vera Posted May 3, 2013 Report Share Posted May 3, 2013 (edited) How did you find the exam? Question 4, which was about supply side policies was easy. However, the micro part was a bit confusing. Question 1 (which was about monopoly and legislation/regulation) was pretty hard, especially for a 15 point question. I mean, my book just talks about it in just three paragraphs. Question 2 was decent, with the part a question being just the tax diagrams with PED. However, I rushed in part b and ended up using the negative externality of production instead of the negative externality of consumption .... And my evaluation on the solutions of negative externality of consumption was horrible ... I didn´t had enough time !! Compared to paper 2 and 3, it was much harder .... Edited May 3, 2013 by vera Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jinye Posted May 4, 2013 Report Share Posted May 4, 2013 (edited) Well the exam didn't go terribly bad, but it sure could be better...Section A Microeconomics, I did question 1, however 1 a) was a bit complicated... Distinguishing the two concepts of decreasing returns to scale and diminishing returns turned out to be quite hard, even though I understand the concepts. The part b) was quite easy, comparing and contrasting between the two market structures, however I do feel that I didn't write enough, due to time constraints.Section B Macroeconomics was quite easy, however I feel I didn't evaluate enough in the 3 b).... Oh well, good luck to you!EDIT: Ups forgot to say my was TZ2, so it is different from yours... Edited May 4, 2013 by jinye Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nik.carverhill Posted May 4, 2013 Report Share Posted May 4, 2013 @vera - I did the same thing as you with the wrong externality graph... too bad there isn't any error carried forward, cause all of my analysis was correct, but that won't matter! Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
So Yeon Lizzie Choi Posted May 4, 2013 Report Share Posted May 4, 2013 I did question 1 and 3 for paper 1. Quite surprised to see diminishing returns on micro. I thought that part wasn't that important.But still Theory of the firm was better than YED. HahaI thought paper 1 and 2 were ok-ish but paper 3 was hell.I didn't even study the ad valorem tax and breakeven price/shut down price. And for ad valorem, I didn't even learn how to calculate and it wasn't in our text bookas well!! I was shocked to see that question T^TI think I'll get most of my marks off from paper 3 overall ....How did you think about paper 3? Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
yii yann Posted May 4, 2013 Report Share Posted May 4, 2013 Paper 3 was pretty easy to be honest, but I couldn't quite explain the difference in PED question that they asked for 4 marks. Also did anyone know that we had to write the numbers from the table on the previous page onto the ATC/AVC graph where we were asked to identify break-even and shut-down price?! I just drew dotted lines and labelled them as break even or shut down We were never asked to calculate ad valorem tax were we? They asked for the gvt revenue from the specific tax. I think I lost most my marks in paper 1, qn 3. Had no idea about the keynesian stuff, but even less idea on qn 4 about labour market rigidities (thought it'd never come out), so I did question 3. Qn 1a was fine, drew the graphs and explained , though honestly there wasn't much to talk about! Qn 1b was a gift Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jinye Posted May 4, 2013 Report Share Posted May 4, 2013 Oh, I did not write the numbers for the ATC/AVC... I thought it was just to dot the lines... Damn...Apart from that, it was pretty easy yeah... About the difference of PED, you needed to say that the PED is the multiplication of the slope of the demand curve times the ratio of initial price and initial quantity. the slope is the same, however the ratio does change along the curve. and that is why the PED is different along the curve.Oh damn, now I know that I lost points on paper 3 who told you that you needed t give the numbers?Paper 3 was pretty easy to be honest, but I couldn't quite explain the difference in PED question that they asked for 4 marks. Also did anyone know that we had to write the numbers from the table on the previous page onto the ATC/AVC graph where we were asked to identify break-even and shut-down price?! I just drew dotted lines and labelled them as break even or shut down We were never asked to calculate ad valorem tax were we? They asked for the gvt revenue from the specific tax. I think I lost most my marks in paper 1, qn 3. Had no idea about the keynesian stuff, but even less idea on qn 4 about labour market rigidities (thought it'd never come out), so I did question 3. Qn 1a was fine, drew the graphs and explained , though honestly there wasn't much to talk about! Qn 1b was a gift Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
yii yann Posted May 4, 2013 Report Share Posted May 4, 2013 Well my teacher (He attended some IB Economics official workshop for teachers), and the senior examiner, who's his buddy, told him that they expect numbers when we've been given numbers :/He also said that the evaluation qn for paper 2 needs to be around 3 pages minimum if we are trying to get close to full marks for that question. Which sounded scary to me at first, but then there indeed was a lot to talk about, so it worked out Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Silantyev Posted May 4, 2013 Report Share Posted May 4, 2013 Paper 3 was pretty easy to be honest, but I couldn't quite explain the difference in PED question that they asked for 4 marks. Also did anyone know that we had to write the numbers from the table on the previous page onto the ATC/AVC graph where we were asked to identify break-even and shut-down price?! I just drew dotted lines and labelled them as break even or shut down We were never asked to calculate ad valorem tax were we? They asked for the gvt revenue from the specific tax. I think I lost most my marks in paper 1, qn 3. Had no idea about the keynesian stuff, but even less idea on qn 4 about labour market rigidities (thought it'd never come out), so I did question 3. Qn 1a was fine, drew the graphs and explained , though honestly there wasn't much to talk about! Qn 1b was a gift I am not completely sure, but I think that min ATC and min AVC on the graph actually matched the prices from the table, correct me if i'm wrong but I did it this way and not quite sure of any other way to do it. Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
difiCa Posted May 4, 2013 Report Share Posted May 4, 2013 I did two and three in TZ2 (XED-YED and deflationary gap), and I was (along with a few friends) actually surprised to see that the part B questions did not, as such, really invite much evaluation, especially 3. I tried to put some in but I'm not really sure whether it was enough. Overall, I think the P1 was the hardest I've done so far (three mocks and this), and I reckon P2 and P3 went better. All in all, I'm pretty happy though with good IA grades as a basis. Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bennyboii Posted May 4, 2013 Report Share Posted May 4, 2013 I did the TZ2 paper and it was completly awful! I answered question 1 in micro on the basis that that I know theory of the firm of the top of my head and spent forever on it to get all the marks as I knew nothing for part a. For macroeconomics, I paniced and had no idea what to write about and just wrote down anything economical that came to mind =[ Safe to say paper 1 = Fail for me Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
yii yann Posted May 4, 2013 Report Share Posted May 4, 2013 @ Ed Silantyev: I though we just had to draw a dotted line on the price level where it would be break even or shut down, onto the graph, not that we'd actually have to put the numbers from the table. @ Bennyboi and difiCa: Yeah paper 1 wasn't too friendly :/ Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Silantyev Posted May 4, 2013 Report Share Posted May 4, 2013 Thanks for extra reassurance, if all is well, that should make it 90-100% on paper 3. Paper 1 TZ1 q1a made you think a bit and did make you brainstorm, but then I realized that both the diminishing returns to scale and law of deminishig returns both could take place because of labour/capital ratio being too high, being the main similarity. And the fact that one is long run and one is short run is the main difference. Macro section was smooth. And so was paper 2. Hoping for the best results. Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joalwil Posted May 11, 2013 Report Share Posted May 11, 2013 Did anyone do Q2 and Q3 from Paper 1 TZ1 or Q1 and Q4 from Paper 2 TZ1? How about Question 1 from Paper 3? Thanks!Best Regards Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.