Login

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

April 20, 2024, 10:29:51 am

Author Topic: Wording of the questions  (Read 626 times)  Share 

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

almostc

  • Victorian
  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 6
  • Respect: 0
Wording of the questions
« on: November 11, 2009, 08:28:15 am »
0
I've had it drilled into me to learn how the questions are worded. Such as, people generally mess up "critically examine" or "evaluate", because they only show one side when you are meant to come up with the strengths AND weaknesses.

So, are there any other terms in questions that I should learn at the last minute?

Good luck to those sitting the exam today!

Killerkob

  • Victorian
  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 60
  • Creativity is the ability to hide your soures.
  • Respect: +1
Re: Wording of the questions
« Reply #1 on: November 11, 2009, 10:58:30 am »
0
"Critically examine" and "Evaluate" while they do mean what you said, they ALSO mean to give your own opinion on the matter, whereas something like "Identify" does not require you to give your opinion (and I'm not certain whether they mark you down if you do give it in such a case.)

Such as "Critically evaluate one ADR" might go along the lines of..

"I believe the most effective ADR is -------------, this is because *outline strengths* blah blah *outline weaknesses* blah blah
and as such the pros easily outweigh the cons" Probs an 8mark question.
2009: Legal Studies
2010: English, Specialists Maths, Maths Methods, Physics, Music Styles
2011: Bachelor of Engineering (Mechatronics) & Bachelor of Science at Monash.

hard

  • Guest
Re: Wording of the questions
« Reply #2 on: November 11, 2009, 12:37:03 pm »
0
hrmm Access Education have a really great page on this where they outline every way that examiners can ask a q and say how to answer it. However i do not have a scanner.

I must disagree with the Killerkob in one part where he used the exam of one ADR. You should NEVER be adament about something, don't leave it blank. Don't say it's more effective than this or this ain't as effective. Be more subtle. First talk about strengths and weaknesses. Than in the conclusion says something like this:

"While ADR's provide a means of providing for better operation of the legal system through it's time efficient methods of resolving disputes, cheap access and often alternative means from going to intimidating and lengthy court proceedings. Nonetheless, it is often not as effective due to the fact that it is not always binding, it may leave present disputes temporarily annealed but may arise in the future, it is not always cheap due to the fact that legal representation is sometimes advisable and it may not be fair due to the fact that one party may hire legal rep while the other can't."