Jump to content

sormaj

Members
  • Content Count

    27
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Recognised

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Exams
    May 2016
  • Country
    Sweden

Recent Profile Visitors

237 profile views
  1. It was absolutely the worst topic for me, as I hadn't studied the satellite states and especially not East Germany as much as I had studied Gorbachev and Deng Xiaoping so I was kind of disappointed with the topic, I feel like I would have done a better job with the other topics. However, I feel that if you have the right strategies, time management, structure of your answers etc. and cite sources in the essay you will be fine in Paper 1 - extensive own knowledge about the topic can help but is not essential for Paper 1 (of course you should be able to know the topic enough to understand the sources and write a good essay though).
  2. sormaj

    Biology SL Paper 3

    Section A was a disaster for me as well, the Measelson Stahl question was really difficult and I really had no idea what to answer... What did you answer to those questions, regarding the N14, N15 generations, bands etc. ? I think that for SL at least, option C is by far the easiest. It's a lot of common sense (like, you kind of know why plastics in the oceans is harmful to the environment and things like that) and there is a lot of knowledge that is the exact same or very linked to the knowledge in Ecology. There was one question about trophic level and food web, one about realized niches, one about biomagnification, one longer question about how invasive species change the structure of a community and maybe some other question that I have forgotten.
  3. sormaj

    Economics HL paper 1 Time Zone 0 May 2016

    They do reduce taxes, but the economics IB-book says that they should be considered as a market-based policy, not a government regulation. Which I don't agree with though because as the taxes regulate the market + they are impose by the government I wrote that they are a government regulation. Oh well...
  4. sormaj

    Economics HL paper 1 Time Zone 0 May 2016

    If you did not include a graph at all for the b) answer you can at the most get 9 points I think, as a appropriate diagram is required if you want to get more points. As for the government regulation - as I did the same mistake I really really hope that we won't lose a lot of points for that, but we will certainly not get to the upper markband as it requires you to have "no significant errors". However I hope they won't punish us to harshly and say that we "didn't understand the specific demands of the question" because then I think we can only get like 4 points or something for the b)-part... But yeah let's hope it only counts as a "significant error" because then we still have a chance to get 11p for the b-part I guess.
  5. sormaj

    Economics HL paper 1 Time Zone 0 May 2016

    I think that if you could chose Q2 because you had a good sense of price discrimination, then it wasn't as difficult as if you had to chose Q1 because of time management. Everyone I spoke said that time management was the thing they struggled with (not really the content and formulating coherent arguments) and that made the test so much harder, because Q1a) was asking so much of you so you lost a lot of time already in the beginning and were so stressed out during the rest of the exam, which at least for me makes it more difficult to have a nice structure and an effective evaluation.
  6. sormaj

    Economics HL paper 1 Time Zone 0 May 2016

    Yes, I did not show it in my diagram though as I did not have time, but I mentioned it as an advantage. However, since I discussed neg. ext. of consumption I said that direct legislation (in form of preventing people of young age to buy the good) would be a better option if you really want to reduce the externality as it would decrease the demand, which would have a more significant difference in quantity consumed than the tax due to the very inelastic PED of cigarettes. Did you focus on consumption and if you did, did you come to the same conclusion?
  7. sormaj

    Economics HL paper 1 Time Zone 0 May 2016

    Yes, and showed how a shift in S-curve=MPC due to the tax would lead to a quantity produced closer to the Qopt and thus reducing the externality etc.
  8. sormaj

    Economics HL paper 1 Time Zone 0 May 2016

    For the entire exam I think I did 6 graphs - two on number 3 (one on a and one on b) and 4 on number 1
  9. sormaj

    Economics HL paper 1 Time Zone 0 May 2016

    How did you answer the 3a) question, with automatic stabilizers? I drew a business cycle diagram with two curves (one with more recessionary and inflationary gaps and one that was 'flatter' + the potential output curve) and then kind of explained how unemployment benefits keeps consumption up in a recession and progressive income tax system keep consumption down in an expansion - but I am not sure if this was how you should do it?
  10. sormaj

    Economics HL paper 1 Time Zone 0 May 2016

    Yes I did mention crowding out very briefly as I spent most time discussing government expenditure on physical capital
  11. sormaj

    Economics HL paper 1 Time Zone 0 May 2016

    I did (isn't that one of the criteria in P1?), one explaining how legislation will affect the market and one in which I explained how a tax might reduce the negative externality of consumption and why it might not be as efficient as legislation directly preventing the consumption. However I did not have time to include all important arguments.
  12. sormaj

    Economics HL paper 1 Time Zone 0 May 2016

    I guess that the question wants you to discuss which is most effective; direct legislation (government regulation) or market-based policies - and I hope that as long as you discussed these aspects and came to a conclusion you get some points at least. Yet - do they really want you to discuss BOTH negative externalities of consumption and production? because I only discussed how they affect negative externalities of consumption as if I would include production I would need at least 20 minutes more...
  13. sormaj

    Economics HL paper 1 Time Zone 0 May 2016

    Right, this is what I argued but when looking in the Economics text book they separate regulations and market-based policies...
  14. sormaj

    Economics HL paper 1 Time Zone 0 May 2016

    No they don't... I did say that regulations included indirect taxes though so I hope they won't give me a 0 for not understanding the specific demands of the question... I did argue that one way of regulating the market is by imposing market-based policies while another way of regulating the market is through legislation and thus I feel like I justified why I thought that indirect taxes counted as a regulation but I don't know...
  15. sormaj

    Economics HL paper 1 Time Zone 0 May 2016

    That is the one I had! Not sure if it was TZ0 though, but yeah it was horrible. I picked the 1a question and it was really a trap since you really had to explain a lot for an a) question - so I was really stressed out for all the other questions... I guess the only thing we can do is to pray for low grade boundaries...
×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.