Post Exam Thoughts!

[lukew]

How did everyone go? Did you find it hard/easy?

I felt that I was definitely stretched for time, with 70 marks in 2 hours I didn't expect any less however.

[lukew]

Forgot to mention that I completely blanked cos' of the nerves at the beginning of the exam, in reading time I glanced over the front page, since all you do is 'write your name' on it and then once it was writing time and time to write your VCAA code on it, I totally blanked and had no idea what it meant in the second row labeled 'words'.

I wrote down the numerical values of my code just fine, but then I started looking all over my sheet for an alphabetic code to write on too!
The VCAA supervisor and asked me if I was going to write the words at the end of the exam, I flustered and asked her what the words were. She pointed at the numbers and spoke them, upon which I was thinking 'wtf lady I already wrote down the numbers' and  the supervisor told me to just start writing my exam and go back to it.

Funnily enough, those precious few seconds would have let me add a few well needed words to my conclusion for the last question before the time ran out.

Ah well, I'm in year 11 so I can use this exam as a learning experience

[Tragesty]

Im in year 11 too so I can use it as a learning experience too. And like you I was like 'huh, words, what?'.

What was up with the 'civil pre-trial procedures and access to the legal system' question? Thatw as the only one I fumbled upon, what points did other people raise?

[Zafaraaaa]

Im in year 11 too so I can use it as a learning experience too. And like you I was like 'huh, words, what?'.
What was up with the 'civil pre-trial procedures and access to the legal system' question? Thatw as the only one I fumbled upon, what points did other people raise?

Same here! I tried to just link it up with ACCESS at all points so then just ended up mentioning Pleadings, Discovery, and Directions hearings and how they increase access to Legal system by reducing costs and delays through allowing parties to see the case ahead of them, thus they may deicde its better for an out of court settlement so Parties wont be put off by cost in pursuing their case and can better access the legal system to pursue their case and how directions hearings identifies main issues in the case, which alleviates the confusion felt by parties regarding complex legal processes or technical language and thus allows them to better access the legal system because they understand their case more effectively and might be more encouraged to access the legal system

I think I stopped making sense somewhere in there...Hahaha

[Tragesty]

God damn wish I wrote something that actually makes sense. Will I get any marks for mentioning pleadings? I dont want to lose the whole 6 marks.

[RobDog]

Thank God, legal is done!!!

[Zafaraaaa]

God damn wish I wrote something that actually makes sense. Will I get any marks for mentioning pleadings? I dont want to lose the whole 6 marks.

Of course you will!

[damo707]

couldn't start the 10 marker lost 10 marks straight up

[lukew]

Huge sigh of relief when that was done haha. Not that I didn't enjoy Legal, but my god it was my whole life for the fast 2 weeks.

I related 'access to legal system' as understanding of legal system, financial etc. And so I listed the pre trial procedures used and how they can assist in someone with limited knowledge of the legal system as to what to expect in a 'full' trial/evidence being brought up etc etc. However also explained that it is limited in achieving the 'access to legal system' as financially and timely it was still taxing on people, regardless of the pre trail procedures.

Did anyone else get a bit stuck on evaluating 2 weaknesses of Parliament? It seemed strange to me that you'd evaluate a weakness, rather than parliament itself and listing weaknesses...

[Tragesty]

The parliament one was a bit annoying during reading time because I, like most, usually relate a strength then weakness strength then weakness - it wouldn't sound right if done in reverse, for most.

I discussed how Parliament may act as a rubber stamp when a major political party has majority in both houses.
Then said 'however, when a party does not hold majority in both houses, parliament provides for an arena for debate through vigirous scrutiny etcetc'

Then went on say Parliament may pass popular rather than necessary laws, and in the explanation included the strength of representing society's views.

Was a bit strange going topsy turvy.

[lukew]

Yeah, I argued the rubber stamp weakness and that parliament doesn't sit all day every day and since they can only pass legislation when they sit (and it's their primary role), they're ineffiecient etc

[selim31]

couldn't start the 10 marker lost 10 marks straight up

Missed out on the 2 Marker which asked us about the Media :[

[selim31]

and that parliament doesn't sit all day every day and since they can only pass legislation when they sit (and it's their primary role), they're ineffiecient etc

Wooo me to!

[Tragesty]

Is the juries act amendment 2000, whereby the right to be excused as a right was removed, thus allowing a more effective cross section of the community, an acceptable answer to the 2 mark recent change?

[STUDENT4]

didnt finish............. only did half of the last question so i dont think i can get A+ now..