Unit 2: Political Institutions
Comp Gov · Unit 2 · Paper 3

Political Institutions unit test

A test on this unit alone, marked as a percentage and a letter grade — for the test your class is actually sitting, rather than for May. Answer everything, then submit once: seeing the answer to question 3 before attempting question 4 makes the final percentage meaningless.

Paper 1Paper 2Paper 3
Each paper is built from this unit’s 27 terms and is the same for everyone, so a teacher can assign “Unit 2, Paper 3” and every student sits the identical test. Multiple choice is marked objectively; the written sections you mark yourself against the model answer and rubric.
Suggested time 32 min 29 points0/17 attempted
1

Judicial independence, compared

2

Mexico's electoral institute

3

Nigeria's presidential distribution requirement

4

Military and politics

5

Russia's siloviki

6

Mexican Congress

7

Nigeria's National Assembly

8

Russian Federal Assembly

9

Iran's Assembly of Experts and Expediency Council

10

UK House of Commons

11

Parliamentary sovereignty

12

Nigerian President and the federal character principle

Short answer 1. Define or explain: Iran's Supreme Leader

3 pts

Short answer 2. Define or explain: Head of state vs head of government

3 pts

Short answer 3. Define or explain: Vote of no confidence

3 pts

Short answer 4. Define or explain: UK Prime Minister

3 pts

Free response

5 pts

ARGUMENT ESSAY (Question 4). Develop an argument as to whether having an independent legislative branch promotes or discourages corruption in a country. Use one or more of the following course concepts in your response: Separation of powers · Transparency · Accountability. In your response you should: respond to the prompt with a defensible claim or thesis that establishes a line of reasoning using one or more of the provided course concepts; support your claim with at least two pieces of specific and relevant evidence from one or more course countries; use reasoning to explain why your evidence supports your claim; and respond to an opposing or alternate perspective using refutation, concession, or rebuttal.