Nailing the Economics Essay Exam (Paper 1)
We’re back with another how-to article on crushing those Econ Essays!
For those who are unsure and wish to brush up on their essay skills, stay tune and read further down below.
For IB, your essays are broken down into different “QUESTION TYPES”.
Question Type 1: Explain (10m)
These are questions which focus primarily on your ability to explain economic theories with relevant diagrams, and are pretty much straightforward compared to part b) question types. They purely require you to explain your definitions, draw appropriate diagrams and explain economic concepts well, and in depth.
A question I often hear is, “How much should I write?” Simple. If you don’t believe us, you can check the rubric. However, the IB generally requires you to explain three factors/causes/reasons if it’s a 10m question, while only explaining two will cap you maximum at the 8m band.
For instance, if I get a question such as “Explain three factors why certain goods have higher PED than others.”, you will need to find three factors such as 1. Degree of necessity, 2. Income level and 3. Presence of substitutes etc.
Question Type 2: Evaluate/Discuss/Comment (15m)
These questions are often harder as they require students to have the ability to critically think and draw parallels between certain factors or policies. Oftentimes, most of these questions are policy-based such as “Evaluate the use of market-based policies to boost economic growth.” Or consequences-based like “Discuss the consequences an indirect tax will have on its stakeholders”.
Without any form of evaluation of attempt to weigh the pros and cons of each policy/consequences*, your essay will only be capped at the 12m assuming you can explain everything else fully and in depth.
*We will be explaining how to go about these questions later so read further on!
These questions sift out the Grade 7s from the Grade 6s and 5s, so it’s therefore imperative you put in the best work you can for these!
Common Pitfalls
We’ve decided to list down the five most common pitfalls we see students making for Economics essays!
Pitfall #1: Time Management
Economics usually requires a lot of writing…. And when I mean by writing length, I mean a 3-4 page long essay (inclusive of diagrams of course). Double that up and it’s a lot to write. As a result, it’s vital that some form of time management is planned even before the paper is attempted.
Usually, here’s a good recommendation to break down the 1hr 30min you have:
Essay 1 : 45 min
1. Planning – 5min
2. Part a) – 15min
3. Part b) – 25min
Essay 2 : 45 min (essentially the same as above)
1. Planning – 5min
2. Part a) – 15min
3. Part b) – 25min
During the stage of planning, that’s where you need to highlight the keywords of the essay, try and frame out the entire essay within your head. The entire process should take less than 5 minutes, and I urge you guys to spend as little time as possible on this short, but crucial part.
Most of your time should be spent writing especially for part b) answers, as it requires a solid evaluative conclusion. A rule of thumb is spend more time writing…. than thinking. By the time it’s nearer to your actual exams, and with countless practices done, you should be able to picture the essay out in your head already during the 5 min reading time given to you.
Pitfall #2: Not Understanding Keywords
I cannot stress this enough, but there’s a need to highlight, highlight, highlight keywords.
If you do not have a highlighter it’s okay, but make sure you annotate, scribble, or circle them. Reason? So that you do not forget to define them in your introduction of the essay, and it forms the scope and skeletal of it.
By making a dent on them, it helps you to remember the relevant economic concepts behind the question.
Pitfall #3: Lack of Explanation…. Because of Poor Studying Techniques
Alright, we will be spending some time on pitfall three here, because I cannot stress this enough to my students as many of them have made the same mistakes over and over again.
Majority of students love to read the textbook or study guide, however, when it comes to writing essays, they aren’t able to link the explanation together to form a clear elaboration. This is not an issue with memorisation, or insufficient reference to the textbook, but it’s due to studying technique.
Let me bring up an example about this. We shall use the topic of reduction of income taxes as a form of expansionary fiscal policy.
Bad Elaboration:
A reduction of income taxes will spur consumers to spend more, as a result, consumer spending increases which leads to a rise in AD.
In this sentence, you are missing certain pieces in your elaboration, therefore your goal now is to fill in the gaps.
Good Elaboration:
Reduction of income taxes —> Leaves consumers with higher levels of disposable income —> Higher purchasing power —> Have the ability to spend more —> Increase in consumption spending —> Lead to rise in AD as C (consumption spending) is part of AD.
You get what I mean? Many students end off with one sentence elaborations, which makes me wonder “How does income taxes ‘spur consumers’ to spend more?” There must be a missing piece within the puzzle rite?
As such, while creating your notes I suggest this thing known as an ARROW METHOD. Whenever you try to expand further on your points, arrow it out with the explanation. Keep doing it till you have found all the missing pieces for your elaboration, and you’ll eventually get one that suffices the IB rubric for well-depth explanation.
In my personal opinion, though this method may not be applicable to all, focus on writing down the proper explanations in point form while creating your notes is more effective than reading the textbook over and over again to find out where the pertinent points actually are.
Pitfall #4: Trying to Evaluate Only During the Exam… When It Could Be Done At Home.
Do the evaluative conclusion at home!
That’s another tip I have for students, because when you attempt to do it during the exam, you’ll either be:
a) Brain dead
b) Running out of time
As such, you wouldn’t be able to think clearly.
What I suggest, would be to list down potential evaluative questions, or compare the pros and cons of each policies and find out would be better.
For instance, would an indirect tax or advertising be more effective in reducing the overconsumption of cigarettes? Picture that in your head while studying, and at the same time, try to create an evaluative conclusion. The ‘answer’ is usually an integrated approach of a bunch of policies, or policies that supplement/complement one another because each policies have their own limitations and benefits.
An example of a well-written evaluative conclusion (for a market failure question on demerit goods) is:
“Despite the tax making the government and society better off as market failure is resolved, the tax on cigarettes may not equal the negative externalities incurred. Due to limited time and data, it is difficult for the government to calculate the externality and design a tax to fully eliminate it. Thus, the tax may not effectively resolve the market failure and needs to complement it with other policies such as legislation or adverting. An integral approach of these policies are best needed to resolve the market failure at hand. Therefore, it is imperative the government conducts a cost-benefit analysis to calculate the externality, and the use of budget for policies to curb the consumption of demerit goods. Although tax may seem to be the most effective as prices can directly influence consumer behaviour, they are limited which gives rise to the need for the integration of other policies.”
You Get What I Mean?
In the paragraph, there is ability to weigh the pros and cons of each policy, while giving a stand together with justification. It further suggests the steps the government should take to best tackle the solution at hand such as a cost-benefit analysis. It acknowledges that each policy to limited on it’s on, and there are other solutions to be imposed together to achieve the best effective outcome. By doing so, can the examiner see a judgement call being played.
Such paragraphs can be created in the comforts of your own home while studying… and you just got to tweak it for the exam then!
Pitfall #5: Not Using Real-Life Examples Well Enough
You also always need to give concrete, specific examples in each essay. Note that your example should be one that is fairly recent. Examiners don’t look too kindly on examples taken from the Great Depression era.
Let’s say you’re talking about how a limitation of GDP as an indicator of the standards of living in a country is that it make no distinction about the composition of a country’s output.
A Weak Example: Country A may have a lower GDP than Country B, but the standard of living in Country A may still be better than that of Country B, because Country A may be producing higher levels of merit goods than Country B.
A Strong Example: The US has ranked highly in its GDP tally but at one point over 25% of the federal budget was spent on military goods (cost of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in 2013 totalled to almost $10 trillion) which, unlike merit goods, have little impact on the standard of living in a country.
I do not think this example requires further explanation because the contrast is quite explicit! However, remember to always use relevant examples and then incorporate them! Another tip is to create a bunch of real life examples for each chapter/topic and eventually you’ll have a list of examples to share with your studying pals!
Need Help Honing Your Essay Skills?
If you ever need help with your essays, be sure to seek your seniors, peers or even a bunch of IB tutors for help. In this article, we’ve just touched the tip of the iceberg and actually go through more in-depth explanations and analysis you should incorporate to deliver the best essays possible.
Stay tuned for more!
Need help for Economics or another IB subject?
