how to write a law essay a level

The right to disconnect has started, giving Australians legal cover to stop responding to emails and calls after hours

Topic: Work

Lachy is a shift worker who says the right to disconnect will allow him to "get some of my life back". ( Supplied )

The right to disconnect means you can reasonably refuse to be contacted outside of work hours.

For people tied to the "digital leash" of phones and email this marks a substantial boost in their right to break free.

What's next?

Employees of smaller businesses will be able to disconnect after work on August 22, 2025.

Millions of Australians will now be able to clock off from their work shifts without having to be available after hours.

Under right to disconnect laws, employees from Monday will have the right to refuse contact outside their working hours — including calls and emails — unless that refusal is unreasonable.

"Oh, it'll be a weight off my shoulders, for sure," said shift worker Lachy.

He is looking forward to living his life outside of work hours, without worrying if the phone will ring with news about his job.

"It'll give me some of my life back. Even going out to walk the dogs, going out with the mates," he said.

"If I receive a phone call, there is some expectation that I do pick up."

Performing extra unpaid hours of work is common in Australia and many jobs come with an expectation of being contactable beyond paid or rostered hours.

But the right to disconnect is aiming to create limits around this work culture and the so-called 'digital leash' of phones, laptops and easily accessible email.

While it may be welcome news to employees, it doesn't mean the boss can't call you.

What it does mean is you might not have to answer.

What do the new laws mean for you?

The distinction is important. Brent Ferguson, head of national workplace relations policy for employer body Ai Group, explained the new laws won't bring an end to late-night calls.

"This isn't a prohibition on an employer contacting or attempting to contact an employee," he said.

"It's a new right for an employee to refuse that contact, to refuse to monitor their emails, or to refuse to take a telephone call from their employer, if it's outside of their working hours."

While the details are still being worked out, one thing is clear: today workers at businesses with more than 15 employees get the right to disconnect.

The legislation is thin, but it states that if there is a dispute, it has to be first dealt with "at the workplace level by discussions" between workers and bosses.

"It is subject to that important caveat that [employees] can only refuse if their refusal is 'not unreasonable'," Mr Ferguson said.

"Now, what's reasonable or unreasonable is going to depend on the individual circumstances.

"And that uncertainty is part of the difficulty that industry is really grappling with at the moment."

How the pandemic blurred our working and personal lives

Academic Gabrielle Golding said the COVID-19 pandemic and enforced "work from home" periods promoted growth in what she calls "availability creep".

"During that time when we were, by and large, forced to work from home, we were kind of training ourselves to be constantly available within our homes and elsewhere outside of the workplace," she said.

Dr Gabrielle Golding is a senior lecturer at the University of Adelaide Law School, focussed on labour law and workers rights. ( Supplied: Gabrielle Golding )

Even as restrictions rolled back, cheap and easy access to digital connectivity meant being available became a default setting for employees.

Many employers took advantage of it, but the new laws should give workers the option to reset.

"If we have some sort of a 'guard rail' in place like this, it will change the patterns in the way in which people are conducting work," Dr Golding said.

"And hopefully give them an opportunity to take some of their private life back."

Just like doctors who work on call and shift workers who get penalties for starting early in the morning, it could be that disconnect laws prompt people who are expected to be available to win compensation for that time in future.

The legislation has a requirement that disputes are dealt with at a workplace level first.

Sally McManus, secretary of the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU), said "workers have got a brand new right", which is "really awesome".

Sally McManus says the right to disconnect means if your employer contacts you, "it has got to be reasonable". ( ABC News: Ian Cutmore )

"What that basically means is your employer can't harass you after work," she said.

"So emails, calls … if they contact you, it's got to be reasonable, and you've got a right not to respond."

Ms McManus said "if you work, you should get paid" and the right to disconnect will enable workers to put in place boundaries between their work and personal life.

"Not all employers, but some employers have completely blurred or just crossed over those boundaries and are expecting people to be connected and answer their emails and look at their phones, 24/7," she said.

"And that's just not on."

It may mean employees don't have to check their phone every few minutes

Lachy works at Melbourne Airport, a role that requires him to work shifts at odd times.

"If you go to check in for a flight, I'll be there. You go to board a flight, I'll be there," he said.

Like many who work difficult and unsociable hours, he struggles to rest and sometimes wakes up to missed calls and texts.

Lachy works shifts at the airport and has welcomed the idea of not having to answer work calls after hours. ( ABC News: Billy Draper )

"There'll be days where I'm not rostered to work but I wake up to a call from work thinking: 'Hang on, what day is it? When am I scheduled to work?'

"It's reminiscent of when you would be waking up like for a school day and thinking: 'Oh crap, I'm late.'

"I suppose it's a form of anxiety. You feel the phone ring, and I don't think 'Oh it's one of my friends or family'. I think: 'It's work.'"

Lachy loves his job, taking a call from his employer while the ABC is interviewing him at his house, but he is looking forward to being protected when he reasonably refuses contact from them.

"Just the expectation to be taken off my shoulders that I don't have to check my phone every few minutes to see if there's been any changes to my roster," he said.

"[Or] if they've sent out any emails that are changing how we're working. It'll be a weight off my shoulders, for sure."

How will disconnecting actually work?

More than 20 countries have put in place similar laws, and research has found improved wellbeing and work satisfaction in companies with right-to-disconnect policies.

In Australia, Telstra has set boundaries around employees being contacted — or feeling like they should be available — for years.

Despite being in the business of selling communications, and the need for constant monitoring and maintenance of vital networks, the company has built in boundaries so staff are not "always on".

Telstra human resources executive Kathryn van rer Merwe said there will "always be a requirement to contact certain people for certain types of situations". ( ABC News: Matthew Holmes )

"A lot of it comes down to behaviours and work practises," said Kathryn van der Merwe, the human resources executive in charge of Telstra's 31,000 employees.

"It's reminding our people of the importance of having a conversation within your team, with a leader and a team agreeing a set of 'team norms' and work practises.

"And reminding people that we also have tools that actually help to respect those boundaries and personal time."

Dr van der Merwe suggested tools such as the "delay send" function on emails, or stating a person's normal working days and hours in their email signature.

There will always be a need for certain people and roles to have a reasonable expectation of being contactable, she said, and many are compensated specifically for that.

For everyone else, Dr van der Merwe sees the start of the right to disconnect as a reminder to work in ways that respect an employee's personal time.

"We all, I think, have felt that blurring between work and personal life, particularly as we spend more time working from home."

"This gives us a chance to have a renewed conversation [about] some of our ways of working and to reset some norms to help firm up those boundaries."

Will there be guidelines around the 'right to disconnect'?

The legislation requires the Fair Work Commission (FWC) to provide guidelines around the new entitlement. But it has so far declined to do so.

Instead, FWC found it would be better off issuing guidelines after it has dealt with a few disputes around the new entitlement.

Employees from today will have the right to refuse contact outside their working hours unless that refusal is unreasonable. ( Pixabay )

So expect to see "test cases" that tease out the difficult legal and practical nature of the word 'reasonable' and what it means in a world where mobile phones are ubiquitous and employees want flexibility in how and where they can work.

"The new entitlement is cast in very broad terms," Mr Ferguson said.

"We're going to have to see how it operates in practice over time to understand exactly what the parameters of the new right are."

Ms McManus believes the new right could take us back to a time when the life/work balance of Australians was in better shape.

"We have lost that over a period of time," she said, noting that Australians' long working hours harm mental health.

"If you're constantly connected, if you're not able to switch off, if you're not able to refresh and recuperate … obviously you're going to be a worse worker."

The right to disconnect could end what she calls "unreasonable pressure" on workers.

"So this is actually good for employers, as well as for workers," Ms McManus said.

"A more productive workforce where people actually are rested enough and they're not constantly driven by the beeping and the notifications on their phone."

Suggestions or feedback?

MIT News | Massachusetts Institute of Technology

• Machine learning
• Sustainability
• Black holes
• Classes and programs

Departments

• Aeronautics and Astronautics
• Brain and Cognitive Sciences
• Architecture
• Political Science
• Mechanical Engineering

Centers, Labs, & Programs

• Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL)
• Picower Institute for Learning and Memory
• Lincoln Laboratory
• School of Architecture + Planning
• School of Engineering
• School of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences
• Sloan School of Management
• School of Science
• MIT Schwarzman College of Computing

MIT study explains why laws are written in an incomprehensible style

Press contact :.

Previous image Next image

Legal documents are notoriously difficult to understand, even for lawyers. This raises the question: Why are these documents written in a style that makes them so impenetrable?

MIT cognitive scientists believe they have uncovered the answer to that question. Just as “magic spells” use special rhymes and archaic terms to signal their power, the convoluted language of legalese acts to convey a sense of authority, they conclude.

In a study appearing this week in the journal of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , the researchers found that even non-lawyers use this type of language when asked to write laws.

“People seem to understand that there’s an implicit rule that this is how laws should sound, and they write them that way,” says Edward Gibson, an MIT professor of brain and cognitive sciences and the senior author of the study.

Eric Martinez PhD ’24 is the lead author of the study. Francis Mollica, a lecturer at the University of Melbourne, is also an author of the paper .

Casting a legal spell

Gibson’s research group has been studying the unique characteristics of legalese since 2020, when Martinez came to MIT after earning a law degree from Harvard Law School. In a 2022 study , Gibson, Martinez, and Mollica analyzed legal contracts totaling about 3.5 million words, comparing them with other types of writing, including movie scripts, newspaper articles, and academic papers.

That analysis revealed that legal documents frequently have long definitions inserted in the middle of sentences — a feature known as “center-embedding.” Linguists have previously found that this kind of structure can make text much more difficult to understand.

“Legalese somehow has developed this tendency to put structures inside other structures, in a way which is not typical of human languages,” Gibson says.

In a follow-up study published in 2023, the researchers found that legalese also makes documents more difficult for lawyers to understand. Lawyers tended to prefer plain English versions of documents, and they rated those versions to be just as enforceable as traditional legal documents.

“Lawyers also find legalese to be unwieldy and complicated,” Gibson says. “Lawyers don’t like it, laypeople don’t like it, so the point of this current paper was to try and figure out why they write documents this way.”

The researchers had a couple of hypotheses for why legalese is so prevalent. One was the “copy and edit hypothesis,” which suggests that legal documents begin with a simple premise, and then additional information and definitions are inserted into already existing sentences, creating complex center-embedded clauses.

“We thought it was plausible that what happens is you start with an initial draft that’s simple, and then later you think of all these other conditions that you want to include. And the idea is that once you’ve started, it’s much easier to center-embed that into the existing provision,” says Martinez, who is now a fellow and instructor at the University of Chicago Law School.

However, the findings ended up pointing toward a different hypothesis, the so-called “magic spell hypothesis.” Just as magic spells are written with a distinctive style that sets them apart from everyday language, the convoluted style of legal language appears to signal a special kind of authority, the researchers say.

“In English culture, if you want to write something that’s a magic spell, people know that the way to do that is you put a lot of old-fashioned rhymes in there. We think maybe center-embedding is signaling legalese in the same way,” Gibson says.

In this study, the researchers asked about 200 non-lawyers (native speakers of English living in the United States, who were recruited through a crowdsourcing site called Prolific), to write two types of texts. In the first task, people were told to write laws prohibiting crimes such as drunk driving, burglary, arson, and drug trafficking. In the second task, they were asked to write stories about those crimes.

To test the copy and edit hypothesis, half of the participants were asked to add additional information after they wrote their initial law or story. The researchers found that all of the subjects wrote laws with center-embedded clauses, regardless of whether they wrote the law all at once or were told to write a draft and then add to it later. And, when they wrote stories related to those laws, they wrote in much plainer English, regardless of whether they had to add information later.

“When writing laws, they did a lot of center-embedding regardless of whether or not they had to edit it or write it from scratch. And in that narrative text, they did not use center-embedding in either case,” Martinez says.

In another set of experiments, about 80 participants were asked to write laws, as well as descriptions that would explain those laws to visitors from another country. In these experiments, participants again used center-embedding for their laws, but not for the descriptions of those laws.

The origins of legalese

Gibson’s lab is now investigating the origins of center-embedding in legal documents. Early American laws were based on British law, so the researchers plan to analyze British laws to see if they feature the same kind of grammatical construction. And going back much farther, they plan to analyze whether center-embedding is found in the Hammurabi Code, the earliest known set of laws, which dates to around 1750 BC.

“There may be just a stylistic way of writing from back then, and if it was seen as successful, people would use that style in other languages,” Gibson says. “I would guess that it’s an accidental property of how the laws were written the first time, but we don’t know that yet.”

The researchers hope that their work, which has identified specific aspects of legal language that make it more difficult to understand, will motivate lawmakers to try to make laws more comprehensible. Efforts to write legal documents in plainer language date to at least the 1970s, when President Richard Nixon declared that federal regulations should be written in “layman’s terms.” However, legal language has changed very little since that time.

“We have learned only very recently what it is that makes legal language so complicated, and therefore I am optimistic about being able to change it,” Gibson says. 

Share this news article on:

Press mentions.

Researchers at MIT have found that the use of legalese in writing “to assert authority over those less versed in such language,” reports Noor Al-Sibai for Futurism . “By studying this cryptic take on the English language, the researchers are hoping to make legal documents much easier to read in the future,” explains Al-Sibai.

Previous item Next item

Related Links

• Eric Martinez
• Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences

Related Topics

• Communications
• Literature, languages and writing
• Brain and cognitive sciences

Related Articles

How “blue” and “green” appeared in a language that didn’t have words for them

Even lawyers don’t like legalese

Objection: No one can understand what you’re saying

More mit news.

Students learn theater design through the power of play

Read full story →

A framework for solving parabolic partial differential equations

Designing better delivery for medical therapies

Making a measurable economic impact

Faces of MIT: Jessica Tam

First AI + Education Summit is an international push for “AI fluency”

• More news on MIT News homepage →

Massachusetts Institute of Technology 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA, USA

• Map (opens in new window)
• Events (opens in new window)
• People (opens in new window)
• Careers (opens in new window)
• Accessibility
• Social Media Hub
• MIT on Facebook
• MIT on YouTube
• MIT on Instagram

Samantha Putterman, PolitiFact Samantha Putterman, PolitiFact

Leave your feedback

• Copy URL https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/fact-checking-warnings-from-democrats-about-project-2025-and-donald-trump

Fact-checking warnings from Democrats about Project 2025 and Donald Trump

This fact check originally appeared on PolitiFact .

Project 2025 has a starring role in this week’s Democratic National Convention.

And it was front and center on Night 1.

WATCH: Hauling large copy of Project 2025, Michigan state Sen. McMorrow speaks at 2024 DNC

“This is Project 2025,” Michigan state Sen. Mallory McMorrow, D-Royal Oak, said as she laid a hardbound copy of the 900-page document on the lectern. “Over the next four nights, you are going to hear a lot about what is in this 900-page document. Why? Because this is the Republican blueprint for a second Trump term.”

Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic presidential nominee, has warned Americans about “Trump’s Project 2025” agenda — even though former President Donald Trump doesn’t claim the conservative presidential transition document.

“Donald Trump wants to take our country backward,” Harris said July 23 in Milwaukee. “He and his extreme Project 2025 agenda will weaken the middle class. Like, we know we got to take this seriously, and can you believe they put that thing in writing?”

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, Harris’ running mate, has joined in on the talking point.

“Don’t believe (Trump) when he’s playing dumb about this Project 2025. He knows exactly what it’ll do,” Walz said Aug. 9 in Glendale, Arizona.

Trump’s campaign has worked to build distance from the project, which the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, led with contributions from dozens of conservative groups.

Much of the plan calls for extensive executive-branch overhauls and draws on both long-standing conservative principles, such as tax cuts, and more recent culture war issues. It lays out recommendations for disbanding the Commerce and Education departments, eliminating certain climate protections and consolidating more power to the president.

Project 2025 offers a sweeping vision for a Republican-led executive branch, and some of its policies mirror Trump’s 2024 agenda, But Harris and her presidential campaign have at times gone too far in describing what the project calls for and how closely the plans overlap with Trump’s campaign.

PolitiFact researched Harris’ warnings about how the plan would affect reproductive rights, federal entitlement programs and education, just as we did for President Joe Biden’s Project 2025 rhetoric. Here’s what the project does and doesn’t call for, and how it squares with Trump’s positions.

Are Trump and Project 2025 connected?

To distance himself from Project 2025 amid the Democratic attacks, Trump wrote on Truth Social that he “knows nothing” about it and has “no idea” who is in charge of it. (CNN identified at least 140 former advisers from the Trump administration who have been involved.)

The Heritage Foundation sought contributions from more than 100 conservative organizations for its policy vision for the next Republican presidency, which was published in 2023.

Project 2025 is now winding down some of its policy operations, and director Paul Dans, a former Trump administration official, is stepping down, The Washington Post reported July 30. Trump campaign managers Susie Wiles and Chris LaCivita denounced the document.

WATCH: A look at the Project 2025 plan to reshape government and Trump’s links to its authors

However, Project 2025 contributors include a number of high-ranking officials from Trump’s first administration, including former White House adviser Peter Navarro and former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson.

A recently released recording of Russell Vought, a Project 2025 author and the former director of Trump’s Office of Management and Budget, showed Vought saying Trump’s “very supportive of what we do.” He said Trump was only distancing himself because Democrats were making a bogeyman out of the document.

Project 2025 wouldn’t ban abortion outright, but would curtail access

The Harris campaign shared a graphic on X that claimed “Trump’s Project 2025 plan for workers” would “go after birth control and ban abortion nationwide.”

The plan doesn’t call to ban abortion nationwide, though its recommendations could curtail some contraceptives and limit abortion access.

What’s known about Trump’s abortion agenda neither lines up with Harris’ description nor Project 2025’s wish list.

Project 2025 says the Department of Health and Human Services Department should “return to being known as the Department of Life by explicitly rejecting the notion that abortion is health care.”

It recommends that the Food and Drug Administration reverse its 2000 approval of mifepristone, the first pill taken in a two-drug regimen for a medication abortion. Medication is the most common form of abortion in the U.S. — accounting for around 63 percent in 2023.

If mifepristone were to remain approved, Project 2025 recommends new rules, such as cutting its use from 10 weeks into pregnancy to seven. It would have to be provided to patients in person — part of the group’s efforts to limit access to the drug by mail. In June, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a legal challenge to mifepristone’s FDA approval over procedural grounds.

WATCH: Trump’s plans for health care and reproductive rights if he returns to White House The manual also calls for the Justice Department to enforce the 1873 Comstock Act on mifepristone, which bans the mailing of “obscene” materials. Abortion access supporters fear that a strict interpretation of the law could go further to ban mailing the materials used in procedural abortions, such as surgical instruments and equipment.

The plan proposes withholding federal money from states that don’t report to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention how many abortions take place within their borders. The plan also would prohibit abortion providers, such as Planned Parenthood, from receiving Medicaid funds. It also calls for the Department of Health and Human Services to ensure that the training of medical professionals, including doctors and nurses, omits abortion training.

The document says some forms of emergency contraception — particularly Ella, a pill that can be taken within five days of unprotected sex to prevent pregnancy — should be excluded from no-cost coverage. The Affordable Care Act requires most private health insurers to cover recommended preventive services, which involves a range of birth control methods, including emergency contraception.

Trump has recently said states should decide abortion regulations and that he wouldn’t block access to contraceptives. Trump said during his June 27 debate with Biden that he wouldn’t ban mifepristone after the Supreme Court “approved” it. But the court rejected the lawsuit based on standing, not the case’s merits. He has not weighed in on the Comstock Act or said whether he supports it being used to block abortion medication, or other kinds of abortions.

Project 2025 doesn’t call for cutting Social Security, but proposes some changes to Medicare

“When you read (Project 2025),” Harris told a crowd July 23 in Wisconsin, “you will see, Donald Trump intends to cut Social Security and Medicare.”

The Project 2025 document does not call for Social Security cuts. None of its 10 references to Social Security addresses plans for cutting the program.

Harris also misleads about Trump’s Social Security views.

In his earlier campaigns and before he was a politician, Trump said about a half-dozen times that he’s open to major overhauls of Social Security, including cuts and privatization. More recently, in a March 2024 CNBC interview, Trump said of entitlement programs such as Social Security, “There’s a lot you can do in terms of entitlements, in terms of cutting.” However, he quickly walked that statement back, and his CNBC comment stands at odds with essentially everything else Trump has said during the 2024 presidential campaign.

Trump’s campaign website says that not “a single penny” should be cut from Social Security. We rated Harris’ claim that Trump intends to cut Social Security Mostly False.

Project 2025 does propose changes to Medicare, including making Medicare Advantage, the private insurance offering in Medicare, the “default” enrollment option. Unlike Original Medicare, Medicare Advantage plans have provider networks and can also require prior authorization, meaning that the plan can approve or deny certain services. Original Medicare plans don’t have prior authorization requirements.

The manual also calls for repealing health policies enacted under Biden, such as the Inflation Reduction Act. The law enabled Medicare to negotiate with drugmakers for the first time in history, and recently resulted in an agreement with drug companies to lower the prices of 10 expensive prescriptions for Medicare enrollees.

Trump, however, has said repeatedly during the 2024 presidential campaign that he will not cut Medicare.

Project 2025 would eliminate the Education Department, which Trump supports

The Harris campaign said Project 2025 would “eliminate the U.S. Department of Education” — and that’s accurate. Project 2025 says federal education policy “should be limited and, ultimately, the federal Department of Education should be eliminated.” The plan scales back the federal government’s role in education policy and devolves the functions that remain to other agencies.

Aside from eliminating the department, the project also proposes scrapping the Biden administration’s Title IX revision, which prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. It also would let states opt out of federal education programs and calls for passing a federal parents’ bill of rights similar to ones passed in some Republican-led state legislatures.

Republicans, including Trump, have pledged to close the department, which gained its status in 1979 within Democratic President Jimmy Carter’s presidential Cabinet.

In one of his Agenda 47 policy videos, Trump promised to close the department and “to send all education work and needs back to the states.” Eliminating the department would have to go through Congress.

What Project 2025, Trump would do on overtime pay

In the graphic, the Harris campaign says Project 2025 allows “employers to stop paying workers for overtime work.”

The plan doesn’t call for banning overtime wages. It recommends changes to some Occupational Safety and Health Administration, or OSHA, regulations and to overtime rules. Some changes, if enacted, could result in some people losing overtime protections, experts told us.

The document proposes that the Labor Department maintain an overtime threshold “that does not punish businesses in lower-cost regions (e.g., the southeast United States).” This threshold is the amount of money executive, administrative or professional employees need to make for an employer to exempt them from overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

In 2019, the Trump’s administration finalized a rule that expanded overtime pay eligibility to most salaried workers earning less than about $35,568, which it said made about 1.3 million more workers eligible for overtime pay. The Trump-era threshold is high enough to cover most line workers in lower-cost regions, Project 2025 said.

The Biden administration raised that threshold to $43,888 beginning July 1, and that will rise to $58,656 on Jan. 1, 2025. That would grant overtime eligibility to about 4 million workers, the Labor Department said.

It’s unclear how many workers Project 2025’s proposal to return to the Trump-era overtime threshold in some parts of the country would affect, but experts said some would presumably lose the right to overtime wages.

Other overtime proposals in Project 2025’s plan include allowing some workers to choose to accumulate paid time off instead of overtime pay, or to work more hours in one week and fewer in the next, rather than receive overtime.

Trump’s past with overtime pay is complicated. In 2016, the Obama administration said it would raise the overtime to salaried workers earning less than $47,476 a year, about double the exemption level set in 2004 of $23,660 a year.

But when a judge blocked the Obama rule, the Trump administration didn’t challenge the court ruling. Instead it set its own overtime threshold, which raised the amount, but by less than Obama.

Support Provided By: Learn more

Educate your inbox

Subscribe to Here’s the Deal, our politics newsletter for analysis you won’t find anywhere else.

Thank you. Please check your inbox to confirm.

In partnership with

The University of Law

Does anyone have Law a level essay writing techniques??

Quick Reply

Related discussions.

• A level Aqa Psych or OCR Law
• Study techniques!
• How can I get 30/40 or more in French A-Level Writing?
• A-level (AQA) economics essay advice
• A level ancient history 30 mark essays
• english lit a level or history a level
• A level - English Literature AQA help
• A Level Law help!
• A-Level Options for History and Politics / PPE
• Writing essays at uni
• Law or Politics-A level
• Any tips on how to get an A*/A in English literature alevel?
• Alevels for corporate law
• A-level Options
• Anyone do any of these a levels lmk
• AQA A-Level Psychology Support for 2024 exams
• thesis statement for english lit
• A-level options for law at oxford

Last reply 1 day ago

Last reply 1 week ago

Posted 1 week ago

Last reply 2 weeks ago

Posted 3 weeks ago

Last reply 3 weeks ago

Last reply 4 weeks ago

Last reply 1 month ago

Last reply 2 months ago

Articles for you

How to get an offer to study law at university

Writing a law personal statement: expert advice from universities

Personal statement secrets – universities reveal all

Studying for a law degree: how to choose the best university for you

Get the Reddit app

This subreddit is intended for the discussion of interesting UK caselaw and legislation, and for discussion of the legal profession - NOT FOR OBTAINING LEGAL ADVICE. Modmail in your proof of being a lawyer/solicitor/law student and get flair!

A Guide on Writing Law Essays

Funnily enough, this was one of the things I was worst at when I went to university. I took English Lang, Chemistry and Maths for my A Levels; needless to say, my essay-writing skills were lacking in first and second year. Then, I had look at the things I did well and I thought about a formulaic approach in constructing an essay. From a 58 and 68 in Semester 1 of third year, I shot up to getting 72s in every single thing I did after that point (including my dissertation). Here's how I did it: a "five act structure".

All essays can be broadly broken down into 5 sections:

Introduction

History of the Law

Current Implications of the Law

Law schools absolutely love this analytical method: say what you've just done, say what you're doing now, and say what you're going to do. It's not difficult to see how this immediately applies to the context of an essay subject, i.e. "What has the law done ? What is the law doing now ? What will the law do?" I'll discuss these in greater detail.

1. Introduction

This is where you read the question and decide how you're going to answer it. For instance, if the question is something like "The law on assault is too broadly applied. Discuss." you would say something like, "This essay takes the stance that the law on assault is broadly applied, but for a reason. Through analysis of the historical and contemporaneous contexts, it will be argued that the propositions or alternatives would undermine the objectives the law as viewed through a harm-reduction lens." Many, many people will say that you shouldn't write your introduction until the end of the essay; I disagree. Using this structure enables you to know what your argument is, how you're going to get there, and what you're going to discuss along the way. It also helps keeps you focused on the point you're making. You can always edit your introduction to sound a lot more powerful afterwards, and I'll put some examples of my highest scoring introductions with the questions asked in the comments.

If you've ever been told that you're "being too descriptive", what that means is that you're not going further than mere re-statements of the law or academic insight. The history of the law is good to get analytical marks because you can't discuss the state of things now without looking first at how we got here. Using the example above, you might argue that assault was criminalised initially because of X reasons, and the law was built upon that to be in line with the overall zeitgeist of harm-reduction. Basically, analysing the historical context is a great way of showing the marker that you've engaged with the material and understood the body of law in which it sits. Don't be ridiculous and go back to Medieval times, but part of the skill is being able to make a persuasive argument that is grounded in research and context.

Here is where you have the bulk of your analysis because you're discussing ongoing caselaw and legislation that is relevant to right now, and bringing in sources beyond the legal world (like for instance political, media, public perception) is something you can (and should!) do.

Use sources from the last few months to a year ago to really focus on the contemporary implications and, most importantly, use modern discourse to synthesise your own answer. You'll get a metric f*** tonne of marks for constructing a solution to the question that is grounded in research.

5. Conclusion

Sum everything up. It can be as few as 100 words, or as many as 300. The important thing here is not to introduce any new points into your argument. If you imagine an essay as a mountain, your previous (reforms) section should be the peak, and the conclusion is where you take a breather to toboggan down the other side at a rapid pace. It's a quick view of everything you've discussed.

What is Analysis?

Analysis is getting down to the nub of something. I usually have an end goal in mind whenever I make a point, so when I'm writing something, I ask myself, "So what?" If you keep asking yourself that as you write, you'll get down to the essence of a point and how that furthers your argument. Analysis comes in many forms, and critical analysis is looking at an academic's work with a critical eye. In effect, it's examining the limitations of an otherwise thorough piece of work. These limitations can be intentional, for instance an academic who wants to make a point may choose to overlook some argument, but you might think that the argument overlooked is actually really convincing because someone else pointed it out, so use that!

Do I Argue Both Sides?

NO! Never. In fact, you shouldn't even argue one side. I learned very late in my law school career that the best marks come from people who argue a nuanced view. You, of course, need to address the other side, but do it in an argumentative way, i.e. address it to undermine it. This is called Evaluation and is a step above analysis because you're exerting your skill in arguing why your stance is so strong that it undermines alternative views.

Sub-headings?

Hell yeah. I'm a huge proponent of sub-headings in my essays because they provide structure. I sub-head for each of the sections above; keeping Introduction and Conclusion the same, I tailor those other sections to the context of my essay. It keeps you focused, it helps the reader see a barebones outline of your essay, it makes a world of difference.

How Long Should a Paragraph Be?

The general rule is: 1 point/1 paragraph. This is a very good rule. When I was in school, I was too focused on letting my work look nice that I never paid any attention to the fact that the rule exists. If you spend multiple paragraphs discussing the same point, it actually breaks up your analysis and makes it seem like each separate paragraph is its own, incomplete, analysis. I've had paragraphs go on for more than entire pages of 12pt Arial 1.5 spaced writing (about 550 words), and those were the ones that got all the "Excellent" comments. Let go of your conceptions of what a "nice" paragraph is, just write!

If you have any other questions, just leave a comment down below or message me. I'm going to do another post for Problem Questions. Good luck to everyone starting or continuing their law degree this year, you can do it!

By continuing, you agree to our User Agreement and acknowledge that you understand the Privacy Policy .

Enter the 6-digit code from your authenticator app

You’ve set up two-factor authentication for this account.

Enter a 6-digit backup code

Create your username and password.

Reddit is anonymous, so your username is what you’ll go by here. Choose wisely—because once you get a name, you can’t change it.

Reset your password

Enter your email address or username and we’ll send you a link to reset your password

Check your inbox

An email with a link to reset your password was sent to the email address associated with your account

Choose a Reddit account to continue

A-Level Law

The right page you need to master a-level law., created by a student for the use of other students 😉.

Improve your knowledge with out materials, practice exercises, games… and more!

Welcome to the the A-Level Law website!

Simple and easy to use. Oh, and colourful!

Struggle to answer A-Level Law essay questions? Check the I.D.E.A.L. method of tackling them.

Practice makes perfect!

Law is impossible without knowing your terms.

Learn and apply cases in support of your arguments.

University or apprenticeship? Find out some advice.

Find out who stands behind the website.

Edmund Burke

‘Laws, like houses, lean on one another.’

William E. Gladstone

‘Justice delayed is justice denied.’

William Godwin

‘Justice is the sum of all moral duty.’

Thomas Jefferson

‘A lawyer without books would be like a workman without tools.’

Share this website on social media. Help grow our international community of users! 🙂

Our website has visitors from 80 locations around the globe, including:

What do you think of the website? Tell us below by either writing a comment, or filling in our form…

https://forms.microsoft.com/Pages/ResponsePage.aspx?id=HhF8To_Dg0GAnm-GuB7UZA4Hq6JiHjVHiEwAhW4qUWpUMlRWUFdXMEozMVIwNjgxOUc1NFpOUVNGWC4u

Our rating (out of 5.0):

Brief customer review:

Share this:

10 thoughts on “ a-level law ”.

I love you my man. LEGEND

Like Liked by 1 person

Thank you very much, Jake! Our users’ support is really appreciated!

Very useful website, made revision a lot easier!

Thank you, Alannah! It is much appreciated!

Very practical and useful website. No negative aspects at least for me!

Thank you, Grisha! It is much appreciated!

Well, it is made by this guy… So you know it is 10/10. If there is someone you can trust about law, it is literally this guy. Great website, great content, easy and simple to understand.

Your review is extremely appreciated! Thank you very much for the support! 🙂

Congratulations from Brussels, Georgi!!! I’m proud of you!!! You are the man !!!

Thank you so much, Kalin! Really kind and inspiring words! 😊

Leave a comment Cancel reply

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

Username or email  *

Password  *

Forgotten password?

[email protected]

+44 (0)20 8834 4579

4 Simple Tips to Get an A* in Your Law A-Level

A-level law is certainly a very interesting subject to study since it enables you to widen your knowledge on various roles the legal sector has to offer, as well as how laws are made in the English legal system – including specifics of many cases.  It is a subject that encourages you to approach a new style of thinking by applying your legal knowledge to problem questions or scenarios to explain the likely outcome of a case.

However, it ’s no surprise that it can surely seem daunting at times, so here are four simple tips to ace your exams!

Take 30 seconds to sign up to TLP and you’ll receive free, tailored information straight to your inbox, as well as be the first to know about new, free events – what are you waiting for?

Sign-Up Now

  Tip #1: Finish (and Learn) Your Notes Early On

The general rule is little and often so if you can help it, definitely do not make the mistake of leaving all your challenging material to learn towards the very end of your second year – there’s nothing worse than missing the grades you want while knowing you could have helped it!

Make sure you understand all of the content and the cases that you learn at the end of each lesson or at the very least, at the end of each unit. Try to make your revision notes as you go throughout the year, with the aim of having less note-making and more time for revision towards exam season – which leads onto my point about effective revision.

Revision is most effective when you are revisiting your material over a longer period of time in an area with no surrounding distractions. In terms of law, it is no surprise that the A-level requires a large amount information to be remembered accurately.

Therefore, you should find the learning style that suits you best – whether that is make both detailed and summarised posters for each section or unit you study or using flash cards to remember key cases.

Tip #2: Be Proactive and Organised

To succeed in your law A-level, you need to be proactive in the lesson – if you don’t fully understand a particular aspect, ask the teacher to help you straight away. Never leave a lesson thinking ‘what was that about’ or ‘I’ll learn this later’ – get to the bottom of your questions in the lesson. By doing this, you are reducing both your workload and stress when it comes to the exam period.

Additionally, with a demanding essay-based subject such as law, organising your time to do past papers is a must. Unlike many other subjects, you can essentially guess the possible questions that will come up on your exam as they are very similar every year.

So master the past papers under timed conditions and you will be well prepared. Always make a short plan before starting your essay and consider potential points based around the argument – instead of a description of what happened.

Tip #3: Memorise a Good Essay Structure

There are many great ways to structure your legal essay to impress your examiner and get the top marks. Here are only a couple examples of effective structures:

CLEO Method:

C – Claim: Identify the particular issue relating to the facts;

L – Law: Present the specific law relevant to the issue;

E – Evaluate: Apply the law from the previous step to the facts or claims;

O – Outcome: Summarise and conclude by justifying the various points you have made.

This can be applied both at a paragraph level with a larger conclusion at the end, or in the essay as a whole.

For problem questions, it is vital that you know the law. Granted that you discuss the relevant law applicable to the scenario, you should apply the law to the facts with reference to the cases. A structure that works here is the:

IRAC Method:

I – Issue: Identify the problem;

R – Rule: Set out the legal principles that can be used to address or solve the problem;

A – Application: A detailed explanation of whether the claims can be justified and take time to infer the possible less-obvious aspects of the case;

C – Conclusion: Take on the role of a judge and use a persuasive explanation as to why the argument you accept as correct is the strongest.

Tip #4: Use Any Available Revision Resources

This is perhaps the easiest key to success since there are many ways you can improve your grade by simply using revision resources. An obvious example of this is using mark schemes of past or practise papers to see the type of answers achieving top-band marks.

Similarly, reading model answers from a revision guide or law textbook is also very beneficial.

Furthermore, a great revision resource is using websites that are specifically targeted to A-level law revision. Some examples are listed below:

• Revision World
• D.Hussain Publications
• Hodder Plus 

By using these simple tips to your advantage, you can most certainly get that A* which you want and deserve. Good luck!

Published: 07/03/18     Author: Tvara Shah

• A-level Exam Help: How I Went From a C to an A*
• 5 Revision Tactics for January Exam Success
• What Makes a Good Lawyer
• Ultimate Guide to the LNAT

Free Guides

Our free guides cover everything from deciding on law to studying and practising law abroad. Search through our vast directory.

Upcoming Events

Explore our events for aspiring lawyers. Sponsored by top institutions, they offer fantastic insights into the legal profession.

Join Our Newsletter

Join our mailing list for weekly updates and advice on how to get into law.

Law Quizzes

Try our selection of quizzes for aspiring lawyers for a fun way to gain insight into the legal profession!

NEXT ARTICLE

4 Things I Wish I'd Known Before UCAS

You may also like.

Loading More Content

Public Law for Everyone

by Professor Mark Elliott

Writing a Law essay? Remember to argue!

Providing advice in the abstract about how to write Law essays is difficult because so much depends on the nature of the question you are answering. It’s also important to take into account whatever are the expectations for your particular course, degree programme or university. Nevertheless, a useful rule of thumb, I think, is that a good Law essay will normally set out and advance a clear thesis or argument . (Note that I’m referring here to essays as distinct from problem questions: the latter call for a different approach.)

The need for an argument

Some answers explicitly call for this. Take, for example, the following essay title:

‘Do you agree that parliamentary sovereignty is the most important principle in the UK constitution?’

Here, the question itself in effect advances an argument — that parliamentary sovereignty is the most important principle in the constitution — and invites you to say whether you agree with it or not. And in saying whether you agree, you need to advance your own argument: ‘I agree with this because…’. Or: ‘I disagree because…’. Or even (because if the question advances a position that you think implies a misconception, oversimplification or false premise, you can say so): ‘I will argue that the question oversimplifies matters by assuming that a particular constitutional principle can be singled out as uniquely important…’

Other questions may indicate in a less direct way the need for you to put forward your own argument. For example:

‘“Parliamentary sovereignty is the most important principle in the UK constitution.” Discuss.’

Here, we don’t have a ‘do you agree?’ prompt; instead, we have the apparently less directive ‘discuss’ prompt. If we read the question literally, it may seem that there is no need for you to put forward your own argument here. After all, it’s possible to ‘discuss’ something without advancing your own argument about it: you could make various points, explain various matters, and leave the reader to make up their own mind. But while this may be formally true, it’s unwise to read the question in this way, because it creates the risk that you will end up writing something very general and descriptive on the topic without going any further.

To summarise, then, there are at least three reasons for making an argument part of your essay. First, the question will often call for this, whether explicitly or implicitly, such that you wouldn’t be answering the question if you didn’t set out and develop an argument. Second, if you don’t impose on yourself the discipline of articulating and defending an argument, you risk underselling yourself by writing something that is descriptive and meandering rather than purposefully constructed . Third, setting out and developing an argument involves taking ownership of the material. By that, I mean using the material in a way that serves the purposes of your argument, showing that you are in command of it and that it is not in command of you. This, in turn, provides an opportunity to demonstrate a level of understanding that it would be hard to show in a descriptive essay that simply wandered from point to point.

Setting our your thesis

If putting forward an argument is (often) important or necessary, how should it be done? There are no great secrets here: the formula is straightforward. You should begin your essay by stating your thesis — that is, by setting out what it is that you are going to argue. This should be done in your introductory paragraph — by the time the reader reaches the end of that paragraph, they should be in no doubt about what you are going to argue. Imagine, for instance, that you are presented with the following essay title:

‘“The courts have expanded their powers of judicial review beyond all acceptable constitutional limits in recent decades; it is time to clip the judges’ wings.” Discuss.’  

In response to such a question, it might be tempting to say in your introduction that (for example) you are going to ‘show’ how the courts’ powers of judicial review have grown, ‘consider’ why this has happened and ‘examine’ the criticisms of judicial over-reach that have resulted. These are all perfectly sensible things to do when writing an essay on this topic, but if that is all you say in your introduction, you will leave the reader wondering what you think — and what you are going to argue . In contrast, an introductory paragraph that lays the foundation for essay that properly advances a thesis will set out what that thesis is. You might, for instance, take each of the propositions set out in the question and stake out your position:

‘In this essay, I will argue that (a) while the courts’ powers of judicial review have grown in recent decades, (b) it is misguided to suggest that this has breached “all acceptable constitutional limits” and (c) that those who now advocate “clip[ping] the judges’ wings” misunderstand the role of the judiciary in a rule of law-based constitution. In other words, the courts’ judicial review powers are entirely appropriate and those who seek to limit them risk undermining the rule of law.’  

An introduction of this nature would achieve two things. First, it would make clear to the reader the position you proposed to take. Second, it would immediately lend the essay a structure.

Developing your thesis

Once you have set out your thesis in the introduction, you need to develop or defend it. This will involve making a series of connected points in successive paragraphs, each of which relates to your overarching thesis. One way of thinking about this is that the individual points you make in the main body of the essay should all relate or point back in some way — and in a clear way — to the position that you staked out in the introduction.

In the example introduction above, the overarching thesis is set out in the second sentence; the individual and connecting parts of the argument are set out in propositions (a), (b) and (c) in the first sentence. One approach, therefore, would be to divide the answer, once the introduction has been written, into three parts, dealing in turn with points (a), (b) and (c). Naturally, as you work through the various parts of your argument, you will need to cite relevant evidence (cases, legislation, literature and so on) in support of your argument. You will also need to deal with matters that appear, at least at first glance, to sit in opposition to your argument (on which see further below) or which, once properly considered, require your argument to be refined.  

A key point, however you proceed, is that the reader should also be clear about how each successive point relates not only to the previous point but also to the overarching argument. The reader should never be left wondering ‘Where does this fit in?’ or ‘Why am I being told this?’ A simple way of avoiding these problems is to signpost , by saying at the beginning of each section how it relates to the overall argument. The flipside of this coin is that you should avoid saying things like ‘Another point is that…’ since this gives the impression, rightly or wrongly, that the various points in your essay have been thrown together in a random order, with little thought as to how they fit together or relate to your overall argument. Even if that’s not the case, you don’t want to risk giving the reader that impression.

A one-sided approach?

The advice set about above might seem to imply that I’m suggesting you write one-sided essays — in which you set out points that support your argument while ignoring those that don’t. However, that’s not at all what I’m suggesting. In order to set out your argument in a persuasive manner, you need to deal both with relevant points that support your argument and with relevant points that appear to challenge your argument — and, in dealing with the latter points, you need to show why they do not in fact fatally undermine your argument. In other words, the approach I’m suggesting here doesn’t mean that you should adopt a blinkered approach, paying no attention to counterarguments: rather, you need to deal with them in a way that shows that, having thought about and weighed them in the balance, you are in a position to show why your argument stands in spite of them (or why your argument can be adapted in a way that accommodates such points).  

All of this points towards a further matter: namely, that advancing an argument in your essay does not mean that you need to (or should) be argumentative in the sense of adopting a strident tone that brooks no debate or compromise. Rather, advancing an argument in the way I’ve suggested here means being thoughtful and persuasive : taking the reader with you on a journey that demonstrates that you have looked at the relevant material, carefully thought through the issues raised by the question, and arrived at a view that you are able to justify and defend through well-reasoned and suitably evidenced argument.

So what about your conclusion? If you’ve followed my advice above, it should more or less write itself. People often agonise over conclusions, perhaps thinking that there has to be some ‘big reveal’ at the end of their essay. But there doesn’t need to be — and indeed there shouldn’t be — any big reveal. There should be no surprises at the end precisely because you’ve set out your argument at the beginning and spent the rest of the essay carefully constructing the different strands of your argument. The conclusion is an opportunity to draw those stands together, but no-one should have to wait with bated breath for the conclusion before finally realising: ‘Ah, so that’s what they think!’ If that’s the impact of the conclusion on your reader, it means there’s something wrong with the introduction!

This post was first published on The Law Prof blog . It is re-published here with permission and thanks.

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

Band 8+: Some countries have introduced a law to limit working hours for employees. Why is this law introduced? Do you think it is a positive or negative development?

Working hours have become a central topic of the rising debate in the present world. While employees argue that they are being exploited, employers dispute that they are not getting enough profit. In my opinion, long working hours are a negative development. Therefore, laws must be made by the government to set limits on working hours. This essay will explore the consequences led to introducing labor laws.

To commence with, there are several compelling arguments supporting my belief. The most prominent one is that working all day in extreme conditions may have devastating effects on workers’ mental and psychological health. For example, according to research conducted by Western Sydney University, 80 percent of workers having to work more than 8 hours a day suffer from psychiatric illness. This example explains why authorities around the world are enacting laws to protect these workers.

Another point to consider is that strict laws could restrict the exploitation of business owners, forcing them to have empathy for their employees. Consequently, the workers would have a potential passion for the workplace after realizing they are not being exploited. For instance, a survey carried out in the United States revealed that the proficiency of the staff increased by 50 percent over the usual. For this reason, making strict laws prohibiting working too long a day is beneficial for the workforce as well as the investors.

To conclude, there are legitimate concerns regarding excessive working hours. As a result, harsh restrictions must be made in all nations to protect citizens from being exploited by business tycoons. Moreover, these regulations must be carefully supervised and monitored. Therefore, these laws should be embraced and utilized in a responsible manner. However, their improper or excessive use should be discouraged. With the right approach, these rigid guidelines can continue to positively impact our lives and society as a whole.

Check Your Own Essay On This Topic?

Generate a band-9 sample with your idea, overall band score, task response, coherence & cohesion, lexical resource, grammatical range & accuracy, essays on the same topic:, some countries have introduced a law to limit working hours for employees. why is this law introduced do you think it is a positive or negative development.

Limits on working hours have been introduced in some countries to promote a better work-life balance. This means that with a balanced approach, employees will work for a limited amount of time, allowing them to dedicate more time to family and friends, as well as enjoy their social lives. Without restrictions on working hours, employees […]

There are many countries, where a person cannot work for more than a certain hour a week. In my opinion, it is a positive development. In the following paragraphs, I shall discuss, why this law was introduced, and my arguments to support my views. This law was introduced with a view to protect the economic […]

Experts worldwide, both in developing and developed nations believe that several countries are establishing laws and regulations to lower the time limit of working hours. The reason for this is that numerous people work overtime in order to save more money. As a result, they are unable to make a healthy lifestyle. In my perspective, […]

Laws limiting working hours are introduced for several key reasons, with the ultimate goal of protecting workers’ well-being and promoting a healthy work-life balance. One primary reason is to ensure worker physical and mental health. Long working hours can lead to physical and mental exhaustion, increasing the risk of accidents, injuries, and even work-related illnesses. […]

Other Topics:

Some people think that the government should give financial support to artists such as musicians, painters and poets. others think that it is a waste of money. discuss both views and give your opinion..

Society has varying opinions regarding government assistance for individuals engaged in creative work, such as drawing, music, and poetry. While some groups advocate for this support, others view it as a waste of taxpayer money. I believe the government should provide assistance to foster growth in these sectors. Firstly, artists involved in creative endeavors like […]

Society has various thoughts about the government providing assistants to people who do creative works like drawings,music and poets. A group which supports the statement and others think it is a waste of money. I believe the government should provide assistance for the growth of these sectors. To begin with, individuals who do creative works […]

Some people think that, parents of children who commit crime should also receive punishment. Do you agree or disagree.

Crime is increasing is by leaps and bounds in specially in youth.Thus, a section of society reckons that parents should be punished because of their offspring’s crime.I am partially agree with this notion. Arguments to crutch my statement will be discussed in the forthcoming paragraphs. Why parents should get penalty of their children’s crime ? […]

Many working people do not have enough free time off work to spend with their families and friends. Why? What are the effects on family life and society?

In this contemporary society, many employees spend their free time working rather than for their families and friends. This phenomenon adversely impacts family life and society, and can be attributed to several reasons outlined below. There are two main reasons why people take extra working time more often. First, due to the exorbitant living cost, […]

1. A rise in the standard of living in a country often only seems to benefit cities rather than rural areas. What problems can this cause? How might these problems be reduced?

The development of a country usually goes to the advantages of the urban areas compared tot the countryside. Usually, it can create unequal living standards and overcrowded cities. On the other hand, the government can minimize the gap by initiating distributive job opportunities and extensive human resource management all over the regions. To begin with […]

Plans & Pricing

• UCAS Guide Home >
• A-Level English Literature

How to Write an A-Level English Literature Essay

Writing an A-level English Literature essay is like creating a masterpiece. It’s a skill that can make a big difference in your academic adventure. 

In this article, we will explore the world of literary analysis in an easy-to-follow way. We’ll show you how to organise your thoughts, analyse texts, and make strong arguments. 

The Basics of Crafting A-Level English Literature Essays

Understanding the Assignment: Decoding Essay Prompts

Writing begins with understanding. When faced with an essay prompt, dissect it carefully. Identify keywords and phrases to grasp what’s expected. Pay attention to verbs like “analyse,” “discuss,” or “evaluate.” These guide your approach. For instance, if asked to analyse, delve into the how and why of a literary element.

Essay Structure: Building a Solid Foundation

The structure is the backbone of a great essay. Start with a clear introduction that introduces your topic and thesis. The body paragraphs should each focus on a specific aspect, supporting your thesis. Don’t forget topic sentences—they guide readers. Finally, wrap it up with a concise conclusion that reinforces your main points.

Thesis Statements: Crafting Clear and Powerful Arguments

Your thesis is your essay’s compass. Craft a brief statement conveying your main argument. It should be specific, not vague. Use it as a roadmap for your essay, ensuring every paragraph aligns with and supports it. A strong thesis sets the tone for an impactful essay, giving your reader a clear sense of what to expect.

Exploring PEDAL for Better A-Level English Essays

Going beyond PEE to PEDAL ensures a holistic approach, hitting the additional elements crucial for A-Level success. This structure delves into close analysis, explains both the device and the quote, and concludes with a contextual link. 

Below are some examples to illustrate how PEDAL can enhance your essay:

Clearly state your main idea.

Example: “In this paragraph, we explore the central theme of love in Shakespeare’s ‘Romeo and Juliet.'”

Pull relevant quotes from the text.

Example: “Citing Juliet’s line, ‘My only love sprung from my only hate,’ highlights the conflict between love and family loyalty.”

Identify a literary technique in the evidence.

Example: “Analysing the metaphor of ‘love sprung from hate,’ we unveil Shakespeare’s use of contrast to emphasise the intensity of emotions.”

Break down the meaning of the evidence.

Example: “Zooming in on the words ‘love’ and ‘hate,’ we dissect their individual meanings, emphasising the emotional complexity of the characters.”

Link to Context:

Connect your point to broader contexts.

Example: “Linking this theme to the societal norms of the Elizabethan era adds depth, revealing how Shakespeare challenges prevailing beliefs about love and family.”

Navigating the World of Literary Analysis

Breaking Down Literary Elements: Characters, Plot, and Themes

Literary analysis is about dissecting a text’s components. Characters, plot, and themes are key players. Explore how characters develop, influence the narrative, and represent broader ideas. Map out the plot’s structure—introduction, rising action, climax, and resolution. Themes, the underlying messages, offer insight into the author’s intent. Pinpointing these elements enriches your analysis.

Effective Text Analysis: Uncovering Hidden Meanings

Go beyond the surface. Effective analysis uncovers hidden layers. Consider symbolism, metaphors, and imagery. Ask questions: What does a symbol represent? How does a metaphor enhance meaning? Why was a particular image chosen? Context is crucial. Connect these literary devices to the broader narrative, revealing the author’s nuanced intentions.

Incorporating Critical Perspectives: Adding Depth to Your Essays

Elevate your analysis by considering various perspectives. Literary criticism opens new doors. Explore historical, cultural, or feminist viewpoints. Delve into how different critics interpret the text. This depth showcases a nuanced understanding, demonstrating your engagement with broader conversations in the literary realm. Incorporating these perspectives enriches your analysis, setting your essay apart.

Secrets to Compelling Essays

Structuring your ideas: creating coherent and flowing essays.

Structure is the roadmap readers follow. Start with a captivating introduction that sets the stage. Each paragraph should have a clear focus, connected by smooth transitions. Use topic sentences to guide readers through your ideas. Aim for coherence—each sentence should logically follow the previous one. This ensures your essay flows seamlessly, making it engaging and easy to follow.

Presenting Compelling Arguments: Backing Up Your Points

Compelling arguments rest on solid evidence. Support your ideas with examples from the text. Quote relevant passages to reinforce your points. Be specific—show how the evidence directly relates to your argument. Avoid generalisations. Strong arguments convince the reader of your perspective, making your essay persuasive and impactful.

The Power of Language: Writing with Clarity and Precision

Clarity is key in essay writing. Choose words carefully to convey your ideas precisely. Avoid unnecessary complexity—simple language is often more effective. Proofread to eliminate ambiguity and ensure clarity. Precision in language enhances the reader’s understanding and allows your ideas to shine. Crafting your essay with care elevates the overall quality, leaving a lasting impression.

Mastering A-level English Literature essays unlocks academic success. Armed with a solid structure, nuanced literary analysis, and compelling arguments, your essays will stand out. Transform your writing from good to exceptional. 

For personalised guidance, join Study Mind’s A-Level English Literature tutors . Elevate your understanding and excel in your literary pursuits. Enrich your learning journey today!

How long should my A-level English Literature essay be, and does word count matter?

While word count can vary, aim for quality over quantity. Typically, essays range from 1,200 to 1,500 words. Focus on expressing your ideas coherently rather than meeting a specific word count. Ensure each word contributes meaningfully to your analysis for a concise and impactful essay.

Is it acceptable to include personal opinions in my literature essay?

While it’s essential to express your viewpoint, prioritise textual evidence over personal opinions. Support your arguments with examples from the text to maintain objectivity. Balance your insights with the author’s intent, ensuring a nuanced and well-supported analysis.

Can I use quotes from literary critics in my essay, and how do I integrate them effectively?

Yes, incorporating quotes from critics can add depth. Introduce the critic’s perspective and relate it to your argument. Analyse the quote’s relevance and discuss its impact on your interpretation. This demonstrates a broader engagement with literary conversations.

How do I avoid sounding repetitive in my essay?

Vary your language and sentence structure. Instead of repeating phrases, use synonyms and explore different ways to express the same idea. Ensure each paragraph introduces new insights, contributing to the overall development of your analysis. This keeps your essay engaging and avoids monotony.

Is it necessary to memorise quotes, or can I refer to the text during exams?

While memorising key quotes is beneficial for a closed text exam, you can refer to the text during open text exams. However, it’s crucial to be selective. Memorise quotes that align with common themes and characters, allowing you to recall them quickly and use them effectively in your essay under time constraints.

How can I improve my essay writing under time pressure during exams?

Practise timed writing regularly to enhance your speed and efficiency. Prioritise planning—allocate a few minutes to outline your essay before starting. Focus on concise yet impactful analysis. Develop a systematic approach to time management to ensure each section of your essay receives adequate attention within the given timeframe.

Still got a question? Leave a comment

Leave a comment, cancel reply.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Let's get acquainted ? What is your name?

Nice to meet you, {{name}} what is your preferred e-mail address, nice to meet you, {{name}} what is your preferred phone number, what is your preferred phone number, just to check, what are you interested in, when should we call you.

It would be great to have a 15m chat to discuss a personalised plan and answer any questions

What time works best for you? (UK Time)

Pick a time-slot that works best for you ?

How many hours of 1-1 tutoring are you looking for?

My whatsapp number is..., for our safeguarding policy, please confirm....

Please provide the mobile number of a guardian/parent

Which online course are you interested in?

What is your query, you can apply for a bursary by clicking this link, sure, what is your query, thank you for your response. we will aim to get back to you within 12-24 hours., lock in a 2 hour 1-1 tutoring lesson now.

If you're ready and keen to get started click the button below to book your first 2 hour 1-1 tutoring lesson with us. Connect with a tutor from a university of your choice in minutes. (Use FAST5 to get 5% Off!)