UNSW Subject Reviews. (7 Viewers)

[slyhunter]

FINS1613 wasn't that bad... Probably guessed around 30% of the test though... But that's me lol.

Said no one ever

 

[halapenyo]

lol seriously im probably going to end up ruing missing that first quiz really badly. at the time i thought fuck it they count best of three. but then quiz 4 happened and now this.

 

[BoredDude]

lol seriously im probably going to end up ruing missing that first quiz really badly. at the time i thought fuck it they count best of three. but then quiz 4 happened and now this.

Yea same here... So jealous of the guys who got 10/10s for the first 3 quizzes... I wonder when they're releasing quiz 4's marks..

 

[UNSWs]

Good game fins1613.

First make 4 quizzes that have a combined number of textbook relevant questions of about 1 (even the Challenge questions in the TB were difficult but could be solved based on the information in the chapters), then, don't give us any feedback for any of the quizzes, Ie. Do not give us the tests back so we can see what we got wrong/right, then, do not provide any past exams/practice questions for us, then, structure the entire exam exactly like the quizzes which have zero relevance to the textbook questions and could vaguely be related to the lecture slides at the best of times.

Why give us all the textbook practice questions each week if we are not going to be tested on any of the concepts, just a 7 answer long question about dividend rubbish that is the most unrealistic/totally non real world applicable shit you could ever dream up.

Top it off it takes weeks to mark a 3 question MCQ quiz.. Yeah A, D, E = correct, 5 seconds... But really who gives a shit anyway since you can't possibly guess what you got right or wrong..

There is obviously one screw up tutor or busy head lecturer, because I would guess with 99% certainty that it's one person holding the whole shit process up, and the exam was an exact regurgitation of last years which is why no practice was given to us.

Thanks Peter Anderson for all your slides and attempting to teach us the material of the course, unfortunately 100% of the effort was wasted because none of it actually showed up on any tests. How about put Peter as head lecturer and throw the guy with 55 university medals and 100 degrees out the fucking door because he can't do his job for shit.

fins1613- 1/10

 

[UNSWs]

Good game fins1613.

First make 4 quizzes that have a combined number of textbook relevant questions of about 1 (even the Challenge questions in the TB were difficult but could be solved based on the information in the chapters), then, don't give us any feedback for any of the quizzes, Ie. Do not give us the tests back so we can see what we got wrong/right, then, do not provide any past exams/practice questions for us, then, structure the entire exam exactly like the quizzes which have zero relevance to the textbook questions and could vaguely be related to the lecture slides at the best of times.

Why give us all the textbook practice questions each week if we are not going to be tested on any of the concepts, just a 7 answer long question about dividend rubbish that is the most unrealistic/totally non real world applicable shit you could ever dream up.

Top it off it takes weeks to mark a 3 question MCQ quiz.. Yeah A, D, E = correct, 5 seconds... But really who gives a shit anyway since you can't possibly guess what you got right or wrong..

There is obviously one screw up tutor or busy head lecturer, because I would guess with 99% certainty that it's one person holding the whole shit process up, and the exam was an exact regurgitation of last years which is why no practice was given to us.

Thanks Peter Anderson for all your slides and attempting to teach us the material of the course, unfortunately 100% of the effort was wasted because none of it actually showed up on any tests. How about put Peter as head lecturer and throw the guy with 55 university medals and 100 degrees out the fucking door because he can't do his job for shit.
<--- And no I don't mean he should be teaching us like in highschool, but if you are running fins1613 with the lecture slides provided and the book prescribed, don't test us on fins1614 ugh.
fins1613- 1/10

 

[halapenyo]

lol

 

[UNSWs]

Why give us all the textbook practice questions each week if we are not going to be tested on any of the concepts, just a 7 answer long question about dividend rubbish that is the most unrealistic/totally non real world applicable shit you could ever dream up.

Think I'm going to love this finance major... Can't wait to get out into the real world and advise somebody to sell 13% of their woolworths holding and reinvest the money in a 10% savings account that doesn't have taxes because I'm forecasting they are going to change their dividend this by -25% this year but then resume their perpetual 4c dividend next year, all so the fucker can maintain his desired D/E ratio.. Should be fun when my ass gets kicked out on the curb and told to go back to primary school.

 

[4025808]

tbh Peter Andersen was the guy who actually saved my rating of the subject from being lower than it would have been. Awesome guy. but all that effort put in was all ripped to shreds because nothing learned off him was even tested in the finals =_=

 

[4025808]

but seriously, is the stuff from fins1613 even going to be used in real life? a friend of mine doing FINS3625 (ACF) told me that the lecturer told the cohort to forget everything learned in FINS1612 and FINS1613 =_=

 

[maratyeu]

but seriously, is the stuff from fins1613 even going to be used in real life? a friend of mine doing FINS3625 (ACF) told me that the lecturer told the cohort to forget everything learned in FINS1612 and FINS1613 =_=

Thats true for any subject really.

Except for the definitions, the concepts you learn early on are over/simplified for you to grasp the processes and the way of thinking (logic/common sense).

 

[blindedinchains]

@UNSWs are you from a private school? you sound like its this guys job to spoonfeed you through uni

 

[blindedinchains]

a friend of mine doing FINS3625 (ACF) told me that the lecturer told the cohort to forget everything learned in FINS1612 and FINS1613 =_=

your friend couldn't be more wrong

1612/3 are broad and basic, but you still need half the maths from 1613 to understand the models in ACF

 

[UNSWs]

your friend couldn't be more wrong

1612/3 are broad and basic, but you still need half the maths from 1613 to understand the models in ACF

They are both trash, and 402 is correct we will not use a piece of financial theory other then NPV's, IRR's and sensitivity analysis in the real world..
My gripe is not with the university system of teaching, I'm annoyed at the style of the course.
'students will be given continuous feedback on their progression throughout the semester in the tutorial sessions and through tutorial quizzes', 4 quizzes that aren't returned to see what you got right or wrong, how is that feedback? Then an exam with no preparation questions (no this would not be a problem if the textbook questions actually coincided with what the lecturer dreamed up', of which we won't get to see what we get right or wrong (of course), so basically we end up with some mark out of 100 without the slightest fucking clue of whether we correctly understand certain parts of the course, whether we got lucky in guesses, or whether we got them wrong and in which case we should be given feedback so that we may correct our understandings of the 'fundamentals' of finance.

Do you think this is a good way to learn and worth $4000? I do not.

 

[wantingtoknow]

yeh, I don't like how they don't return the quizzes to us either. I mean, how hard is it to bring the test papers back to class...
but if you really wanted feedback that badly, why didn't you just book a consultation with your tutor

 

[kaz1]

they don't return quizzes because they recycle them duhh

 

[4025808]

they are both trash, and 402 is correct we will not use a piece of financial theory other then npv's, irr's and sensitivity analysis in the real world..
My gripe is not with the university system of teaching, i'm annoyed at the style of the course.
'students will be given continuous feedback on their progression throughout the semester in the tutorial sessions and through tutorial quizzes', 4 quizzes that aren't returned to see what you got right or wrong, how is that feedback? Then an exam with no preparation questions (no this would not be a problem if the textbook questions actually coincided with what the lecturer dreamed up', of which we won't get to see what we get right or wrong (of course), so basically we end up with some mark out of 100 without the slightest fucking clue of whether we correctly understand certain parts of the course, whether we got lucky in guesses, or whether we got them wrong and in which case we should be given feedback so that we may correct our understandings of the 'fundamentals' of finance.

Do you think this is a good way to learn and worth $4000? I do not.

LOLOLOLOL my goodness

 

[halapenyo]

4K? Is that the international student fee price?

nah thats the fee altogether for a semester for normal students.

international students pay a lot more.

 

[halapenyo]

they don't return quizzes because they recycle them duhh

if they were really worried we would not recycle them ourselves they should just give it to us in class and take it back at the end.

 

[UNSWs]

yeh, I don't like how they don't return the quizzes to us either. I mean, how hard is it to bring the test papers back to class...
but if you really wanted feedback that badly, why didn't you just book a consultation with your tutor

Yeah recycling is just a joke however, how long does it take to write 4 questions x 3 tests and just change the numbers around so there are multiple versions... and I'm on 30/30 for the tests so it doesn't matter, but I'm complaining about the appalling nature of the course, everything I learnt was due to a $50 second hand textbook, it had absolutely nothing to do with the mighty UNSW business school or our ultra intelligent lecturer. I could rock up to the tutorials 3 times for quizzes and show up for a final exam with the exact same result, slap it on those HELP's, uni sure is worth the fucking cost.

 

[halapenyo]

Yeah recycling is just a joke however, how long does it take to write 4 questions x 3 tests and just change the numbers around so there are multiple versions... and I'm on 30/30 for the tests so it doesn't matter, but I'm complaining about the appalling nature of the course, everything I learnt was due to a $50 second hand textbook, it had absolutely nothing to do with the mighty UNSW business school or our ultra intelligent lecturer. I could rock up to the tutorials 3 times for quizzes and show up for a final exam with the exact same result, slap it on those HELP's, uni sure is worth the fucking cost.

LOL wait a sec so you've been complaining this whole time about the course and you are sitting on 100%. that means the shit nature of the course you are talking about helped you.