Outline

Overview

From the nostalgia film to the Holocaust documentary, cinema is implicated in complex processes of forgetting and remembering. This unit introduces students to thinking about how film represents memory formally and narratively, and its thematic, cultural and ethical implications. It traces film's relation to nostalgia and history, while approaching cinema more broadly as an archive of memory, especially of those ephemeral or affective experiences not often thought of as historical.

Unit details and rules

Unit code	FILM2001
Academic unit	Film Studies
Credit points	6
Prohibitions ?	ARHT2053 or ARHT2653
Prerequisites ?	12 credit points at 1000 level in Film Studies
Corequisites ?	None
Assumed knowledge ?	None
Available to study abroad and exchange students	Yes

Teaching staff

Coordinator	Matilda Mroz, matilda.mroz@sydney.edu.au

Type	Description	Weight	Due	Length
Assignment	Essay Topic chosen from set questions. Refer to Assessment Summary and Canvas.	50%	Formal exam period Due date: 09 Jun 2023 at 23:59	2500 words
Outcomes assessed:
Participation	Participation Class participation. Refer to Assessment Summary for details.	10%	Ongoing	Throughout semester.
Outcomes assessed:
Assignment	Short Essay Short Essay. Please see Assessment Summary for details.	10%	Week 04 Due date: 17 Mar 2023 at 23:59	600 words
Outcomes assessed:
Assignment	Film Analysis Analysis of a ten-minute sequence. Refer to Assessment Summary and Canvas.	30%	Week 09 Due date: 28 Apr 2023 at 23:59	1400 words
Outcomes assessed:

Assessment summary

Short Essay

Weighting: 10%

Word count: 600 words

Instructions

This first assessment is designed to test your writing, analytical and referencing skills, and to give you feedback early in the unit.

Select a brief scene from a film that you have found to be particularly memorable, affecting or compelling in some way. It should not be a film from the unit. Write a short reflective essay on the scene, considering how and why the scene might have lodged in your memory - what specific formal or narrative techniques does the scene employ to generate its specific meanings and experience? Does the chosen film/scene explore memory and or haunting overtly, and if so, how?

You must choose one reading from the required/recommended lists on this unit to illustrate or build on your ideas. Make sure you use the appropriate film studies terms in your reflection.

You must cite and include a short bibliography (not included in the word count) as follows:

the film, and
one journal article, scholarly book chapter or book on film and memory on the required and/or recommended reading list for this unit.

For referencing style, use either Chicago 16th A, MLA, or APA 7.

See the Library’s Referencing and Citation Styles Guide: http://libguides.library.usyd.edu.au/citation?hs=a

Marking criteria

Demonstrates an engagement with the introductory issues and concepts studied in the first weeks of the unit, and their applicability to the selected film scene and to the way in which you have remembered it.
Effectively uses one of the required or recommended readings on the unit.
Uses film terms correctly.
Uses clear prose, accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation.
Adheres strictly to the word limit, +/10%.

Film Analysis

Weighting: 30%

Word count: 1400 words

Instructions

Select ONE of the following films. The sequence for analysis is chosen by the Unit Coordinator and will be made available on the Canvas site.

The Falling (Carol Morley, UK, 2014)

Daughters of the Dust (Julie Dash, USA, 1991)

Hiroshima Mon Amour (Alan Resnais, France/Japan, 1959)

The Silences of the Palace (Moufida Tlatli, Tunisia/France, 1994)

Atlantics (Mati Diop, France/Senegal/Belgium, 2019)

The Devil’s Backbone (Guillermo del Toro, Mexico/Spain, 2001)

Analyse and interpret the film’s representation of memory and/or haunting by attending closely to its formal and narrative elements. Consider what strategies of representation are employed in your selected sequence, and their effects in terms of theme and form/aesthetics. Make sure to move between close description and analysis of salient elements in your selected sequence (drawing on technical terms as necessary), and your larger argument about the film’s representational project. While you should be closely focused on your selected sequence, you must demonstrate an understanding of the film as a whole, and situate your analytical claims in relation to the entire film.

Avoid plot summary, character-centred accounts, description not linked to analysis, and timecode references.

You must cite one or two scholarly texts from the recommended and/or required reading on this unit. However, keep in mind that this assessment is not a research essay. You will be drawing on the knowledge and capacity that you’ve developed in the unit so far for analysing and interpreting your sequence and film. It is an exercise in writing in your own voice, while focused on description, analysis and argument. Make sure the citations that you use are not overshadowing your own critical voice.

For referencing style, use either Chicago 16th A, MLA, or APA 7.

See the Library’s Referencing and Citation Styles Guide: http://libguides.library.usyd.edu.au/citation?hs=a

Restrictions

Do not use the same scholarship that you used for the Short Essay. You will not be able to write your final Research Essay on the film that you choose for this assessment task.

Marking criteria

Offers a coherent and persuasive analysis and interpretation of the selected film sequence.
Demonstrates a critical engagement with the issues and concepts studied in the first half of the unit, and their applicability to the selected film sequence.
Engages with relevant scholarship on the unit, demonstrating a solid understanding of the relationship this scholarship has to the film under discussion.
Uses technical terms correctly.
Uses clear prose, accurate spelling, grammar and punctuation.
Adheres strictly to the word limit, +/10%.

Essay

Weighting: 50%

Word count: 2500 words [does not include bibliography/filmography]

Instructions

Select two films on the unit’s ‘required’ viewing list and discuss them in relation to one essay question.

Any of the ‘required’ films can be combined and used to answer any of the questions, so long as you can make a case for the relevance of the quotation/question to the films. In addition, you can make reference to the films on the ‘recommended’ viewing list.

Your essay should formulate an overarching argument. You should make reference to the key elements of the quotation/question. Compare and contrast your chosen films. Try to be creative and original.

This is a research essay, so make sure you utilise the required and recommended reading/viewing for the unit. You should also conduct your own research, using academic sources (books, book chapters, journal articles).

For referencing in your essay, use either Chicago, MLA or APA 7. You will need a bibliography which gives full bibliographic information for all the texts and films that you explicitly cite in the essay.

See the Library’s Referencing and Citation Styles Guide: http://libguides.library.usyd.edu.au/citation?hs=aLinks to an external site.

Restrictions

You must not write on the films that you analysed for Assessment 1: Short essay or Assessment 2: Film Analysis.

Marking criteria

Marking criteria will be posted on Canvas.

Essay questions

Essay questions will be posted on Canvas.

Participation

Weighting: 10%

Active participation in tutorials is an important part of learning in this unit. Tutorials are designed to be a welcoming, supportive and open space for exploring the critical issues that arise in the unit. Tutorial participation includes demonstrated preparation for tutorial discussions (watching films, attending lectures, doing the reading), as well as the forms of conduct, leadership, reasoning and listening outlined in the rubric which can be found on Canvas.

Please note that your tutor might call upon students to lead discussion on a particular reading or film. Please make sure that you come to each class prepared to lead discussion if you are called upon by the tutor.

Assessment criteria

Assessment Criteria

This unit uses standards based assessment for award of assessment marks. Your assessments will be evaluated solely on the basis of your individual performance. The following grade descriptors are also available online at:

http://sydney.edu.au/arts/art_history/student_resources/

This guide indicates broadly the qualitative judgements implied by the various grades which may be awarded. A more precise evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of individual essays will be provided in examiners’ comments. Evaluation is made with due consideration of the different standards likely to be achieved by students in junior and senior intermediate (2nd year) and advanced (3rd year) units.

85%+ (High Distinction)

Work of exceptional standard.

Work demonstrates initiative and originality in research, analysis and argumentation; presents innovative, insightful interpretations of specific works of art, architecture, film and/or other media, which are used throughout to demonstrate points being made; effectively integrates visual analysis and critical engagement with scholarly debates to develop a rich and thorough analysis of its object(s) of study; indicates awareness of complexities and qualifications in argumentation; demonstrates careful thought about the critical, historical and/or theoretical context; provides evidence of wide ranging reading; is properly referenced and well presented; writing is clear, fluent, and persuasive.

A High Distinction is distinguished from a Distinction by the depth and sophistication of visual analysis deployed, and by the evidence of independent, critical thinking. Work which is awarded a mark of over 90% in senior level units of study will often contain some publishable or potentially publishable elements.

75-84% (Distinction)

Work of a superior standard

Work demonstrates an intelligent understanding of, and individual engagement with, material; visual analysis is well developed and harnessed to the argument, with thoughtful, detailed visual exposition of specific works used to demonstrate points; addresses an issue and presents a well argued, coherent case; demonstrates careful thought about the critical, historical and/or theoretical context; demonstrates an independent and critical attitude to readings; written work is properly referenced and well presented, with a clear structure and coherent overall argument; writing is characterized by individuality, clarity, and independent insight.

A Distinction is distinguished from a High Credit chiefly by the quality of its analysis of the works of art under discussion, and by its level of critical understanding and intellectual enquiry.

70-74% (High Credit)

Highly competent work demonstrating clear capacity to complete Honours successfully. This level of work is considered above average.

Work provides evidence of independent reading and thinking about relevant works of art and their contexts; demonstrates capacity to undertake close analysis of works of art and develop with c independent observations; demonstrates a sound grasp of subject matter and a good appreciation of key issues and contexts; shows understanding of relevant critical and theoretical considerations and of the conceptual issues raised; avoids summary; indicates an intelligent attempt at a critical or theoretical argument; is clearly and effectively written; is well referenced.

A High Credit is distinguished from a Low Credit chiefly by the extent of independent analysis of works of art, and by some obvious attempt to interpret the outcome of close analysis.

65-69% (Low Credit)

Very competent work though not necessarily of the standard to complete Honours.

The work shows some understanding of relevant critical and theoretical considerations and of the conceptual issues raised by a unit of study; demonstrates some independent reading and thinking about key works of art and their contexts; uses close critical analysis; avoids summary; attempts a critical or theoretical argument; is clearly and effectively written; is adequately referenced.

A Low Credit is distinguished from a High Pass by the degree of independent discussion of works of art, the clarity of the writing and the extent to which it attempts a more general critical and/or theoretical argument.

58-64% (High Pass)

Work of a good, satisfactory standard

Work demonstrates a broad and reasonably accurate command of the subject matter and some sense of its broader significance; demonstrates a genuine attempt at independent reading and thinking about works of art; generally avoids summary, paraphrase or unsubstantiated assertion; arguments may contain some oversimplification or superficiality; may sometimes present quotation for illustrative purposes merely, but does also present the outcome of some critical analysis; is adequately expressed; is adequately referenced.

50-57% (Pass)

Work of an acceptable standard

Work provides evidence of having read and thought about relevant works of art and issues; attempts a coherent argument though there may be ellipses in argumentation; discussion of works of art tends towards description rather than analysis; insufficient preparation for a visual test may be indicated by missed or incorrect identifications, lack of familiarity with periods, styles, key critical issues; may paraphrase fairly extensively; tends to use quotation for illustrative purposes only; may tend towards generality in answering a question; may present simplistic comment or unsubstantiated assertions; is adequately expressed though there may be some weaknesses in this area; may contain some referencing errors.

Below 50% (Fail)

Work not of an acceptable standard

Work may fail for any of the following reasons: little or no analysis of works of art; in a visual test, an inability to correctly identify works, periods and styles; serious mistakes in identification, indicating lack of understanding of the material taught; minimal research; irrelevance of content; unacceptable levels of paraphrasing; excessive use of quotation for illustrative purposes only, without any attempt at analysis; excessive level of generality in answering a question; sloppy, inconsistent presentation; inappropriate or obscure expression; incoherent general structure; inadequate referencing; late submission of work without extension.

For more information see guide to grades.

Late submission

In accordance with University policy, these penalties apply when written work is submitted after 11:59pm on the due date:

Deduction of 5% of the maximum mark for each calendar day after the due date.
After ten calendar days late, a mark of zero will be awarded.

Academic integrity

The Current Student website provides information on academic integrity and the resources available to all students. The University expects students and staff to act ethically and honestly and will treat all allegations of academic integrity breaches seriously.

We use similarity detection software to detect potential instances of plagiarism or other forms of academic integrity breach. If such matches indicate evidence of plagiarism or other forms of academic integrity breaches, your teacher is required to report your work for further investigation.

You may only use artificial intelligence and writing assistance tools in assessment tasks if you are permitted to by your unit coordinator, and if you do use them, you must also acknowledge this in your work, either in a footnote or an acknowledgement section.

Studiosity is permitted for postgraduate units unless otherwise indicated by the unit coordinator. The use of this service must be acknowledged in your submission.

Learning support

Simple extensions

If you encounter a problem submitting your work on time, you may be able to apply for an extension of five calendar days through a simple extension.  The application process will be different depending on the type of assessment and extensions cannot be granted for some assessment types like exams.

Special consideration

If exceptional circumstances mean you can’t complete an assessment, you need consideration for a longer period of time, or if you have essential commitments which impact your performance in an assessment, you may be eligible for special consideration or special arrangements.

Special consideration applications will not be affected by a simple extension application.

Using AI responsibly

Co-created with students, AI in Education includes lots of helpful examples of how students use generative AI tools to support their learning. It explains how generative AI works, the different tools available and how to use them responsibly and productively.

Weekly schedule

WK	Topic	Learning activity
Week 01	Introduction: Cinemas/memories/hauntings	Lecture (1 hr)
Week 02	Introduction: Cinemas/memories/hauntings	Tutorial (2 hr)
Week 02	The remembered film: Pastiche, nostalgia and The Falling	Lecture (1 hr)
Week 03	The remembered film: Pastiche, nostalgia and The Falling	Tutorial (2 hr)
Week 03	The remembered film: Migrating sense memories and Daughters of the Dust	Lecture (1 hr)
Week 04	The remembered film: Migrating sense memories and Daughters of the Dust	Tutorial (2 hr)
Week 04	Trauma and flashbacks: Hiroshima mon Amour	Lecture (1 hr)
Week 05	Trauma and flashbacks: Hiroshima mon Amour	Tutorial (2 hr)
Week 05	Trauma and flashbacks: The Silences of the Palace	Lecture (1 hr)
Week 06	Trauma and flashbacks: The Silences of the Palace	Tutorial (2 hr)
Week 06	Haunting: Why do the dead return? (Atlantics)	Lecture (1 hr)
Week 07	Haunting: Why do the dead return? (Atlantics)	Tutorial (2 hr)
Week 07	Haunting: What is a ghost? (The Devil's Backbone)	Lecture (1 hr)
Week 08	Haunting: What is a ghost? (The Devil's Backbone)	Tutorial (2 hr)
Week 08	Haunting: Signs and omens (Throne of Blood)	Lecture (1 hr)
Week 09	Haunting: Signs and omens (Throne of Blood)	Tutorial (2 hr)
Week 09	Landscape and memory: Picnic at Hanging Rock	Lecture (1 hr)
Week 10	Landscape and memory: Picnic at Hanging Rock	Tutorial (2 hr)
Week 10	Country and memory: In My Blood it Runs	Lecture (1 hr)
Week 11	Country and memory: In My Blood it Runs	Tutorial (2 hr)
Week 11	Collective Memory and the monstrous: The Host	Lecture (1 hr)
Week 12	Collective Memory and the monstrous: The Host	Tutorial (2 hr)
Week 12	Repressed memory and the monstrous: The Babadook	Lecture (1 hr)
Week 13	Repressed memory and the monstrous: The Babadook	Tutorial (2 hr)
Week 13	Haunted screens: Looking back at the unit and forward to the final assessment	Lecture (1 hr)

Attendance and class requirements

Attendance

According to Faculty Board Resolutions, students in the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences are expected to attend 90% of their classes. If you attend less than 50% of classes, regardless of the reasons, you may be referred to the Examiner’s Board. The Examiner’s Board will decide whether you should pass or fail the unit of study if your attendance falls below this threshold. If a unit of study has a participation mark, your attendance may influence this mark. For more information on attendance, see https://sydney.edu.au/handbooks/arts/rules/faculty_resolutions_arts.shtml.

Class Requirements

All lectures for this unit will be conducted online and available as recordings. Based on NSW Health directives, student preference and availability, students will be allocated to either an online or face-to-face tutorial. Please check your individual timetables.

Study commitment

Typically, there is a minimum expectation of 1.5-2 hours of student effort per week per credit point for units of study offered over a full semester. For a 6 credit point unit, this equates to roughly 120-150 hours of student effort in total.

Required readings

Topic 1. Introduction: Cinemas/memories/hauntings

Entry for “Memory”, Bill Schwarz. In New keywords: A revised vocabulary of culture and society, edited by Lawrence Grossberg, Meaghan Morris, Tony Bennett and Raymond Williams. Blackwell, 2005.

Radstone, Susannah. “Cinema and memory”. In Memory: Histories, Theories, Debates, edited by S. Radstone and B. Schwarz. Fordham University Press, 2010.

Topic 2. The remembered film: Pastiche, nostalgia and The Falling.

The Falling (Carol Morley, UK, 2014).

Burgin, Victor. The Remembered Film. Reaktion, 2004. Pages 58-73.

Entry on “Pastiche”. A Dictionary of Film Studies by Annette Kuhn and Guy Westwell. Oxford UP, 2012.

Klinger, Barbara. “The art film, affect and the female viewer: The Piano revisited”. Screen 47, 1. 2006. Pages 19-41.

Morley, Carol. “These are the films that inspired The Falling.” BFI, 2015.

Topic 3. The remembered film: Migrating sense memories and Daughters of the Dust

Daughters of the Dust (Julie Dash, USA, 1991).

Lemonade (Beyoncé Knowles-Carter, USA, 2016).

Ebron, Paulla A. “Site Of Memory 1: A Film Revival.” In Transnational Memory: Circulation, Articulation, Scales, edited by De Cesari, Chiara, and Ann Rigney. De Gruyter, 2014. Pages 158-160.

Erhart, Julia. “Picturing ‘What If’: Julie Dash's Speculative Fiction.” Camera Obscura 13, 2. 1996.

Marks, Laura. The Skin of the Film. Duke University Press, 2000. [extracts]

Topic 4. Trauma and flashbacks: Hiroshima mon Amour

Hiroshima mon Amour (Alain Resnais, France, 1959)

Branigan, Edward. “Flashback.” In Narrative Comprehension and Film. Routledge, 1992.

Caruth, Cathy. Unclaimed Experience: Trauma, Narrative, History. The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996. Pages 1-9.

Wilson, Emma. “Hiroshima Mon Amour (1959)”, in Alain Resnais. Manchester University Press, 2006. Pages 46-66.

Topic 5. Trauma and flashbacks: The Silences of the Palace

The Silences of the Palace (Moufida Tlatli, Tunisia/France, 1994)

Donadey, Anne. “Representing Gender and Sexual Trauma: Moufida Tlatli’s Silences of the Palace.” South Central Review, 28, 1. 2011. Pages 36-51.

Sherzer, Dina. “Remembrance of Things Past: Les Silences du palais by Moufida Tlatli.” South Central Review, 17, 3. 2000. Pages 50-59.

Topic 6. Haunting: Why do the dead return? (Atlantics)

Atlantics (Mati Diop, France/Senegal/Belgium, 2019)

Kara Keeling, “Preface: Another Litany for Survival”, from Queer Times, Black Futures. New York University Press. 2019

Camilla Fojas, Zombies, Migrants, Queers: Race and Crisis Capitalism in Pop Culture. University of Illinois Press, 2017 [extracts]

Davis, Colin. Haunted Subjects: Deconstruction, Psychoanalysis and the Return of the Dead. Palgrave Macmillan, 2007 [extracts]

Topic 7. Haunting: What is a ghost? (The Devil's Backbone)

The Devil’s Backbone (Guillermo del Toro, Mexico/Spain, 2001)

Brinks, Ellen. “‘Nobody’s Children’: Gothic Representation and Traumatic History in “The Devil’s Backbone”.” JAC 24, 2. 2004. Pages 291-312.

Gordon, Avery. “Introduction” in Ghostly Matters: Haunting and the Sociological Imagination. University of Minnesota Press, 2008.

Labanyi, Jo. “Coming to terms with the ghosts of the past: history and spectrality in contemporary Spanish culture”. Arachne 1, 1. 2001.

Topic 8. Haunting: Signs and omens (Throne of Blood)

Throne of Blood (Akira Kurosawa, Japan, 1957)

Ryle, Simon. “Moles, spots, stains and tincts: marks of futurity in Shakespeare and Kurosawa”, Textual Practice 28, 5. 2014.

Suzuki, Erin. “Lost in Translation: Reconsidering Shakespeare's Macbeth and Kurosawa's Throne of Blood”, Literature/Film Quarterly 34, 2. 2006.

Topic 9. Landscape and memory: Picnic at Hanging Rock

Picnic at Hanging Rock (Peter Weir, Australia, 1975).

Steele, Kathleen. “Fear and Loathing in the Australian Bush: Gothic Landscapes in Bush Studies and Picnic at Hanging Rock”. Colloquy: Text, Theory, Critique 20. 2010.

Tilley, Elspeth. “The Uses of Fear: Spatial Politics in the Australian White-vanishing Trope”. Antipodes 23, 1. 2009.

Tilley, Elspeth. “A Colonising Paradox: White presencing and contamination politics in the Australian white-vanishing trope”. Critical Race and Whiteness Studies. 2011.

Topic 10. Country and memory: In My Blood It Runs

In My Blood It Runs (Maya Newell, Australia, 2019)

Roberts, Meg. “Cultural healing: Rethinking education in Maya Newell’s In My Blood It Runs”. Metro, 2021.

Stefanoff, Lisa. “The Australian government is not listening: Education justice and remote indigenous futures”. Overland, 2021.

Topic 11. Collective memory and the monstrous: The Host

The Host (Bong Joon-ho, South Korea, 2006).

Peeters, Jeroen. “Replacing the Monstrous”, in Meg Stuart/Damaged Goods’ REPLACEMENT, ed. by Christoph Gurk and Jeroen Peeters. Volksbuehne am Rosa Luxemburgplatz/Alexander Verlag, 2006, Pages 33-48.

Lee, Meera. “Monstrosity and Humanity in Bong Joon-ho’s The Host.” Positions 26, 4. 2018.

Topic 12. Repressed memory and the monstrous: The Babadook

The Babadook (Jennifer Kent, Australia, 2014).

Mitchell, Paul. “The Horror of Loss: Reading Jennifer Kent’s The Babadook as a Trauma Narrative”, Atlantis English Studies 41, 2. 2019.

Thomson, Morten. “You start to change when I get in. The Babadook growing right under your skin. Monstrous intermediality in Jennifer Kent's The Babadook”, Horror Studies 10, 1. 2019.

Topic 13. Haunted screens: Looking back at the unit and forward to the final assessment

Learning outcomes

Learning outcomes are what students know, understand and are able to do on completion of a unit of study. They are aligned with the University's graduate qualities and are assessed as part of the curriculum.

Outcomes
Graduate qualities

At the completion of this unit, you should be able to:

LO1. demonstrate an advanced understanding of different concepts of memory and haunting, and their application to the study of film in terms of representation, spectatorship, and reception;
LO2. analyse the representation of memory and spectrality across a range of genres and national cinemas;
LO3. critically reflect on the relation of cinema to various forms of memory, processes of memorialization, historical discourse, theories of haunting, and theorisations of the archive;
LO4. draw on the concepts and issues explored in the unit, as well as further independent research, to construct arguments and perspectives on cinema, the spectral, memory, and history.

Graduate qualities

The graduate qualities are the qualities and skills that all University of Sydney graduates must demonstrate on successful completion of an award course. As a future Sydney graduate, the set of qualities have been designed to equip you for the contemporary world.

GQ1	Depth of disciplinary expertise Deep disciplinary expertise is the ability to integrate and rigorously apply knowledge, understanding and skills of a recognised discipline defined by scholarly activity, as well as familiarity with evolving practice of the discipline.
GQ2	Critical thinking and problem solving Critical thinking and problem solving are the questioning of ideas, evidence and assumptions in order to propose and evaluate hypotheses or alternative arguments before formulating a conclusion or a solution to an identified problem.
GQ3	Oral and written communication Effective communication, in both oral and written form, is the clear exchange of meaning in a manner that is appropriate to audience and context.
GQ4	Information and digital literacy Information and digital literacy is the ability to locate, interpret, evaluate, manage, adapt, integrate, create and convey information using appropriate resources, tools and strategies.
GQ5	Inventiveness Generating novel ideas and solutions.
GQ6	Cultural competence Cultural Competence is the ability to actively, ethically, respectfully, and successfully engage across and between cultures. In the Australian context, this includes and celebrates Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures, knowledge systems, and a mature understanding of contemporary issues.
GQ7	Interdisciplinary effectiveness Interdisciplinary effectiveness is the integration and synthesis of multiple viewpoints and practices, working effectively across disciplinary boundaries.
GQ8	Integrated professional, ethical, and personal identity An integrated professional, ethical and personal identity is understanding the interaction between one’s personal and professional selves in an ethical context.
GQ9	Influence Engaging others in a process, idea or vision.

Outcome map

Learning outcomes	Graduate qualities
Learning outcomes

Responding to student feedback

This section outlines changes made to this unit following staff and student reviews.

The reading and viewing list for this unit has been revised since the unit was last offered.

Additional information

Additional costs

Students may be required to rent or purchase films for this unit. This is due to copyright restrictions.

Disclaimer

The University reserves the right to amend units of study or no longer offer certain units, including where there are low enrolment numbers.

To help you understand common terms that we use at the University, we offer an online glossary.

Current students

Overview

Overview

Unit details and rules

Teaching staff

Assessment

Assessment

Assessment summary

Assessment criteria

Late submission

Academic integrity

Learning support

Learning support

Simple extensions

Special consideration

Using AI responsibly

Weekly schedule

Weekly schedule

Attendance and class requirements

Study commitment

Required readings

Learning outcomes

Learning outcomes

Graduate qualities

Outcome map

Responding to student feedback

Responding to student feedback

Additional information

Additional information

Additional costs

Disclaimer

On this page

Useful links

Media

Student links

About us

Connect

Current students

FILM2001: Haunted Screens: Film and Memory

Semester 1, 2023 [Normal day] - Camperdown/Darlington, Sydney

Overview

Overview

Unit details and rules

Teaching staff

Assessment

Assessment

Assessment summary

Assessment criteria

Late submission

Academic integrity

Learning support

Learning support

Simple extensions

Special consideration

Using AI responsibly

Weekly schedule

Weekly schedule

Attendance and class requirements

Study commitment

Required readings

Learning outcomes

Learning outcomes

Graduate qualities

Outcome map

Responding to student feedback

Responding to student feedback

Additional information

Additional information

Additional costs

Disclaimer

On this page

Useful links

Media

Student links

About us

Connect