The content of Sustainable Development is quite vague and unfocused. In my opinion it is very broad - sometimes to the point of confusion. That said, it does have some things going for it. The subject takes its title from the 'Brundtland Report', which more or less asks “How can we meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs?” It’s the kind of high-minded quotation that doesn’t really say anything - a fair, if unanswerable question, hedged by an unknowable assumption. Although it is a fitting title since it encapsulates the entire subject: wishy-washy, vague, and being about everything and nothing at the same time. Many of the concepts and ideas within it are airy-fairy. This airy-fairy(ness) creeps its way into the assignments, unfortunately. Both the midterm and the final essay (less so the final I would say) were pretty broad topics, leaving for better or worse (usually worse) you to decide what to write about. Many people found it difficult to even start writing. The lynchpin of the theory for this subject is framing and coproduction, the latter of which is as vague as it sounds. Now this subject is not hard to pass. The weekly reflections and quizzes are basically a free 30%. I suppose if the point of this subject was to criticize the idea of sustainable development rather than promote it, it was good. Amongst the vague concepts, some of the material was interesting as were some of the readings, and the tutorial discussions were enjoyable. While there were a few instances, I didn't find the lecturer to be arrogant as the other reviews have said. Overall, this subject is not bad, but very middle of the road.

The final assignment had a clearer question with better instructions than the mid-term essay. It really boosted up my final score for this subject and managed to get an H2A. Both the quizzes and tutorial reflections were also very achievable.

The content is interesting, the first 2 weeks of readings are a little bit confusing but if you stick with it you'll be fine. 30% of your grade comes from MC quizzes and weekly reflections which are easy to score well in. I'm not sure if it was just the essay questions this year (the lecturer kept talking about chat gpt so maybe made them more difficult?) but I found both essays difficult. Even my tutor lowkey apologised for the first essay because it was just not good and didn't give you enough to work with. I don't think it gives you a chance to reflect your knowledge. And the second essay... lol. I wouldn't recommend this class. There's also no choice with essay questions, it's like one question so bit narrow. Again, content is interesting but the 2 essays really put me off.

If you have strong essay writing skills, this subject is an easy H1. Two of the assignments include a weekly multiple choice quiz worth 10% of your final grade, and a weekly tutorial reflection worth 20% of your final grade. The multiple choice is easy to score 9+/10 in, and the weekly tutorial is easy to score 100% in. I score an overall score of 9.1/10 for the quizzes, and 100% for all 10 tutorial reflections. So, right off the bat I had 29.1% of my final grade finished, as did most students. The other two assignments are essays, these are more difficult to do well in. What most students miss in their essays is critical engagement. But, if you're a psychology student or a philosophy student and have practiced writing essays it's possible to do very well in these essays - in fact, multiple students scored 100% for the first essay. As for the lecturer, there was a pretty big divide on whether students liked him or not. Some students thought he was quite arrogant whereas others thought he was entertaining. In all honesty, I thought he was okay and pretty engaging; however, I didn't feel like the content discussed in the lectures really helped me prepare for the essays so I rarely attended the lectures. Overall, I'd recommend this subject to students who want to do well in a 3rd year science subject but don't have any prerequisites. The course is easy to get an H1 with minimal work in but only if you have strong essay writing skills.

The subject is challenging if you don't have a background in social sciences and familiarity with basic economics, so be warned - this is not an easy H1 if you're new to ideas in social science. However, the lecturer is clear about expectations and gave us plenty of opportunities to ask questions and clarify things we didn't understand. If you put in the work and write towards what they mark for you can get 90+ on essays, with some people even getting 100s. As a science student (studying psych) who had a developing interest in economics and social sciences, this subject was perfect for me. If you're not interested in economics and social sciences, however, I wouldn't recommend this subject, as it can be quite difficult if you don't find it interesting. If you are familiar with ideas in these fields, this subject should be pretty manageable, and perhaps slightly easy.

Lecturer ebbs arrogance, assessments are very difficult to do well in. Not an enjoyable subject at all.

Lecturer's attitude wasnt very good but overall a very interesting subject. Mid term and final essay is very difficult though so be prepared.

Interesting content, and the tutorials were well-organised and led to some really great, in-depth discussions. I didn't really like the lecturer's attitude overall, but he was quite engaging.

I found this subject really interesting as I learnt a lot of new things. The lecturer is really engaging and so are the lectures, tutorials and readings.