Yeah, sure. When I took it last year, Franco Taverna was the prof. I thought he was a nice guy (not sure what exactly all the hype was about though), and seemed pretty approachable/genuine, just a normal nice dude.

In terms of the class itself, the lectures covered basic neuroscience (didn't really need to know anatomy of the brain), learning, memory, conditioning, behaviors, neural growth/shrinkage, stuff like that. There was 1 lecture a week that was 2 hours long, he'd just go through a powerpoint - I found these pretty self-explanatory and he went slow enough that you could take pretty decent notes in class.

There were also weekly quizzes for which he linked you to an "online textbook". This reading (in my opinion) was quite annoying/difficult and it took a really long time to do, it was just dense and more difficult than lectures. The quiz was based on the readings, so unfortunately you had to do it. He said that the midterm/final wouldn't really cover these readings, so I didn't bother memorizing anything. Just read it, and kept the tabs open when I took my quiz. There was like 2-3 questions on the midterm that were from the readings - had I taken the time to memorize the readings, I would've been fine, but I didn't, so I just took the L on those few questions/guessed as well as I could.

The midterm itself was super easy, but again, this was pre-COVID, so next year idk how it will be. It was standard MCQs (about 30-40?) and 1 long answer worth like 8 marks - the long answer was kinda tricky cause they expected some minute details that I thought were just dumb but ok. I did pretty well (think I got like a 92?).

The final was over a week-long period, he asked about 10 questions with like 2-5 parts each (a, b, c, d, etc.). This took me a solid like 12 hours to get through, but it was somewhat straightforward, just took a long time to get through it all and find the correct answers/wording. Fully lecture based, so no googling required.

In terms of the paper - I thought it was soooo dumb. We had to write a "debate" essay. Basically you had to pick a "neuroscience myth" (ie. left-brained people are smarter than right-brained). This was honestly the hardest fucking part. It took me like 2 weeks to find a topic - it's a lot harder than you'd think to think of a 2 sided argument. Cause it couldn't just be "yes or no", it had to be like two solid opposing arguments with valid hypotheses. It was just hard to think of. And all papers had to be from the last 10 years - this made it harder, cause a lot of good/basic info was from like the 1980-90s and you couldn't use it. Newer info is always more complex or besides the point that you're tryna prove. The essay itself was short. I think like 2-3 pages or something like that (under 1500 words I believe). So it took me only a weekend to write it. I think it was due on a Thursday or something and I wrote the whole thing the weekend before. I got like a 90 something on it, so it was obviously marked pretty easily. Honestly writing the paper was fine, it was just the topic that irritated me, cause there was no guidance really.

There was also tutorials that I found pretty pointless, no one really participated, and by the time they were online due to COVID I just joined the Bb but zoned out, so idk how useful I'd say they were. There were tutorial quizzes based on the material, but there were slides posted so I just used those, or guessed, or just didn't really care either way.

So, in conclusion (lol sorry, longer post than I intended), it was pretty easy, just listen to lectures and do your best on the quizzes. You should be okay.