GE1342 Light: from Double Rainbows to Optical Fibers B It is out of every possible expectation that I got a B in this course. With regards to the comments left by those who have studied this course before, it seems that this course awards students with generous grades. BUT IT IS NOT.The workload is tbf light. No class attendance, except tutorials, is needed. For tutorials, you basically only need to be there and sign ur name and done. For the lectures, they are not really helpful either, so you can basically skip the whole course and just attend the tests, presentation and lab visits, etc.However, the tests were highly eccentric. Take the first test as an example, MCs were adopted as a means of assessment. However, Pun [the course leader] promised that there would be 45 minutes of exam time. But, he stopped us after 30 minutes had passed. It was highly unfair and no one objected. Even though, most of us could finish the test wfin 30 mins, it was not a valid justification for cutting our test time.For the 2nd test, long questions were adopted for means of assessment. I remember it was a 2 in 4 choice, you can choose any 2 Q.s out of 4 Q.s to answer. It was not merely asking for definition of concepts, as suggested by previous comments, but some concepts, for example, chromatic dispersion, which was NOT EXPLAINED clearly by Pun AT ALL, or the advantages and disadvantages of optical fibres [Pun only gave us pictures in the concerned slides, without detailed points given for us to ans such Q.s]. The tests were traps.As to the final report occupying allegedly 60% of the total course marks, I firmly believe that our project at least worth a B+ or an A-, as one of my gpmate got a final grade of A-, and another one got a B+. But then, it seems that as contrary to the course manual, it seems that the tests instead of the project is the decisive factor. When the project is at least a B+/A-, how could I get a B only? Especially, one of my gpmates got a C+. If the project really weighs 60%, this should not happen.When I informally ask Pun to review my grades, he gave an extremely irresponsible response that all grades must be correct, as the staff should have reviewed the marks before entering them and generate the final grade. He did not even bother to give us the marks distribution even when enquiries are raised. The transparency is low and the course leader's ability and attitude are simply doubtful. In addition, I would like to mention that after me, acting on behalf of our group, sending the project to Pun, who immediately acknowledged the acceptance of our project, sent an email to my gpmates 2 weeks afterwards alleging that they hadnt submitted the group project report. This is simply a powerful illustration of how highly incompetent Pun is and how much vigilance should one take before enrolling into this course.