Status: Closed — this petition is no longer accepting signatures.
Final supporters
It is felt by the students of the Diploma in Professional Legal Practice at the University of Strathclyde that the Civil Litigation exam sat on 14th December 2015 was much more difficult than students had been given fair notice of.
Namely:
1) The Exam Part A consisted of 3 detailed case/problem questions, rather than previous formats where objective questions were more numerous. This meant that reading and digesting the questions alone took up a substantial portion of time, in an already time-intense exam setting.
2) Exam Part A was fundamentally more difficult in nature than previous papers. Previous year’s questions were general, and included questions such as the constituent elements of an Initial Writ, the fundamentals of written pleadings, etc., whereas the 2015 paper contained questions which were far more narrow and intricate in nature. This meant that a more detailed analysis of the procedural rules was required, which again added an element of time pressure.
3) Students were directed to rely on the examples of the past papers provided as an outline of the nature of this exam. These were misleading when compared with the nature and substance of the December 2015 exam.
More like this
Request for action and investigation regarding MANG1007 - Management Analysis…
The unreasonable Forensic Psychlogy Exam JSB174
Updates
December 14, 2015
The feedback from students across the cohort confirms that the exam structure deviated significantly from the materials provided to us. I am currently compiling these accounts to present to the department head. Post this link on your social media accounts and contact your student representative to demand an immediate review of the grading criteria.
December 14, 2015
The administration is finally feeling the pressure because of the volume of students joining this cause. Email the course director today to insist they address the misleading exam format immediately.
38 Comments
The exam was totally different from what we practiced. Spent way too much time just unpacking the questions, leaving nothing to actually write good answers. Stressful and unfair.
May the decision makers in the consideration of this petition arrive at a decision which is not; So outrageous in its defiance of logic or accepted moral standards that no sensible person who had applied his mind to the question to be decided could have arrived at it. As per Lord Diplock in Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service [1983] UKHL 6 (PF McKenna matric no. 201551343)
we were NOT made aware by our tutor that we should have watched ALL webcasts, not just those related to semester's teaching and topics. Some tutors told their students to do this- disadvantageous to those students who were not advised. No advice on MyPlace to this effect
201554843 I felt that the paper was considerably difficult. I'm comparison to previous years, the structure was different and the questions were too lenghy and there was not enough time to read it all and answer the questions. the questions asked were very specific to areas that were not covered in great detail in Webcasts. additionally the only source of guidance we had were past papers and the exam was nothing like the past papers.
This is a fair and just petition. Hopefully it will be properly considered and assessed sympathetically by Strathclyde Law School.
201554786
201573756
Share this petition
Share this petition to help it reach more people.
Your share link
Status: Closed — this petition is no longer accepting signatures.
Final supporters
It is felt by the students of the Diploma in Professional Legal Practice at the University of Strathclyde that the Civil Litigation exam sat on 14th December 2015 was much more difficult than students had been given fair notice of.
Namely:
1) The Exam Part A consisted of 3 detailed case/problem questions, rather than previous formats where objective questions were more numerous. This meant that reading and digesting the questions alone took up a substantial portion of time, in an already time-intense exam setting.
2) Exam Part A was fundamentally more difficult in nature than previous papers. Previous year’s questions were general, and included questions such as the constituent elements of an Initial Writ, the fundamentals of written pleadings, etc., whereas the 2015 paper contained questions which were far more narrow and intricate in nature. This meant that a more detailed analysis of the procedural rules was required, which again added an element of time pressure.
3) Students were directed to rely on the examples of the past papers provided as an outline of the nature of this exam. These were misleading when compared with the nature and substance of the December 2015 exam.
Updates
December 14, 2015
The feedback from students across the cohort confirms that the exam structure deviated significantly from the materials provided to us. I am currently compiling these accounts to present to the department head. Post this link on your social media accounts and contact your student representative to demand an immediate review of the grading criteria.
December 14, 2015
The administration is finally feeling the pressure because of the volume of students joining this cause. Email the course director today to insist they address the misleading exam format immediately.
38 Comments
201588291. Agree with the points raised here. The past papers were useless for this format.
The exam was totally different from what we practiced. Spent way too much time just unpacking the questions, leaving nothing to actually write good answers. Stressful and unfair.
May the decision makers in the consideration of this petition arrive at a decision which is not; So outrageous in its defiance of logic or accepted moral standards that no sensible person who had applied his mind to the question to be decided could have arrived at it. As per Lord Diplock in Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service [1983] UKHL 6 (PF McKenna matric no. 201551343)
we were NOT made aware by our tutor that we should have watched ALL webcasts, not just those related to semester's teaching and topics. Some tutors told their students to do this- disadvantageous to those students who were not advised. No advice on MyPlace to this effect
201554843 I felt that the paper was considerably difficult. I'm comparison to previous years, the structure was different and the questions were too lenghy and there was not enough time to read it all and answer the questions. the questions asked were very specific to areas that were not covered in great detail in Webcasts. additionally the only source of guidance we had were past papers and the exam was nothing like the past papers.
This is a fair and just petition. Hopefully it will be properly considered and assessed sympathetically by Strathclyde Law School.
201554786
201573756
Share this petition
Share this petition to help it reach more people.
Your share link
Petitions like this
Other petitions you might want to support
Scan to share
Anyone who scans this can sign the petition.
201588291. Agree with the points raised here. The past papers were useless for this format.