FE1 Exam Thread (Read 1st post!) NOTICE: YOU MAY SWAP EXAM GRIDS

jenspondolik

Arcturus2112 wrote: »

There are clearly so many others in a similar situation due to this particular paper. It's not just disheartening, it's unacceptable.

Does it sound bad to say it actually comforting at least there's some clarification for me that I'm not completely off the mark. As its been a few years since I finished college i was worried I wasn't up to it after today

FeDespair

I seriously questioned myself after today too. Was trying to imagine what others were writing and thinking that i'm just not cut out for the law game.

Good to know yizzer'all'bleedin dopes with me no 'ffence like!

Arcturus2112

jenspondolik wrote: »

Does it sound bad to say it actually comforting at least there's some clarification for me that I'm not completely off the mark. As its been a few years since I finished college i was worried I wasn't up to it after today

That's not bad at all. I have always done pretty well in exams, at undergrad, postgrad and in my first four FE1s. This time around, I'm fairly confident that the previous three exams are safe. Then there was today's exam.. And there was a world of a difference between this exam and all previous exams, in my experience.

lawbear

I would definitely be on board for some sort of petition, but if we are going to take action we eould need to act fast, long before results come out. I didnt prepare for eu as well as i prepared for my other four (I passed 3 in my last sitting) but i prepared a good bit nonetheless and i would have been able to answer the past papers alot more comfortably. There is absolutely no need for the questions to be structured the way they are...aside from content...i find there extremely badly worded the problem questions.

Troels Hartmann

LawyrUp wrote: »

Well, what can I say that hasn't already been said here since 12.30 today. What an absolute joke of a paper.
EU is the only subject I have left and I'm nearly at the 5 year limit. I left another career to pursue law and all I have to show for it is a mountain of debt and years of stress.
I worked my arse off for the exam today. I tried to cover everything as best as I could so I would be guaranteed of being able to attempt 5 questions. Could barely manage 2.
I presume I'm of average intellifence yet the FE1'S have been a struggle every step of the way.
They're a baffling set of exams and even though I've passed 7, I still don't know how to pass them.
Sorry. Just on a general rant here. Today's paper was a disgrace. But in a profession that will always be oversubscribed, I guess the Law Soc can set whatever paper they want. Someone will always pass.
I really needed to get to Blackhall this September. It's not happening now. I can't afford another year of working for 200 euros per week.
If there's going to be a concerted campaign to petition for a summer resit I'm onboard.

Don't give up. Passing 7 of them is a major achievement if you're from a non-law background

LawyrUp

Troels Hartmann wrote: »

Don't give up. Passing 7 of them is a major achievement if you're from a non-law background

Thanks. Not sure what to do. Feel like there's only so many times I can dust myself off and go again.
Yeah my background isn't law at all. When I started, I just borrowed some manuals and started reading. How naive!

Rickytumtum

Long time follower here. Joined now just to say...what a ridiculous paper. I've never ever sat in an exam like that before. those questions seemed designed to catch us out. Failed without a doubt. All the stuff I had learnt and had no idea how to answer those problem questions!

FeDespair

The good news is, as you can see, you're not on your own. Laughing to myself here now. The old if you do 5 questions you're bound to get some marks...so eh...maybe he'll change his marking to...if you do any questions and write your exam number on the front you'll get marks?

COH1234

I agree with everyone going to complain about the paper. Never mind the areas the questions were poorly drafted and confusing to say the least and unfair when the work has been put in for the exam! I'm emailing on Monday and would strongly suggest everyone does as well guys strength in numbers!

COH1234

southcounty wrote: »

I'm putting pen to paper tomorrow and writing a letter too. Screw this we study for months on end and pay enough between hotels and transport as well the exam fees and then to go in and have questions come up on topics that aren't even the syllabus and casenotes on cases so fresh from the ecj there not even on the EU website yet!! I would strongly urge everyone who feels an injustice was done today to also write a letter or an email, and keep a copy of it!! The more people that speak out the better they can't ignore us all!! At the very least we deserve a resit even though it's not ideal but a lot of people,including myself, put in a damn lot of work to get to blackhall this year!! They don't realise it's peoples lives they are messing with. I am going to try and find out which authority at the law society these letters should be sent to and I will post it here ASAP for people who want to follow suit.

Do keep us posted if you find where to post the letter etc just thinking about the question on children's rights etc as well farcical

Lily Belle

lawbear wrote: »

I would definitely be on board for some sort of petition, but if we are going to take action we eould need to act fast, long before results come out. I didnt prepare for eu as well as i prepared for my other four (I passed 3 in my last sitting) but i prepared a good bit nonetheless and i would have been able to answer the past papers alot more comfortably. There is absolutely no need for the questions to be structured the way they are...aside from content...i find there extremely badly worded the problem questions.

I agree guys. If anything is to be done we need to do it fast. Not that I think it'll make a difference. But it's unacceptable, I had three other exams that allowed me to apply my knowledge. This exam made me feel inferior and has set my career back a year and is showing the law society to be as money grabbing as they've always been made out to be. Why is it that the exams are being set at a harder level in all subjects as the years progress? I've had a few drinks now and feeling slightly william Wallace about it all. Strongly worded email being drafted on the bus home tomorrow (no idea where to send it though?!).

jenspondolik

Lily Belle wrote: »

I agree guys. If anything is to be done we need to do it fast. Not that I think it'll make a difference. But it's unacceptable, I had three other exams that allowed me to apply my knowledge. This exam made me feel inferior and has set my career back a year and is showing the law society to be as money grabbing as they've always been made out to be. Why is it that the exams are being set at a harder level in all subjects as the years progress? I've had a few drinks now and feeling slightly william Wallace about it all. Strongly worded email being drafted on the bus home tomorrow (no idea where to send it though?!).

[email]fe1section{at}lawsociety.ie[/email]

Arcturus2112

jenspondolik wrote: »

[email]fe1section{at}lawsociety.ie[/email]

Also, I think Paula Sheedy is head of examinations in the Law Society. Her email is [email]p.sheedy{at}lawsociety.ie[/email]

notabasicb

Were there Qs not on the syllabus or was it just a very tough paper which focused on discrete areas?

Pepp1989

Arcturus2112 wrote: »

Also, I think Paula Sheedy is head of examinations in the Law Society. Her email is [email]p.sheedy{at}lawsociety.ie[/email]

Cc one of them I'd say. I'll prob do that when I can summon the energy to put my thoughts into words. Horrible feeling waking up this morning and remembering it.

LawCQ91

notabasicb wrote: »

Were there Qs not on the syllabus or was it just a very tough paper which focused on discrete areas?

There is at least one question that's not on the syllabus there is no way you could prepare for unless you had done your masters or PHD in it !! Then there is another question which you can 'argue' is someway related to the syllabus but it's really not..

LawCQ91

Someone posted earlier that they were going to email their lecturers from a prep course? What course did they do?

Pepp1989

LawCQ91 wrote: »

There is at least one question that's not on the syllabus there is no way you could prepare for unless you had done your masters or PHD in it !! Then there is another question which you can 'argue' is someway related to the syllabus but it's really not..

I haven't been able (mentally) to look at the paper again or think about it. What questions were the ones that weren't on the syllabus? My only memory of the exam is reading the problem questions over and over and just going 'what? Read it again'.

LawCQ91

Pepp1989 wrote: »

I haven't been able (mentally) to look at the paper again or think about it. What questions were the ones that weren't on the syllabus? My only memory of the exam is reading the problem questions over and over and just going 'what? Read it again'.

Mine is all packed up , not going to look at it again ;( but recall It's the one on the charter, something about double jeopardy on EU criminal law and one about art 47 of the charter, The one on criminal law one is definitely not on the syllabus .. To be honest I didn't know what the art 47 is it asking ..

sunshine and showers

LawCQ91 wrote: »

Mine is all packed up , not going to look at it again ;( but recall It's the one on the charter, something about double jeopardy on EU criminal law and one about art 47 of the charter, The one on criminal law one is definitely not on the syllabus .. To be honest I didn't know what the art 47 is it asking ..

And Jen pointed put that her manual says the euro and monetary stuff is beyond the scope of the FE1s. That makes that Pringle question dodgy.

Lily Belle

sunshine and showers wrote: »

And Jen pointed put that her manual says the euro and monetary stuff is beyond the scope of the FE1s. That makes that Pringle question dodgy.

The three big issues here were 1) Topics arising that weren't on the syllabus 2) Focus on discrete topics and 3) Topics coming up in such a complex manner as to make them unidentifiable (for me at least!). The latter was the biggest problem for me.

I have never been one to dwell on exams once they're done but I'm properly furious over this.

FE1 student

LawCQ91 wrote: »

Someone posted earlier that they were going to email their lecturers from a prep course? What course did they do?

I did const and EU with City. So later today when I come out from under my duvet to face the world I will send paper to lecturer.

genuinely55

Haven't been able to read through all the posts but definitely get the jist.

That paper was poorly drafted and contained multiple questions clearly beyond the scope of the FE1s. Those of you who rattled out 3.5 rubbish answers will probably pass but I was among those who couldn't even take a stab at that.

Is there consensus on the best way of making our voices heard to the law society? Just so everyone is clear on what to do.

Lily Belle

On the bright side guys, it is some day out there! Great day for the rugby. Everyone enjoy your weekends, we deserve it!!

Lily Belle

genuinely55 wrote: »

Haven't been able to read through all the posts but definitely get the jist.

That paper was poorly drafted and contained multiple questions clearly beyond the scope of the FE1s. Those of you who rattled out 3.5 rubbish answers will probably pass but I was among those who couldn't even take a stab at that.

Is there consensus on the best way of making our voices heard to the law society? Just so everyone is clear on what to do.

So far, what iv got is email to fe1 section, copying Paula Sheedy, outline issues, propose resit. I think it's unlikely but if nothing else it might help us get a better paper next time!

My roommate is working in the firm currently who my TC is with and she's going to mention it to head of HR next week. It's going to affect the firms big time with the amount of us who can't start as hoped so would be great to get them involved, they have sway.

jenspondolik

Just looked at manual again its in the context of ecb and budgetary policy etc that it says its beyond the scope of the fe1s. The articles we were asked about in that monetary question I think were related to Pringles arguments in the case but nowhere in my materials is that a particular area. I understand if it was asked in the context of supremacy and crotty that's specifically on the syllabus. I only looked at Pringle in the context of supremacy so had nothing for that question.

chops018

When I did EU there was a question on EU Criminal Law and I remember everyone giving out about it coming up. EU Criminal Law was a module in my Masters so I was able to give the question a go. There is nearly a whole treaty or section of a treaty on criminal law in Blackstones. I don't think I had any case law, and if I did it was only one case. I think I just talked about EAW, cross border policies, EUROPOL, the treaties, how criminal law took ages to develop.

I suppose those who have never studied it before, and if it wasn't on the syllabus, couldn't even attempt that question though.

FeDespair

Yeah Jen I knew it specifically in that context.

So what happens next? Write letters to the lady mentioned?

I suppose it's a case of power in numbers. Even if nothing is done, the whole thing should be highlighted for the joke that it is.

Do your degree, study like a demon for 2 full months, be pretty confident that you could at least say what the question is ABOUT...and then give your cases and apply them etc...

Yesterday I looked at the questions and thought studying at all was a waste of time.

sunshine and showers

chops018 wrote: »

When I did EU there was a question on EU Criminal Law and I remember everyone giving out about it coming up. EU Criminal Law was a module in my Masters so I was able to give the question a go. There is nearly a whole treaty or section of a treaty on criminal law in Blackstones. I don't think I had any case law, and if I did it was only one case. I think I just talked about EAW, cross border policies, EUROPOL, the treaties, how criminal law took ages to develop.

I suppose those who have never studied it before, and if it wasn't on the syllabus, couldn't even attempt that question though.

It was a specific question about the development of double jeopardy in criminal law.

lawbear

LawCQ91 wrote: »

Mine is all packed up , not going to look at it again ;( but recall It's the one on the charter, something about double jeopardy on EU criminal law and one about art 47 of the charter, The one on criminal law one is definitely not on the syllabus .. To be honest I didn't know what the art 47 is it asking .

Did anyone else attempt the charter question? I didnt have a clue what it was really asking but i remembered studying something on the charter, how the judiciary played a huge role in developing it, art 7 then with lisbon, how eu is influenced by ECHR and threw in Art 260 about pecuniary fines and that ....probaby completely wrong but I was desperate...rattled my brain to throw sometging down