nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

FE1 Exam Thread (Read 1st post!) NOTE: YOU MAY SWAP EXAM GRIDS

Tom Young

This is the new FE1 Exam Thread

This is a link to the old one: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055143169

This is a link to the next one: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056907164

Sorry, I'm aware we are in the throws of FE1 season, but due to a server issue, a new thread was required. Old chats and posts below - Thanks!

Mod warning in post #1205: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=88514663&postcount=1205

Mod warning in post #2555: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=91819622&postcount=2555

Mod warning in post #2593: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=92025688&postcount=2593

Moderator: The above warnings mean it is not ok to buy, sell or swap (trade) any exam materials in this thread. Exam grids are the only exception. You may request and exchange exam grids but at no point will money be allowed to change hands for them.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Fe1student1234

Deleted User wrote: »

It may do! I just didn’t think it added up to over 2000 as I had only heard of the metropole and rochestown Park in cork and croke park and The RDS in Dublin so estimated 200. My number was in the 500s alright so perhaps the 2000 is a combination of students sitting EU and Tort?

Yeah I assume it’s a combination of both so that’s why I assumed/ guessed around 1000 students in each exam.

I think there was another cork one and then the law society was a venue and there were around 200 in that I think possibly more or slightly less.

[Deleted User]

Fe1student1234 wrote: »

Yeah I assume it’s a combination of both so that’s why I assumed/ guessed around 1000 students in each exam.

I think there was another cork one and then the law society was a venue and there were around 200 in that I think possibly more or slightly less.

Oh I thought the restriction at the time was still 50 per room? I dunno anyway... we all sat the exams/had our exams cancelled through extenuating circumstances on no fault of our own and I think the LS could have made provisions for examiners/themselves to get the results out so not to affect us in our next sitting too

Fe1student1234

Deleted User wrote: »

Oh I thought the restriction at the time was still 50 per room? I dunno anyway... we all sat the exams/had our exams cancelled through extenuating circumstances on no fault of our own and I think the LS could have made provisions for examiners/themselves to get the results out so not to affect us in our next sitting too

Yeah it was 50 per room but they used multiple rooms and the big halls and dining room.

I agree they should have but it’s possibly more complicated than we think it’s unprecedented for everyone involved. The results definitely should not be released only a week before the exams

IgoPAP

Hate to say it, but there's no way they're changing the October dates for the exam. They're already making preparations for it.

Boltabb

Can I ask if anybody else here didn't get results yesterday, who has passed all exams other than the August sitting?

hnum0

It seems that if it is possible to have two sitting, that would make a lot of sense - one that is earlier for people who are in the hybrid program, or people who just feel well prepared and want to take it sooner, and then one that is in November to allow people awaiting results to make a decision on retakes if they need to. This would also help make the distancing guidelines easier, less people sitting at the same time.

aisoburke1994

I see a lot of people posting "there's not much we can do here" or "they won't change the exams" or so on.

I realise they held an additional sitting in August due to the March examinations, but we are living in extremely unprecedented times. There is a global pandemic going on and we have only been told yesterday when these examinations will happen. The applications are not even out yet.

There might not be much we can do, but we might as well try? These exams are stressful enough. I agree with hnou, let people have a choice, have two sittings. It's only fair to every student.

FE1Rookie

I don't see how 1 person can mark hundreds of papers in time, as much as I'd like to get my results asap. Plus marking papers isn't their sole job as far as I know. Not trying to undermine anyone's efforts but what can they do? I'm certainly not being sympathetic to the LS, as they have failed us many, many times, however what can be done?

I would not want the examiner to rush through it and just jot down any auld marks to fly through them for the sake of people getting their results earlier. I could be wrong now, but isn't it just the internal examiner that marks the paper initially and the external one does the rechecks...so I really don't see any way this can be expidited as we all would like.

Plus the October exams can't be delayed. People will need them done in October so they can start the hybrid course.

Like this sucks for me, and a lot of us, but not much can be done can there?

Lawlaw12

htnor wrote: »

At the end of the day this was a rescheduled additional sitting. For anyone like me who hadn’t even registered to sit them in March it was an added bonus to have sat them in August.

For a lot of us this was not an additional sitting - we had been registered to sit this exam in March and were left in the dark for months waiting for it to be rescheduled.

And for anyone in this situation who has a training contract lined up and starting before the March 2021 sitting, October is our last opportunity to pass, so giving us one weeks notice is extremely unfair.

IgoPAP

I wonder if the Law Society monitor this board?

FE1Rookie

IgoPAP wrote: »

I wonder if the Law Society monitor this board?

Ha good one. They barely monitor their emails or their phones.

LawLover2020

Do people think that the Law Society could put on an extra sitting in November like they did in August. A sitting with just a Tort and EU exam for those candidates who get their results on the 28th but didn't pass. I feel that could be the fairest solution for all parties concerned. Keep the October sitting as is. And then have an extra sitting in November just for those candidate who received their Tort and EU Law results on the 28th and failed but were then too late to apply to sit the exam in October. They could even arrange the two exams to be taken online like they did for some candidates a number of weeks ago. I wanted to sit Tort in March and couldn’t when it was cancelled the day before so the August sitting for me wasn’t an additional sitting for me. This is all such a nightmare.

Fe1student1234

LawLover2020 wrote: »

Do people think that the Law Society could put on an extra sitting in November like they did in August. A sitting with just a Tort and EU exam for those candidates who get their results on the 28th but didn't pass. I feel that could be the fairest solution for all parties concerned. Keep the October sitting as is. And then have an extra sitting in November just for those candidate who received their Tort and EU Law results on the 28th and failed but were then too late to apply to sit the exam in October. They could even arrange the two exams to be taken online like they did for some candidates a number of weeks ago. I wanted to sit Tort in March and couldn’t when it was cancelled the day before so the August sitting for me wasn’t an additional sitting for me. This is all such a nightmare.

That would be ideal but they should definitely only allow the people that failed it to sit it and not open it up to new applications like in August

FE1Rookie

They didn't limit the people who could sit the August sitting, I can't see them having the organisation skills to know exactly who failed as of the 28th - and also did not pass via a recheck - and limit this November sitting to just them.

Fe1student1234

FE1Rookie wrote: »

They didn't limit the people who could sit the August sitting, I can't see them having the organisation skills to know exactly who failed as of the 28th - and also did not pass via a recheck - and limit this November sitting to just them.

They would have saved themselves a lot of trouble if they did limit it in the first place.

Lawlaw12

Fe1student1234 wrote: »

That would be ideal but they should definitely only allow the people that failed it to sit it and not open it up to new applications like in August

I agree
The fact that they opened up the August sitting to everyone has only added to this disaster as it resulted in much more papers to correct. Not to mention unnecessarily having more people to accommodate with social distancing :rolleyes:

htnor

LawLover2020 wrote: »

Do people think that the Law Society could put on an extra sitting in November like they did in August. A sitting with just a Tort and EU exam for those candidates who get their results on the 28th but didn't pass. I feel that could be the fairest solution for all parties concerned. Keep the October sitting as is. And then have an extra sitting in November just for those candidate who received their Tort and EU Law results on the 28th and failed but were then too late to apply to sit the exam in October. They could even arrange the two exams to be taken online like they did for some candidates a number of weeks ago. I wanted to sit Tort in March and couldn’t when it was cancelled the day before so the August sitting for me wasn’t an additional sitting for me. This is all such a nightmare.

This actually would be a great solution. Hopefully they will consider it.

htnor

Lawlaw12 wrote: »

For a lot of us this was not an additional sitting - we had been registered to sit this exam in March and were left in the dark for months waiting for it to be rescheduled.

And for anyone in this situation who has a training contract lined up and starting before the March 2021 sitting, October is our last opportunity to pass, so giving us one weeks notice is extremely unfair.

Totally understand that and it is a complete joke. I would love nothing more than to know if I failed so I can go ahead and sit them while still fresh in my head.

Also you say about not being able to sit in March, I assume you mean if you are starting a pre seat.. I know in my firm pre seat trainees have previously been waiting on final results from a March sitting - do other firms just flat out not allow this?

Lallers96

Whoever said the results were meant to be out the 3rd week of September are the type of people that ruin this thread, make me mistrust the information here, and make me never want to read this again.

IgoPAP

Lallers96 wrote: »

Whoever said the results were meant to be out the 3rd week of September are the type of people that ruin this thread, make me mistrust the information here, and make me never want to read this again.

Think that was someone passing on LS communications.

We shouldn't start blaming each other here. Only makes things worse.

nicolesd

are people signing the petition?

Aoibhin511

IgoPAP wrote: »

I wonder if the Law Society monitor this board?

I think they do, the day we had to register for the August sitting and the site kept crashing and everyone was complaining here, they posted with advice

lsheehaneire

Excuse me !!! I received the email telling me they would be released hopefully in the 3rd week of September. I directly quoted what was said. I was merely passing on information in a bid to clarify the situation. Personal attacks are not warranted.

Lallers96

lsheehaneire wrote: »

Results for the rest of us are the 3rd week of September, just received email from Law society. Congrats to everyone who is on the way to blackhall, enjoy the celebrations !!

You did not say hopefully you stated it as fact. I did not personally attack you. I just harshly judge anyone who spreads if buts and maybes as fact. Hence the spreading of misinformation

CSC1997

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHmmjnEdtx8

Lealaw

Lallers96 wrote: »

You did not say hopefully you stated it as fact. I did not personally attack you. I just harshly judge anyone who spreads if buts and maybes as fact. Hence the spreading of misinformation

Ah here, this platform is for sharing information. The mens rea here was not malicious (to utilise my study notes). No-one can say 100% that the information they receive is going to happen, especially not when it is during a pandemic and coming from the LS. Channel your anger elsewhere, no need to go hunger games on this. Chill out

lsheehaneire

My original post was : Personal email "Please note result release date should be third week of September 2020."

"Should" being the operative word. I took what the law society said at face value believing it to be true, I had no intention to mislead and give mis information.

You might do well to remember that we could all potentially be colleagues in the future and this level of hostility is absolutely disgraceful.

Al1501

Would anybody have an up-to-date constitutional grid, or know what come up on the March paper?

Fe1student1234

nicolesd wrote: »

are people signing the petition?

I won’t be.

I checked it and think it has like 80 signatures

Lallers96

lsheehaneire wrote: »

My original post was : Personal email "Please note result release date should be third week of September 2020."

"Should" being the operative word. I took what the law society said at face value believing it to be true, I had no intention to mislead and give mis information.

You might do well to remember that we could all potentially be colleagues in the future and this level of hostility is absolutely disgraceful.

What hostility??? I just quoted you directly...