Actually yea good question, those aren't a-levels I could see my mate prof Gravells accepting (the head of undergraduate programs at Nottm, he wrote a land law textbook but I doubt you use it as its ridiculously detailed andactually a bit gay for undergrads! but he recommends it to us, for obvious reasons).
What, that thing is even worse!! I met Kevin Gray actually, hes a prof at Cambridge and a visiting prof here at NUS, a thoroughly nice guy. However, his book is far too detailed and (some comedy here, Gravells is a bit of a legend for this) at the start of the year G picked it up and pretended it was too heavy to lift, informed us it was far too detailed and contained alot of stuff we never needed to know, then told us the pages felt like toilet paper!! was so funny. Anyway of the 3 books (gray, gravells and thompson) gray is too detailed but extremely good, thompson is too simple, and i found gravells struck the balance nicely ... I got 70 for land (second highest in my year) so I did ok.
I have never used a casebook. They really bug me, I prefer just to read the headnotes (not really the best method). I just used a textbook and a statute book, and articles (which, as you've probably realised are the best way to get a first). Some of our textbooks are cases and materials books and the extracts from cases really annoy me and interrupt the text.
What? Thats *******s what you just wrote about a 2.2. Provided you know the law and can apply it accurately (which can ceasily be found in textbooks, im not saying CITE them) then you should get a 2.1. Although yes, heavy reliance on lectures notes does give a 2.2.
Well I can honestly say I dont, and I have a first ... just out of interest what do you ahve and where from... dont think I know.
Articles and the like *can* improve marks if used well. Sometimes they can actually cause problems, as students get involved in complex debates without establishing a sound grasp of more fundamental issues first
Yea, I agree. But I still dont accept superdillions argument that if you only know whats in textbooks and lectures its impossible to score a 2.1. Although my land law lecturers did say that you cant get a 2.1 with lectures alone, there was alot of debate and further stuff in the textbook quite sufficient to make it up.
Guys, I'm having the same crisis! I know I definitely want to do English Literature, History and French, but I can't decide on my fourth subject! I was thinking of doing Maths, but I don't think that would be a good idea as I'm predicted A/B, and I don't think I'd cope very well with the A level. I was also thinking of doing Philosophy but I've heard that it's a 'soft' option, and I'm not sure if doing three essay-based subjects would be a good idea. I'm considering Economics - is it a respected A level? Is it hard? What is it, exactly? I know it deals with money and how it affects the world around us, but could someone give me a more detailed description of what the subject consists of? I also considered Psychology, but I heard that this is also a 'soft' option, so I don't think I'll do that anymore. I'm no good at sciences. Does anyone have any suggestions as to which fourth subject I should take?