This unit cannot be cramped and content can be difficult to understand. However, if you put LOADS of effort, could definitely score a high D or even HD. The first quiz that was weighted 15% (i think) was quite difficult and as said by previous students that gave reviews, yes, the cohort average was really low. The clinical report was quite challenging to grasp at first but constant reading, questions etc really helps. I thought I would get around 50s for this clinical report, but ended up scoring a 79 which i was so grateful for + surprising! Despite the difficult first quiz and challenging report, the exam was VERY fair (MCQs + 2 short answers). With the exam, we had little guidance in how to answer/respond to the short answers/type of short answers which was actually daunting. But the MCQs and short answer questions turned out to be straightforward and again, very fair, and I managed a 81. Both unit coordinators are very approachable. Overall, you have to take initiative in reading extra stuff, ask questions, extra research & more study.

For me personally, this was not an enjoyable unit as it was hard to engage with the content due to it not really being an area of interest to me. The unit consisted of one 2 hour lecture a week, which was crammed with a lot of information which then needed to be supplemented by a lot of textbook reading in order to gain understanding. The quiz which was early in the semester was received as quite challenging, with a low average and people said the difficulty didn't match the practice quizzes that were provided on LMS. The written assignment was a clinical report, which most psych students never had to do before and was a novel concept and therefore quite challenging despite having lab classes dedicated to the report. It would have been more helpful to see an example of a clinical report. The exam consisted of 60 MCQs which were easier than the first quiz, and also two 'long' answer questions with four options given for each, with the first question based on week's 1-7 of the semester and the second based on weeks 8-12. Again, no examples of what was expected were given, but we were told they would be based on the important themes/learning outcomes given in the lectures and I would say that that was accurate, so the questions weren't too unexpected and it wasn't too difficult to choose a topic to write on.

The overall content was interesting to learn, but the delivery and structure was terrible. Report lacked guidance - would be better with an example report in proper APA format they expect us to write in. Practise quizzes for each topic consisted of a limited pool of questions. Although this is good for practice for the multiple choice section of the exam, 2/3 of the exam is based around 2 short essay questions which we get no practice questions for. Asked the professor for some example questions and was just told that there was none. Overall I think it is unreasonable for the exam to be worth 55% of the grade when all you're told is that you will be writing 2 short essays + 60MCQ with no other context, not even a single example question. Tutorial classes (at the time I took this unit) only helped to write the report, and once the report was done, there were no classes for the rest of the semester. I think that weekly tutorials should continue throughout the whole duration of the semester, with the rest of the tutorials being used to help students with the final exam, with some example questions and even past papers. TL:DR - Interesting content, bad structure, lacked resources (example reports, past papers, example questions, etc.)

The lectures by Prof. Badcock were very informative; however, the other lectures of inferior quality. The assignment was terrible. They did not even provide an example essay to compare to.

Lab report focused on aspect ratios which I did not draw meaning from. Overall, the unit content was very dry. I performed better than expected eventually, but did not enjoy the process one bit. You might like it if you're really into neuroscience though.