UNSW Subject Reviews. (1 Viewer)

[lordfraction]

Econ1203: Business and Economic Statistics

Ease: 2/10, the first chapters of the course were relatively straightforward but I got smacked hard when we arrived at hypothesis testing. The final exam went really deep into the content. It feels like HSC physics to a certain extent with a high level of thinking and usage of formulas involved.
Interest: 7/10, Some of the stuff was engaging as it applied to all areas of business such as regression analysis
Lecturers: 8/10, Dennis Fiebig was really good and explained the content clearly
Overall: 6/10, read the textbook before each lecture so you won't end up confused

ACCT1501: Financial Accounting 1a

Ease: 4/10, I had trouble with some concepts and it really showed in the Perdisco assessment
Interest: 1/10, absolutely mind numbing
Lecturers: 3/10, I could not understand most of it but I didn't put in the effort so it's my fault
Overall: 2/10, Accounting is so important in business and it is unfortunate I did not enjoy it

MGMT1001: Managing Organisations and People

Ease: 7/10, the content is easy however, the questions in the final exam tend to be esoteric and require a high level of understanding to correctly interpret.
Interest: 9/10, I enjoyed this course the most as there was no numerical aspect and each concept related to everyday events and group activities
Lecturers: 8/10, there were 3 different lecturers and they conveyed the subjects in a clear and comprehensive manner
Overall: 8/10, beware of formatting in your hand in essays, I lost most of my marks due to incorrect paragraphing and all that nonsense. Also read the marking guidelines as I lost marks for not reflecting on my personal experiences.

Econ1101: Microeconomics

Ease: 8/10,
Interest:8/10
Lecturers: 9/10, 7/10
Overall: 8/10

 

[Huang-Paradigm]

Subject Reviews Semester 1

PSYC2061 (Social and Developmental Psychology)
Ease: 9/10. The first half of the course is basically a revision of what you learn in first year psychology. The second half builds upon that slightly. The journal article assignment was piss easy and required no research whatsoever. The essay on the other hand was a lot more difficult and required 'critical analysis' of the research in that area. The final exam was a combination of 60 multiple choice and 4 short answer questions. Funnily enough, the multiple choice was a bitch whereas the short answers were extremely straight forward. Textbook was not used for the most part except to help study for the finals and the essay. Do not buy the textbook because there is an online pdf available.

Content: 7.5/10. Developmental psychology was very straightforward whereas social psychology got confusing at times. The content was interesting overall apart from the crosscultural psychology lectures. They were merely a repeat of what was learned in first year cross cultural psychology

Lecturer: 9/10 Jenny Richmond was a lot better in this course than in the first year courses. She seemed more confident about her topic and tried to make the lectures interesting with youtube videos. I appreciate that. Cranney, the cross cultural lecturer, was terrible and awfully monotonous. Forgas, the social lecturer knew his topic inside out. He had practically memorised the whole textbook. The only downside was that his lectures were a tad too serious and seldom were there any jokes thrown in

Tutor: Sarah 9/10. She made the tutes very interactive and interesting. She also knew her stuff very well. Her feedback on assignments were quite helpful.

Overall: 8.5/10. Solid course

CRIM2032 (Disability in the Criminal Justice System)
Ease: 9/10. Content is fairly straightforward, especially if you understand first year criminology concepts well, such as institutionalisation, net widening etc. You can achieve a high grade without doing any of the readings that are not necessary. You will have to do some readings though for the assessments. However, I don't know if its just me, but the marking seems to be harsh or at the very least, inconsistent with the feedback that is given. For my final assignment, the comment I received was 'The report was excellent. Well written structured and analysis was critical. Well done!' and only received 35/45. Yes, that's a distinction, and i'm happy with a distinction, but if i got that kind of comment in any of my other courses I would be expecting at least a HD.

Content: 8/10 Very interesting learning about people with mental disabilities in the criminal justice system. Really makes you realise how unjustly they are being treated in gaol.

Lecturer: Eileen Baldry 7.5/10. I did not attend many of the lectures but when I did attend, she seldom taught for the entire duration of the lecture. Often there was a guest speaker and they gave a lecture about their area of expertise. When she did teach though, she was decent and made us watch videos that were usually entertaining as well as insightful

Overall: 8/10. Good course, just be prepared for inconsistent assessment feedback and marks that will leave you saying 'dafk'.

LAWS1052 (Introduction to Law and Justice)
Ease: 8/10. My experience with this course was that it was relatively easy. The court report was straightforward but it required a balance of describing the court proceedings and analysing those proceedings within the content of the course. Apparently, many people did not do as well as they should have because they because they could not strike that balance. In saying that, referencing was a bitch though, you have to be very very careful. Depending on your lecturer, they may take marks off for the absence of a comma in your footnotes. Ridiculous. Also, do not underestimate the case note. It was extremely time consuming and understanding the case was not simple. The harshness of the marking is largely dependent on the lecturer.

Content: 8/10. A lot of wishy washy history stuff and legal theories. This course really does not reflect what studying law is like. I recommend, if possible, that you take this course alongside LAWS1141 because the content overlaps to a large extent. There were topics in this course I did not study for at all (such as the rule of law) because LAWS1141 covered it already, and in more depth as well.

Lecturer: Kripps 5/10. Her positives: she was nice, makes you do a lot of group work so that you can interact with the rest of the class and gives easy CP marks. Her negatives: her favorite word is 'um'. Not even joking, every second word uttered by her is 'um. Funny at first but gets extremely annoying when she is trying to explain an important concept. She also does not seem to know her content well at all. She will struggle to explain or answer many of the questions that are asked to her, even though its expected that she would know the answer to such questions. Her assessment feedback consists of many ticks, and a one word comment at the end. Finally, she doesnt seem to be qualified to teach law in the first place since she doesn't even have an LLB. Therefore, the marks she gives you should not be trusted, whether they be good or bad. Do not choose her classes if you want to learn.

Research Tutor: Collin Fong 10/10. His tutes are so chill, which doesn't mean you won't learn anything. He demonstrates all the research methods on the smart board so that's very useful.

Overall: 8/10. In summary, the lecturer that end up teaching you will largely determine whether you enjoy the course or not. Choose wisely. I hear Vines and Engels were pretty good.

LAWS1141 (Principles of Public Law)
Ease: 7/10. Not going to lie, the assessment wasn't very clear. A problem with law courses is that they do not provide marking criteria before the assessment is due. Therefore, you don't know what your assignment is missing until you receive the feedback. I find that extremely annoying. On the other hand, I suppose it compels you to consider every possible aspect that may be relevant to your assignment. Final exam was seemingly straight forward and I felt that I was copying large chunks off my notes into the exam paper (open book exam).

Content: 9/10. Builds upon many of the principles and concepts learned in LAWS1052 and teaches many more related ones about the arms of government and administration. Personally, I found the content very interesting and it definitely helped me learn about how our government was set out, its constitutional framework and the accountability mechanisms that are in place to ensure limited government.

Lecturer: Jackie Hartley 10/10. Excellent lecturer. She knows her shit, that's as simple as I can put it. She explains herself very well and makes us question ourselves every time a question is asked. Her assessment feedback, although vague on paper, is compensated by the fact that she is willing to sit down with you one-on-one and discuss your assignment with you. I learned a lot from her classes.

Overall: 9/10. Not the easiest course, but you will learn a lot!

 

[M1993]

Hi

I am a Study Abroad Student for Sem 2 and I need some advice for my subject choice.

I have to take FINS1613 and ECON2102 because they are compulsory subjects at my home university and I can't do them next semester at my university. From what I read I am looking forward to FINS1613 xD
I have to take two other subjects, but I am not sure which I should take. Some opinions on the courses below (e.g. how is the teacher? Grading, etc.)?
The Marine Environment - GENS0501 Lecturer: Maharaj
Introduction to Climate Change - CLIM1001 Lecturer: Abramowitz
Australia in the Global Economy - ECON1301 Lecturer: Dyster
Australia's Asian Context - Arts 1211 Lecturer: Paull
Concepts of Physical Activity, Exercise and Health - GENM0703 Lecturer: Matthews
Introductory Marine Science - MSCI2001 Lecturer: Dafforn
Any other recommendations?
I would like to take one course about Australia (History, Culture, etc.) and one about the (Marine) environment.

Thanks in advance

 

[4025808]

ARTS1810 (International Relations - Conventions and Challenges)

Ease: 6.5/10. Tbh this course isn’t very easy, and some of the readings are just fucked up. A lot of the stuff you learn in this course is highly theoretical and can bore you to death – which is why I dropped the course before census date.
Content: 3/10. Worse than ACCT1501 and FINS1613 imo. Too much theoretical content and so many words you never ever use.
Lecturer: 8.5/10 - Laura Shepard – She’s a good lecturer to learn from, and she helps a lot of the first years in getting their way through uni, which is a good sign.
Tutor: 8/10 – Ian Zucker – good tutor but I’ve only had him for two lessons. Judging by those two lessons I learned quite a bit out of him.
Overall: 6/10 – if you’re doing International Studies, you have to take this course, so try to like it as much as you can.


ARTS3450 (Advanced Chinese A – Background Stream)

Ease: 3/10. Holy fuck. The whole textbook is written in Chinese, and if you aren’t very fluent in Chinese, you have to decipher most of the new words, and try to re-read what you previously read. Also, lots of hard work to do that makes you go like WTF. =_=’
Content: 2/10. Worst Chinese course I’ve taken – the stuff you learn in this course is pretty much what only mainland Chinese understand and is pretty irrelevant to real life. Also, the links in the textbook are broken, so you often have to find the stuff yourself, which is a pain.
Lecturer: 5/10 – Zhong Yong. Not that great of a lecturer even though he can speak quite well. Reason as to why I give him this rating is that although he is very passionate about what he is teaching, the way he teaches this course is just horrible. The course is just everywhere and there’s almost no sense of direction.
Tutor: Chen Xiaofang – 7/10. Decent tutor, not that interesting though, BUT she made our class have good times especially with karaoke and on-the-spot presentations.
Overall: 4/10 – do not take if you don’t have to, in particular the background stream. Go to the non-background stream, it’s a lot more structured in comparison to the background stream.


MATH2011 (Several Variable Calculus)

Ease: 6/10 – I struggled with Stokes theorem and Divergence theorem, and in general, the end parts of the course. The first half of the course is very easy (if you took MATH1251 that is – it’s pretty much just revision of the end parts of MATH1251).
Content: 8/10 – interesting stuff I’ve learned. Calculus is actually quite interesting.
Lecturer: Jim Franklin – 6/10. He is a decent lecturer but boring at times. He does make pretty decent lecture slides. Johann Brauchart – 2/10. Shit experience, hence I stopped going to lectures after he started lecturing. His lecture slides are horrible as well.
Tutor: Nick Fewster – 7/10: he’s quite good as he explains his stuff quite well, but he needs to go through the harder questions.
Overall: 7/10 – pretty good course to take. But take MATH2111 if you can because the course scales a lot better – in MATH2011 the final mark is pretty much determined by the sum of your raw marks.


MATH2901 (Higher Theory of Statistics)

Ease: 4/10. FML this course is actually freaken hard so you actually need to consistently study week by week. I crammed for my finals and didn’t do well as a result.
Content: 7/10. The first parts of the course were quite boring but towards the end they were pretty interesting to study for.  Hypothesis testing and maximum likelihood estimators are quite interesting because they are a part of the reason why statisticians are needed in this world.
Lecturer: Zdravko Botev – 5/10. He’s pretty boring, but he does give us an incentive to go to the lectures tbh. Like, he puts up extra stuff needed for the final exam, and I actually appreciate that.
Tutor: Forgot his name – 4/10. Went through tute questions and that’s all, nothing extra.
Overall: 6/10 – it’s a hard course but it’s not too bad imo. Just make sure you stay consistent with your studies with this subject.

 

[Huang-Paradigm]

Bro I know that feel for Chinese Yongzhen Worst fucking major if you're a noob at chinese

 

[4025808]

Bro I know that feel for Chinese Yongzhen Worst fucking major if you're a noob at chinese

LOL yeah, far out. esp. if you're background speakers. everyone is a freaken troll there.

thank god you dropped Chinese, the new VP of artssoc

Better off doing languages outside of uni, i.e. TAFE or somewhere else.

 

[Ryan Nguyen]

Hi

I am a Study Abroad Student for Sem 2 and I need some advice for my subject choice.

I have to take FINS1613 and ECON2102 because they are compulsory subjects at my home university and I can't do them next semester at my university. From what I read I am looking forward to FINS1613 xD
I have to take two other subjects, but I am not sure which I should take. Some opinions on the courses below (e.g. how is the teacher? Grading, etc.)?
The Marine Environment - GENS0501 Lecturer: Maharaj
Introduction to Climate Change - CLIM1001 Lecturer: Abramowitz
Australia in the Global Economy - ECON1301 Lecturer: Dyster
Australia's Asian Context - Arts 1211 Lecturer: Paull
Concepts of Physical Activity, Exercise and Health - GENM0703 Lecturer: Matthews
Introductory Marine Science - MSCI2001 Lecturer: Dafforn
Any other recommendations?
I would like to take one course about Australia (History, Culture, etc.) and one about the (Marine) environment.

Thanks in advance

If u like math then FINS1613 is ok. But if u are more into MACROeconomics and math then econ2102 is good. Personally, i like fins1613 (easier

 

[timeslowsdown]

Semester 1, 2013

CHEM1031
Ease: 5/10 - most difficult subject for me - an eye opener, showed me that I hated chemistry which was good because the major I was planning on taking involved a lot of it.
Interest: 6/10 - labs were really fun but the lectures especially were horrible - I found it especially boring because the content covered was quite difficult.
Lecturers: 6/10 - you get a mix of lecturers - I think about 4 - some make it extremely hard for the content to be understood, others do a better job at it.
Overall: 6/10 - I think I'm biased because I realised I hate chemistry - the course itself is fine, I just found it very difficult - involves a lot of understanding and a whole heap of practice papers (which I did not complete).

SCIF1121
Ease: 10/10 - ridiculously easy
Interest: 3/10 - I honestly think this course should not be compulsory for those in advanced science - it is a complete waste of time. I understand that it is important to develop different skills to succeed as a scientist, but the inclusion of this course so early in the degree does not make sense.
Lecturer: 2/10 - the lectures in the stream I did (biological + life sciences) mostly included practising scientists coming in to talk about their research, which was not assessable. As a result, I wagged most of them because they were a complete waste of time.
Overall: 1/10 - I know this is harsh but I honestly think this course is a complete waste of time. However, if you plan to do advanced science, it is still compulsory.

LAWS1052
Ease: 8/10 - some of the material was a little challenging - especially reading and critically analysing lengthy cases. But on the whole, it is bearable if you do the readings (class participation should be an enough incentive).
Interest: 10/10 - absolutely loved this course! There was a bit of history - I'm not a history buff but I enjoyed learning about the origins of our legal system, which I think is quite important. I think this course really serves its purpose as an introductory course to law - you do a bit of history, jurisprudence, statutory interpretation and intentional torts.
Lecturers: I had the pleasure of having Jeni Engel - I highly recommend her! She makes the theory very accessible and makes an effort to engage all the class. We also did small team pop quizzes to help us learn some of the more tedious theory which I thought was really nice. I've chosen her for LAWS1061.
Overall: 9/10 - it may be just me but I really loved this course - a great introduction to law! The one thing I would change is the legal research component - I think a lot of the research skills could have been learnt in a much smaller time frame, instead of being stretched over a whole semester which made the tutorials very boring. Overall a great course (although again I am biased).

MATH1131
Ease: 7/10 - personally, I found the algebra component much harder than the calculus component. This was complicated by the fact that I never did the tutorial questions - I think the course would have been much easier if I actually studied periodically...
Interest: 7/10 - I had Milan Pahor for calculus - he was absolutely amazing! 10/10. However, I found algebra very boring - I had Murray - just isn't a good communicator.
Lecturers: 7/10 - as above.
Overall: 7/10 - I think this is a great course; I think I would have enjoyed it more if I actually did my homework.

 

[kaz1]

fuark good old days in first year when Murray used to spend 20 minutes of the lecture talking about his fishing adventures

 

[wilsondw]

SCIF1121
Ease: 10/10 - ridiculously easy
Interest: 3/10 - I honestly think this course should not be compulsory for those in advanced science - it is a complete waste of time. I understand that it is important to develop different skills to succeed as a scientist, but the inclusion of this course so early in the degree does not make sense.
Lecturer: 2/10 - the lectures in the stream I did (biological + life sciences) mostly included practising scientists coming in to talk about their research, which was not assessable. As a result, I wagged most of them because they were a complete waste of time.
Overall: 1/10 - I know this is harsh but I honestly think this course is a complete waste of time. However, if you plan to do advanced science, it is still compulsory.

lol we were in the same stream

 

[timeslowsdown]

lol we were in the same stream

Lol! Did you feel the same way about it? I just hated it...

 

[wilsondw]

SCIF1121
Ease: 9/10
Content: 7/10 the course pretty much focuses on generic skills that are important in life and the workforce like communication, teamwork etc.
Lecturers: 6/10 I was in the biology stream and it was mainly lecturers talking about their research. Majority of them were quite boring in my opinion. I went to all of them since I had to take one for my team. There were a few great lecturers though, especially Mike Archer (Awesome guy). The tutorials on the other hand were fun since I had a good tutor.
Overall: 3/10 I put the most effort into this course since there was there was a lot of work to do and I found it difficult keeping up with the work at times. Also it pissed me off when the assessment submission was released later than the expected date and we don’t get an extension. This shows that the course is disorganised.

CHEM1031
Ease: 7/10 I was alright in chemistry in the beginning so I had to put in some effort to do well in the course.
Content: 7/10 I struggled quite a bit with the first part of the course since it involved a lot of physics and I did not do physics in high school. I managed to understand it over time thanks to Youtube. The last section of the course taught by Haines focused on thermodynamics and an extension on acids and bases, electrochemistry and equilibrium. I found that the content on acids and bases was difficult while the rest was alright (medium difficulty).
Lecturers: 6.5/10 Professor Stride was a good lecturer as he made the course very engaging. Then we had Marcus Cole and I found him quite monotone, causing me to be disengaged in the lectures. However, it was good that he tried to engage the audience by giving out chocolates to those who answered his questions. I reckon Haines is a pretty good lecturer, but I wasn’t very engaged with the content he was teaching.
Overall: 7/10 honestly if you manage to finish most or all of the tutorial questions and the past papers they hand out, you should do fine in the course overall and for the final exam, don’t forget to study the practicals (one of my big mistakes).

BABS1201
Ease: 8/10 If you focus in the lectures, then this course should be fairly straightforward even if you don’t have a biology background.
Content: 7.5/10 A lot of the things that you will learn in this course is an extension on HSC biology. I reckon metabolism and photosynthesis are one of the harder topics as they are long processes and you need to memorise them. The labs on the other hand were fairly tedious.
Lecturers: 7.5/10 John Wilson is a good lecturer but I felt that he rushed photosynthesis even though he said it was one of the harder topics. Anne Galea and Louise Lutze-mann were awesome, they explain things so well and they it easy to understand. Peter White was alright but I don’t like how he turns the lights down throughout the lectures since I had difficulties staying awake. I personally feel that Peter White should probably put a bit more relevant information in his slides. Funny how he briefly mentions a few things like the central dogma of biology and that ends up being in our mid-semester test and final exam (He pissed a lot of people off).
Overall: 8/10 Course is interesting overall and it is mainly a lot of memorising. Just a tip for those doing the course, I noticed in the final exams in my year and the previous years that they usually include the enzyme practical experiment that you did in one of the questions.

MATH1131
Ease: 8.5/10 doing extension 2 maths helped me quite a bit for this course
Content: 7.5/10 Calculus was actually quite interesting as I found it fairly conceptual. But I disliked how we have to memorise the theorems and writing them down in the tests. Algebra was boring, especially the matrices part as it was quite tedious doing several row reductions and I found it easy to make an arithmetic error. Maple was a bit boring since its mainly memorising codes.
Lecturers: 8/10 For Calculus, I had David Angell and for Algebra I got Thomas Britz. Both are good lecturers in my opinion. Despite how boring the Algebra content was, Thomas Britz made it very engaging. With David Angell, I notice how a few guys dislike his teaching style since they didn't understand much. But I reckon that if you listen carefully and focus throughout his lectures you will find that he's fairly good.
Overall: 8.5/10 Do your homework and the past papers and you will be fine with the in class tests and the final exams. Maple are easy marks, you just have to do them and you can ask for help in the red centre basement (don’t know what they call it).

 

[amal_kaybee]

Anyone has experience with GENC3004 Personal Finance?
Is it hard? Planning to take this S2 '13.

 

[aaron_syd]

ENGG1000 (Solar Elevator):
Ease: 4/10 bloody thing didn't work on test day, lost like 20% just for that (most other projects don't have such extreme penalties), and our group met up 1-2 times a week outside contact hours.
Lecturer(s): 2/10 (Stephen) Honestly, I never paid attention to a single thing he said, not that it was ever relevant anyways. All the lectures were just reading off some powerpoint slides.
Interest: 5/10 Don't do the solar elevator, just do the bridge, it's much much easier, and probably more fun.
Overall: 3/10 It was so horrible, it was by far my worst subject, despite putting so much effort and it having a reputation for being bludgey.

MATH1131:
Ease: 7/10 It seemed hard during the semester, but when I saw the past papers, I felt like it was a completely different course. I was scared cos there were some really hard questions in the book which I couldn't do at all (mainly those marked with H and X, but even some R ones). The final test was so easy though, I could have done it blindfolded or something.
Lecturer: 10/10 for Milan (calculus), he was awesome, 5/10 for the other guy (Murray was it? i dunno, i was never awake when he was talking), ended up just self learning algebra.
Interest: 9/10. Learning new things in maths, nuff said.
Overall:8/10 Good course, but honestly I wasn't very motivated.

PHYS1121:
Ease: 6.5/10 It's a hard course, but it scales very well. I am definitely not the only one who was pleasantly surprised when we got our results.
Lecturer: 7/10. Angstman was decent. Always had something cool to show us each week. I forgot the other guy though, but I didn't learn anything from him.
Interest: 4.5/10. First half was just plain boring. Second half was even worse. Labs are fun if you're one of those groups who finish earlier everytime with 10/10, for everyone else, it was just a stressful ordeal.
Overall: 6/10 I'm happy with my mark, especially with the lack of work I put in. Still, I'm glad i'm done with this subject... neva again.

ENGG1811:
Ease: 9.5/10 Very easy to get 100% for coursework (except maybe assignment 2). Only hard part was the exam, and even then, studying for it is not hard.
Lecturer: 7/10 Asian guy. When I actually listened, I tend to remember stuff.
Interest: 6/10 Labs were kinda ok, never went to lectures (too boring).
Overall: 7/10. Good bludge subject if you know what you're doing.

 

[timeslowsdown]

Anyone has experience with GENC3004 Personal Finance?
Is it hard? Planning to take this S2 '13.

My friend did it is semester 1 - she said it was really easy - there's no final exam, you just have online quizzes and assignments

 

[traiwit]

PHYS1121:
Ease: 6.5/10 It's a hard course, but it scales very well. I am definitely not the only one who was pleasantly surprised when we got our results.
Lecturer: 7/10. Angstman was decent. Always had something cool to show us each week. I forgot the other guy though, but I didn't learn anything from him.
Interest: 4.5/10. First half was just plain boring. Second half was even worse. Labs are fun if you're one of those groups who finish earlier everytime with 10/10, for everyone else, it was just a stressful ordeal.
Overall: 6/10 I'm happy with my mark, especially with the lack of work I put in. Still, I'm glad i'm done with this subject... neva again.

ENGG1811:
Ease: 9.5/10 Very easy to get 100% for coursework (except maybe assignment 2). Only hard part was the exam, and even then, studying for it is not hard.
Lecturer: 7/10 Asian guy. When I actually listened, I tend to remember stuff.
Interest: 6/10 Labs were kinda ok, never went to lectures (too boring).
Overall: 7/10. Good bludge subject if you know what you're doing.

i guess that is John Webb, and yeah i learnt nothing from him LOL.

 

[YoYoWayne]

ACTL1101：
Ease: 3/10 This subject is definitely the hardest subject among the 4 I have done, requires skills from multiple fields such as maths, finance, microeconomics etc. Moreover, it's not a subject you can pick up in 2 days.
Content: 9/10 Knowledge crosses different fields, very nicely related together.
Lecturer: 9.5/10 Brian is THE most dedicated lecturer I've seen, he is so passionate about them, and we can easily get the most out of his lecturer because it's far more than just reading the slides. Not 10/10 just because he believes that he can do better.
Interest: 6/10 It's alright.
Overall:7/10 It's a hard subject but compulsory.

MATH1151:
Ease: 6/10 It's the hardest maths course offered to Yr1 sem1 students, but since it's pure maths, by knowing the content and ways to solve questions it's not too hard to get over it for sure.
Content: 8/10 Find most of them useful
Lecturer: 7.5/10 Dr. Tran has a powerful voice, although a bit monotone, he can still tell everything clearly; 2 lecturers are not so interesting, but not dry either.
Interest: 8.5/10 I prefer the word 'challenging' than 'hard' I guess?
Overall: 7.5/10 Worths doing it, I guess it could give a head start somehow.

ECON1101:
Ease: 8.5/10 Perfectly fine to skip lectures I guess (although I didn't skip them, I didn't listen to anything in the lecture either lol). Didn't get good marks for essays, but the finals are all multiple choices and 5 hours will be more than enough to revise everything even if you haven't ever been to the lectures.
Content: 7/10 Not very useful but the common knowledge make it a subject that's easy to understand.
Lecturer: 7/10: Diane is a bit monotone and she couldn't use computer so 4/10, but ALBERTO IS THE LEGEND, I'm sure everyone will agree with me if you had him ever before.
Interest: 7/10: Not very interesting, but not too bad either.
Overall: 7.5/10 Definitely a WAM booster for anyone interested to choose this as GenEd.

FINS1613:
Ease: 7.5/10 There are hard contents, but very reasonable
Content: 8/10 a good tool to other subjects. Comparing to Microeconomics it's more skill-based
Lecturer: 7/10 ...normal... don't know what to say there, but probably it's them who made everything easier to understand
Interest: 7/10 Moderate
Overall: 7.5/10

 

[4025808]

ACTL1101：
Ease: 3/10 This subject is definitely the hardest subject among the 4 I have done, requires skills from multiple fields such as maths, finance, microeconomics etc. Moreover, it's not a subject you can pick up in 2 days.
Content: 9/10 Knowledge crosses different fields, very nicely related together.
Lecturer: 9.5/10 Brian is THE most dedicated lecturer I've seen, he is so passionate about them, and we can easily get the most out of his lecturer because it's far more than just reading the slides. Not 10/10 just because he believes that he can do better.
Interest: 6/10 It's alright.
Overall:7/10 It's a hard subject but compulsory.

Brian is a good lecturer, knows his stuff well, but when we had him for ACTL1001, things didn't go out too well.

Btw, did you guys have any mathematical mistakes on your paper? I remember in the 2011 and 2012 ACTL1001 papers (I took ACTL1001 in 2012), there were maths errors in the question and everyone complained about it.

 

[BabBab007]

Has anyone done MATH1011?

 

[Swishswag]

Hi I'm new to the forum so here's my take on my subjects:

ECON1101:
Ease:10/10
Content:10/10
Lecturer:- didn't go for lectures
Overall:10/10
Dumbest fucking subject ever. Didn't have to do anything whole semester except towards the finals an still Hded the course

ACCT 1501:
Ease:9/10
Content:10/10
Lecturer: - didn't go lecture
Overall 10/10
Same as Econs 1101, except more work to be done during the semester

ACTL 1001:
Ease: 7/10
Content: 8/10
Lecturer: 5/10
Brian Chu tries, but he ain't good
Overall:6/10
Course was not in depth as compared to year 2 actl courses.

MATH1151:
Ease: 10/10
Content:7/10
A lot of content, mostly retarded but I still studied anw.
Lecturer:- didn't go lectures
Overall: 8/10
Easy course to hd because of class tests and similar final exams to the past year papers

ACCT1511:
Ease:8/10
Content:8/10
Lecturer:7/10 Nicole ang was good. Leon Wong was a condescending douche.
Overall:10/10
Acct 1a and 1b are pretty much wam boosters.

Math 1251:
Ease:6/10
Content:6/10
Lecturer:8/10
Overall:7/10

Acct2522:
Ease:10/10
Content: 10/10
Overall: 10/10

Actl 2001
Ease: 7/10
Content: 7/10
Lecturer: 1/10. Ziveyi is the worst lecturer of all the courses I've ever done.
Overall: 7/10. Pretty simple course except for the uncommitted lecturer.

Actl 2002:
Ease: 4/10. Worst nightmare
Content: 3/10
Lecturer: 8/10. Katja was good
Overall: 6/10.
Easy to HD with enough effort. Everyone didnt seem to understand anything so putting in the effort helps to stand out from the rest and score hd