GCE Economics: Evaluation @ AS

Introduction
To achieve the highest marks, candidates have to demonstrate that they are able to evaluate economic arguments and evidence, making informed judgements. At Advanced Subsidiary (AS) level, 16% of the marks available in the assessment are for evaluation, whilst at A2 25% of the marks are for evaluation. At AS, all the marks for evaluation are in part (d) of the data-response question. Candidates cannot achieve more than 13 marks out of 25 for this part of the question unless they demonstrate some evaluative skills. For each assessment unit, 12 out of 75 marks are for evaluation. At both AS and A2, those parts of the questions in which candidates are expected to demonstrate their evaluative skills are marked using a Levels Mark Scheme. The Level Descriptors also refer to other skills such as knowledge and understanding, application, analysis and the Quality of Written Communication, but there is a constraint imposed if candidates fail to evaluate. When distinguishing between Level 3, Level 4 and Level 5 responses, the quality of the evaluation is not the only factor that determines the level into which the answer is placed, but it is the most important factor.

Evaluation at AS
The following extracts from the AS Levels Mark Scheme illustrate progression through the levels in respect of evaluation: Level 2 There may be some attempt to present alternative points of view but any attempt at evaluation is limited or superficial. Level 3 There will be some attempt to present alternative points of view and to evaluate the issues, arguments and/or data. Level 4 Some appreciation of alternative points of view is shown. Satisfactory use is made of evidence and/or theoretical analysis to evaluate the issues/arguments/economic models identified and to support conclusions. Level 5 Clear understanding of alternative points of view is shown. Good use is made of evidence and/or theoretical analysis to evaluate the issues/arguments/economic models identified and to support conclusions. A clear final judgement is made www.eamonncasey.co.uk caseye@salisbury.enfield.sch.uk

Signalling to candidates that they need to demonstrate the skill of evaluation

This is done through the use of appropriate command words in the questions. Typically, those questions that require candidates to evaluate will use words or phrases such as: assess or critically assess, evaluate, discuss, justify your answer, to what extent. In addition, since centres are aware that certain parts of the AS and A2 questions will always include an assessment of candidates ability to evaluate economic arguments and evidence, and make informed judgements, it is sensible that this information should be passed on to students and be included as an integral part of any teaching programme and preparation for the external examinations. How can candidates demonstrate the skill of evaluation in an examination? Candidates should appreciate that evaluation in economics involves making judgements and supporting those judgements by data and logical arguments. The list below indicates some of the ways in which candidates can demonstrate their evaluative skills to examiners. Answers should include alternative points of view and these should be clearly identified. Some attempt should be made to consider the strengths and weaknesses of the different viewpoints. Where possible, candidates should use data to provide support for arguments or to refute a point of view. When answering a data-response question, the data could be taken from both the textual and non-textual/statistical sources. Candidates can also use their own knowledge of developments in the economy to support or reject a point of view. For example, candidates should be aware of recent trends in inflation and unemployment in the United Kingdom. When answering a question relating to conflicting policy objectives, the following would show the use of data to evaluate the view that reducing unemployment conflicts with the objective of low and stable inflation: Since the early 1990s, the level of unemployment in the United Kingdom has fallen substantially and yet this has not been accompanied by an upturn in inflation. This supports the view that there isnt necessarily a conflict between the governments objective of low unemployment and low inflation. The judgement made could be developed further by the candidate exploring the reasons for these events. Data can be used to help to evaluate economic models and to distinguish between theory and practice. When using data to evaluate different positions, the candidate might wish to consider the reliability of the data. For example: is the data from a reliable source, subject to possible bias, inaccurate in any respect, out-of-date or incomplete? Candidates should identify the circumstances where different outcomes are likely. For example, a candidate discussing the possible consequences of a substantial increase in consumption expenditure might state that: A substantial increase in consumption is likely to reduce unemployment when there is plenty of

www.eamonncasey.co.uk

caseye@salisbury.enfield.sch.uk

spare capacity but if the economy is currently operating close to its normal capacity level of output the rise in aggregate demand is more likely to lead to inflation. Candidates might also discuss how their conclusions might be affected by other influences such as the price elasticity of demand for the product, the governments policy response, what happens to the exchange rate, etc. They might also consider how the extent and duration of a change in the economy will affect its impact, e.g. a small, temporary rise in oil prices will have a very different impact on the economy from a large, sustained rise in the price of oil. Some explicit consideration could be given to other factors that might be important, e.g. if the question asks the candidate to consider the role and significance of aggregate demand in affecting unemployment, a balanced answer is also likely to show that the candidate recognises that other factors (e.g. the replacement ratio) affect the level of unemployment. Depending upon the actual question, an attempt might be made to judge the relative importance of the different factors. It is often important for candidates to show that they can distinguish between short run and long run effects. When a question is testing the candidates ability to evaluate, it is essential to include a conclusion. A conclusion might be used, for example, to summarise the previous discussion, synthesise arguments and make final judgements. Whilst candidates may wish to show their support for a particular point of view, it is perfectly acceptable for a candidate to conclude that there is insufficient evidence to support a particular opinion. Final judgements might be qualified by statements that include phrases such as it depends on

Evaluation: Glossary of useful words and phrases

The following list is not meant to be exhaustive but it does provide examples of words and phrases that candidates might find helpful to get them started in making judgements. However Hence Nevertheless Although It is likely that The tendency is But In retrospect With the benefit of hindsight On the other hand In the short run .. but in the long run It depends upon (e.g. price elasticity of demand, what happens to the exchange rate, etc.) The data suggest that According to the article The writer argues that but

www.eamonncasey.co.uk

caseye@salisbury.enfield.sch.uk

THE LEVELS MARK SCHEME FOR AS

Level Descriptions In part (d) of the data response questions, approximately half the marks are available to award to candidates who demonstrate that they can evaluate economic arguments and evidence, and make informed judgements. An answer showing no evidence of evaluation, however good the analysis, should be awarded a maximum of 13 marks (in Level 3). The quality of evaluation should be the sole distinction between a Level 4 and Level 5 answer. It is not necessary for the answer to identify a wide range of issues to score the top mark. As indicated below, the Quality of Written Communication used should be taken into account when awarding marks. Level 1: A very weak answer Few, if any, relevant issues are recognised. Economic concepts and principles are not adequately understood or applied to the question. No satisfactory analysis or evaluation. There might be some evidence of organisation in the answer but generally it fails to answer the question. Descriptions and explanations lack clarity. Spelling, punctuation and grammar may be poor. There is little use of economic terminology. 0 to 6 marks Mid-Point 4 marks Level 2: A poor answer but some understanding is shown One or more relevant issues are recognised. An attempt is made to use basic economic concepts to answer the question but the candidates explanation may become confused and analysis will therefore be very limited. There may be some attempt to present alternative points of view but any attempt at evaluation is limited or superficial. There is some logic and coherence in the organisation of the answer. The candidate demonstrates some ability to spell commonly used words and to follow the standard conventions of punctuation and grammar. Some use of economic terminology is made but this is not always applied appropriately. 7 to 11 marks Mid-Point 9 marks Level 3: An adequate answer with some correct analysis but very limited evaluation Two or more relevant issues are recognised. The candidate has made a reasonable attempt to apply economic concepts and ideas. A satisfactory understanding of some basic economic concepts and theories is demonstrated and there is some evidence that the candidate can analyse issues. There will be some attempt to present alternative points of view and to evaluate the issues, arguments and/or data. There is some logic and coherence in the organisation of the answer. The candidate is generally able to spell commonly used words and usually follows the standard conventions of punctuation and grammar. Some descriptions and explanations are easy to understand, but the answer may www.eamonncasey.co.uk caseye@salisbury.enfield.sch.uk

not be expressed clearly throughout. There is some evidence of the correct use of relevant economic terminology. 12 to 16 marks Mid-Point 14 marks Level 4: Good analysis but limited evaluation Two or more relevant issues are identified. Good understanding of basic economic concepts and models is demonstrated. The candidate is able to apply these concepts and models to answer the question. Some appreciation of alternative points of view is shown. Satisfactory use is made of evidence and/or theoretical analysis to evaluate the issues/arguments/economic models identified and to support conclusions. Spelling is generally accurate and the standard conventions of punctuation and grammar are usually followed. The answer is well organised. Descriptions and explanations are clearly expressed. Appropriate use is made of relevant economic terminology. 17 to 21 marks Mid-Point 19 marks Level 5: Good analysis and evaluation Two or more relevant issues are identified. Good understanding of basic economic concepts and models is demonstrated. The candidate is able to apply these concepts and models to answer the question. Clear understanding of alternative points of view is shown. Good use is made of evidence and/or theoretical analysis to evaluate the issues/arguments/economic models identified and to support conclusions. A clear final judgement is made. Spelling is generally accurate and the standard conventions of punctuation and grammar are usually followed. The answer is well organised. Descriptions and explanations are clearly expressed. Appropriate use is made of relevant economic terminology. 22 to 25 marks Mid-Point 24 marks

www.eamonncasey.co.uk

caseye@salisbury.enfield.sch.uk