Third Year Law Students were up in arms today, after a meeting with one of their lecturers to discuss the “abnormal marks” in one of their subjects didn’t go according to plan: “We didn’t know what to expect, but it certainly wasn’t anything like this.”
A number of third year law students approached Insite to express their disgust at an abnormally-low average attributed to one of their modules, and the apparently “condescending” tone used by a lecturer in a meeting set-up earlier today by the Faculty as a consequence of these results.
The module in question, Law of Obligations, is famous amongst law students for having a very high fail rate on a yearly basis, but this year students became even more livid when the class average from this year’s results was published. One legal student explained that the average mark in question “was a fail mark, 43.1 out of 100. For a module with 150 students registered and worth more ECTS than any other subject throughout the year, it’s utterly embarrassing and unbelievable that the average of the marks of these students is less than a pass mark. Something is very wrong.”
Students were then called into a meeting with one of the lecturers responsible for the subject, but many of them were surprised with what attendees described as “an apparent ignorance of said low average mark” from the attending lecturer. “When we asked about it, he told us that he believed more than two/thirds of those doing the exam had passed, which when comparing both statistics doesn’t seem to be even remotely probable. The lecturer seemed more intent to explain to us what exactly we did wrong during the exam in vague, generalist and contradictory statements, rather than admitting that the marks were inherently irregular.”
At one point, the lecturer even picked on a negligible grammatical mistake, and then it devolved to an argument about semantics and nomenclature used by law students in an examination. “Incorrect prepositions in a highly-stressful examination seemed to irk him, but a failing class average seemed like a foreseeable casualty.”
While these students acknowledged that most of them had a chance to re-do the examination in the September sessions, and another student said that the lecturer seemed to agree with the opinion of one of the attendees and that “he’ll be making a post-examination of these marks,” there is reasons for cynicism and pessimism by many of these attendees. “This is too late for those who for some reason or other are unable to redo the exam. Worst of all, the fact that the results of this exam is a yearly-conundrum by all third year students doesn’t bode well for the future either.”
Matthew Charles Zammit is a 21 year old, third year Law student, who’s the current Human Resources Manager of Insite Malta for the 2016/2017 academic year. He started as a writer, before becoming Editor, proceeding to Media Officer and moving to Chief Executive Officer during the 2015/2016 tenure.