I majored in biochemistry and this was the first (and only) health sciences course that I took during my undergrad.

The course (during the fall 2007 semester) was taught by four professors, each offering a slightly different approach to their teaching and injecting their own style into...

Click here to read the entire review

agreed, there are just a limited number of seats for non-health sci kids

Originally Posted by n_kissoon

agreed, there are just a limited number of seats for non-health sci kids

How many limited seats? This class isn't just for health science students. It's in my program's course list and I'm sure it's in others too.

there are maybe 300 people in the class, and less than 80 are in health sci from what I've seen. so tons of spots for science kids

its a new prof this year so what do you think?

Does anyone know if this course counts as a bio in order to do a minor in biology?

Originally Posted by gaitons

Does anyone know if this course counts as a bio in order to do a minor in biology?

I think they have to be part of the bio department. So I don't think it would count. Check with an academic advisor though.

Are tutorials mandatory for this course?

Originally Posted by nabiha.h

Are tutorials mandatory for this course?

From the review:

The grading scale is as follows: 10% tutorial, 2 midterms and a final. If I recall correctly, the midterms were 20% each and the final was worth 50%. The tutorial assignments were graded on a pass/fail basis and a complete rating on all three assignments is equivalent to a full 10% on the tutorial component.

Does anyone know what the final exam is like? Nothing specific please. A general feedback on the exam and some advice on possibly effective study strategies will be highly appreciated. Thanks in advance!

I took this course this past fall, and it was probably one of the best courses I've taken! I actually learned a lot from this class, although I wish the testing wasn't so much detail oriented.

There were 3-4 professors for this course, all were pretty good at explaining things - but Dr. Stampfli was probably the most funniest!

The assessments for this course consisted of 3 tutorial assignments (3x5%) = 15% - which were usually a page in length. The TAs were very specific with their marking of these assignments, and they mainly looked for key words for marks - so everyone did horribly on the first assignments, but eventually everyone caught on, and started to do better. They were a page in length.

There were 2 midterm tests in this course valued at 25% each (25%x2) = 50%. These midterms consisted of multiple choice questions, fill in the blanks, mix and matching, and short answers. One problem of both these midterms was that they were unquestionably long for the time we had to write them (50 minutes). A lot of people complained that they did not have enough time for both the midterms, and the average for the first one was ~67%. That being said, the grades for the first midterm were curved. After this, many people dropped the course. There was also a lot of drama on LL as there were alleged "post deletions" by the TAs, and responses by some TAs seemed to be condescending. The testing for both midterms were more straight up regurgitation, rather than understanding concepts... Note the TA's like diagrams and pictures rather than writing for the short answers.

The exam was probably one of the hardest things to prepare for in my undergraduate career. It was weighed at 35%. We were given 10 questions, which had to be answered in a similar fashion to the tutorial assignments. It was really difficult for this because there was little Fguidance given to the answers for the questions, and your studying was contingent on the quality of your answer prepared. I found it best to work in groups for this, and assign a different person a question and then collaborate. Four questions of the ten were chosen to be on the exam, and the TAs expected us to write 1.5 pages for each...

All in all, this was a really good course to take, especially if you are thinking of going into medicine. Immunology is a branch of science which has far wide implications in explaining many diseases, from auto-immunity, and is important for fighting infections against your run of the mill common colds and flu's. The course was pretty difficult to do well in, but if you put in the work, you will do well.

Is this course better or worse than 3K03? Is there anyone here who has taken both?

Originally Posted by doucetj

Is this course better or worse than 3K03? Is there anyone here who has taken both?

I heard 3k03 was easier but 3i03 is more interesting..

2 assignments for 5% each = either a pass or fail mark so as long as you've completed the 1 page and answered the questions you should get the full mark. This prepares you for the final exam.
2 midterms for 25% each = MC, fill in the blanks, T/F, short answer. Pretty straightforward.
1 final for 40% = we were given 10 long answer 1 page questions a week beforehand that were similar in style to the assignments, and on the final was 6 random ones from those 10 questions, so you have time to prepare your answer.

I would recommend buying the textbook because it really helped explain the concepts to me. My favourite prof of the 4 was Dr. Stamphli he really made things interesting. But Dr. Kaushic and Dr. Ashkar were quite confusing and I didn't quite understand until I went over it with the textbook. Dr. Rosenthal likes to prepare long lectures, realize he's running out of time, and rush through the last 10 slides, even if they're important >_<!

Overall, I really liked this course, it serves well as an introductory immunology course and I learned a lot!

PS. I've taken both 3K03 and 3I03. I liked 3I03 because it was more straightforward than 3K03, but 3K03 was more interesting because you learn a lot about each virus. I think they go well together though, so taking them together is a good idea. It's like learning two sides to the story, how the immune system acts (3I03), and how the virus evolves and attacks it (3K03).

Is 4I03 much harder than 3I03? I kinda want to take it but not at the expensive of lowering my cGPA

For the Fall 2011 term there were 4 professors responsible for lecturing our class, but there was really only 1 professor that I liked (Dr. Stampfli). He was the only one who made going to an 8:30/10:30 class worthy. The other 3 professors were really confusing and sometimes really hard to understand, which forced me to resort to the textbook to understand most of the material.

The two midterms we had I thought were fair and simple as long as you reviewed the details of your lecture notes. I felt the second midterm was much easier than the first (which was probably because most of the material was based on Dr. Stampfli's lectures).

The two assignments we did were not too hard. It was mostly just a pain to find time to do them since I had other midterms and assignments to do around the same time. I was a little confused on how to approach and start these assignments, but tutorials really helped me so I definitely recommend going to tutorials.

My only real problem with this course was the final exam. They gave us 10 days to prepare 10 1-page answers which was supposedly enough time. I personally did not feel it was enough time because I had 3 other exams before the immunology one. I had to do a lot of extra research to answer the questions, either looking through the whole textbook or using outside sources (i.e. articles) which took a lot of my time. I also stressed over the fact I had to remember all 10 of my answers because we weren't allowed to bring any cheat sheets or notes during the exam.

Looking at my final mark was shocking. I was doing consistently well throughout the term but because I did poorly on the exam, my grade dropped drastically. This was my first health sci course and I don't think I'll take another one again. Overall, I say the course was very disappointing.