Tips for Success in Assessment Tasks (VCE SSCE Legal Studies): Revision Notes
Tips for Success in Assessment Tasks
Introduction
Throughout VCE Legal Studies Units 1 & 2, you will complete various learning activities and assessment tasks designed to test your understanding of key knowledge and key skills. To maximise your success in these tasks, there are five essential tips you should follow.
This guide will help you develop the critical skills needed to excel in your Legal Studies assessments. Each tip builds on practical strategies that have proven successful for VCE students.
Tip 1 – Use key legal terminology
What is expected
A crucial skill in Units 1 & 2 is your ability to define and correctly use legal terminology. Using precise legal language demonstrates your understanding of the subject matter and shows examiners that you can communicate effectively in a legal context.
Key strategies for learning legal terms
To help you master legal terminology, consider these practical approaches:
- Sticky notes method: Write words and their definitions on sticky notes and place them around your room or house where you'll see them regularly
- Flashcards: Create portable flashcards that you can carry with you for quick revision sessions and to test yourself or quiz others
- Digital tools: Use online platforms like Quizlet to test yourself and compete with classmates
- Practice in context: Get into the habit of using precise legal terms in your written responses (for example, use plaintiff instead of writing 'a person who is suing another person')
Using correct legal terminology is not just about memorising definitions. It shows that you understand the concepts behind the words and can apply them appropriately in different contexts. Key legal terms appear at the start of each chapter in your textbook and are also compiled in the glossary.
Tip 2 – Understand command terms
What are command terms?
Command terms (also called task words) are specific words used in assessment questions that tell you how to demonstrate your knowledge. They indicate the type of response required and the level of detail expected.
Difficulty levels
Command terms vary in difficulty:
- Low difficulty: Terms like identify, define, describe, 'who', 'what' are straightforward and require you to state or provide information
- Medium difficulty: Terms like explain, compare, justify require more detailed responses with reasoning
- High difficulty: Terms like evaluate, analyse, discuss are the most challenging and require critical thinking, detailed commentary, and often a conclusion
Important note about command terms
In Legal Studies assessment questions, command terms appear in bold to remind you to think carefully about what you're being asked to do. The VCAA provides a glossary of commonly used command terms, though this list is not exhaustive. Be aware that command term requirements may differ between VCE subjects – for instance, in Legal Studies, an evaluate question requires you to provide a conclusion, even if this isn't required in other subjects.
Common command terms explained
Low difficulty command terms
Define – State the precise meaning, qualities or features of a term, phrase, or concept. This is straightforward recall of a definition without requiring explanation.
Example Question: "Define the term 'injunction'."
Describe – Give a detailed account of the characteristics, features or qualities of a system, process, role or institution. This requires more detail than a definition but doesn't require explanation of why or how.
Example Question: "Describe one role of community legal centres in assisting an accused."
Identify – State or recognise a specific feature, factor or part from a list, description, scenario or system. You may need to provide some basic facts about it, but not extensive detail.
Example Question: "Identify two participants in the plea negotiation process."
Outline – Give a brief overview or summary of the main features of a system, role, scenario or argument. This requires a concise summary rather than detailed explanation.
Example Question: "Outline how a victim impact statement is used when determining a sentence."
Who/What – Specify an individual (person), group, institution, organisation, or provide further information about a feature, concept, issue or circumstance. These questions require straightforward, factual answers.
Example Question: "Who has the burden of proof in this case and what is the standard of proof?"
Medium difficulty command terms
Advise – Offer suggestions about the best course of action or make recommendations. This requires you to apply your knowledge to a specific situation and provide guidance.
Example Question: "Advise on one enforcement issue she should consider before initiating this claim."
Compare – Recognise the similarities and differences between approaches, roles or institutions by identifying the qualities or features they have in common as well as those they do not. Use words like similarly, in contrast, whereas to signpost your comparisons.
Example Question: "Compare the role of a criminal jury with that of a civil jury."
Explain – Clarify a point, feature or concept by describing it in more detail or revealing relevant facts about it. Provide a detailed account of how or why something occurs, with reference to causes or effects.
Example Question: "Explain how the separation of powers acts as a check on parliament in law-making."
Justify – Show or prove a statement, opinion, argument or contention to be right or reasonable by providing evidence, information or examples. Your response should support the position with clear reasoning.
Example Question: "Justify how judicial activism is a strength of the law-making process."
Why – Give a reason or explanation for the cause or purpose of an action or impact. This requires you to explain the reasoning behind something.
Example Question: "Why is it possible for a Victorian law to be in conflict with an existing Commonwealth law?"
High difficulty command terms
Analyse – Examine facts, data or issues in detail. Where possible, identify the parts or components and give a detailed commentary on those parts, including how they relate to one another. This requires breaking down information and examining relationships between elements.
Example Question: "Analyse two factors that Guy should consider before initiating civil action against Tom."
Discuss – Give a clear and reasoned argument for and against a particular issue by providing points for and against, benefits and limitations or restrictions (and strengths and weaknesses if applicable). You should also give your opinion if the question asks for it. This requires balanced consideration of multiple perspectives.
Example Question: "Discuss the roles of the Victorian courts in law-making."
Distinguish – Show the clear differences and distinctive characteristics between two or more features, concepts, roles, methods or institutions. Use comparison words like in contrast and whereas to clearly demonstrate the differences.
Example Question: "Distinguish between mitigating factors and aggravating factors."
Evaluate – Identify key features and assess their relative merits by considering the strengths and weaknesses and providing a concluding judgment about the overall benefit or worth of what is being evaluated. In Legal Studies, you must provide a conclusion to your evaluation.
Example Question: "Evaluate two ways in which the Australian Constitution enables the Australian people to act as a check on parliament in law-making."
To what extent – Describe the degree or level to which a statement, opinion or contention is (or is believed to be) correct or valid. This requires you to make a judgment about how far something applies.
Example Question: "To what extent do fines achieve two purposes of sanctions?"
Sample answers demonstrating command terms
Sample 1: Distinguish command term
Question: "Distinguish between mitigating factors and aggravating factors to be considered in sentencing, and provide an example of each in Bob's case."
Sample response: Mitigating factors differ from aggravating factors in regard to the effect they have on the sentence imposed. Mitigating factors are facts or circumstances about the offender or the offending that can reduce the offender's culpability and lead to a less severe sentence being imposed. In contrast, aggravating factors are facts or circumstances about the offender or offending that increase the offender's culpability and can lead to a more severe sentence being imposed.
In Bob's case, the fact that he had been cooperative with the police since his arrest would be considered a mitigating factor that could lead to a less severe sentence whereas the use of the firearm is an aggravating factor that increases his culpability and would likely lead to a more severe sentence.
Key points:
- The command term distinguish requires you to show differences and distinctive characteristics
- Use words like in contrast and whereas to clearly signpost where you're making distinctions
- Examples must be drawn directly from the stimulus material provided
- The response clearly identifies the contrasting effects of each type of factor
Sample 2: Who/What command terms
Question: "Who has the burden of proof in Kylie's case and what is the standard of proof in this case?"
Sample response: Kylie holds the burden of proof in this case. The standard of proof required for her to succeed in the civil action is on the balance of probabilities.
Key points:
- Who and what are low-level command terms requiring straightforward provision of information
- No explanation or discussion is required – simply state the facts
- The response must reference the stimulus material (using Kylie's name)
- Keep answers concise and direct for these command terms
Tip 3 – Understand the structure of questions
To maximise your performance in assessment tasks, you need to become familiar with how Legal Studies questions are typically structured. Once you recognise these key features, answering questions becomes much simpler.
Key features of exam questions
Command terms – These are the words that tell you how to demonstrate your knowledge (e.g., identify, explain, discuss, evaluate). Always pay careful attention to the command term as it determines the type and depth of response required.
Content – This is the subject matter or topic you're required to write about in your answer. For example, you might need to write about the roles of key personnel in a criminal trial (judge, jury, parties) or discuss principles of justice.
Mark allocation – The total number of marks available for the question. This helps you determine how much time to spend on the question and how detailed your answer should be. Generally, you should spend approximately one minute per mark.
Stimulus material – Questions may include legislation extracts, visual material, article excerpts, or actual/hypothetical scenarios (or combinations of these). While stimulus material can appear in any section of exams, Section B questions are always scenario-based.
Limiting words – These specify the exact numbers (quantities) of examples or definitions you should provide. For example, "provide two features" or "identify one role". Follow these instructions precisely – providing more or fewer than requested may not earn additional marks and wastes time.
Qualifying words – These are additional words or phrases that limit or restrict what you should provide in your answer. For example, "discuss the ability of one sanction, other than fines" or "apart from imprisonment". These qualifiers are crucial – ignoring them will result in lost marks.
Understanding Limiting and Qualifying Words
Limiting words (like "two" or "one") tell you exactly how many examples to provide, while qualifying words (like "other than" or "apart from") restrict what you can include. Always read these carefully – they are essential to getting full marks.
Examples of question structure
Example 1: "Describe [command term] one [limiting word] purpose of damages [content]." – 3 marks [mark allocation]
Example 2: "Discuss [command term] the ability of parliament to change the law [content]. In your answer, provide one [limiting word] recent example of an individual or group influencing legislative change [qualifying requirement]." – 10 marks [mark allocation]
Tip 4 – Use the stimulus or scenario material
Understanding stimulus material
Assessment tasks often include stimulus or scenario material that provides context for your answers. This material might include case studies, legislation excerpts, newspaper articles, diagrams, or hypothetical scenarios.
When to use stimulus material
Some questions are stand-alone, meaning you answer them without reference to any stimulus material. Other questions are attached to stimulus material and require you to incorporate information from it in your response.
Critical Rule: Using Stimulus Material
To avoid losing marks, you should:
- Always refer to and use stimulus material when it's provided
- Must use stimulus material when the question specifically asks you to do so
- Look for phrases like in this case, referring to the scenario, or "see the examination for the stimulus material"
- Incorporate specific details from scenarios (such as names, facts, circumstances) into your answers
Practical tips
When stimulus material is provided:
- Read it carefully before attempting the question
- Highlight or underline key information relevant to the question
- Reference specific details from the material in your answer
- Use names and specific circumstances from scenarios rather than general statements
Pro Tip: If a question mentions "in this case" or uses a specific name from stimulus material, this is your signal that you must incorporate details from that material in your answer. Generic responses without reference to the scenario will lose marks.
Tip 5 – Practise answering questions with varying degrees of difficulty using the same key knowledge
Understanding difficulty levels
Each area of key knowledge in VCE Legal Studies can be assessed in different ways and at varying levels of difficulty. The difficulty level depends on both the command term used and how the question is structured.
Example: Different difficulty levels for the same topic
Consider questions about the principle of fairness:
Low difficulty question: "Describe the principle of fairness." (approximately 3 marks)
How to answer:
- Provide a detailed account or summary of what fairness is
- Explain what the principle means
- No application to a specific scenario required
Medium difficulty question: "Explain how the principle of fairness could be achieved in this case." (approximately 4-5 marks)
How to answer:
- More detail needed than a simple description
- Must explain specific ways fairness could be achieved
- Answer must relate directly to the case provided
- Cannot just summarise what fairness means in general
High difficulty question: "Evaluate the ability of the criminal justice system to achieve the principle of fairness in this case." (approximately 6+ marks)
How to answer:
- Consider both strengths and weaknesses of how fairness is achieved
- Requires detailed examination of specific events in the case
- Must provide a concluding judgment about overall effectiveness
- Needs balanced discussion with supporting evidence
Why this matters
Understanding that the same topic can be tested at different levels helps you:
- Prepare more effectively by practising various question types
- Recognise what depth of response is needed
- Allocate appropriate time based on question difficulty
- Develop skills progressively from simple recall to complex evaluation
Practice Strategy
For each major topic you study:
- Practice writing low-difficulty responses (describe, identify, define)
- Progress to medium-difficulty responses (explain, compare, outline)
- Challenge yourself with high-difficulty responses (evaluate, analyse, discuss)
- Compare your responses to model answers to identify areas for improvement
Remember!
Key Points to Remember:
- Master legal terminology – Learn definitions and use precise legal terms in all your responses instead of general descriptions
- Know your command terms – Understand what each command term requires and adjust your response accordingly; remember that evaluate and discuss questions need conclusions in Legal Studies
- Decode question structure – Identify the command term, content, mark allocation, stimulus material, and any limiting or qualifying words before you start writing
- Use stimulus material wisely – Always reference provided scenarios, cases, or other stimulus material when it's given, and you must do so when specifically asked
- Practise at all levels – The same topic can be tested at different difficulty levels, so practice answering low, medium, and high difficulty questions to build comprehensive skills