IgoPAP wrote: » Anyone else very hesitant to sit company and equity this March due to how it has been marked in the November remote exams? I'll be doing EU instead of company. I really don't want to be working on a subject for months only to get slapped with a 36 at the end of it. I'm thinking about just waiting until the Autumn which will hopefully be in person to sit those exams
Fe7 wrote: » Genuinely. It was my best and most confident exam. I even passed Tort and Equity for christ's sake. Something is not right with Company this year. I went to the bathroom once half way through - said I was going. Missed the first five minutes of the exam because of tech issues (I was in the waiting room I think its called already at 7am, but the time the exam opened, I had to do the blasted passport thing all over again). Even still, I had my pick of questions and did all five and had time to bold/italicize cases/legislation near the end, look over and make sure I was happy. Added in Covid-19 Act amendments to the CA where applicable. I had my CA tabbed and highlighted exactly as allowed as if I was to sit in person in the off chance they asked for photos of random pages, etc. I was petrified as it was the first exam to even be suspected of anything. Didn't look around my computer at all. No chance for them to think of cheating, and my knowledge was not lacking. Now, if for whatever reason I *thought* I did well but didn't, my mark would have at least been in the 40s having done 5 Qs. However I got 36.
Lallers96 wrote: » Any sign of that guy who surveyed people's results posting the average grades? Really curious to see before I apply for an exam. Looking at you equity
EmmaO94 wrote: » I was one of the (few) lucky ones on results day but totally feel everyone's frustration. For my first FE1 sitting (2018) I went in totally blind (had never looked at past papers / reports / manuals etc) and only managed about 3.5 questions and two of my marks were in the mid 30s. So imagining that you guys were a LOT better prepared than me back then and are still getting marks in the 30s means something's not right imo. I'd honestly be worried that some of your answers didn't save? Hope you guys put pressure on the Law Soc for answers because from reading on here there seems to have been a hell of a lot of people who may have been royally screwed over.
Sesh0nm0m wrote: » I was the same the first time I sat company. I did an abomination of an exam and got 29 and was like yup fair enough.. it was the second paper I ever sat and my first sitting.. this time round I studied a lot and got a lovely paper and got 28... doesn't add up. I also hope people don't acquiesce and put themselves through studying for it again when they feel like their grade was way way way wrong but honestly the stress of having to absolutely hound the LS like we shouldn't have to deal with it.
EmmaO94 wrote: » Absolutely, something doesn't add up. I know people say you can never predict how well you've done in an exam, but if you've sat FE1s before then you can pretty reliably imo rely on your gut instinct to tell you the rough ballpark of how you've done. People's comments on here & the sheer amount of them lead me to think something has gone seriously wrong with the online platform or something seriously untoward is going on re the marking...
awsah wrote: » I think everyone should be requesting their scripts, then you can determine if any of your answers were deleted and if not you can compare them to papers of people who passed. I only got 50 in company, but I will happily post it here when I receive it so that people can compare, I obviously did the bare minimum to pass!
Fe7 wrote: » What can we do? I know we can apply for a re-check. I know the people in the FE1 section don’t mark – so they don’t have any answers. There’s only two ways the 30s are achieved by the feedback on here. A. Failing and KNOWING you failed B. The examiner not tallying up marks correctly or missing entire questions in normal circumstances. This is revealed in the re-check/script viewing. Surely if (B) was the case due to the system not logging answers or something, the examiner would have caught on there were so many epic fails? Maybe they chalked it up to students doing the online method first time/pandemic stress and did not question it? Throwing in the online format and it being the first exam of the bunch just throws a wrench into the mix. There has to be a way to get answers what has happened. It will be interesting to see what the scripts look like. I haven’t said anything regarding this to them because I’m waiting for the script.But leave it to the Law Society when that happens to throw something else into the mix that leaves us with more questions than answers.
Jackson44 wrote: » Anyone looking to swap manuals DM me, looking for Property, EU, Company and Contract. I have the 4 other manuals to trade. Even if someone only have 1 of the other manuals happy to send you all that I have. Thanks.
IgoPAP wrote: » You would think, as a matter of policy, just for one or two sittings, they might actually be more lenient considering the difficult circumstances and perhaps be a bit more forgiving with the markings. Never in a million years did I think they might actually be much tougher. It's kind of bizarre. I just had a look through the Fe1 threads during the result period of previous years and this is definitely the worst people have done.
NewFe1 wrote: » I will be calling them tomorrow and explaining to them about how many people cannot make sense of their results. I'll ask if there was any issues with the online system that we were not told of. I'm also asking what the re-check process actually includes and asking for them to viewed by an external examiner. I am going to make it very clear to them that there is a worrying about of students in the same position here and that simply not answering our calls/emails or giving a 2 minute re-check won't work. I'll make sure they know that we won't be going away without knowing exactly what has gone here as it makes no sense.
LeagleEagle747 wrote: » Do update us and let us know how that goes. I'm utterly bewildered having failed property and equity. And I can't face sitting 7 exams in March...
Sesh0nm0m wrote: » So so weird that so many people failed property that never happens... Also the worst thing is if I knew I failed I would have mentally prepared since coming out of the exam in November to repeat but I thought it went well. You almost always know when you take it especially if you've done FE1s before.
Fe7 wrote: » Went digging in the archives of older FE1 threads and it seems the majority experience is if people got 30s in Company knowing full well they deserved more theres usually a marking error. Here’s hoping if there was tech errors the screen share recorded our typing. Regardless of the re-check outcome, going forward I’m going to screen capture each answer before submitting. One example of many I read: “Hi All, Just wanted to share a good news story. I sat Company in March this year and got 36%. Couldn't believe it as felt confident coming out of the exam that I at least should have passed (passed all other 7 exams first time). I decided to stick with my instinct and get it re-checked....... The re-checks are out today and I passed...Can't believe it. Moral of the story - stick with your gut and if you feel you should have passed, go for the re-check. Everyone I spoke to said that I'd never be brought up by that amount... Blackhall here I come...!!”
LeagleEagle747 wrote: » Exactly. I sat equity, property and contract with the aim of sitting the other 5 in March (incredibly foolish I know). And came out of contract with 65 and equity and property with 42, yet property was my strongest subject in college. Makes you just feel like a fool having felt it went really well only to fail, definitely reconsidering a career as a solicitor now...
