A Day In The Life of a Law Student (1 Viewer)

[Bobbo1]

Why make it open book, doesn't it defeat the purpose of the test?

 

[izzy88]

Why make it open book, doesn't it defeat the purpose of the test?

Because they are assessing if you can apply your knowledge to the factual scenario. You have to think. You can't just recite rules or principles. Trust me, its actually a lot more difficult then it sounds, and a lot of people can struggle with it.

For example. Property mid-semester exam we had earlier this semester, 1 hour, open book - results were approximately: 14% fail, 40% pass, 25% credit, 15% Ds, 4% HDs.

There are a couple of reasons as to why most law exams are open book -
1) some subjects are heavily based on statute. It is extremely difficult to remember every section and subsection of a piece of legislation. All the different little rules and exceptions, and which number they correspond to.
2) At some level, there's no point having to memorise legislation because its likely that by the time you even have to practice as a lawyer the legislation may have changed.
3) Even saying the law was the same as when you studied it 5 years ago, when you're a lawyer its unlikely you will have to suddenly recite something/some piece of information - if you have a problem for your client you will go and research it. Your law school knowledge will help you with the basics, and where to look for that information. But it certainly won't provide you with an answer immediately, at the top of your head.

Law school teaches you the basics you need to interpret legislation/case law and the foundations of different areas of law. However law is not static, it changes, and can change a lot. Law school intends to give you the tools so that when the government introduces some game changing piece of legislation, you will be able to interpret it and teach yourself what it means/how it applies. Same goes for when the High Court may alter the way it approaches something. The best law subjects can be the quite broad ones - I had a friend that did an entire subject last semester that ended up being redundant because the government then announced a couple of weeks before exams that they were changing the legislation.

 

[Aerath]

Why make it open book, doesn't it defeat the purpose of the test?

Not at all. Law isn't like the HSC - it's not about regurgitating facts: Atkins LJ in Donoghue v Stevenson said X. It's about saying: "In this scenario, the defendant has injured her shoulder, after dropping a tub of Sasha Ly icecream (sidenote: izzy88, I'm so proud of myself, I can make lame problem question names, just like law professors!! ) after the shock of seeing a cockroach at the bottom of the tub. On the surface, this may seem analogous to Donoghue v Stevenson, but, this case can be distinguished on the fact that here, there was physical harm and injury, whereas in Donoghue, there was psychiatric shock and injury."

So it's not just regurgitating the law - it's knowing the law, and then applying it to the facts, whether analagously or distinguishing the law.

 

[Bobbo1]

Fair enough!

 

[izzy88]

(sidenote: izzy88, I'm so proud of myself, I can make lame problem question names, just like law professors!! )

haha that's great! Although unfortunately I don't think any my exams so far this semester have had any kind of fun scenarios or names. They've all been pretty bland

I think I remember actually laughing in my crim law exam because of the silliness of the factual scenario, if only because life is very unfortunate for the characters in a crim law problem question! (didn't help me do that well in it though...)

 

[Aerath]

haha that's great! Although unfortunately I don't think any my exams so far this semester have had any kind of fun scenarios or names. They've all been pretty bland

I think I remember actually laughing in my crim law exam because of the silliness of the factual scenario, if only because life is very unfortunate for the characters in a crim law problem question! (didn't help me do that well in it though...)

My Crim exam was Tony, Kevin and Julia. Julia sexually assaulting Tony, and then Kevin being assaulted by Julia. Too bad Julia didn't cause grievous bodily harm/wounding by kniving Kevin in the back.

Our problem question for Torts last year was something like: "Blake fell off Clayton's ute, and landed in Horton's roses" etc etc. - unintentional assault, false imprisonment, and then, trespass of land.

In Contracts - there was a scenario where there were people playing cards, with the oral agreement that the loser would pay the winner. Harrison's cards lost to Steven's jacks; but Harrison refused to pay etc etc.

[For those who don't get it - they're parodies of law firms - Blake Dawson, Clayton Utz, Norton Rose & Mallesons Stephen Jaques.]

 

[Bobbo1]

how much reading per day would you say is required? sorry for all the questions :S

 

[enoilgam]

Because they are assessing if you can apply your knowledge to the factual scenario. You have to think. You can't just recite rules or principles. Trust me, its actually a lot more difficult then it sounds, and a lot of people can struggle with it.

For example. Property mid-semester exam we had earlier this semester, 1 hour, open book - results were approximately: 14% fail, 40% pass, 25% credit, 15% Ds, 4% HDs.

There are a couple of reasons as to why most law exams are open book -
1) some subjects are heavily based on statute. It is extremely difficult to remember every section and subsection of a piece of legislation. All the different little rules and exceptions, and which number they correspond to.
2) At some level, there's no point having to memorise legislation because its likely that by the time you even have to practice as a lawyer the legislation may have changed.
3) Even saying the law was the same as when you studied it 5 years ago, when you're a lawyer its unlikely you will have to suddenly recite something/some piece of information - if you have a problem for your client you will go and research it. Your law school knowledge will help you with the basics, and where to look for that information. But it certainly won't provide you with an answer immediately, at the top of your head.

Law school teaches you the basics you need to interpret legislation/case law and the foundations of different areas of law. However law is not static, it changes, and can change a lot. Law school intends to give you the tools so that when the government introduces some game changing piece of legislation, you will be able to interpret it and teach yourself what it means/how it applies. Same goes for when the High Court may alter the way it approaches something. The best law subjects can be the quite broad ones - I had a friend that did an entire subject last semester that ended up being redundant because the government then announced a couple of weeks before exams that they were changing the legislation.

This - as a lawyer, you dont need to memorise cases and legislation as you will have access to a wide range of resources for research(some lawyers are lucky enough to have clerks, paralegals and graduates to do it for them). So really, having an open book test mirrors whats required in the legal profession. As for reading, there is quite a bit but most people dont do it, as it is mostly pointless (I'm only first year though, so I cant speak for the later years). And yes, lecturers can come up with the most ridiculous situations imaginable for problem questions - but after seeing some cases in criminal law, sometimes I wonder whether those cases are more bizarre.

 

[Aerath]

This - as a lawyer, you dont need to memorise cases and legislation as you will have access to a wide range of resources for research(some lawyers are lucky enough to have clerks, paralegals and graduates to do it for them). So really, having an open book test mirrors whats required in the legal profession. As for reading, there is quite a bit but most people dont do it, as it is mostly pointless (I'm only first year though, so I cant speak for the later years). And yes, lecturers can come up with the most ridiculous situations imaginable for problem questions - but after seeing some cases in criminal law, sometimes I wonder whether those cases are more bizarre.

Brown anyone? I'm sure even izzy88 remembers that one.

 

[enoilgam]

Brown anyone? I'm sure even izzy88 remembers that one.

Thats the one I was referring to - bizarre to say the least.

 

[Aerath]

I hate doing Arts sometimes......

Everyone else has finished their exams.

 

[izzy88]

I hate doing Arts sometimes......

Everyone else has finished their exams.

You're not alone I (and the rest of 4th yr law) only just finished half an hour ago. Exam had some pretty evil multiple choice as well- gosh I hate those kind of questions!

 

[Politic]

It depends, some firms give it weight whilst other firms dont really care. However, what really matters with law (and most degrees for that matter) is that you have good marks and extra cirriculars. If you are averaging P's and have no extra cirriculars, its going to be difficult to find work, regardless of whether your degree is from UNSW or Usyd.

What are some examples of extra curriculars?

 

[enoilgam]

What are some examples of extra curriculars?

Getting involved in university stuff, like being part of the law society, entering team or solo competitions (mooting, legal letter writing etc). I also think it applies to stuff like volunteer work. What employers really like however is work experience (this goes for most degrees).

 

[Politic]

Getting involved in university stuff, like being part of the law society, entering team or solo competitions (mooting, legal letter writing etc). I also think it applies to stuff like volunteer work. What employers really like however is work experience (this goes for most degrees).

work experience as in interships? are there any other avenues?

 

[enoilgam]

work experience as in interships? are there any other avenues?

Internships are probably the most prominent one, other people get jobs at law firms like as a research assistant etc.

 

[Aerath]

work experience as in interships? are there any other avenues?

Paralegal positions at law firms.

 

[Omnidragon]

If I had my time again I'd drop this useless degree. Lucky I cut a year off.

 

[andyfg88]

If I had my time again I'd drop this useless degree. Lucky I cut a year off.

Wow, you think that having knowledge about what governs your everyday life is useless? That's umm... interesting to say the least.

 

[Omnidragon]

Wow, you think that having knowledge about what governs your everyday life is useless? That's umm... interesting to say the least.

Righhhhhhhtttt... let me know when your law degree helps you save $200k. Bookmark this page somewhere on your browser

If you ever become a lawyer when you graduate in 2015 or whenever you do and one day wonder what you're doing when you're 3 years in to the workforce in 2018 or whatever it is, open this page and realise "crap... this Omnidragon guy told me so in 2011".