Taught by: Dr John Rhym
Name: Jeremy Hor
Content (Structure/Organization): 4
The course is divided into three main parts:
Part 1 focuses on film analysis, covering topics like cinematography and editing.
Part 2 focuses on the discourse around trauma in different fields such as psychology, political science, and even literature.
Part 3 focuses on more specifically on writing skills, and learning to fuse the two domains together for your papers.
I found the content very interesting, but YMMV.
There are two main assignments for the course, a film analysis paper due after Part 1, and a final paper due at the end of the semester. The final paper requires you to combine a film analysis together with a source synthesis - that is, using academic sources and picking out their arguments to support your thesis.
There are also 5 short essays spread throughout the semester. These are meant to practice the writing and organisational skills needed for your final paper.
Manageability of Workload: 3
Workload will be heavy as it is an NTW course [You can] expect late nights when assignments are due, especially if you have poor time management like me. Readings are given for majority of the classes, about 30 pages per class. However, do not worry if you cannot fully understand the reading by yourself, the Prof does go through in class and break down in arguments into easily digestible parts. Overall, despite it being heavier than other mods, with good time management and consistent effort it's really not that bad.
Ease/Difficulty of Attaining Grades:
Although the writing assignments make up majority of your grade, class participation as well as a presentation are opportunities to pull your grade up. It might be difficult to get an A as that requires exemplary work, but an A- is definitely achievable, Prof is strict but fair, and gives good feedback on your areas for improvement.
Learning Value/Recommendation: 5
Although film studies is probably something i would never touch again with a ten foot pole, it was still very interesting to understand the theory behind what captures our attention and evokes our emotions. In addition, it was really interesting to learn about trauma, as the course touches on how difficult it is to define trauma - despite us being able to identify it, it is surprisingly difficult to articulate what exactly it is. The second part of the course also gives you an insight into the field of academia, and how scholars think and respond to each other's ideas, be it building on or rejected an argument. Learning how to write effectively and coherently, connecting ideas across paragraphs to create a cohesive narrative is also an invaluable skill.
About the Instructor:
Prof John is very knowledgable in terms of film and writing. His feedback is very descriptive, and highlights the flaws in your argument. He is very open to emails and consults, and is willing to answer questions. In addition, he has a great sense of humour and will try to make class as interesting as possible even when the content gets dry. He is able to facilitate class discussions effectively, drawing together ideas produced by the students and building on them to get his point across.
Additional Comments/ Word of Advice:
Be prepare for class discussions, they are where you really understand the material and learn from your peers. Also don't be afraid to ask prof John questions. [Be] consistent with your work, don't rush assignments last minute like me.
Content (Structure/Organization): 4
The course is well-planned. The topics followed nicely one after another, so that you move onto the next topic without feeling overwhelmed. The first half of the semester mostly discussed film techniques, while the second half delve deeper into trauma theories. There are small writing assignments throughout the semester to apply the theoretical contents learned in class.
Manageability of Workload: 2
Though there are quite a lot of small writing assignments, they are manageable, (can be completed within one afternoon), and prof would set deadlines to match our preferences (e.g. avoiding exam periods). The final essay and the midterm analysis paper are the most time-consuming as it require consistent editing and changing and may even require you to discard your original ideas for completely new ideas.
Ease/Difficulty of Attaining Grades:
To do well and get a decent grade, you’ll need strong analysis and clear arguments in your essays, plus attention to detail when interpreting films, prof would be expecting that from you, however, he is a pretty fair marker. One of the advantage with having many small assignments is that it is okay if you don't do well in one or two of them. In fact, prof doesn't count the two small writing assignments with the lowest grade.
Learning Value/Recommendation: 5
The course felt really rewarding. It really pushed me to think deeper and come up with more sophisticated ideas. I also picked up valuable skills like writing structured analysis papers and conducting proper research.
About the Instructor:
The professor is quite knowledgeable, you can see that the prof knows a lot of the papers in this domain. During lessons, he can explain the concepts clearly and would help breaking down complex ideas in class. Also, he is super approachable; very responsive to emails, and is open to consultations. The consultations gave clear, constructive feedbacks, and prof is willing to help you brainstorm when you are stuck for ideas.
Content (Structure/Organization): 4
First time that prof is running this course, but it is pretty well structured due to his previous experience.
split it into 3 parts - we started with the thematic interpretation and formal analysis of films, then moved on to literature review and synthesis, before ending with the last research paper component, basically a synthesis of the first 2 parts.
prof makes it rather accessible for all, and does keep in mind that everyone probably has no idea of anything film studies related.
Accessibility and Assessment: 4
though the content does get dry at times (esp during literature review lectures), all the content is very accessible. prof makes sure that for 95% of the class which doesn't have any prior experience in film studies or writing papers, everyone can still catch up and learn effectively. prof is also open to consults etc to help us out with our essays / ideation, just approach him with some initial work done / something for him to work with.
Manageability of Workload: 2
heavy, prof gives a lot of small 250-300 word essays that require you to watch a whole movie before writing it. BUT that being said, he knows that the workload is high, and he is working to improve the syllabus and make it more manageable.
Ease/Difficulty of Attaining Grades:
ehh seems more liberal than other NTWs but still pretty average, he's very fair and gives good feedback for students to improve
Learning Value/Recommendation: 4
good
About the Instructor:
prof is super knowledgeable about what he teaches
Name: Chen Wyman (@wwaiiman)
Content (Structure/Organization): 4
Overall the course is very structured and the topics that were discussed over the semester were well-defined and clear. Over the course of the semester there were several cuts to the content because prof realised that he wouldn't be able to squeeze everything he wants to teach. Given that this is the first iteration of this mod at NUSC, the structure would slowly be set in stone.
Due to the nature of this course being more film-studies aligned, prof mainly lectures on the technicalities of analysing audio-visual work, whereas class discussions was mainly centered around the students' readings of the films, so there is a balance between what the prof and the class brings to the table.
Accessibility and Assessment: 5
Although the name of course "Screening Historical Trauma" can sound very heavy, but no prior background in literature, film studies, history, or psychology is needed. For the "screening part", prof will spend the first few weeks introducing the technical stuff on how to analyse films, like mise-en-scen, sound design, editing, etc. Whereas for the "historical trauma" part, the prof introduces us to trauma discourse from different disciplines, including psychology, literature, political science, and history. Overall nothing too technical.
Manageability of Workload: 4
For this course in particular I spent zero time doing the readings because the readings were mainly published as post-lecture supplementary content if you wanted to understand more about the concepts discussed during class. However, I spent the most time doing the mini-essays (or micro-themes). The prompts of the micro-themes are released at the end of one seminar, and you are expected to complete them before the next seminar so the prof can look through them and use them as discussion material. The prompts were not too complicated but for 3 of theme we were required to watch some films so that took a lot of time. Overall, the micro-themes weren't anything too complicated but it's the time constraint that puts quite some pressure.
For the essays, we had to write 3 essays, which sounds a lot, but prof structures the essays in a way that you can stitch your first two essays to form the third, or you could write three completely different and independent essays. Although I went with the first route to save me some time I ended up ditching everything and rewriting my third essay then deconstructed it to form my first two essays.
Overall the workload is not too heavy that you need to spend a lot of time understanding and grasping content, but time consuming because you have two write mini-essays often that require you to do some readings or watch some films.
Ease/Difficulty of Attaining Grades:
I don't think prof grades harsher or more lenient on average, but he is stricter when it comes to making observations and inferences from watching audio-visual material.
Learning Value/Recommendation: 4
This course is definitely a fresh breath of air compared to the sociology/politics/philosophy inclination that quite a number of NUSC mods have, so I definitely recommend taking it. I also managed to learn a lot about making observations and inferences through analysing different audio-visual works. All in all nice prof nice course.
About the Instructor:
Prof is definitely very well versed with the subject (he did English all the way from his Bachelors to Phd) and is very sharp when it comes to responding to arguments and claims being made in class discussions and written assignments. He is also a very nice guy that cracks random jokes and likes to point out observations about the differences between students in Singapore and the USA. I would probably take another course under him if ever offers one.