This post presents and explains a worked example response to a Recommendation Type Q4 Essay, then it sets you a question to try yourself.
Example Question
First read all the sources in the Insert.
| Your government is considering different actions to improve employment for local people. The following actions are being considered: – closing the pay gap between low and high paid workers – increasing the funding of research into science and new technology – spending more on education and training of employees to improve skills. Which one of these actions would you recommend to the government, and why? In your answer, you should: – state your recommendation – give reasons and evidence to support your choice – use the material in the sources and/or any of your own ideas – consider different arguments and perspectives. |
Photo by Austin Distel, useproof.com
Example Response
In the essay below, the introduction mentions an assumption to focus the question precisely, unpacks the issue (very briefly – in 17 words!) and clearly states the judgement.
If the government is trying to improve employment for local people, we must be talking about an area that is doing less well than the nation as a whole. Presumably, pay, working conditions and job satisfaction need to be raised, and there is too much unemployment. To address this problem I would recommend the third proposal: spend more on education and training of employees in local industries to improve job skills.
The next paragraph gives several brief reasons why Option 3 would improve employment. It considers the perspectives of both business owners and employees.
Higher skilled workers can expect better pay and working conditions because they can do more and better work. They are empowered because they can leave and find a job elsewhere. Employers are happy to pay more to keep skilled workers, because their extra productivity makes the company more profitable. More profitable businesses will tend to expand, creating more jobs to lower local unemployment. Both business owners and employees will support this policy because it benefits both.
The next paragraph develops a point about spending public money. It explains how the chosen action is better than Proposal 2 because of difficulties of accountability, potential vested interests, and value for money.
Public money comes from collected taxes, so it must be spent in a way that is better collectively than if it was left in the hands of the separate people and businesses. Businesses benefit from having a pool of educated local people to employ, but not all businesses invest enough in training; this policy ensures businesses act collectively to create a local population of skilled people who can be good workers. This way of spending money is transparent and accountable. The results can be measured by the number of people who pass training courses. In contrast, the second proposal would have vague outcomes – how do you measure the value created by increasing the funding of research into science and new technology? It would be create an opportunity for tech entrepreneurs to make a quick profit without benefiting the area much. They might even bribe the officials who allocate the money.
The next paragraph continues the criticism of Option 2 in favour of Option 3 by contrasting the perspectives of high-tech and low-tech companies. An example from the Insert is used as evidence.
Moreover, funding for science/technology research would be attractive mainly to high-tech industries, whereas all industries, even low-tech ones, want higher skilled workers. Option 3 (upskilling workers) will also help individuals and local firms to evolve flexibly – for example, Knut’s mother (Source 4) could take a computer skills course to get a new job with a company that wants to modernise.
Although we must come to a clear judgement, our conclusion doesn’t have to be simplistic. The final body paragraph considers the attractions of Option 1 and rejects it because the national perspective may conflict with the local one.
Finally, I wouldn’t reject Option 1 completely – I would favour a good minimum wage to help close the pay gap between low and high paid workers. It would benefit areas with a weak economy most, and the effect would be immediate. However, it would need to be a national policy, and the nation may not approve it. If it was applied only locally, businesses would move away to parts of the country which allow them to pay less to those at the bottom.
The final paragraph briefly extends the proposal to create a satisfying conclusion, by mentioning who in particular should get the training.
Therefore, to help a particular local area the best option is well-targeted funding for job-specific training especially for the unemployed and those with no hope of rising above low-paid jobs.
The whole essay comes to 471 words. Q4 provides the usual two lines per mark. If we estimate ten words per line, that gives us an upper limit of 480 words when we are practising. Of course, in the exam there is no word limit – only a time limit!
Marking Policy
Now you try
First, read all the sources for this topic.
| Question 4 A local community wants to reduce pollution of the sea-coast and beaches in the area. The following actions are being considered: • organise community volunteers to clean local beaches every week • visit schools to raise awareness about pollution of the sea • ask the government to make dumping of waste at sea illegal. Which one of these actions would you recommend to the community, and why? In your answer, you should: • state your recommendation • give reasons to support your choice • use the material in the sources and/or any of your own ideas • consider different arguments and perspectives. |
You can post your essay in the comments below. Make sure you don’t go over 480 words.
Photo by OCG Saving The Ocean on Unsplash