What are some good ways to prepare for exams??

[sabii]

Exams are approaching and im not sure how to prepare for them??? Study design, making notes, past exams, whats the best way?? Thank you.

[brenden]

If you haven't made notes it's not toooooooo late to start. If you do, categorise them with the study design dot points. *Note, the idea of making notes is to read those notes.
Otherwise the biggest thing you can do is past papers, for sure. Do them, learn what you got wrong and understand it, so that you could get 100 percent on every paper you've already done, then move on. That, and teaching everyone else. Remember, after you last SAC it's in your best interests for everyone else to do great on the exam so just teachteachteachteachteach.

[eeps]

Depends on your own individual learning style. If anything, don't limit yourself to just doing past exam papers. Form a study group with your friends and test one another. Note, doing more exams doesn't necessarily equate to achieving a higher grade. As what brenden hinted on, there is no point doing exams over and over again if you continue to get the same things wrong. Quality over quantity. Having a clear, concise set of notes does help from my own personal experience of doing this subject.

[DiMennzzaa]

for legal, would you recommend just looking at the study design and making notes from that and what you've done throughout the year

[eeps]

for legal, would you recommend just looking at the study design and making notes from that and what you've done throughout the year

Yeh, I would. Use the study design as a guide for what areas to revise on, because it does cut out a lot of the unnecessary/extra information in the textbooks - which is not examinable.

[sabii]

for legal, would you recommend just looking at the study design and making notes from that and what you've done throughout the year

Yeh, I would. Use the study design as a guide for what areas to revise on, because it does cut out a lot of the unnecessary/extra information in the textbooks - which is not examinable.

I also agree, however in the study design it states that you should be familiar with the role of the VLRC, it says nothing about structure; does this mean that we only need to know the role, and that there will be no such question focusing on the structure or process used by VLRC?

Also when talking about ways individuals can affect a change in law, it explicitly states that you should know petitions, demonstrations and media. Does this yet again mean that we don't have to know all the other methods (e.g. defiance of the law, lobby etc.) ?

[meganrobyn]

I also agree, however in the study design it states that you should be familiar with the role of the VLRC, it says nothing about structure; does this mean that we only need to know the role, and that there will be no such question focusing on the structure or process used by VLRC?

Also when talking about ways individuals can affect a change in law, it explicitly states that you should know petitions, demonstrations and media. Does this yet again mean that we don't have to know all the other methods (e.g. defiance of the law, lobby etc.) ?

Essentially - yes.

There ought to be no question directly on the structure or process, but... you need to know a little about the structure to understand whether you appeal to the SC or the CoA, and also to know whether the hearing will be conducted using arbitration or judicial determination. Elements of the structure and process also help in making excellent comparisons with court and strengths and weaknesses (plus, it helps you not fall into the trap of thinking VCAT is totally different from judicial determination).

With the methods of influencing parliament, the ones listed are the only ones that can be examined directly - ie have a question specifically naming them. But if they give you an open-ended question there's nothing to stop you using another method (such as defiance) if you prefer it.

[sabii]

I also agree, however in the study design it states that you should be familiar with the role of the VLRC, it says nothing about structure; does this mean that we only need to know the role, and that there will be no such question focusing on the structure or process used by VLRC?

Also when talking about ways individuals can affect a change in law, it explicitly states that you should know petitions, demonstrations and media. Does this yet again mean that we don't have to know all the other methods (e.g. defiance of the law, lobby etc.) ?

Essentially - yes.

There ought to be no question directly on the structure or process, but... you need to know a little about the structure to understand whether you appeal to the SC or the CoA, and also to know whether the hearing will be conducted using arbitration or judicial determination. Elements of the structure and process also help in making excellent comparisons with court and strengths and weaknesses (plus, it helps you not fall into the trap of thinking VCAT is totally different from judicial determination).

With the methods of influencing parliament, the ones listed are the only ones that can be examined directly - ie have a question specifically naming them. But if they give you an open-ended question there's nothing to stop you using another method (such as defiance) if you prefer it.

THANK YOU!!!! I was just a little unsure. Personally I will learn the process and other methods, just because it endows you a more broader knowledge in the content and allows you to use that knowledge like you said, to make comparison and understand the difference between VCAT and judicial determination to a high extent. However in saying that, I would rather spend now more time knowing and understanding the role, rather than pushing myself to know the process of by heart. But thank you, you always give such good advice. 

[DiMennzzaa]

I heard its better to learn each component of the study design really well rather than study than do heaps of practise exams, is this true?

[sabii]

I heard its better to learn each component of the study design really well rather than study than do heaps of practise exams, is this true?

I plan on doing that, so lets just hope it is!!

[Iniquity]

I heard its better to learn each component of the study design really well rather than study than do heaps of practise exams, is this true?

Yeah - no use doing heaps of practice exams if you're constantly making the same mistakes. At the same time though, make sure you do end up doing a few, so you can get used to applying the knowledge you've learned to questions, exam conditions, working to time constraints, etc.

[meganrobyn]

I think it depends a bit on where you're losing marks. Some people just need to memorise the whole thing, then their question interpretation, timing, structure and wording are pretty much perfect; other people know the course, but write the wrong thing or don't allocate their marks properly for every second question; others have it all in their heads, but it doesn't come out of their pen the right way - unstructured, vague, etc.