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

Jenosul

sh_owens wrote: »

Maybe we should all take collective action as a student body and pen a letter to the President of the Law Society mentioning our concerns. A lot of the concerns noted by users above are undoubtedly valid and should be communicated to the Law Society for them to consider it.
Would anyone be interested in getting involved to draft a letter we could send this week? Or does anyone have any contacts in the Law Society we could send this letter to?
I have sent numerous emails over the last few weeks and I'm aware most candidates have too which have just been ignored.

Does anyone have any other ideas? It seems like collective action as a group might be the only option to communicate our concerns and highlight the unfair treatment us as candidates have received during these unprecedented times.

I agree with a letter as it is quite worrying the stress levels people are experiencing by both the virus which if we get we do not know for certain how our body will react, the future of gaining a contract and studying as mentioned before for exams many if not most solicitors currently practicing did not have to sit! It was very unprofessional and disappointing not to send a collective email.

Law20213

Jenosul wrote: »

I agree with a letter as it is quite worrying the stress levels people are experiencing by both the virus which if we get we do not know for certain how our body will react, the future of gaining a contract and studying as mentioned before for exams many if not most solicitors currently practicing did not have to sit! It was very unprofessional and disappointing not to send a collective email.

Love good petition and letter but fear will fall on deaf ears

Coopie

I think who ever as one exam left should be given an exemption so we can start the Hybrid in December. This would reduce the numbers you have to deal with.

SKLaw

Law20213 wrote: »

Couldn’t agree more but another problem is they opened the Fe1 exams up to college students why....I don’t get either, they should be studied separately for one....and perhaps if they didn’t do that and the number students sitting these exams hadn’t increased as result in the change to the Rules, we would be sitting online exams right now and no Previous cancelled sittings

I feel like they should’ve limited these sittings to those who have already graduated so that they could facilitate for the rest of the candidates

Law20213

Coopie wrote: »

I think who ever as one exam left should be given an exemption so we can start the Hybrid in December. This would reduce the numbers you have to deal with.

You can’t give a pass to one and not all it wouldn’t be fair....and there be uproar

Aoibhin511

Law20213 wrote: »

Couldn’t agree more but another problem is they opened the Fe1 exams up to college students why....I don’t get either, they should be studied separately for one....and perhaps if they didn’t do that and the number students sitting these exams hadn’t increased as result in the change to the Rules, we would be sitting online exams right now and no Previous cancelled sittings

Yes! This is what I've been thinking. I know they didn't know the pandemic was going to happen when they changed they rules but like why don't they just change them back for this year at least

Fe1student1234

Aoibhin511 wrote: »

Yes! This is what I've been thinking. I know they didn't know the pandemic was going to happen when they changed they rules but like why don't they just change them back for this year at least

I’m not sure that would even reduce the numbers by a significant amount - how many college students are actually sitting them

Like either way there’s a good few hundred per exam
My exam number for both sittings so far have been 2000 and over

Law20213

Aoibhin511 wrote: »

Yes! This is what I've been thinking. I know they didn't know the pandemic was going to happen when they changed they rules but like why don't they just change them back for this year at least

I’ve no doubt it has increased revenue for them but has made competition of securing a training contract 10 times harder now for graduates on top of the current climate due to Covid it’s ****

john_fe12020

As one of the current third level undergrads (final year) who had applied for March and October, as much as I'd be a bit put out if we were to be excluded in a capped sitting, if numbers are the issue for the Law Society then online exams for those who are on their last exams and those with imminent TC starting dates should take priority. And with such reduced numbers, surely then an online exam could've taken place in October or November from the get go.

Now that would've been forward planning with a proper contingency plan, but it would be the shock of the century if the Law Society were to be found thinking ahead...

LawStudent999

Another thing the LS have failed to appreciate is that while the holding of these exams is their sole concern, many of the people here have concerns outside of the exams, which are dependent on them going ahead. Whether it be training contract deadlines to be met or hybrid course commencement dates, these all require constant consideration, whereas the LS have the benefit of making their decisions free of any other external pressures.

Feeling genuinely sorry for a lot of people here as I'm sure there are many things to consider alongside these exams and the pressure that comes with them.

Law20213

Fe1student1234 wrote: »

I’m not sure that would even reduce the numbers by a significant amount - how many college students are actually sitting them

Like either way there’s a good few hundred per exam
My exam number for both sittings so far have been 2000 and over

It would actually there’s anything from 500-600 students sitting exams prior to the changes in the fe1 rules and there’s certainly not the same number of training contracts on the market Since but I’m speaking from grads position so

Fe1student1234

Law20213 wrote: »

It would actually there’s anything from 500-600 students sitting exams prior to the changes in the fe1 rules and there’s certainly not the same number of training contracts on the market Since but I’m speaking from grads position so

I didn’t realize it went up that much tbh like there was 1000 sitting each exam in August or so!

I’m not really focused on the training contract aspect right now haha I just didn’t realize that usually there’s only like 500 per exam before these rule changes
I couldn’t imagine sitting the FE1s whilst in college

Lawlaw12

Fe1student1234 wrote: »

I didn’t realize it went up that much tbh like there was 1000 sitting each exam in August or so!

I’m not really focused on the training contract aspect right now haha I just didn’t realize that usually there’s only like 500 per exam before these rule changes
I couldn’t imagine sitting the FE1s whilst in college

I sat one sitting before the rule change and my exam number was over 1500, so if exam numbers are related to numbers sitting then it seems there was more than 500 or so

Lawlaw12

Aoibhin511 wrote: »

Yes! This is what I've been thinking. I know they didn't know the pandemic was going to happen when they changed they rules but like why don't they just change them back for this year at least

That seems like the logical thing to do! But don't forget when they postponed the March sitting to August they opened that up to everyone (not just those already registered in March) even though they knew of the pandemic at that stage. So I doubt they'll start limiting numbers now
Even though that made things more difficult for themselves, as if they had not opened it up to all they would have had their confirmed numbers from the March sitting, and would have had results out quicker...

Law20213

Lawlaw12 wrote: »

I sat one sitting before the rule change and my exam number was over 1500, so if exam numbers are related to numbers sitting then it seems there was more than 500 or so

I don’t think the exam numbers are in direct correlation to the number of people sitting the exams

Fe1student1234

Law20213 wrote: »

I don’t think the exam numbers are in direct correlation to the number of people sitting the exams

I was pretty sure they were - could be wrong haha

How else do they give out the numbers ?

AlexTG356

The already made point of comparison between us and the leaving certs and the fact that the leaving certs had their results decided by past results is an excellent one.
Many of us have sat and passed these very same subjects in college. I don’t understand why the law society can’t just look at our transcripts and do the same for us due to the current circumstances and the fact that the online exams seem to be such an issue to organise. Surely that’s the easiest option? If the DES made that call for an entire year of leaving certs the Law Society could surely make it for us.

Ianmc97

anyone else find it curious that the law society posted in here for the first time only an hour or 2 after a journalist posted that they were interested on doing a story about the issues with the FE1s......... maybe my tinfoil hat is on too tight.

Law20213

Fe1student1234 wrote: »

I was pretty sure they were - could be wrong haha

How else do they give out the numbers ?

I thought at random but then again I could be wrong!

Law20213

Ianmc97 wrote: »

anyone else find it curious that the law society posted in here for the first time only an hour or 2 after a journalist posted that they were interested on doing a story about the issues with the FE1s......... maybe my tinfoil hat is on too tight.

Ironic I know but they do chime in here now and again particular when exams results are released and the system crashes regularly

sarahlawless

Ianmc97 wrote: »

anyone else find it curious that the law society posted in here for the first time only an hour or 2 after a journalist posted that they were interested on doing a story about the issues with the FE1s......... maybe my tinfoil hat is on too tight.

I spotted that. Enough material on this thread for a mean article.

Ianmc97

Law20213 wrote: »

Ironic I know but they do chime in here now and again particular when exams results are released and the system crashes regularly

I stand corrected so. I hadn't remembered seeing them here. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt as it is an update on the situation albeit an empty one

nicolesd

sh_owens wrote: »

Maybe we should all take collective action as a student body and pen a letter to the President of the Law Society mentioning our concerns. A lot of the concerns noted by users above are undoubtedly valid and should be communicated to the Law Society for them to consider it.
Would anyone be interested in getting involved to draft a letter we could send this week? Or does anyone have any contacts in the Law Society we could send this letter to?
I have sent numerous emails over the last few weeks and I'm aware most candidates have too which have just been ignored.

Does anyone have any other ideas? It seems like collective action as a group might be the only option to communicate our concerns and highlight the unfair treatment us as candidates have received during these unprecedented times.

Paula sheedy in the law society is great at repying she has been replying to me all week even outside of work hours. P.Sheedy@LawSociety.ie

Dliodoir2021

rebuke wrote: »

It is quite ironic to see the Law Societies press release today in relation to mental health week considering the amount of unwarranted stress they have subjected FE1 students to over the last number of months

Number of decades***

Ruined a lot of peoples twenties, etc.

I wish I was exaggerating but I'm not.

Hamerzan Sickles

I would be in favour of awarding exemptions to students (maybe leaning towards those who are close enough to finishing all eight) who have had their sittings messed around on them now three times in a row. We can't just indefinitely press pause on our lives while this virus ravages society when so many things could be done ahead of time to make life easier for everyone involved.

Fe1student1234

Hamerzan Sickles wrote: »

I would be in favour of awarding exemptions to students (maybe leaning towards those who are close enough to finishing all eight) who have had their sittings messed around on them now three times in a row. We can't just indefinitely press pause on our lives while this virus ravages society when so many things could be done ahead of time to make life easier for everyone involved.

I wish they would award exemptions to candidates in relation to the subjects they are registered for for November ( means Id only have 2 left ðŸ€·ðŸ¼*♀️) but I can’t see it happening at all

Law20213

Hamerzan Sickles wrote: »

I would be in favour of awarding exemptions to students (maybe leaning towards those who are close enough to finishing all eight) who have had their sittings messed around on them now three times in a row. We can't just indefinitely press pause on our lives while this virus ravages society when so many things could be done ahead of time to make life easier for everyone involved.

would it not be prejudice to allow one person to pass over another just because one person is closer to finishing the exams than the other...like what if your half way through them

Fe1student1234

Law20213 wrote: »

would it not be prejudice to allow one person to pass over another just because one person is closer to finishing the exams than the other...like what if your half way through them

Yes they’d have to give everyone an exemption from this sitting or no one

But it’s definitely not going to happen

LawStudent999

While the idea of exemptions seems out of the question in my opinion (apologies if I’ve shattered anyone’s hopes) if they do happen they will have to be across the board on the basis of who has registered to sit them I think.

nicolesd

Ianmc97 wrote: »

anyone else find it curious that the law society posted in here for the first time only an hour or 2 after a journalist posted that they were interested on doing a story about the issues with the FE1s......... maybe my tinfoil hat is on too tight.

Has people been replying to the jornalist? maybe if we get them involved in our concerns and suggestions might put more pressure on the society! as it seems to have done. Agreed it is odd we are just hearing from them now on this after their comment!