Dissecting essay questions in examinations

Information and guidance about breaking down and unpacking essay questions in examinations.

Introduction

Many exams include essay style questions. This means that students are required to provide a reasoned argument in response to a particular question.

​

A key challenge in achieving success is fully understanding what the question is asking you to do. This resource is designed to help ‘unpack’ essay questions so you can see exactly what is and is not required if you are to achieve maximum marks.

​

A number of real exam essay questions will be dissected.

​

NOTE - this is a generic resource and you should find and use guidance from your department to discover what exams in your department entail. This should be in your module handbook or on your module VLE.

A general method of dissection

Each exam, each department and each module will require a specific set of nuanced choices when writing exam essay answers. But, there are some basic general steps that can help you succeed.

​

1. Look for instruction words. These are telling you what to do and a list (non-exhaustive) is found here: Instruction words in examinations.
2. Look for the concepts, theories, key ideas and/or examples that are part of the question. These will be based on your module learning and tell you what intellectual information and understanding to include in your answer.
3. Look for relationships in the question. You may be asked to show a connection between theories, to discuss an apparent correlation, or to discuss how two things interrelate, amongst many other possibilities. Evaluative, evidence based judgement is at the heart of gaining a high mark.

Example question 1 - from Philosophy

‘Critically evaluate the supervaluationist solution to the Sorites Paradoxes’.�Note - One hour was allocated to this question.

1. Look for the instruction words: ‘Critically evaluate’. In simple terms this means to break down theories and ideas in the question, and to supply some form of evidence based judgement.
2. Look for theories, ideas and/or frameworks you must use. ‘Supervaluationist solution’ and ‘Sorites Paradoxes’ are those in this question. This means you must show the examiner that you understand and can use both of these concepts. Using them critically means you show their limits, complexity and strengths/weaknesses etc.
3. Look for relationships you must explore. In this case the ‘supervaluationist solution’ is being applied to the ‘Sorites Paradoxes’. The critical evaluation will be in showing how suitable/efficacious/coherent the solution is to the paradoxes. In exploring this using detail, examples, showing the limits of each concept and drawing upon the work of key theorists and thinkers are key to success.

Example question 2 - from Sociology

‘To what extent might neo-liberalism be opposed to democracy? Use examples to illustrate your answer.’

Note: One hour was allocated to this question.

• Look for the instruction words: ‘To what extent?’, ‘use examples to illustrate’. ‘To what extent?’ is asking for an evidenced judgement, using learning from the module and your thinking based on academic reading, ideas and theories. Using examples to illustrate is asking you to choose examples that further expand on your thinking and/or that add detail to exploring an academic concept.
• Look for theories, ideas and/or frameworks you must use. ‘Neoliberlism’ and ‘democracy’. Each of these are huge ideas, so the question is asking you to use relevant elements of both and as it is a sociology paper, to use them within frameworks of sociological thinking.
• Look for relationships you must explore. In this case the idea that neoliberalism might be opposed to democracy is the relationship. This means using the theoretical and applied understanding of each, including examples, to make a judgement as to whether neoliberalism is opposed to democracy. All judgements must be based on evidence-based thinking, not the student’s opinion.

Example question 3 - from History

‘War is the national industry of Prussia.’ (Honoré Comte de Mirabeau) Discuss’

This was part of a 24 hour examination, sat remotely in 2020.

• Look for the instruction words: ‘Discuss’. This instruction is asking you to consider the statement in a balanced way, using evidence to explore the various aspects of the statement and from multiple perspectives. It should not be a one-sided answer.
• Look for theories, ideas and/or frameworks you must use. In this case you have a statement made by a named person that contains the key ideas. This is asking the student to comment on the society, politics, history, economics etc of Prussia, based on historical evidence, resources and learning in the module.
• Look for relationships you must explore. In this case the relationship is an implied one between the international relations of Prussia (at a point(s) in history) and the internal workings (society, politics, economics, culture) of Prussia. It requires the student to use evidence from their learning in the module to construct a coherent argument.

Example question 4 - from PPE

‘ “The bureau shaping model is theoretically more persuasive than the budget maximising model, but the empirical support for it is weak.” Discuss.’

Note: approximately 1 hour was allocated to answering this question.

• Look for the instruction words: ‘Discuss’. This instruction is asking you to consider the statement in a balanced way, using evidence to explore the various aspects of the statement and from multiple perspectives. In this case there are several elements to discuss.
• Look for theories, ideas and/or frameworks you must use. ‘Bureau shaping model’ and ‘budget maximising model’ are the two key ideas to be considered. The student must show they can understand and use each in the context of the question and be critical by showing the limits, complexity and relative efficacy of each model.
• Look for relationships you must explore. In this case there are two relationships: that the bureau shaping model is theoretically more persuasive than the budget maximising model. This is asking the student to consider only the theoretical (non-applied) understanding of the first model in relation to the theoretical understanding of the second. A second relationship is between empirical evidence and the bureau shaping model. Both of these relationships will need to be explored and used as part of the judgments formed within the essay.

Example question - from an ‘Environment and Geography

‘What do you think are the main disadvantages to using modernization theory

to guide development interventions? In your answer refer to TWO required texts

used during the module.’

Note: approximately 45 minutes was allocated to answering this question.

• Look for the instruction words: ‘Refer to two required texts’. This is a compulsory element that if you don’t include will limit your highest possible mark. The mark scheme will have mark limits for no texts and just one text used. ‘Main disadvantages’ is another. It is instructing you to focus on the disadvantages and to evaluate the two most significant ones, using evidence and logical argument to support your choices.
• Look for theories, ideas and/or frameworks you must use. In this case ‘modernization theory’ and ‘development interventions’. Each of these are clear and defined ideas within the subject area and have been taught in the associated module. The student must show knowledge and understanding of both in their answer to achieve high marks.
• Look for relationships you must explore. There are two. The first is the idea that modernization theory does guide development interventions. The way this is presented suggests a critical evaluation is needed, as you are told there are disadvantages to this relationship. The second is that there are disadvantages to using modernization theory in the way described; this is not to be argued, it is a fact that the student has to use and explore as part of the essay.

A task to prepare for exam essay writing

Pick a past paper or mock examination available for the exam you are preparing for.

• You could try to complete one of the essay questions from the exam under timed conditions.
• You could produce a plan for each essay question, to see if you are prepared to answer similar questions in the exam.
• You could either answer or plan for answering each question, then compare your efforts with course mates to learn from each other.
• You could try to make your own questions from the questions in the past papers. In doing this you might predict this year’s questions! Or more likely, you can explore each possible concept whilst considering how a question could be asked.

Final thoughts

Now you have seen a range of examples that apply the basic principles from the introduction, it is apparent that in each case applying an analytical approach to dissecting exam essay questions reveals what is required from you, as the student.

​

• Always look for instructions.
• Always look for compulsory elements.
• Always look for any facts or relationships that are stated in the question and thus are not to be contradicted.
• Always try to find past papers to become familiar with what is required. Ideally you will also have examiners’ reports and mark schemes to guide you.
• Try to gain feedback from exams you have completed to see where you could have gained more marks.

Next steps

Further resources to develop your dissertation conclusion writing:

• See the rest of the exam writing guide.
• Check all guidance is provided by the university and your department. The university examinations page contains lots of information: University of York Assessment and Examination page.
• Task: Have a look at past papers in each of your modules to see what types of exam essay questions you will be faced with, if any. Use information on the exams page to prepare for each style you will be faced with.