Exam Results - Implications (1 Viewer)

[neo o]

The Semester 2, 2005 distributions for Torts and Contracts 2 are reproduced below.

Torts

Fails below 40: 2 (1%)
Fails above 40: 1 (~0%)
Passes: 41 (12%)
Credits: 168 (49%)
Distinctions: 114 (33%)
High Distinctions: 20 (6%)


Contracts 2

Fails below 40: 6 (2%)
Fails above 40: 0
Passes: 50 (17%)
Credits: 133 (46%)
Distinctions: 87 (30%)
High Distinctions: 12 (4%)


Also, some 2003 stats are here

30-35% D's. If only they did that at ANU... From the ANU Law handbook...

In light of those considerations, the final assessment results for students in each course (except Honours Thesis and Law Internship) should normally conform to the following guidelines:
High Distinction (80% +)
2–5% of candidates
Distinction (70–79%)
10–20% of candidates
Credit (60–69%)
30–50% of candidates
http://law.anu.edu.au/Publications/llb/2006/llbhandbook2006.pdf

@ Summer Rain: I've seen past scaling tables for Usyd, UNSW, MAQ, and ANU and both of the former universities tend to award a larger proportion of Ds. As long as you put the same amount of effort in at Usyd as you're putting in at UNSW you should be fine (assuming you're doing well at UNSW that is )

 

[MoonlightSonata]

Is that 2005 or 2006 (before you said you had the 2006 sats). You are a legend for posting this up, do you have some mates in student admin or something to get this info. Your great. Its very interesting indeed and very scary too Thats alot of distinctions and HD's, its not that uncommon to fall into that range. I hope sydney uni has similar stats otherwise I won't be transfering.

2005. I only have the Semester 1 stats for 2006.

No problem. But don't thank me, thank Lazarus - he is the one who shared them with me

 

[je2obrien]

I got offered a summer clerkship today at a mid-sized country firm. They didn't even ask to see my results .

One of the directors did make a joke that anything above a 50 was wasted effort heh. I guess it's a different kettle of fish for the big six.

 

[Summer Rain]

I got offered a summer clerkship today at a mid-sized country firm. They didn't even ask to see my results .

One of the directors did make a joke that anything above a 50 was wasted effort heh. I guess it's a different kettle of fish for the big six.

Je2obrien, you give us all hope.

They sound really cool and down to earth; I hope there are others like that. You must have really good looks

 

[hfis]

I got offered a summer clerkship today at a mid-sized country firm. They didn't even ask to see my results .

One of the directors did make a joke that anything above a 50 was wasted effort heh. I guess it's a different kettle of fish for the big six.

May I ask how you got said clerkship? I'm really curious.

Did you just send in a resume with lots of work experience on it or what?

 

[Summer Rain]

2005. I only have the Semester 1 stats for 2006.

No problem. But don't thank me, thank Lazarus - he is the one who shared them with me

Thanks Lazarus.

Moonlight, let me know when u get s2 2006.

 

[Summer Rain]

I just had a thought, it is a bit off the topic but I find it weired how I am talking to all these people and I don't know who you are. I could be sitting opposite you in the library or behind you going up the escalater or pass you by on the stairs (I usually only take the stairs walking down though). Hell, you could have been my peer support tutor for all I know.

Just had to share that thought. Pretty scarry stuff.

 

[Frigid]

we are also the same person that stands between you and a law D/HD.

 

[sarevok]

MS:

The other thing is that despite what some people have said, passes are usual for most law students. People who contribute to this board are, by virtue of the fact that they are contributing to this board in their spare time, more likely to consider a 4 a failure. Because of that - they are also more likely to hang around with like-minded people. So don't be so concerned - getting passes is perfectly normal - you're not going to be driven out of a law firm with a stick just because you have a few of them on your acedemic transcript.

Agreed. I noticed in the USyd Semester II Results thread that even c_james with his 100 UAI and multiple state rankings copped a pass in Torts last semester Though if the selection process wheredanton posted is accurate, it's a scary thought. I'm not sure I want to work for a big law firm anyway; if it's that hard to get in, I can only imagine what working for them would be like...

 

[Frigid]

Agreed. I noticed in the USyd Semester II Results thread that even c_james with his 100 UAI and multiple state rankings copped a pass in Torts last semester

law courses and HSC courses are like apples and oranges.

(although i'm glad i got a lowly UAI and still managed a D in torts )

 

[je2obrien]

May I ask how you got said clerkship? I'm really curious.

Did you just send in a resume with lots of work experience on it or what?

This may be privative means to get a seasonal clerkship but it worked for me! I simply went through the yellow pages and rang up firms. I basically said:

"Hi my name is James, I've just finished my second year of law studies and was just wondering if your firm offered any seasonal clerkships?"

The worst they can say is no . Most of them told me no, or they already had a clerk (so you send them a resume "for their files"), some of them said to call back another time. Finally one told me to send in my resume and a cover letter and they would put it to the partners the next day at their meeting.

I guess it pays to be direct sometimes . And don't worry about the rejections. They are inevitable.

As for my resume having heaps of experience? I really only have had about a week of experience preparing a case with a sole practitioner (whom i met when he was blind at a judge's reception ) and subsequently instructing the barrister. Also did some voluntary work with vic legal aid interviewing clients.

 

[Summer Rain]

law courses and HSC courses are like apples and oranges.

(although i'm glad i got a lowly UAI and still managed a D in torts )

That's right. A high UAI does not necessarily correspond to high grades at university and in fact I have been told by a professor that alot of people who scrape through often do better than those who received the highest UAI's. I am not sure why this is so though. I think the HSC is different from university study. The grading system is different. For example your UAI is effected by what school you go to and what your teacher teaches whereas at uni there is no scaling and the teacher that teaches you marks your paper so they know exactly what you have studied and what you have not. In other words you are in the same boat as the other students in your class; there is no disadvantage.

Also, I think in a course like law, you need to be able to think like a lawyer or have a legal mind. While a high school student might get a UAI of 100%because they were a genius at 4 unit maths and 3 unit chemistry or something. Does not mean they will be good at law though. I wouldn't be able to study b.science even if my life depended. It all depends on how your brain works.

 

[sarevok]

law courses and HSC courses are like apples and oranges.

(although i'm glad i got a lowly UAI and still managed a D in torts )

I agree, though I think it's unlikely that you'd see someone with a 100 UAI get consistently poor marks in law (from the thread, his other humanities and law subject were excellent)
I was just pointing out that it's possible for even the most intelligent and talented of us to occasionally get a bad mark

 

[M_M]

Wooow~This is the first time i come back after my original post and I am absolutely bombarded by all the replies. Thanks for replying guys!! *shake claws*

Well, I am feeling much better now after being comforted by some of you guys. I will study harder for the remaining four years and hopefully I can even out the bad scores I had...One thing i need to mention is that I did five law subjects this year because I'm doing Science(psychology)/Law which is structured differently from other first yrs.

To show my determination, I borrowed the crim and admin textbooks from the lib so I can have an early start (after Xmas of course! @_@)

And good luck to all the guys out there who have had a bad year like I did. Hopefully everything will be better in the Year of Pig ^_^

 

[Frigid]

One thing i need to mention is that I did five law subjects this year because I'm doing Science(psychology)/Law which is structured differently from other first yrs.

ouch. i guess foundations, contracts 1+2, public and torts hurt?

 

[LaraB]

lol everyone stresses over 1st year marks...

it's not necessarily a case of you do worst in first year and get better as people have already said... That said though... i mean, first semester i got 3Cs and a D... 2nd and 3rd semester i got 3Ds and a HD, this semester i got 2HDs and 2Ds with the marks rising in each respective bracket... and a lot of friends have experience similar mark ranges... a lot of us found that first semester really was a getting the hang of things kind of semester and then we did a lot better after that...

But everyone's different... you could be the opposite like some people and start out really well but burn yourself out or lose interest or pick poor subjects for you and go the reverse way...

Especially in a course like Law, you've gotta keep in mind how different units can be... some are really like.. hands on and "legally based", some are very historical/philosophical, some have a more commercial slant, some have a more "personal" slant which all means you'll remember them or enjoy them at varying degrees and thus do more/less well than you'd like...

 

[Summer Rain]

I think also law is special in the sense that it is a bit of a "hit or miss" displine. Sometimes I do a problem question and I am so sure I am way of track, or I am applying the correct area of law etc (Everyone studying law here knows exactly what I mean) and you don't really know how well you go until you get your assignment/exam back. You may get a HD in one subject and a P in another. In other courses such as business, you generally know if you wrote a good assignment or did a good presentation and can maintain the same grade more or less. Law is much more unpredictable. The best students can bomb out on a subject, its because the law is really uncertain and thats what makes it hard.

Lara B is also right, the subjects vary greatly, some are more philisophical, others have much more cases and problem orientated like contracts which is why I sometimes prepare different style of notes or no notes at all for exams depending on the nature and structure of the subject.

 

[c_james]

That's right. A high UAI does not necessarily correspond to high grades at university and in fact I have been told by a professor that alot of people who scrape through often do better than those who received the highest UAI's. I am not sure why this is so though. I think the HSC is different from university study. The grading system is different. For example your UAI is effected by what school you go to and what your teacher teaches whereas at uni there is no scaling and the teacher that teaches you marks your paper so they know exactly what you have studied and what you have not. In other words you are in the same boat as the other students in your class; there is no disadvantage.

Also, I think in a course like law, you need to be able to think like a lawyer or have a legal mind. While a high school student might get a UAI of 100%because they were a genius at 4 unit maths and 3 unit chemistry or something. Does not mean they will be good at law though. I wouldn't be able to study b.science even if my life depended. It all depends on how your brain works.

I think I can explain this one, from my (admittedly limited) university experience. Generally, smarter people (and I recognise the subjectivity of this description) will perform excellently at subjects they're passionate about, but not so crash hot in those they have absolutely no interest in. I think this is because they are, in general, the kind of people who learn for life, and not simply for the marks. As I've found, your typical law student, on the other hand, will trudge through the murkiest, most boring academic crap and scrape themselves a distinction or possibly HD.

Case in point with my Torts mark - it was an atrocious subject, and I hated every second of it. I think it's safe to say I won't become an ambulance chasing lawyer, anyway. Foundations, on the other hand, I found very enjoyable, and my mark reflected that.

I think the reason I did so well in the HSC is because I really did enjoy all my subjects - the advantages of being able to choose your year 12 subjects. Not so with the first three years of law. Ditto for my arts subjects - I chose only the ones I had a keen interest in.

That said, for fear of getting any more yucky passes, I'll probably try to become the typical, jaded law student next semester.

Moral of the story - rote learners sometimes prevail over the smart because the smart get complacent and/or simply disinterested.

 

[El Misterio]

Case in point with my Torts mark - it was an atrocious subject, and I hated every second of it. I think it's safe to say I won't become an ambulance chasing lawyer, anyway.

While you're entitled to hate torts as much as you like, it should be pointed out that tort law comes up in commercial legal situations all the time, and it isn't only personal injury lawyers that need to have a strong command of the area.

That said, universities do, unfortunately, tend to unduly emphasise the personal injury aspects of tort law.

 

[c_james]

While you're entitled to hate torts as much as you like, it should be pointed out that tort law comes up in commercial legal situations all the time, and it isn't only personal injury lawyers that need to have a strong command of the area.

That said, universities do, unfortunately, tend to unduly emphasise the personal injury aspects of tort law.

Yeah, "commercial legal situations" aren't exactly my cup of tea either. I'm much more interested in international law and possibly criminal law.