just a heads up. the 4/5 star reviews below are just my friends trolling haha pls don't take them seriously. listen to the 1 star review instead

Peter is so cute 🥺 His lectures made me feel Fuzzy inside

Highly intellectually stimulating topics. Lots of content, but if you keep up with the lectures, a H1 is highly achievable. Definitely one of the best subjects I've took so far.

I really disagree with the many 1 star reviews. This subject was difficult but super interesting. There was a lot of nuanced psychological stuff that i personally thought was really cool. Peter's lecture slides were frustrating but if you write down what he says for notes rather than just focusing on the slides then you'll be fine. A lot of people complained about the subject in the Ed Discussion but I think it was quite clear that it wasn't being monitored by staff (which is common). Emailing these questions to Peter (as he offered) or talking to him after a lecture would have been the smarter option. I didn't do amazingly on the MST but that's on me for not studying - and helpful feedback was given for the questions which isn't usually given. If you're someone that likes to learn interesting things further than just how synapses work and what the serotonin is, you will like this subject - its one of the most intellectually stimulating ones I've ever taken.

would give 0 stars if i could. fully agreed with all the 1 star comments below. so disappointed. Coordinators don't care about students feedback and 0 support.

Do not take if you don't have to, super poorly structured. No learning objectives, lecturer goes on random philosophical rants with basically nothing on his lecture slides anyways. MST was really hard and random. Content changes sporatically every lecture and feels jumbled.

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.