Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 3B: 9PL0 3B - 17 June 2022 [Exam Chat]
Scroll to see replies
Also, the 3.5 global notes link has finished its limits, if anyone wanted it and did not get it, I put it in another link, see below:
https://filetransfer.io/data-package/6W4lD7D9#link
https://filetransfer.io/data-package/6W4lD7D9#link
Original post by Bleepbloopblap
Is this in line with the advanced information? or does it contain questions that wont come up?
My teacher made the essay bank and as far as I know, everything is in line with the advanced info
Original post by MissBookLover25
3.5 notes: I couldn't find the google drive link and the file is too big to upload, but hopefully this works:
https://filetransfer.io/data-package/Dmo5Yo6d#link
https://filetransfer.io/data-package/Dmo5Yo6d#link
Are you able to re-post this? Link expired. Much appreciated
Original post by Hythlo
Are you able to re-post this? Link expired. Much appreciated
https://filetransfer.io/data-package/6W4lD7D9#link
Original post by mercy-o
is anyone learning the EU enlargement process? if so, could someone simplify it for me 
or do we think it's pointless to know?
or do we think it's pointless to know?Hi, there's stuff about the EU's eastern enlargement in the 3.5 document I posted, from page 14, link below, hope it helps!
https://filetransfer.io/data-package/6W4lD7D9#link
Original post by MissBookLover25
Revision notes (my teacher made them)
3.1: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1W5bqtwwjLcTiBdbZejjbNaFiMqtRp_U7/view
3.2: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XmA1cPv_LBt4IgFqZEulbp8H1rv1rZky/view
3.3: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zo-M87enkZiHdInNCzYZqfWhs1ztPY2p/view
3.4: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1g6rRs6BvGUMAYzYgOnxICsxV0Hnm0Xbq/view
3.6: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nzVB7ZM3IyEzTQFvNxWUUaywiULvJN-8/view
They contain the complete notes for the whole spec, so still have the stuff that got cut out. Cross-reference with the advanced info, but these notes are super useful and have loads of examples!
3.1: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1W5bqtwwjLcTiBdbZejjbNaFiMqtRp_U7/view
3.2: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XmA1cPv_LBt4IgFqZEulbp8H1rv1rZky/view
3.3: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zo-M87enkZiHdInNCzYZqfWhs1ztPY2p/view
3.4: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1g6rRs6BvGUMAYzYgOnxICsxV0Hnm0Xbq/view
3.6: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nzVB7ZM3IyEzTQFvNxWUUaywiULvJN-8/view
They contain the complete notes for the whole spec, so still have the stuff that got cut out. Cross-reference with the advanced info, but these notes are super useful and have loads of examples!
Hey, why doesn't 3.1 contain any info on nation states? Edit: ignore me, i found it
(edited 1 year ago)
Anyone got any ideas on how to answer:
Examine the differences between the regionalism of the African Union and ASEAN (12 marks)?
bit confused to say the least, much appreciated
Examine the differences between the regionalism of the African Union and ASEAN (12 marks)?
bit confused to say the least, much appreciated
so p1 could be type of regionalism: so African Union is more centred around political regionalism whereas ASEAN is more economic and expand on make up of the organisations e.g AU's main decision making body is the Assembly of the African Union. Explain the differences between political and economic regionalism.
p2 could be membership and how the members between the two differ- ASEAN's regional influence is weakened by significant differences between member states such as different political systems whereas the AU is made up of heads of African governments so are more similar.
12 markers are always tricky as they are so niche and regionalism is defo my weakest topic lol so what I would definitely recommend doing to pick up extra marks is mention hyperglobalisers/sceptics. Sceptics would be good to use for regionalism as they believe regionalism not global governance has come as a result of globalisation. Realism and liberalism also really good- states in regional bodies would prioritise their own economic gains according to realists- seen with ASEAN and issues with coming to agreements based on political differences and alliances between states
hope this helps
p2 could be membership and how the members between the two differ- ASEAN's regional influence is weakened by significant differences between member states such as different political systems whereas the AU is made up of heads of African governments so are more similar.
12 markers are always tricky as they are so niche and regionalism is defo my weakest topic lol so what I would definitely recommend doing to pick up extra marks is mention hyperglobalisers/sceptics. Sceptics would be good to use for regionalism as they believe regionalism not global governance has come as a result of globalisation. Realism and liberalism also really good- states in regional bodies would prioritise their own economic gains according to realists- seen with ASEAN and issues with coming to agreements based on political differences and alliances between states
hope this helps
Hey, does anyone have any exemplars for realism & liberalism 12 markers? Preferably on power as I really struggle to think of 3 points
Original post by yasmingrxce
Hey, does anyone have any exemplars for realism & liberalism 12 markers? Preferably on power as I really struggle to think of 3 points
State sovereignty, conflict + human nature?
Original post by yasmingrxce
Hey, does anyone have any exemplars for realism & liberalism 12 markers? Preferably on power as I really struggle to think of 3 points
My teacher wrote this on human nature, the structure is a bit different, instead of 3 different points, it's 1 para for realism and 1 for liberalism and a comparative comparison
Analyse the difference between the realist and liberal views of human nature.
Realists, as a school of international relations theory, believe that human nature is fixed and fashioned by nature. Unadulterated human nature is driven by the pursuit of self-interest above all else, whether or not this is to the detriment of others – this closely resembles the condition of an individual in the Hobbesian state of nature. Rather than making decisions made on rational arguments, we are predisposed to act based on instinct, which is necessarily clouded by our moral and intellectual imperfections. Since, as in the traditional conservative view, we are fearful and desire security, human nature tends towards the blind acquisition of power both to secure the ability to live as we want, and to fend off potential threats. On the international stage, the pursuit of power – this being a finite resource – will result in conflict between greedy states. The aggressive pursuit of power to achieve security means that other states feel insecure (because of the irrationality and imperfection of human nature), and seek to expand their own power. That the pursuit of security leads to more conflict and less security is a neo-realist paradox known as the security dilemma, which is fundamentally intractable because of the instinctual drive of human nature to feel ‘safe’. Cooperation between states is unlikely because the acquisition of power by one state will mean that it is denied to another, and even a state which seems friendly may become a threat in the future – again, our human nature is irrational and we cannot trust others. Unitary, sovereign states pursue their national interest in an amoral way, and this is a reflection of imperfect sovereign humans pursuing their self-interest. Therefore, realists believe that human nature is flawed and that this manifests in conflict and a lack of cooperation between states as they believe power is a zero-sum game.
Liberal theorists, by contrast, would adopt a more optimistic stance on human nature, believing that human beings are not ‘born perfect’, but are at least capable of self-development. This closely reflects the modern liberal concept of ‘developmental individualism’ – that human nature can be moulded through reason and rationality to remove internal barriers to fulfilment and express a desire to live in harmony with each other. In this model, conflict is not the status quo **but is a last resort when reasoned argument fails. Peace is not inevitable, therefore, but is the more likely outcome if we apply the positive qualities of our human nature. Because of the liberal belief in a moral-ethical dimension to human nature, expressed through the Lockean concepts of tolerance and reason, we understand that there is value in treating others with respect. On the international stage, human nature manifested in states means that states will seek to resolve conflict through cooperation, discussion and negotiation – one could link this to the Millian idea that through the ‘marketplace of ideas’ that disagreements can be best resolved in a productive and practical way to approach a peaceful universal consensus. Because of these beliefs regarding human nature, liberals would also believe that cooperation is much more likely – states will forge links with each other by establishing international organisations, eschewing war in favour of diplomatic congress, trading extensively and weaving webs of complex cultural and economic interdependence. Liberals would say, however, that this is not a ‘given’ and that the structure of the state can affect the expression of human nature – if a state is autocratic, then the developmental aspect of human nature will be stunted and we will revert to egoism; only within a liberal democracy can these positive aspects of human nature influence state behaviour on an international level.
Therefore, whilst realists have a pessimistic view of human nature as flawed, irrational and aggressive, liberals have an optimistic view of human nature as having the capacity to be moral, rational and discursive. In this sense, whilst the realist view of the international system is one of conflict in the pursuit of power, the liberal view is one where states can cooperate to achieve a greater level of power together than they could individually.
Original post by yasmingrxce
Hey, does anyone have any exemplars for realism & liberalism 12 markers? Preferably on power as I really struggle to think of 3 points
Hi, tbh you really don't need 3 points, 2 is enough. Human nature is always good to have as your first point and you can link in core ideologies here (you'll get capped if you don't) and then a second paragraph would be hard vs soft power if you are writing about use of power. Mention how realists and liberals disagree on both of these in your two paragraphs. Soft power is used by NGOs and hard power is often militaristic
Original post by Anonymous #289
so p1 could be type of regionalism: so African Union is more centred around political regionalism whereas ASEAN is more economic and expand on make up of the organisations e.g AU's main decision making body is the Assembly of the African Union. Explain the differences between political and economic regionalism.
p2 could be membership and how the members between the two differ- ASEAN's regional influence is weakened by significant differences between member states such as different political systems whereas the AU is made up of heads of African governments so are more similar.
12 markers are always tricky as they are so niche and regionalism is defo my weakest topic lol so what I would definitely recommend doing to pick up extra marks is mention hyperglobalisers/sceptics. Sceptics would be good to use for regionalism as they believe regionalism not global governance has come as a result of globalisation. Realism and liberalism also really good- states in regional bodies would prioritise their own economic gains according to realists- seen with ASEAN and issues with coming to agreements based on political differences and alliances between states
hope this helps
p2 could be membership and how the members between the two differ- ASEAN's regional influence is weakened by significant differences between member states such as different political systems whereas the AU is made up of heads of African governments so are more similar.
12 markers are always tricky as they are so niche and regionalism is defo my weakest topic lol so what I would definitely recommend doing to pick up extra marks is mention hyperglobalisers/sceptics. Sceptics would be good to use for regionalism as they believe regionalism not global governance has come as a result of globalisation. Realism and liberalism also really good- states in regional bodies would prioritise their own economic gains according to realists- seen with ASEAN and issues with coming to agreements based on political differences and alliances between states
hope this helps
thank you so much you icon ❤️❤️👑
Original post by frankie2323
Hey, why doesn't 3.1 contain any info on nation states? Edit: ignore me, i found it
wait where is it lmao i cant find it
Analyse the difference between the realist and liberal views of power [12]
Analyse the difference between the realist and liberal views of order and security [12]
Analyse the difference between the realist and liberal views of the inevitability of conflict [12]
Analyse the difference between the realist and liberal views of international organisations [12]
Analyse the difference between the realist and liberal views of states [12]
Analyse the difference between the concepts of the security dilemma and complex interdependence [12]
does anyone have essay plans for these questions?
Analyse the difference between the realist and liberal views of order and security [12]
Analyse the difference between the realist and liberal views of the inevitability of conflict [12]
Analyse the difference between the realist and liberal views of international organisations [12]
Analyse the difference between the realist and liberal views of states [12]
Analyse the difference between the concepts of the security dilemma and complex interdependence [12]
does anyone have essay plans for these questions?
Original post by en4ml
Analyse the difference between the realist and liberal views of power [12]
Analyse the difference between the realist and liberal views of order and security [12]
Analyse the difference between the realist and liberal views of the inevitability of conflict [12]
Analyse the difference between the realist and liberal views of international organisations [12]
Analyse the difference between the realist and liberal views of states [12]
Analyse the difference between the concepts of the security dilemma and complex interdependence [12]
does anyone have essay plans for these questions?
Analyse the difference between the realist and liberal views of order and security [12]
Analyse the difference between the realist and liberal views of the inevitability of conflict [12]
Analyse the difference between the realist and liberal views of international organisations [12]
Analyse the difference between the realist and liberal views of states [12]
Analyse the difference between the concepts of the security dilemma and complex interdependence [12]
does anyone have essay plans for these questions?
I got you bae for 2:
Analyse the difference between the realist and liberal views of power [12]
para 1: realists view power as a finite source. pursuit of power is ‘zero-sum’ game meaning for there to be a winner there must be a loser. power necessary for security. anarchic society of states, as states don't trust each other so security dilemma means they all wanna fight for finite power.
liberals see power as unlimited and states can gain it simultaneously. not a game of winners and losers, cooperation = multiple winners.
para 2: realists like Morgenthau, see conflict as inevtiable. classical ones see it like this bc states reflect aggressive hn, structural realists see it inevitable bc security dilemma means states feel they must pursue power to feel safe, which in turn makes conflict, thus classical more to do with hn with conflict
liberals are like hell naw, ration long term that conflict is mutually destructive, interests of state for cooperation to avoid conflict bc of this. states prefer to solve disputes via diplomacy and debate bc of power being unlimited and can be given to all states
para 3: realists see states as key and only significant actors in global politics. all pursue national interest based on desire for power. are unitary, not guided by any morality or justice.
states no longer only actors global politics, also non-state actors to liberals. these are not unitary and usually act according to ethical principles.
3.6: Analyse the difference between the realist and liberal views of human nature [12]
para 1: realists come from conservatism. Hobbes be like “nbs” showing humans just vulnerable in a world that tries to lead them astray so must be protected by a sovereign.
liberals come from liberalism, altruistic, rational and cooperative hn. all individuals have great potential thus want to work together
para 2: realists believe in ‘global anarchy’ Bull. in a society of states international organisations are meaningless because states only interested in their own national self interest, not others. lack of trust means they are ineffective and makes institutional cooperation is difficult. organisations will become dominated by by great powers/hegemon anyway so organisations that are state-centric, like EU, ineffective from aggressive hn
liberals are like (all eco, pol, non or govt mental) reflect cooperative ability of states. have gained power and influence over time from their success because of cooperative hn
para 3: realists like Morgenthau, see conflict as inevtiable. classical ones see it like this bc states reflect aggressive hn, structural realists see it inevitable bc security dilemma means states feel they must pursue power to feel safe, which in turn makes conflict, thus classical more to do with hn with conflict
liberals are like hell naw, ration long term that conflict is mutually destructive, interests of state for cooperation to avoid conflict bc of this. states prefer to solve disputes via diplomacy and debate bc of rational hn of humans
sorry ive shortened words lol but hope it helps chicken 😙
Original post by eloiselily
I got you bae for 2:
Analyse the difference between the realist and liberal views of power [12]
para 1: realists view power as a finite source. pursuit of power is ‘zero-sum’ game meaning for there to be a winner there must be a loser. power necessary for security. anarchic society of states, as states don't trust each other so security dilemma means they all wanna fight for finite power.
liberals see power as unlimited and states can gain it simultaneously. not a game of winners and losers, cooperation = multiple winners.
para 2: realists like Morgenthau, see conflict as inevtiable. classical ones see it like this bc states reflect aggressive hn, structural realists see it inevitable bc security dilemma means states feel they must pursue power to feel safe, which in turn makes conflict, thus classical more to do with hn with conflict
liberals are like hell naw, ration long term that conflict is mutually destructive, interests of state for cooperation to avoid conflict bc of this. states prefer to solve disputes via diplomacy and debate bc of power being unlimited and can be given to all states
para 3: realists see states as key and only significant actors in global politics. all pursue national interest based on desire for power. are unitary, not guided by any morality or justice.
states no longer only actors global politics, also non-state actors to liberals. these are not unitary and usually act according to ethical principles.
3.6: Analyse the difference between the realist and liberal views of human nature [12]
para 1: realists come from conservatism. Hobbes be like “nbs” showing humans just vulnerable in a world that tries to lead them astray so must be protected by a sovereign.
liberals come from liberalism, altruistic, rational and cooperative hn. all individuals have great potential thus want to work together
para 2: realists believe in ‘global anarchy’ Bull. in a society of states international organisations are meaningless because states only interested in their own national self interest, not others. lack of trust means they are ineffective and makes institutional cooperation is difficult. organisations will become dominated by by great powers/hegemon anyway so organisations that are state-centric, like EU, ineffective from aggressive hn
liberals are like (all eco, pol, non or govt mental) reflect cooperative ability of states. have gained power and influence over time from their success because of cooperative hn
para 3: realists like Morgenthau, see conflict as inevtiable. classical ones see it like this bc states reflect aggressive hn, structural realists see it inevitable bc security dilemma means states feel they must pursue power to feel safe, which in turn makes conflict, thus classical more to do with hn with conflict
liberals are like hell naw, ration long term that conflict is mutually destructive, interests of state for cooperation to avoid conflict bc of this. states prefer to solve disputes via diplomacy and debate bc of rational hn of humans
sorry ive shortened words lol but hope it helps chicken 😙
Analyse the difference between the realist and liberal views of power [12]
para 1: realists view power as a finite source. pursuit of power is ‘zero-sum’ game meaning for there to be a winner there must be a loser. power necessary for security. anarchic society of states, as states don't trust each other so security dilemma means they all wanna fight for finite power.
liberals see power as unlimited and states can gain it simultaneously. not a game of winners and losers, cooperation = multiple winners.
para 2: realists like Morgenthau, see conflict as inevtiable. classical ones see it like this bc states reflect aggressive hn, structural realists see it inevitable bc security dilemma means states feel they must pursue power to feel safe, which in turn makes conflict, thus classical more to do with hn with conflict
liberals are like hell naw, ration long term that conflict is mutually destructive, interests of state for cooperation to avoid conflict bc of this. states prefer to solve disputes via diplomacy and debate bc of power being unlimited and can be given to all states
para 3: realists see states as key and only significant actors in global politics. all pursue national interest based on desire for power. are unitary, not guided by any morality or justice.
states no longer only actors global politics, also non-state actors to liberals. these are not unitary and usually act according to ethical principles.
3.6: Analyse the difference between the realist and liberal views of human nature [12]
para 1: realists come from conservatism. Hobbes be like “nbs” showing humans just vulnerable in a world that tries to lead them astray so must be protected by a sovereign.
liberals come from liberalism, altruistic, rational and cooperative hn. all individuals have great potential thus want to work together
para 2: realists believe in ‘global anarchy’ Bull. in a society of states international organisations are meaningless because states only interested in their own national self interest, not others. lack of trust means they are ineffective and makes institutional cooperation is difficult. organisations will become dominated by by great powers/hegemon anyway so organisations that are state-centric, like EU, ineffective from aggressive hn
liberals are like (all eco, pol, non or govt mental) reflect cooperative ability of states. have gained power and influence over time from their success because of cooperative hn
para 3: realists like Morgenthau, see conflict as inevtiable. classical ones see it like this bc states reflect aggressive hn, structural realists see it inevitable bc security dilemma means states feel they must pursue power to feel safe, which in turn makes conflict, thus classical more to do with hn with conflict
liberals are like hell naw, ration long term that conflict is mutually destructive, interests of state for cooperation to avoid conflict bc of this. states prefer to solve disputes via diplomacy and debate bc of rational hn of humans
sorry ive shortened words lol but hope it helps chicken 😙
thank u so so so much omg ur the best
Original post by en4ml
thank u so so so much omg ur the best
naw probs dawg, will be doing more tomorrow and thurs so will send them when i finish 🤠
Hi Guys good luck with revision this is a 12/12 marked essay on the comparative theories!
Analyse how realists and liberals explain the likelihood of war and conflict (12) In your answer you must discuss any relevant core political ideas.
Realists and liberals adopt a completely opposing approach to the likelihood of conflict due to the differing opinions on human nature, global governance and security dilemmas.Realists and liberals differ on the likelihood of war and conflict due to differing approaches on human nature. Realists argue a pessimistic view of human nature, arguing that the individual is inherently selfish. This concept was argued by Morgenthau who examined state egoism and the maximisation of power to be at the core of states attempting to engage in war and conflict. This view on human nature is very similar to the traditional conservative view of individuals, such as Hobbes, who viewed human beings as self-serving and self-interested individuals. The result of state egoism and selfishness is a desire to maximise one’s own position, hence making the likelihood of war and conflict an inevitable factor in global politics. However, liberals argue more optimistic view of human nature suggesting that although state egoism is rife in the global sphere, states arguably have means of co-operating with one another for mutual benefit. Some may argue that co-operation is not only possible but desirable due to globalisation, as suggested by liberal thinker Ohmae
.Furthermore, realists and liberals differ over the need for global governance to reduce the likelihood of war and conflict. Realists believe that states emphasise the importance of maximising power and hence are constantly working for ways to defend their own national interests. The concept of global governance, through IGOs or regional groups, would undermine the sovereignty of the nation state. Waltz, a defensive realist, may argue that the concept of giving up sovereignty is unachievable as states are the most significant actors in the global sphere. However, liberals believe global governance is a realistic, desirable aim for states. The creation of the EU and UN that means of global governance reduces the likelihood of war and conflict due to the complex interdependence between nation states that is developed. Keohane explains this complex interdependence as a “cobweb” of shared mutual interests. One may link this to the socialist idea of John Donne’s quote “no man is an island, entire of itself”, arguably suggesting that states depend on each other, hence reducing the likelihood of war.
Finally, the concept of the security dilemma is a realist principle that argues states will attempt to protect their own self-interest and territory, hence making the likelihood of war and conflict aninevitable factor in global politics. One may argue that Hedley Bull attempts to bridge this gulf between realists and liberals with the concept of a society of states which suggests that states do share common objectives, for example trade. However, liberals would argue that the only means of preventing war and conflict is through dialogue and co-operation between states in the form of global governance and international law. This protects states from causing conflict due to mutual interests in each other’s foreign affairs
Analyse how realists and liberals explain the likelihood of war and conflict (12) In your answer you must discuss any relevant core political ideas.
Realists and liberals adopt a completely opposing approach to the likelihood of conflict due to the differing opinions on human nature, global governance and security dilemmas.Realists and liberals differ on the likelihood of war and conflict due to differing approaches on human nature. Realists argue a pessimistic view of human nature, arguing that the individual is inherently selfish. This concept was argued by Morgenthau who examined state egoism and the maximisation of power to be at the core of states attempting to engage in war and conflict. This view on human nature is very similar to the traditional conservative view of individuals, such as Hobbes, who viewed human beings as self-serving and self-interested individuals. The result of state egoism and selfishness is a desire to maximise one’s own position, hence making the likelihood of war and conflict an inevitable factor in global politics. However, liberals argue more optimistic view of human nature suggesting that although state egoism is rife in the global sphere, states arguably have means of co-operating with one another for mutual benefit. Some may argue that co-operation is not only possible but desirable due to globalisation, as suggested by liberal thinker Ohmae
.Furthermore, realists and liberals differ over the need for global governance to reduce the likelihood of war and conflict. Realists believe that states emphasise the importance of maximising power and hence are constantly working for ways to defend their own national interests. The concept of global governance, through IGOs or regional groups, would undermine the sovereignty of the nation state. Waltz, a defensive realist, may argue that the concept of giving up sovereignty is unachievable as states are the most significant actors in the global sphere. However, liberals believe global governance is a realistic, desirable aim for states. The creation of the EU and UN that means of global governance reduces the likelihood of war and conflict due to the complex interdependence between nation states that is developed. Keohane explains this complex interdependence as a “cobweb” of shared mutual interests. One may link this to the socialist idea of John Donne’s quote “no man is an island, entire of itself”, arguably suggesting that states depend on each other, hence reducing the likelihood of war.
Finally, the concept of the security dilemma is a realist principle that argues states will attempt to protect their own self-interest and territory, hence making the likelihood of war and conflict aninevitable factor in global politics. One may argue that Hedley Bull attempts to bridge this gulf between realists and liberals with the concept of a society of states which suggests that states do share common objectives, for example trade. However, liberals would argue that the only means of preventing war and conflict is through dialogue and co-operation between states in the form of global governance and international law. This protects states from causing conflict due to mutual interests in each other’s foreign affairs
(edited 1 year ago)
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- A-level Exam Discussions 2024
- Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 3 (9PL0 3A/3B) - 14th June 2024 [Exam Chat]
- A Level Exam Discussions 2023
- Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 2 (9PL0 02) - 5th June 2024 [Exam Chat]
- Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 3B (9PL0 3B) -16th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
- GCSE Exam Discussions 2024
- A-level Politics Study Group 2022-2023
- Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 1 (9PL0 01) - 21st May 2024 [Exam Chat]
- GCSE Exam Discussions 2023
- further maths level grade boundaries
- Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 3B (9PL0/3B ) 16th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
- GCSE Biology Study Group 2022-2023
- Edexcel A Level German Paper 1: 9GN0 01 - 9 Jun 2022 [Exam Chat]
- Edexcel A Level English Language Paper 2: 9EN0 02 - 6 Jun 2022 [Exam Chat]
- A-level Business Study Group 2022-2023
- Edexcel A Level Biology B Paper 3: 9BI0 03 - 24 Jun 2022 [Exam Chat]
- Edexcel GCSE Combined Science Paper 4: Biology 2 Higher 1SC0 2BH - 15 Jun 2022 [Chat]
- OCR A-level History British period study and enquiry: All exams 10th Jun 2022
- How can i sit A level further maths?
- AQA A-level Physics Paper 3 (7408/3) - 15th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
Latest
Trending
Last reply 9 hours ago
Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 2 (9PL0 02) - 5th June 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 15 hours ago
How to go from an A grade essay to an A* essay in edexcel politics?Last reply 3 days ago
Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 3B (9PL0 3B) -16th June 2023 [Exam Chat]Last reply 3 weeks ago
Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 3 (9PL0 3A/3B) - 14th June 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 3 weeks ago
AQA A Level Politics Paper 3 (7152/3) - 14th June 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 3 weeks ago
AQA A Level Politics Paper 2 (7152/2) - 5th June 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 3 weeks ago
AQA A Level Politics Paper 1 (7152/1) - 21st May 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 1 month ago
AQA A-Level Politics Paper 2 - 7152/2 7 June 2023 [Exam chat]Last reply 2 months ago
Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 2 (9PL0 02) 7th June 2023 [Exam Chat]Trending
Last reply 9 hours ago
Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 2 (9PL0 02) - 5th June 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 15 hours ago
How to go from an A grade essay to an A* essay in edexcel politics?Last reply 3 days ago
Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 3B (9PL0 3B) -16th June 2023 [Exam Chat]Last reply 3 weeks ago
Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 3 (9PL0 3A/3B) - 14th June 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 3 weeks ago
AQA A Level Politics Paper 3 (7152/3) - 14th June 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 3 weeks ago
AQA A Level Politics Paper 2 (7152/2) - 5th June 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 3 weeks ago
AQA A Level Politics Paper 1 (7152/1) - 21st May 2024 [Exam Chat]Last reply 1 month ago
AQA A-Level Politics Paper 2 - 7152/2 7 June 2023 [Exam chat]Last reply 2 months ago
Edexcel A Level Politics Paper 2 (9PL0 02) 7th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
