How to Ace A-level Politics Essays
Achieving top marks in AQA or Edexcel A-level Politics exams requires more than just detailed subject knowledge; it demands mastery of essay writing. For those facing the challenge of 25-mark questions, this short guide provides essential strategies to craft a balanced and well-structured argument that impresses examiners. Expert tutors break down the key components of an effective essay: introduction, main body, and conclusion. Finally, we offer a model answer on feminism to put our template and advice into practice.
Planning is Paramount
Before diving, plan your answer effectively. Focus on the specific question and read it very carefully. Avoid tangents and map out your argument before writing. A strong essay starts with a clear thesis in the introduction and then proves it with solid, diverse evidence throughout the main body. Remember to bring in key thinkers, specific legislation, and historical events.
Introduction: Setting the Stage
Targeted Response: Directly answer the question with relevant terminology. Don't go into too much detail here—just signpost your argument.
Balance: Show you understand both sides of the argument. Outline the different factors you'll explore, for example, contrasting economic approaches within a political ideology.
Clear Judgement: End your introduction with a clear thesis statement—what you're aiming to prove.
Main Body: Building Your Case
Structure: Aim for 3-4 paragraphs. This is where you develop your thesis and explore both sides thoroughly.
Principle of Charity: Start by addressing the opposing viewpoint. This shows balance. For instance, if you're arguing an ideology is divided, begin by discussing areas of agreement.
Connectives & Counterarguments: Use words like "nevertheless" or "however" to introduce contrasting points. Explore why there might be fundamental disagreements despite some overlap.
Depth & Development: In subsequent paragraphs, further develop your argument. Introduce new factors and link them back to the question. Avoid repetition.
Evidence: Include key thinkers, historical understanding with dates and events, and relevant terminology (e.g., "proletariat," "class consciousness").
Analysis, Not Description: Explain key ideas and events, but always connect them back to your thesis.
Conclusion: The Final Word
Clear Answer: Restate your position and summarise the arguments supporting it, as well as those you've challenged.
Final Judgement: End with a concise judgment, e.g., "Thus, conservatives have been divided on economic intervention since the rise of the New Right."
No New Information: Stick to what you've already discussed. Keep it brief—no more than 4-5 lines.
With these tips, you'll be well on your way to writing stellar 25-mark essays that demonstrate your knowledge and analytical skills in your A-level Politics exams. What follows is a model answer on feminism written by our expert tutors. Try to identify the tips we discussed and apply the same techniques in your exams.
Model Answer
Question: Is feminism more united than divided? [25 marks]
1. Introduction
Although feminists are united by certain core principles, such as the belief that patriarchy is an artificial social construct, there is substantial disagreement regarding the origins of patriarchy and the ultimate goals of the movement. With the rise of radical and intersectional feminists in the late 20th century, further disagreements have arisen regarding the strategies and methods for advancing female liberation. These divisions have become more significant than their commonly held beliefs.
2. Main Body
There are some important areas of concord within the feminist movement. All feminists agree that women's subordinate place in society is not a result of natural weakness, biological inferiority, or divine judgement. Rather, patriarchy is a power relation, or artificial social construct, which imposes the rule of men over women. This system of oppression is deeply entrenched in our culture and history. Simone de Beauvoir argues that patriarchy has become so deeply ingrained that women themselves internalised it. All feminists agree that patriarchy is an unjust construct which can, and must, be removed for women to advance in society.
Nevertheless, there is substantial disagreement regarding the causes and origins of patriarchy. Liberal feminists argue that it originates in the ‘public sphere’ through factors such as the underrepresentation of women in politics and executive positions. They argue that education and involvement in public life is the best way to challenge sexist attitudes and enfranchise women. Charlotte Perkins Gillman contends that education allows women to achieve economic independence and therefore personal freedom. Drawing on the classical liberal tradition, liberal feminists argue that men and women are autonomous agents whose personal freedom must be respected. Following J.S Mill, they wish to prevent tyrannical governments legislating on personal life. Thus, unlike radical feminists, they focus on challenging patriarchy in the public sphere, believing the private to be a realm of individual liberty.
Channelling this conception, socialist feminists argue that patriarchy is underpinned by capitalism. Gender and economic exploitation are interlinked forms of oppression. Frederick Engels offered the ‘warm bath theory’ stating that capitalism created the nuclear family so wives can attend to the needs of proletarian workers, thereby making them more productive. Moreover, in times of war or economic downturn, women can be drawn upon as a reserve army of cheap labour. Thus, for socialist feminists, patriarchy is a direct product of class exploitation. Capitalism must be removed and replaced by socialist system for women to advance in society. The feminist movement must therefore be intertwined with the socialist movement in pushing for revolution and redistribution.
Radical feminists argue that liberal feminists do not go far enough. While they recognise the patriarchy is present in the public sphere, they argue that it originates in the private realm of the home. It’s within the family that gender norms are established, and the subordination of women is normalised. The nuclear family must be abolished, and gender relations radically restructured. Although there are various different proposals, many involve state intervention, such as communal daycare centres which prevent women being trapped in the home. Thus, while all feminists aim to eradicate patriarchy, they disagree regarding its causes and solutions.
There are further disagreements within feminism regarding the strategy of the movement. Liberal feminists are gradualists who favour democratic reform within the existing system, while socialist feminists are revolutionaries who advocate class struggle and the violent overthrow of capitalism. Radical feminists argue for a fundamental restructuring of gender relations in the private sphere. Some contend that patriarchy is intrinsic to the male-female relations. Kate Millet argues that to be fully liberated women must free themselves of heterosexuality and live in separation from men.
Intersectional feminists challenge the presuppositions of earlier traditions by pointing out that gender oppression is not experienced in the same way by different racial, ethnic, and economic groups. The early feminist movement was dominated by middle-class white women who wrongly assumed that patriarchy always operates in the same way. This ignores the complex interlinking forms of oppression. Bell Hooks argued that the feminist movement has not paid attention to the specific forms of oppression faced by working class and BAME women. She argues that feminism needs to become more diverse and understand the intersection between these different forms of oppression, if all women are to be liberated. These differences in strategy show that feminism is more divided in the late 20th century, than it was in the 19th century where it was dominated by the liberal tradition.
Finally, there is significant division within feminism over the notions of equality and difference. The majority of feminists believe in androgyny- the idea that men and women are fundamentally the same and gender distinctions are a social construct. They therefore push to eradicate this artificial difference and achieve equality between the sexes. However, some ‘difference feminists’ argue that this emphasis on equality will lead to women becoming ‘male identified’. In other words, because men exert a dominant power relation, equality will be achieved by women sacrificing their own unique virtues (such as nurture, creativity, and care) to embrace masculine traits such as competitiveness, violence, and aggression. Thus, rather than pursuing equality, these feminists emphasise innate gender differences and advocate separation from men. This highlights another significant division within feminism.
3. Conclusion
In conclusion, while feminism was largely united under the liberal tradition in the 19th century, the advent of new strands means it is now more divided than ever. While all feminists seek to advance the place of women in society through the removal of patriarchy, they disagree on the causes of gender oppression and the methods for its removal. The rise of intersectional feminism has led to further division in the movement, as the unique experience of minorities has gained increased attention. Even the notion of equality, initially a cornerstone of the movement and thinkers such as Mary Wollstonecraft, has been challenged by difference feminists who favour separation and a recognition of women’s intrinsic difference. Therefore, the modern feminist movement is more divided than united.
