FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

chops018

Hogzy wrote: »

But thats not going to happen is it? Everyone goes in trying their best. Obviously if everyone goes in and writes nothing then everyone fails.

If everyone goes into an exam and does excellent, then the standard to pass is raised. Its the simple law of averages.

True.

JCJCJC

With all due respect to you Hogzy, I've never heard that the FE1s are marked on the curve, and there wouldn't seem to be any point. In an academic exam where the results are structured A, B, C, D, etc from 1st class honours standard down to abysmal failure or virtual non-attempt, there is some arguable logic in letting a class set its own standard through a type of natural selection that lets the best excel. However, the FE1s are a threshold entrance exam - once you reach the required standard, you're in. Apart from the small minority who are prize-winners and seeking scholarships etc, there is nothing to be gained by most candidates beyond the requisite 50%. In Formula 1 racing, the legendary Nikki Lauda used to say his approach was to win going as slowly as possible, ie just a thousandth of a second faster than the 2nd guy. The FE1s are similar. Four 50's beats two 90's and two 49's. If it was a curve marking system, we would be put under notice of it.

brumbram6

noseriously wrote: »

Ok, firstly I'm really glad that everyone else thought that was a horrible paper too! secondly, am the only person who thought the fundamental rights q was referring specifically to the human personality test???

nope, thought the same and put in equality (human personality context basis approach)

chops018

When are results usually out for the October sitting? It was about 6 weeks after the March one's I think, the same for these is it?

boomtown84

noseriously wrote: »

Ok, firstly I'm really glad that everyone else thought that was a horrible paper too! secondly, am the only person who thought the fundamental rights q was referring specifically to the human personality test???

Nope, I wrote my whole fookin essay on equality....he'll be laughin his fat head off at some of my answers!:pac:

evercloserunion

chops018 wrote: »

When are results usually out for the October sitting? It was about 6 weeks after the March one's I think, the same for these is it?

Yeah, November some time.

RandolphEsq

Re: the bell curve.

The Law Society are, as we are undoubtedly aware, extremely money-hungry. With this in mind one can be consoled after a bad FE1 exam by considering that this money-hungry organisation require the revenue stream from PPC training courses so if not enough FE1 exams are being passed, that means less bums on those PPC seats and consequentially less money for the Law Society. Therefore they will have to apply a bell curve if insufficient students hurdle over the 50% mark.

Strawberry Fields

I agree, the law society merely regulate the numbers who can enter to practice law, I don't think it's a threshold, I mean how many people worked their ass off for 40-49, the answers weren't that bad I'm sure.

doing

There is definitely a bell curve, otherwise why are people going in knowing 100% of the case names, correctly identifying all the issues and putting down legitimate advice based on statute and case law - and then barely passing?

A 70% is considered an incredible score, if there's no bell curve then actually that's a terrible score and we're all thick.

Theoretically, what do you have to do to get 100% on these exams? Because knowing 100% of the law and doing the perfect exam doesn't seem to do it.

RandolphEsq

This completely doesn't take away from Carolan's absolutely impractical paper. It was as if he was justifying the extortionate wages of lecturers by professing that a certain specific level of knowledge of a law subject is absolutely vital in order to appreciate the full extent of the law's fingering of every aspect of life. The paper was far too wishy-washy, and 'academic', even though the Law Society syllabus even recognises Constitutional Law as a mainly academic subject.

My personal dissatisfaction stems from having studied philosohpy as a minor for my undergraduate degree. Law was the major which was always seen as a practical, job-getting subject, and philosophy, although fascnating, inspiring and wonderful, was not seen from the perspective of obtaining a job. Constitutional law, for me, can be seen as a niche application of this more general perspective. And thus; I truly despise unnecessary and self-centered trumpet-tooting i.e. Carolan is making us suffer for his commitment to learning what is effectively an irrelevant subject, except at one, absolutely surreal, level.

Procrastastudy

RandolphEsq wrote: »

This completely doesn't take away from Carolan's absolutely impractical paper. It was as if he was justifying the extortionate wages of lecturers by professing that a certain specific level of knowledge of a law subject is absolutely vital in order to appreciate the full extent of the law's fingering of every aspect of life. The paper was far too wishy-washy, and 'academic', even though the Law Society syllabus even recognises Constitutional Law as a mainly academic subject.

My personal dissatisfaction stems from having studied philosohpy as a minor for my undergraduate degree. Law was the major which was always seen as a practical, job-getting subject, and philosophy, although fascnating, inspiring and wonderful, was not seen from the perspective of obtaining a job. Constitutional law, for me, can be seen as a niche application of this more general perspective. And thus; I truly despise unnecessary and self-centered trumpet-tooting i.e. Carolan is making us suffer for his commitment to learning what is effectively an irrelevant subject, except at one, absolutely surreal, level.

I have a funny felling attitudes will change when you've found you flew through it and you are just in that post exam stage at the moment!

Lillylally

Procrastastudy wrote: »

RandolphEsq wrote: »

This completely doesn't take away from Carolan's absolutely impractical paper. It was as if he was justifying the extortionate wages of lecturers by professing that a certain specific level of knowledge of a law subject is absolutely vital in order to appreciate the full extent of the law's fingering of every aspect of life. The paper was far too wishy-washy, and 'academic', even though the Law Society syllabus even recognises Constitutional Law as a mainly academic subject.

My personal dissatisfaction stems from having studied philosohpy as a minor for my undergraduate degree. Law was the major which was always seen as a practical, job-getting subject, and philosophy, although fascnating, inspiring and wonderful, was not seen from the perspective of obtaining a job. Constitutional law, for me, can be seen as a niche application of this more general perspective. And thus; I truly despise unnecessary and self-centered trumpet-tooting i.e. Carolan is making us suffer for his commitment to learning what is effectively an irrelevant subject, except at one, absolutely surreal, level.

I have a funny felling attitudes will change when you've found you flew through it and you are just in that post exam stage at the moment!

I'm loving you're positive attitude but, for me I have to say this post exam stage is like no other... I've come out of exams before feeling many emotions but never of such shock and disgust ..... I worked my tushy off and it was like a kick in the gnashers

Denham

RandolphEsq wrote: »

When I read the exam first:


Now having done it and hearing how everyone else did:

So what was the key to passing this subject? Study everything and stop picking and choosing?

RandolphEsq

Denham wrote: »

So what was the key to passing this subject? Study everything and stop picking and choosing?

I haven't passed yet! But I would never be one to go on 'what's tipped'.

Avatargh

RandolphEsq wrote: »

And thus; I truly despise unnecessary and self-centered trumpet-tooting i.e. Carolan is making us suffer for his commitment to learning what is effectively an irrelevant subject, except at one, absolutely surreal, level.

This sounds intriguing...I'm sure its the last thing on your mind, but could you post some examples of what you mean here? I'd love to see. If not, no problems. I'm curious because most of the exams in the past have involved the facts of actual cases or issues going on (but not yet reported or heard etc), but this sounds like a complete volta face.

RandolphEsq

Avatargh wrote: »

This sounds intriguing...I'm sure its the last thing on your mind, but could you post some examples of what you mean here? I'd love to see. If not, no problems. I'm curious because most of the exams in the past have involved the facts of actual cases or issues going on (but not yet reported or heard etc), but this sounds like a complete volta face.

I've no idea what I mean, I was drunk typing that!

Avatargh

RandolphEsq wrote: »

I've no idea what I mean, I was drunk typing that!

Pretty heavy-handed stuff to type when you're specifically naming the object of your attack!

RandolphEsq

Avatargh wrote: »

Pretty heavy-handed stuff to type when you're specifically naming the object of your attack!

MoneyMilo

Is anyone writing a complaint to the law society? Do people ever do this in relation to what they deem an unfair paper?

doing

MoneyMilo wrote: »

Is anyone writing a complaint to the law society? Do people ever do this in relation to what they deem an unfair paper?

You'd just be burning your bridges.

Hogzy

I really want to see what was so unfair about the constitutional paper, does anyone have a link to it?

Or can anyone upload a copy?

boomtown84

wasn't unfair...just not what people expected.

Hogzy

boomtown84 wrote: »

wasn't unfair...just not what people expected.

In fairness, You can never 'expect' anything on the constitutional paper. It took me 4 attempts to get it. Kept failing and failing until i literally covered everything in JM Kelly. I then passed with flying colours.

Passing constitutional requires an in depth knowledge of EVERYTHING on the course and a VERY up to date knowledge of recent caselaw. IMO its the hardest paper out of the 8, Not because of the content (which is quite easy to get your head around) but because of the unpredictability of the examiner.

doing

I notice the thread for selling/buying manuals is closed, what's going on there?

Hogzy

doing wrote: »

I notice the thread for selling/buying manuals is closed, what's going on there?

Looks open to me

doing

Hogzy wrote: »

Looks open to me

The link in the first post of this thread links to a closed one. Thanks.

dinemo6

Hogzy wrote: »

In fairness, You can never 'expect' anything on the constitutional paper. It took me 4 attempts to get it. Kept failing and failing until i literally covered everything in JM Kelly. I then passed with flying colours.

Passing constitutional requires an in depth knowledge of EVERYTHING on the course and a VERY up to date knowledge of recent caselaw. IMO its the hardest paper out of the 8, Not because of the content (which is quite easy to get your head around) but because of the unpredictability of the examiner.

Sorry this is prob' a very "green" Q but what is "JM Kelly"...???

Hogzy

dinemo6 wrote: »

Sorry this is prob' a very "green" Q but what is "JM Kelly"...???

The leading Irish Text on Constitutional Law.

Its Officially Hogan & White - Kelly - Irish Constitutional Law.

Avatargh

MoneyMilo wrote: »

Is anyone writing a complaint to the law society? Do people ever do this in relation to what they deem an unfair paper?

Can you set out what was thought to be unfair? I'm seeing no specifics here!

Avatargh

Hogzy wrote: »

I really want to see what was so unfair about the constitutional paper, does anyone have a link to it?

Or can anyone upload a copy?

+1