JeaicMaG wrote: » Is the mark for first year just an average of all our marks? (PH1003 and Biology worth twice as much as the rest?) And then we get that percentage of the 10% going for first year? Like a 50% average gives you 5% etc.?
partyatmygaff wrote: » How hard is PH2009 marked? If the schols results are anything to go by, the standard needed for a good answer in PH2009 is sky-high. I wrote (what I thought) was a very good essay and almost (but not quite) made 60%. How did people fare last year?
Scortho wrote: » What's 2009 again? Harkin? My trouble last year was with 3 and 4. Therefore not too hard, but it depends what mark you're looking for!
partyatmygaff wrote: » Harkin yeah. 04 went by without a hitch on Tuesday. 03's on Monday, should be interesting... The entire class was terrified of biotech and a good of few us pulled all-nighters (i've been awake since 7AM yesterday and i'm studying PH2009 now). Turns out there was no need as all the material on the exam was material i'd studied at the start of April. Feel like such an idiot, wasted so many hours on that module for no good reason. Anyway... he gave most of the people who got schols in 40s-50s and very low 60s. I've got a feeling he marks the annuals a bit easier? Hopefully anyway, otherwise he must have impossibly high standards.
Scortho wrote: » Oh I feel your pain. I've had 2 hours sleep since yesterday. Studying radomski and Frankish in one day ain't good! Got a bit of s fright in thecq when i saw more frankish to radomski. Just had a sleep there now though before sitting into sasses 02 for the evening.
On Hawkins stuff, I knew the first 8 lectures going into the morning of the exam. Read the next few before the exam started at 2 o clock. I was only able to answer 2 of the 3 essays (due to lack if study) and the mcqs and left after an hour. Somehow ended up with 55. Not bad for a mornings work.
Tip for the mcq. It's true or false, so 50:50 chance of getting the mark. However examiners don't like asking negative questions in mcqs, especially true or false. It's easier for them to make up 7 false answers and mix them up amongst the paper. So if you don't know the answer guess true, as statistically it'll be in your favour.
partyatmygaff wrote: » I can only imagine how horrible all that must be. Course handbook doesn't make it sound all that appealing! That's pretty damn good for 2/3 essays and the MCQ. Each essay worth something like 18% of your total grade so you technically could've got a first had you done the third essay. Hopefully won't need that! Questions seem nice enough.
partyatmygaff wrote: » Two Quigley questions usually spells a pass! (Although looking at those PH3002 papers is quite scary, it looks hellish)
JeaicMaG wrote: » For the PH1006 MCQs what does it mean by "2nd statement is a correct explanation of the 1st". For example: First statement: The EU has a policy of supporting the development of Orphan Medicinal Products. Second statement: Orphan Medicinal Products are used in the management of rare diseases and it would not be profitable for companies to develop them without support. I think both are true but would the second be considered an explanation?
JeaicMaG wrote: » Hopeful Henman's question will reappear today :L Edit: It came up! Now to settle into my least favourite module 1002. Almost finished. The next two years seem like great craic btw :P
133Acrolein wrote: » harkin is prob one of the better markers/fairer markers.. 2 exams to go and I'm done with TCD pharmacy:P
partyatmygaff wrote: » Highlight of the next two years will probably be aseptics in PH3004 (save for the exam which probably won't be very fun...)
partyatmygaff wrote: » 4 more exams (PH2009 was beautiful today).
partyatmygaff wrote: » Wednesday 22nd May for me! 11 more days, 3 more exams. Oh yeah, there's talk going around that there may be something i'm sure you'll all be very interested in signing out sometime in the next two weeks. I'll say no more until then.
Scortho wrote: » Talk of something that will have little effect on 3rd years! And possibly you either.
JeaicMaG wrote: » What's this about? :P
partyatmygaff wrote: » I like the sound of that... Shame veterinary pharmacy is useless unless you're living out in the shticks and only 1 credit? Boo-urns.
partyatmygaff wrote: » You know what else reminded me of LC biology? The PH2003 exam today. The long question for pharmacognosy was based on the monograph (which was attached) for Senna and one of the questions was label the tissues in a few slides and comment on whether or not it complied. The second part was four of the pharmacognostic tests and the third gave 5 marks for calculating % content from an absorbance reading (2 seconds on a calculator as you know). The rest of paper wasn't as nice, granted but that was a nice question to open the paper to.
