Lecturer Survey
Legal Professions Admissions Board
Legal Institutions
1.
What are the main reasons students fail?
Students essentially fall into two groups – those who don’t make it to the
exam (either through self selection or not meeting the assessment criteria)
and students who fail the exam.
Those who don’t make it to the exam underestimate what is involved (time,
commitment, nature of work) in either the entire course, or the particular
subject of Legal Institutions. Some of these students never return. Most, reorganise their lives to allow them to return and successfully complete their
studies.
Those who fail the exam have underestimated what is involved in the exam.
They have either not prepared enough topics to answer the whole paper, or
their knowledge is too superficial to indicate a satisfactory grasp of the
material. It is essential that a strong, detailed foundation is built in the early
subjects. Again, many return and succeed.
2.
What principles do students find most difficult to grasp?
The common areas of difficulty are:

Struggling to understand how the common law system works

Understanding legal method/problem solving and how to approach
and support answers to legal problem questions

Statutory interpretation (which is why we have developed a new
subject to assist students with their understanding in this regard)
3. How can students increase their chance of success?
Every student is individual, but a couple of useful strategies would be:

Take notes from the very first lecture. Don’t merely rely on tapes –
begin the learning process by writing your notes, and engaging your
brain in sorting and classifying what is important, and what you can
write down.

Writing notes also helps train your hand and your brain for the three
hour exam you need to pass (when is the last time most of us wrote
for three hours straight – lectures are the perfect opportunity to
practice.)

Keep up to date with readings
4. What factors do you give most weight to in assessing assignments?(or,
what differentiates a successful assignment?)
I think this is clearly discussed in lectures, but without being trite, the best
advice is “answer the question”. Don’t write about what you hoped the
question would be; don’t criticise what the question is – just answer it. If you
don’t know the answer – find out, rather than hoping for the best.
A successful assignment (or exam question) is:

Well structured. That is, it builds a clear argument, which addresses
the question and leads to a logical conclusion.

One which identifies all the issues for discussion, not just the first
one identified.

One in which the answer is well supported by reference to relevant
legal authority (primary, not secondary)

Grammatically correct, and follows all the standard conventions of
spelling and punctuation. While it may not be possible to identify
marks lost for poor expression, the more difficult an answer is to
follow and understand, the more the examiner is of the view that the
work as a whole has been poorly understood.
5. As an examiner, do you prefer students to take a particular approach in
structuring an answer?
It is always a delight to encounter a well structured, well supported, clearly
written – and legible- answer, free of distracting spelling and grammatical
mistakes, and not marred by the over-use of a thesaurus.
Legal Institutions is an open book exam. I think this is a barrier to success for
some students as they are tempted to rewrite their (almost relevant) notes,
rather than to use their body of knowledge to answer the question. As before,
a good answer actually addresses the question, rather than writes about the
general topic area.
6.
How does a student obtain a distinction?
It is my view that the failure rate is not a real problem in Legal Institutions –
students fail for a number of reasons, many of them related to adjustment to
study, or adjustment to the study of the law, rather than the course material.
The bigger problem is the number of marks clumped around the pass mark,
and the few people who obtain higher marks.
A distinction is obtained by a student who can distinguish themselves from
others by their understanding of the material. This involves:
7.

Identifying all the issues for discussion in the question. This is
impossible without a thorough grasp of the material.

Supporting their discussion of the issues with relevant legal sources
– and these should be primary sources.

In a problem question, applying the law to the facts to provide an
answer, rather than simply providing a theoretical discussion of the
law.

Providing a clearly structured answer, which logically addresses
the question, and builds a sustained argument.

Appropriate attention to detail – eg which section of the Act; which
judge in a particular appellate decision. (A crisp understanding of the
material.)
Any other feedback for incoming students?
We will cover this in class.
Torts
1. What are the main reasons students fail your course?
Unsuccessful students do not answer the question. The main reasons appear to be:
1. Poor planning has left the student with insufficient time to finish the
question;
2. The student did not read the question properly. An unsuccessful student will
go off on a tangent without addressing the main issues;
3. Only part of the question is answered. For example, if there are two parts of
the question an unsuccessful student will fail to consider the second part;
4. Failure to identify the issues;
5. Applying the wrong law. For example, focusing on the common law when
legislation applies.
2. What principles do students find most difficult to grasp?
In Torts, unsuccessful students fail to understand:
1.
2.
To what extent and in which contexts the common law survives;
How the common law and legislation may interact. For example, the test
for intentional torts like trespass is the common law. However, s.3B(1)(a)
of the Civil Liability Act essentially states that certain defences under the
Act apply even to intentional torts. For example, the unusual
3.
subjective/objective test of self-defence under s.52.
That there is no universal rule for a duty of care in Australia. The key to
negligence is to understand and identify the different established
categories of a duty of care. Then by applying s.3B(1) of the Civil Liability
Act, a student will know whether the common law or Civil Liability Act
tests for negligence apply.
3. How can students increase their chance of success?
Attend lectures and ask questions. The internet and on-line learning opportunities
are great but there is nothing better than instant feedback.
Don’t be afraid to ask a question. Contribute to discussions in lectures. If you are shy,
ask questions at the end of lectures or even email questions.
Do some reading in advance. Or at least, do some reading after the lecture.
Depending on the student’s preference, use either a textbook with commentary or a
cases & materials text.
4. What factors do you give most weight to in assessing assignments? (Or, what
differentiates a successful assignment?)
Structure and method are always impressive as it demonstrates an understanding of
the issues. Problem questions are a little like mathematical problems. Even if the
answer is not correct, the student will get marks for methodology and reasoning.
For example, if a negligence question involves a work accident the student should:
1.
Identify the established category of duty of care: master & servant
2.
Consider whether the Civil Liability Act applies or not: No, as it is excluded
by s.3B(1)
3.
Apply the applicable law: The common law test of negligence applies to
work accidents
If the student does not apply s.3B(1) of the Civil Liability Act properly or at all, it may
cause the student to go down the wrong path and apply the wrong law.
So the key is to show that you understand the tests by applying them methodically.
Headings are also very useful and make the examiner’s task that much easier.
5. As an examiner, do you prefer students to take a particular approach in structuring
an answer?
Yes, I like to see a clear application of the law in a methodical and structured way.
Avoid dense monolithic paragraphs reciting legislation or the facts of basic cases –
eg. Donoghue v Stevenson!
Apply the law to the facts and come to a conclusion. The conclusion does not even
have to be correct as long as the student demonstrates sound legal analysis of the
facts provided. I don’t even mind if the student makes some assumptions in the facts
as my questions are never perfect and can be open to interpretation.
6. How does a student obtain a distinction?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Answer all parts of the question – for example both parts A and B
Identification of the applicable law – preferably with headings
Concise statement of the applicable law – briefly citing common law,
legislation or both and even academic debate on controversial topics.
Application of the facts to the law – demonstrate an understanding of
the issue at hand and how the law applies
Conclusion – offer an opinion of whether the action will succeed or not
with a clear explanation why
7. Any other feedback for incoming students?
That’s enough, I think...