We don't have any textbooks for this subject yet.

Why don't you be the first?
Sell your textbook for FOOD20003

Comprehensive Food Nutrition Summary Notes

Written by Tom

Full 12 weeks of lecture summaries Well spaced out for further annotation with many images includ...

120 pages, 16722 words

FOOD20003 : Food Chemistry, Biology, and Nutrition -Summary Textbook and Lecture Notes

Written by Patricia

Covers all lectures and important parts of the textbook 1. Overview of Nutrition 2. Digestion and...

30 pages, 12354 words

FOOD20003 Food Chemistry, Biology, and Nutrition (H1:95) Mid-Semester Test Notes

Written by Planning Jay Vynn

I wrote up my notes based on both the lecture slides and the textbook Understanding Nutrition. T...

78 pages, 25856 words

FOOD20003 Chapter 1 - Overview of Nutrition Notes (H1 - 95)

Written by Planning Jay Vynn

This is the Topic 1/Chapter 1 notes for the subject - Intro to Food Science & Human Nutrition (FOOD...

21 pages, 5436 words

Complete FOOD20003 H1 Notes Part 3

Written by Ivona

This document comprises of week 10 to week 12 H1 lecture notes. It is extremely well organised and e...

40 pages, 9545 words

Complete FOOD20003 H1 Notes Part 2

Written by Ivona

This document comprises of week 6 to week 9 H1 lecture notes. It is extremely well organised and eas...

32 pages, 10652 words

Complete FOOD20003 H1 Notes Part 1

Written by Ivona

This document comprises of week 1 to week 5 H1 lecture notes. It is extremely well organised and eas...

49 pages, 16502 words

Comprehensive Lecture Summary Notes for FOOD20003

Written by Stephanie

A comprehensive set of notes covered all 36 Lectures, including diagrams and pictures. Organised int...

61 pages, 15000 words


We don't have any tutors for this subject yet.

Why don't you become the first?
Become a tutor for FOOD20003


As you probably guessed, the subject has a history of poor coordination (and very sadly it still continues to this date)! The MST was relatively straight forward (but had no back-tracking) and the essays were marked quite harshly (considering they did not not even provide with an exemplar). On to the exam - the MCQ part was easy (this time around they enabled back tracking) but Part B SAQ due to technical issues was pretty difficult (the questions were pretty broad - "2 marks to explain the whole universe"). Having said that, I'm still inclined to give 4 stars primarily due to a relatively easy content, which you could cram during SWOTVAC (if you ask me I spent two weeks before the exam catching up with 8 weeks of content and managed to get a "decent" mark)

Anonymous, Semester 1, 2020

The subject was coordinated very poorly. Lectures were delivered as lecture recordings online due to Covid-19. Some lecturers were just terrible (mumbling or simply reading off the powerpoint), watching their lectures was simply a torture. Only do the subject if you want to practise your self-teaching skills. It was much easier to understand the content by reading the textbook than by watching terrible lecture recordings. In terms of assessments, I personally think they were not adjusted reasonably. MST was MCQ on food science aspect of the subject. As it was done online this year, time limit was set to be very very tight. The questions were worded really badly and there were errors in some of the questions as well. To me, errors in test questions is simply ridiculous. It shows how irresponsible they are coz they can't even be bothered to double check the test questions to make sure the questions are right. They also disabled the backtracking function so if we chose the wrong answer and moved on to the next question, that's it, can't go back and change it. For the final exam, there were MCQs and Short Answer Questions. The MCQs for the exam were easy and straight forward if you know the content reasonably well. For SAQs, they put the questions in a word document that was poorly formatted. And again, time limit was very tight and there was a major tech issue with CANVAS (couldn't even log in to canvas to download the questions for at least 10 minutes). There was tech issue with uploading our answers as well, but it took the teaching team a long time to address and respond to these issues. Many students didn't even see their emails regarding the tech issues during the exam and were really disadvantaged because of this. What I heard the most from the teaching team was "the subject was never designed to have open book exams.", "we have 500+ submissions to mark every week (it was them that cancelled tutorials and made worksheet submission compulsory every week to make up for the attendance hurdle)". To me, it seemed that they just hate doing their jobs. Problems like these probably won't happen when everything is back to normal, but the teaching team response and their attitude say a lot about how disorganised and unsupportive they are. I wouldn't normally write a review but my experience was so bad that I had to write a review to give people an idea of what they're getting themselves into if they choose to undertake this subject.

Anonymous, Semester 1, 2020

Don't do this subject. The test had questions that were never taught and essays were marked really really harshly.

Anonymous, Semester 2, 2020

Had previously heard good things about this subject until this semester. Terrible. From lecturers to content to exams. Tough subject as a breath.

Anonymous, Semester 1, 2019

Terrible. Badly coordinated, really harsh marking on essay with nothing but a copy and paste piece of feedback, bad lecturing and really absurd lecture times that make it near-impossible to attend for most people. Steer clear.

Anonymous, Semester 1, 2019

I would give 1.5 star. The subject has a lot of content. Pangzhen, one of the lecturers didnt even know what he was talking about. He kept mumbling to himself. On top of that, he was not sure what he wrote on his slides so he had to take 10 seconds to read the slide before continuing again. Basically, it was just a disaster. As mentioned by someone, not sure how he is qualified to teach.

Anonymous, Semester 1, 2019

Worst subject ever! Poorly coordinated and the lecturer was really bad!

Anonymous, Semester 1, 2019

I am writing this review while sitting in the lecture. I did enjoy the subject overall although it has a fair bit of content. However, for the last 2 weeks of this semester we got a new professor and I cannot seem to understand how he was declared to be fit for teaching. Every 2 words an aaah and basically is inserted into his sentence structure which makes it unbelievably hard to follow. One example of the slides: "If vitamin D mobilises calcium from bones, deficiency in vitamin D should prevent calcium loss from bones and should not mega doses of Vitamin D should result in low bone density diseases such as osteoporosis/osteomalacia?" How is anyone supposed to understand this? Really disappointing!

Anonymous, Semester 1, 2019

This was a fantastic subject! The content is interesting and straight forward and all assessment is well guided. The only issue I had was the lack of support material (eg practice exams). To score well on the tests and final exam I highly recommend getting your hands on a copy of the textbook. Complete the suggested readings and end-of-chapter questions (some of which are covered in tutorials) and keep your ears open for the little hints that lecturers drop from time to time. :)

Anonymous, Semester 1, 2017

Pretty easy content wise while still fairly interesting. Lectures could be boring and drag on, and often weren't fully recorded, but I did pick up some cool facts. My tutor was often late to class (like, significantly late) and told us different things to what the lecturer told us. However, still enjoyed the subject overall

Anonymous, Semester 1, 2016