Subject selections and assessment (Suzanne)

So I realised the other day that LLB students (that’s law kids under the old model) can’t take classes offered to JD students (that’s law kids under the Melbourne Model). I’m really hoping that doesn’t mean subject cuts for LLB kids in law, because although the law faculty has a buttload of cash to throw around, I’m guessing most of it will probably go to JDs. Not that it would massively matter in law, since we only get to choose 8 subjects out of 24, and theoretically I could just go on exchange for a year and take all my optional subjects there if I wanted lots of choice. Plus most of the subjects I want to take are not really taught in classrooms, like the Jessup Moot or Legal Internship or Advanced Legal Research or Institutions in International Law, so they’re pretty much not getting cut since as far as the administration is concerned the only difference between JD kids and LLB kids in those subjects is which subject code gets put on the transcript.

I’m really jealous of those bloody JD kids, actually. They get classes of 20 people as opposed to 60, which makes for much better learning in law, since we’re all taught in discussion seminars. Plus they refurbished the library and student centres in preparation for the JD intake, and they never did that for us. Oh well.

I guess my concern should probably be more along the lines of the older JDs with the benefit of a previous degree and life experience pushing me out of the practical classes like the Innocence Project or the Jessup Moot that have (insanely) selective enrolment, since they’ll probably be better prepared for them and therefore more likely to be selected. Eh, I suppose I’ll just have to make up for it by being brilliant.

Given the progress I’m making in my study, that’s probably not going to happen any time soon. My legal theory essay was probably the worst piece of bullSchmitt (see two posts back for explanation of this joke) I’ve ever written, second only to the Obligations essay due on the same day. And I kind of haven’t really done anything for my Obligations exam.

Well, I know the two lectures on s 52 of the Trade Practices Act back to front thanks to today. Now I just need to work on the other 20 lectures worth of stuff. It’s going considerably better than my essays went.

I had a look at my classes for next semester, and I have no essays, only three classes assessed 100% by exam (although one of those splits 70/30 between two different exams), and one class that is 50% exam and 50% weekly assignments, plus one class assessed 100% by attendance (ah, Orchestra), although I’m thinking of switching that to chamber music which I think is 100% exam as well. I have decided that this is a good thing as I quite like exams, at least compared to essays. You can eat well and go to sleep early the night before the exam and justify it on the basis of being well-rested for the exam, which you can’t really do for essays. Plus the stuff you do on autopilot during the semester like going to lectures makes up for your lack of independent work in preparation for exams, and it doesn’t for essays because everything you have to research in essays is beyond the scope of what is covered in the course. Exams promote a much better work-life balance, at least for me.