In AS and A2 economics exams, especially in the essay questions that require evaluation, examiners will always reward students who adopt a balanced approach and those who try to reason out and explain their arguments i.e. they demonstrate an awareness of different points of view / different schools of thought in Economics.
Examples might include:
*Monetarist versus Keynesian views on the impact of fiscal and monetary policies as instruments of demand management during a recession
*The arguments for and against the Coalition’s plans to eliminate the structural budget deficit over the next four years
*Polluter-pays principle (carbon tax) versus tradable-permits (carbon trading) versus regulation as means of cutting emissions and addressing environmental market failure
*The arguments for and against manipulation of currencies as an instrument of macroeconomic policy
*Competing views on the relationship between economic growth and its long-term environmental impact.
*Different schools of thought on the benefits of competition versus regulation in a market
*Free market forces versus state intervention approaches to reducing child poverty or poverty in general
Discussion of competing theories leads naturally into good evaluation – For example, you may be asked to evaluate how well the free-market performs and the circumstances in which there may be a case for non-market (state) provision of goods or services or other forms of government intervention.
Maintaining a semblance of balance means avoiding extreme views or assertions that are never backed up with any evidence or examples. The final section of your essay answer does give you an opportunity to come to a reasoned conclusion that favours one side of an argument of another - but do this having considered a variety of arguments and perspectives rather than a narrow, blinkered approach! (That last bit is for you Milad!!)
No comments:
Post a Comment