VCE Legal Studies Question Thread

[Lear]

Thanks Poet, I really appreciate it
I will also consult my teacher.

[madhu04]

Do we need to special condition attached to CCO?  If so how many should I learn?

It's things like unpaid community eork, curfew,  alcohol exclusion etc


Thanks

[dsabeta]

I'm abit unsure as to how to approach question 3 of the sample exam
"Why is the requirement for standing important for a court to be able to make laws?"

[DoctorTwo]

I'm abit unsure as to how to approach question 3 of the sample exam
"Why is the requirement for standing important for a court to be able to make laws?"

Hey! Once you understand how standing affects a court's ability to make laws, you won't forget it and you can use it in a variety of examples, such as the disadvantages for Section 109.

To answer the question, the requirement for standing is important for a court to be able to make laws because it cannot make common law (or change/interpret statute law) unless a plaintiff with standing initiates a case.
To have their claim heard in a court, a plaintiff must be directly affected by the defendant's actions, and be affected to a greater degree than the general public. Basically, you can't just sue someone because they're doing something wrong, you have to be directly affected by it. For example, in the McBain case, McBain, the doctor, was directly affected by the inconsistency in the Commonwealth and state laws because he was fined under the Commonwealth Act. If somebody who noticed the inconsistency, but wasn't directly affected by it, tried to challenge the state law, they probably wouldn't have standing and the court wouldn't be able to hear their case, even though it was completely justified.This is why I said it can be used for disadvantages in Section 109 - the state law cannot be deemed inoperable unless someone with standing challenges it. Remember, courts cannot change the law without a case before them, even if it is justified.
The requirement for standing is in a similar vein to costs and time in bringing a case to court. If nobody has standing, or nobody has the time and money to initiate a case, the court cannot change the law, so their law-making ability is extremely limited in this respect.

[dsabeta]

Hey! Once you understand how standing affects a court's ability to make laws, you won't forget it and you can use it in a variety of examples, such as the disadvantages for Section 109.

To answer the question, the requirement for standing is important for a court to be able to make laws because it cannot make common law (or change/interpret statute law) unless a plaintiff with standing initiates a case.
To have their claim heard in a court, a plaintiff must be directly affected by the defendant's actions, and be affected to a greater degree than the general public. Basically, you can't just sue someone because they're doing something wrong, you have to be directly affected by it. For example, in the McBain case, McBain, the doctor, was directly affected by the inconsistency in the Commonwealth and state laws because he was fined under the Commonwealth Act. If somebody who noticed the inconsistency, but wasn't directly affected by it, tried to challenge the state law, they probably wouldn't have standing and the court wouldn't be able to hear their case, even though it was completely justified.This is why I said it can be used for disadvantages in Section 109 - the state law cannot be deemed inoperable unless someone with standing challenges it. Remember, courts cannot change the law without a case before them, even if it is justified.
The requirement for standing is in a similar vein to costs and time in bringing a case to court. If nobody has standing, or nobody has the time and money to initiate a case, the court cannot change the law, so their law-making ability is extremely limited in this respect.

This explanation was seriously great, thank you sososo much!!

[Google123]

Hi all,
Just asking about how to structure the Sample Exam 10 mark question?

"Discuss the extent to which the use of a judge and jury in criminal and civil trials helps the justice system achieve the principles of fairness and equality."
There are many things going on, so how do you separate them?
I tried doing it this way:
- Intro = to a large extent...
- paragraph 1 = jury - how its use leads to a fair trial, how it achieves equality (total of 2 points)
However, (and then one weakness of it)
- paragraph 2 = judge - how its use leads to a fair + equal trial (total of 2 points)
One weakness
- conclusion

My answer is long, (38 lines in the answer book) and I submitted this to my teacher, but she says it's not comprehensive enough for 10 marks. She said provide examples for my points. But what does she mean by examples? It's just the roles right? What would be examples?

Would really appreciate some help!

Thank you very much! 

[Rachel braden]

Heyy
does anyone no where to find practice exams for new 2018 study design???
cos ive got hardly any except VCAA Sample 2018
thanku

[DoctorTwo]

For question 5 on the sample exam, which is an 'advise' question, do we have to agree that CAV is the most appropriate body and then justify this? Because I wrote a sample answer that said basically VCAT was more appropriate because it offers a final and binding decision and the vendor isn't prepared to settle while CAV only takes cases that have a reasonable chance of settlement. My teacher said she wouldn't have given me full marks because CAV is more appropriate. Is there a right answer and will you lose marks for choosing one side over another? Thanks.

[MissSmiley]

Hi everyone,

Just wanted to know, how do you answer an 'analyse' question? Our teacher mentions to write about 'how' and 'why,' but if it's a question like 'analyse the role of the media to encourage law reform' or something like that, how do you answer this?
I can explain the 'how' part, but what about the 'why'? Just because it gets public attention?
How do you analyse any analyse question?

Also, (perhaps past students can respond better to this):
how do the assessors separate students when it comes to the higher bands? Since memorising plays a big part in legal and which potentially everyone can do as a basic requirement, how do you stand out?
Obviously the way you answer questions matters, but will it be impressive if you know the very comprehensive details about every section in the areas of study?
Or what do you need to do that'll be special?

Sorry for the many questions, but would really appreciate a response!!

Thank you very much!

[clarke54321]

Just wanted to know, how do you answer an 'analyse' question? Our teacher mentions to write about 'how' and 'why,' but if it's a question like 'analyse the role of the media to encourage law reform' or something like that, how do you answer this?
I can explain the 'how' part, but what about the 'why'? Just because it gets public attention?
How do you analyse any analyse question?

This question type entails some sort of evaluation. Usually, you'd begin with a general outline. For example, 'While the media has provoked some legislative change, its effectiveness remains somewhat limited'. Your answer could then follow something similar:

P1: What are the strengths of the media? How: through its ability to reach a wide-spanning audience. Why (is this effective): it can garner greater support/engage greater attention. Including an example would be excellent here.

P2: What are the limitations? Repeat.

Therefore you will often find that the how/why is inextricable. You are just explaining the significance of a certain function. Examples are great for helping with this 

Also, (perhaps past students can respond better to this):
how do the assessors separate students when it comes to the higher bands? Since memorising plays a big part in legal and which potentially everyone can do as a basic requirement, how do you stand out?
Obviously the way you answer questions matters, but will it be impressive if you know the very comprehensive details about every section in the areas of study?
Or what do you need to do that'll be special?

I think the best way to stand out is through detail. Yes, many students will have memorised the core points. But not many students will have taken the time to consider the wider implications of these points. For example, a student may remember that in the adversary system, a witness needs to submit to strict procedural rules. However, they may not consider how narrow questions can incite intimidation, pressure or a fallible memory, where the prospects of a fair and unbiased trial is severely restricted. If not included in the question, an even stronger student may then link these issues to the relevance of reform and the approaches being suggested to overcome these issues.

In addition to the importance of detail, examiners want you to be clear. Set out your short contention at the top, and go through your paragraphs systematically reaching some kind of conclusion. It does not need to be flowery. Conciseness is appreciated.

Good luck 

[MissSmiley]

This question type entails some sort of evaluation. Usually, you'd begin with a general outline. For example, 'While the media has provoked some legislative change, its effectiveness remains somewhat limited'. Your answer could then follow something similar:

P1: What are the strengths of the media? How: through its ability to reach a wide-spanning audience. Why (is this effective): it can garner greater support/engage greater attention. Including an example would be excellent here.

P2: What are the limitations? Repeat.

Therefore you will often find that the how/why is inextricable. You are just explaining the significance of a certain function. Examples are great for helping with this 


I think the best way to stand out is through detail. Yes, many students will have memorised the core points. But not many students will have taken the time to consider the wider implications of these points. For example, a student may remember that in the adversary system, a witness needs to submit to strict procedural rules. However, they may not consider how narrow questions can incite intimidation, pressure or a fallible memory, where the prospects of a fair and unbiased trial is severely restricted. If not included in the question, an even stronger student may then link these issues to the relevance of reform and the approaches being suggested to overcome these issues.

In addition to the importance of detail, examiners want you to be clear. Set out your short contention at the top, and go through your paragraphs systematically reaching some kind of conclusion. It does not need to be flowery. Conciseness is appreciated.

Good luck 

This is exactly what I wanted!!
You're the best, Clarke!!
Thank you!😊

[ImTryingIGuess]

Quick question, How many lines or rather how long should 3 mark questions be?
I know it is an open-ended question, as it is dependant on the size of the writing, but I just want an estimation.
From what I've seen it's around 1 paragraph length, but I tend to write in a brief straight to the point manner, and so that answers itself feels rather short.

Thank you in advance!

[MissSmiley]

Quick question, How many lines or rather how long should 3 mark questions be?
I know it is an open-ended question, as it is dependant on the size of the writing, but I just want an estimation.
From what I've seen it's around 1 paragraph length, but I tend to write in a brief straight to the point manner, and so that answers itself feels rather short.

Thank you in advance!

Hey!
A 3 mark question on the sample VCAA exam has 12 lines, and they're about 14cm in length haha!
It's good that you write straight to the point, but you want to fully explain your point as well. So I think it's best if you stick with the 1.5 mins per mark rule, so you have 4.5 mins for the 3 marker. If you write at a steady pace, I'll suggest maybe using 3 or 3.5 mins for 3 mark questions, so you can maybe have extra time for the 6,8 and 10 markers.
Make sure you write at least a sentence to elaborate on your point. (most likely you'll have 1 main point, but then elaborate, provide an example, briefly conclude)
That should occupy at least 10 lines + will hopefully be manageable in 3-4 mins!
Does that answer your question?

Good luck!

[ImTryingIGuess]

Hey!
A 3 mark question on the sample VCAA exam has 12 lines, and they're about 14cm in length haha!
It's good that you write straight to the point, but you want to fully explain your point as well. So I think it's best if you stick with the 1.5 mins per mark rule, so you have 4.5 mins for the 3 marker. If you write at a steady pace, I'll suggest maybe using 3 or 3.5 mins for 3 mark questions, so you can maybe have extra time for the 6,8 and 10 markers.
Make sure you write at least a sentence to elaborate on your point. (most likely you'll have 1 main point, but then elaborate, provide an example, briefly conclude)
That should occupy at least 10 lines + will hopefully be manageable in 3-4 mins!
Does that answer your question?

Good luck!

Thanks Smiley! really appreicate the help! I will try and do 10 lines haha

[31415926535]

How would you answer the last two questions on the VCAA sample exam?