Tips for "discuss, suggest, explain" type questions

[Jen L]

Hello

Just wondering if anyone has a strategy they work through when answering "discuss, suggest, explain" type questions? I usually define any key terms, make any relevant observations and then relate these to the question but it seems this is no longer enough.

I am working through past papers and I am finding it difficult to obtain marks for the higher-order questions. I can usually get the first 1-1.5 marks, but then miss out on the rest.

When looking at the examiner reports, I find that there are often marks awarded which don't directly relate to the question. For example, in April 2023 Q1iv asks 'Discuss briefly what your answers to parts (ii) and (iii) suggest about the singer’s appetite to risk' but then the marking guide allows marks for "Initially it appears the singer would be better off not purchasing the insurance" and "So they might prefer to buy the insurance." This seems like a stretch to me since the question asks about risk appetite, and the discussion around preferring to buy insurance is indirectly related. The answer also awards marks for referencing the singer's iso-elastic utility function when this is not referenced in parts i or ii.

Does anyone have tips for scoring well on these types of questions? Looking at marking guides, I always know the content but i don't write it down because the questions aren't a sufficient prompt for me.


How can I self-prompt to score well? Alternatively, since these questions seem to require some discussion of indirectly related topics - will you be awarded marks for something that it reasonable, even if it doesn't appear in the marking guide?

 

[Alvin Kissoon]

Hi Jen,

These sort of questions do seem to be becoming common in CM2. One thing you notice is that they come up at the end of a question or after a set of questions, so these can be a guide for your answer.

The way I personally think of approaching these questions is to:
a) State the obvious - what are the key results you have observed and how do they relate to each other?
b) understand and state the story of the question - the examiner is trying to make a point from the preceding parts, what is it?
c) see if you can get one (or more) relevant point from each of the preceding parts
d) consider the implication of the results. Even if they stray into other areas of the course, it shows that you can think more widely and link parts of the course together.

This aims to give the balance of providing specific points of the question with the wider understanding of the question and the course. Naturally be proportionate to the number of marks of the question as well.

On your final point, we are noticing that yes - credit is given for reasonable points which do not appear in the marking guide.

I hope this helps, let me know if you have any followups.

Alvin.