Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

ignoring one section completely

Recommended Posts

Hey people, so I have been studying for my economics IB finals which is in four weeks! I have been wondering, if its wise to study 3 sections thoroughly and ignore 1 section completely! I have decided to focus on micro, macro and international and ignore development! The reason is that development lacks diagrams and I find that without diagrams there is only so much you can do with your analysis and probably won't be able to analyse it as well economically as the other 3 sections! I find macro the easiest!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Loco Mo Mo

Hey people, so I have been studying for my economics IB finals which is in four weeks! I have been wondering, if its wise to study 3 sections thoroughly and ignore 1 section completely! I have decided to focus on micro, macro and international and ignore development! The reason is that development lacks diagrams and I find that without diagrams there is only so much you can do with your analysis and probably won't be able to analyse it as well economically as the other 3 sections! I find macro the easiest!

I was thinking about a similar scenario for myself as well. I think you should definitely know Macro and Micro - inside out (although you'll have bits that you're stronger in than others). For international, I would just learn the "main" sections like protectionism, exchange rate and balance of payment since it comes up quite a lot in paper 3. That being said, development tends to come up quite a lot in paper 3 also. Thus it may be wise to also know the main sections which shouldn't be too hard since a lot of development is things you would have learned growing up or in something like Geography.

So no, don't completely ignore development but don't spend ages on it either. Spend more time perfecting micro and macro.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't study development at all and studied micro, macro, and international for my exam last year. I got a 7 in the end so it worked out fine :P I started studying pretty late (procrastination, the devil...) but if I started earlier, I would have studied development. It would have given me more choice in my exam. I was forced to do a macro question on paper 2 where I had forgotten how to draw the circular flow of income... T___T

BUT if you choose to study three sections only, know them inside and out, forwards and backwards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with most of what's said above. If you're going to skimp on revising a topic, development is definitely the one to do. However, do make sure you know the basic concepts - They're not hard, it shouldn't take long to get those in order.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be skimming over Development Economics as well, not in detail though. I would never write about it on paper 1. My teacher always says that is the question for the blabla people :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also feel as though studying econ is different to studying another subject cause well its more like you have an idea of everything you're studying, so its more of making sure you have the evaluation points and know your diagrams and how to explain em! I find micro and macro really easy! International is abit more complicated for me, but its probably cause I haven't had as much practice with it as the other two!

Edited by Summer Glau
please don't use text speak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go over development briefly but I have actually found on past papers I can almost complete avoid it on Paper 1 and 3 for HL, and paper 2 if you MUST attempt it's probably relatively easy to do because of the length and it will be a simple discussion of the different between economics growth vs. development or the role of the WTO or something like that. When I did attempt a Paper 3 case study on development I lost more marks because of the evaluation, and I could have avoided it had I been more confident about the international trade question, so I would definitely say be very confident in Mico, Macro, International. They are all relatively good questions where you can score in the highest markband without a doubt if you are well prepared :) Revise development so that you don't see a question and your jaw drops and you're like WHAAA? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also feel as though studying econ is different to studying another subject cause well its more like you have an idea of everything you're studying, so its more of making sure you have the evaluation points and know your diagrams and how to explain em! I find micro and macro really easy! International is abit more complicated for me, but its probably cause I haven't had as much practice with it as the other two!

By the way, international is also very easy once you wrap your head around the more annoying things like Balance of Payments. The diagrams you most often will use are like simple Supply & Demand diagrams but of currencies or a particular good and you want to show the World Price as below the domestic price, or sometimes if you draw that basic diagram to exemplify the difference between Floating & Fixed exchange rate systems. I never liked international until recently, but if you are HL and you get a question about comparative advantage or protectionist measures, trust me it's really easy and actually interesting. If you have the Oxford Economics Course Companion, it'll make life easier :)

Edited by ro_1293x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think skipping one entire section is a good idea. For me, i would just try the best to understand it, or at least skim read it. It comes in handy in Paper 3 of the HL exam. Everything in Economics tie into each other

If I had to skim a section, it would be Theory of the firm. It's full of confusing diagrams (don't get me started on the Monopoly diagrams) and generally. Theory of the firm tends to show up in Paper 1 as well as some reference to paper 3. But make sure you know the rest inside out (e.g. Macro, Development, International).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you guys recommend skipping International Trade section?

I personally prefer to focus on micro, macro and development. International trade is a bit confusing for me :dontgetit:

You could get away with it MAYBE, I wouldn't advocate it because I'm sure if you just read through it, maybe get a little help from friends, you would be able to grasp half of the section pretty well. But it's the same thing as with development, you have to be really clear about everything else because you won't really have an option with the other questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could get away with it MAYBE, you have to be really clear about everything else because you won't really have an option with the other questions.

I thought we always have options in all papers? For example, in paper 1 I can always choose a question on either micro or macro. In paper 2, I can do micro, macro, and development. And for paper 3, I just have to avoid questions with international in it. Would it work out right? :dontgetit:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could get away with it MAYBE, you have to be really clear about everything else because you won't really have an option with the other questions.

I thought we always have options in all papers? For example, in paper 1 I can always choose a question on either micro or macro. In paper 2, I can do micro, macro, and development. And for paper 3, I just have to avoid questions with international in it. Would it work out right? :dontgetit:

Yeah, sorry not to confuse you we always have options definitely. But you can end up having 2 options on paper 2 that involve international, still leaving you 3 options but you have no choice and must take them though the international one could be something relatively easy. And on paper 3 I don't know if it was just our teacher but I thought we had questions from a past paper, and I have seen sections mixed up.

For example, this is a question taken from a Nov 2007 past paper, HL Paper 3

a) Define the following terms indicated in bold in the text:

(i) quotas

(paragraph )

(ii) normal profit

(paragraph ).

[2 marks]

[2 marks]

(b) Using an appropriate diagram, explain how the potential increase in the number

of bicycle taxi operators in Kenya will create “too much competition to maintain

normal profit (zero economic profit)”

(paragraph ). [4 marks]

© Using an appropriate diagram, explain how the elimination of the tariff will

affect the level of bicycle imports into Kenya.

[4 marks]

(d) Using information from the text and your knowledge of economics,

evaluate the implications for economic development in Tanzania of a reduced

tariff on bicycles.

So in this question there is a talk about tarrifs and in the passage their is some talk about exporting/importing though they are also looking at the micro industry and profit/loss making, so if you were really good at the micro part and not the international part, then what? And this is what I mean by getting the basics. Learning about protectionist measures and just sort of reading up and exchange rate systems, it's really not too bad :)

It's up to you to skip the section, I'm just saying you'd be better off at least making an effort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And on paper 3 I don't know if it was just our teacher but I thought we had questions from a past paper, and I have seen sections mixed up.

So in this question there is a talk about tarrifs and in the passage their is some talk about exporting/importing though they are also looking at the micro industry and profit/loss making, so if you were really good at the micro part and not the international part, then what? And this is what I mean by getting the basics. Learning about protectionist measures and just sort of reading up and exchange rate systems, it's really not too bad :)

It's up to you to skip the section, I'm just saying you'd be better off at least making an effort.

Okie thanx, I'll make sure I briefly read through International parts as well :hmmm:

don't skip international economics, skip development economics ;)

International economics is really confusing for me :eek:.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And on paper 3 I don't know if it was just our teacher but I thought we had questions from a past paper, and I have seen sections mixed up.

So in this question there is a talk about tarrifs and in the passage their is some talk about exporting/importing though they are also looking at the micro industry and profit/loss making, so if you were really good at the micro part and not the international part, then what? And this is what I mean by getting the basics. Learning about protectionist measures and just sort of reading up and exchange rate systems, it's really not too bad :)

It's up to you to skip the section, I'm just saying you'd be better off at least making an effort.

Okie thanx, I'll make sure I briefly read through International parts as well :hmmm:

don't skip international economics, skip development economics ;)

International economics is really confusing for me :eek:.....

Are you HL or SL? If you are HL then yeah it can be a little annoying. Balance of Payments and Terms of Trade are not my favorite part of the course but if you can get a grasp on exchange rates and how they can be influenced, you will eventually understand everything else because they all sort of go along the same lines. Like the solutions for fixing a deficit or the adv & disadv of a deficit and the terms of trade index... all work on the same theory you just got to wrap your head around it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its like balance of payments deficit- imports > exports (more expenditure than revenue) although this is not strictly true because current accounts include net income flows as well but to simplify the matter we'll just consider imports and exports! Then if deficit then the capital account must finance this deficit because there needs to be a balance between the two! This means either of 3 things, since capital account is the measure of buying and selling of assets from a country to all other countries, more assets are being sold to foreigners so the deficit is able to be financed the deficit that way. Then another thing is the deficit is financed by using the foreign exchange reserves but obviously these are limited so its not a very long-term thing, or ofcourse foreign currency can be borrowed from other countries but it creates a debt problem especially because the country has to pay back interest as well! When there's a surplus, the capital account should have a deficit to balance out the current surplus, this means that the exchange rate is low (your currency is high) which will prevent importers from abroad from importing more and it is allowing the domestic consumers to import more, or it can also mean that there is more buying of fixed assets from abroad, which is creating the capital account deficit and hence balancing out the current account surplus! The deficit is controlled by using expenditure reducing and switching policies. Expenditure switching would mean depreciating your own currency to lower imports, and lower domestic inflation rates. Or reduce expenditures overall by using deflationary fiscal and monetary policies.

Edited by IBCONQUERER

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its like balance of payments deficit- imports > exports (more expenditure than revenue) although this is not strictly true because current accounts include net income flows as well but to simplify the matter we'll just consider imports and exports! Then if deficit then the capital account must finance this deficit because there needs to be a balance between the two! This means either of 3 things, since capital account is the measure of buying and selling of assets from a country to all other countries, more assets are being sold to foreigners so the deficit is able to be financed the deficit that way. Then another thing is the deficit is financed by using the foreign exchange reserves but obviously these are limited so its not a very long-term thing, or ofcourse foreign currency can be borrowed from other countries but it creates a debt problem especially because the country has to pay back interest as well! When there's a surplus, the capital account should have a deficit to balance out the current surplus, this means that the exchange rate is low (your currency is high) which will prevent importers from abroad from importing more and it is allowing the domestic consumers to import more, or it can also mean that there is more buying of fixed assets from abroad, which is creating the capital account deficit and hence balancing out the current account surplus! The deficit is controlled by using expenditure reducing and switching policies. Expenditure switching would mean depreciating your own currency to lower imports, and lower domestic inflation rates. Or reduce expenditures overall by using deflationary fiscal and monetary policies.

Haha, that sounds good pretty good though you can take a breath! :) Well I just got home from my exam, hope your papers did go well!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×

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.