Calculation questions

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question was designed to test quantitative ability and was focused on price elasticity. Candidates who lost marks did not manage to understand how to use the PED figure within the equation to complete the new quantity demanded, however on the whole was very well answered by the vast majority of candidates.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• %change in P = 20%
• %change in Qd = PED x %change in P = -0.2 x 20 = -4%
• 4% of 2.5m = 100 000, so new quantity = 2.4 million per week
• maximum 2 marks without the correct answer
• report: some could not use the PED to find the new quantity

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 8 (make calculations of elasticity and interpret the result)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Many candidates performed very well on this relatively simple calculation question which centred on the understanding of index numbers, which is an area that has not been tested as frequently as other concepts. Most candidates completed this effectively using the correct information and scored well. Section B: Data response questions Responses to 6(a) This question focused on revenue increases as a result of the change to meat- substitute products and generally there was very good use of the extract, however limited further understanding of the link to why and how revenue would increase. Strong responses demonstrated understanding of the inelastic nature of such products as mentioned and made clear within the extract.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• index for 2023 = 287 825 / 400 000 x 100 = 71.96 (2010 = 100)
• giving 28.04 (the % fall) scores maximum 2 marks

Quantitative skills: QS 5 (calculate and interpret index numbers); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

In this question, candidates were asked to calculate the change in supernormal profit when a restaurant changed its objective from revenue maximisation to profit maximisation. Marks were awarded for identifying the respective maximising positions, then performing the requested calculation. This question was answered correctly by the vast majority of candidates, though there were several common pitfalls. Some candidates were unable to calculate the change correctly. A smaller minority corrected the change correctly, but failed to recognise that it was an increase rather than a decrease in supernormal profit. Other candidates gave the percentage change in supernormal profit rather than the change in total supernormal profit. This response appears on first sight to tick all the boxes. The candidate has correctly calculated the supernormal profit at both the revenue maximising output and the profit maximising output. However, they have made the mistake of subtracting the profit maximising profit from the revenue maximising profit. The answer given is -£429. The correct answer is an increase of £429, not a decrease. This response scored 3/4 marks. It is vital to read the question carefully here and check any calculations made carefully. The question asks for the change in supernormal profit, and the change is a positive one for the firm, not negative. In this second example, we can see that the candidate has clearly identified the maximising outputs and performed the calculations correctly. The direction of change has been understood and the correct answer of 426 has been given, scoring 4 marks.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• revenue maximisation where MR = 0: (£10 - £8) x 130 = £260
• profit maximisation where MC = MR: (£14 - £7) x 98 = £686
• change = +£426 (an increase)
• -£426 scores 3
• common errors: subtracting the wrong way round, giving a percentage change

Quantitative skills: QS 4 (construct and interpret a range of standard graphical forms); QS 6 (calculate cost, revenue and profit (marginal, average, totals))

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

There was a limited amount of confusion on this question when it came to what is meant by the labour force inactivity rate. As such, different answers were allowed to this question as you can see in the mark scheme. Having said that, the overwhelming majority of candidates calculated it as the question was originally intended, with an answer of 7.42m The candidate has correctly calculated a value of 7.4 million and so they achieved full marks. There is no need to write any words in a 'calculate' question so don’t waste time doing so. Just do the calculation as this candidate has. This answer achieves 1 mark as the candidate has not expressed their answer in millions. It is important to remember to check for units when you are doing calculation questions. The question says the total UK labour force was 34.5 million.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 34.5m x 0.215 = 7.42 million
• leaving out "million" loses a mark
• alternative interpretations accepted by the mark scheme (0, as the labour force excludes the inactive)

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Question 5 (a) Many students performed very well on the price elasticity of demand question and produced an elasticity coefficient between -1.5 and -1.54. As within previous series, students did struggle to find the change in price, as a percentage. The formula appeared very well recalled by the majority of candidates.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• %change in price = -4 200 / 42 990 x 100 = -9.77%
• PED = 15 / -9.77 = -1.54 (allow 1.5 to 1.54)
• many struggled to find the percentage change in price

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 8 (make calculations of elasticity and interpret the result)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question asked candidates to calculate percentage decrease in budget deficit. Many candidates found this question a little challenging to answer. These candidates lost marks because they did not use the correct formula.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• (83.6 - 38.7) / 83.6 x 100 = 53.7% decrease (accept 54)
• many used the wrong formula, e.g. dividing by the 2019 figure

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

On this question, candidates had to use the information in the market share chart to explain the market structure of mortgage lending in the UK. The most effective method here was to calculate the n-firm concentration ratio, which was worth two marks. This calculation indicated that the market structure was oligopolistic. Marks were then available for some explanation of the characteristics of oligopoly, such as high barriers to entry or a few large firms. Some candidates mistakenly identified monopolistic competition or monopoly from this data. This response clearly recognises that the market structure of the UK mortgage industry is oligopolistic. The candidate then tells us that there are multiple large firms with significant market share. There is then a final mark for the reference to Lloyds being the largest firm. Overall, this response scored 3 marks. To maximise your marks, always refer to the stem for numerical data. Quoting the table provided or, better still, manipulating the numbers provides access to higher marks. This second response achieved full marks. The candidate informs us that this industry is an oligopoly. They have then used the numerical data to calculate the five-firm concentration ratio of 64%. They go on to tell us this is typical of oligopolistic industries. A very efficient response.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• calculate an n-firm concentration ratio (e.g. 5-firm 64%) for 2 marks and conclude oligopoly
• some wrongly said monopolistic competition or monopoly

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question tested whether the skills of this economist candidate include the use of data, and the majority found the 10% savings ratio. Some students misinterpreted the graph (1ap mark for reading off the savings level) but almost all students could calculate the percentage and score one mark that way. The only issue noticed with this question was that the 'quarter' markers did not tie up with the year changes, and were marking the end of the quarters rather than the start. This is a fair way to illustrate data, but not one that many students might be used to. This a lovely, clear and correct answer. 1 mark for data use, and 1 mark for correct calculation. Always show your working. It is imperative not to give 'subsequent information' that contradicts your answer. If you add something to your answer that makes it incorrect, we cannot allow this as fully correct. This is a tragedy – the workings did include the correct answer, but the answer finally presented was not correct, so only 1 mark could be awarded. Underline your final answer, and make sure you show the savings as requested.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• savings ratio in Q4 2015 is 10%, so 10% x £26 300 = £2 630
• report: some misread the quarter markers
• do not add later working that contradicts the answer

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

4a This question felt very familiar and the mean score was high. The only errors seem to have arisen from the negative words in A and D (discourage, and restrict) which sometime cause processing errors when students are under mental and time pressure. 4b This again felt like an approachable question for many candidates. Although it appears easy at the outset it surprises examiners that very many students each year drop marks on making calculation errors, for example. 1/mpc and 1/(mpc-1) are common errors. Missing units (millions) 3 out of 4 Do note that £ sign not needed. Answer alone can get full marks on a calculation question, so there is no need to define or explain your answer. If you have the correct multiplier you can get 3 out of 4, so it is very wise to show your working, even if you make a mistake at the end. Make sure the answers seems right and logical. If students put 6.67 million this does not feel right as a total if the government has spent £60 million, when G is clearly part of AD. It is important to think about units (e.g. millions) and using a % sign here makes it seem there is some confusion going on. Wrong units so 3/4 Check your answer seems right. A total increase is unlikely to be a percentage. It is very helpful to show your working... ...although if the answer is correct it will not add marks. Examiners look through your working very carefully to see if they can add marks, if by chance your final answer is not correct. Show every step!

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• multiplier = 1 / (1 - 0.1) = 1.11
• 1.11 x £60m = £66.6m to £66.7m
• report: 1/MPC and 1/(MPC - 1) are common errors
• missing "million" scores 3 of 4
• a total below £60m cannot be right

Quantitative skills: QS 1 (calculate, use and understand ratios and fractions)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

In this question the marks are split as 1 for knowledge, 1 for application, and 1 for analysis. This is a budget balance question that candidates were able to answer relatively easily and the majority were able to do this. Candidates also need to be careful to read the question and the data carefully, as some candidates lost marks because they did not understand the requirements of the question.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• spending £1 053bn exceeds tax £820bn: a budget (fiscal) deficit of £233bn
• develop with extra borrowing adding to the national debt

Quantitative skills: QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

In this question, the focus is on having the ability to clearly calculate the opportunity cost of the decision by the farmer to harvest 6 units of wheat at point Y. Candidates were being asked to calculate this change, which is 1 unit of oats. The main issues faced by candidates were either stating the opportunity cost of 4 wheat to 2 oats at point X and 6 wheat to 1 oats at point Y. The question was asking about the reduction in the number of oats. Another issue was to discuss the increase in the production of wheat, which though rewarded, didn't score full marks. In this response the candidate has correctly calculated the opportunity cost as 1 unit of oats. Ensure you read the question carefully so that you give the correct answer in terms of the movement from point X to point Y. In this response, the candidate has calculated the opportunity cost ratios at point X and point Y but has completed an incorrect calculation. This scored 0/2.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• moving from X (4 wheat, 2 oats) to Y (6 wheat, 1 oats) gives up 1 unit of oats
• report: some gave ratios at X and Y or stated the 2 extra wheat instead of the oats forgone

Quantitative skills: QS 4 (construct and interpret a range of standard graphical forms); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This was a straightforward percentage change question and the vast majority of candidates answered it correctly. However, around 10% of candidates either scored 0 or just 1. Again this stresses the importance of practising the quantitative skills type of question. A typical mistake was to divide the change by the new price rather than the original price. On this response we can clearly see an accurate formula, followed by the correct answer. For all the calculation questions make sure you show your workings just in case there is an error in your calculation. A calculator can make sure you get this calculation right. On this response, the candidate has entered the correct data into the formula, therefore scoring the first mark, but has then made a mistake with the calculation. As a result, it scores 1/2.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• (5 664 - 5 044) / 5 044 x 100 = 12.3%
• report: a typical mistake was dividing by the new price rather than the original

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

For this question, there is one mark for identifying the correct market structure as either an oligopoly or a legal monopoly. A further two marks were awarded for the correct calculation of any concentration ratio. Two analysis marks were available for a linked explanation, for example high barriers to entry or a market dominated by a few large firms. There were a few cases of candidates either not using the numerical data at all, or calculating the ratios incorrectly. In this response, the candidate achieves the knowledge mark for the identification of the market as an oligopoly. There is then a correct calculation of the 3 firm concentration ratio in the second quarter of 2022, which is 58.5%. The analysis marks are then achieved for the reference to a few big firms and high barriers to entry. This is a strong response which also makes use of a diagram, though this would not be necessary to achieve the full marks available. Again, we can see here the importance of using quantitative data to achieve the application marks, and again the importance of a calculator to aid with the process. In this second response, the candidate has correctly identified the market structure as an oligopoly, and calculated a 5 firm concentration ratio of 74% for the second quarter of 2022. It is acceptable for this question to round numbers up or down to the nearest whole number. The first analysis mark is awarded for the recognition of a few large firms dominating the market, but no further marks are achieved, so this response scored 4/5. Question (b) The assess type questions on this paper take us into levels based marking, which means that we are looking for a best fit approach to awarding marks. There are 6 marks for knowledge, application and analysis, and 4 for evaluation. This question was answered well by the majority of candidates, with many very strong responses. The usual approach was to write about why Netflix subscribers did behave rationally, for example by switching to Disney because it has a higher customer satisfaction rating. The counter view, that subscribers behave irrationally tended to centre on the idea of habitual behaviour, with subscribers paying for a service that isn't necessarily used extensively, or the idea of 'forgetful subscribers', who forget to cancel after a short term trial period. This first response is a very strong example. The candidate explains carefully how Netflix subscribers behave rationally, by cancelling their subscriptions and switching to better value alternatives like Disney+. The candidate also makes a clear link to the concept of maximising their utility. There is full use of supporting numerical data in the response, which really helps to lift the quality. The counter view is also well developed, with the candidate going on to explain a series of reasons why subscribers are behaving less rationally, such as other services being cheaper or 'not being bothered to deal with the administrative faff' of trying to switch or cancel a subscription, which is a good reference to habitual behaviour or inertia. This response scored at the top of level 3 for knowledge, application, and analysis. It also scored at the top of level 2 for evaluation. Overall, this achieved 10/10. Ensure that in levels based responses, you clearly link the analysis of concepts to data which supports your points, like the previous example. In this response the candidate develops some analysis of rational behaviour by subscribers. There is clear use of context. However, the analysis is not linked to utility, so it didn't get into level 3 for knowledge, application and analysis. The evaluation was clear, and linked to inertia and information gaps. Overall, this scored top level 2 for KAA and top level 2 for evaluation. Overall, 4 + 4.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• oligopoly (or legal monopoly for Amazon over 25%): calculate a concentration ratio (e.g. 3-firm Q2 2022 = 58.5%) for 2 marks
• explain few large firms and barriers to entry
• report: a few did not use the data or miscalculated

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question asks students to calculate and make use of the data provided in the table. The majority of candidates understood what calculation was required of them, but a significant number didn't appreciate that the data in the table was in £ millions. Properly reading headings in tables/on graphs is absolutely vital, and in this case something that cost a lot of candidates a mark. This answer has correctly calculated the right answer and so gains full marks. Remember to always show your working out. If this candidate had written out the right calculation but somehow got the wrong answer, they would still have gained 1 mark. This answer only gets 1/2 as it is not the correct answer. The candidate has not noticed that the data in the table is in £ millions.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 198 473m x 1.035 = £2 275 420 million
• many lost a mark by omitting 'million' (data are in £ millions)

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This calculate question asks candidates to calculate US national debt as a percentage of GDP. Most candidates got the correct answer. The incorrect ones had often got the numbers round the wrong way, dividing 23 by 28.4. This is the correct answer and, as such, achieves full marks. This answer has the correct formula but the candidate has made a mistake in their calculation so they get 1/2. This shows why always writing out your working out is important. If this candidate had simply written their answer (12.35%) they would have got 0/2.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 28.4 / 23 x 100 = 123%
• common error dividing 23 by 28.4

Quantitative skills: QS 1 (calculate, use and understand ratios and fractions); QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question was a four-mark calculation based on the concept of cross elasticity of demand. A majority of candidates were able to complete this successfully, which is a pleasing indicator of the improving numeracy of the cohort each year.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• XED = -8: %change in Qd chips = -8 x 2% = -16%
• 950 000 x 0.16 = 152 000
• new Qd = 798 000 bags
• up to 3 marks for working

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 8 (make calculations of elasticity and interpret the result)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question requires candidates to calculate GDP per capita. Many candidates were able to answer this question relatively easily. However, some candidates lost all marks because they selected the wrong two pieces of data.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2 061 408 / 66.4 = £31 045.30
• adding 'million' to the answer caps at 1 mark
• some used the wrong data

Quantitative skills: QS 1 (calculate, use and understand ratios and fractions); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

In this question the focus is on having the ability to correctly calculate the percentage change in quantity demanded and to substitute the answer into the PED formula. A mark was not awarded for the formula itself but overall, this question was well answered by candidates and nearly all carefully made use of the formula and showed their working to achieve their final answer. This response provides a correct answer and is awarded 2 marks. This response correctly manipulates the formula to identify 5 % x 1.37 for 1 mark. However, the calculation is incorrectly given as 0.0685% which negates the answer. Therefore, this response was awarded 1 mark. Ensure you make use of a calculator and double check that your final answer makes sense.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• %change in Qd = PED x %change in P = -1.37 x 5 = -6.85%
• report: some slipped to 0.0685%

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 8 (make calculations of elasticity and interpret the result)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

In this question the focus is on having the ability to correctly calculate the percentage change in quantity demanded and to substitute the answer into the XED formula. A mark was not awarded for the formula itself but overall this was well answered by candidates and nearly all carefully made use of the formula and showed their workings to achieve their final answer. This response gives a considerable amount of detail for a 2 mark calculate response. The final correct answer is quite obscured at the foot of the page and was rounded up to 3.2%. Whilst most candidates identified an answer of 3.15%, rounding up to 3.2% or down to 3% was accepted and the response was awarded the full 2 marks. Be careful to clearly identify your final answer. This is an example of a common response to this question and it was awared the full 2 marks. It is always worth showing your workings. This does not need to take a lot of time and can help you pick up a mark if human error creeps into your final calculation.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• %change in Qd of water = XED x %change in price of sweetened drinks = 0.63 x 5 = +3.15%

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 8 (make calculations of elasticity and interpret the result)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Candidates were asked to calculate the concentration ratio with the majority taking a straightforward approach. The candidates were allowed to round up or down the answer of 52.96%. Candidates were also allowed to write as a ratio but there was little evidence of this happening. As a calculate-type question, the expectation was for a numerical answer but a definition was allowed as a knowledge mark. This response is awarded 4 out of the 5 marks available up until the final answer. By writing the final correct answer this response is awarded the full 5 marks. It is important to show your workings to secure marks in case your final answer is incorrect. This response correctly identified the answer '4354' and was awarded 1 mark. The response is also awarded 1 mark for knowledge for an accurate definition. As a consequence, this response is awarded 2 of the 5 marks available. For calculate questions, numerical responses are the most simplest expected answer.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• (2681 + 1025 + 648) / 8222 total shops = 4354 / 8222 = 52.96%
• total must include AMT, Soho, Coffee Republic and other chains

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

In this question, candidates are required to calculate the total reduction in the UK’s GDP. There are two steps in the process. Firstly, candidates need to calculate the value of the multiplier. Secondly, they need to multiply this value by £20 million. There were a range of answers with many of the weaker responses demonstrating a lack of understanding of this key macroeconomic formula. This is a response that was awarded the full 4 marks for the correct answer. Make sure you know key formulas, such as how to calculate the multiplier. It is always worth showing your workings in case you make a mistake as marks can be awarded for the workings.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• multiplier = 1/(1 - MPC) = 1/0.36 = 2.78
• 2.78 x £20m = £55.6m (allow £55m to £56m)
• 3 marks if 'million' is missing
• show working
• weaker answers did not know the multiplier formula

Quantitative skills: QS 1 (calculate, use and understand ratios and fractions); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• TR = $40 x 300 seats x 5 shows = $60 000
• show working ($12 000 per show) for a mark if the final answer is wrong

Quantitative skills: QS 6 (calculate cost, revenue and profit (marginal, average, totals))

Mark scheme

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• subsidy share = 100% - 30% ticket sales - 12.5% donations = 57.5%
• 0.575 x $200 000 = $115 000

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 6 (calculate cost, revenue and profit (marginal, average, totals))

Mark scheme

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• final increase in AD = multiplier x injection = 1.5 x $800bn = $1 200 billion
• 1 mark only if units are wrong ($1 200)

Quantitative skills: QS 1 (calculate, use and understand ratios and fractions)

Mark scheme

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• (3.69 - 3.50)/3.50 x 100 = 5.4%

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Question 6a asked candidates to calculate the change in the level of total aid funding using the data provided. There are a number of steps required to work out the answer, and it is always advisable that candidates write out their working to help them avoid making mistakes. The main problem that a number of candidates ran into with this question was not reading the question properly- it asks to calculate the change in the level of total aid funding, but a significant number of candidates decided to calculate the percentage change between the two figures, even though this wasn’t mentioned anywhere in the question. In question 6b candidates are asked for ‘two likely benefits’. As with all 8-mark questions, there are 2 marks for each of the four assessment objectives- knowledge, application, analysis, and evaluation. It is important that candidates remember this when answering 8-mark questions such as this- often very good answers don’t achieve full marks because they don’t include any application or evaluation. From question 6c onwards, all the questions are marked using the levels mark schemes, so examiners are focusing on the quality of the argument as a whole and not looking for specific bits of knowledge, application, etc. In this question in particular, candidates were asked about the likely impact on the Rwandan economy of the cut in aid funding. Candidates took this question in many different ways, depending on if they discussed aid funding that went directly to people, businesses, or the government, but all were relevant, and led to some very interesting answers. The answer below scored highly on this question, discussing clearly some impacts and offering some evaluation of them

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• total aid = aid per capita x population: 2011 10.29m x $123 = $1 265.67m, 2012 10.55m x $83 = $875.65m, change = -$390.02m (4/5 without the minus)
• many wrongly calculated a percentage change

Quantitative skills: QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question was a four-mark calculation based on the manipulation of student loans data. A large majority of candidates were able to complete this successfully, which is a pleasing indicator of the improving numeracy of the cohort each year. There were still errors, nonetheless, where percentage changes were clearly confused.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• (102 357 - 45 418) / 45 418 x 100 = 125% (accept 125 to 126)
• up to 3 marks for correct working
• some confused the percentage change formula

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question asked candidates to calculate index numbers for 2016. Many candidates were able to answer this question relatively easily. However, some candidates lost marks because they selected the wrong two pieces of data.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• (1 920 116 / 1 806 468) x 100 = 106.3
• 1 mark for 2014 = 100 or partial working
• some used the wrong years

Quantitative skills: QS 5 (calculate and interpret index numbers)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Most students were able to accurately calculate the answer here. Those who didn't get full marks generally hadn't read the question properly and so didn't calculate what they had been asked to. This answer achieves 1/2 marks for correctly calculating the total variable cost. They also would secure one out of two marks for 300 + 320.Unfortunately they do not provide the final correct calculation required for full marks. This answer achieves 2/2 marks for correctly identifying the answer is £620.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• AVC = 40% x £2 = £0.80
• TVC = 0.80 x 400 = £320
• TC = £320 + £300 = £620
• report: errors came from misreading what was asked

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 6 (calculate cost, revenue and profit (marginal, average, totals))

Mark scheme

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• growth in 2017 was 1.7%: £200 000m x 1.017 = £203 400m
• report: "students found this a fairly difficult calculation" and scored much lower than on the Q4(a) calculation

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• (910 - 894) / 894 x 100 = 1.79% (accept 1.78 to 1.8)
• divide by the April figure

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question was a challenge for some. Many candidates were able to do the maths but not link the numbers to the requirements of the question, which was asking about total revenue. There was an acknowledgement that a correct percentage change calculation could access the application mark even if the answer was incorrect.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• %change in Qd = -0.5 x 3% = -1.5%, so 19.1m x 0.985 = 18.8135m tickets
• TR = £7.63 x 18.8135m = £143.547m (allow 143.5 to 143.6)
• many did the percentages but never reached total revenue
• max 2 without the correct answer

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 6 (calculate cost, revenue and profit (marginal, average, totals)); QS 8 (make calculations of elasticity and interpret the result)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question was a four-mark calculation based on the idea of charging patients when they visit a GP. A large majority of candidates were able to complete this successfully, which is a pleasing indicator of the improving numeracy of the cohort each year.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 450m visits x £12 = £5.4 billion
• only 10% are charged, so £5.4bn x 10% = £540 million (£0.54bn)
• 4 marks for the correct answer
• most candidates got this right

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This is a multiplier calculation question that candidates were able to answer relatively easily, and the majority were able to do this. Candidates also need to be careful to read the question and the data carefully, as some candidates lost marks because they didn’t understand the requirements of the question.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• multiplier = change in GDP / injection = £44.1bn / £9.3bn = 4.74
• report: some misread what the question required

Quantitative skills: QS 1 (calculate, use and understand ratios and fractions)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question asked candidates to calculate index numbers for 2015 and 2016. Many candidates were able to answer this question relatively easily. However, some candidates lost marks because they selected the wrong two pieces of data.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2015: 200 141 / 189 709 x 100 = 105.5
• 2016: 215 127 / 189 709 x 100 = 113.4
• report: some used the wrong pieces of data

Quantitative skills: QS 5 (calculate and interpret index numbers)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

In this question the focus is on having the ability to correctly calculate the percentage change in quantity supplied and to substitute the answer into the PES formula. A mark was not awarded for the formula itself but overall this was well answered by candidates and nearly all carefully made use of the formula and showed their working to achieve their final answer. The main issues that candidates faced here was failing to correctly calculate the percentage change or to apply the formula the correct way around. The candidate correctly calculated the % change in quantity supplied as 20.99 thus earning one mark. They then substituted their answer correctly into the PES formula but the final calculation was wrong. As an incorrect answer they receive 0 marks for the final calculated answer despite having the correct working. Overall they achieve 1+0 = 1 mark. Ensure you make use of a calculator and double check that your final answer makes sense – to overcome human error. This candidate provides a correct answer, achieving 2 marks.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• %change in Qs = 28 268 / 134 612 x 100 = 21%
• PES = 21 / 5.4 = 3.9
• report: errors were a wrong % change or the formula the wrong way round

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 8 (make calculations of elasticity and interpret the result)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Being a few years into the new specification candidates are well practiced in showing their working. A significant number of candidates were not able to calculate the total revenue and profit for 2016 so were unable to obtain the final answer. Some candidates wrongly subtracted the 2017 figures to obtain their final answer of 58.3 million. Nearly all responses seen ensured that they used the correct unit of measurement as £58.4 million rather than 58.4. This answer achieves one mark for correctly calculating profit in 2016 as being equal to 14.4 million. They miscalculate revenue for 2016 resulting in the wrong overall answer. An additional mark was awarded for the correct use of the formula. 2 marks overall. By showing your working it is possible that you may pick up at least a mark even if computational errors occur. This candidate has the correct answer of £58.4 million and hence achieves full marks.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2016 profit = 17.5 / 1.215 = £14.4m
• 2016 revenue = 75.8 / 1.041 = £72.8m
• TC = TR - profit = £58.4 million
• report: some subtracted the 2017 figures instead of working back to 2016

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 6 (calculate cost, revenue and profit (marginal, average, totals))

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question required a simple calculation of the index number. There seemed to be an improvement in candidates' understanding of index numbers compared to previous exam papers. The main problem candidates found was in selecting the wrong initial data from the figure - something that is worth practising. This answer scores full marks having correctly calculated the index number to be 115.4 This answer scores 1/2 marks as the two correct pieces of data have been identified from the figure but the calculation is not correct. Ensure you know key formulas such as how to calculate an index number from data.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• index = (March 2017 / January 2016) x 100 = (15 000 / 13 000) x 100 = 115.4
• the common error was reading the wrong data from the chart

Quantitative skills: QS 5 (calculate and interpret index numbers); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

The majority of candidates were able to accurately calculate the answer here. Those who didn't get full marks generally hadn't read the question properly and so didn't calculate what they had been asked to. This answer achieves 1/2 marks for correctly constructing the formula 500,000 X 0.17 but unfortunately the candidate didn't get the right answer from their calculation.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 500 000 x 0.17 = £85 000

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This was mainly well-answered, with good responses able to both explain the characteristics of a highly concentrated market (knowledge and analysis) and calculate an appropriate n-firm concentration ratio. The mean was 3.8 out of 5. Many candidates scored well on this question, showing a clear understanding of highly concentrated markets which was often developed through an understanding of the market structure being an oligopoly or monopoly power. The best answers calculated an accurate concentration ratio in order to gain both marks, although many just listed market shares to score one application mark. Weaker responses tended to make errors through confusing 'highly concentrated' and 'highly competitive', or simply listing the firms' market shares rather than using them to show the concentrated nature of the market. The data could be numerical or verbal, and it is advised to use both sources (though not required for full marks). We were strict in not awarding a mark for the observation that Walker's had or was a (pure) monopoly; rather we were looking for candidates to appreciate that it was a legal or working monopoly, or in another way showing market dominance rather than overall control. Please note the similarity with the marking on the coffee shop question in 2018 1(a). Don't list data. Use it. Try to make two separate points if you can't use the data in a calculation.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• highly concentrated means a few firms hold a large market share, not many firms or 'highly competitive'
• calculate a concentration ratio (2-firm 78.0%, 3-firm 82.2%) for both application marks rather than just listing shares
• Walkers is not a pure monopoly
• max 1 application mark without Figure 1 or Extract A

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

For this question candidates were given a statement indicating that Cuba has a healthcare system with a patient to doctor ratio of 155:1, then asked to calculate the number of doctors in an estimated population of 11 000 000 people. Most candidates were able to gain 2 marks on this question, firstly by using the figures in the correct formula for 1 mark, and then correctly calculating the number of doctors in Cuba from the data given. The candidate here provides a simple two-step answer, dividing the Cuban population by 156. This is elaborated to show that the 156 figure includes the 155 patients plus the doctor. Showing your working will enable you to gain a mark for that step even if you make an arithmetical mistake at the final stage of the process. This response shows the other acceptable response, with the candidate here dividing 11 000 000 by 155 to achieve an answer in the range of 70 500 and 71 000, as required by the mark scheme. Again, a clear two-stage answer to the question.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 11 000 000 / 155 = 70 968 doctors (or / 156 = 70 512 counting the doctor)
• accept 70 500 to 71 000
• show working

Quantitative skills: QS 1 (calculate, use and understand ratios and fractions)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question was answered well by a large majority of candidates and again the use of a two-step method using the data was essential. It was important for candidates to use the data to obtain the first mark, with both marks being reserved for a correct answer. A common mistake was for candidates to get the formula for Price Elasticity of Demand the wrong way around, dividing 8.3 by -5.4 and getting -1.54. In this example the candidate has clearly worked through the steps of the calculation, gaining the first mark for 8.3, and the second for the correct answer of -0.65. Writing the correct formula doesn't in itself gain any marks here but it is the first step in obtaining the correct percentage change in price. This then enables the correct final answer to be calculated.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• %change in P = 5 / 60 x 100 = 8.3%
• PED = -5.41 / 8.3 = -0.65
• report: common mistake was the formula upside down (8.3 / -5.4 = -1.54)

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 8 (make calculations of elasticity and interpret the result)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Though most candidates were able to score 2 marks on this question the majority were unable to score 3 marks. So, whilst candidates could define inferior goods and/or give a formula, and many could identify bus travel as an inferior good, there was insufficient manipulation of the data, e.g. calculating the percentage change in income, i.e. 6.2%, or the YED of bus travel, i.e. -0.48. This is an excellent answer which gains marks for the relevant formula, a correct calculation, and the statement that bus travel is an inferior good. 3 marks. Use the data provided to calculate whether bus travel is a normal or an inferior good. In this example the candidate both defines inferior goods and identifies that bus travel is an inferior good. However, the data is only quoted and not used to calculate the change in income or YED. Use the data provided in the question beyond simply re-stating what is in the question.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• %change in income = 1 500 / 24 200 = +6.2%
• YED = -3 / 6.2 = -0.48, negative so bus travel is an inferior good
• report: most scored only 2 of 3 as they quoted the data without calculating

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 8 (make calculations of elasticity and interpret the result)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This is a GDP per capita calculation question that candidates were able to answer relatively easily. Candidates need to be careful to read the question and the data carefully, as some candidates lost marks because they selected the wrong two pieces of data. This candidate achieves 2/2 marks. They have correctly calculated an answer of £28,766.73. This candidate achieves 0/2 marks. They have not correctly calculated the UK's GDP per capita.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• GDP / population = 1 872 714 / 65.1 = £28 766.73
• some selected the wrong two figures

Quantitative skills: QS 1 (calculate, use and understand ratios and fractions); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question asked candidates to calculate the forecast UK government spending on social protection as a percentage of total forecast UK government spending in 2016/17. Many candidates were able to answer this question relatively easily. However, some candidates lost marks because they selected the wrong two pieces of data. This candidate achieves 2/2 marks. They have correctly calculated an answer of 31%. This candidate achieves 0/2 marks. They have not shown the correct workings and their answer is incorrect.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 240 / 772 x 100 = 31.1%
• the £716bn tax receipts figure is a distractor
• some used the wrong data

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

In this question the focus is on having the ability to apply the concept of opportunity cost to the PPF curves as shown. There are 2 marks for application. The main issue that candidates faced here was failing to correctly read the information as presented; with some candidates identifying the original opportunity cost as 70 or not displaying a clear understanding of opportunity cost and therefore the ability to apply. This often meant that candidates were unable to achieve full marks, since it often led on to incorrect application. This answer scores the full 2 marks. The candidate has identified correctly the original and new opportunity cost. Be clear and concise in these short questions. This candidate correctly identifies 20 as the original opportunity cost to obtain one mark and provides their working as per the mark scheme. They then correctly identify that the calculation of new opportunity cost of 50 capital goods along XZ is 170-140 but then make the computational error of saying this is equal to 70 rather than 30 consumer goods. As an incorrect answer they receive 0 marks for the new opportunity cost despite having the correct working. Overall they achieve 1+0 = 1 mark. Always try to ensure you re-read your work – especially if you allow time for this at the end of the exam.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• read across at 50 capital goods: on XY 120 - 100 = 20 consumer goods, on XZ 170 - 140 = 30
• report: some misread the PPF and gave 70 as the original opportunity cost

Quantitative skills: QS 4 (construct and interpret a range of standard graphical forms); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This was a straightforward question with most candidates completing the calculation accurately however a few omitted the “million”. There are 2 marks available for application, with 2 marks awarded for the correct answer or 1 mark for the correct calculation without stating the correct answer. If candidates failed to score full marks on this question it was generally either because they had misread the data or they made a computational error. This answer achieves a mark of 2/2. This candidate achieves full marks for providing the correct answer, being £128.48 million. They have carefully shown their working – so in the absence of the correct answer due to a computational error they would have secured 1 mark for £146million or £17.52 million. Always ensure you state the correct unit of measurement. This answer achieved 1 out of 2 marks for £1.76 x 73m as per the mark scheme. It is advisable to show your working – as you may obtain a mark for working towards the correct answer.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• (£2 - £0.24) x 73 million = £128.48 million, or £146m - £17.52m
• omitting "million" or misreading the data lost marks

Quantitative skills: QS 6 (calculate cost, revenue and profit (marginal, average, totals))

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Most candidates found this to be a straightforward question, gaining 2 marks for giving the correct answer of £6357 or rounded up to £6360. There are 2 marks available for application, 2 marks for the correct answer or 1 mark for providing the correct working but not the correct answer. This answer scores the full 2 marks. The candidate makes clear their final answer by double underlining £6357. In the absence of this correct answer they would have obtained 1 mark for 0.013 x 489 000. Ensure you make clear your final answer on quantitative skill questions. This answer scores zero as unfortunately the candidate doesn't have the correct percentages – in this case what 1.3% means numerically. Candidates need to develop their competence in the quantitative skills as listed in the specification.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 1.3% x £489 000 = 0.013 x 489 000 = £6 357
• report: some could not convert 1.3% into a decimal

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

In this question, candidates needed to make sure they could identify supernormal profit at a profit maximisation and revenue maximisation level of output. They then need to calculate accurately the supernormal profits and subtract to achieve a change of £117. The majority of candidates did identify the profit maximisation and revenue maximisation level of output but some had difficulties with knowing how to calculate the supernormal profits – especially at the revenue maximisation output. Full marks could be achieved for simply stating £117 or -£117. This answer achieves a mark of 3/4. They provide a model approach when showing their working and do identify accurately the change but do not calculate the change of £117 in total supernormal profit as stated in bold in the question. Ensure you provide the final answer to the question set. For stating change = -£117 the candidate obtains full marks.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• profit max MC = MR at 25 treatments: (£17 - £8) x 25 = £225
• revenue max MR = 0 at 36: (£12 - £9) x 36 = £108
• change = -£117
• report: some could not calculate supernormal profit at the revenue-maximising output, or did not state the final change

Quantitative skills: QS 4 (construct and interpret a range of standard graphical forms); QS 6 (calculate cost, revenue and profit (marginal, average, totals))

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This was a high scoring question with the vast majority of candidates gaining 2 marks, although a few only scored 1 mark as they had only calculated the total market share of the companies but had not expressed the answer as a percentage. This answer achieves a mark of 2/2. Full marks for correctly identifying 68.75% for five firm concentration ratios. Without the correct answers being provided only one mark would have been awarded for the formula provided as per the mark scheme. Ensure you clearly state your final answer.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• sum of five largest firms' sales 190 239 / 276 700 x 100 = 68.8%
• report: a few gave the total share but not as a percentage

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question should be a standard calculation task. Candidates simply need to calculate the percentage change using the data provided. The main mistake candidates made was not correctly working out that the change in the current account from -200 to -800 is 600. This candidate has the correct answer of 300% and hence achieves full marks. This answer achieves no marks as the candidate is not using the correct numbers in their formula.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• deficit rose from 200 to 800 billion: 600/200 x 100 = 300%
• main error was not reading the change from -200 to -800 as 600

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This answer is actually very straightforward but it seems that many candidates did not correctly understand the data they had been presented with before starting to answer the question. The data is already presented as percentage change, as it says clearly in the title. Therefore candidates simply needed to add 4 to 100 to get the answer of 104. This answer achieves 1 mark for 2015=100, since this shows the candidate has some understanding of index numbers and base years. This candidate has the correct answer of 104 and as such achieves the full two marks. Ensure you understand what index numbers are and that you can calculate them.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• the data are already percentage changes: 2015 = 100, plus 4% gives 104
• 2015 = 100 alone earns 1 mark
• report: many candidates did not understand the data were presented as percentage changes

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 5 (calculate and interpret index numbers); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Most candidates achieved 1 mark by defining opportunity cost. This question polarised performance with a significant number ignoring the ‘marginal’ content of the question, many calculated the opportunity cost cumulatively in the column provided. Top marks were awarded for completing the columns correctly using marginal analysis and referring to the table for contact to define opportunity cost to score the third mark. This answer achieved 3 out of 3 marks. The candidate began by accurately completing the table as instructed, (1 Application mark). They then provided an accurate, concise definition of opportunity cost (1 Knowledge mark) before linking this as an example to the opportunity cost of the economy of moving from consumer goods to capital goods is initially small compared to gains in production. This was made using numerical references (1 Analysis mark) and the marginal opportunity cost increases again made numerically explicit. Make sure you use the table provided and any calculations you have made to answer the question set. This answer achieved 1 out of 3 marks. The definition provided was correct (1 Knowledge marks). Application was missing from the table with no attempt to complete it and confused in the written response (0 mark for Application). A PPF diagram was drawn but the attempt to link it to the question set was not clear (0 mark for Analysis). It is good practice to start with a definition, but look carefully at what the question is asking you to do with the concept – in this case ‘using marginal analysis’.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• complete the column marginally: opportunity costs 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 units of consumer goods per extra 10 capital goods (at least two calculations)
• many calculated cumulatively and ignored 'marginal'
• analysis = increasing opportunity cost, PPF concave to the origin

Quantitative skills: QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Seventy percent of candidates achieved full marks on this question. Many candidates entered the data into the column. For those only using the answer space there was evidence of lots of working so it was important for them to clearly identify their final answer. It is advisable to show your working for your own benefit to avoid computational errors. This answer achieved 2 out of 2 marks. This answer achieved 2 out of 2 marks and could have alternatively inserted the accurate figures in the boxes provided. You can simply provide the correct answers and move on if you are certain.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 2011 = 15 257 / 14 878 x 100 = 102.5
• 2012 = 13 261 / 14 878 x 100 = 89.1 (accept 102 to 103 and 89 to 89.2)
• show working or fill the table

Quantitative skills: QS 5 (calculate and interpret index numbers); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

The question was one requiring use of quantitative skills and provided an accessible question asking candidates to calculate the price elasticity of demand for tobacco cigarettes in high-income countries and in low-middle-income countries. Eighty five percent of candidates achieved full marks by correctly applying the PED formula twice to the data provided in Extract A, lines 11–13. Where marks were lost was an inability to identify the correct formula to perform the calculation. Where the correct formula data was substituted into the formula but the wrong answer was provided this was awarded 1 of the marks available. Answers which simply wrote down an acceptable accurate response, 0.4 and 0.5, were awarded full marks. 4 out of 4 marks awarded. Correct formula identified which if it was done in isolation with no further correct responses would obtain 1 mark. 1 mark was awarded for data located for high income countries and substituted into correct formula used (1 mark). Correct answer ‘-0.4’ was provided (2 marks). 1 mark for data located was awarded for low income countries and substituted into correct formula used (1 mark). Correct answer ‘-0.5’ was provided (2 marks). The written comments explaining what the answers meant were not relevant to the question so were awarded no marks. Accurate working will always receive credit and candidates are strongly advised to show their working in case they make a computational error with the final answer. 1 out of 4 marks awarded. 1 mark was awarded for a correct formula as an alternative for substituting correct figures on up to one occasion. The candidate did not then apply the data to calculate the formula for high and low income countries. Showing your working, including stating the correct formula, may help pick up some marks if you make computational errors.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• PED = %change Qd / %change P: high income -4 / 10 = -0.4
• low-middle income -5 / 10 = -0.5
• 85% scored full marks
• a correct formula alone earns 1

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 8 (make calculations of elasticity and interpret the result)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This is a straightforward percentage change calculation that candidates should be able to answer relatively easily, and the majority were able to do this. It is vital that time is spent practicing calculations such as this. Candidates also need to be careful to read the question and the data carefully, as a number of candidates lost marks because they selected the wrong two pieces of data. This candidate achieves 2/2 marks. They have correctly calculated an answer of – 0.16%. Always show your working out in calculation questions. This candidate also correctly calculates the right answer and as such achieves full marks.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• (128.2 - 128.4) / 128.4 x 100 = -0.16% (accept -0.15 to -0.2)
• use the September 2014 and 2015 values, some picked the wrong pair

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 5 (calculate and interpret index numbers)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This is a Theme 1 question and a number of responses only stated the equilibrium price and not the quantity as requested. Candidates need to practice completing such tables as part of their exam preparation. This answer achieves a mark of 4/4. The candidate accurately inserts the data in the last two columns and has calculated the correct equilibrium price (£24) and quantity (9,000). This answer achieves a mark of 4/4. The columns alone would score zero as the measure per month is (000) making the quantity at £24 being 9,000,000. The answer does achieve full marks for going on to identify the new equilibrium as £24 and 9,000. Ensure you are careful with the unit of measure.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• add 3 to every Qd and 1 to every Qs: new equilibrium £24 and 9 000 kits per month
• "9" alone scores nothing (units are 000)
• report: many gave only the price and not the quantity

Quantitative skills: QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Another Theme 1 question. In this question it was clear who knew their PED formula and who did not. Candidates need to practice such key calculations as part of their exam preparation. This answer achieves a mark of 2/2. This candidate has got the correct answer of 1.2, a minus or plus sign is allowed. Some margin for rounding up/down is allowed on mark schemes but do try to be as accurate as you can with calculations. This answer achieves a mark of 1/2. This candidate receives one mark for correct calculations of both percentages. However their formula is the wrong way around. A significant minority of candidates made this mistake. Learn your formulas and be careful in applying the formula accurately.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• PED = %change in Qd / %change in P = -21.65 / 17.78 = -1.2
• 1 mark for both percentages
• report: a significant minority put the formula the wrong way round

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 8 (make calculations of elasticity and interpret the result)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

In this question it was clear who knew how to calculate revenue and who did not. A number of candidates lost a mark as 'million' was missing from their answer as the unit of measure. This answer achieves a mark of 2/2. This candidate achieves full marks for providing the correct answer, being £53.9 million. Always ensure you state the correct unit of measurement. This answer achieves a mark of 1/2. This answer can only be awarded 1 mark as million, the unit of measure, is missing.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• TR = P x Q: £7.20 x 97m = £698.4m and £8.48 x 76m = £644.5m, a fall of £53.9 million
• leaving out "million" loses a mark (common, per report)
• demand is price elastic so revenue falls

Quantitative skills: QS 6 (calculate cost, revenue and profit (marginal, average, totals))

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

In this question it was clear who knew how to calculate subsidy and who did not. A number of candidates lost a mark as 'million' was missing from their answer as the unit of measure. Candidates need to practice similar subsidy and tax diagrams from Theme 1. This answer achieves a mark of 2/2. This candidate achieves full marks for providing the correct answer, being 1,022,400,000. Best practice is always to state the currency. This answer achieves a mark of 1/2. The candidate can only be awarded 1 mark as million, the unit of measure, is missing. Always ensure you state the correct unit of measurement.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• subsidy per unit = 1023 - 455 = 568 rupees x 1.8 million cylinders = 1 022.4 million rupees
• leaving out "million" loses a mark
• read the subsidy as the vertical gap between S and S1 at the new quantity

Quantitative skills: QS 4 (construct and interpret a range of standard graphical forms); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Most candidates achieved full marks but a significant number of candidates lost a mark as the answers were transposed incorrectly i.e. they identified consumers as receiving 87.55 and producers 12.5%. Candidates need to practice similar subsidy and tax diagrams from Theme 1. This answer achieves a mark of 2/2. Full marks for correctly identifying 12.5% for consumers and 87.5% for producers. Without the correct answers being provided only one mark would have been awarded for correct annotation of diagram. This answer achieves a mark of 1/2. This response has transposed the answers incorrectly. Ensure you carefully follow the instructions provided.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• consumers gain the fall in price 526 - 455 = 71 rupees: 71 / 568 x 100 = 12.5%
• report: a significant number transposed the consumer and producer shares

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 4 (construct and interpret a range of standard graphical forms); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Most candidates achieved full marks but a significant number of candidates lost a mark as the answers were transposed incorrectly i.e. they identified consumers as receiving 87.55 and producers 12.5%. Candidates need to practice similar subsidy and tax diagrams from Theme 1. This answer achieves a mark of 2/2. Full marks for correctly identifying 12.5% for consumers and 87.5% for producers. Without the correct answers being provided only one mark would have been awarded for correct annotation of diagram. This answer achieves a mark of 1/2. This response has transposed the answers incorrectly. Ensure you carefully follow the instructions provided.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• producers receive 1023 - 526 = 497 rupees: 497 / 568 x 100 = 87.5%
• the two shares must sum to 100%
• supply is inelastic so producers gain most of the subsidy

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 4 (construct and interpret a range of standard graphical forms); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

Most candidates were able to calculate correctly. The main problem was a failure to indicate the answer as a unit that clearly could be interpreted in pence between 29 and 30. This answer achieves a mark of 2/2. A clear answer is provided. This answer achieves a mark of 1/2. The wrong answer is provided but one mark is awarded for 13% of £2.27 in their working. It is always advisable to show your working in case of a computational error.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• profit = 13% of 227p = 29.5p (accept 29 to 30)
• answer must be clearly in pence (report)
• show working to earn a mark for 13% x 227

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 6 (calculate cost, revenue and profit (marginal, average, totals))

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

In this question it was clear which candidates knew what the four firm concentration ratio meant. Candidates need to practice such key knowledge and why it may change as part of their exam preparation. Be careful in future about percentage points change and percentage change. This answer achieves a mark of 5/5. The candidate starts by calculating the four firm concentration ratio for both years and identifies that the ratio has decreased by 3.6 percentage points (benefit of doubt given here as technically it is not 3.6%); thereby picking up 2 marks for analysis and one for implicit knowledge of concentration ratio. They then go on to provide and explain the reason for the change. This answer achieves a mark of 5/5. The candidate starts by calculating the four firm concentration ratio for both years thereby picking up 2 marks for analysis and one for implicit knowledge of concentration ratio. They then go on to provide and explain the reason for the change. Ensure you carefully apply the data available, as instructed in the question.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• 4-firm CR fell from 76.1% (2010) to 72.5% (2015), a fall of 3.6 percentage points not 3.6%
• reason: shoppers switching to discounters Aldi and Lidl and online (Extract A)
• define or show understanding of a concentration ratio

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This answer is a straightforward percentage change calculation. Most candidates were able to answer this question easily and achieve the full 5 marks. Some candidates forgot the minus (or a reference to decrease or similar) and as such scored 4/5 marks. This question also demonstrates the need for candidates to know key calculations such as percentage change. This answer scores 4/5 marks. They have the correct value but have not appreciated that this is a decrease in the exchange rate. This candidate has calculated the correct answer and as such achieves full marks. Always ensure you know how to calculate percentage change and other similar calculations.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• (0.75 - 0.95)/0.95 x 100 = -21% (accept -21 to -21.1)
• no minus sign or reference to a fall = max 4

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

The question was one requiring use of quantitative skills question and provided an accessible question asking candidates to calculate the percentage change in house prices between the first quarter of 2009 and the first quarter of 2015. Nearly all candidates were able to obtain at least 1 mark by locating the data. Where marks were lost was an inability to identify the correct formula to perform the calculation. Where the correct formula and calculation was completed resulting in a mistaken answer this was awarded 3 marks, for example in identifying prices had fallen. Answers which simply wrote down an acceptable accurate response, 23-25%, were awarded full marks but were rare to find indicating good exam technique by the overwhelming majority of candidates. 4 out of 4 marks awarded. 1 mark for data located accurately and easy to follow with year references 375 (2015) and 300 (2009). Correct formula used (1 mark) and data substituted accurately (1 mark). Without the correct answer identified this would achieve 3 marks. The correct calculation is made, a 25% change, which makes the overall score 4 marks. In isolation writing '25%' change would have received full marks but this candidate has clearly shown their working in a concise manner in case they did make a computational error. Ensure you understand what Index numbers mean, some candidates added pound signs and zeros i.e. 2008 house prices were £300,000 which is inaccurate. Despite this error full marks could still be achieved for identifying the correct percentage change. Accurate working will always receive credit and candidates are strongly advised to show their working in case they make a computational error with the final answer. 1 out of 4 marks awarded. This answer clearly locates the data for 2009 and 2015 and uses the key to identify that they are Index numbers (1 Application mark). Unfortunately they do not then apply the data to calculate the percentage change (1+0 Application marks). They do not know how to work out a percentage change so receive no knowledge marks. Make careful use of data in a Figure you are asked to look at, spending time to see what the data is showing, there are always marks for doing this. Being aware of how to calculate percentage changes accurately is a useful tool for economists.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• (373 - 300)/300 x 100 = 24% (accept 23 to 25%)
• index read from Figure 2 at Q1 2009 and Q1 2015
• some used the wrong formula or showed a fall

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 5 (calculate and interpret index numbers); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

This question was a straightforward test of quantitative skills, and most candidates could correctly do the calculations involved. With the renewed emphasis on quantitative skills it is important that candidates practice such questions as part of their economics course. This candidates has got the correct answer of '-10.70%'. Some margin for rounding up/down is allowed on mark schemes but do try to be as accurate as you can with calculations. This answer only scores 1/2 as the candidate has failed to appreciate that this is a fall in the percentage change in the claimant count. Always check whether an answer should be positive or negative in calculation questions.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• (858 344 - 961 149) / 961 149 x 100 = -10.7%
• giving +10.7% scores 1
• check the sign of the answer

Quantitative skills: QS 2 (calculate, use and understand percentages, percentage changes and percentage point changes); QS 9 (interpret, apply and analyse information in written, graphical tabular and numerical forms)

Mark scheme

Examiner's comment

In this question it was clear who knew their multiplier formula and who did not. Candidates need to be practicing such key calculations as part of their exam preparation. This candidate has the correct answer of '£30bn' and so achieves all 3 marks. This candidate achieves 2/3 as they have correctly identified the multiplier formula and worked out that the multiplier is 2. Unfortunately the candidate fails to multiply it by £15 billion. Always show your working out in calculation questions. That way even if you get the wrong answer at the end (or fail to include it like here) you can still get marks for your working out.

Notes from the mark scheme and report

• multiplier = 1 / (1 - MPC) = 1 / 0.5 = 2
• £15 billion x 2 = £30 billion
• some found the multiplier but did not multiply by £15 billion

Quantitative skills: QS 1 (calculate, use and understand ratios and fractions)