[Serious] Law students, do you have a life?

[jellyback]

You can hide this advertisement by registering.

Calling all law students without supernatural memory and/or studying abilities, do you have a life?

Or are you cramming texts and working on assignments just to maintain high Cs, while your friends in other faculties actually live life and smell the flowers so to speak? Is law as intense as it's perceived to be?

There's a lot of buzz about balance and being well-rounded, but seriously, do you have time for family, other pursuits, leisure reading and even just to be still and ruminate?

Law is something I see myself doing, because I enjoy logical reasoning etc., and I'm prepared for the hard work that will come with it. However, I hear law students being completely occupied and stressed out, and wonder if it's worth it? I know there is sacrifice involved, but I also want to stay engaged in other important aspects of life beyond school.

Views and reflections from those before me will be much appreciated, thanks!

[melsc]

Yes, you can have a life and get decent grades. It takes a bit of getting used to and after your first year, you start to get the time management skills down. Its all about being responsible and sensible. For instance, unless something is due very soon are you really going to get effective study done on a Friday night? Keep in mind that you will need study breaks and uni should not consume your whole life. If you go to class and keep up with the work then you wont be cramming and law is tests skills you learn rather than the content (you often have open book exams or even take homes).

You just need to find balance, I tend to work about 16 hrs/week (sometimes more sometimes less depending on when assignments are due etc) go to uni around 12-14 hrs a week and try and meet up with uni friends out of uni at least once a week. I have somewhere between a credit-distinction average.

Do remember uni students also get 1 month holidays during July and Dec-Feb holidays.

[neo o]

Law is actually very, very easy, law students just whine alot. In my honest opinion, the only undergraduate courses easier than law courses are humanities, marketing, management and accounting courses.

Law students don't spend much time at university. Law students have about half the load of engineers and scientists and sometimes even less than humanities students. I have about ten hours of lectures per week, and as a first year (if you're combining with arts) you'll have one, or if you're lucky two days off class completely. I don't even go to the class for three-quarters of my courses, I only go when I know a lecturer is going to be particularly good.

Law students overstate the amount of time they spend reading. You don't need to read every case fully, if you did you'd go mad. All you need to do, particularly in first year courses is derive an essential principle from a case i.e. a sentence. You only really need to consider minority judgements and other nuances in theoretical courses or for essays, not for exams, which is where most content is assessed (at most universities anyway). If you study hard (but effectively) I can't imagine you spending more than two to three hours per week on each course, outside of exams, which you'd spend reading, preparing notes and preparing for tutorials.

Good marks are easy to get. At 'top tier' universities law faculties throw around distinctions and high distinctions like Kevin Rudd throws around stimulus money. The University of Sydney has a rule that as a MINIMUM 40% of students must get high distinctions and distinctions combined. Of course, if you're unfortunate enough to enrol in a university with standards, you may not get high distinctions at all (like MAQ) or there may be a rule that a maximum of only 15% of students can get high distinctions and distinctions combined (like ANU). Even at those universities through, credits are easy to maintain.

Law exams are easy. They're all take-homes and open book.

[compache]

I am doing law and I agree with Melsc and Neo_o.

Its time management and skill-learning, which is much better then some of the rote-learning I have to force myself to do in my Arts subjects.

If you have a good set of notes on the subject, and you learned how to apply them, you will cruise to Credit-->+.

[Strawbaby]

Originally Posted by neo o

Good marks are easy to get. At 'top tier' universities law faculties throw around distinctions and high distinctions like Kevin Rudd throws around stimulus money. The University of Sydney has a rule that as a MINIMUM 40% of students must get high distinctions and distinctions combined.

Goddamned! Only a couple of people in a given class at Melbourne ever get the equivalent of an HD

[jellyback]

Thanks all of you! The first-hand accounts really advanced my perspective on doing Law, and alleviated much of my anxieties.

Originally Posted by neo o

At 'top tier' universities law faculties throw around distinctions and high distinctions like Kevin Rudd throws around stimulus money. The University of Sydney has a rule that as a MINIMUM 40% of students must get high distinctions and distinctions combined. Of course, if you're unfortunate enough to enrol in a university with standards, you may not get high distinctions at all (like MAQ) or there may be a rule that a maximum of only 15% of students can get high distinctions and distinctions combined (like ANU).

Interesting, do you happen to know what Monash is like pertaining to this issue?

[runoutofsleep]

Originally Posted by neo o

The University of Sydney has a rule that as a MINIMUM 40% of students must get high distinctions and distinctions combined.

no.

d/hds combined are limited to about 14% for first year; 18% for senior subjects.
hds to 3 and 4% respectively.

i doubt other unis are much different.

[undalay]

Originally Posted by http://www.usyd.edu.au/handbooks/law/09_undergrad_resolutions.shtml;

24.1.5.1
The range of HD grades awarded should be between 3-10% of the total;
24.1.5.2
The range of D grades awarded should be between 5-30% of the total;

24.1.5.3
No more than 40% of a group (class of cohort) should receive HD or D grades;

and yes typically the HD and D %s are awarded on the lower end (no citation)

[izzy88]

Originally Posted by neo o

The University of Sydney has a rule that as a MINIMUM 40% of students must get high distinctions and distinctions combined.

no it isn't. It is a MAXIMUM of 40% on D and HD grades. HD is between 3-10% and D between 5-30%.

Originally Posted by neo o

Law exams are easy. They're all take-homes and open book.

my contracts exam was not open book (or a take home exam).

edit: someone got there before me while i was looking for percentages

[runoutofsleep]

oh that's strange. i assume they generally keep well clear of those maximums, in order to keep within the university wide policy?

edit: referring to undalay

[Kujah]

And you've got stacks of social events organised by your law society... for instance, SULS has something on nearly every single week.

[dude01]

Originally Posted by neo o

Good marks are easy to get. At 'top tier' universities law faculties throw around distinctions and high distinctions like Kevin Rudd throws around stimulus money. The University of Sydney has a rule that as a MINIMUM 40% of students must get high distinctions and distinctions combined. Of course, if you're unfortunate enough to enrol in a university with standards, you may not get high distinctions at all (like MAQ) or there may be a rule that a maximum of only 15% of students can get high distinctions and distinctions combined (like ANU). Even at those universities through, credits are easy to maintain.

That's a bit of an exaggeration. More like 40% of students get CREDITS. I'd say the most common grade (at any law school) would be a credit. There's no way 40% of students in a subject would get D's/HD's - maybe in later year law electives, but not for core subjects.

I've found that when grade distributions are put up for assigments/exams it usually follows a bell curve (even though unis love to say there's no scaling) and that D's and HD's are usually the smallest percentage...

[jellyback]

Originally Posted by izzy88

my contracts exam was not open book (or a take home exam).

This was an exception, or are most of your exams non-open book as well?

[melsc]

It can depend on the uni, I have always had open book exams (at UWS) and take-homes or open book exams (at MQ). For law, for Arts it was a mixed of all three

[Strawbaby]

At Melbourne, and I believe Monash, all exams are open-book. That said, it's pretty much useless except for the opportunity to quickly skim through general lists of considerations and elements of causes of action, because you're so pressed for time. You need to be able to pick what facts give rise to what causes and relate to what cases without looking at your notes much at all.