Chat UniversityExample · Paragraph Builder
Task sheets for a sample Economics statement
LSE BSc Economics · UCL Economics BSc (Econ) · University of Warwick Economics BSc (UCAS L100) · University of Bristol BSc Economics · University of Nottingham Economics BSc Hons
Exactly what you'll get, for a draft we wrote ourselves, with four topics plus work experience and a society role. We never show a statement a student has submitted: those stay private.
Read the draft statement
When my local high street lost three shops in a year, I wanted to know whether it was rents, online shopping or something else. That question about why markets change, and who loses when they do, is why I want to study Economics. For my EPQ I investigated whether the 2016 National Living Wage cut jobs in retail. I read Card and Krueger's study of fast-food restaurants and used ONS data for my county. Employment did not fall much, but hours did, which surprised me. I was fascinated by behavioural economics and gained an insight into how people make irrational decisions after reading Thinking, Fast and Slow. A Planet Money episode on retail closures explained that some shops close even in months when they make a profit, because of fixed costs. This made me think again about my high street. I completed a spring week at Goldman Sachs, where I presented to a panel and developed my teamwork and networking skills. An online course in game theory taught me the prisoner's dilemma and Nash equilibrium. I applied them to supermarket price wars, where each firm cutting prices leaves all of them worse off. As president of my school's economics society, I ran weekly debates on current affairs. I am excited to study Economics at university and to keep asking why markets change.
Write every sentence in your own words. Use the starters only as a guide: if you copy them, your statement may read as AI-written, and UCAS checks every statement for similarity with others.
Where your statement is
Some real work to do first
You have a clear spark (your high street) and three good topics that fit it: your minimum wage EPQ, why shops close, and game theory in supermarket price wars. Build your body paragraphs on these three and cut the Goldman Sachs and society paragraphs. Each paragraph is only two or three sentences at the moment, so the main job is to grow the learning in each one: name the concept, explain it in your own words, and say why it matters.
EPQ: the 2016 National Living Wage, retail jobs and hours
Learning: you don't say what Card and Krueger found, how they tested it, or what standard theory predicts, so the reader can't tell what you took from the reading
3 tasks →
Fixed costs and the decision to close a shop
Action: the episode isn't named exactly, and the claim is vague. A profit on what: on its day-to-day costs, or on all its costs?
3 tasks →
Game theory and supermarket price wars
Spark and Action: there's no reason for starting, and 'an online course' isn't named (which course, which provider)
3 tasks →
Cut from your statement
- Behavioural economics (Thinking, Fast and Slow) (paragraph 3): You leave this out because it's only an optional module at some of your universities, not core at all five. Right now it names a book but no concept you actually learned, and it has no link to your high street story.
- Goldman Sachs spring week (paragraph 5): This is finance work experience about presenting and teamwork, with no economics learning, so cut it.
- School economics society president (paragraph 7): This is a leadership role inside school, not an academic topic you explored. Cut it, or squeeze it into a short phrase somewhere else.
Need new super-curriculars, or help choosing them? Use Personal Statement Builder Pro. Need to strengthen the ones you have? That's what these task sheets are for.
Introduction
Your introduction
First fix: Develop the spark before you name the subject
Too short
Introduction
Your introduction
First fix: Develop the spark before you name the subject
Working
- Your spark is real and specific: three shops closing on your own high street is a moment only you could write about, and it avoids generic 'always been passionate' openings.
- It sets up your kept topics well. 'Why shops close' leads straight into your firm costs paragraph, 'online shopping' hints at competition (your price wars paragraph), and 'who loses' connects to the workers in your minimum wage EPQ.
- It suits all five courses. Nothing in it points to behavioural economics, which you are cutting, and it frames Economics as asking questions about real-world problems, which every course description stresses.
Missing
- At 229 characters it is well under the 400 minimum, so the spark is named but not explored.
- There is nothing on what you did with the question after you noticed the shops closing. Did you look into rents, talk to anyone, or find the explanation was more complicated than you expected?
- The jump from one high street to 'why markets change' happens too fast. One step showing how a local puzzle became a wider economic question would make the link convincing.
What to change
- 1Develop the spark before you name the subject. Add one or two sentences after the shops closing about what you noticed or tried to find out, and what surprised you. This is where most of your missing characters should go.
- 2Show how the question grew into your three threads. Without listing your paragraphs, let the intro hint that the question opened up into costs for firms, how rival businesses compete, and what happens to workers. Your phrase 'who loses when they do' is a good hook, so keep it and build on it.
- 3Hint that you want answers backed by evidence. Every course you are applying to puts heavy weight on testing ideas against data (econometrics, statistics). A short signal that you wanted to know which explanation was actually true, not just which ones were possible, would suit all five courses.
Show your current introduction
When my local high street lost three shops in a year, I wanted to know whether it was rents, online shopping or something else. That question about why markets change, and who loses when they do, is why I want to study Economics.
Paragraph 2
EPQ: the 2016 National Living Wage, retail jobs and hours
Missing: Learning: you don't say what Card and Krueger found, how they tested it, or what standard theory predicts, so the reader can't tell what you took from the reading
Needs depth
Paragraph 2
EPQ: the 2016 National Living Wage, retail jobs and hours
Missing: Learning: you don't say what Card and Krueger found, how they tested it, or what standard theory predicts, so the reader can't tell what you took from the reading
Where it is now
Working
- Action: you name a real study (Card and Krueger) and a real data source (ONS data for your county), so the reader can see what you actually did
- Learning: your finding that employment held up but hours fell is specific and is your own result, which makes it the best part of the paragraph
- Spark: the question is narrow and testable: one policy, one year, one sector
Missing
- Learning: you don't say what Card and Krueger found, how they tested it, or what standard theory predicts, so the reader can't tell what you took from the reading
- Learning: you say the result surprised you but not what you expected or which idea explains the gap between jobs and hours
- Why it matters: nothing yet on why the jobs-versus-hours distinction matters to someone setting or judging minimum wage policy
Show your current paragraph
For my EPQ I investigated whether the 2016 National Living Wage cut jobs in retail. I read Card and Krueger's study of fast-food restaurants and used ONS data for my county. Employment did not fall much, but hours did, which surprised me.
Your three tasks
Do these as rough notes first. Each one fills the matching gap in the outline below.
Pin down what theory predicts and how Card and Krueger tested it
Reread Card and Krueger (1994). Note what a simple competitive labour market model predicts when a minimum wage is set above the market wage. Then note how they compared New Jersey, where the minimum wage rose, with eastern Pennsylvania, where it didn't, and what they found.
Look up:
- The competitive supply-and-demand model of the labour market
- Difference-in-differences: comparing the change in a treated group with the change in a similar untreated group
- Monopsony (Joan Robinson, The Economics of Imperfect Competition), one explanation of why a minimum wage might not cut jobs
- Neumark and Wascher's critique of Card and Krueger, using payroll data instead of phone surveys
Write: 2 to 3 sentences in your own words: what the standard model predicts, how Card and Krueger set up their comparison, and what they found.
Explain your own finding
Go back to your ONS figures. Write down what you expected after reading Task 1, then what employment and hours actually did. Learn the difference between the extensive margin (how many people are employed) and the intensive margin (how many hours each person works), and think about one reason your county data can't prove the wage caused the change.
Look up:
- Extensive margin versus intensive margin of labour demand
- Jardim et al. (2017), the University of Washington study of Seattle's minimum wage, which looked at hours as well as jobs
- Low Pay Commission reports on the impact of the National Living Wage (check this)
- Confounding factors: other things that changed in retail around 2016, such as the growth of online shopping
Write: 2 to 3 sentences: what you expected, what the data showed, the concept that explains the difference, and one limitation of your data.
Say why the jobs-versus-hours distinction matters
Think about someone judging whether a minimum wage rise worked. If they only count jobs, what might they miss about workers' weekly pay? Consider how this affects the Low Pay Commission when it recommends the next rate.
Look up:
- The Low Pay Commission's annual recommendation on the National Living Wage rate
- The difference between the hourly wage and weekly earnings
- Card and Krueger's focus on headcount compared with studies that measure hours
Write: 1 to 2 sentences: how measuring only job numbers could mislead a policymaker, and what they should measure instead.
Then write it from this outline
Swap each coloured gap for what you wrote in that task, in your own words, then smooth it into one paragraph of about 700 to 1,000 characters.
Spark: one sentence on why you picked the 2016 National Living Wage as your EPQ question, without repeating the high street story from your introduction For my EPQ I investigated whether the 2016 National Living Wage cut jobs in retail. I began with Card and Krueger's study of fast-food restaurants. Task 1: what the standard model predicts, how they compared New Jersey with Pennsylvania, and what they found, in your own words Using ONS data for my county, I expected Task 2: what you expected after the reading, but employment did not fall much while hours did. Task 2: the concept that explains the gap between jobs and hours, plus one limitation of your county data This matters because Task 3: how counting only jobs could mislead someone setting or judging the minimum wage, and what they should measure instead. University link: one sentence on what you want to study further, e.g. the econometric methods needed to separate the wage's effect from other causes
Paragraph 4
Fixed costs and the decision to close a shop
Missing: Action: the episode isn't named exactly, and the claim is vague. A profit on what: on its day-to-day costs, or on all its costs?
Needs depth
Paragraph 4
Fixed costs and the decision to close a shop
Missing: Action: the episode isn't named exactly, and the claim is vague. A profit on what: on its day-to-day costs, or on all its costs?
Where it is now
Working
- Action: you name a real source (a Planet Money episode on retail closures), which is a good start.
- Learning: you've spotted a real puzzle, that a shop can close in a month when it makes a profit, and that fixed costs explain it.
Missing
- Action: the episode isn't named exactly, and the claim is vague. A profit on what: on its day-to-day costs, or on all its costs?
- Learning: you name fixed costs but don't explain them, and you don't explain why they lead to closure. This should be about half the paragraph.
- Why it matters: the paragraph ends with 'made me think again about my high street'. That repeats your introduction and doesn't say what changed in your thinking.
Show your current paragraph
A Planet Money episode on retail closures explained that some shops close even in months when they make a profit, because of fixed costs. This made me think again about my high street.
Your three tasks
Do these as rough notes first. Each one fills the matching gap in the outline below.
Pin down exactly what the episode claimed
Listen to the episode again and write down its exact title. Note which costs it counted as fixed (for example rent, business rates, lease length) and what it meant by a profitable month: more money coming in than the shop's day-to-day costs, or more than all its costs.
Write: 1 to 2 sentences naming the episode and stating its claim precisely, including the fixed costs it mentioned.
Learn the difference between shutting down and leaving the market
Read the chapter on firms' costs and decisions in an introductory microeconomics textbook. Learn fixed costs and variable costs, and the difference between the short run and the long run. In the short run, a firm stays open if its revenue covers its variable costs, because it must pay fixed costs like rent anyway. In the long run, for example when a lease ends, the rent becomes avoidable, so the firm compares revenue with all of its costs.
Look up:
- The chapter on firms in competitive markets in Mankiw's Principles of Economics (shutdown and exit decisions)
- Average variable cost compared with average total cost
- Contribution margin: revenue minus variable costs
- Sunk costs and why they shouldn't affect forward-looking decisions
Write: 3 to 4 sentences in your own words: what fixed and variable costs are, using a shop's real costs as examples; the short-run rule for staying open compared with the long-run decision to close; and why a month that covers day-to-day costs can still mean the shop is losing money overall. Use no formulae or symbols.
Work out why this matters beyond one shop
Think about what the short-run versus long-run distinction means for someone trying to protect high streets. It may explain why closures often happen when a lease ends, and why cutting fixed costs and cutting variable costs have different effects. Read about one UK policy or report on high-street costs.
Look up:
- The Portas Review (2011) on the future of high streets
- The Grimsey Review (2013)
- UK business rates and retail rate relief (check the current scheme)
- Upward-only rent review clauses in UK commercial leases
Write: 2 sentences explaining how this idea changes what a council, landlord or government should do about closures, naming one specific policy or report.
Then write it from this outline
Swap each coloured gap for what you wrote in that task, in your own words, then smooth it into one paragraph of about 700 to 1,000 characters.
Spark: one sentence on the specific puzzle that made you look into this, without retelling the high-street story from your introduction Listening to Task 1: exact title of the Planet Money episode, I learned that Task 1: the episode's precise claim about shops closing after a profitable month, and the fixed costs it named. Task 2: your own explanation of fixed and variable costs, using a shop's real costs as examples Task 2: in words, the short-run rule for staying open compared with the long-run decision to close for good Task 2: why covering day-to-day costs in one month does not mean the shop covers all its costs This suggests that Task 3: how this changes what a council, landlord or government should do about closures, naming one policy or report.
Paragraph 6
Game theory and supermarket price wars
Missing: Spark and Action: there's no reason for starting, and 'an online course' isn't named (which course, which provider)
Needs depth
Paragraph 6
Game theory and supermarket price wars
Missing: Spark and Action: there's no reason for starting, and 'an online course' isn't named (which course, which provider)
Where it is now
Working
- Learning: you name two real concepts, the prisoner's dilemma and Nash equilibrium, not just 'game theory'
- Action: you applied the theory to a real market, supermarket price wars, which turns a course into your own analysis
Missing
- Spark and Action: there's no reason for starting, and 'an online course' isn't named (which course, which provider)
- Learning: you name the concepts but don't explain them. Say why each supermarket cuts prices whatever its rival does, and what makes that an equilibrium
- Why it matters: nothing yet on how this changes a decision for a regulator, a firm or economic theory
Show your current paragraph
An online course in game theory taught me the prisoner's dilemma and Nash equilibrium. I applied them to supermarket price wars, where each firm cutting prices leaves all of them worse off.
Your three tasks
Do these as rough notes first. Each one fills the matching gap in the outline below.
Pin down the core concept
Check the exact title and provider of your course. Then draw a 2x2 payoff table for two supermarkets that can each keep prices high or cut them. Find each firm's dominant strategy and the Nash equilibrium, and see why both firms end up worse off than if both had kept prices high.
Look up:
- The classic prisoner's dilemma payoff matrix (Albert Tucker's formulation)
- Dominant strategy versus Nash equilibrium: how they differ
- The Bertrand model of price competition
Write: 2 to 3 sentences, in words and without symbols, explaining why each supermarket cuts its price whatever its rival does, and why the result is stable but worse for both. Also note the course's exact name for the Action sentence.
Find where the simple model breaks
Real supermarkets meet again every week, so a one-off prisoner's dilemma is too simple. Read about repeated games and how firms can hold prices up without ever agreeing to do so. Pick ONE idea and work out what it adds.
Look up:
- Robert Axelrod's computer tournaments and the tit-for-tat strategy (The Evolution of Cooperation, 1984)
- Tacit collusion in repeated games (the folk theorem, in outline)
- Price-match promises as a commitment device that can make price cuts pointless
Write: 2 sentences: one limit of the one-off prisoner's dilemma for supermarkets, and what your chosen repeated-game idea predicts instead.
Explain why it matters
Think about someone who has to act on this: a competition regulator deciding whether matching prices means competition or quiet coordination, or a supermarket deciding whether to start a price war. Look at what competition law can and can't stop.
Look up:
- The UK Competition and Markets Authority's role in grocery markets (check this for any recent reviews)
- The Competition Act 1998: explicit cartels are illegal, but tacit coordination is much harder to prove
Write: 1 to 2 sentences on how your learning changes a specific decision made by a regulator or a firm.
Then write it from this outline
Swap each coloured gap for what you wrote in that task, in your own words, then smooth it into one paragraph of about 700 to 1,000 characters.
Spark: one sentence on what made you want to understand how rival firms react to each other. Don't reuse the high street from your introduction. To find out, I took Task 1: exact name and provider of the online game theory course, which introduced the prisoner's dilemma and Nash equilibrium. Applying them to supermarket price wars, I found that Task 1: 2 to 3 sentences in your own words on why each supermarket cuts its price whatever its rival does, and why that stable outcome leaves both worse off. However, Task 2: one limit of the one-off prisoner's dilemma for supermarkets that meet every week. Task 2: what your chosen repeated-game idea predicts instead. This matters because Task 3: 1 to 2 sentences on how this changes a specific decision by a competition regulator or a supermarket.
Conclusion
Your conclusion
First fix: Restate your core question in new words
Too short
Conclusion
Your conclusion
First fix: Restate your core question in new words
Working
- It goes back to your opening question, so you clearly meant to close the circle.
- It adds no new information and stays clear of careers talk.
Missing
- 'Keep asking why markets change' repeats your intro almost word for word instead of restating the idea in fresh words.
- It skips the middle of the circle: there is no reminder of how you explored the question through your EPQ, game theory and firm costs.
- 'I am excited to study Economics at university' is a generic ending that any applicant could write, and it says nothing about where you want to take your interest next.
What to change
- 1Restate your core question in new words. Keep the idea of markets changing and someone losing out, but express it differently from the intro, perhaps through what you now understand that you didn't when the shops first closed.
- 2Briefly look back on how you explored it. In one sentence, draw your three body topics together (wages and jobs, strategic pricing, firm costs) as parts of one investigation. Don't introduce anything the body hasn't already covered.
- 3End on where you want to go next, not on excitement. Replace the 'excited' line with what you want to learn to do at university, tied to content all five courses share, such as microeconomic theory or using econometrics to test your ideas against data. Don't name any single university.
Show your current conclusion
I am excited to study Economics at university and to keep asking why markets change.
Get this for your own statement
Task sheets for every paragraph, feedback on your introduction and conclusion, and a full review once you've rewritten it.