The use of the word

Often candidates in Economics exams, they often say that things will happen and we have an example here; the lowering of taxes will lead to a rise in GDP and unemployment will therefore fall. We can’t assume these things.

For example, lowering taxes could lead to a rise in GDP. All the things in the economy might happen to lead to a fall in GDP, so we can’t be 100% certain that things will actually always happen. So, we should really change the sentence to lowering taxes should lead to a rise in GDP, and unemployment could possibly fall or is likely to fall. This shows a lack of understanding of the economy; not everything, a certain. 99.999% at the time all factors are not held the same. So, nothing can be presumed.

The use of examples

So, the second mistake often people make is by drawing a diagram and then they give little or no explanation on the diagonal; just throw it in there, you will usually get little credit for this.

So, we’ve gone through about always being precise and also don’t always assume that some fingers demand or supplied normally as is here. Often things are supplied very inelastically. So, for example the supply of wheat is inelastic if demand for the week goes or not. A whole lot of weeks can be supplied because it takes a long time for that. Week to actually grow so you need to consider the elasticities when drawing your supply and demand curves.

Try to avoid rambling through large blocks of text. Often a lot of candidates see a question and then they go off on a large tangent about things that generally interest them but they aren’t actually answering the question. So, for example, a quick question here explains the reasons for the growth in GDP. So, start by answering the question, why one reason for a growth of GDP is because this and specifically honed in on the question and therefore you’re sort of answering the question and then the examiner can’t help.

We’ll give you marks. Also, remember if it doesn’t answer the question, you won’t gain any credit. So, you might be going against some really complex in-depth analysis of something. But, it’s not linked to the question. The examiner can’t reward you lastly.

One mistake that some candidates make is by being too controversial or biased. Avoid presenting radicals, socially transforming ideologies such as Marxism. In your essays, even if you think that they’re correct in under 40 minutes, you’ll probably not going to be able to find the time to justify your argument fully, and also there are some other reasons for avoiding going down. The route of becoming too radical. You probably won’t be answering the question directly. So, you’ll be rumbling on for a topic that doesn’t directly link the question as previously discussed and you could also lead the risk of the examiner disagreeing with you in agitating him and he could mark you harshly and you need to remember that they’re only human.

There’s something that annoys them subconsciously, they could more. You doubt one to two marks for something that they don’t agree with you how hardline. So, always try to give both sides of the argument. You probably haven’t considered your argument fully.

Remember you’re only an old student, you’re not a Ph.D researcher. So, don’t try and get too ahead of yourself.

Stay tuned with Zeeable for more of such updates and news!!

Share this: Twitter

Facebook



Like this: Like Loading...