How toppers approached this question
1. (b) All correct decisions are honest and all incorrect decisions are dishonest. Do you agree? How should the correctness and incorrectness of a decision be decided?
How toppers built answers of this type: the structure spine and the moves they converged on. Aggregated across real past-paper answers for this paper and directive, not this one question, so no question-specific evidence is shown. No answer text is reproduced.
The topper method
Stance then justify
The spine toppers built
Open
- Define the key term first
- Context-hook opening
- Roadmap statement
Build
- Both sides before the verdict
- Numbered enumeration
- Directive-mirroring headers
Close
- Verdict conclusion
- Forward-looking close
Moves they converged on
- Example as evidence80% of answers
Tag a concrete example explicitly as evidence.
- Verdict conclusion66% of answers
End with a clear verdict.
- Both sides before the verdict63% of answers
Weigh both sides before taking a stand.
- Stance then justify61% of answers
Take a stance, then justify it.
- Define the key term first58% of answers
Open by defining the central term.
Evidence toppers carried (per answer)
Examples ~2Thinkers ~1Concepts ~1Principles ~1People ~1Other anchors ~1Statutes ~1Current events ~1
GS4 · Stance then justify: derived from 59 real past-paper answers: counts, not copied prose
Write your own answer to this question
Mark my answer freeMethod is derived from real past-paper answers as anonymized aggregate signal. Construction moves and counts, never copied answer text.