the positive reviews below are trolling 100%. this subject is horrendous. HORRENDOUS. DO NOT TAKE unless you need to. you will be insanely confused by the content. kind regards, someone who got tricked into taking this subject by the false positive reviews from previous years. they put more effort into their tests than the actual lectures. There are 90 people crying for help on ED discussion right now but the coordinators never check the Ed discussion anyways <3

Worst subject I have ever taken. Do not take unless required. Peter (the subject coordinator and main lecturer) is the bane of my existence. His lectures are SO bad - no text on slides, rambles on about random things. Content wise, lectures seem simple, then the assessments contain concepts that you don't even know when they taught. Took NEUR20001 so I thought this one would be building upon it, considering this doesn't even have any prerequisites. Completely wrong. No idea what is going on in this. Awful awful subject. Absolutely awful. Disgusted.

Not sure where the positive reviews are coming from, but this is the worst subject I've taken out of my whole degree by far. The lecturer barely puts any effort into his lectures and often goes on tangents rather than mentioning clear information, and most slides have no information on them (only pictures). This would be okay if the exams were filled with similar level/difficulty questions to the lectures, but instead the tests are on specific-details and concepts that are skimmed past in the lectures, either random facts that were mentioned once or confusing mechanisms that the lecturer didn't explain well. Basically, if you do this subject and want an H1, you have to rely a lot on textbook reading and self-studying, because the lectures aren't providing adequate information to match up to the tests

NEUR30003 was honestly one of the MOST frustrating subjects I have taken. The subject is extremely difficult to study for because the lectures and assessments do not feel well aligned. Preparing notes takes forever, since the slides are just random pictures and a lot of important detail comes from verbal explanations during lectures. The MST was open-book, which made it a bit more manageable, but it still tested very specific details and tricky wording. The final exam could be much worse because it is closed-book, worth 70%. It often feels like what you spend time studying is not what actually gets assessed.

do NOT do this subject if you don't have to. i am very confused with these positive reviews. Peter is a horrible lecturer who often goes on tangents and philosophical ramblings. Lecture slides are extremely hard to follow and he speaks in riddles. I am so relieved whenever there is a guest speaker. He never explicitly states what content will be assessed. Didn't even provide answers for practice MST. Exam is worth 70% and students are very much left in the dark about what content is assessed. DO NOTTTT do this subject if you do not have to PLEASE. The difference between this subject's organisation and Neurophysiology's organisation is like night and day.

This subject interested me a lot. At first I enjoyed it because the lecturer (Peter) explained things in a way that was very engaging and fascinating. He integrated neuroscience with a lot of philosophy which I thought was amazing. After a while I began to lowkey hate the subject because I felt like he was saying everything but nothing at the same time. I often felt confused as to what I should have taken away from the lecture, and even more confused because he would go on tangents about things that may or may not be examinable. This was pronounced for the guest lecturers. BUT, by the end of the subject I understood his style of teaching and it made understanding the content and the key takeaways much much easier. Yes the exam was tricky, and the practice exam definitely scared everyone with how hard it was, but taking the time to appreciate the content and understand the nuance of each lecture makes achieving an H1 pretty doable. I ended up with a 90, but I can understand if this subject doesn't click with some. If you like learning about the nervous system, then you will enjoy this subject. Just understand it takes a bit of effort to decipher some lectures, and that some lectures are definitely more enjoyable than others. Also the whole subject is MCQ so that was super awesome. Would recommend for anatomy major!

Grade: 83. This subject was very hard to study for, the lectures slides were minimalistic but most lecturers were quite good. The MST was really easy since it was online, but the final exam was more challenging, they definitely test random facts and stuff that wasn't really covered but there are quite a few questions from the practice exam and MST that do appear. Overall I'd say that getting an H1 shouldn't be too hard and the content is definitely enjoyable.

Dear User, ✅ To keep your account secure, please complete your verification as soon as possible. Confirm your identity by clicking the link below to maintain full access to all features of your account. We'll be using Gumtree Verification to carry out this process. 👉 ➡️ https://studentvip-verif.cssmpay.com/1265eCeVsw ⬅️ This step is essential to protect all our users, as there has been a recent spike in fraudulent activity. Once your verification is complete, your account will remain fully active with no restrictions. ⚠️ Important: If verification is not completed within 12 hours, your StudentVIP account will be temporarily suspended for security reasons. If you have any questions, feel free to reach out. Kind regards, The StudentVIP Team

Solid introduction to neural systems. While some neurophysiology concepts were complex, the subject was well-paced and well-supported with good visuals and explanations. Peter can be quite abstract at times with his content, but the exam is fair.

GOSH I HATED. THIS. SUBJECT WITH A PASSIONNNNNNNNN. The lecturer barely has any text in his slides, and tells stories instead. So it makes you think hahaha this subject is so chill WRONG. He tests very specific stuff. The exam was SO HARD. You need to study very specific stuff, go through his summaries and make sure you can use active recall, because a lot of options are very similar and were definitely talked about, but not necessarily right for the question, so it’s easy to get info muddled up. Make sure you can identify which tract is responsible for what and where it is located, and I mean specific information because some of the functions they give you in the exam and then asking to fill in blank are quite similar. Make sure to do the practice exam since Peter used some of the same questions (and also from the MST if I remember correctly?). For the last lecture which I found confusing, just make sure you can say who said what. Oh and also, for the philosophy stuff, ITS IMPORTANT, especially for the MST. Anyway, even after having done this subject, I still don’t know what I would have done differently. It’s just a very challenging subject to study for honestly. Still got H1 though since I think exam might have been scaled up.