Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    The 15 markers in the 3C paper were ridiculously hard I thought. Nothing like any past questions I've done. Mostly very specific and niche questions. I managed to answer all 3 but most of the answers I gave felt very wishy washy. The electoral college 45 marker was decent on the other hand.

    I hope the 15 markers on 4C aren't as bad because it's really got me down.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I have to agree tbh. the wording of the 15 markers were very very specific
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    can someone who hv done affirmative action and caucus 15 marker tell me wt did they write?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    What could you say if "what is the federal bureaucracy and assess its significance" came up?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    For the party decline question I did 2 points for party decline and then argued against it with a paragraph arguing renewal? Can someone please tell me if this structure is wrong so I don't make the mistake again
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    What is meant by Imperial Presidency and Post-Imperial Presidency?

    Imperial - Powerful, does things on itself?

    Post-Imperial - Cannot do things by itself, less powerful?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adriansiuyikto)
    can someone who hv done affirmative action and caucus 15 marker tell me wt did they write?
    Why Caucus is better than Primary (15)

    - Caucuses help build community cohesion and debate, something which is very democratic and what primaries lack.
    - In caucuses where voters can move from non-viable groups, they reduce thenumber of wasted votes, whereas votes tend to be wasted in primaries

    On the other hand...
    - Primaries are better as they don't alienate voters like Caucuses do, Caucuses have been seen to discriminate against people who work as they won't get time to participate
    - Primaries have generally a higher turnout and quick to carry out
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by eamonnkearney_)
    What is meant by Imperial Presidency and Post-Imperial Presidency?

    Imperial - Powerful, does things on itself?

    Post-Imperial - Cannot do things by itself, less powerful?
    Imperial presidency is when the president is acting like a dictator, no idea where you pulled post-imperial from as i've never heard of it.
    http://ussmokefilledroom.blogspot.co...-in-chief.html
    Decent plan
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by imaaniee)
    For the party decline question I did 2 points for party decline and then argued against it with a paragraph arguing renewal? Can someone please tell me if this structure is wrong so I don't make the mistake again
    What was the exact wording of the question? I thought you were not supposed to argue for renewal at all?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pato1)
    What was the exact wording of the question? I thought you were not supposed to argue for renewal at all?
    i believe it was 'assess the arguments for the theory of party decline'.
    i gave one against point myself because i wasn't sure! but in hindsight maybe they wanted you to evaluate your point, it was a stupid question ngl, even if it seems simple on the face of it.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pato1)
    What was the exact wording of the question? I thought you were not supposed to argue for renewal at all?
    Yeah because it said assess I thought you had to argue against 😭 Sigh well I messed that up
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nta786)
    i believe it was 'assess the arguments for the theory of party decline'.
    i gave one against point myself because i wasn't sure! but in hindsight maybe they wanted you to evaluate your point, it was a stupid question ngl, even if it seems simple on the face of it.
    Yeah it was stupid...I'm scared I did it wrong now. Just frustrating because I knew enough to argue only party decline but I left possible points out because I wasn't sure
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mugiiwara)
    Hey quick question about today's exam guys. I did a decent 45 marker (EC reform) and 1 good 15 marker (pressure group). The paper was a dream and I guess we couldn't have asked for better, but for 2 of the 15 markers I ran out of time and was only able to get 2 points down for both One of them I mentioned a 3rd point but ran out of time so all I did was mention it and give an example. It sucks to choke in an exam and I feel like I screwed up big time. How detrimental is it to the grade for only mentioning 2 points for the 15 markers?
    Two points is fine as long as they are detailed and thorough, a third is always better just to be safe but as long as the ones you did are good it should be fine!!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by imaaniee)
    Yeah it was stupid...I'm scared I did it wrong now. Just frustrating because I knew enough to argue only party decline but I left possible points out because I wasn't sure
    same! no point being scared though, no one really knows and maybe they did want an argument against though , makes sense as they asked you assess the argument, but best to move on instead of dwell.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by imaaniee)
    Yeah it was stupid...I'm scared I did it wrong now. Just frustrating because I knew enough to argue only party decline but I left possible points out because I wasn't sure
    I'm fairly certain that your against point had to be a criticism of the argument you put forward in favour. So for example my arguments supporting party decline theory were:
    1) parties have no coercive control over voting in Congress (2013 GOP shutdown)

    BUT 2) argued that following reforms to committees in 1990s that's not so relevant (2012 Boehner purging House + Business Committee

    3) Local nature of elections means parties can't control candidates/campaigns (Southern Democrats in 2014 campaigning against Obama)

    BUT 4) This isn't such a prevalent argument as mid term elections have been nationalised over national party concerns (2014 focused around Obama/economy).
    I think/hope that's what they were looking for
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    hey has anyone got solid plans for the majority of past questions for both 15 and 45 marker for unit 4C?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by issyr123)
    Two points is fine as long as they are detailed and thorough, a third is always better just to be safe but as long as the ones you did are good it should be fine!!
    You might be saying this to make me feel better, but I hope you're right! I guess its natural after an exam to stress over your mistakes Thanks! <3
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    thought the 15 markers were very specific and quite hard, and my answers were vague in terms of the points i was making but I used a lot of examples, referring to the NRA ad giving details of their revenue and success and failures of their bills as evidence to support my points. Although on both the 15 markers and the 45 markers i referred to AIPAC loads, but I made an error and got their name mixed up and called them AATIP instead. 1) how much will me giving them the wrong name hinder me and will the examiner know what I'm referring to and 2) will referring to the same evidence in my 45 markers as i did in my pressure group 15 marker hinder me?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hey guys, to people who did the 45 marker on parties. For that there is no significant overlap:

    1. 2016 race differences in ideas/policies of Clinton/Trump
    2. Decline in bi partisanship in Congress suggests lack of shared ideas
    3. Growth of radicals for each party that have opposing ideas/aims to other party
    4. Decline of Blue Dog democrats, one group in Dems who advocated conservative ideas

    Then on the other side

    1. Obama's 'pragmatism' particularly on foreign policy -> evaluated by saying pragmatism largely due to Congress being GOP controlled
    2. Bi partisanship over areas such as education/continuing resolutions -> evaluated by pointing out this overlap insignificant compared to lack of bi partisanship
    3. Moderate influence in the GOP, specifically over reducing food stamps in 2014 Agriculture Act -> evaluated by saying they don't have that much influence
    4. Policies of McCain/Romney similar to Obama, specifically Romney's healthcare -> evaluated by saying such ideas not prevalent in GOP today

    WouldI be able to get an A/A* with this structure providing my evidence/argument was good?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MelissaaC)
    What could you say if "what is the federal bureaucracy and assess its significance" came up?
    I'm pretty sure the specification says the federal bureaucracy cannot be the subject of a 45 mark question.

    IDK whether it could be a 15-mark question though...?
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.