Timothy Pang (@timothyy) AY25/26 Sem 1

About the Instructor

I genuinely looked forward to NTW class because the content was interesting and Prof Lo is great at facilitating discussion. He has been teaching this course for a decade(?) at this point and i think it shows in how he can predict how we are going to respond to the ideas he brings up. It also seems like his brain has 64gb of ram because he could seemingly remember everything each of us said and connect it seamlessly to the current discussion. 

He also organised mandatory consultation sessions for papers 1 and 3, where he would give feedback on an initial draft. I appreciated this because the initial draft was not graded. 

He was open to discussion regardless and was very sharp in evaluating ideas

Content (Structure/Organization)

In my opinion, the course covers 2 things: one is a discussion on tourism and authenticity, and the other how to write a research paper 

Tourism and authenticity:

I think that the title of the course is slightly misleading. I think that a more descriptive title would go something like "Cultural Tourism and Authenticity." The course begins with an overview of the history of tourism in Europe and America, but quickly delves into scholarly debates over the authenticity of tourism, the strategies some writers suggest to have an authentic experience, and the implications of the discussion of authenticity in relation to culture — e.g. is it right for an outsider to comment on the authenticity of a foreign culture?

Through tourism, the course pivots to a wider focus on authenticity. Is 'authenticity' always objective? What is authenticity defined in relation to? What does it mean to be an "authentic person"? 

I enjoyed the progressive discussion.

Writing a research paper: 

The course had 3 papers to be written: 

1. What is an argument worth arguing and how do we create a motive that proves that it is worth arguing 1-1.2k words

2. How do we (using the MLA format) work with sources to summarise their arguments and create a motive for our own arguments 1.4-1.8k words

3. Putting together parts 1 and 2 to write a research paper 2.8-3.5k words

You may have noticed that these are not research questions, because the topic for each paper was open. In fact, my final paper was neither about tourism, nor authenticity. The papers simply assess if you can demonstrate the required skills. Prof Lo put a lot of emphasis on forming our own arguments and deciding if it is worth arguing. While it gave me quite the headache coming up with interesting and arguable arguments, i found this to be a useful skill in my other NUSC and FASS mods. 

Manageability of Workload

i felt like i spent 8mc worth of time on this mod. some of the readings were really long and required close reading in order to participate meaningfully in class. beyond that, because of the open ended nature of the assignments, i spent hours thinking of suitable topics to write about. while it may be the nature of research, i found finding a topic harder than the actual writing. he does make an effort to streamline this process with pre-writing assignments, which helped us practice the skills needed/ brainstorm topics for the paper assignments. I still found them difficult nonetheless

Ease/Difficulty of Attaining Grades

I think that, as with other NTW courses, getting an A is... a dream. That being said, I think that Prof Lo's reputation for being harsh with grades is undeserved. i got a B+ overall, but i also think that i did not put in as much effort as i could

Learning Value/Recommendation

while i got a B+ overall, I think that skills I learnt in NTW were crucial for my good grades in NSW, and my other essay dependent FASS mods. Specifically how it forced me to learn what an 'arguable' argument is and how to justify it's existence to a reader. 

Anonymous AY23/24 Sem 2

About the Instructor

He is definitely very knowledgeable and does carefully scaffold class discussions so that concepts are easily grasped, but sometimes it may be a bit hard understanding his expectations for the assignments.

Content (Structure/Organization)

Prof uses a spiral approach, where earlier essays on authenticity were first introduced, before more contemporary essays that build on earlier thinkers. Overall, he does stick to a fixed curriculum, though he also does integrate students’ insights into the content taught.

The course is pretty accessible, and prof does use use everyday examples to illustrate the different types of authenticity. He teaches the writing skills that he expects us to use in the assignments, though I feel that I personally had not enough time/practice grasping these skills due to the fast-paced nature of the course and the assignments.

Manageability of Workload

There are usually one or two readings a week, which averages into 30-40 pages a week. The class participation assignments are pretty light, but the graded assignments are time-consuming especially since prof has high standards and usually gives you 3 days to rework your draft (which sometimes require rewriting it entirely) before its final submission. This can be quite tough especially if you have to do readings + submit an assignment within a short timeframe.

Ease/Difficulty of Attaining Grades

Getting an A is not impossible, but it can be very hard as prof can and will be critical with his assessments, leading to harsher grades. I felt that originality of ideas and how interesting/novel an argument is is more important for grades than the structure/quality of writing.

Learning Value/Recommendation

As the course focuses a lot on writing academic essays, I found it most useful for FASS majors and maybe less so for business/SOC majors

Ng Shang Wen (@shangwenn) AY22/23 Sem 2

About the Instructor

Prof Lo is a very knowledgeable professor who clearly knows the subject matter very well. The structure of the module is logical and a testament to his knowledge of the topic. As a teacher, he has high expectations from the class in terms of class participation and asks many questions, although he also scaffolds when necessary to help in students' understanding. Prof Lo is clear in his explanations and also provides very detailed feedback for each submission.

Content (Structure/Organization)

The module is very well-structured and is separated into three units, each covering a specific area of authenticity/tourism and essay writing. The teaching points are clearly stated in the module's very helpful syllabus outline.

The subject matter of authenticity and tourism is rather accessible and no prior knowledge (e.g. in humanities or social sciences) is required to understand the content. Given the module focuses on close reading as the anchor of an argumentative essay, it might be slightly advantageous to have majored in literature, but this is definitely neither necessary nor sufficient.

Manageability of Workload

The workload of this module is rather heavy. For starters, you may expect about one reading (20 pages-ish) every week, and perhaps one short """"pre-writing"""" exercise every two weeks, which is less than a page but requires some thought (maybe about 1h?). Assignments-wise (75% of the module!), this module has 3 major papers, ranging from 1500 to 3500 words. Each assignment also requires a draft before final submission. It is likely that you may have to make major revisions after each draft, so the workload is closer to 6 papers! Oh and each submission also requires a one-page cover letter reflecting on your thought process in doing the essay, so... prepare to burn the midnight oil on the night before submissions. It was definitely the module with the heaviest workload by far in the semester for me.

Ease/Difficulty of Attaining Grades

I would say it is difficult to get a good grade in this module -- B+ is probably above average in this module. Prof Lo is rather strict (but still fair) in his marking and he """"prizes clarity"""" (in his words). Hence, you can't really try to smoke your way past him since he can and will most definitely call you out for it. Achieving a decent grade requires you to first be sure of what you're arguing, then spend time to re-read and revise your essay multiple times to ensure that you clearly express your argument and analyses. Make use of the individual conferences to consult Prof Lo on his (detailed) feedback how to best revise and improve your essay

Learning Value/Recommendation

Overall I feel that this module was very helpful in terms of teaching me how to structure an argumentative essay and I feel it is particularly beneficial for me as a FASS major given that I have to write many essays in future.

Anonymous AY19/20 Sem 2

About the Instructor

Prof Lo Mun Hou is very detailed and clear in his lessons, and he's reasonable when it comes to assignments and expectations for each paper. He encourages questions and inputs from students during the lessons which fosters a good learning environment. When students are unable to understand the lesson/discussion or ask seemingly silly questions, he's good at re-explaining the concept in a different way and understanding a student's train of thought. The latter is especially clear during one-on-one consultations when you present the arguments of your paper to him. I found his consultations very rewarding because he was able to help me to find clarity about issues I had with my paper. He doesn't spoon-feed students but instead poses questions that helps students to reflect on their essays.

Content (Structure/Organization)

The content of the module focused less on the facts about modern tourism and rather the theoretical questions underlying the tourism industry, including authenticity (which has a main role in many of the readings), and how and why tourism occurs (e.g. Do tourists seek novelty or familiarity? How do tourism agencies entice tourists?).

Manageability of Workload

The workload is manageable at around 1 reading each lesson and with lessons twice a week. At the beginning of the module there are a few in-class and take home assignments that are quite light. There are three main essays to be completed for this module with increasing length and difficulty that you will be graded on. Each essay has a first draft and final submission. During each essay submission he requires students to attach a short reflection on the strengths and weaknesses of their essay.

Ng Jia Yeong AY19/20 Sem 1

About the Instructor

Prof Lo is a good prof, emphasis on prof. He may not seem very friendly, but honestly after a while you'll know he's very chill and open to any and all questions. He makes seminars very engaging; no opinion is too stupid or obvious (really!) and you'll come out of every seminar having learnt something through debates between you, your classmates, and the prof. He structures the mod very well too, and hands out the syllabus and schedule at the very beginning so you'll know what to expect in each week and seminar. On giving feedback though, he doesn't hold back. He can be blunt, but he puts his thoughts in a constructive manner and almost always offers suggestions on how you can improve your draft to prepare for the final submission -- which is something I appreciated a lot. Other than that he's also very reasonable in giving us leeway for our submissions, say if you email him explaining why you may need an extension, or when we wrote our Paper 3 in AY19/20 Sem 2 and he was willing to forgo the consultation in light of COVID, and even give everyone a one-day extension to finalise our formatting (don't underestimate formatting).

Content (Structure/Organization)

The topics of discussion come from the readings where we discuss about issues related to tourism and authenticity -- What is authenticity? How do you find an authentic tourist site? Does authenticity even exist? Prof Lo subtly weaves in the writing content as we go through the syllabus -- typical WCT topics like thesis statements, motives etc. Though the module title says 'Sites of Tourism', I'm more inclined to call it 'Tourism and Authenticity' because of the bias in module content towards authenticity rather than tourism, which becomes much more apparently in the second half of the module. Nevertheless, the final paper can be about any topic at all and not necessarily related to tourism and/or authenticity.

Manageability of Workload

Workload is pretty standard for a WCT tbh. Prof Lo is very good at providing feedback and receptive to queries about content or assignments -- going so far as to type out in detail a page or so summarising his thoughts on what's good about each submission and draft submission and what can be improved. Writing isn't easy; each draft will inevitably take up a lot of time if you want to do it seriously, which you should. After feedback comes in (and a lot of feedback generally results in substantial changes to your final submission) it's another round of writing and rushing to meet the submission deadline. You'll probably burn through at least one night to churn out an essay before the deadline, which is perfectly normal for this mod and I presume for other WCT's. WCT's are just intense in general so there's no escaping high workload :""). Readings are very very important; how much you read will determine how much you're able to contribute to class discussions which in turn determines how much you'll take away from each seminar. Readings aren't short but they aren't too long either (usually in the range of 20-30 pages) and it's important to keep up with them as the module progresses, though the prof is always kind enough to remind the class of upcoming readings and assignments to keep everyone on track.

Learning Value/Recommendation

Highly recommended if you missed the WCT's in Sem 1 because this mod is only offered in Sem 2. Advice for this module that applies well generally: Be serious and proactive in preparing for classes and engaging in discussion, don't be afraid at all of offering your opinion in class, or submitting a bad draft -- submitting a bad draft means you can only get better for your final submission! It's also a great opportunity for you and the prof to identify potential missteps in your essays, and is all part of generating a good essay in the end :)