Skip to content The Open University

Student and tutor module reviews

Molecules in medicine

see module description

  • Points: 60
  • Code: S807
  • Level: Postgraduate

Student reviews

I enjoyed the module and it was a great experience in which I learnt a lot. It was well organised, however it should be more tutorial especially for the end-of-module assessment.

Course starting: January 2018

Review posted: January 2019

This course wasn't hard. It eased you in nicely and covered many interesting topics. Tutor took a long time to respond and mark work, tutor was the only downfall.

Course starting: January 2010

Review posted: January 2011

This course starts with quite a lot of chemistry which was daunting at first, but the modular architecture of the course helps you through this step by step and in the end, the modelling tools are very useful. The course then progresses to look at disease processes and drug development, with choices between two topics for each eTMA.

There is not a lot of time between the poster and the assignment at the end of the course so make sure you keep on top of the deadlines. The online forums are also useful and my tutor was very quick to answer queries and return marked work via e-mail.

Overall a good introduction to the OU for me, as the course content overlapped with my work in the pharmaceutical industry. I am now looking forward to something a bit different as I start Science Communication S804

Course starting: January 2007

Review posted: December 2007

I started this course with some trepidation, given other reviews stressing how much organic chemistry was involved, and this not being my strongest point.

However, once I had overcome this issue along with problems with using ISIS draw (constantly causing my computer to crash or freeze), I did enjoy this course.

This course is ideal for someone working in the pharmaceutical industry as I do, given that it encourages a better understanding of all aspects of drug design. The occasional 'drug company bashing' was not as bad as it could have been.

The Course Manager and the rest of the course team are great. Producing the poster was not as bad as it could have been, as the poster does not have to be some flash single page thing. Mine was a series of slides created in Powerpoint. The biggest problem in producing the literature review was trying to keep to the required number of words, but that might be because I wrote mine on chronic myeloid leukaemia.

I would suggest combining this course with 'Science and the Public', because the two do work well together. This course does involve a lot of work, but the eTMA system means an end to panic over posting TMAs.

Overall, as the student survey scores demonstrate, this is a course well worth the time and money.

Joanne Katherine Pilsworth

Course starting: January 2006

Review posted: December 2007

Having completed chemistry 'O'level and obtaining a grade C I was rather anticipating a rough ride on this course. I was, however, pleasantly suprised as the course flows well and I found I could work in small chunks easily. This may have been due to completing other OU science courses at masters level but I did find this course the best to 'get into'.

I had several family/medical setbacks during that year but due to the terrific way the work was structured I was able to complete all of the assignments without the extensions offered by my tutor.

There is a certain amount of computer modelling which I found fun, although some may have got frustrated. Don't waste time on the modelling, if you get stuck, just ask on the chat rooms if you can't find the button that changes the orientation of the bond!

I had a small hiccup submitting one assignment which meant about 6 marks of essay vanished but otherwise the electronic system worked well.
Obviously the poster and the ECA came close together but with a bit of planning one can evolve from the other which is easier on the grey matter.

Maxine Bloom

Course starting: January 2006

Review posted: January 2007

I thought that this was a fantastic course. The material was very interesting and I was always clear about what was required. I felt that the course was very well-structured, gradually building up my knowledge base as it progressed.

Annabel Jane McDonald

Course starting: January 2005

Review posted: January 2006

Having completed this course I found it an interesting, and, at times a challenging course. I had quite a good chemistry and biology background from previous study, which made the course easier in the sense that there was little background research required. This meant that I could focus on the main course concepts. My only disappointment, if it can be called that, was being made to choose topics. I would have prefered to have covered all 6 of the major subjects. With this being my second MSc course, the ECA components were less daunting.

Course starting: January 2005

Review posted: January 2006

I found S807 to be an extremely interesting course with lots of areas that would have been good to pursue further.

Admittedly I found ISIS draw took me a while to get used to but then computers are a very new experience for me! Once I had mastered the package it was great fun and very useful.

The workload was quite high and with the poster presentation and review in close proximity the latter stages were a little manic.

I hadn't done chemistry for 20 years but the course materials enabled me to pick it up again readily and after the introductory phase the course covered broader aspects of drugs and disease with an element of choice in each study area.

A brilliant course!

Course starting: January 2005

Review posted: January 2006

Molecules in Medicine was a welcome return to science for me as I had studied science and the public the year before. It was heavily chemistry based but I found the basic introduction a good refresher on what I needed to know. I was impressed with the up to date nature of the case studies and the opportunity to study in a much less structured way than before. I found that I learnt a great deal, especially in the pharmaceutical area. The poster aspect was very informative and has helped me with presentation skills also, that I need for my job. The mini-review was a bit close to the poster finish date and so things were quite hectic at the end. However, overall this course has inspired me to move on to the project module next year with a lot less apprehension.

Louise Emma Rigden

Course starting: January 2004

Review posted: December 2004

This was an interesting course but relies a lot on knowledge of chemistry. The first section does cover the basics but is very difficult if one's only experience of chemistry has been at school several years ago.
The workload is high during the middle of the course, with 4 assignments in 12 weeks, eg 1 every 3 weeks. These are very different to each other so a completely new 'study head' will be needed for each.
Beware that there is a relatively short gap between the poster and mini review (about 5 weeks or less, depending on the poster school attended) which can add a lot of stress at the end of the course.

Isabella Brown

Course starting: February 2003

Review posted: October 2004

Please note

Each of the views expressed above is an individual's very particular response, largely unedited, and should be viewed with that in mind. Since modules are subject to regular updating, some of the issues identified may have already been addressed. In some instances the faculty may have provided a response to a comment. If you have a query about a particular module, please contact your Regional Centre.


Module satisfaction survey

The figures below are taken from a survey of students who sat the exam/completed the end-of-module assessment for the February 2016 presentation of S807. The survey was carried out in 2016.

19 students (a response rate of 29.7%) responded to the survey covering what they thought of 10 aspects of the module.

Please note that if the percentage of students who responded to this module survey is below 30% and/or the number of responses is below 23 it means that only a small proportion of students provided feedback and their views as shown here may not be fully representative of all students who studied the module.

See this page for the full text of questions and more information about the survey.

% Count
Overall, I am satisfied with the quality of this module 94.7 18
Overall, I am satisfied with my study experience 94.7 18
The module provided good value for money 78.9 15
I was satisfied with the support provided by my tutor/study adviser on this module 78.9 15
Overall, I was satisfied with the teaching materials provided on this module 89.5 17
The learning outcomes of the module were clearly stated 89.5 17
I would recommend this module to other students 89.5 17
The module met my expectations 94.7 18
I enjoyed studying this module 89.5 17
Overall, I was able to keep up with the workload on this module 68.4 13
Faculty comment: "The module team would like to thank respondents for their feedback and comments in the recent survey. We're delighted that respondents rated the module so highly on a number of factors, particularly that 90% enjoyed the module and would recommend it to others. With more guidance provided for using the e-book versions of the two set books, student satisfaction with the quality of the study materials also improved this year to 89.5%, up from 79.2%. We were also pleased to note that 94.7% were happy with the module in terms of the value for money and experience, further improved from the previous survey."
Enter a module code to find a review

To send us reviews on modules you have studied with us, please click the sign in button below.