VCE Legal Studies Question Thread

[meganrobyn]

No, it's way more flexible than that. I'd do at least three.

[thaaanyan]

No, it's way more flexible than that. I'd do at least three.

Thank-you so much!!! You're a god send meganrobyn!

[cameotodd]

Would you say that s.128 comes under the structural protection of rights as they allow express rights to be amended via the referendum process?

[meganrobyn]

Would you say that s.128 comes under the structural protection of rights as they allow express rights to be amended via the referendum process?

Yep, I would - tying it in with a democratic system. Luckily, structural protections are unlisted and ambiguous, so you have a fair bit of wiggle-room.

[cameotodd]

Yep, I would - tying it in with a democratic system. Luckily, structural protections are unlisted and ambiguous, so you have a fair bit of wiggle-room.

Thanks! and also another question: how long should a typical 10 marker response be? Like roughly how many pages or words etc.

[cameotodd]

Which key question words demand a concluding paragraph? For example I've been doing a conclusion for pretty much everything (Discuss, examine, evaluate, critically evaluate etc) but I'm not sure if all of them need a conclusion and I might just be wasting time by writing it for all. So which key words definitely demand a conclusion?

[meganrobyn]

Which key question words demand a concluding paragraph? For example I've been doing a conclusion for pretty much everything (Discuss, examine, evaluate, critically evaluate etc) but I'm not sure if all of them need a conclusion and I might just be wasting time by writing it for all. So which key words definitely demand a conclusion?

Anything that asks for an opinion (ie the ones you listed, generally, plus a few others in the same category) demands either an introductory sentence or concluding sentence or both (you can also weave the opinion through the answer, but that's harder) - note, though, a *sentence*. Never a paragraph.

[scottg15]

Can someone help me with a strength of the jury system relating to the timely resolution of disputes???
Thanks in advance

[euphoric]

Tips on how to remember all the theory in legal?

[maddiej]

Hi,

Just wondering if we are required to have an evaluation of the concepts of the overall concepts of  implied rights, express rights, separation of powers and Australias approach to rights protection?

Thanks!

also scottg15 does this help: Juries don’t give reasons for their decisions which probably helps to reduce the number of appeals. Additionally there is a tendency of being more accepting of jury decisions, as they include community values 

[HasibA]

Tips on how to remember all the theory in legal?

Hey man! I suggest breaking everything up into manageable sections and then from there, delegating certain amount of time to each section. You could also try to teach someone else the content ( not necessarily someone, you can do the 'teach the dog' [or pillow in my case, as i have no pets sad lifeeee] .
Also, use acronyms for a lot of things i.e Reversing, Disapproving, Over-ruling and Distinguishing can be remembered by R.O.D.D

Try using different colours to help break up repititive content (psychology says it helps you remember better, and it looks nice = all round winning

Try listening to other people recite the content. if you want, you can try create funny or memorable 'memories' of that moment to help you remember (my teacher grabbed an umbrella when describing specific powers and how concurrent and exclusive powers fall under the 'SPECIFIC UMBRELLA', which made me LOL in class and yeah i literally cannot forget that now )

And the best tip is.. BELIEVE IN YASELFF , YA BISH!
 seriously, believe you can and you are already half way there (my life story tbh, i have been so lazy all year and now im killing exam prep). Try your best to enjoy the content, in and amongst all the stress, you really tend to forget how enjoyable legal truly is

goood luck!!!

[HasibA]

Hi,

Just wondering if we are required to have an evaluation of the concepts of the overall concepts of  implied rights, express rights, separation of powers and Australias approach to rights protection?

Thanks!

also scottg15 does this help: Juries don’t give reasons for their decisions which probably helps to reduce the number of appeals. Additionally there is a tendency of being more accepting of jury decisions, as they include community values

by evaluation , i am assuming you mean strengths and weakness. Personally, i woudn't say you would need to learn and evaluate all of those concepts directly, but it would be sensational to know them down to their intricacies. i.e the implied right of political communication arose from the necessity to uphold structural protectioins (mainly representative and responsible government, i mean , if you cannot talk about the politicians representing you / vote and deliberate  on these aforementioned politicians (as this is not a clear cut express right or structural protection) , how can you ensure you truly have a representative gov?

Things like that ^^ should suffice in your discussion. and linking to cases (I.e The Roach Case) should be plenty to award full marks in an exam situation

(BTW, if anyone disagrees with me, please say so! Anything i have stated is from pure knowledge accrued, and is accurate to the extent of my ability; please correct me if i have given inaccurate or false information!!)

Good luck!!

EDIT: didn't make sense, fixed it up now

[scottg15]

also scottg15 does this help: Juries don’t give reasons for their decisions which probably helps to reduce the number of appeals. Additionally there is a tendency of being more accepting of jury decisions, as they include community values

Yep does. It just sounds stupid if you're arguing that it is an effective system, but you only have negatives in relation to a timely resolution. So yeah, thanks heaps

[HasibA]

how many practice exams has everyone done? I've done a few, but they (to me ) aren't as effective in improving my marks as i'd like them to be. I find that reading more and more of my notes helps me much more than practice exams- the questions in the exam  don't seem to throw me 'off guard' and i usually get full marks for them (and when i don't , it's due to not going extremely in-depth due to lack of memorisation of every single concept in my text book and notes).

Sorry for the huge as question , it;s just im finding reading my notes more effective than prac exams (whilst doing generally well in them) - anyone else feel the same ?

[Alter]

how many practice exams has everyone done? I've done a few, but they (to me ) aren't as effective in improving my marks as i'd like them to be. I find that reading more and more of my notes helps me much more than practice exams- the questions in the exam  don't seem to throw me 'off guard' and i usually get full marks for them (and when i don't , it's due to not going extremely in-depth due to lack of memorisation of every single concept in my text book and notes).

Sorry for the huge as question , it;s just im finding reading my notes more effective than prac exams (whilst doing generally well in them) - anyone else feel the same ?

This happens to most people, I'd say. Legal Studies is a big 'content subject', so to speak. Much of the marks you gain will be from simply knowing the content. Obviously, there will be times when you're asked to cross over between areas of the study design that rely on your ability to apply info. If you're finding that simply churning through the content is better for you, by all means do it. Just keep in mind that there will usually be a question or two on the exam that will really test your thinking and won't be as simple as identifying which dotpoint they fall under in the SD. Best of luck!