Section A: Questions based on a case study (25 marks)
Section B: A selection of 3 x 2 part questions. You answer one question (parts A and B) only. (35 marks)
The exam is 2 hours long and is worth a total of 60 marks
You need to carefully read the case study and highlight the key points
You should spend 50 minutes on this section
2 minutes per mark
These are worth 1 or 2 marks. You need to learn the textbook definitions so you are able to confidently use these in essays and in answering these short questions.
What is meant by the term ‘transport infrastructure’? (1 mark) (Jan 2013)
‘State’ / ‘Identify’ questions
These are worth 1 or 2 marks and typically ask you to explain two effects or two impacts of something. You do not need to explain why or how, just bullet point answers will gain the marks.
Identify two possible negative externalities resulting from increasing road congestion. (2 marks) (Jan 2010)
‘Explain’ / ‘State and explain’ questions
These are typically worth 2 marks for each point you need to make and explain, because they often ask you to state and explain two or three points these are worth 4 – 6 marks. ‘State’ means you must identify. You can demonstrate the ‘explain’ skill in a sentence or two by describing what, why or how.
Another way to approach about this type of question is to explain what causes something, and identify the consequence/s.
State and explain two possible reasons for the change in rail passenger journeys in 2008. (4 marks) (Jan 2012)
Occasionally ‘explain’ questions are worth up to 3 marks, as in the question below.
The construction of a new high speed rail line may create negative externalities. Explain why negative externalities are an example of market failure. (3 marks) (Jan 2013)
In this case you will need to make 3 linked points: “Negative extemalities arise where individuals ignore the external costs of their actions (1). This results in market failure as there is overconsumption of the good (1) and hence allocative inefficiency (1)”. ‘Comment on’ 5 mark questions
These questions are marked 2 + 2 + 1.
They ask you to give both sides of an argument and then state your opinion
You get two marks for an analytical explanation of how it should work in theory, two marks for why it may not work and a final mark for your judgment about the effectiveness of this approach
Comment on the effectiveness of higher fuel prices as a means of reducing car use. (5 marks) (Jan 2011)
‘Discuss’ 8 mark questions
These questions are marked 3 + 3 + 2.
You are asked to present two sides of an argument and then give an evaluation as to the overall effectiveness of a course of action
You get three marks for an analytical explanation of how it should work in theory, three marks for why it may not work and a final two marks for your judgment about the effectiveness of this approach
Discuss the effectiveness of cost-benefit analysis for the government in making