Grade: 90+. If you're looking for an easy biology subject, not a lot of work, easy to get H1, then this is it. Tips: - project: use TEEL for the discussion - some quiz questions are not worded well, not clear. So just make sure to choose the answer that is MOST correct. General comments: - content pretty dry, ngl since I am not a fan of plants or ecology aspects. Took this as a prereq - exam very similar to practise exam, just that it's super duper long, so manage time well - WATCH THE SEMINARS trust me on this - workshops are quite boring...not very helpful in attending, but pls show up to the third hr to help with the group project tho

why this is a prereq for anatomy and physiology is beyond me

This subject was meh. To start off with some good points, the lecturers seemed passionate about what they were teaching, the workshop and practical demonstrators were really nice and funny (shoutout to Ollie and Antanas), and it was a very easy subject with little to no study needed for a high H1. However, the overall subject experience was hindered by the poor organisation of pracs (Two of our pracs were cancelled), and the extremely boring content of the subject (ever wanted to learn about urban forests?). Why this is required for practically every biology major is beyond me. Don't do this subject if you don't have to, but if you do have to do it, you'll be fine.

TERRIBLE SUBJECT!!! I agree with all the other reviews published on how poor of a subject this was. Nothing much to add on top of what has already been said but please only take this subject if it is a pre-requisite. This is not a fun subject and the lectures were very boring. You would assume that ecology is easy and that you may score well, BUT NOOOO the questions that they give you are terrible and there is not much support from the staff. One of the worst subjects I have taken this year, and it is similar to how bad BIOL10009 was. I did well in VCE Biology and thought this subject would build from that but nope, this is a bad subject. :( Don't ruin your WAM for this terrible subject.

if i could give this subject 0 stars i would. 150+ powerpoint slides weekly which is quite overwhelming for a lvl 1 subject, no answer sheets/guidance for practice tests and exams - if your answers/ understanding is wrong - then too bad. workshops and tutorials were lazy and a repeat of weekly content instead of an informed discussion stemming from the content learnt. used my notes in an open book exam and ended up with a misconduct allegation. i would not recommend as a breadth and only do if you must to meet a prerequisite.

The delivery of this subject was quite disappointing, which is a shame as the lecture content itself was quite interesting and the majority of the lecturers were very passionate about the content. However, the subject staff's amount of "support" and their engagement with the student body was, simply put, embarrassing. Announcements came off as passive-aggressive and they refused to respond to feedback on campuswire, no matter how much attention said feedback attracted. In one case, students received a scolding email for the lack of attendance in a help session that the staff completely forgot to announce was occurring, and took no accountability for the mistake on their part, even when pointed out on campuswire. I can count on one hand the number of staff who I can say wholeheartedly had students' best interests at heart (shoutout to Luke and Kirsten specifically). The practicals were longer than needed and became tiresome by the end of the semester. The workshops were a little better and the group project was interesting - we were required to come up with a report based on the distribution of a certain genus within Australia which varied with temperature, among other factors. However, I was lucky enough to be put with a great group of people, so I acknowledge that many students would not have had as positive of an experience. The marking for the workshop project was incredibly scattered - there was very little consistency in the critiques and marks given. The fortnightly quizzes were not opened up after marking was complete, but rather, the answers were published in a separate PowerPoint, which made revision quite difficult as it was hard to recall which answers I submitted, especially considering how long it took for the grades for a 10 MC quiz to come back. The exam itself was pretty stock standard, however, the teaching team made revision tricky. Only one practice exam was given, and the staff claimed we would not be getting answers to this practice at all - they decided against this the day before the exam. The feedback to questions on campuswire varied greatly depending on the lecturers for that specific module - some lecturers gave really detailed answers, while other lecturers were not present on the site at all. Staff reminded us specifically to not "rote-learn" the content on multiple occasions, however many of the questions in the exam asked for specific examples that were quoted in lectures that we were told were "not examinable, but rather used in order to demonstrate a larger idea". It was not impossible to do well in the exam, however, comprehensive notes (and quick googling skills) were an absolute must for success. It came across like the staff were actively trying to harm this chance. Overall, this subject would be majorly improved if there was a little bit more effort from the teaching team. The constant sarcasm and passive-aggressive tones were not appreciated, especially in an online environment where everyone is struggling. It really is a shame as this subject has great potential due to the content. I would recommend against this subject unless it is required as a prerequisite or you do not mind the tough workload.

Please don't do this subject unless you must. In my experience I found it to be poorly coordinated, lacking useful feedback, and content-heavy. The lecturers were lovely and their content fantastic, but my love for biology was significantly dampened for the reasons that several others have outlined. It could have been the online nature of the subject, but I dreaded all practicals and workshops. The lack of specific feedback on assessments was disappointing. The only redeeming part of this subject was its decent exam. I can understand why others have felt frustrated and upset at the poor delivery of what could have been an amazing subject.

horrible don't do it

I enjoyed this subject, but most people did not. TLDR: It was very poorly organised/designed. An H1 is achievable with decent effort though, so if you like Biology, you might still want to take it. I enjoyed it and found topics enjoyable, but most people hated it due to its organisation. Pros: - content is super easy to grasp and fairly interesting (except the Hardy Weinberg Equilibrium-watch out for that one, it's hard!). - The topics are also widespread from basic biology (eg: reproduction, feeding, movement) to genetics (Hardy Weinberg Equilibrium) and conservation (eg: mountain pygmy possum genetic rescue, Indigenous burning practices, Mountain Ash forests etc). I personally liked that we covered a lot of different biology themes/disciplines - they gave (some) feedback on the prac/topic tests which allowed you to work out where you went wrong - Exam was very fair Cons: basically, everything else. - The Pracs/Topic Tests were ONLY 10MCQs/10 marks long, which is ridiculous since they could be worth up to 5% for each test. Furthermore, sometimes they made one MCQ worth more than one mark (eg: 2 marks) which I loathed. In my opinion, most two mark questions could have just been split into two separate questions, so your depth of understanding could ACTUALLY be tested. They also really need to make the tests longer!!!! - Also, not everyone gets the same test for pracs/topic tests: so for each question, there are multiple variations and people get different variations of the same question. The bad part of this is that some variations are harder than others!!! Eg: In a question about flower parts, the flower whose parts I had to identify was very convoluted, but other people got more straightfoward flowers: ie the tests are unfair imo. - feedback: the feedback from the pracs/topic tests is general, so you may or may not know where YOU went wrong. But I guess this subject is better than BIOL10009: Life's Machinery (they don't even give ANY feedback). - general organisation: very poor. Eg: the pracs started in week 1, but often the material covered in the pracs/workshops was still being covered that week. I had my prac on Tuesdays, but often lecture material from the Wednesday lecture would have helped me with the prac. They should have just started pracs on Week 2. Please take your prac/workshop classes on Thu/Fri if you can! -practice exam: disaster. They said they wouldn't give us any answers. So we had to get together as a cohort and discuss answers. And when they gave us answers (on the day before the exam), some of them were just flat out wrong. They also couldn't be bothered to write new questions I guess because a lot of the exam was just repeated questions (eg: from topic 6 practice quiz, end of lecture/workshop questions etc) -topic 6 practice quiz: some answers were just flat out wrong. they expected us to know far too much for the quality of the lectures we were given. Eg: they wanted us to know about Active Carbon Reservoirs, when the words "active reservoir" was not even MENTIONED in the lectures! - group project: although the project is well taught/guided, the marking was ridiculous. Eg: my group submitted a draft and was basically told "all good! good effort!", but when we got our actual mark back, we got points taken off for something WHICH WE NEVER EVEN GOT FEEDBACK ON FROM THE DRAFT. Our draft had NO COMMENTS whatsoever on our discussion, but our final project got taken marks off from our discusssion paragraph, saying that it could be better! How are we meant to know it could be better, IF WE NEVER GOT ANY FEEDBACK ON IT???? I'm furious at the ridiculousness of this subject. I posted a question on CampusWire about this (very respectfully worded btw), but never got a reply from any lecturer/co-ord. But Group Project Overall is still doable, and fairly easy to score well in, just don't expect any consistency in marking between your draft + final report. OVERALL: this subject kinda sucks. I love Biology so I loved the content in the lectures. But the organisation sucks so bad that it really starts hurting your grades. There was no need for this subject to be this bad, but it was. As other people mentioned, the co-ordinators really seemed to hate the students and made passive aggressive announcements all the time (eg: only ONE student showed up to our consultation!!! We really expect more participation!!! SO disappointing!). Overall, an okay subject, but definitely don't do it as an elective or breadth etc, only if you really need to, OR if you reallyyyy like Biology. An H1 is definitely acheivable with consistent effort throughout, but be prepared for plenty of marks to be lost along the way due to organisation/unfair marking.

I 100% agree with all of the things that has been written about this subject. Going into it, I was pretty excited but then everything seemed going towards the same concept and became really repetitive, frankly quite boring. However, I kept my head high and kept going, yet it did not get any better. The topic quizes were only 10 MCQ questions, which did not help ME understand my level of understanding because I couldn't even see where I went wrong. Not only that, how can you judge ones understanding by just 10 questions (there are just not enough sample). What made me mad the most is the fact that they did not consistently provide practice questions that shows how I can answer the questions properly. So I came into the exam with just contents that I reviewed from my notes, lecture notes, and ONE practice exam (that had many poorly worded questions and errors in the answers). I'm really disappointed with the grade I receive for this subject, but I can't even check where I did wrong in the exam.