The Student Room Group

AQA A-level History USA: Making of a Superpower (7042/1K) 2024 exam thread

Scroll to see replies

Did anybody answer the Unit 3 economy question? If so, how did you structure it?
Reply 21
Original post by beatriceanne
Did anybody answer the Unit 3 economy question? If so, how did you structure it?

Yes, if you are talking about the 1920-1945 development of the economy questions.

I first talked about Harding and Coolidge and how in the short term there beleif in laissez-faire led to prosperity. But then i highlighted how this also led speculation of the stock market, which in turn caused financial disaster, brought some of Hoovers policies into this. The point of this paragraph was to demonstrate although there was development in the economy it eventually led to downturn.

I then linked this to the short term prosperity caused by the crash- very short paragraph but felt like it was necessary. But i did encapsulate the great economic disaster that it led to due to the crash.

After this i discussed the new Deals and there influence. Concluded although there was development in term of unemployment, however other factors were more influential.

Next i discussed consumerism. Discussing things such as electricity, labour saving devices and credit.

Linking to this i talked about the car industry and also linked this to roads- where government has an influence with federal high way act 1921.

Finally i discussed WWII. This led to development of the economy as a whole, but also most demographics such as: farmers, women, workers and even African Americans.

I concluded War was the most influential factor in terms of development.
Original post by hqrryb
Yes, if you are talking about the 1920-1945 development of the economy questions.
I first talked about Harding and Coolidge and how in the short term there beleif in laissez-faire led to prosperity. But then i highlighted how this also led speculation of the stock market, which in turn caused financial disaster, brought some of Hoovers policies into this. The point of this paragraph was to demonstrate although there was development in the economy it eventually led to downturn.
I then linked this to the short term prosperity caused by the crash- very short paragraph but felt like it was necessary. But i did encapsulate the great economic disaster that it led to due to the crash.
After this i discussed the new Deals and there influence. Concluded although there was development in term of unemployment, however other factors were more influential.
Next i discussed consumerism. Discussing things such as electricity, labour saving devices and credit.
Linking to this i talked about the car industry and also linked this to roads- where government has an influence with federal high way act 1921.
Finally i discussed WWII. This led to development of the economy as a whole, but also most demographics such as: farmers, women, workers and even African Americans.
I concluded War was the most influential factor in terms of development.

Ah that makes sense! I was slightly confused in the exam if “how significant were the presidents” meant evaluation of presidential actions regarding the economy (did them develop/ improve economy or were they redundant) so I did a chronological approach of evaluating of pre depression, depression and post 1932 and evaluated how significant the president intervention was. on the end of each bulk evaluative paragraph revolving around the presidents i included other possible influential factors e.g at the beginning of the period- consumerism, big business and at the end ww2. I’m not sure if that was the right approach now…
Should a “How significant” question be answered like a factors question on as an evaluative question? As in discuss 3 separate factors, not just evaluate the actual significance of presidents on the economy?
(edited 1 month ago)
Reply 23
Original post by beatriceanne
Ah that makes sense! I was slightly confused in the exam if “how significant were the presidents” meant evaluation of presidential actions regarding the economy (did them develop/ improve economy or were they redundant) so I did a chronological approach of evaluating of pre depression, depression and post 1932 and evaluated how significant the president intervention was. on the end of each bulk evaluative paragraph revolving around the presidents i included other possible influential factors e.g at the beginning of the period- consumerism, big business and at the end ww2. I’m not sure if that was the right approach now…
Should a “How significant” question be answered like a factors question on as an evaluative question? As in discuss 3 separate factors, not just evaluate the actual significance of presidents on the economy?


To be honest i think it was basically a factors questions “how significant were presidents”, so presidents is the given factor and then you can discuss other factors such as the already discussed. At least that’s how i interpreted it
Reply 24
Hey, pls can someone write out what all the questions were ? w time periods
Original post by Hqrryb
Any predictions for this year? What are you focusing on?
Considering last year's part A was on Vietnam, is it necessary to focus on foreign policy in the later timer period?

Predicting exam questions can be tricky, but if last year focused on Vietnam in Part A, it might be wise to review foreign policy in other contexts and time periods as well. Considering the pattern of exams, look into areas not recently covered, like domestic policies or significant legislative changes, to ensure a well-rounded preparation.
What areas are you considering focusing on for your studies?
(edited 1 month ago)

Quick Reply