legallyginger wrote: » Back on this rant again but emailed the LS twice for candidate ID has anybody had any luck? Can't imagine the panic on the morning not being able to log in
CoconutHeadMia wrote: » Can anyone remember if terms came up on the last contract paper?
Iso_123 wrote: » Just as a matter of interest, how long before the exam do people aim to have all their notes done and when do people start learning off/route learning their notes? Its my first time doing them with a job that doesn't allow for a lot of study leave (my last job I had 5 weeks off and now i'll probably get 2.5)
Paraeagle wrote: » I think this very much depends on a person’s study method. For me, writing notes is my method of learning and I am painfully slow but that’s probably because I try not to take notes passively and instead try to understand and learn the information/concept as I go. I probably won’t finish my notes until the week of the exams! Works for me but everyone is different. I only say this because it can sometimes be very daunting hearing of others who have finished their notes months in advance of an exam . Stick with whatever has worked for you in the past.
BugsySiegel wrote: » Depends how you study. I do one topic at a time and constantly revise the ones Iv done briefly so Im route learning from the start. No point thinking about what someone else is doing really. Its whatever works for you.
law987 wrote: » Re: pay during Blackhall, Eversheds and Dillon Eustace both pay full salary and pay your fees so I think it's safe to say all the biggest 10 firms do. Also seems the big firms hire very much in advance, I know Arthur Cox are now full until 2024 and most of the others until 2023. I did a lot of milkround interviews in November, got a TC for 2023 but hoping to have FE1s finished in March, so currently wondering how to fill the next 2 years, hopefully travelling and working abroad, any suggestions welcome haha
Iso_123 wrote: » Thanks! You guys are right about doing what works best for each person, I just get so paranoid all the time that what I'm doing isn't enough so I try get some justification by asking other people! its my toxic trait lol
lawgrad49 wrote: » I understand the advantage for those firms having a steady pipeline by filling up well in advance but surely they have to set aside a few spots every year for drop outs/those who don't pass all 8 by the time they are meant to?
LawLearnin wrote: » What is actually being tested in the exams? I've sat six now and they don't appear geared towards either the workplace/skills required to be a solicitor or a thorough test of legal knowledge. (Yes, I'm pretty jaded with the FE1 process at this point but it is a genuine question!) I graduated over a decade ago and have done a range of professional certs/masters/courses since and they were all more attuned to either the related workplace or the broadening of your knowledge in that field. I feel like if I could get my head around what the FE1s are actually testing, then I'd be less stressed while studying and when sitting them, and am really interested to hear what ye think.
maggie95 wrote: » Do we think they would have contacted us by now if they suspected us of cheating or will it just be an automatic fail tomorrow? Worried about toilet breaks ahahahaha
Lallers96 wrote: » Memorisation of case names and legislation, application of case law and legislation to given scenarios. Then for essays the same but with commentary on the law itself. I'd imagine those are skills you'd need as a solicitor.
EmmaO94 wrote: » From working in a law firm, I have first hand experience that memorisation plays little part in practice lol, considering firms have their own law libraries and near limitless online resources. Personally I think open-book exams would make a lot more sense so that it's not basically a memory test.
IgoPAP wrote: » It's important to remember that the only reason the Fe1s exist in the current format because a few disgruntled QUB students took a Case to the Supreme Court relating to exemptions and won. The Law Society absolutely can, and should, remove the exams for law graduates as it was the case before. And don't give me this "integrity of profession" nonsense. Unless you're arguing that solicitors that qualified decades through the old system are somehow incompetent.
maggie95 wrote: » B-b-but Emma that would compromise the integrity of the exam!!
rightytighty wrote: » The difficulty of getting a training contract is very often bemoaned in this thread. Imagine how hard it would be without the FE1s and hundreds of eligible graduates joining the hunt every year.
SKLaw wrote: » Anyone else get that email re. logging in with your candidate number? Every email from the LSI makes me anxious these days! I’m just very nervous for the results
