) summarises each subject in quite a good manner. The only time someone wouldn't find the material easy, I imagine, would be if they had zero interest in the subject matter.

    Lecturer: 8/10 - Depends. Lesley Scanlon was a fantastic lecturer who articulated everything in an interesting and concise manner, and Robyn Ewing (curriculum/knowledge) was able to do the same, albeit in a much nicer tone. The men who took the teaching technologies and empathy related classes were quite good too. Other than that though, there really weren't any lecturers to write home about. Quite frankly, other than the ones mentioned the lecturers were really quite shit. Sometimes this was dependant on the subject matter (aboriginal teaching), other times the lecturer was just horrible (hidden curriculum). It's a good thing that Lesley and Robyn took most of the lectures

    Interest: 9.5/10 - I found most of the subject matter quite relevant, thus interesting. The material was far more tailored to suit first year interests and needs than any UNSW course was. In other words, putting education students into the fram of mind of being a teacher is by far more important than just launching them right into it, ala' UNSW. Regardless, the course was aimed at getting students to get into the teachers frame of mind. I feel that this was acheived for the students who would naturally have an interest in the matter. Those who were not interested, might do well to get out of teaching? Then again, maybe I've just been brainwashed by Lesley.

    Overall: 9/10 - Course would have got a complete 10/10 if it had have been not so obviously oriented towards the arts students. Maybe just a little on the educational psychology side of things would have made the course a little better...maybe. None the less, a relevant, interesting and quite fun course. Peaks were the seminar discussions and the lectures of Lesley, troughs were the lecturers who took only one lecture and then moved on.
    Nebuchanezzar: Everything in the first two years of a (secondary) education degree is completely irrelevant overall. Enjoy, though.

  19. #69
    Retired Rafy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    HSC
    2005
    Uni Grad
    2008
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    10,740
    Rep Power
    20

    Re: Subject Reviews

    For Stazi (and since there is no final exam for the subject):


    CLAW2205 - Trade Practices and Consumer Law
    Lecturer: Patty Kamvounias

    Ease: 8.5/10. - Its a clearly structured, straight foward subject. If you can handle the earlier claw subjects, this one shouldnt be too difficult. The workload is manageable.

    Lecturer: 9/10 - Great lecturer. No complaints from me. It probally helped that she also took all the tutorials and was thus able to get to know everybody.

    Interest: 9/10 - Like many claw subjects, its relevance to everyday real life situations is immediately apparent. I was able to stay quite interested throughout.

    Overall: 9/10 - Probally the best claw subject i've done so far

    Topics: Restrictive Trade Practices (Anti-competitive agreements, misuse of market power, exclusive dealing, resale price maintenance, mergers and aquisitions,) Consumer Protection (Product Liability, Misleading and deceptive conduct, False Representations, Unconscioable conduct.)

    Assessment: Multiple choice exam (15%), Participation (10%), Essay (25%), Speech (10%), Group Essay (40%)
    ボードオブスタディーズ

  20. #70
    Dignitatis Contentio
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    HSC
    2006
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    2,094
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: Subject Reviews

    No exam for this one either, so:

    ARPH1001 Introduction to Archaeology
    Lecturer: Dr Martin Gibbs (and his wacky crew of guest lecturers)
    To be recoded ARCA1002 and moved to Sem 2 from next year

    Ease: 8.5/10. Most of the material covered was reasonably basic, and the lack of an exam meant you didn’t need any deep understanding of it. The two 15% quizzes – which were mainly multiple choice with a few short answers - weren’t particularly challenging, just going over notes and memorising lists was good enough to get a decent mark. It probably wasn’t necessary to go to the lectures, since the textbook* and the notes on WebCT were pretty comprehensive. The essay was OK if you started early and picked a decent topic – I stupidly chose a complicated topic and started late, but I did it reasonably thoroughly anyway and got a D. The other element of assessment was a workbook based on the six workshop sessions. The main thing was not to put it off until later but just to do each workshop’s tasks soon after the workshop, to avoid it all piling up. The hardest task was Documents in Archaeology, which took a long time because it actually required thinking.

    Lecturer: 9/10 for Martin, 6/10 for the guest lecturers. Martin Gibbs is an excellent lecturer who can convey a lot of fairly dry topics humorously and clearly. He also has a ton of interesting examples from his own research in the Solomon Islands and thereabouts. Unfortunately, most of the lecturers from the second half of the course, ‘Themes in archaeological research’, were guest lecturers from the Department of Archaeology talking about their areas of expertise. Most of them weren’t much good at lecturing: lowlights were Sarah Colley’s excruciatingly boring lecture on environmental archaeology, Ian Johnson’s pointless lecture about computer applications in archaeology, and every lecture by Lesley Beaumont, who has the unique ability to make it sound like she’s reading her lecture word-for-word off the paper in front of her even though she actually isn’t.

    Interest: 8/10. The first half of the course, ‘Definitions and techniques in archaeology’, was fascinating – looking at different aspects of practical archaeology like surveying, settlement patterns, excavation, chronologies and ethnoarchaeology. The second half varied, as it was pretty much a pick’n’mix of different areas of archaeological research – the stuff about the development of literacy and trade was interesting, but the stuff about the archaeology of identity and religion was awful. Some of the workshops were better than others – Identities in Rubbish, where we looked through people’s household waste to see what we could conclude about them, was really fun, but the stratigraphy one was basic, tedious and difficult at the same time.

    Overall: 8.5/10. It was an interesting (and easy) course that provides a decent foundation for further study in archaeology. I’d rate it higher if not for some of the guest lecturers and a couple of boring and fiddly workshops.

    *Don't bother buying it unless you're really committed. I just got it out of the library a week before each test to go through a few details that the online notes didn't cover in enough depth.
    Last edited by Triangulum; 18 Nov 2007 at 5:38 PM.

  21. #71
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    HSC
    2003
    Gender
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    479
    Rep Power
    11

    Re: Subject Reviews

    Quote Originally Posted by Rafy
    For Stazi (and since there is no final exam for the subject):


    CLAW2205 - Trade Practices and Consumer Law
    Zomg the final group assignment isn't due till tues of stuvac, he can't accurately describe the difficulty of the subject as such imo, innacuracy !!111one

  22. #72
    Nightman stazi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    HSC
    2004
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    14,125
    Rep Power
    20

    Re: Subject Reviews

    lawlz. on that note, could someone please post the UOS outline for that subject. I'm quite interested And wierd, a group assignment for claw. I just can't imagine that.

  23. #73
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    HSC
    2003
    Gender
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    479
    Rep Power
    11

    Re: Subject Reviews - UPDATED WITH .PDF on first post

    There ya go.

  24. #74
    Nightman stazi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    HSC
    2004
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    14,125
    Rep Power
    20

    Re: Subject Reviews - UPDATED WITH .PDF on first post

    Thanks so much !

  25. #75
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    HSC
    2003
    Gender
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    479
    Rep Power
    11

    Re: Subject Reviews - UPDATED WITH .PDF on first post

    No thank you stazi for making me believe again!

Page 3 of 24 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •