ATAR Notes: Forum
VCE Stuff => VCE Science => VCE Mathematics/Science/Technology => VCE Subjects + Help => VCE Biology => Topic started by: amar on January 05, 2010, 11:43:58 am
-
I hate biology
It's the worst subject ever.
You do all this work then they hardly even test you on (as much of) the knowledge (as other subjects)
that's why I am not going to put in even 10% of the effort i put into other subjects into biology
what's the best way of me to 'wing' biology?
my parents got me a tutor and the tutor expects me to do at least 5 multiple choice and 2 short answer questions per day.
If i fake doing it, it'll be obvious when I get tested.
he also shows the class all the results and makes it public.
it'll be really embarrassing for me if i don't do it.
what do VN?
-
easy: put effort in... do all the work...
there's no use asking us what to do if you already sure your not doing anything for it.
but i reckon biology is awesome:D
-
From what I've heard, you can do well in biology with minimal effort; provided that you enjoy the subject :)
-
You do all this work then they hardly even test you on (as much of) the knowledge (as other subjects)
I don't do bio, but still, isn't there some way to separate redundant information from useful information?
-
You do all this work then they hardly even test you on (as much of) the knowledge (as other subjects)
I don't do bio, but still, isn't there some way to separate redundant information from useful information?
It's quite hard. Well more specifically, it's quite hard to do so and do well at this subject. Those who strictly follow study guides don't do too well from my experience. Biology requires continual exposure to seemingly irrelevant case studies and applications given that most exam questions are based off such things and not theory straight from the textbook.
-
Why don't you just drop it. It's not a prerequisite for anything.
If you want an easy subject that you can "wing," then Further Maths is pretty good.
-
Why don't you just drop it. It's not a prerequisite for anything.
haha that's what I noticed when I first looked at prerequisites, I thought for sure that biology would be needed for medical stuff, and instead chem is everywhere.
-
really wish i did bio i love bio stiff cept for the cutting mice part....
I never had to do that.
Why don't you just drop it. It's not a prerequisite for anything.
haha that's what I noticed when I first looked at prerequisites, I thought for sure that biology would be needed for medical stuff, and instead chem is everywhere.
That's because you'll learn Biology inside the actual course, whereas the principles of Chem aren't taught at all.
-
really wish i did bio i love bio stiff cept for the cutting mice part....
I never had to do that.
Why don't you just drop it. It's not a prerequisite for anything.
haha that's what I noticed when I first looked at prerequisites, I thought for sure that biology would be needed for medical stuff, and instead chem is everywhere.
That's because you'll learn Biology inside the actual course, whereas the principles of Chem aren't taught at all.
Really? I thought that chem was a really big part of medicine because you have to know which substances that are harmless on their own that can be lethal when mixed together?
-
really wish i did bio i love bio stiff cept for the cutting mice part....
I never had to do that.
Why don't you just drop it. It's not a prerequisite for anything.
haha that's what I noticed when I first looked at prerequisites, I thought for sure that biology would be needed for medical stuff, and instead chem is everywhere.
That's because you'll learn Biology inside the actual course, whereas the principles of Chem aren't taught at all.
O...surgeons have to learn about flowers? What?
I got turned off in Y10 because of flowers...
-
The fact that Biology is not a prerequisite for medicine leads me to believe that 98% of what you are taught in VCE Biology is crap, and hence why it is taught again from scratch at Uni.
kyzoo, you are right on! as if i'm going to waste my time learning about plants.
-
The fact that Biology is not a prerequisite for medicine leads me to believe that 98% of what you are taught in VCE Biology is crap, and hence why it is taught again from scratch at Uni.
kyzoo, you are right on! as if i'm going to waste my time learning about plants.
Evolution is crap. The other 75% I've all used though. Chem jumps straight to the pharmacy side of things; it's not that we don't learn Chem, it's that we just skip everything that was in VCE. The chem is mixed with Biology anyway though. It becomes quite hard to separate the two.
-
Thanks for clearing that up shinny.
You are also correct. Chem and Bio do seem to overlap quite a lot.
-
yeah chem and bio go very well together
-
^ only in 3/4 with all this stuff about DNA, carbohydrates, proteins, fat, etc. There's little connection between 1/2 Chem and biology.
-
Yep but the fundamental principles of chemistry taught in 1/2 are useful for biology, specifically for biochemistry. All the stuff on organic molecules in 1/2 also helps. There is a nice overlap.
-
All the biology-related stuff in chem makes me really regret I elected to do it.
-
All the biology-related stuff in chem makes me really regret I elected to do it.
Why?
-
All the biology-related stuff in chem makes me really regret I elected to do it.
Thats the only reason im excited about chem :P. I can atleast try to drop some bio knowledge on all the chem nerds in my class cause like no one has except one of my good friends. So then I can be like bam bam. DNA and what not :P
-
i would just like to say that i agree with you, and biology sucks !!
i think i am gonna drop it - yay :D
-
biology sucks =P (because i didn't do good in it ) and my brain hurt
-
i think biology is a good subject. if you get it, find it interesting and concentrate/follow on in class you'll probably find that minimal external work is required (apart from a bit of revision). that said, if you find it interesting, you may find that you dont mind doing the work so much... i definitely enjoyed biology as a subject a lot.
-
so my advice would be try to understand and think about everything as you learn it and you shouldn't find it too bad. any issues (which if you're thinking in depth, you should have, contrary to popular VN opinion) just post them up here.
-
i think biology is a good subject. if you get it, find it interesting and concentrate/follow on in class you'll probably find that minimal external work is required (apart from a bit of revision). that said, if you find it interesting, you may find that you dont mind doing the work so much... i definitely enjoyed biology as a subject a lot. So my advice would be try to understand and think about everything as you learn it and you shouldn't find it too bad. any issues (which if you're thinking in depth, you should have, contrary to popular VN opinion) just post them up here.
+1
-
All the biology-related stuff in chem makes me really regret I elected to do it.
Even though I decided in Y10 that I was averse to Biology, I couldn't help but find this "biology-related stuff in chem" the most fascinating component of Chem 3/4 I've encountered so far. Terms like mono-saccharides seem intimidating at first, but it's mesmerizing once you understand it. You're learning about the stuff that makes food and humans, it's very relevant to rl =)
-
That's the thing, though. I have almost no interest in real-life applications and memorizing a tonne of stuff about how the body works just turns me off. It's more tedious than difficult, really. This is why I prefer physics and maths, and even then certain topics that tend towards application like circuitry I am not fond of. I like the theoretical part of chem: why things react, the technical details describing it, theories about the nature of matter, etc etc, but when it comes to learning 6-7 different spectroscopy techniques, I want to fall asleep.
Hell, that might even be a way to cure my sleep problems...
-
^ I think I understand you.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you are fond of hard to understand but easy to remember abstract systems that have a logical pattern to them, rather than arbitrary "human-made information" that is easy to understand but hard to remember.
-
Close enough.
I just fail to see the intellectual merit in memorizing information and regurgitating it on a paper.
-
Close enough.
I just fail to see the intellectual merit in memorizing information and regurgitating it on a paper.
Oh biology has its own paradigms (and dogmas) if you go far enough. I see where you are coming from though, however I don't think biology is rote learning or memorization and neither are the spectroscopic techniques in chemistry. For spectroscopy, you have to learn the basic principles, and then from those basic principles you have to learn how to use them. It is incredibly relevant to further progress in the chemistry field and is actually very interesting. I took a lot of joy out of getting a mass spectrum, IR spectrum and NMR and % compositions and being told to go ahead and draw out the structure. It felt like I was doing something for a change.
For biology, at first I was a bit daunted by it as well. I think it was during yr 9 that I started exploring as I had to pick what 1/2 I wanted to study in yr 10 and at first I was put off pretty quickly. But in reality the brain has the capacity to understand all those things and make the long words just seem second nature. If you understand the central dogma of molecular biology (essentially: DNA --> RNA --> protein, with some exceptions) and how it occurs then you understand the structure and function of many of the components of a cell. Similarly, if you understand the basic concept of 'structure determines function' then you make it a lot easier to understand aspects of molecular biology. I also enjoy biology because it relates to our own existence: our own structure and function and is pretty much the basis for all medicine, all evolutionary theory and all our knowledge about the way life works.
-
^
I have looked through the entire course for biol, and sorry i'll have to disagree with "i don't think biology is rote learning or memorization". there are a lot of parts of biol that must be memorised, however unlike legal/psych, it does not have to be close to perfect. understanding it certainly aids in the memorisation of some parts, but others require a ROTE learned answer.
-
^
I have looked through the entire course for biol, and sorry i'll have to disagree with "i don't think biology is rote learning or memorization". there are a lot of parts of biol that must be memorised, however unlike legal/psych, it does not have to be close to perfect. understanding it certainly aids in the memorisation of some parts, but others require a ROTE learned answer.
We'll agree to disagree then. I got through biol in year 11 with minimal rote learning and memorization. The only part I remember specifically rote learning were plant hormones. Although maybe we've got disparate definitions of memorization. What I'm saying is that for areas like the immune system in unit 3 or meiosis in unit 4, I remembered it all in terms of knowing every step and what occurs, but I never sat down to memorize it, rather I just watched videos/animations, made notes, read through a couple of extra biology resources and just understood it and so knew every step. Whereas for plant hormones I had to sit down and memorize the names, functions etc. and then check whether I knew everything.
I do agree that there is a lot to learn in biology though.
-
^
I have looked through the entire course for biol, and sorry i'll have to disagree with "i don't think biology is rote learning or memorization". there are a lot of parts of biol that must be memorised, however unlike legal/psych, it does not have to be close to perfect. understanding it certainly aids in the memorisation of some parts, but others require a ROTE learned answer.
We'll agree to disagree then. I got through biol in year 11 with minimal rote learning and memorization. The only part I remember specifically rote learning were plant hormones. Although maybe we've got disparate definitions of memorization. What I'm saying is that for areas like the immune system in unit 3 or meiosis in unit 4, I remembered it all in terms of knowing every step and what occurs, but I never sat down to memorize it, rather I just watched videos/animations, made notes, read through a couple of extra biology resources and just understood it and so knew every step. Whereas for plant hormones I had to sit down and memorize the names, functions etc. and then check whether I knew everything.
I do agree that there is a lot to learn in biology though.
No one understands how conceptual Biology actually is until they actually start doing VCAA exams. Same thing happened to me; took me by surprise really and I had to jump back and reinforce these concepts despite having rote learned most of what I needed in the course.
-
^ hmm i see. i guess i shouldn't comment too much about it since i haven't actually done the subject yet. but i'm hoping its much less ROTE learning than it appears to be.
-
^
I have looked through the entire course for biol, and sorry i'll have to disagree with "i don't think biology is rote learning or memorization". there are a lot of parts of biol that must be memorised, however unlike legal/psych, it does not have to be close to perfect. understanding it certainly aids in the memorisation of some parts, but others require a ROTE learned answer.
We'll agree to disagree then. I got through biol in year 11 with minimal rote learning and memorization. The only part I remember specifically rote learning were plant hormones. Although maybe we've got disparate definitions of memorization. What I'm saying is that for areas like the immune system in unit 3 or meiosis in unit 4, I remembered it all in terms of knowing every step and what occurs, but I never sat down to memorize it, rather I just watched videos/animations, made notes, read through a couple of extra biology resources and just understood it and so knew every step. Whereas for plant hormones I had to sit down and memorize the names, functions etc. and then check whether I knew everything.
I do agree that there is a lot to learn in biology though.
No one understands how conceptual Biology actually is until they actually start doing VCAA exams. Same thing happened to me; took me by surprise really and I had to jump back and reinforce these concepts despite having rote learned most of what I needed in the course.
Yeah, there is little chance that you get through bio with a high study score if you expect to regurgitate rote learned definitions and answers in the exam. They give you all sorts of random applications, many of which are sort of going off the course, and you just have to use the concepts that you have learned and extend them to new places. It's really hard to predict what questions will appear as well, because of that variety.
-
^ yeah i guess.
i'll just try and do heaps of prac exams then after knowing everything to ensure i can apply it all correctly.
-
What NE said about regurgitating rote-learned answers applies to every subject. Additionally, it's much more engaging and easier to holistically understand concepts; whereas it's more stressful and monotonous to memorize tons of answers word-by-word, not to add less effective.
-
What NE said about regurgitating rote-learned answers applies to every subject.
Except Business Management.
-
What NE said about regurgitating rote-learned answers applies to every subject.
Except Business Management.
Wait, do you mean that you don't have to rote-learn for every subject?
I think you are mistaken & if so, there's no way to do even 'alright' in a subject like Psychology, Legal studies, Ect unless you sit down and rote-learn word-for-word answers......
-
What NE said about regurgitating rote-learned answers applies to every subject.
Except Business Management.
Wait, do you mean that you don't have to rote-learn for every subject?
I think you are mistaken & if so, there's no way to do even 'alright' in a subject like Psychology, Legal studies, Ect unless you sit down and rote-learn word-for-word answers......
What he meant is that you can't rely on rote-learning alone to get those scores. Every subject will have some degree if rote-learning, except possibly Maths.
-
^ oh yeah this is definitely true. but since i did psych, i know that you have to rote learn everything and then do heaps of prac exams to do well. i can't imagine for any subj memorisation being enough. practice of application and such is needed !
-
yeah rote learning in biol will definatley only get you an A on each exam. To push for that A+ you need to be able to apply really broad and convoluted concepts to much more specific yet even more convoluted situations.
-
Are you sure? Hardly any textbook information (besides case studies) can be directly related to exam questions.
-
Just for the record, I never implied that chem/bio is solely memory/"rote-learning". All I mean is there's enough that I dislike the subject.
-
I don't think the difference between chem/phys and bio is really one of rote-learning or not - that is, after all, just one method of learning, which students may use or not use as they wish. I do think, however, that bio tends to emphasise so-called "declarative knowledge" rather than "procedural knowledge" - i.e., in bio, it is more important that you _know a fact_, rather than know _how_ to solve a problem. In chemistry, I found it was distressingly the opposite - it was the method that was more important.
I think the phrase "rote learning" slightly obscures this fact, as its certainly possible to "rote-learn" chemistry to some degree - i.e., to know how to manipulate all the data to solve the problem, but have no idea what any of it actually means.
-
sorry vexx but i'll have to disagree with you. as with almost any subject, a degree of memorisation is required in order to be able to intellectually discuss the subject matter. however, in order to understand and delve into the questions asked of biology students requires a level of understanding which i feel is higher than that of, say, chemistry, which i felt was more or less completely rote, or logic, or a combination of the two.
at kyzoo, if you managed to find the small parts of biochem present in the chemistry 3/4 course interesting, i think biology 3/4 would definitely appeal to you. i thought it was great, and really interesting (unlike chemistry, which i thought was relatively straight forward, but boring)
-
^ lol I am also entranced by the puzzles to be solved in Chem when you are given are given data, and need to figure something out from the data such as concentration, structure, or something along those lines.
-
^ lol I am also entranced by the puzzles to be solved in Chem when you are given are given data, and need to figure something out from the data such as concentration, structure, or something along those lines.
haha I wouldn't consider them as puzzles
-
sorry vexx but i'll have to disagree with you. as with almost any subject, a degree of memorisation is required in order to be able to intellectually discuss the subject matter. however, in order to understand and delve into the questions asked of biology students requires a level of understanding which i feel is higher than that of, say, chemistry, which i felt was more or less completely rote, or logic, or a combination of the two.
yeah i have noticed that bio is harder then chem due to some of the ambiguous application questions i have already encountered in year 11. whereas chem is much more straightforward but with more complicated concepts (with exception to unit 3 bio's respirations & photosynthesis, which i have yet to fully understand) otherwise the course of bio appears rather basic, so the exams must be much more difficult to compensate. (i have been through the unit 3 chem course, and briefly the unit 3 bio course)
since you appear to agree that bio is harder, how come you were able to do better at bio by quite a lot? or was that just due to the time you spent on bio and such?
-
well, i did biol in year 11, and really enjoyed it - chem required minimal work because i understood the concepts more or less first off, and didnt rememeber formulas really. im not entirely sure why i didnt do a bit better in chemistry, because i got A+ in everything, but my guess is that chemistry is much more competitive for marks, and so any silly mistakes i would have made (of which there would have been many) would have counted significantly against me. to be honest though i found biology hard because of the ambiguity, but it was exam technique that brought me down in both subjects, because i knew the courses (and understood them) both completely.
re: photosynthesis and respiration, thats exactly what im talking about - theres nothing really like that in chem, and such a relevant and in-depth concept is why i found biology interesting. now i hate to admit this, because its such a shame, but in the VCE biology course an extensive in-depth understanding isnt necessarily required (although i always made sure i did just in case, for peace of mind, and because i was interested). to beat the exam just know the ins and outs, energy produced at different stages, and where they occur, more or less... :(
-
hmmmm i see. well you did very well overall so no need to think you should have done better!
did you do a lot of prac exams for both of them?
ah ok thanks for that, i think i saw - those were the only things that shinny had wrote about each process in his notes, i may go read them now to check. it doesn't actually seem like there's that much to know from what i recall, but it just looks confusing. haha
-
well exactly - i was a little disappointed with individual subjects, but overall i did much better than i was expecting so i cant complain. any chem or biol help lemme know :) yeh i did heaps of praccy exams for both, more for biol (i found chem a bit repetitive after awhile). in most subjects my advice for revision would be a) know the content b) do every exam you can get
-
well exactly - i was a little disappointed with individual subjects, but overall i did much better than i was expecting so i cant complain. any chem or biol help lemme know :) yeh i did heaps of praccy exams for both, more for biol (i found chem a bit repetitive after awhile). in most subjects my advice for revision would be a) know the content b) do every exam you can get
thank you:)
i am aiming for a bio/chem score close to what you got for bio, so i will have to work hard and know all the content. definitely will do heaps of biol exams, there are plenty around VN so that should be fine.
&surely you cannot be too disappointed with German, PE & English they are pretty much perfect (except English which IS perfect ha).
so how many prac exams did you do during unit 3 for bio? (just to know how many to get a score like 47) did you spend a lot of time writing out notes and going through theory?
-
by the time exams come around, you'll more or less know the content - i did a bit of specific revision (e.g. respiration) so that i knew that i knew the specific and random little factgs which may come up on exams. i did a lot of practice ones, but once you do enough even they will only help so much - i feel that, even if i had done more practice exams for biol, i wouldnt've done any better.
-
by the time exams come around, you'll more or less know the content - i did a bit of specific revision (e.g. respiration) so that i knew that i knew the specific and random little factgs which may come up on exams. i did a lot of practice ones, but once you do enough even they will only help so much - i feel that, even if i had done more practice exams for biol, i wouldnt've done any better.
ooo kk thanks for your help.
i guess ill just try and understand all the content during the semester and start doing as many prac exams as possible. hopefully i get a score like yours! haha.
-
well good luck for med :) its what my sister's doing but personally wouldnt be for me. again, if i can help in any way get onto me.
-
well good luck for med :) its what my sister's doing but personally wouldnt be for me. again, if i can help in any way get onto me.
thanks:) ooh well done to your sis for getting in!
what are you considering to do? you pretty much can get into anything!!
-
Why is it that biology doesn't get scaled up as much as say, chemistry? It isn't that easy :( I guess it's just that the competition isn't as high, but I dunno...
Looking forward to it this year though as it'll be much more interesting that 1/2!
-
Why is it that biology doesn't get scaled up as much as say, chemistry? It isn't that easy :( I guess it's just that the competition isn't as high, but I dunno...
Looking forward to it this year though as it'll be much more interesting that 1/2!
yeah the competition isn't as high as chemistry or physics, but i'm quite excited too - 1/2 was one of my fav classes, so this year shall be very interesting from what i've read so far:)
-
less scaling is because you CAN get a reasonable grade (e.g. B) without much work at all, so in comparison its easier to get an ok grade in biol than chem, because the basics are maybe a bit easier than chemistry. getting mid to high forties, however, is competitve in any subject, but particularly biology, and requires much more work than scaling would imply.
I will (probably :P) do science/law at monash, which i'm really looking forward to. science will probably be mainly biology/biochem or environmental...
-
less scaling is because you CAN get a reasonable grade (e.g. B) without much work at all, so in comparison its easier to get an ok grade in biol than chem, because the basics are maybe a bit easier than chemistry. getting mid to high forties, however, is competitve in any subject, but particularly biology, and requires much more work than scaling would imply.
I will (probably :P) do science/law at monash, which i'm really looking forward to. science will probably be mainly biology/biochem or environmental...
oooh, have fun with that :)!!
-
i willlll im excited XD
-
Why is it that biology doesn't get scaled up as much as say, chemistry? It isn't that easy :( I guess it's just that the competition isn't as high, but I dunno...
Looking forward to it this year though as it'll be much more interesting that 1/2!
yeah the competition isn't as high as chemistry or physics, but i'm quite excited too - 1/2 was one of my fav classes, so this year shall be very interesting from what i've read so far:)
yeah i'm really interested in the immune system etc. so i'm hoping i won't get disappointed :) what textbooks are everybody using? i'm using heinemann (notorious for many errors in their textbooks ..)
-
less scaling is because you CAN get a reasonable grade (e.g. B) without much work at all, so in comparison its easier to get an ok grade in biol than chem, because the basics are maybe a bit easier than chemistry. getting mid to high forties, however, is competitve in any subject, but particularly biology, and requires much more work than scaling would imply.
I will (probably :P) do science/law at monash, which i'm really looking forward to. science will probably be mainly biology/biochem or environmental...
hmm i think i agree with you there, my friend who did it didn't try very hard and got a B (midyear), and then an A (end of year) and got 36 as a study score which isnt too bad considering the effort put in! but yeah a lot of work has to be put into biology, i better get cracking :P
-
yeah i'm really interested in the immune system etc. so i'm hoping i won't get disappointed :) what textbooks are everybody using? i'm using heinemann (notorious for many errors in their textbooks ..)
+1
heres a link with lots of updated news articles about immunology
http://www.topix.com/science/immunology
-
yeah i'm really interested in the immune system etc. so i'm hoping i won't get disappointed :) what textbooks are everybody using? i'm using heinemann (notorious for many errors in their textbooks ..)
+1
heres a link with lots of updated news articles about immunology
http://www.topix.com/science/immunology
Interesting, bookmarked to do some reading :P
-
yeah some new developments
theres also a microbio one too
http://www.topix.com/science/microbiology
-
yeah i'm really interested in the immune system etc. so i'm hoping i won't get disappointed :) what textbooks are everybody using? i'm using heinemann (notorious for many errors in their textbooks ..)
+1
heres a link with lots of updated news articles about immunology
http://www.topix.com/science/immunology
Thank yeah i'm really interested in the immune system etc. so i'm hoping i won't get disappointed :) what textbooks are everybody using? i'm using heinemann (notorious for many errors in their textbooks ..)
+1
heres a link with lots of updated news articles about immunology
http://www.topix.com/science/immunology
Interesting, bookmarked to do some reading :P
Bookmarked too :)