I don't think this course is going to change. It has been like this for a very long time. However I suspect it once had an easy exam pre 2008.This subject isn't hard its just poorly organised like who gives a damn attitude. Having done the mid sem for it in this year, I see a lot of problems with this subject.
For future FIN310 students here is some advice for the mid sem.
1.Don't bother with all the theory - that's probably for final exam. Study all the calculations found in the lecture slides. This includes worst case default rate, calculating confidence intervals, studying ahead of time and studying binomial model from a proper textbook. You won't understand the general concept of binomial from the shitty incomplete lecture notes. franks stochastic lecture notes usually contains loads of typos. this also includes the proofs as well.
Every NON Actuarial/math student will have no chance in understanding (given the time needed to study it impossible) Ito's Lemma, Brownian motion, and basically everything topic of stochastic calculus and finance etc. A grounding for university level mathematics education is a must for understanding the notation such as the commonly used notation of partial differentiation. I don't get why they don't include maths in as a core subject as part of the degree in finance/economics.
Stat170 teaches nothing btw.
I believe Actuarial/math students will find Ito's lemma etc real easy because they have to do it anyways in other acst305 etc for example.
So basically the student with no background in university level mathematics will automatically lose at least 5% of their total assessment marks. FIN310 is a crappy subject anyways. Along with econ232 econ 200 and econ210(worst subject ever)
This is a course in which you try so hard and panic only to discover all that you studied the wrong thing. Also I believe marking in this subject is highly subjective. Even in exam questions they test you about opinions from an article.
Overall mid sem exam written by franks and trueck is really dodgy and unethical.
Loads of typos in there too with unreasonable questions. For so many years e.franks never wants to correct his typos in his lecture notes. Everyone sees it and goes wtf, 5 minute notes done at breakfast. Macquarie has some real serious ethical problem employing staff like that.
The course stresses that you have to go your own yards to learn. 'Why is that?' you may ask.
I don't want to make a new thread for this but:
Only 1% of finance grads actually land that graduate job, the job they wanted. Real finance jobs are competitive no shit. (loads of phony finance job out there).
I believe even some of the academic staff have trouble obtaining employment, including those who have Phds(poor communication skills) They usually move around from uni to uni because they aren't good enough.
The message that you get implicitly from attending lectures and is like this: don't bother enrolling in finance degrees, the job market is competitive. It's like lecturer almost spouted out 'even I didn't get a good job so how can you'.
p.s Learning statistics and mathematics at higher level > useless degrees.
Finance degrees are practically worthless. especially at undergraduate level.
Australian universities esp in NSW are marketing and boasting how great degrees are. Look at the marketing strategy - profit maximising has some serious concerns over quality of degree programs.