Thoughts on HSC mark given for this answer? (1 Viewer)

[swagmeister]

Hey guys,

This was a question that after the exam many of my classmates as well as people on BoS seemed to find weird.

2015 HSC Economics 24 (a) - given 3/4:

How does the international division of labour contribute to globalisation?

Globalisation refers to the breaking down of natural and man made barriers to the movement of trade, finance, investment, labour and transnational corporations across borders, as nations connections are increased. The international division of labour, meaning that individuals can work in countries whereby that country has an absolute or comparative advantage in the production of a particular good, helps to contribute to globalisation by increasing ties between countries in that their citizens may be located all over the world. It also contributes to the benefits of globalisation by helping economies of scale to be better achieved, as outputs of a particular good or service can be completed in particular countries. It also encourages other aspects of globalisation to occur, as ideas as well as technologies spread around the world as workers migrate, and will also help to encourage international trade and financial flows because migrating citizens retain their connections with their home country.

The difference between 3 and 4 in the marking criteria were based upon either a sound or comprehensive understanding of how the international division of labour contributes to globalisation.

Anyone have any thoughts on this? I reckon I should have been given 4/4

(edit - see my last post, I realised that in the stress of the exam I forgot to link the whole absolute/comparative advantage stuff to the skills that workers had, which is why they may migrate and so forth)

 

[BandSixFix]

"The international division of labour, meaning that individuals can work in countries whereby that country has an absolute or comparative advantage in the production of a particular good, helps to contribute to globalisation by increasing ties between countries in that their citizens may be located all over the world."

Do you think it was this sentence? I don't understand the part "whereby country has an absolute or comparative production of a particular good" - Isn't the international division of labour promoted by better working conditions etc etc? Just my 2 cents. Might have pushed it down to a 'sound' and not a 'comprehensive'.

 

[swagmeister]

I see what you mean - I didn't really tie things into the skills the individual has (that's what I was getting at - you can work out what you're good at then move to a country that's good at producing it, that's the basis for the international division of labour). I actually reckon that's where the mark was lost, because I jumped from absolute/comparative advantage to citizens of one country ending up all over the world.


Looking at it more now I might be going a bit off what you were saying but I feel that's how I lost the mark - and annoying considering the circumstances of the exam but it is what it is... Got 19/20 and 20/20 raw for the extended responses so I can't not be happy with that

What you're suggesting is also right - e.g. improved working conditions in India might lead an Australian to move to India because it is very competitive in producing something that requires the skills the Australian has, whereas they wouldn't be able to fund much good work domestically. In that sense, improved working conditions and overall quality of live in certain countries almost becomes a prerequisite for the international division of labour to occur.