FACULTY OF LAWS
Title & Code of Course Unit
LAWS1011: Public Law
Course Unit
1.0
Year
2013/14
Course Convenor
Richard Rawlings
Number Enrolled on Course
182
Average Mark Gained
60.0
Standard Deviation
6.8
Minimum Mark
35
Maximum Mark
72
Median
60.0
Module Unit Report Form
Module Statistics
Number of
Students
Marks
Percentage
Number
80-100
0.0 %
0
70-79
6.6 %
12
60-69
49.5 %
90
50-59
34.1 %
62
40-49
4.9 %
9
35-39
1.1 %
2
30-34
0.0 %
0
20-29
0.0 %
0
0-19
0.0 %
0
Absent
0.5 %
1
Irregular
0.0 %
0
Not Completed
3.3 %
6
Withheld
0.0 %
0
A Course Organizer’s Report (quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and effects of any action(s)
taken to resolve past problems)
Overall, this was a solid performance by the public law students this year, much in line with previous years.
B Any Learning Resources problems (e.g quality of lecture or tutorial rooms)
N/A
C Issues Identified by Students (from questionnaires, staff-student committee etc.) and Action Taken or Planned
Some students felt that the course was ‘end-heavy’ with lots of cases to read. We are responding to this by creating some
extra space in the lectures and tutorials for discussion of the relevant topics (judicial review at common law and the
Human Rights Act).
Some students also felt that there was too much duplication of the discussion of parliamentary sovereignty (with the EU
and Human Rights Act connections being covered at the beginning and then – in more detail – later on). We are
responding by reducing the discussion of these connections at the beginning (though the nature of the subject does not
admit of easy line-drawing).
D Issues Identified by Visiting Examiners and Action Taken or Planned
The external commented that ‘one area in which candidates were relatively weak was with regard to their evaluation of the
secondary literature’ and further that ‘candidates would benefit from developing their own perspective on public law’.
Simply put, too many candidates appeared to think that A-level answers were sufficient and did not fully engage with the
more critical perspective required at degree level. We will try once again to communicate this vital message.
E Vice-Dean for Taught Programmes’ Comments and Action Taken or Planned