Exam-style question
Try this first
What distinction should frame an answer about separation powers checks balances — constitutional nature, sources, provisions, separation of powers and checks and balances in the UK and USA? Use the relevant political concepts and evidence from Constitutional arrangements.
- A.Use a precise political example, explain the relationship or consequence, and show why it matters to the question.
- B.List several political facts without explaining a relationship.
- C.State a personal opinion and call it evaluation.
- D.Describe an unrelated institution from another paper.
Model answer
What a good answer should say
- The correct answer is Use a precise political example, explain the relationship or consequence, and show why it matters to the question.
Explanation
Why this works
Use a precise political example, explain the relationship or consequence, and show why it matters to the question. This is correct because AO2 requires analysis of causes, consequences, relationships, similarities or differences rather than factual listing.
The UK and USA may perform a related political function, whereas their constitutional structures differ; the comparison matters because it changes power and accountability. One viewpoint supports the stated approach.
However, a competing viewpoint may be stronger in another context. Overall, AO3 judgement must follow from political evidence rather than assertion when answering "Analyse and evaluate constitutional nature, sources, provisions, separation of powers and checks and balances in the UK and USA.".
Common mistake
No common mistake is linked to this question yet.