Good lecturer, poorly designed assignments, took almost 1.5 months to get marks back. Wouldn’t do it as breadth, maybe if you plan on studying the JD

While the quality of the academic staff in this subject is superb - Jason and Brendan are excellent in what they do - this subject is way too theoretical and flimsy for a law subject, especially in a level 1 breadth subject. It also so incredibly hard to do well in this subject. The one assessment during the semester is given with very little instruction as to how they want you to complete it and the fail rate is pretty high. All I can hope for is that future law breadth subjects are more interesting and the assessment tasks are more conducive/instructive to learning.

The lecturer was great and the subject is generally really interesting. The tutorial is very boring and I feel like didn't really help. There's a ton of reading and the teachers have a really high expectation. I didn't really understand what was expected of us.

Really interesting subject content, and discussions in tutes were good too. But the subject wasn't structured well (e.g the structure we used for our assessment was completely different from the structure of the exam).

The subject matter was interesting, but for the most part the way it was taught was dry and detached. I found it very difficult to focus on the lectures and tutorials. And to get high marks in the assessment you had to be really meticulous and talk about things that don't really relate to the case study.

This subject gave a very clearly insight into what it would be like to study law. A very heavy reading load, but the assessment is fair - a hypothetical case study and an open book exam at the end of semester. I had an excellent tutor but others have had less positive experiences. The lecture is always detailed and outlines what you need to know very well. I would recommend this subject if you think the JD is for you, because it will ensure you are making the right decision.

Good lecturer and relatively interesting content but bad tutors. Th tutes were vague and the tutor was unhelpful and wouldn't answer anyone's questions. For a second year breadth subject the reading was very heavy and the expectations too high (particularly given most students had never taken any law subjects before). This subject honestly made me rethink wanting to continue law in the future.

Interesting content but with a very, very heavy reading load every week - there's a lot of expectation to prepare thoroughly for tutorials but very little background information is offered and some prior knowledge seems to be assumed (which is frustrating considering it's offered as a breadth subject). I found the lectures most helpful, with lots of information covered, but the tutorials were very vague and almost pointless at times. I took the subject out of pure interest (as an Arts student), but would probably only recommend it to people wanting to pursue Law.

don't pick this sub unless you love heavy reading, law and memorising pages of notes. for a breadth subject they should've given more warning, it is hard to decipher certain law texts and writing the essay was confusing

All responses I received from my tutor: oh, cant really help you with that!