Edexcel 20 marks AS Micro-Economics Watch

that.kid
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#1
Hi!
I just want to ask; how are we supposed to structure the 20 mark questions on the AS Edexcel Micro-economics paper?

I am aware about the allocation of marks in the 20 mark questions:
Knowledge [4 marks]
Application [4 marks]
Analysis [6 marks]
Evaluation [6 marks]

I just did two 20 mark questions and always ran out of space in the exam paper. So I was thinking maybe my structure is wrong or maybe its just my writing.

Anyway, are we supposed to structure our answers like STRUCTURE A) or STRUCTURE B)?

STRUCTURE A

- Intro

- Paragraph 1 (argument 1)
Knowledge
Application
Analysis
Evaluation [counter-argument]

- Paragraph 2 (argument 2)
Knowledge
Application
Analysis
Evaluation [counter-argument]

- Judgement

OR

STRUCTURE B

- Intro

Knowledge
Application
Analysis
Evaluation

- Judgement

And good luck to everyone tomorrow taking this exam!
0
reply
keenafied
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#2
Report 3 years ago
#2
Structure A. Its preferable to evaluate each point directly after, in a new paragraph to make it clear to the examiner, rather than a bunch of evaluation paragraphs right at the end of your essay. But really everyone is different, it wouldn't matter if you used either structure as long as you have the correct amount of points and marks allocated to each K(4) A(4) A(6) Ev(6).

I have my exam tomorrow and have really been practicing my evaluations, they are key.

Oh and btw don't worry if you run out of space on the actual paper, most of us will, just ask for more paper and you'll be able to continue on there.

Hope I was able to help and goodluck!
0
reply
sragdoll
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#3
Report 3 years ago
#3
Hiya, I'm super stuck on how to evaluate something as well as include a counter point/other side of the argument. Does anyone have any model answers, would be HUGELY appreciated.

As normally an evaluation is explain what flaws the point you just made has, eg what's wrong with it eg(in the long run will work but not in the short run) , but THEN you're meant to include a counter point, to me this is a whole other KAA paragraph included in the evaluation? Can anyone clear this up for me, probably save my whole life!
0
reply
that.kid
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#4
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#4
(Original post by keenafied)
Structure A. Its preferable to evaluate each point directly after, in a new paragraph to make it clear to the examiner, rather than a bunch of evaluation paragraphs right at the end of your essay. But really everyone is different, it wouldn't matter if you used either structure as long as you have the correct amount of points and marks allocated to each K(4) A(4) A(6) Ev(6).

I have my exam tomorrow and have really been practicing my evaluations, they are key.

Hope I was able to help and goodluck!
Apologies, I don't think I made my question clear. But your answer did help! I will start writing evaluative statements in another paragraph.

My question really is:
Do we need more than one argument in our 20 mark essay? So 2 KAAE paragraphs + judgement
or do we just need to go in depth with one argument? So 1 KAAE argument + judgement

And good luck man!
0
reply
that.kid
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#5
(Original post by sragdoll)
Hiya, I'm super stuck on how to evaluate something as well as include a counter point/other side of the argument. Does anyone have any model answers, would be HUGELY appreciated.

As normally an evaluation is explain what flaws the point you just made has, eg what's wrong with it eg(in the long run will work but not in the short run) , but THEN you're meant to include a counter point, to me this is a whole other KAA paragraph included in the evaluation? Can anyone clear this up for me, probably save my whole life!
Hey, I watched this video and it explained Evaluation clearly
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=isBVq4MRuHs
It was uploaded very recently Published on 13 Apr 2016

Hope it helps!
0
reply
JonJO99
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#6
Report 3 years ago
#6
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_o3...3RLfnYynR_6AsM

this guys great!! hope it helps
0
reply
keenafied
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#7
Report 3 years ago
#7
(Original post by that.kid)
Apologies, I don't think I made my question clear. But your answer did help! I will start writing evaluative statements in another paragraph.

My question really is:
Do we need more than one argument in our 20 mark essay? So 2 KAAE paragraphs + judgement
or do we just need to go in depth with one argument? So 1 KAAE argument + judgement

And good luck man!
Nono never one point however strong it may be, my economics teacher was telling us to do around 5 points for insurance lmao but obviously thats a bit too much, but normally its around 3-4 points and 2 strong evaluations (3+3 marks) or 3 fair evaluations (2+2+2 marks).

I would recommend watching 'econplusdal' on youtube and go through his exam technique playlist.
1
reply
that.kid
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#8
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#8
(Original post by keenafied)
Nono never one point however strong it may be, my economics teacher was telling us to do around 5 points for insurance lmao but obviously thats a bit too much, but normally its around 3-4 points and 2 strong evaluations (3+3 marks) or 3 fair evaluations (2+2+2 marks).

I would recommend watching 'econplusdal' on youtube and go through his exam technique playlist.
Okay thank you so much for clarifying
Yeah, I've seen his videos and that 20 mark video.
I was just getting less confident about the structure because I keep on running out of space in the exam paper. Guess I have to write more concise.
How long are your answers usually to 20 mark questions?
0
reply
that.kid
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#9
(Original post by sragdoll)
Hiya, I'm super stuck on how to evaluate something as well as include a counter point/other side of the argument. Does anyone have any model answers, would be HUGELY appreciated.

As normally an evaluation is explain what flaws the point you just made has, eg what's wrong with it eg(in the long run will work but not in the short run) , but THEN you're meant to include a counter point, to me this is a whole other KAA paragraph included in the evaluation? Can anyone clear this up for me, probably save my whole life!
Search "How to perfect evaluation in economics econplusdal" on Youtube. He explains it really well

I just saved your life lol
Good luck tomorrow
0
reply
keenafied
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#10
Report 3 years ago
#10
(Original post by that.kid)
Okay thank you so much for clarifying
Yeah, I've seen his videos and that 20 mark video.
I was just getting less confident about the structure because I keep on running out of space in the exam paper. Guess I have to write more concise.
How long are your answers usually to 20 mark questions?
My 20 markers usually take up all the space in the examination paper, and then I carry on for another page on one sheet of A4. I've done loads of 14 markers from the old spec and imagined them as 20 markers for practice because theres not much material out there for new spec which is why I hate being the first year especially for physics , but hey if you know the theory and your structures right you should be good to go!
0
reply
sragdoll
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#11
Report 3 years ago
#11
(Original post by that.kid)
Search "How to perfect evaluation in economics econplusdal" on Youtube. He explains it really well

I just saved your life lol
Good luck tomorrow
I've already looked at his video! Thanks though , he explains it pretty well, he explains the basic 15 marker kind of evaluation when you tell the examiner why your points are flawed, however you're also meant to make a counter point which i don't understand, maybe i should make it clearer. We have two sides of arguement, side A and side B. Now i make a SIDE A point, i then evaluate that point, and WITHING that evaluation, i make a SIDE B point, INSIDE the evaluation?

OR am i mean to do a SIDE A point, (KAA) then evaluate, then next paragraph SIDE B point, the KAA and evaluate, eg the only way that makes sense in my head?

Thanks for caring enough about my life to try to save it though
0
reply
keenafied
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#12
Report 3 years ago
#12
(Original post by sragdoll)
Hiya, I'm super stuck on how to evaluate something as well as include a counter point/other side of the argument. Does anyone have any model answers, would be HUGELY appreciated.

As normally an evaluation is explain what flaws the point you just made has, eg what's wrong with it eg(in the long run will work but not in the short run) , but THEN you're meant to include a counter point, to me this is a whole other KAA paragraph included in the evaluation? Can anyone clear this up for me, probably save my whole life!
I made a site a while back and only managed to upload a few of my essays, you can have a look if you would like. keenafied.wix.com/essays .. obviously they won't be perfect but they might help you, who knows but good luck.
0
reply
that.kid
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#13
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#13
(Original post by keenafied)
My 20 markers usually take up all the space in the examination paper, and then I carry on for another page on one sheet of A4. I've done loads of 14 markers from the old spec and imagined them as 20 markers for practice because theres not much material out there for new spec which is why I hate being the first year especially for physics , but hey if you know the theory and your structures right you should be good to go!
I write about the same amount lol
I guess in the end, as long as you show your knowledge and clear understanding you'll get the marks.
Wish you all the best for Physics as well man
0
reply
guyr
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#14
Report 3 years ago
#14
Have a look at the video on exam technique and data response frameworks here as well:

https://uplearn.co.uk/economics-exam-technique

For a 20 marker, you should be looking to do 4 points and 3-4 evaluations.

Using your format e.g.

- Intro

- Paragraph 1 (argument 1)
Knowledge
Application
Analysis
Evaluation [counter-argument]

- Paragraph 2 (argument 2)
Knowledge
Application
Analysis
Evaluation [counter-argument]

- Paragraph 3 (argument 3)
Knowledge
Application
Analysis
Evaluation [counter-argument]

- Paragraph 4 (argument 4)
Knowledge
Application
Analysis
Evaluation [counter-argument]

- Judgement
0
reply
sragdoll
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#15
Report 3 years ago
#15
(Original post by guyr)
Have a look at the video on exam technique and data response frameworks here as well:

https://uplearn.co.uk/economics-exam-technique

For a 20 marker, you should be looking to do 4 points and 3-4 evaluations.

Using your format e.g.

- Intro

- Paragraph 1 (argument 1)
Knowledge
Application
Analysis
Evaluation [counter-argument]

- Paragraph 2 (argument 2)
Knowledge
Application
Analysis
Evaluation [counter-argument]

- Paragraph 3 (argument 3)
Knowledge
Application
Analysis
Evaluation [counter-argument]

- Paragraph 4 (argument 4)
Knowledge
Application
Analysis
Evaluation [counter-argument]

- Judgement
When you say 'counter argument' you don't mean the OTHER SIDE of the argument do you, you just mean a basic evaluation were you explain why a point you made is flawed? Not a whole separate kaa point right?
0
reply
that.kid
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#16
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#16
(Original post by sragdoll)
I've already looked at his video! Thanks though , he explains it pretty well, he explains the basic 15 marker kind of evaluation when you tell the examiner why your points are flawed, however you're also meant to make a counter point which i don't understand, maybe i should make it clearer. We have two sides of arguement, side A and side B. Now i make a SIDE A point, i then evaluate that point, and WITHING that evaluation, i make a SIDE B point, INSIDE the evaluation?

OR am i mean to do a SIDE A point, (KAA) then evaluate, then next paragraph SIDE B point, the KAA and evaluate, eg the only way that makes sense in my head?

Thanks for caring enough about my life to try to save it though
We're talking about the structure for 20 marks right?
Evaluate is basically stating your counter argument

From my understanding we do:
Paragraph 1 = Side A point (KAA) then evaluate (counter argument) then weigh up which is the better argument
Paragraph 2 = Side B point (KAA) then evaluate (counter argument) then weigh up which is the better argument
Paragraph 3 = Side C point (KAA) then evaluate (counter argument) then weigh up which is the better argument
Judgement Paragraph

I think econplusdal was kinda confusing too because he was stating how to do evaluation for both micro and macro.
0
reply
that.kid
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#17
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#17
(Original post by sragdoll)
When you say 'counter argument' you don't mean the OTHER SIDE of the argument do you, you just mean a basic evaluation were you explain why a point you made is flawed? Not a whole separate kaa point right?
Yeah I think Evaluation is separate from KAA. Just state your counter argument with a strong chain of reasoning.
0
reply
sragdoll
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#18
Report 3 years ago
#18
(Original post by that.kid)
We're talking about the structure for 20 marks right?
Evaluate is basically stating your counter argument

From my understanding we do:
Paragraph 1 = Side A point (KAA) then evaluate (counter argument) then weigh up which is the better argument
Paragraph 2 = Side B point (KAA) then evaluate (counter argument) then weigh up which is the better argument
Paragraph 3 = Side C point (KAA) then evaluate (counter argument) then weigh up which is the better argument
Judgement Paragraph

I think econplusdal was kinda confusing too because he was stating how to do evaluation for both micro and macro.
It's confusing because this term 'counter argument' is thrown about alot and it confuses me, a counter argument is for example, ' what are the consequences of building a cross rail train' , now we can say that the it's either GOOD or BAD, so..

POINT 1 : KAA on why it's a GOOD thing, eg extra geographical mobility, THEN we evaluate, an evaluation isn't explaining the other side of the argument, eg it isn't why the cross rail is a BAD thing, it's explaining why the cross trail MIGHT NOT actually give better geographical mobility, eg there aren't many jobs/homes in where the cross trail goes to, therefore the geographical mobility isn't useful. NOW what I'm asking is, IN THE EVALUATION, I wouldn't start talking about the high opportunity cost of building a cross rail- as that would be my SECOND point..

POINT 2: KAA on high opportunity cost.. EVALUATION OF SECOND POINT, would be something like, although it has a high opportunity cost, the long run benifits will be huge as we'll get extra tax revenue that can be reinvested, or maybe that the cross rail will encourage foreign investment.

welp :adore:
0
reply
that.kid
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#19
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#19
(Original post by guyr)
Have a look at the video on exam technique and data response frameworks here as well:

https://uplearn.co.uk/economics-exam-technique

For a 20 marker, you should be looking to do 4 points and 3-4 evaluations.

Using your format e.g.

- Intro

- Paragraph 1 (argument 1)
Knowledge
Application
Analysis
Evaluation [counter-argument]

- Paragraph 2 (argument 2)
Knowledge
Application
Analysis
Evaluation [counter-argument]

- Paragraph 3 (argument 3)
Knowledge
Application
Analysis
Evaluation [counter-argument]

- Paragraph 4 (argument 4)
Knowledge
Application
Analysis
Evaluation [counter-argument]

- Judgement
Thanks! This is the clear structure guys!
0
reply
that.kid
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#20
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#20
(Original post by sragdoll)
It's confusing because this term 'counter argument' is thrown about alot and it confuses me, a counter argument is for example, ' what are the consequences of building a cross rail train' , now we can say that the it's either GOOD or BAD, so..

POINT 1 : KAA on why it's a GOOD thing, eg extra geographical mobility, THEN we evaluate, an evaluation isn't explaining the other side of the argument, eg it isn't why the cross rail is a BAD thing, it's explaining why the cross trail MIGHT NOT actually give better geographical mobility, eg there aren't many jobs/homes in where the cross trail goes to, therefore the geographical mobility isn't useful. NOW what I'm asking is, IN THE EVALUATION, I wouldn't start talking about the high opportunity cost of building a cross rail- as that would be my SECOND point..

POINT 2: KAA on high opportunity cost.. EVALUATION OF SECOND POINT, would be something like, although it has a high opportunity cost, the long run benifits will be huge as we'll get extra tax revenue that can be reinvested, or maybe that the cross rail will encourage foreign investment.

welp :adore:
Firstly I think you are talking about macro instead of micro (which is the topic of this thread).
But I get your point. Maybe I was wrong in saying counter argument because evaluation is a different word.
For evaluation in Micro, the most common ones I talk about are:
- the extent/magnitude
- elasticity
- opportunity costs
- time lags
etc.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts

University open days

  • Bournemouth University
    Clearing Open Day Undergraduate
    Wed, 31 Jul '19
  • Staffordshire University
    Postgraduate open event - Stoke-on-Trent campus Postgraduate
    Wed, 7 Aug '19
  • University of Derby
    Foundation Open Event Further education
    Wed, 7 Aug '19

Are cats selfish

Yes (139)
61.23%
No (88)
38.77%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise