Category Archives: Course Reviews

Course Review: SCIE 113

Leave a reply

First-Year Seminar in Science

“So we are now going to review your review of the reviewer” 

Text: (non-CPR version)

Prof: Dr John Sherman

Dr Sherman is a no-nonsense, but laid-back prof. I have a feeling he skimmed over a lot of material that is part of the curriculum of this course, so that we could focus on writing more. If you are not happy with your grade on your rough draft, keep revising and send it back to him. He is really helpful that way. The TA, Vivienne, was also really helpful and supportive.

Difficulty

This course was pretty chill. If you have difficulty writing, you might have to put slightly more work in. But the work-load is less then most writing classes. Most of the time you are either preparing for an in class writing, editing an in class writing, or giving feedback on another students writing. Every now and then there is some sort of discussion on the scientific method and research, but they require little, if at all, preparation. The term project can be a lot of work, so getting started and getting teacher feedback ASAP is important.

Key Concepts

Scientific arguments

Scientific Method

Hard Concepts

How to construct a research paper: Term project is quite hard, especially if you pick your on thesis. There are so many pitfalls. My advice is to get as much input and feedback from TA and prof.

 

Conclusion

Our class was special in that we did no CPR, but in class reviewing. All in all, good course to improve on writing skills. I found the philosophy of science components of this course superficial and distracting from the main goal of improving writing. I am pretty sure that the marks on this course are higher than those in other first year English options.

Email, RSS Follow

Course Review: MATH 121

Leave a reply

Honours Integral Calculus 

“Some of the best ideas in mathematics have been very simple ideas”

Text: Robert A. Adams and Christopher Essex: Calculus: Single Variable, 8th Edition, Pearson, Toronto, 2013

Prof: Dr. Young-Heon Kim

Professor Kim is a boss. He challenges us. He aims to make us understand the mathematical thinking behind a proof. He also promised us that if we worked hard and understood the basics, we should get an A, which was probably realized for most people who worked hard at the end of the term. He answers questions generally patiently and tries to sense if the class is understanding what he is doing, instead of just droning on. Highlights of the class:

On the first class. “I looked at the textbook we are using for this course. It was very disappointing. The questions are too easy.”

“Why are you guys looking so dumb today?”

“Let this by a probability distribution of the midterm. As you can see, it isn’t very high.”

Kim: “Should we do this problem this way or that way? It’s a matter of taste.” Student: “So it doesn’t matter?” Kim: “No. TASTE MATTERS A LOT!”

“Hey! doesn’t this parametric curve look like Picasso?”

Near the end of the course. “I just realized that you guys have been working very hard for this course. Please don’t ignore your other subjects. How come nobody complained? Whenever anyone comes to speak to me, it seems like you are saying “please give me more work”.

Difficulty

This course was significantly harder than Math 120. For example. the average on the first homework was 6/15, but it improved dramatically over the course of the term. Midterms were conceptually challenging but only trivial computations. The prof loved to mix multiple concepts into one question. There was generally one proof on every exam. There were often proofs on the weekly homework, and these were significantly more challenging than the ones in the exam. The questions used to nag me for days. The Final exam was 40% of Math 101 stuff and the average was scaled to 75-78. So if you work throughout the course, and make sure you understand the basics well, you should get an A. 16/29 students achieved an A.

Key Concepts

The (Riemann) Integral

Sequences and Series

The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus

Convergence

Hard Concepts

Riemann Integral: Defining integration in terms of epsilons and partitions. Similar to limit definition, but the hard part is the mathematics, not just the logic.

Probability: Some of the harder questions are difficult to wrap one’s head around, especially on the homework, where we had to find the probability of a series converging. One way is to think of probability as mass.

Functions defined by series: Last question on final was a function defined by a series of functions defined by a sequence. Can get pretty meta. One way is to look at how output function is changing with a small change in x, to understand.

Polar Co-ordinates/Parametric: Drawing, finding derivatives etc can get pretty computationally challenging and technical. But there is a step-by-step process one can follow. Also, to find parametric function it is a good idea to divide motion into motion of the centre of mass and motion relative to the centre of mass.

Centre-of-Mass: Some pretty crazy mass distributions. Make sure to define axis etc clearly, and not to change it during the course of the calculation.

Volumes by slicing: Can get pretty hard to imagine. Might require good 3D geometry imagination skills.

 Conclusion

Great course.  I wasted a lot of time studying for the first two midterms by practicing too many questions from the book. It was better for me to just try to understand the concepts. The homework problems were challenging but rewarding. The Webwork was a bore, but that is in Math 101 anyway, so you can’t escape it. Some aspects of the course were a bit rushed, but that is to be expected with an honors course. I would recommend it to anyone who wants to really improve their understanding of mathematics.

 

Email, RSS Follow

Course Review: PHIL 220A

Leave a reply

Symbolic Logic I 

“Not-not is not the same as not-not-not-not. But they are equivalent.”

Text: (Logic 2010 Software + Textbook)

Prof: Dr Roberta Ballarin

Roberta Ballarin seemed like she knew her onions. I had very limited interaction with her. One of the two times she spoke to me was to reprimand me, because she thought I started the exam when I was writing my name :P. There were a few interesting points raised in lectures regarding the philosophical implications of logic, but most of the lectures were practice problem sessions.

Difficulty

In comparison to Comp Sci, Physics and Math classes, the weekly problem sets were generally a breeze in terms of length and difficulty. Part of the reason I found this course easy was because I had covered similar material in CPSC 121. That said, if you have not taken anything vaguely computational in while, this course could take more time than you anticipated. Further, even if you do find the concepts easy, one cannot expect to succeed this course without any effort at understanding the material. All the midterms/final were fine if one did the homework and practised a few extra problems by hand. The first midterm was especially easy.

Key Concepts

Propositional Logic

Predicate Logic

Hard Concepts

Symbolizations with predicates: These can get really nasty. One has to symbolize really convoluted English sentences. Make sure you learn the how to deal with specific phrases and connectors.

Derivation with free variables: Tricky. Best to eliminate the free variable using tricks outlined in the software.

Software

Logic 2010 is the name of the software. Some aspects of it are pretty neat, but others are poorly designed. One thing I wish I knew earlier was ‘direct’ symbolization. In any case, later on in the course, the software will start to reject correct symbolizations of sentences, making it pretty useless. The only way to get around this is to try to figure out what the computer wants and only use that. The online book is pretty dry. But there are some useful hints interspersed in the various documentation attached to the software. But it might require some digging.

 Conclusion

If I had known the nature of this course, given that I had already taken CPSC 121, I would not have taken it. It does go a little deeper into logic then CPSC 121 though, so that might make it worthwhile for some. I did find the topic interesting. I just felt another course might have used my time more efficiently. Additionally, If you are student used to crunching through problem sets and are looking for an arts elective that is a grade booster, this could easily help you out.

Email, RSS Follow

Course Review: CPSC 110

Leave a reply

Computation, Programs, and Programming 

“Trust the natural recursion!”

Text: (online videos via Coursera on Systematic Program Design)

Prof: Dr Ronald Garcia

Ron is a cool guy. Great sense of humour. He spent a lot of time answering basic questions and doing (generally) simplified examples which annoyed some, since they had already grasped the basics from the videos, and wanted him to explain the more complex aspects of the course. I didn’t mind, since I failed to fully grasp some of the basics from the videos. And sometimes Ron’s simplifications can be applied to a more complex setting. For example, the way he explained built in abstract functions was simple but did not leave out any nuances.

Difficulty

I worked very hard in this course. Some people who had serious prior programming experience, or got really addicted to programming once initiated by this course, found the assignments and tests a breeze. I did not. I got a very good result, but I think that was a result of generous scaling and a lot of hard work on my part. Problem sets are increasingly difficult. Though the first midterm is really easy if you made the faintest attempt to keep up with the material, the second midterm and the final are exponentially harder.

Key Concepts

HTDF recipe

HTDD recipe

Recursion

Abstraction

Hard Concepts

Work-list accumulators: Required me to fundamentally alter the way I saw the structure of  my template, which was a challenge. Lots of moving parts as well.

Back-tracking search over generated trees: Most finals have a question on this, pretty tough, with so many moving parts, but the structure is pretty repetitive.

Abstract fold functions: Making one is easy, but using one to solve a problem is a challenge. Requires practice, insight and being methodical.

Lab

Generally okay lab, since the TA’s are on hand to help. This was in stark contrast to the problem sets which are generally harder, and you have to work on individually. I found the first few labs super-simple, but the one’s after the first midterm increased dramatically in hardness. I generally did not come close to the the 3-hour mark, though many people often remained till the end and many others would finish ahead of me within the first 30 minutes.

 Conclusion

If you are not really  into programming, or have no serious programming experience, be prepared to work very hard to get the most out of this course. I honestly felt that the course was rushed and I didn’t have time to digest what I had learnt.

Email, RSS Follow

Course Review: CPSC 121

Leave a reply

Models of Computation

 “The laptop that you are using is a lot more powerful than a DFA!”

Text: Discrete Mathematics with Applications 4th Edition by S. Epp (see website for other options)

Prof: Dr George Tsiknis

George Tsiknis is the kindest prof in the world. His amazing accent, and personal warmth really leave an impression. He also has a great sense of humour. Its unfortunate that he had family emergency towards the end. Even though he was really going through a lot, he came to class and made sure we were ready for our final. Great guy. Some of the questions in the slides are worded vaguely, making it difficult to get the I-clickers, but they are only for participation anyway, so its all good.  Really willing to slow down and take questions if you need help, in class. I suppose tutorials and office hours must have been equally beneficial.

Difficulty

I get the sense that the topics on this course are very deep. That said, we skirt at the surface of most of these topics, and as a result, the course is quite straight-forward for the most part.

Key Concepts

Elementary Logic

Proof Strategies

Logic Circuits

Hard Concepts

Algorithm Efficiency: The rigorous definition is quite long-winding. Knowledge of Big-Oh notation from Calculus class could help.

Interpreting Sequential Circuits: I found these really tricky in the lab and on exams. They are kind of puzzle like problems- in that you either get them or you don’t- but you can spend a long time just making sense of what’s going on, even if you understand the fundamentals really well.

Predicate: Conceptually easy, but also easy to make careless mistakes or you can confused in half-way through your own translation.

Lab

Fun lab. I kinda freaked out the first few days since I had no clue how to operate a Magic Box or breadboard, but after a while the labs started making sense and I started to enjoy simulating circuits with Logism (which is freely downloadable, btw) or cracking circuit puzzles. Ultimately you simulate a working computer, but it is still a long way a way from the real deal. Pre-labs are not too intense. Most labs are with a partner, so efficient teamwork can get you done a lot faster.

 Conclusion

Fun course. Useful in learning basic logic, mathematical proof and simple models of a computer. But I get the feeling that the computer models we use are so simplified that they are ultimately interesting but have appear to have little real world application. I was waiting to connect what we learnt in class with my PC at home but that happened only superficially for me…The surprising immediate application I got out of this class were proof strategies that helped a lot in Math 121.

Email, RSS Follow

Course Review: PHYS 107

2 Replies

Enriched Physics I 

“In the same way that Calculus was invented for Mechanics, most of Mathematics was invented by physicists”

Text: Matter and Interactions Vol 1, Modern Mechanics 3rd Edition by Chabay and Sherwood

Prof: Dr. Ian Affleck

Google Ian Affleck. He’s got stuff named after him. Physics stuff. He’s a bad-ass.

Dr. Affleck was actually a lot humbler in person then you would expect. He doesn’t talk to his students as if he is an all-knowing-master. The in-class discussions are pretty useful, as are the tutorial discussions. The I-clickers come pretty fast though, so watch out! I lost many participation marks, overly engrossed in a discussion. Quite often during the lectures, there were large chunks of time when I had no clue what the prof was talking about, and neither did my neighbours. Dr. Affleck would sense that he had lost half the class at some point and would ask, optimistically, “Any questions?”. When no-one raised their hand because they could not sensibly articulate their wide-ranging confusion about what was going on, Dr. Affleck would continue, with renewed confidence. At the same time though, when I did my readings thoroughly and did the homework, I noticed that Dr. Affleck boiled down the concepts mentioned in the textbook to a simplicity and tangibility that was really rewarding when I got it, that is.

Difficulty

Not knowing what’s going on happened a lot to me in this class.  The readings are quite challenging and the lectures can be pretty out there. However, thanks to generous scaling, innovative grading and a final exam that focussed a lot more on high-school Physics, one can do quite well in this course. Some of the key concepts in this course are from high-school Physics, just generalized.

Key Concepts

Momentum Principle

Energy Principle

Angular Momentum Principle

Hard Concepts

Entropy: Though I didn’t include it in the key concepts, this is a fundamental concept within Physics and can it take a while to get your head around it

Angular momentum esp. gyroscopes: Angular momentum meets vector calculus for some crazy, yet rewarding Physics

Energy Quantization: Quantum physics can get pretty funky when there are multiple types of energies being quantized. Esp. with a ball-and-spring model of matter.

Collisions: Can involve some tricky geometry and hairy systems of equations

Relativity: Particles may suddenly start travelling at relativistic speeds rendering multiple carefully derived formulae useless. Intuition also fails you.  One has to use first principles.

 

Lab with Doug Bond and Joss Ives

Not so much Physics as a Statistics course. Not too much pre-lab but some experiments can be pretty repetitive. They attempted to prevent us from collaborating with our lab partners on lab notebooks and spreadsheets but it didn’t really prevent copying.

I suppose I will eventually be grateful for what I learned during those 3-hour chunks, but at this stage my memories are of frustration with Excel and a mercilessly fast learning and implementing speed. The statistical tools you learn are not rigorously proved, in stark contrast to the more theoretical physics class, which could peeve some, but I infer the lab is intentionally meant to be more “hands on”.

 Conclusion

Really rewarding course. Could change the way you see the mechanical processes in nature.

Email, RSS Follow

Course Review: MATH 120

Leave a reply

Honours Differential Calculus

“For any topic in mathematics, you just need to do a few ‘cute’ problems. Otherwise, your mind starts ‘turning'”

Text: Robert A. Adams and Christopher Essex: Calculus: Single Variable, 8th Edition, Pearson, Toronto, 2013.

Prof: Dr. Yue-Xian Li

The thing that I’ll remember the most from Dr. Li’s class were his bizarre one-line quips including:

“You should have asked me that question weeks ago! You are going to fail the midterm tomorrow!”

“How can you confuse a “gamma” with an “r”? The “gamma” looks like the thing you use to hang people!”

“I have some  videos I could show you… people driving on a bridge while it is collapsing… some really great videos”

“There is some theory behind this, but I don’t really understand the theory… let me show you how to get the solution though”

“My third-year students keeping making this mistake, but you guys are honours, so you shouldn’t have a problem”

Dr. Li is actually a mathematical biologist. He was alots of fun and very passionate. He was also really nice during office hours. The best part of his classes were when he deviated from the textbook a bit. That said, he took most of his examples  directly from the assigned readings in the textbook.

Difficulty

I am sure most people who takes this class are a bit apprehensive about the word honours. Is that apprehension justified? I am not so sure. I think that the key to this course is identifying the handful of additional/challenging concepts early on, and being prepared to put some extra effort into them. Both the midterms and the final were really fair, since the prof gave us very similar practice exams. I found the last few questions on the weekly homework pretty hard, though. I often had to think over the questions for a few days to understand them. I also tripped on an optimization question in the final, but I think that was just me…

Key Concepts

Limits

Derivatives

Mean-Value Theorem

Continuity

 Hard Concepts

Epsilon-delta Definition of Limit: Arguably  the hardest concept to understand quickly in the course. Make sure you understand the “logic” of it before diving into the math.

Proofs: Proofs often involving mean value theorem on tests, but anything course-related for homework.

Differential  Equations: Lots of Physics often involved, could be hard if that’s not your strongest subject.

Derivatives of inverses: Some of these questions can be computationally difficult and you can get really confused if you don’t notice that a function evaluated at its inverse is x.

Continuous and Differentiable Functions: Often involving piecewise functions with parameters. Its best to go back to definitions when dealing with either or both of these properties.

Chain rule: If you don’t like computation, some chain rule questions could bring you down. Its just a matter of practice and accuracy though. Not really smarts.

Optimization and Related Rates; If geometry’s not your strongest point, these could be a challenge. Once again, practice is key. ( I didn’t practice optimization enough for my final)

Conclusion

Great course, but be prepared to put in extra effort.

 

Email, RSS Follow