Myra’s marking is nothing like I’ve seen before. She does not take the time to read the work properly and gets many things wrong. Myra’s comments are commonly rude and condescending. She likes the sound of her own voice so never listens, and likes writing in red ink more than marking with detail and precision. She is rude and teaching style is horrible as it has no structure and no organisation. She can’t even make the ppt notes match her own notes on her ppt presentation.

This unit is taken by Myra Keep. The lectures are taught way too fast, making it very difficult to grasp the new material. Some things taught in class conflict with the reading material too. One of them is right or wrong (seems the book was correct). The lecture material was not well structured; many found Wikipedia provided more structure. Important aspects of Breecreek that were marked on, were not taught during class. Combine this with strict marking and it is counterproductive for student’s confidence and learning. Strict marking should go together with detailed teaching or actual teaching of the material that is going to be marked on. Questions in-class were either not answered, occasionally berated, or were told to be correct, only to be marked wrong later on. Marking for Breecreek was incredibly inconsistent across different Breecreek papers and appeared to have absolutely no structure to it. Actually, the marking was so inconsistent, it was quite simply ridiculous. The lecturer has a strong reputation for favouritism. There were clear and obvious mistakes in the marking, points were deducted for things that were simply not incorrect. In all honesty the marking is based on who she likes and who she does not and is made up accordingly. The work load of Breecreek was far too much, especially for those studying hydrology at the same time. To give the students the final report part with only seven days till the due date is completely counterproductive to learning and quite a silly thing to do. The final exam made little sense, many questions were worded badly and most didn’t understand what was being asked. On top of that, the exam covered only about 5% of the entire unit – it was a very poorly thought out and written exam; this was noted by all students. Some student/s have quit geology because of this unit and lecturer and many are trying to transfer to Curtin. Myra is also quite happy to fail students, so be fore warned. In summary this lecturer took a lot of joy and excitement in geology away from a lot students, her behaviour was atrocious and someone really needs to call her out to changer her ways.

The other comments are spot on. Poor teaching, unstructured content, excessive workload, marking was very inconsistent, assessment also based on things not taught. I agree metamorphic was 5 star but Structural stuff -4

It's really hard unit even tho you know some basic field geo stuff. Lots of contents are cramped, which is not really good way to study The metamorphic part after structural geo was really good (5stars for this)

Would not recommend as an elective or broadening unit as the workload is extreme. The infamous Bree Creek assignment is done in Processes, a quick google search of this assignment and you will quickly find out why the unit is demanding. Having said that, you do learn a lot of structural geology. A big step-up from Intro to Geology.