Methoden der Politik- und Wirtschaftswissenschaft: Materialanalyse, Statistiken, Quellenkritik, Urteilsbildung
This domain tests procedural competence: can you extract information from a text, chart or statistic, criticise the source and reach a defensible judgement? In Hesse these skills carry marks in every Aufgabenart, including the final evaluation.
Operators and structure
Know what each operator demands: beschreiben/darstellen means reproducing content in your own words without interpretation; analysieren means breaking down structure, argument and data; erklären means causal explanation; erörtern means weighing arguments and reaching a reasoned position. A material analysis follows introduction (source, date, author, genre, theme), structured main part and short conclusion; the evaluation is separate and criterion-led.
Reading statistics
Check title, source, year, units and base. Distinguish absolute from relative figures, nominal from real values, levels from rates of change, stock from flow, per capita from aggregate, and percentage from percentage points. With index series, note the base year (e.g. 2015 = 100) and remember that a rise of five index points is not five per cent. Ask what is missing: comparison group, sample size, regional scope.
Source criticism
Identify the author's position (business association, union, ministry, NGO), the date and occasion, the addressee and the argumentative strategy: thesis, premises, evidence, rhetoric, implicit assumptions. A one-sided source is not worthless - state what it can and cannot support.
Judgement
Separate Sachurteil (empirical, testable) from Werturteil (normative). Name criteria - Legitimität, Effizienz, Freiheit, Gerechtigkeit, Nachhaltigkeit - weigh them, address the strongest counter-argument, and only then conclude.
Worked example
Figure: nominal GDP +3.0%, real GDP +0.2% in the same year. Reasoning: the gap is the deflator, roughly 2.8% inflation; nominal growth is partly price illusion; real growth per capita would be lower still if the population grew. So "the economy grew by 3%" misreads the data, and "prosperity rose by 3%" is doubly wrong.
Traps
Describing instead of analysing; calling a single-year movement a trend; confusing per cent and percentage points; comparing nominal sums across years; ignoring the index base; asserting an opinion without criteria or a counter-argument.