genetics anyone?

[Parthenon89]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

sup guyss

welllll my university breaks up the biology core into 4 semsters instead of 2 like most

bio1: evolution
bio2: genetics
bio3: cell biology
bio4: global ecology

i'm taking bio2: genetics next semseterr, i did alright in bio1 it was my first semster and i got a B+, but how hard is genetics in your opinion? i'm excellent with memorization, is genetics like memory-based? or is it based on concepts and fundamentals like evolution?

thanks guys.

 

[futuredrcrawfor]

genetics is both memory and concepts- you remember concepts like transcription and translation and you memorize certain genetic disease (like turners syndrome)

but you have to be able to problem solve to do well in it.
to me the course wasn't that bad- I had a really hard teacher though and made a B (we are on a pure A,B,C scale)

good luck- just start studying now and don't get behind

 

[bodonid]

If you mean memory like in organic, biochemistry, or physics, I would say not at all. Critical thinking and problem solving skills are pretty important, though, but the limited number of concepts makes memory less important. But in genetics any one concept can be tested 1000 ways. So I am saying conceptual learning is more important. Like general biology or physiology or cell biology. You have discrete topics that you learn a lot of information about and apply through problems. The topics are interrelated, but not so much as orgo or biochem.

 

[PanicAttack]

In my genetics course we had to do significant amounts of problem solving - I remember really having trouble with linked genes: they would give you 3 linked genes and the recombinant probabilities and you had to map them. It was tricky, and there was math to be done. It's been a while though.

 

[scrubsaresexy]

Fair warning: If your textbook is called iGenetics, it sucks. My professors insisted it was the best book for Genetics but it just confused the crap out of me. I ended up referring back to my principles of biology book to understand a lot of the stuff.

 

[Parthenon89]

Fair warning: If your textbook is called iGenetics, it sucks. My professors insisted it was the best book for Genetics but it just confused the crap out of me. I ended up referring back to my principles of biology book to understand a lot of the stuff.

lol nooo its called 'essential genetics'

 

[bodonid]

Fair warning: If your textbook is called iGenetics, it sucks. My professors insisted it was the best book for Genetics but it just confused the crap out of me. I ended up referring back to my principles of biology book to understand a lot of the stuff.

I second that. My university used it for one year and one year only. Unfortunately, it was the year I took the course.

 

[derArzt]

Very little of it is pure memorization.

Tons of linking together concepts, pulling from what you learned and applying it to new info, critical thinking.

I loved genetics 🙂

 

[scrubsaresexy]

I second that. My university used it for one year and one year only. Unfortunately, it was the year I took the course.

I can't believe someone else was actually tortured with that book. What really annoyed me is how it would refer to a figure, and the figure would be ten pages later because they had too many figures to fit anywhere near the text that referenced it. I don't know why that bothered me so much, but it just seemed like too much flipping back and forth to be conducive to learning.

 

[Caesar]

Fair warning: If your textbook is called iGenetics, it sucks. My professors insisted it was the best book for Genetics but it just confused the crap out of me. I ended up referring back to my principles of biology book to understand a lot of the stuff.

Which igenetics? A mendelian Approach or A Molecular Approach?

We are using "A Mendelian Approach". Ive only read the first chapter, but it doesn't seem too bad yet... then again chapter one just explained the 4 kinds of genetics... so you cant really make that confusing.

 

[scrubsaresexy]

Which igenetics? A mendelian Approach or A Molecular Approach?

We are using "A Mendelian Approach". Ive only read the first chapter, but it doesn't seem too bad yet... then again chapter one just explained the 4 kinds of genetics... so you cant really make that confusing.

There's two?? Oh god, that's awful. I think I used A Molecular Approach. Hopefully A Mendelain Approach is better? Although that's kind of strange that they're divided like that, especially since I thought both approaches were covered very thoroughly in A Molecular Approach. Then again, how much of the book did I actually read? Maybe just my professors were thorough.

 

[bodonid]

There's two?? Oh god, that's awful. I think I used A Molecular Approach. Hopefully A Mendelain Approach is better? Although that's kind of strange that they're divided like that, especially since I thought both approaches were covered very thoroughly in A Molecular Approach. Then again, how much of the book did I actually read? Maybe just my professors were thorough.

Yep. Two, unfortunately. Molecular Approach was the one I had, and I took it in Spring '05. The molecular approach was in its first edition, and the mendelian approach did not exist yet. Incedently, was your molecular approach book black, or was it green with an abacus or something on the front? I haven't seen the new edition, but then again you can't make a quality read out of a pile of crap. Probably still bad.

 

[scrubsaresexy]

Yep. Two, unfortunately. Molecular Approach was the one I had, and I took it in Spring '05. The molecular approach was in its first edition, and the mendelian approach did not exist yet. Incedently, was your molecular approach book black, or was it green with an abacus or something on the front? I haven't seen the new edition, but then again you can't make a quality read out of a pile of crap. Probably still bad.

It was green, with mystery designs all over the front. I think it's a fairly new edition, I took the class last semester.

 

[justme456]

🙁 dont care for genetics too much