Five Examination Answers for Schools: Microeconomics

Neville Norman ()

Australian Economic Review, 1993, vol. 26, issue 1, 89-96

Abstract: This article follows a similar format to my contribution on five sample answers on macroeconomics, published in the 3rd quarter I992 issue of this journal. The aim is again to present essays written under pressure, as if an Australian teenager with a good command of the subject had written them. The positive response to the first set of essays suggests there may be value in this approach. As before, I have supplemented my draft with footnote after‐thoughts to explain my strategy and some of the temptations I have sought to avoid. Very often it is important to stop a particular line of argument, or the detail or definition of something, to prevent the essay getting out of balance or straying into what an examiner may brand as 'trivia'. at least in the sense of the question asked. This time I have also added some extended comments on the overall approach to each question. I have avoided diagrams and data that I would normally use in an academic writing as such. This is mainly because a student would not have the data in the exam room and because a good answer can explain a diagram in the mind without actually drawing it. Sometimes the question is already structured for you: write notes on each of the following six things, for instance. This can be deceptive, for there will sometimes be a requirement to relate the concepts to each other, or to some defined context. (Eg 'In relation to the Australian economy…') I have selected five essays that cover different parts of microeconomics and tried to answer in different styles. Some questions call for a good understanding of the principles involved, and if you knew nothing of Australia's situation it would hardly matter. Others call for that knowledge of our industries, their operations and policy aspects bearing on them. As before I consulted no references or data, and some of my recollection may be imperject. I recall someone saying that if you read anything from anyone who has been through Economics at Cambridge, all the best bits are to be found in the footnotes. That may well be true here.

Date: 1993
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8462.1993.tb00774.x

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:ausecr:v:26:y:1993:i:1:p:89-96

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://ordering.onl ... 7-8462&ref=1467-8462

Access Statistics for this article

Australian Economic Review is currently edited by John de New, Viet Hoang Nguyen and Susan Méndez

More articles in Australian Economic Review from The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().