Login

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

March 29, 2024, 07:46:41 am

Author Topic: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread  (Read 596321 times)  Share 

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

M_BONG

  • Guest
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #1020 on: September 29, 2013, 09:39:25 pm »
0
What you're saying is correct, but that's not what is being implied by the title. I'll try reword it to illustrate what I mean. It's entitled equal citizenship rights for aboriginals, meaning as citizens they were finally granted equal rights Remember section 51 (xxvi) deleted the clause excluding the Commonwealth Parliament from making laws on behalf of Aboriginals. The referendum ensured that the Commonwealth was able to now make laws that allowed Aboriginals to share the same rights as non-indigenous Australians  -- equality was therefore granted for indigenous citizens. Also the deletion of section 127 meant that they could now be counted in the census (just like non-indigenous Australians). So, yeah that's where the title comes from. But you're right, the referendum broadened the powers of the Commonwealth to make laws in Aboriginal affairs.

Does that make sense?

I'm 99.99% with evaluate questions, inserting an opinion is irrelevant. They don't care about your opinion (as blunt as that sounds), but rather interested in your objective evaluation of whatever it is you are evaluating. Unless the question directly asks, "to what extent do you agree/disagree" or "in your opinion," then that's when you'd provide your own opinion (as you have done). However, since I'm not 100% sure, it would be wise to consult the examiners report and see what the VCAA has to say about this or you could wait until Megan or someone else can confirm this.
Yeah that Indigenous point is a minor one. My fault, they were given equal citizenship; What I MEANT to say/make clear was that they weren't given citizenship in that referendum as that it possibly a confusion.
With evaluate, you have to have an opinion and express it in the answer. I am 100%on that. As in, you have to make a judgment on whether you agree or disagree-regardless of whether the question asked you to or not. Being objective is really bad in evaluating questions. I am pretty sure you automatically get marks deducted if you don't have a clear opinion or stance in higher-order evaluate, analyse etc. questions because you haven't truly evaluated (weigh up s + w)-  Being objective can't do that .
« Last Edit: September 29, 2013, 09:46:18 pm by M_BONG »

DetteAmelie

  • Guest
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #1021 on: September 29, 2013, 10:01:01 pm »
0
With evaluate, you have to give your opinion. As in, you have to make a judgment on whether you agree or disagree. Regardless of whether the question asked to or not. Being objective is bad in evaluating questions. I am pretty sure you automatically get marks deducted if you don't have a clear opinion or stance in higher-order evaluate, analyse etc. questions because you haven't truly evaluated.

Marks deducted? Or do you mean you won't get awarded marks?
Alright, I wasn't entirely sure anyways I was under the impression that 'evaluate' only required you to discuss the strengths and weaknesses in terms of the question, without the need of an opinion. But there you go. :)

M_BONG

  • Guest
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #1022 on: September 29, 2013, 10:08:20 pm »
0
Marks deducted? Or do you mean you won't get awarded marks?
Alright, I wasn't entirely sure anyways I was under the impression that 'evaluate' only required you to discuss the strengths and weaknesses in terms of the question, without the need of an opinion. But there you go. :)
Marks awarded*. Thanks for picking that crucial point up.
Yeah I only learned that opinion thing about evaluating things a few weeks back - lucky it was before not after the exam! :P

meganrobyn

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +62
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #1023 on: September 29, 2013, 10:34:01 pm »
+1
1. When you are asked to evaluate the process of referendum, you are expected to EVALUATE not EXPLAIN. Thus, you gain little or no marks from describing the whole referendum process.

Entirely agree. And then parts of the process might naturally come out during that evaluation.

Also, with evaluate, remember to include an opinion. Eg. I believe referenda are largely ineffective in protecting rights [link back to stimulus]

Yep, entirely agree.

2. Your second question about the parliament question.
That is an example of a composite question. It is looking for you to mix the knowledge from AOS1 with AOS3. You need to look at the strengths and weaknesses of both parliament and comment on which of the two you believe is more effective in responding to the needs of society.

Also agree!

Also, one quick thing. 1967 referendum didn't give equal citizenship. It gave the Commonwealth powers to make laws with regards to Indigenous Australians and allowed them to include them in the Federal Census. Indigenous Australians were Australia citizens prior to this referendum.

Also agree :) Aboriginal people had been citizens since 1949, and all the change to s51 did was allow the Commonwealth to make uniform national laws regarding the Aboriginal race. They could use this power to grant rights, but also to take away rights if they wanted (like some people argue the NT intervention laws do).


Lastly, just regarding the question about referenda and rights: the referendum process is very relevant to rights because it is the only way in which express rights can be removed, modified (in terms of their wording, not their interpretation) or new ones added. The process is also the only way to alter the sections on which implied rights (and even structural protections) are based. It therefore makes the people the ultimate arbiters of their own rights - but if referenda are difficult to pass, the rights are difficult to update, too. Hence, rigid.

[Update: full for 2018.] I give Legal lectures through CPAP, and am an author for the CPAP 'Legal Fundamentals' textbook and the Legal 3/4 Study Guide.
Available for private tutoring in English and Legal Studies.
Experience in Legal 3/4 assessing; author of Legal textbook; degrees in Law and English; VCE teaching experience in Legal Studies and English. Legal Studies [50] English [50] way back when.
Good luck!

meganrobyn

  • Victorian
  • Forum Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +62
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #1024 on: September 29, 2013, 10:42:57 pm »
+1
For suggested reforms to the jury system, would I be marked incorrect by VCAA on the exam if I said "one suggested reform is to improve jury directions? Because the Vic. parliament has recently legislated on this issue (Jury Directions Bill 2012).

Is VCAA really tight with 'suggested reforms"? Ie. can suggested reforms be something that is already put in place? Would something like improving jury directions not be a "suggested reform" but instead, a "recent change"?


Sorry, Murph - assented to on 13 March, so a 'recent change'.

On the bright side, the SD doesn't specify recent or recommended for your jury reforms, so having one or two of each is really just playing it safe :)
[Update: full for 2018.] I give Legal lectures through CPAP, and am an author for the CPAP 'Legal Fundamentals' textbook and the Legal 3/4 Study Guide.
Available for private tutoring in English and Legal Studies.
Experience in Legal 3/4 assessing; author of Legal textbook; degrees in Law and English; VCE teaching experience in Legal Studies and English. Legal Studies [50] English [50] way back when.
Good luck!

M_BONG

  • Guest
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #1025 on: September 29, 2013, 10:44:22 pm »
0
Sorry, Murph - assented to on 13 March, so a 'recent change'.

On the bright side, the SD doesn't specify recent or recommended for your jury reforms, so having one or two of each is really just playing it safe :)
Haha thanks, I was worried that wouldn't be answered!

tcstudent

  • Victorian
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 211
  • Respect: +2
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #1026 on: September 30, 2013, 07:13:47 pm »
0
Awesome discussion guys, thanks for the help. btw this question was a past exam question from 2004 or 05 i think so out of the old study design thus may confusion ppl, i did a trial exam from tssm last week with questions from the 2004 legal studies exam, wtf?

kevinnguyen

  • Victorian
  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 19
  • Respect: 0
  • School: Kealba Secondary College
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #1027 on: October 03, 2013, 11:04:02 am »
0
I need help in this question. - Thanks

Raymond has been found gulity of culpable driving and was sentenced to 150 hours of Community service

Identity one pre-trial procedure Raymond would have gone through before his Trial.
Assess the ability of this pretrial procedure?

akeergar

  • Victorian
  • Trailblazer
  • *
  • Posts: 42
  • Respect: 0
  • School: The Grange P-12 College
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #1028 on: October 03, 2013, 12:31:12 pm »
0
Hey guys,

This is more a general question...
So I found that when I'm responding to 10 mark questions each point I make tends to be too detailed and I feel like I write too much. I'm the kind of person who gets carried away when answering 10 mark questions so to stop myself from spending too much time on it in the exam, what is the recommended number of points you should make in a 10 mark question (sorry I know it varies depending if a question has multiple parts)?

If somebody could show me a concise but still detailed 10 mark response that would get in the upper range that would be soooo helpful.
Hopeful Atar score: 98

Arts/Law Monash University.

hannah2013

  • Victorian
  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 53
  • Respect: 0
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #1029 on: October 03, 2013, 12:40:15 pm »
+1
I need help in this question. - Thanks

Raymond has been found gulity of culpable driving and was sentenced to 150 hours of Community service

Identity one pre-trial procedure Raymond would have gone through before his Trial.
Assess the ability of this pretrial procedure?

I would talk about a bail hearing but you could also talk about a committal hearing depending
'Raymond would have gone through a bail hearing to determine if he would be granted bail or held in custody on remand. (this would probably be fine if its just one mark for identifying it)

Then is it assess the ability to uphold the elements of a fair trial?
'Bail hearings uphold the presumption of innocence by potentially releasing a person until they are proven guilty. They help ensure a fair trial as the defendant is treated innocent until it is proven otherwise in court. However the rights of the defendant need to be carefully weighed against the rights of the community. The community needs to be protected from further harm due to the behaviour of the accused'

Is the question 4 marks?
2012: Theatre studies 41
2013: English 38| Methods 31 | Biology 37 | Legal studies 43 | Psychology 44 |

tcstudent

  • Victorian
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 211
  • Respect: +2
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #1030 on: October 03, 2013, 12:52:17 pm »
0
Hey guys,

This is more a general question...
So I found that when I'm responding to 10 mark questions each point I make tends to be too detailed and I feel like I write too much. I'm the kind of person who gets carried away when answering 10 mark questions so to stop myself from spending too much time on it in the exam, what is the recommended number of points you should make in a 10 mark question (sorry I know it varies depending if a question has multiple parts)?

If somebody could show me a concise but still detailed 10 mark response that would get in the upper range that would be soooo helpful.



For 10 mark questions, I do this

Agree/disagree with the statement, E.g AN individual has recently said the jury system is outdated and plays no part in the effectiveness of the legal system, therefore introduce the piece with an
agree/disagree, now uno u have one more for stating your stance, therefore the other 9 marks comes from identifying a strength of the jury system then a weakness of a jury system

it should be 4 strengths followed by 4 weaknesses, equallying 8 marks if identified and explain,then lastly finish with a conclusion such as the jury systems strengths far outweight the weaknesses therefore provides an effective legal system, blah blah blah. which results in one mark too, so therefore you have achieved 10 marks for the questions if properly structued as stated above, hope this helps. if not there are many more people here that will help.

arshavin23

  • Victorian
  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 7
  • Respect: 0
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #1031 on: October 03, 2013, 01:11:37 pm »
0
Hey guys, anyone know if we need to know an Example of a failed referendum for the exam?

akeergar

  • Victorian
  • Trailblazer
  • *
  • Posts: 42
  • Respect: 0
  • School: The Grange P-12 College
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #1032 on: October 03, 2013, 01:14:15 pm »
0

it should be 4 strengths followed by 4 weaknesses, equallying 8 marks if identified and explain,then lastly finish with a conclusion such as the jury systems strengths far outweight the weaknesses therefore provides an effective legal system, blah blah blah. which results in one mark too, so therefore you have achieved 10 marks for the questions if properly structued as stated above, hope this helps. if not there are many more people here that will help.

Okay, you know thanks for the help, I think I'll do 4 point with a corresponding weakness/disadvantage/alternative/comparison.. I'll try it out see how i go.

I need help in this question. - Thanks

Interestingly enough I came across a similar question as you. It was on one of the exams and I remember it being two marks (at least part two was).

In your question I think it might have been the word ‘ability’ that thru you off, it’s quite strange and vague in this context. Instead I would look at it as ‘effectiveness’ of your chosen pre-trial procedure. Much like Hannah I would say a strength and weakness.

Eg.  Remand is an effective criminal pre-trial procedure as it protects the community by removing from society, and holding in custody, those accused who are believed to likely cause harm or abscond. However, if Raymond was held on remand, it denied him the presumption of innocence and removed his ability to prepare his defence thus limiting his ability to receive a fair trial.
« Last Edit: October 03, 2013, 01:20:44 pm by akeergar »
Hopeful Atar score: 98

Arts/Law Monash University.

akeergar

  • Victorian
  • Trailblazer
  • *
  • Posts: 42
  • Respect: 0
  • School: The Grange P-12 College
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #1033 on: October 03, 2013, 01:18:59 pm »
0
Hey guys, anyone know if we need to know an Example of a failed referendum for the exam?

Pretty sure study design wants an example of a successful referendum, it didn't say anything about a failed referendum. Maybe just know the stats (I think 8/44 have been successful) that shows more powerfully the ineffectiveness of a referendum then one example 
Hopeful Atar score: 98

Arts/Law Monash University.

M_BONG

  • Guest
Re: VCE Legal Studies Question Thread
« Reply #1034 on: October 03, 2013, 01:45:09 pm »
0
Hey guys,

This is more a general question...
So I found that when I'm responding to 10 mark questions each point I make tends to be too detailed and I feel like I write too much. I'm the kind of person who gets carried away when answering 10 mark questions so to stop myself from spending too much time on it in the exam, what is the recommended number of points you should make in a 10 mark question (sorry I know it varies depending if a question has multiple parts)?

If somebody could show me a concise but still detailed 10 mark response that would get in the upper range that would be soooo helpful.
I could send you a 10 marker that I just completed yesterday on a practice paper; if you want.
But generally things to look out for:
1. Task words: generally 10 markers require you to evaluate. S+W and opinion.
2. Actually responding to the whole question. Ie. don't focus on one part only. Respond to quotes, stimulus etc. Everything in the question
3. When a 10 marker has "effectiveness" in it, always refer to FAT if it is on adversary, jury or pre-trial procedures.
4. The number of strengths + weaknesses is not formulaic. But use your common sense. I always aim for 3 s + w. (4 might be too much, but I focus on detail so you might be different).