Taken AY2014/2015 Semester 1
EN1101E/GEK1000: Introduction to Literary Studies
I felt that this module could have been done much better. As someone who loves Lit, I felt that this module really emphasised a lot on the more technical aspects during the lectures, which took away the joy of Lit. Of course, I understand the necessity of understanding literary technique, and I’m all for the terminology, but I think the way that it was taught was rather dry and unfocused for the most part. I suppose it has something to do with the fact that I wasn’t used to the idea of spending only 2 weeks on each Lit text, and focusing so much on poetry for the first five weeks or so. For a person who enjoys novels and plays much more than poetry, this came as a discomfort and a disappointment. My familiarity of the texts were also lacking, and I only read most of them (A Raisin in the Sun and Northanger Abbey) twice, Volpone once and Breakfast at Tiffany’s thrice (if only because I did my assignment on this book).
I think the saving grace of the module were the books – I grew to love Breakfast at Tiffany’s over time, even though I disliked it during my first reading. As for A Raisin in the Sun and Northanger Abbey, I have absolutely no objections regarding them; they are pleasant reads. Northanger is a bit long though, and I read it quite slowly because I was unaccustomed to Austen’s way of writing. I have never been a fan of Austen, but Northanger was alright and I didn’t mind it much. Volpone, however, was another story altogether. I really hated reading it, because it was written in Shakespearean style (more or less, I’m not very specific about the timeline), but the language had much less grace and elegance, and was crude when it was intended to be funny. I had difficulty understanding what was going on, and what’s worse, wasn’t very motivated to understand either. As with all books, though, everyone will definitely have their own opinions regarding a text, and each person responds to a text differently, and forms different kinds of attachments. I know someone who found Volpone rather humorous, and while I failed to see the humour, I trust her ability and taste, so each to their own.
Assessment: There is a midterm test (20%), an essay assignment (25%), tutorial participation (15%) and finals (40%). My tutor was very strict in her marking, and decimated the whole class; I did slightly above average, but not particularly outstandingly well or anything like that. The midterm test is on poetry, and I think that it would be good practice to use more poetic devices in your analysis, because that was the comment across the board given to us – that we used too little of them. (Unfortunately, having used a few, I’m not sure how much more I could have found in the poem to be analysed.) Finals is based on four sections, and you have to do three – that leaves you with only 40 min for each section, which is really terrible if you had to change your question at the last minute, like I did. There is “no repeat of material” allowed, and so you must choose your questions carefully. While it is not a must for you to study all four texts in great detail, perhaps it would be wise to at least scan through the fourth book. I didn’t do Volpone (gee, what a surprise) and I managed to escape doing it during the finals itself.
Workload: The workload is generally light. Apart from reading the texts over and over again, and reading through the lecture notes and the occasional reading, I would say that the workload is really much more comfortable than any of the other modules. However, I would caution against the mindset that taking A Level Lit is a straight guarantee for an A, because I don’t think that’s true. The cohort is generally quite good, being made up of A Level Lit students, and it may be difficult to stand out among all the good students. Still, I would definitely take this mod again, if only for the fact that I did enjoy three out of the four texts, even if it was mostly self-study.
Source
Module review for HY1101E: Asia and the Modern World
Taken AY2014/2015 Semester 1
HY1101E: Asia and the Modern World
I thought I liked History when I did it at the A Levels, and I loved SEA especially (I still do). But this mod just didn’t do it for me – it was too broad, spanning from the dynastic period to modern history, and it was mostly ‘touch and go’ for each of the different time periods. There was a vastness of regions covered – South Asia (India and Pakistan), East Asia (China, Japan and occasionally Korea/Taiwan), and Southeast Asia (Thailand, Philippines, Burma and Vietnam, mostly). It was too much for me, and I felt that the content wasn’t really organised in an understandable way. The patterns, while there, were not readily apparent, and it was very difficult to track the developments and continuities across so many regions.
I read other module reviews that said if we have taken A Level History before, this module would be not much of a problem. I have to disagree. While it is convenient to have some background information on SEA nationalism, decolonisation, political structures and economic development, as well as a knowledge of the Cold War, the module content organised these topics in a different way. That’s not to say I didn’t enjoy the recap, especially for the SEA region which I love, but other than that, it was all new information and I struggled with synthesising it and using it in my arguments. I really didn’t enjoy this module, but I know of a sizeable amount of people who remained ambivalent or even stayed interested throughout, and to hear my opinion regarding this subject only would be therefore quite an unrepresentative summary of what this mod is about.
Assessment: There were two midterms, each one 25%, and online forum participation was 20% (one forum session was 5%). The finals was 30%, which was a great relief because it didn’t have as high a weightage as the other mods’ finals. However, having two midterms was taxing (even though we would get the Fri lecture off in lieu of this torture) and having to remember so much information without a discernable, identifiable pattern really killed me. The forum participation is something that is required in Sem 1 – if I’m not wrong, Sem 2 may not have this component. It was amusing, if not a bit disturbing, to see everyone duking it out online with their tremendously long posts and taking up all the available points anyone could possibly conceive for a particular question. My advice to you is to start early and beat the crowd, but play fair at the same time – you can write a long post, but try to limit yourself to at most 2 points so that you’ll reserve some space for the rest to write as well. As for the finals, I wanted to die – partly because I left all the memorising to the day before the exam, which was the stupidest thing I’d done this year. The finals test all the semester’s worth of work, but I spotted identification terms from Theme 1 and 2, and thankfully was able to scribble some half-hearted words for them when they came out.
Workload: The forum participation was a pain, really – it required checking to see if anyone replied, and typing another short ‘essay’ in response to someone’s rebuttal, or adding on to their point. It took up even more time than a tutorial would have. There are readings every week, but I gave up very early on in the semester, and only read whenever it would help with the online forum post (I cited some readings for my points). I think the lectures, if you pay attention and diligently take notes, will stand you in much better stead for the exams than the readings. The content, however, is massive, and it’s hard to tell what is permissible to skip. Still, the saving grace of this mod is that they have a tendency to keep the questions at a somewhat doable level (although I would say it’s still hard) and you are probably bound to recognise a few of the ID terms that you have to do if you put in enough effort into at least scoping out the topic in general. I think, though, I would have been better off not taking this mod, especially with my poor time management and inability to memorise copious amounts of information in a short amount of time.
Source
HY1101E: Asia and the Modern World
I thought I liked History when I did it at the A Levels, and I loved SEA especially (I still do). But this mod just didn’t do it for me – it was too broad, spanning from the dynastic period to modern history, and it was mostly ‘touch and go’ for each of the different time periods. There was a vastness of regions covered – South Asia (India and Pakistan), East Asia (China, Japan and occasionally Korea/Taiwan), and Southeast Asia (Thailand, Philippines, Burma and Vietnam, mostly). It was too much for me, and I felt that the content wasn’t really organised in an understandable way. The patterns, while there, were not readily apparent, and it was very difficult to track the developments and continuities across so many regions.
I read other module reviews that said if we have taken A Level History before, this module would be not much of a problem. I have to disagree. While it is convenient to have some background information on SEA nationalism, decolonisation, political structures and economic development, as well as a knowledge of the Cold War, the module content organised these topics in a different way. That’s not to say I didn’t enjoy the recap, especially for the SEA region which I love, but other than that, it was all new information and I struggled with synthesising it and using it in my arguments. I really didn’t enjoy this module, but I know of a sizeable amount of people who remained ambivalent or even stayed interested throughout, and to hear my opinion regarding this subject only would be therefore quite an unrepresentative summary of what this mod is about.
Assessment: There were two midterms, each one 25%, and online forum participation was 20% (one forum session was 5%). The finals was 30%, which was a great relief because it didn’t have as high a weightage as the other mods’ finals. However, having two midterms was taxing (even though we would get the Fri lecture off in lieu of this torture) and having to remember so much information without a discernable, identifiable pattern really killed me. The forum participation is something that is required in Sem 1 – if I’m not wrong, Sem 2 may not have this component. It was amusing, if not a bit disturbing, to see everyone duking it out online with their tremendously long posts and taking up all the available points anyone could possibly conceive for a particular question. My advice to you is to start early and beat the crowd, but play fair at the same time – you can write a long post, but try to limit yourself to at most 2 points so that you’ll reserve some space for the rest to write as well. As for the finals, I wanted to die – partly because I left all the memorising to the day before the exam, which was the stupidest thing I’d done this year. The finals test all the semester’s worth of work, but I spotted identification terms from Theme 1 and 2, and thankfully was able to scribble some half-hearted words for them when they came out.
Workload: The forum participation was a pain, really – it required checking to see if anyone replied, and typing another short ‘essay’ in response to someone’s rebuttal, or adding on to their point. It took up even more time than a tutorial would have. There are readings every week, but I gave up very early on in the semester, and only read whenever it would help with the online forum post (I cited some readings for my points). I think the lectures, if you pay attention and diligently take notes, will stand you in much better stead for the exams than the readings. The content, however, is massive, and it’s hard to tell what is permissible to skip. Still, the saving grace of this mod is that they have a tendency to keep the questions at a somewhat doable level (although I would say it’s still hard) and you are probably bound to recognise a few of the ID terms that you have to do if you put in enough effort into at least scoping out the topic in general. I think, though, I would have been better off not taking this mod, especially with my poor time management and inability to memorise copious amounts of information in a short amount of time.
Source
Module review for PS1101E/GEK1003: Introduction to Politics
Taken AY2014/2015 Semester 1
PS1101E/GEK1003: Introduction to Politics
I’m very sure that every review on PS1101E that you come across will end up extolling the virtues of Prof Yoshi, who has won the Teaching Excellence Award for many years in a row. He is extremely clear in conveying the concepts, and he even repeats them sometimes in order to help you remember. I think part of the reason why his teaching style is so effective is because he is very systematic in explaining the flow of the theories and the concepts; he even puts funny pictures and speech bubbles, as well as ridiculous analogies, in order to make things more understandable. He is most possibly the best lecturer in Political Science (according to some seniors), and he is widely known by even the non-PS students as well for being a great lecturer.
I found the content for PS1101E very interesting for the most part, and the readings as well were difficult but I liked reading them (with the exception of some). However, I think trying to cram the content into my head in a few days before the exam was really difficult and it didn’t help that I didn’t start earlier as well. I would say that it is a relatively content-heavy mod, but it’s worth it because the concepts that he teaches you are valuable in interpreting the world’s politics around you.
Prof Yoshi only uploads his slides after the lecture, and there isn’t any webcast. Furthermore, you should really attend his lectures because occasionally, he gives a random hint of what to study. You should definitely not miss his final revision lecture, in which he basically tells you the 35 identification terms that may come out in finals (out of ten given, you pick five) as well as the possible topics that may be tested for the long essay. Studying the 35 terms is the most difficult part during preparation, but during the finals, it is most certainly the long essay that proves the greatest challenge.
Assessment: Tutorial participation makes up 20% of the grade, and the essay assignment and finals both take 40% weightage each. This means that you won’t be very busy during midterms for this mod, but that doesn’t mean you should be negligent in your readings, either. Not all the readings are important, but it is really hard to know which one will be important later for your essay assignment. Even though Prof Yoshi says that it is a think-piece and that only two references are required, it really depends on your tutor’s marking style, and thus I think it’s better to include more references (maybe five would be a safe number) – although referencing doesn’t guarantee a good score. It probably would be best to read Fukuyama’s The End of History, Samuel Huntington’s Clash of Civilisations and Political Decay, and all the Asian values debate readings (Mahbubani and Aung-Thwin, who happens to be the father of the Burmese HY1101E lecturer) at the very least. It’s also very important how you choose your essay question for both the assignment and the finals – I chose the right question for my assignment and did well, but for my finals, I picked a trickier question and ended up going off point midway.
Workload: In terms of workload, the readings are quite heavy. There’s usually one or two per week, and while you don’t need to read them all, you have to read some of them, or you’ll be left rushing the readings the week before the assignment (like me). Still, it’s good that there is very few assessments for this mod, because it minimises the time spent trying to study or write another essay. Of course, that could also be a downside because it is, to some extent, an ‘all or nothing’ situation. I think that PS1101E is generally hard to score in, but it is definitely worth the effort and the pain, and I would definitely take it if it was under Prof Yoshi.
Source
PS1101E/GEK1003: Introduction to Politics
I’m very sure that every review on PS1101E that you come across will end up extolling the virtues of Prof Yoshi, who has won the Teaching Excellence Award for many years in a row. He is extremely clear in conveying the concepts, and he even repeats them sometimes in order to help you remember. I think part of the reason why his teaching style is so effective is because he is very systematic in explaining the flow of the theories and the concepts; he even puts funny pictures and speech bubbles, as well as ridiculous analogies, in order to make things more understandable. He is most possibly the best lecturer in Political Science (according to some seniors), and he is widely known by even the non-PS students as well for being a great lecturer.
I found the content for PS1101E very interesting for the most part, and the readings as well were difficult but I liked reading them (with the exception of some). However, I think trying to cram the content into my head in a few days before the exam was really difficult and it didn’t help that I didn’t start earlier as well. I would say that it is a relatively content-heavy mod, but it’s worth it because the concepts that he teaches you are valuable in interpreting the world’s politics around you.
Prof Yoshi only uploads his slides after the lecture, and there isn’t any webcast. Furthermore, you should really attend his lectures because occasionally, he gives a random hint of what to study. You should definitely not miss his final revision lecture, in which he basically tells you the 35 identification terms that may come out in finals (out of ten given, you pick five) as well as the possible topics that may be tested for the long essay. Studying the 35 terms is the most difficult part during preparation, but during the finals, it is most certainly the long essay that proves the greatest challenge.
Assessment: Tutorial participation makes up 20% of the grade, and the essay assignment and finals both take 40% weightage each. This means that you won’t be very busy during midterms for this mod, but that doesn’t mean you should be negligent in your readings, either. Not all the readings are important, but it is really hard to know which one will be important later for your essay assignment. Even though Prof Yoshi says that it is a think-piece and that only two references are required, it really depends on your tutor’s marking style, and thus I think it’s better to include more references (maybe five would be a safe number) – although referencing doesn’t guarantee a good score. It probably would be best to read Fukuyama’s The End of History, Samuel Huntington’s Clash of Civilisations and Political Decay, and all the Asian values debate readings (Mahbubani and Aung-Thwin, who happens to be the father of the Burmese HY1101E lecturer) at the very least. It’s also very important how you choose your essay question for both the assignment and the finals – I chose the right question for my assignment and did well, but for my finals, I picked a trickier question and ended up going off point midway.
Workload: In terms of workload, the readings are quite heavy. There’s usually one or two per week, and while you don’t need to read them all, you have to read some of them, or you’ll be left rushing the readings the week before the assignment (like me). Still, it’s good that there is very few assessments for this mod, because it minimises the time spent trying to study or write another essay. Of course, that could also be a downside because it is, to some extent, an ‘all or nothing’ situation. I think that PS1101E is generally hard to score in, but it is definitely worth the effort and the pain, and I would definitely take it if it was under Prof Yoshi.
Source
Module review for SC1101E: Introduction to Sociology
Taken AY2014/2015 Semester 1
SC1101E: Introduction to Sociology
When I first started out, I really didn’t enjoy Soci at all, and I didn’t keep up with my readings or the textbook. I honestly had no idea what was going on, and it showed in my assignment, which I didn’t do too well in (I did it in one night). Afterwards, for the midterm test, I decided to work harder by reading the textbook and the readings, and my results jumped by two whole grades – a testament to the power of the textbook, and actually trying to understand what you’re studying. In fact, the more I studied Soci, the more I had a grudging appreciation for it, because it really does make sense when applied to the world around us, and it wasn’t as nonsensical and ‘fluffy’ as I initially thought it was.
Most of the time I don’t go for Soci lectures, but I do the webcast afterwards. I feel that the webcast really helps much more than going for lecture, because I can take things slow and pause to scribble down something the lecturer said. Of course, if you’re someone who doesn’t like to listen to a video recording for 1 h and 35 min straight, or you’re easily distracted, then chances are you will be better off in the lecture, and you can still use the webcast to catch on specific slides of content you missed out.
The readings (to me) are absolutely useless, at the least the ones for the first few weeks, although I read them to try and catch up for the midterms. After that, however, I just didn’t bother to keep up with them because they were quite random and the amount of time I took to extract anything useful was disproportionate to the time I spent reading the whole thing. Seniors tell me that you do need to read the Soci readings in order to get your examples, but I feel that the textbook has sufficient examples (in fact, maybe a tad too many) for you already. If you’re really passionate about Soci, or you enjoy doing the readings (although I really didn’t like them at all), then you’ll probably look at the readings, but if you’re not that interested, then I think it’s alright to skip out on it.
Assessment: There’s normally an assignment (15%), a midterm (25%) and finals (50%), as well as class participation (10%). I really regretted not speaking up in class more, because it appears that the teachers actually do know who you are, roughly, and they do keep watch to see who’s been talking (sense) and who’s been keeping quiet. For the assignment, you should probably go with the basic theories (Marx, Durkheim, Weber and Merton) – I tried Parks’ Ecological Theory based on one day’s worth of rushing and it didn’t end up well. For the midterms and finals, they have a tendency of combining two or even three topics, so it is best not to spot too much. Usually, power features heavily in both exams, and deviance always comes out for finals (whether or not the question is doable, however, depends on your year). I find that culture is my pet topic, but I still studied everything for the finals except Aging/Elderly, and did Class and Stratification as quickly as I could. Whether it’s easy to score in, I think once you get the hang of the Soci style, it’s much easier to churn out a decent essay. Basically, come up with some broad points that answer the question, GP-style, but then follow up with these thesis statements by using theories to analyse the phenomenon that you have raised, so that you’ll avoid sinking into the trap of writing a wholly GP-ish essay.
Workload: Generally, it’s not actually that bad. You definitely have to be very sure about what’s going on during the lectures, particularly the theories, and you really should follow the textbook. But I won’t say that Soci is a particularly heavy mod, especially not in comparison to others. As for whether I’d take Soci again, I probably would say yes, but I’ll also have started earlier and made sure that I knew what was going on in the first few lectures so that I wouldn’t have been so lost for the essay assignment.
SC1101E: Introduction to Sociology
When I first started out, I really didn’t enjoy Soci at all, and I didn’t keep up with my readings or the textbook. I honestly had no idea what was going on, and it showed in my assignment, which I didn’t do too well in (I did it in one night). Afterwards, for the midterm test, I decided to work harder by reading the textbook and the readings, and my results jumped by two whole grades – a testament to the power of the textbook, and actually trying to understand what you’re studying. In fact, the more I studied Soci, the more I had a grudging appreciation for it, because it really does make sense when applied to the world around us, and it wasn’t as nonsensical and ‘fluffy’ as I initially thought it was.
Most of the time I don’t go for Soci lectures, but I do the webcast afterwards. I feel that the webcast really helps much more than going for lecture, because I can take things slow and pause to scribble down something the lecturer said. Of course, if you’re someone who doesn’t like to listen to a video recording for 1 h and 35 min straight, or you’re easily distracted, then chances are you will be better off in the lecture, and you can still use the webcast to catch on specific slides of content you missed out.
The readings (to me) are absolutely useless, at the least the ones for the first few weeks, although I read them to try and catch up for the midterms. After that, however, I just didn’t bother to keep up with them because they were quite random and the amount of time I took to extract anything useful was disproportionate to the time I spent reading the whole thing. Seniors tell me that you do need to read the Soci readings in order to get your examples, but I feel that the textbook has sufficient examples (in fact, maybe a tad too many) for you already. If you’re really passionate about Soci, or you enjoy doing the readings (although I really didn’t like them at all), then you’ll probably look at the readings, but if you’re not that interested, then I think it’s alright to skip out on it.
Assessment: There’s normally an assignment (15%), a midterm (25%) and finals (50%), as well as class participation (10%). I really regretted not speaking up in class more, because it appears that the teachers actually do know who you are, roughly, and they do keep watch to see who’s been talking (sense) and who’s been keeping quiet. For the assignment, you should probably go with the basic theories (Marx, Durkheim, Weber and Merton) – I tried Parks’ Ecological Theory based on one day’s worth of rushing and it didn’t end up well. For the midterms and finals, they have a tendency of combining two or even three topics, so it is best not to spot too much. Usually, power features heavily in both exams, and deviance always comes out for finals (whether or not the question is doable, however, depends on your year). I find that culture is my pet topic, but I still studied everything for the finals except Aging/Elderly, and did Class and Stratification as quickly as I could. Whether it’s easy to score in, I think once you get the hang of the Soci style, it’s much easier to churn out a decent essay. Basically, come up with some broad points that answer the question, GP-style, but then follow up with these thesis statements by using theories to analyse the phenomenon that you have raised, so that you’ll avoid sinking into the trap of writing a wholly GP-ish essay.
Workload: Generally, it’s not actually that bad. You definitely have to be very sure about what’s going on during the lectures, particularly the theories, and you really should follow the textbook. But I won’t say that Soci is a particularly heavy mod, especially not in comparison to others. As for whether I’d take Soci again, I probably would say yes, but I’ll also have started earlier and made sure that I knew what was going on in the first few lectures so that I wouldn’t have been so lost for the essay assignment.
Module review for IT1004: Introduction to Electronic Commerce
Taken AY2014/2015 Semester 1
IT1004: Introduction to Electronic Commerce
This is a cross faculty module hosted by the School of Computing. However, this module is highly business in nature, so I feel that it is more appropriate to be classified under “Business”. Personally, I would not recommend this module to anyone, as I felt that the time spent on this module does not justify the gains. The content is very general, mainly focusing on the business model of e-commerce firms. Hence, there is very little to be learnt from this module, with most of the content being based on common sense / a google search away.
The lecturer does little in value-adding her lectures, so you CAN skip all the lectures, like I did. All the slides are on IVLE anyway, and if you read the textbook it’ll be more than enough. Tutorials, however, cannot be skipped since attendance is counted into your grades. Although there are no mid terms, the group work component is very taxing.
Assessment
Tutorial attendance + participation: 10%
Case presentation (group): 10%
Group project: 30%
Finals: 50%
As stated above, tutorial attendance is counted towards your grades, so try not to skip any. Also, it’s important to take down notes during case discussions, which is something I regret not doing. As for participation, all the biz students in the tutorial will be clamouring to answer questions, so just be thick-skinned and volunteer. It doesn’t matter if your answer is wrong, most people spout bullshit anyways, plus no one will remember what you’ve said.
Finding the right group is very important, as 40% of the grade is based on group work. Sadly, my group of 4 had a major slacker who was totally useless and actually more of a burden, so this left us with only 3 active members. The case presentation is only 10%, but the standards for presentation are set very high due to the large no. of biz students taking this module. Be prepared to wear your suit and tie to present, and definitely do not use any cue cards. Once again, choosing the right group mates are important, as two of my members were so bad at presenting, it’s as if they have never presented before in their lives.
The group project requires you to come up with a business pitch for your own e-commerce company, and it involves a written report and presentation. The report has a much higher weightage, so do not focus too much on the pitch. Also, not everyone has to present, so you can cut the deadweight (i.e. only get those who are actually good at presenting to present). It is important to communicate well with your members and allocate work efficiently, since the amount of work required is very high, for a relatively paltry 30%. If you have any slackers in your group, just be thick-skinned and report it to your tutor. It’s not worth enduring all the trouble since the workload is really very high. I really regret not reporting, as it meant more work for the rest of us while the slacker gets to coast along.
The finals include MCQs and short answer questions. To prepare, revise your tutorial case studies, which will help a lot. Also, if you’re a truly hardworking student striving for the A, then go ahead and read the textbook as well. As for me, I basically printed and read through the slides on the morning of the exam. Very bad example, but then again I’m planning to S/U this module.
Workload
The workload for this module is HEAVY due to the group work component, while the tutorials require little to no effort. Content-wise, this module focuses heavily on the business aspect of e-commerce, and the lecturer seems ill-equipped at that, given that she is a computer science lecturer. Choose your groups wisely, and if you’re looking to score well then read the textbook. For those looking to use this module to fulfil their breadth requirements: if you’re a seasoned biz student then go ahead, if not please turn away immediately.
(Intended major: Economics)
IT1004: Introduction to Electronic Commerce
This is a cross faculty module hosted by the School of Computing. However, this module is highly business in nature, so I feel that it is more appropriate to be classified under “Business”. Personally, I would not recommend this module to anyone, as I felt that the time spent on this module does not justify the gains. The content is very general, mainly focusing on the business model of e-commerce firms. Hence, there is very little to be learnt from this module, with most of the content being based on common sense / a google search away.
The lecturer does little in value-adding her lectures, so you CAN skip all the lectures, like I did. All the slides are on IVLE anyway, and if you read the textbook it’ll be more than enough. Tutorials, however, cannot be skipped since attendance is counted into your grades. Although there are no mid terms, the group work component is very taxing.
Assessment
Tutorial attendance + participation: 10%
Case presentation (group): 10%
Group project: 30%
Finals: 50%
As stated above, tutorial attendance is counted towards your grades, so try not to skip any. Also, it’s important to take down notes during case discussions, which is something I regret not doing. As for participation, all the biz students in the tutorial will be clamouring to answer questions, so just be thick-skinned and volunteer. It doesn’t matter if your answer is wrong, most people spout bullshit anyways, plus no one will remember what you’ve said.
Finding the right group is very important, as 40% of the grade is based on group work. Sadly, my group of 4 had a major slacker who was totally useless and actually more of a burden, so this left us with only 3 active members. The case presentation is only 10%, but the standards for presentation are set very high due to the large no. of biz students taking this module. Be prepared to wear your suit and tie to present, and definitely do not use any cue cards. Once again, choosing the right group mates are important, as two of my members were so bad at presenting, it’s as if they have never presented before in their lives.
The group project requires you to come up with a business pitch for your own e-commerce company, and it involves a written report and presentation. The report has a much higher weightage, so do not focus too much on the pitch. Also, not everyone has to present, so you can cut the deadweight (i.e. only get those who are actually good at presenting to present). It is important to communicate well with your members and allocate work efficiently, since the amount of work required is very high, for a relatively paltry 30%. If you have any slackers in your group, just be thick-skinned and report it to your tutor. It’s not worth enduring all the trouble since the workload is really very high. I really regret not reporting, as it meant more work for the rest of us while the slacker gets to coast along.
The finals include MCQs and short answer questions. To prepare, revise your tutorial case studies, which will help a lot. Also, if you’re a truly hardworking student striving for the A, then go ahead and read the textbook as well. As for me, I basically printed and read through the slides on the morning of the exam. Very bad example, but then again I’m planning to S/U this module.
Workload
The workload for this module is HEAVY due to the group work component, while the tutorials require little to no effort. Content-wise, this module focuses heavily on the business aspect of e-commerce, and the lecturer seems ill-equipped at that, given that she is a computer science lecturer. Choose your groups wisely, and if you’re looking to score well then read the textbook. For those looking to use this module to fulfil their breadth requirements: if you’re a seasoned biz student then go ahead, if not please turn away immediately.
(Intended major: Economics)
Module review for HY1101E: Asia and the Modern World
Taken AY2014/2015 Semester 1
HY1101E: Asia and the Modern World
This is a compulsory module for anyone interested in majoring in History. However, I took this module with the intention of fulfilling my FASS requirements. Those who have taken H2 History in JC will have an advantage, but only in the sense that they are more accustomed to the demands of history essays, but as long as you have a strong command of language + argumentative skills, you should be fine. Looking back, I really regret my decision to choose this module, and you’ll soon come to know why. Generally, I found this module to be very taxing (for an introduction module at least), in terms of workload and content. If you are truly interested in History, you’ll have a great time I suppose, but my warning to those who are merely looking to fulfil FASS requirements: do not choose this.
The module consists of 2 lectures per week (2h each), with no tutorials. However, do not rejoice just yet. There are “online tutorials”, aka internet forum discussions hosted on IVLE. These online discussions actually took up way more of my time than a normal real-life tutorial session would, which really sucked. As for the lectures, there are no webcasts, so try not to skip any. Solely relying on the lecture notes would be insufficient, as a significant amount of what the lecturer says is not included in the slides. The lectures are split into East Asia + South Asia and South East Asia. Personally, I preferred the lecturer for East Asia, as despite her accent, she was able to deliver her lectures in a clear and concise manner. The other lecturer for South Asia and South East Asia was more long winded, and a lot more less concise.
Assessment
Internet discussion: 20%
Exam type: 1 essay + 4 identification qns
2 tri-term tests: 25% each
Finals: 30%
As stated above, the internet discussions require a SIGNIFICANT amount of effort. Depending on your group, people might take it very seriously. Unfortunately, my group was full of those kind of people. The term “discussion” might bring to mind a collection of short responses, but that is not the case at all. At least for my group, people posted essay-length responses, which was very frightening and stressful. In order to prepare for the discussion, I had to spend at least 2-3h to craft my “response” (read: essay), especially when others have written infinitely long essays that appeared to have covered all grounds already. As such, I suggest that you start preparing immediately when the discussion questions are released, before the forum has opened. This way, you can be the first to post, which would reduce a lot of the headache. Also, try to post at least TWICE for each discussion. Be prepared to spend way more than the usual 1h for this “tutorial”.
There are two tri-term tests instead of midterms (tr-iterm in the sense that 2 “midterms” + 1 finals). Study hard for these as they are 25% each so that you will be less stressed for finals, and make proper study notes so that you can simply refer to your notes for finals preparation. I suggest spending 1h on the essay and 1h on the identification questions (for the identification qn: explain the given historical event/term/person, a brief explanation of who what when where why, plus historical significance of that event/term/person).
For the finals, do try to at least make study notes in advance, as the content is consistently heavy for the entire module i.e. last day cramming will not work. That being said, you don’t have to worry too much for finals if you’ve done consistently ok for the previous two trii-terms.
Workload
The workload for this module is VERY HEAVY. Ridiculously burdensome online discussions, two “midterms” instead of one, and two lectures a week. The content, although interesting, is super heavy. Take this module only if you’re looking to major in history, or if you enjoy a serious challenge.
Source
HY1101E: Asia and the Modern World
This is a compulsory module for anyone interested in majoring in History. However, I took this module with the intention of fulfilling my FASS requirements. Those who have taken H2 History in JC will have an advantage, but only in the sense that they are more accustomed to the demands of history essays, but as long as you have a strong command of language + argumentative skills, you should be fine. Looking back, I really regret my decision to choose this module, and you’ll soon come to know why. Generally, I found this module to be very taxing (for an introduction module at least), in terms of workload and content. If you are truly interested in History, you’ll have a great time I suppose, but my warning to those who are merely looking to fulfil FASS requirements: do not choose this.
The module consists of 2 lectures per week (2h each), with no tutorials. However, do not rejoice just yet. There are “online tutorials”, aka internet forum discussions hosted on IVLE. These online discussions actually took up way more of my time than a normal real-life tutorial session would, which really sucked. As for the lectures, there are no webcasts, so try not to skip any. Solely relying on the lecture notes would be insufficient, as a significant amount of what the lecturer says is not included in the slides. The lectures are split into East Asia + South Asia and South East Asia. Personally, I preferred the lecturer for East Asia, as despite her accent, she was able to deliver her lectures in a clear and concise manner. The other lecturer for South Asia and South East Asia was more long winded, and a lot more less concise.
Assessment
Internet discussion: 20%
Exam type: 1 essay + 4 identification qns
2 tri-term tests: 25% each
Finals: 30%
As stated above, the internet discussions require a SIGNIFICANT amount of effort. Depending on your group, people might take it very seriously. Unfortunately, my group was full of those kind of people. The term “discussion” might bring to mind a collection of short responses, but that is not the case at all. At least for my group, people posted essay-length responses, which was very frightening and stressful. In order to prepare for the discussion, I had to spend at least 2-3h to craft my “response” (read: essay), especially when others have written infinitely long essays that appeared to have covered all grounds already. As such, I suggest that you start preparing immediately when the discussion questions are released, before the forum has opened. This way, you can be the first to post, which would reduce a lot of the headache. Also, try to post at least TWICE for each discussion. Be prepared to spend way more than the usual 1h for this “tutorial”.
There are two tri-term tests instead of midterms (tr-iterm in the sense that 2 “midterms” + 1 finals). Study hard for these as they are 25% each so that you will be less stressed for finals, and make proper study notes so that you can simply refer to your notes for finals preparation. I suggest spending 1h on the essay and 1h on the identification questions (for the identification qn: explain the given historical event/term/person, a brief explanation of who what when where why, plus historical significance of that event/term/person).
For the finals, do try to at least make study notes in advance, as the content is consistently heavy for the entire module i.e. last day cramming will not work. That being said, you don’t have to worry too much for finals if you’ve done consistently ok for the previous two trii-terms.
Workload
The workload for this module is VERY HEAVY. Ridiculously burdensome online discussions, two “midterms” instead of one, and two lectures a week. The content, although interesting, is super heavy. Take this module only if you’re looking to major in history, or if you enjoy a serious challenge.
Source
Module review for EU1101E: Making of Modern Europe
Taken AY2014/2015 Semester 1
EU1101E: Making of Modern Europe
This is a compulsory module for anyone looking to major in European studies. If you are simply trying to fulfil your FASS requirements, do NOT choose this. There is 1 lecture/week, and a 2h tutorial every odd week. However, do not be fooled though, as the workload is ridiculously heavy, and the tutorials do nothing in helping you understand the content better. Although I found the content to be intellectually engaging, the way in which it was taught was awful.
The lecturer, although a very nice and friendly lady, is unfortunately terrible at conducting lectures. Her ppt slides offer mere slivers of information, so >90% of the content comes directly from what she says during lecture. She tends to narrate instead of analysing the events/issues, so if you are weak in history, good luck to you. There is very little organisation of information, and I would compare her lectures to reading a Wikipedia page, except reading Wikipedia might actually do you more good than her lectures. Also, it is difficult to catch everything she says, as she rarely takes any pauses so the entire lecture is just a cacophony of laptop keyboards clicking away, where people desperately try to note down all the info. As such, DO NOT skip any lectures, as there are no webcasts.
The content spans from the Ancien Regime all the way to the Russian Revolution, and covers notable topics such as the Enlightenment, the Industrial Revolution and The French Revolution. Too ambitious, if you ask me. Most topics are just taught at the surface level, but as I’ve said, you never know what’s important and what’s not, since there is no organisation of info. To be honest, I wish I had taken another module, as this was an utter waste of my time and totally not worth the effort.
Assessment
Tutorial participation: 20%
Mid terms: 20%
Group project: 20%
Finals: 40%
For tutorials, do not skip any, as there aren’t that many sessions to begin with. Do try to participate, and it’s totally ok to be wrong, as most people just try to bullshit anyway. On top of that, there are a significant number of arrogant snobs with inflated egos, so do not be intimidated by them either, since most of them have no idea what they are talking about.
The mid terms involve MCQs, Identification questions, and Chronology questions. It’s really a hit-or-miss, as they tested really random facts. I didn’t study at all for it, and ended up with a less than ideal grade (deservedly).
The group project usually involves a conference centered around a particular historical events, and your group gets to act as a stakeholder. I would compare it to the style of Model United Nations, except a lot less organised and based on historical events rather than current affairs. The group portion involves a short write up, which should be no problem. Choosing your group mates is obviously very important. Luckily, I had 2 members who were interested in majoring in History/European studies, and hence were very active and enthusiastic about it. However, for the actual conference, you will be judged individually, so do speak up. Be ruthless, its a dog eat dog world out there. Most have very weak arguments, so it is easy to exploit that.
The finals take up 40%, so try to revise in advance if you’re keen on getting a good grade. I chose to revise on the day itself, which is obviously not ideal. However, one thing that I’ve noticed is that with these content based essays, it is actually better to study less (less being relative…), as it forces you to focus on the quality of your argument. Studying too much may backfire, as you may be tempted to vomit out all your facts during your essay. That being said, consistent studying is still required, as with any other module.
Workload
The workload for this module is VERY HEAVY due to the spread of the content. The group work is manageable, depending on your group mates of course. The content is taught in a haphazard manner, so be wary of that. Only choose this module if you want to major in European Studies, or if you have masochistic tendencies.
Source
EU1101E: Making of Modern Europe
This is a compulsory module for anyone looking to major in European studies. If you are simply trying to fulfil your FASS requirements, do NOT choose this. There is 1 lecture/week, and a 2h tutorial every odd week. However, do not be fooled though, as the workload is ridiculously heavy, and the tutorials do nothing in helping you understand the content better. Although I found the content to be intellectually engaging, the way in which it was taught was awful.
The lecturer, although a very nice and friendly lady, is unfortunately terrible at conducting lectures. Her ppt slides offer mere slivers of information, so >90% of the content comes directly from what she says during lecture. She tends to narrate instead of analysing the events/issues, so if you are weak in history, good luck to you. There is very little organisation of information, and I would compare her lectures to reading a Wikipedia page, except reading Wikipedia might actually do you more good than her lectures. Also, it is difficult to catch everything she says, as she rarely takes any pauses so the entire lecture is just a cacophony of laptop keyboards clicking away, where people desperately try to note down all the info. As such, DO NOT skip any lectures, as there are no webcasts.
The content spans from the Ancien Regime all the way to the Russian Revolution, and covers notable topics such as the Enlightenment, the Industrial Revolution and The French Revolution. Too ambitious, if you ask me. Most topics are just taught at the surface level, but as I’ve said, you never know what’s important and what’s not, since there is no organisation of info. To be honest, I wish I had taken another module, as this was an utter waste of my time and totally not worth the effort.
Assessment
Tutorial participation: 20%
Mid terms: 20%
Group project: 20%
Finals: 40%
For tutorials, do not skip any, as there aren’t that many sessions to begin with. Do try to participate, and it’s totally ok to be wrong, as most people just try to bullshit anyway. On top of that, there are a significant number of arrogant snobs with inflated egos, so do not be intimidated by them either, since most of them have no idea what they are talking about.
The mid terms involve MCQs, Identification questions, and Chronology questions. It’s really a hit-or-miss, as they tested really random facts. I didn’t study at all for it, and ended up with a less than ideal grade (deservedly).
The group project usually involves a conference centered around a particular historical events, and your group gets to act as a stakeholder. I would compare it to the style of Model United Nations, except a lot less organised and based on historical events rather than current affairs. The group portion involves a short write up, which should be no problem. Choosing your group mates is obviously very important. Luckily, I had 2 members who were interested in majoring in History/European studies, and hence were very active and enthusiastic about it. However, for the actual conference, you will be judged individually, so do speak up. Be ruthless, its a dog eat dog world out there. Most have very weak arguments, so it is easy to exploit that.
The finals take up 40%, so try to revise in advance if you’re keen on getting a good grade. I chose to revise on the day itself, which is obviously not ideal. However, one thing that I’ve noticed is that with these content based essays, it is actually better to study less (less being relative…), as it forces you to focus on the quality of your argument. Studying too much may backfire, as you may be tempted to vomit out all your facts during your essay. That being said, consistent studying is still required, as with any other module.
Workload
The workload for this module is VERY HEAVY due to the spread of the content. The group work is manageable, depending on your group mates of course. The content is taught in a haphazard manner, so be wary of that. Only choose this module if you want to major in European Studies, or if you have masochistic tendencies.
Source
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)