Case Study Practical Exercise for Year 10 WJEC Politics | 案例分析实战演练：Year 10 WJEC 政治

📚 Case Study Practical Exercise for Year 10 WJEC Politics | 案例分析实战演练：Year 10 WJEC 政治

In Year 10 WJEC Politics, case studies are essential tools for connecting abstract theories to real‑world political events. This article provides a step‑by‑step practical exercise to help you analyse political issues, structure your answers, and build exam confidence. You will work through three carefully selected case studies that reflect the WJEC specification.

在 Year 10 WJEC 政治课程中，案例分析是将抽象理论与现实政治事件联系起来的重要工具。本文提供分步实战练习，帮助您分析政治议题、组织答案并建立考试信心。您将依次完成三个精心挑选的案例，它们紧扣 WJEC 考纲要求。

1. What Is a Political Case Study? | 什么是政治案例分析？

A political case study examines a specific event, decision, or institution to explore wider political concepts such as power, representation, sovereignty, or participation. It involves breaking down the context, applying key terms, and evaluating outcomes.

政治案例分析通过剖析具体事件、决策或制度，来探讨权力、代表、主权或参与等更广泛的政治概念。它需要拆解背景、应用关键术语并评估结果。

For WJEC, you are expected to use contemporary examples from the UK political system. Typical topics include devolution, the role of Parliament, the Prime Minister’s powers, and electoral systems in action.

在 WJEC 考试中，你需要引用英国政治制度的当代实例。常见主题包括权力下放、议会角色、首相权力以及选举制度的实际运作。

2. How to Select a Strong Case Study | 如何选择恰当的案例

Choose a case that has a clear link to the specification content. It should be recent (within the last 10 years) and have enough depth for analysis. Consider questions like: Does it involve a clash between institutions? Does it illustrate a democratic principle?

选择的案例应与考纲内容有明确关联。案例应较新（近十年内），且有足够的分析深度。可思考：它是否涉及机构间的冲突？是否体现了一项民主原则？

Excellent sources include BBC News, UK Parliament website, and reputable think tanks. Always verify facts and note different viewpoints to strengthen evaluation.

优质信息来源包括 BBC 新闻、英国议会官网及信誉良好的智库。务必核实事实并记录不同观点，以增强评价能力。

3. Structuring Your Case Study Analysis | 构建案例分析框架

A clear framework helps you stay focused under timed conditions. Use the PEEL approach adapted for politics: Point (main argument), Evidence (details from the case), Explanation (how this links to political theory), and Link (evaluate significance or make a connection to wider issues).

清晰的框架有助于在限时条件下保持专注。使用适用于政治学的 PEEL 方法：P 论点（主要观点）、E 证据（案例细节）、E 解释（如何与政治理论关联）和 L 联系（评估重要性或关联更广泛议题）。

In the WJEC exam, you will often be asked to ‘use your knowledge of a case study’. This means you must describe what happened, explain why it is significant, and offer a balanced conclusion.

在 WJEC 考试中，常要求“运用案例研究的知识”。这意味着你必须描述发生的事，解释为何它重要，并给出平衡的结论。

4. Case Study 1: The Brexit Referendum and Parliamentary Sovereignty | 案例一：脱欧公投与议会主权

The 2016 EU referendum is a classic WJEC case study. The vote to leave the EU raised profound questions about where sovereignty lies – with Parliament or with the people? The subsequent legal battles and parliamentary votes illustrate the tension between direct democracy and representative institutions.

2016 年脱欧公投是典型的 WJEC 案例。脱欧投票引发了深刻的主权归属问题——主权在议会还是在人民？随后的法律争端和议会投票体现了直接民主与代议制机构之间的紧张关系。

Key events include the High Court ruling in Miller (2017) that Parliament must vote to trigger Article 50, and the repeated rejections of Theresa May’s withdrawal agreement. These moments highlight the principle of parliamentary sovereignty in practice.

关键事件包括高等法院在“米勒案”（2017）中裁定必须由议会投票触发《里斯本条约》第50条，以及特蕾莎·梅的脱欧协议多次被否决。这些时刻凸显了议会主权原则的实际运用。

5. Analysing the Brexit Case Study | 分析脱欧案例

Apply the PEEL model. Point: The Brexit process shows that parliamentary sovereignty remains a cornerstone of the UK constitution, even when facing a popular mandate. Evidence: The Supreme Court stated that the government cannot use prerogative powers to override established legal rights. Explanation: This confirms A.V. Dicey’s classic doctrine that Parliament is the supreme law‑making body. Link: The case also exposes weaknesses in representative democracy, as many MPs voted against their constituents’ expressed preferences.

应用 PEEL 模型。论点：脱欧进程表明议会主权仍是英国宪制的基石，即使面对民意授权。证据：最高法院指出政府不能动用特权推翻既有的法律权利。解释：这印证了戴雪关于议会是最高立法机构的经典学说。联系：该案例也暴露了代议制民主的弱点，不少议员投票违背了其选民的明确意愿。

For evaluation, you could discuss whether the 2016 referendum enhanced or undermined representative democracy. Note that the WJEC mark scheme rewards the ability to offer a reasoned, two‑sided conclusion.

评价时，可讨论 2016 年公投是加强还是削弱了代议制民主。注意，WJEC 评分标准奖励能够给出有理由、两面对比结论的能力。

6. Case Study 2: The Debate over Electoral Reform in the UK | 案例二：英国选举制度改革之争

The United Kingdom uses First‑Past‑the‑Post (FPTP) for general elections, but critics argue it produces disproportionate results. The 2011 Alternative Vote (AV) referendum gave voters a chance to change the system. 67.9% voted against AV, and turnout was low (42%).

英国大选采用简单多数制（FPTP），但批评者认为它导致得票与议席不成比例。2011 年“排序复选制”（AV）公投让选民有机会改变制度。67.9% 投票反对 AV，投票率仅 42%。

This case study allows you to explore arguments for and against electoral reform. Supporters of FPTP emphasise strong government; supporters of proportional representation (PR) emphasise fairness and wider choice.

通过该案例，你可以探讨支持和反对选举改革的不同论点。FPTP 的支持者强调强势政府；比例代表制（PR）的支持者则强调公平和更广泛的选择。

7. Applying Theory to Electoral Reform | 将理论应用于选举改革

Link the case study to core political concepts. Legitimacy: Does FPTP produce governments with a genuine mandate? In 2005, Labour won 55% of seats with only 35% of the vote. Representation: Smaller parties like the Greens are systematically under‑represented. Accountability: FPTP makes it easier to remove a government, as seen in 2010 when the Labour government lost its majority.

将案例与核心政治概念关联。合法性：FPTP 是否产生具有真实民意授权的政府？2005 年，工党仅以 35% 得票率赢得 55% 的议席。代表：绿党等小党系统性代表性不足。问责：FPTP 使更换政府更容易，例如 2010 年工党政府失去多数席位。

Encourage students to draw a table comparing FPTP with alternatives. Use the following format to organise revision notes:

鼓励学生绘制对比 FPTP 与其他制度的表格。可用下列格式整理复习笔记：

Feature | 特征	FPTP | 简单多数制	AV | 排序复选制	PR | 比例代表制
Simplicity | 简易性	High	Medium	Low
Constituency link | 选区联系	Strong	Strong	Weaker
Fairness of result | 结果公平	Low	Medium	High

8. Case Study 3: The Human Rights Act and Judicial–Executive Tensions | 案例三：《人权法案》与司法—行政紧张关系

The Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) incorporated the European Convention on Human Rights into UK law. This gave judges the power to issue declarations of incompatibility when domestic laws breach Convention rights. The case study focuses on the tension between an independent judiciary and the executive’s desire to control immigration.

1998 年《人权法案》将《欧洲人权公约》纳入英国法律。这使法官有权在国内法与公约权利抵触时发布“不相容宣告”。该案例聚焦于独立司法机构与行政机关控制移民意愿之间的紧张关系。

A prominent example is the Belmarsh case (2004), where the House of Lords ruled that detaining foreign terrorist suspects without trial was discriminatory and breached human rights. The government was forced to replace the legislation with control orders.

一个显著例子是贝尔马什监狱案（2004），上议院裁定未经审判无限期羁押外国恐怖嫌疑人具有歧视性并侵犯人权。政府被迫以控制令取代该法。

9. Structuring an Exam‑Style Answer on the Belmarsh Case | 围绕贝尔马什案构建考试式答案

Begin your answer by stating the significance: the case illustrates how the judiciary can check executive power under the HRA. Then describe the facts: the Anti‑Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 allowed detention without charge; the Law Lords found it disproportionate. Finally, evaluate the implications for the separation of powers and the protection of rights.

作答时先阐明其意义：该案表明司法机构可依据《人权法案》制约行政权力。接着描述事实：2001 年《反恐怖主义、犯罪及安全法》允许未经起诉即羁押；大法官们认为其不成比例。最后，评价其对权力分立和权利保护的影响。

Use political vocabulary precisely: judicial review, ultra vires, declaration of incompatibility. Show awareness that the HRA preserves parliamentary sovereignty because declarations are not legally binding.

精确使用政治词汇：司法审查、越权、不相容宣告。要表现出意识到《人权法案》保留了议会主权，因为此类宣告不具有法律约束力。

10. Common Mistakes in Case Study Answers | 案例分析答案的常见错误

Many students simply retell the story without analysis. Avoid lengthy chronology. Instead, select two or three key moments and explain why they matter for the political concept you are examining.

许多学生只是复述事件而不加分析。避免冗长的时间线梳理。相反，选取两三个关键时刻，解释它们为何对你所考察的政治概念重要。

Another common error is ignoring the ‘evaluate’ command. Always discuss alternative interpretations. For instance, in the Brexit case, acknowledge that some argue the referendum result demonstrates that popular sovereignty now overrides parliamentary sovereignty in practice.

另一个常见错误是忽略“评价”指令。一定要讨论相反的解释。比如在脱欧案例中，承认有人认为公投结果表明人民主权在实际中已超越议会主权。

Also, remember to define key terms in your introduction. You cannot earn high marks for knowledge and understanding if you do not demonstrate precise political language.

同时，记得在引言中定义关键术语。如果不展现精准的政治语言，就难以在知识与理解方面获得高分。

11. Putting It All Together: A Practice Task | 综合练习：一份实战任务

Try this WJEC‑style question: ‘Using a case study you have studied, evaluate the extent to which the judiciary has been effective in protecting citizens’ rights in the UK.’ Spend 5 minutes planning, then write a full PEEL paragraph for the Belmarsh case, a paragraph for a counter‑example (e.g. the court’s inability to strike down primary legislation), and a balanced conclusion.

试做这道 WJEC 风格的问题：“运用你学过的案例，评价英国司法机构在保护公民权利方面的有效性。” 花 5 分钟计划，然后为贝尔马什案写一个完整的 PEEL 段落、一个反面例子段落（如法院无法推翻一级立法），以及一个平衡的结论。

Self‑assessment check: Does your answer use terms like ‘declaration of incompatibility’? Does it mention that the HRA is not entrenched and could be repealed by a simple Act of Parliament? Does it reach a judgement? Master these elements to secure top marks.

自我评估清单：你的答案是否使用了“不相容宣告”等术语？是否提到《人权法案》并非牢固确立，可被一项简单的议会法令废除？是否给出了判断？掌握这些要素，就能确保获得高分。

12. Final Tips for Year 10 Success | Year 10 成功备考的最后建议

Build a personal case study bank in a revision notebook. For each topic on the specification, keep one detailed case with dates, key figures, and two evaluation points. Regularly practise timed answers using the PEEL structure.

在复习笔记本中建立个人案例库。针对考纲的每个主题，保留一个包含日期、关键人物和两点评分点的详细案例。用 PEEL 结构定期练习限时作答。

Remember, markers want to see that you can apply political knowledge, not just recite facts. Every time you use an example, ask yourself: what does this tell us about the distribution of power in the UK political system?

记住，考官希望看到你能应用政治知识，而非仅背诵事实。每次使用例子时，反问自己：这告诉了我们有关英国政治体制中权力分配的什么信息？

---

Published by TutorHao | Politics Revision Series | aleveler.com

更多咨询请联系16621398022（同微信）