FE1 Exam Thread (Mod Warning: NO ADS)

macy9

sunnyside wrote: »

I wish the Griffith people could prevent this from happening. I didn't think it was possible to download the dvd's.

I'm bitter because I've paid (a lot) to watch lectures on moodle.

Ive never heard of anyone selling them. And the average Joe wouldn't know how.

The system isn't full proof. A good download extension will rip them right out.

Have them all stored on an external hard-drive which is handy when i need to brush up on something.

legalDope!

Hey Guys,

Just wondering if anyone on here was surprised by the results of the April 2009 Equity exam?

I took it for the second time (failed it in Oct when I sat all 8 at once) and failed it again, this time only getting 38% having got 49 last time! I am stumped as to what I am missing? I got high marks in Equity in my degree.

Anyone else in the same boat?The thought of having to study equity again is killing me!!!!!!

mandz

Heineken pants wrote: »

Anyone know the usual dates for the repeat results. Think its around mid july but not sure....?

Eh, they're not repeats its just the next sitting of the exams. Two a year March/April and Sept/Oct

mandz

sunnyside wrote: »

I wish the Griffith people could prevent this from happening. I didn't think it was possible to download the dvd's.

I'm bitter because I've paid (a lot) to watch lectures on moodle.

independent colleges won't put up all their lectures in order to prevent people downloading all lectures and putting them up on youtube/selling them.

catch88

mandz wrote: »

independent colleges won't put up all their lectures in order to prevent people downloading all lectures and putting them up on youtube/selling them.

Not true.

Im doing Constitutional there and can watch them all online.

Dandelion6

catch88 wrote: »

Not true.

Im doing Constitutional there and can watch them all online.

Seconded. My work schedule currently interferes with EU and Company so I've been watching them all online.

Dante09

Whats all this about anyway? Lectures are overrated

mandz

Dandelion6 wrote: »

Seconded. My work schedule currently interferes with EU and Company so I've been watching them all online.

I was told by one of the head guys before this course started that most lectures will be put up on Moodle but not all and that those that won't be put up I would be able to watch in a day in the college.

so far so good with them as I'm doing two subjects on moodle with them.

mollydog

anyone know what a good average is over the 8 exams. sat 5 passed 5 with 60 average.

legal eagle 1

60 is good but to be truthful your FE1 results arent that important, the most important part is that you pass them!

Dante09

thats a very good average indeed but tbh i really dont think it matters at all

legal eagle 1

From experience most firms dont even bother looking at your FE1 results, some feedback I got from firms is that you shouldnt even have them listed on your cv instead just have the date when you successfully passed them!

Jev/N

Yeah, I think unless you're getting awards for an FE-1 exam there's no need to mention results

macy9

Jev/N wrote: »

Yeah, I think unless you're getting awards for an FE-1 exam there's no need to mention results

Seriously?

So they'd rather know your college results more than your FE 1's.

Awhhhh why did i have to sleep through college? I thought doing well in my fe 1's and having good post grad would cover third low class honours in my degree.

Jev/N

Well go into Independent & Griffith and while they have advertised as having so many award holders having taken their courses, they always say "writing this or that will give you a pass". Postgrad though would be a different story. Put all the results in if you like, it's just my opinion.

legal eagle 1

Macy9 dont be worrying about your college results, i got very high ones but, im still without a training contract! If you think you have defecinies as regards your results make up for it in other areas i.e with experience, sports etc.

drkpower

Noone cares what your FE1 results are. As someone said, if you won a medal or first place or something it might stand out but the actual results do not matter.

Undergraduate Results do matter to a degree; but when you are looking through a pile of appplication forms where UL, UCD, TCD etc all have different scoring systems, it tends to make spotting who has good results a little more tricky. I often tend to have a galnce at the LC results because at least you know where you stand with them!

But what reallly matters is experience, be it Internshiip, paralegal, 3 months researchin with Law Reform Commission, whatever. If you are going for a Big 5 or middle ranking firm, some kind of experience in commercial firm is important.

But what is probably most important of all (and so often overlooked) is how you answer the Qs in the application form. Silly typos and failure to answer the actual question let even the best candidates down. That is where people need to concentrate on.

catch88

I was at the Law Society's 'how to get a training contract' seminar last year and a lady in her mid to late 40's stood up and told one of the guest speakers who was from one of the top 5 that she was a legal secretary and had been told at a number of interviews that they would rather not take on a former legal secretary.

He had been saying that the best thing for potential trainees was to have some kind of experience, she argued that as a legal sec. she had ample but that the firms just weren't interested. He looked a little hot under the collar :pac:

Is their a snobbery towards legal secs. that are working their way to being a solicitor? I felt bad for her

Legal Exec

It all depends- some secretaries have experience restricted to typing, filing, diary arrangements, taking calls and greeting clients- a well paid job may I add.

I was once a secretary and my experience purely as a secretariy would not be all that useful as a solicitor but some other secretaries are really legal execs or a combination of legal exec/secretary- working on cases, dealing with doctors, barristers, other solicitors and govt depts.

If you want experience pre-traineeship you may have to start of as a secretary and then work up to a legal assistant/law clerk/juniour legal exec which means getting stuck into files and negotiating with the other side and/or your clients/other sides clients- some secretaries are better paid than these para legals and choose to remain as secretaries and some of these para legals make more than some solicitors but not many.

This is all done at the discretion of your employing solicitor.

If you are on the dole try and get some work experience- not easy as there are many others willing to work for free.

drkpower

catch88 wrote: »

I was at the Law Society's 'how to get a training contract' seminar last year and a lady in her mid to late 40's stood up and told one of the guest speakers who was from one of the top 5 that she was a legal secretary and had been told at a number of interviews that they would rather not take on a former legal secretary.

He had been saying that the best thing for potential trainees was to have some kind of experience, she argued that as a legal sec. she had ample but that the firms just weren't interested. He looked a little hot under the collar :pac:

Is their a snobbery towards legal secs. that are working their way to being a solicitor? I felt bad for her

No offence to the lady but a former legal sec in her mid-40s is not what most firms will be looking for for a number of reasons.

IT Loser

drkpower wrote: »

No offence to the lady but a former legal sec in her mid-40s is not what most firms will be looking for for a number of reasons.

I thought we had laws against that.

drkpower

IT Loser wrote: »

I thought we had laws against that.

Against what.....what did I say?

IT Loser

drkpower wrote: »

Against what.....what did I say?

Nothing you said...I was suggesting we had laws against firms not wanting people because of their age.

drkpower

IT Loser wrote: »

Nothing you said...I was suggesting we had laws against firms not wanting people because of their age.

As we all know, you can have laws against all sort of things but they dont necessarily change human behaviour.

In any case, my point was about more than age. A 40 yo legal sec is unlikely to have the academic standards an employer may want nor are they likely to "embrace" the flexibility of working conditions that any NQ solicitor will need.

Obviously I am generalising but you get the point...

Legal Exec

drkpower wrote: »

a 40 yo legal sec is unlikely to have the academic standards an employer may want nor are they likely to "embrace" the flexibility of working conditions that any NQ solicitor will need.

Surely 8 FE1's & a degree are sufficient academic standards- otherwise the possiblility of obtaining a traineeship itself would be merely academic.

I think the lady may have had more of a problem with the fact that the secretarial experience she had was insufficiently compatable compared to the litiagatory experience that legal execs have.

This would put her further down the pecking order, beneath the more experienced candidates who are usually more attractive to potential enrollers.

The "embracing of flexible working conditions" or lack of would be approximated at interview- but who knows people, its all a bit oblique as we do not know all of the facts about this lady or the strength/weakness of her credentials....

eims05

Hi I have 2008 manuals for sale. Subjects are EU, Contract, Company & Criminal. All Griffith College. I also have an Independant Colleges Criminal Manual. 50each. Price includes exam papers and postage. Email eims05@yahoo.com if interested.

Heineken pants

Recheck results.....anyone?

pink101

Met this lady at the weekend told me that her son sat EU and got 21 %. Got a recheck and was brought up to 50% - How is that possible unles the corrector was blind. anyway ever hear of anyone come up even from a 30 to a 50 -

By the way the results are meant to be out I think mid July

Heineken pants

There are some stories about ppl coming up from 37 and then there is also those of ppl failing to come up from 49. Hoping to come up in Const because i thought i did a good enough exam to pass but not feeling too confident about a mark up.From what i have read Const doesnt get marked up too often. There is absolutely no consistency with the marking or the re checks with these exams, its a joke

Joyce Country

Heineken pants wrote: »

Recheck results.....anyone?

Waiting on 2 rechecks myself - anyone with a 'inside track' hear when the law society are posting them?