How much do people actually revise for collections
I’m at Oxford doing law so we have exams (collections) at the start of every new term and I’m just wondering how much people actually revise and study for them. Usually when I ask people in my college, they say they hardly did anything over the vac then they get way better grades than me lol. So I’m wondering if that’s just their natural talent or if they’re actually doing way more revision than they say they are.
I try to do at least a few hours a day but the one when I go back is for a module I absolutely detest (admin) and really struggling to motivate myself to study for it. Should I just leave it and not do much like everyone else apparently does?
I try to do at least a few hours a day but the one when I go back is for a module I absolutely detest (admin) and really struggling to motivate myself to study for it. Should I just leave it and not do much like everyone else apparently does?
Original post by Username123ab
I’m at Oxford doing law so we have exams (collections) at the start of every new term and I’m just wondering how much people actually revise and study for them. Usually when I ask people in my college, they say they hardly did anything over the vac then they get way better grades than me lol. So I’m wondering if that’s just their natural talent or if they’re actually doing way more revision than they say they are.
I try to do at least a few hours a day but the one when I go back is for a module I absolutely detest (admin) and really struggling to motivate myself to study for it. Should I just leave it and not do much like everyone else apparently does?
I try to do at least a few hours a day but the one when I go back is for a module I absolutely detest (admin) and really struggling to motivate myself to study for it. Should I just leave it and not do much like everyone else apparently does?
Original post by thegeek888
I wonder if "Collections" are only in Year 2? 😧
As the opening post clearly states, collections are exams that take place at the beginning of each term.
OP, collections serve two purposes: they keep you in practice for exam technique, and they give your tutors a view of how you are doing, but they are of course college exams, not university exams, which have no impact on your degree classification. The main method of monitoring your process is the tutorial system.
It is many years since I did collections, but I don't recall anyone doing much work for them.
TL/DR? Don't worry, be happy.
(edited 8 months ago)
Original post by Stiffy Byng
As the opening post clearly states, collections are exams that take place at the beginning of each term.
OP, collections serve two purposes: they keep you in practice for exam technique, and they give your tutors a view of how you are doing, but they are of course college exams, not university exams, which have no impact on your degree classification. The main method of monitoring your process is the tutorial system.
It is many years since I did collections, but I don't recall anyone doing much work for them.
TL/DR? Don't worry, be happy.
OP, collections serve two purposes: they keep you in practice for exam technique, and they give your tutors a view of how you are doing, but they are of course college exams, not university exams, which have no impact on your degree classification. The main method of monitoring your process is the tutorial system.
It is many years since I did collections, but I don't recall anyone doing much work for them.
TL/DR? Don't worry, be happy.
thegeek888, If you are ever going to be a law student, or a lawyer, you will need to improve your comprehension of texts. It is important to read every word of a statutory provision, a contract, a case, an examination paper, etc, and to understand each word. You failed to read the opening post with care. Now you have failed to read my previous post in this thread with care. I invite you to look again at what I wrote.
Another useful tip for every aspiring lawyer: do not express opinions about subjects of which you have little or no knowledge. Knowledge does not consist of parroting things which you have seen on the internet. I refer you to the Merton vs St John's thread for an example of what not to do. Be like Mr Dove in "The Eustace Diamonds". See chapters 25 and 28.
If I were a waspish Oxford Don of the old school, I might say "Young man, I doubt that the workload at Oxford will ever trouble you", but I'm not that Don, so I shan't say that thing.
Another useful tip for every aspiring lawyer: do not express opinions about subjects of which you have little or no knowledge. Knowledge does not consist of parroting things which you have seen on the internet. I refer you to the Merton vs St John's thread for an example of what not to do. Be like Mr Dove in "The Eustace Diamonds". See chapters 25 and 28.
If I were a waspish Oxford Don of the old school, I might say "Young man, I doubt that the workload at Oxford will ever trouble you", but I'm not that Don, so I shan't say that thing.
(edited 8 months ago)
Original post by Stiffy Byng
thegeek888, If you are ever going to be a law student, or a lawyer, you will need to improve your comprehension of texts. It is important to read every word of a statutory provision, a contract, a case, an examination paper, etc, and to understand each word. You failed to read the opening post with care. Now you have failed to read my previous post in this thread with care. I invite you to look again at what I wrote.
Another useful tip for every aspiring lawyer: do not express opinions about subjects of which you have little or no knowledge. Knowledge does not consist of parroting things which you have seen on the internet. I refer you to the Merton vs St John's thread for an example of what not to do. Be like Mr Dove in "The Eustace Diamonds". See chapters 25 and 28.
If I were a waspish Oxford Don of the old school, I might say "Young man, I doubt that the workload at Oxford will ever trouble you", but I'm not that Don, so I shan't say that thing.
Another useful tip for every aspiring lawyer: do not express opinions about subjects of which you have little or no knowledge. Knowledge does not consist of parroting things which you have seen on the internet. I refer you to the Merton vs St John's thread for an example of what not to do. Be like Mr Dove in "The Eustace Diamonds". See chapters 25 and 28.
If I were a waspish Oxford Don of the old school, I might say "Young man, I doubt that the workload at Oxford will ever trouble you", but I'm not that Don, so I shan't say that thing.
I cannot tell whether you are joking or are being serious. Your cousin's friend's experience does not equip you to advise someone who already has a degree in maths or physics and is choosing between postgraduate courses.
Why do you spend so much time posturing as someone who is an authoritative source on things that you know so little about? Oxford admissions tutors can spot a faker a mile off. You can't bluff your way into Oxford. An awareness of your own limitations is important for any aspirant scholar.
You would be better off spending time studying rather than pretending to be an Oxbridge guru (an Oxbridge guru who does not even know what Collections are). You might start with a short course on the uses and misuses of the apostrophe. Oxford law Dons tend to be grammar and punctuation fiends. You may not see this, but I am trying to help you.
Why do you spend so much time posturing as someone who is an authoritative source on things that you know so little about? Oxford admissions tutors can spot a faker a mile off. You can't bluff your way into Oxford. An awareness of your own limitations is important for any aspirant scholar.
You would be better off spending time studying rather than pretending to be an Oxbridge guru (an Oxbridge guru who does not even know what Collections are). You might start with a short course on the uses and misuses of the apostrophe. Oxford law Dons tend to be grammar and punctuation fiends. You may not see this, but I am trying to help you.
I wouldn’t necessarily believe people who say they don’t do any/much work and then go on to do brilliantly. A lot of people at Oxford like to give the air of effortless brilliance but are actually working quite hard.
Original post by xyz1234567
I wouldn’t necessarily believe people who say they don’t do any/much work and then go on to do brilliantly. A lot of people at Oxford like to give the air of effortless brilliance but are actually working quite hard.
This is indeed true. I have one friend who waltzed his way to one of the best firsts in English in our year without ever breaking a sweat. His career as a television lawyer was similarly effortless, and now he has retired happy. I and most of my other friends worked our socks off (but also partied like there was no tomorrow). There were a few poseurs in college who affected never to work, but they could be spotted sneaking in and out of the Bodleian.
In those days, you could get away with being drunk/stoned/in a punt the whole time and really doing no work. It was very hard to get sent down. But nowadays you get slung out if you don't work.
But ..., Collections are still not hyper important. I wouldn't say ignore them, but I wouldn't say bust a gut either. If in doubt, as always, talk to your main Tutor. He or she will probably say that he or she would prefer you to work a bit; but he or she was an undergraduate once, and isn't likely to be unrealistic. Dons sometimes bark, but they rarely bite. Talk to them, they like that!
OP, if you are a first year lawyer, go nuts (within reason) about Mods, not Collections. EDIT: I see from another thread that you are in your second year, and have already done Mods. My apologies, I had forgotten that Oxford teaches Constitutional Law in the first year and Administrative Law in the second year.
(edited 8 months ago)
Original post by Stiffy Byng
I cannot tell whether you are joking or are being serious. Your cousin's friend's experience does not equip you to advise someone who already has a degree in maths or physics and is choosing between postgraduate courses.
Why do you spend so much time posturing as someone who is an authoritative source on things that you know so little about? Oxford admissions tutors can spot a faker a mile off. You can't bluff your way into Oxford. An awareness of your own limitations is important for any aspirant scholar.
You would be better off spending time studying rather than pretending to be an Oxbridge guru (an Oxbridge guru who does not even know what Collections are). You might start with a short course on the uses and misuses of the apostrophe. Oxford law Dons tend to be grammar and punctuation fiends. You may not see this, but I am trying to help you.
Why do you spend so much time posturing as someone who is an authoritative source on things that you know so little about? Oxford admissions tutors can spot a faker a mile off. You can't bluff your way into Oxford. An awareness of your own limitations is important for any aspirant scholar.
You would be better off spending time studying rather than pretending to be an Oxbridge guru (an Oxbridge guru who does not even know what Collections are). You might start with a short course on the uses and misuses of the apostrophe. Oxford law Dons tend to be grammar and punctuation fiends. You may not see this, but I am trying to help you.
Original post by thegeek888
I will be reading eBooks about essay writing and the law essay writing book you mentioned in a previous thread that you give to your pupils on their first day at your chambers!!! 😉 lol
I have never given any of my pupils a book on writing essays. I again politely suggest that you pay more attention to what you read. I used to give my pupils a copy of Maitland's "Forms of Action At Common Law", and a copy of the Plain English Campaign's short book on legal writing. If I had a pupil who had poor grammar and/or or poor written style, I would sometimes give him or her a book called "Sin and Syntax", or another book called "The Deluxe Transitive Vampire".
Some of the best legal writing can be found in the judgments of the late Victorian and Edwardian Court of Appeal, and in the Parliamentary drafting of that period. I am not a huge fan of Lord Denning, but he wrote well. I think that two of the best judicial writers of recent times are Lord Justice Laws (sadly now dead) and Lord Justice Moses (now retired).
Here is the late John Laws at his magnificent best, in McFarlane v Relate Avon Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 880, explaining the role of the law in relation to religion. See in particular paragraph 21 onwards.
https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2010/880.html
Original post by Stiffy Byng
I have never given any of my pupils a book on writing essays. I again politely suggest that you pay more attention to what you read. I used to give my pupils a copy of Maitland's "Forms of Action At Common Law", and a copy of the Plain English Campaign's short book on legal writing. If I had a pupil who had poor grammar and/or or poor written style, I would sometimes give him or her a book called "Sin and Syntax", or another book called "The Deluxe Transitive Vampire".
Some of the best legal writing can be found in the judgments of the late Victorian and Edwardian Court of Appeal, and in the Parliamentary drafting of that period. I am not a huge fan of Lord Denning, but he wrote well. I think that two of the best judicial writers of recent times are Lord Justice Laws (sadly now dead) and Lord Justice Moses (now retired).
Here is the late John Laws at his magnificent best, in McFarlane v Relate Avon Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 880, explaining the role of the law in relation to religion. See in particular paragraph 21 onwards.
https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2010/880.html
Some of the best legal writing can be found in the judgments of the late Victorian and Edwardian Court of Appeal, and in the Parliamentary drafting of that period. I am not a huge fan of Lord Denning, but he wrote well. I think that two of the best judicial writers of recent times are Lord Justice Laws (sadly now dead) and Lord Justice Moses (now retired).
Here is the late John Laws at his magnificent best, in McFarlane v Relate Avon Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 880, explaining the role of the law in relation to religion. See in particular paragraph 21 onwards.
https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2010/880.html
Merci!!! 😀 I love you for your kindness. You should be a Don at Oxford? Because you come across as still very highly 'attached' to the world of academia!!! 🙂
Some barristers tend to be somewhat Donnish (Mr Dove is an example of such a barrister), but I would be a useless scholar at any university, because I have no original thoughts about anything. These days just being a good teacher of undergraduates isn't enough, because the publication machine must be kept turning. I have found an OK job using the law as a practical toolkit for the resolution of problems brought to me by clients.
The OP, meanwhile, has to interact with actual Oxford law tutors. Good luck with your collections and/or Mods and/or Schools, OP.
As for administrative law, here is a practitioner's perspective: Much of what the practical lawyer needs to know may be found in Lord Diplock's speech in the GCHQ case. There is no harm in knowing Miller 2 quite well, and also Anisminic. Otherwise, read Wade, or de Smith, but not Fordham.
Arguably, there is only one juridical principle which underpins judicial review: and that is ultra vires. No public body has the power to do anything not given to it by statute or the common law, and no public body has the lawful power to be unreasonable or unfair. Thus Wednesbury, and procedural fairness, are merely expressions of the vires principle. Proportionality is probably just a facet of Wednesbury, but in practice it makes no difference whether it is or not.
The recent Shamima Begum case explains the narrow limits of judicial review. The Court of Appeal evidently thought that the Secretary of State was harsh and wrong to render Begum Stateless after she had been groomed, radicalised, trafficked, and raped; but the Court could not find that the Secretary of State's view was irrational, and the Court cannot substitute its own view for that of the office holder appointed by Parliament to make the decision.
The basic rule of public law is: the Government is not supposed to muck about. The Government often mucks about.
The OP, meanwhile, has to interact with actual Oxford law tutors. Good luck with your collections and/or Mods and/or Schools, OP.
As for administrative law, here is a practitioner's perspective: Much of what the practical lawyer needs to know may be found in Lord Diplock's speech in the GCHQ case. There is no harm in knowing Miller 2 quite well, and also Anisminic. Otherwise, read Wade, or de Smith, but not Fordham.
Arguably, there is only one juridical principle which underpins judicial review: and that is ultra vires. No public body has the power to do anything not given to it by statute or the common law, and no public body has the lawful power to be unreasonable or unfair. Thus Wednesbury, and procedural fairness, are merely expressions of the vires principle. Proportionality is probably just a facet of Wednesbury, but in practice it makes no difference whether it is or not.
The recent Shamima Begum case explains the narrow limits of judicial review. The Court of Appeal evidently thought that the Secretary of State was harsh and wrong to render Begum Stateless after she had been groomed, radicalised, trafficked, and raped; but the Court could not find that the Secretary of State's view was irrational, and the Court cannot substitute its own view for that of the office holder appointed by Parliament to make the decision.
The basic rule of public law is: the Government is not supposed to muck about. The Government often mucks about.
(edited 8 months ago)
Original post by Username123ab
I’m at Oxford doing law so we have exams (collections) at the start of every new term and I’m just wondering how much people actually revise and study for them. Usually when I ask people in my college, they say they hardly did anything over the vac then they get way better grades than me lol. So I’m wondering if that’s just their natural talent or if they’re actually doing way more revision than they say they are.
I try to do at least a few hours a day but the one when I go back is for a module I absolutely detest (admin) and really struggling to motivate myself to study for it. Should I just leave it and not do much like everyone else apparently does?
I try to do at least a few hours a day but the one when I go back is for a module I absolutely detest (admin) and really struggling to motivate myself to study for it. Should I just leave it and not do much like everyone else apparently does?
I usually spent the last week or two of each vacation revising(ish) for collections? I was very much a last minute merchant and definitely spent most of my vacations doing anything but studying. Personally, I liked taking a few weeks off studying completely to avoid burnout, but YMMV.
Is there any chance that you can ask your seniors what papers the tutors usually set for collections and try to "spot" questions? My Trusts tutor usually set the previous year's FHS paper, but also there was one year where he didn't (because said paper didn't have a question on one of the topics he likes) so it's not 100% foolproof.
For admin, can you pick the topics you dislike the least out of the lot? I think on average I tried to study about 6 topics per FHS subject, and that worked pretty well.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Geography IGCSE Edexcel
- Where to find a level maths questions by topic?
- OCR English Lit Help !!
- OCR A- Level Biology 2023
- A Little Late GYG
- AQA GCSE Geography Paper 3 (8035/3) - 14th June 2024 [Exam Chat]
- Geography Nea Ideas
- GCSE English Literature AQA: Can someone mark my English literature essay? Thanks!
- Motivational Quotes - Let's Get Studying
- Is my revision plan gud for a level AQA chem n OCR a bio
- A Level NEA Coasts
- Veterinary Books for Start of Uni
- CALLING ALL YEAR 10/11s!!
- Life is hard
- ACA Exams
- Yr 13 currently doing exams
- A-level Geography NEA - Place of study
- Am I cooked for Lnat
- Messed up my dissertation???
- How long did your dissertation take you to do?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 6 hours ago
Oxbridge applicants for modern languages - 2025 entry (applying in 2024)Last reply 1 month ago
Year 12 Oxbridge hopefuls apply for Lucy Cavendish AAP.Last reply 1 month ago
How do youys feel about the TSA this year compared to the past papers?
