Edexcel A-Level Politics 9PL0 · Paper 3 USA · Content area 5 of 6

5. Democracy and participation

elections and the Electoral College · parties · pressure groups · participation debates and the UK comparison.
← All areasPurple = thinker / institution · Orange = example
Every bar below is a drop-down and starts closed. Click one to open it.
Progress
5.1 Elections and the Electoral College

Essential How Americans elect presidents and members of Congress.

The specification
5.1.1Presidential elections and their significance
Key terminology - tick the terms you can define:
The main processes to elect a US president, including the constitutional requirements, the invisible primary, primaries and caucuses, the role of National Party Conventions and the electoral college, and the resulting party system.
The importance of incumbency on a president seeking a second term.
5.1.2Campaign finance
Key terminology - tick the terms you can define:
The role of campaign finance and the current legislation on campaign finance, including McCain-Feingold reforms 2002 and Citizens United vs FEC 2010.

Wording above is the Pearson specification, unchanged. Tick a line only when you could answer a question on it without notes.

Past questions - how it has been examined
  • Directly: 2019 Q3c (procedures for electing presidents and Congress).
  • Partially: the democracy-and-participation debates.
  • Also asked (2023 on): 2023 Q3c (low turnout the biggest problem); 2024 Q1b (campaign finance and party funding).
What examiners reward and penalise
  • Stronger: use the Electoral College and Citizens United precisely.
  • Weaker: blur elections, parties and pressure groups together.
One way to get high marks
  • Credited: the Electoral College can distort the popular will; money shapes access.
  • Evidence: the Electoral College (2000, 2016); Citizens United and super PACs.

The 30-mark essays (Section C). Marks split 10/10/10 across AO1 (knowledge), AO2 (analysis) and AO3 (evaluation), so an answer that describes without judging gives away a third of the marks. Examiners reward "a clear and consistent line of argument": decide your answer before you write, argue it in every paragraph, weigh the counter-argument as you go, and reach "fully substantiated" judgements. A one-sided essay is capped at Level 2 however much it knows. Structure by theme, never by date and never as a list of examples.

The 12-mark questions (Q1 and Q2). Marked on AO1 and AO2 only, 6 marks each. There is no AO3, so no introduction, no conclusion and no overall judgement. Write three short, dense paragraphs, each making a direct US-UK comparison: "in the US... whereas in the UK...". Describing the two systems side by side without comparing them loses the AO2 marks, and discussing only one country caps the answer at Level 1. On Q2 you must also apply one of the three comparative theories (rational, cultural, structural); leaving theory out caps the answer at Level 3.

Arguments and counter-arguments

Are US electoral procedures democratic?

Yes

  • Point. American voters get to make choices at many different levels of the system. Explanation. This gives citizens far more opportunities to take part, so participation in US elections is unusually wide. Example. Voters choose each party's candidates in primaries, and elections come round frequently. Evaluation. However, the Electoral College can still override the popular vote, so wide participation does not always decide the final outcome.

No

  • Point. US elections are distorted by the Electoral College and by the role of money. Explanation. Because of these distortions, the result of an election can defy what the majority of voters actually chose. Example. In 2016 the winner of the popular vote lost the presidency, and super PACs channel huge sums of money into campaigns. Evaluation. Reform of these problems is blocked, so the distortions look set to continue.
Best judgement. US elections are highly participatory but the Electoral College and campaign money can distort the popular will, so they are democratic in form but flawed in effect.
Using it in essays
  • 30-mark: the procedures for electing presidents and Congress are democratic.
  • Topic sentence: "US elections offer wide participation but the Electoral College and money skew the result."
Wider context
Helpful context

Citizens United (Area 4) links elections to the Court's reading of free speech.

Examination priority

Essential Elections are central to the participation debate.

Voting behaviour: who votes how
RaceBlack voters vote heavily Democratic; Hispanic voters lean Democratic but less uniformly.
ReligionWhite evangelicals vote strongly Republican; the religiously unaffiliated lean Democratic.
Gender and ageWomen and younger voters lean Democratic; men and older voters lean Republican.
EducationThe newest divide: graduates now lean Democratic, non-graduates Republican.

Split-ticket voting has collapsed as the parties polarised, and turnout stays low by democratic standards, with abstention highest among the young and the low-paid. For the 2021 question on voting factors, lead with race and education as the sharpest dividers.

Nominations and campaign finance: the detail
Invisible primaryThe race for money, endorsements and media attention before any votes are cast; a weak invisible primary usually ends a campaign early.
Primaries vs caucusesPrimaries use a secret ballot; caucuses are in-person local meetings, now used by only a handful of states.
National party conventionsFormally confirm the nominee and approve the platform; today they are mostly a televised launch event.
FECA 1974Set donation limits and offered matching funds.
BCRA 2002 (McCain-Feingold)Banned unlimited soft money donations to the parties and restricted electioneering ads close to polling day - the limits Citizens United later unpicked.
Citizens United 2010Allowed unlimited independent spending, which is why super PACs now dominate. A super PAC may raise and spend without limit but must not coordinate with the campaign.
Electoral College mechanics

There are 538 electors. Each state gets one elector per House seat plus two for its senators (California 54, Wyoming 3), and a candidate needs 270 to win. Every state uses winner-take-all except Maine and Nebraska, which split their votes by district.

Disproportionality: smaller states get more electors per head - Wyoming has roughly one elector per 190,000 people, California roughly one per 720,000 - so a Wyoming vote counts for more.

Faithless electors vote against their state's result: seven did in 2016, and states may legally bind their electors (Chiafalo v Washington, 2020). The 2020 "fake electors" schemes - attempts to send rival Trump slates from states Biden had won - is a term you will meet in coverage of January 6 and the court cases that followed.

Reforming the College: the NPVIC

The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact is the live reform plan: member states pledge their electors to the national popular vote winner, whatever their own state result. Around 17 states plus DC, carrying 209 electoral votes, have adopted it, but it stays dormant until states totalling 270 join. It would end the College's distortion without the near-impossible step of a constitutional amendment.

Election vocabulary worth one line each
Open primaryAny registered voter can vote in either party's primary.
Closed primaryOnly registered party members can vote.
Semi-closed primaryParty members plus independents can vote.
Battleground stateA state either side could win, so campaigns pour time and money there (Pennsylvania in 2024).
Bellwether stateA state whose result usually matches the national winner.
GerrymanderingDrawing district lines for party advantage: North Carolina's congressional maps reached the Court in Rucho v Common Cause (2019), which ruled partisan gerrymandering a question federal courts cannot decide.
5.2 Political parties

Essential A two-party system, polarisation and factions.

The specification
5.2.1The distribution of power and changing significance of the parties
Key terminology - tick the terms you can define:
Democrats: progressive attitude on social and moral issues, including crime
Democrats: greater governmental intervention in the national economy
Democrats: government provision of social welfare.
Republicans: conservative attitude on social and moral issues
Republicans: more restricted governmental intervention in the national economy while protecting American trade and jobs
Republicans: acceptance of social welfare but a preference for personal responsibility.
5.2.2The current conflicts and tendencies and the changing power and influence that exist within the parties
Key terminology - tick the terms you can define:
Democrats: liberals, moderates and conservatives.
Republicans: moderates, social conservatives and fiscal conservatives.
5.2.3Coalition of supporters for each party
Key terminology - tick the terms you can define:
Voters: how the following factors are likely to influence voting patterns and why, in relation to one recent presidential election campaign (since 2000) - race, religion, gender and education.

Wording above is the Pearson specification, unchanged. Tick a line only when you could answer a question on it without notes.

Past questions - how it has been examined
  • Directly: 2021 Q3a (party vs constituency in voting behaviour).
  • Partially: the gridlock and effectiveness essays.
  • Also asked (2023 on): 2023 Q1b (US and UK party policies); 2023 Mock Q1b (US and UK party systems); 2023 Mock Q3c (Democratic Party internal divisions).
What examiners reward and penalise
  • Stronger: link polarisation to gridlock and weaker discipline than the UK.
  • Weaker: treat US parties like disciplined UK parties.
One way to get high marks
  • Credited: winner-take-all entrenches two parties; polarisation deepens deadlock.
  • Evidence: party polarisation; the two-party system.

The 30-mark essays (Section C). Marks split 10/10/10 across AO1 (knowledge), AO2 (analysis) and AO3 (evaluation), so an answer that describes without judging gives away a third of the marks. Examiners reward "a clear and consistent line of argument": decide your answer before you write, argue it in every paragraph, weigh the counter-argument as you go, and reach "fully substantiated" judgements. A one-sided essay is capped at Level 2 however much it knows. Structure by theme, never by date and never as a list of examples.

The 12-mark questions (Q1 and Q2). Marked on AO1 and AO2 only, 6 marks each. There is no AO3, so no introduction, no conclusion and no overall judgement. Write three short, dense paragraphs, each making a direct US-UK comparison: "in the US... whereas in the UK...". Describing the two systems side by side without comparing them loses the AO2 marks, and discussing only one country caps the answer at Level 1. On Q2 you must also apply one of the three comparative theories (rational, cultural, structural); leaving theory out caps the answer at Level 3.

Arguments and counter-arguments

Are US parties weak?

Yes

  • Point. US parties have loose discipline over their own politicians. Explanation. Members of Congress are far less whipped than their UK equivalents. That means individual politicians can openly defy the party line. Example. Senator Manchin blocked his own party's Build Back Better bill in 2021, and hard-right Republicans forced 15 ballots before electing Speaker McCarthy in January 2023, then removed him in October 2023, making him the first Speaker ever removed by a House vote. Evaluation. On the other hand, polarisation has tightened party unity, so discipline is not as loose as it once was.

No

  • Point. The two parties dominate US politics and drive its polarisation. Explanation. Almost everything in American political life is structured around the parties, which is not what weakness looks like. Example. The two-party lock on the system means no other party can break through. Evaluation. Even so, internal factions divide both parties, which limits how unified they really are.
Best judgement. US parties are organisationally looser than UK parties but dominate the system and have grown more unified through polarisation, so they are weak in discipline yet strong in dominance.
Using it in essays
  • 30-mark: party versus constituency in congressional voting.
  • Topic sentence: "US parties are looser than UK parties but increasingly polarised."
Wider context
Helpful context

Weaker discipline links to Area 2 (oversight) and Area 6 (cultural and structural explanations).

Examination priority

Essential Parties underpin the gridlock and participation debates.

Third parties and independents

Third parties almost never win: first-past-the-post, the Electoral College, state ballot-access laws and campaign-finance rules lock them out. But they matter as spoilers and as donors of ideas, as with Perot in 1992 (deficit politics) and Nader in 2000 (Florida). Their failure is structural rather than a failure of ideas, which also makes them a ready example for the comparative theories paper.

What the parties stand for
DemocratsA bigger federal role in the economy and welfare, abortion rights, gun control.
RepublicansLow tax, states' rights, gun rights, social conservatism.
Factions inside the parties

The specification names the factions: Democrats divide into liberals, moderates and conservatives; Republicans into moderates, social conservatives and fiscal conservatives. Use those labels in essays, then show you know today's real dividing lines: progressives versus centrists among Democrats, and MAGA loyalists versus a shrinking establishment among Republicans.

Coalitions of supporters: anchor it to 2024

The spec asks how race, religion, gender and education shaped one recent election, so anchor the factors to 2024: the education gap was among the sharpest dividers, with graduates leaning Democratic and non-graduates swinging Republican, and the gender gap widened, with men moving toward Trump and women staying more Democratic. Keep the claims general in the exam: name the pattern, not invented percentages.

Texas 2026: a primary topples a senator

In the May 2026 Texas Republican Senate runoff, Attorney General Ken Paxton beat 24-year incumbent Senator John Cornyn with 63.8 per cent of the vote after Donald Trump's late endorsement - the first Texas Republican senator to lose his own party's primary since 1970. Use it three ways: incumbency no longer protects against a primary challenge from the party's own wing; a president can in effect control candidate selection through endorsement; and hyperpartisanship now operates inside the parties, not just between them.

5.3 Pressure groups and interest groups

Essential How organised interests shape US politics.

The specification
5.3Interest groups in the USA
Key terminology - tick the terms you can define:
The influence, methods and power of at least one single interest group, professional group or policy group.

Wording above is the Pearson specification, unchanged. Tick a line only when you could answer a question on it without notes.

Past questions - how it has been examined
  • Directly: 2019 Q3b (interest groups vs the Court underpinning the Constitution).
  • Also asked (2023 on): 2024 Q3b (voters or lobbies influencing legislators).
What examiners reward and penalise
  • Stronger: use named groups and methods.
  • Weaker: assert influence without examples.
One way to get high marks
  • Credited: groups widen participation but favour the organised and wealthy.
  • Evidence: the NRA; iron triangles.

The 30-mark essays (Section C). Marks split 10/10/10 across AO1 (knowledge), AO2 (analysis) and AO3 (evaluation), so an answer that describes without judging gives away a third of the marks. Examiners reward "a clear and consistent line of argument": decide your answer before you write, argue it in every paragraph, weigh the counter-argument as you go, and reach "fully substantiated" judgements. A one-sided essay is capped at Level 2 however much it knows. Structure by theme, never by date and never as a list of examples.

The 12-mark questions (Q1 and Q2). Marked on AO1 and AO2 only, 6 marks each. There is no AO3, so no introduction, no conclusion and no overall judgement. Write three short, dense paragraphs, each making a direct US-UK comparison: "in the US... whereas in the UK...". Describing the two systems side by side without comparing them loses the AO2 marks, and discussing only one country caps the answer at Level 1. On Q2 you must also apply one of the three comparative theories (rational, cultural, structural); leaving theory out caps the answer at Level 3.

Arguments and counter-arguments

Do pressure groups strengthen US democracy?

Yes

  • Point. Pressure groups widen participation in US politics. Explanation. They give citizens a way to organise and press for change between elections, not just on polling day. Example. Mass-membership groups let large numbers of ordinary citizens join a political cause. Evaluation. However, access to decision-makers tends to track money, so this participation is far from equal.

No

  • Point. Pressure groups skew political influence towards some interests over others. Explanation. The wealthy are heard far more than ordinary citizens are, so influence does not match numbers. Example. Well-funded lobbying and super PAC spending give rich interests a louder voice. Evaluation. Pluralist competition between rival groups offsets this somewhat, because groups can balance each other out.
Best judgement. Pressure groups widen participation but unequal resources skew their influence, so they enrich and distort democracy at the same time.
Using it in essays
  • 30-mark: the Constitution depends more on interest groups than the Court.
  • Topic sentence: "Pressure groups widen participation but hand disproportionate influence to the organised and wealthy."
Wider context
Helpful context

Iron triangles link groups to Congress (Area 2) and the bureaucracy.

Examination priority

Essential A recurring participation theme.

Methods in action

Two examples that show the methods working: the NRA helped defeat the Manchin-Toomey background-check bill in April 2013, which fell 54-46, six votes short of the 60 needed; and the ACLU sued repeatedly over the 2017 travel ban, showing litigation as a method alongside lobbying and funding.

Types of group, and PACs vs super PACs
Single interest groupCampaigns on one issue: the NRA on gun rights.
Professional groupRepresents an occupation: the American Medical Association for doctors.
Policy groupA think-tank-style group pushing a broad agenda: the Heritage Foundation.
PACDonates directly to candidates, but under strict donation limits.
Super PACRaises and spends without limit after Citizens United (2010), but must not coordinate with a campaign.

The PAC versus super PAC line is the heart of the democracy debate: groups widen participation and expertise, but unlimited independent spending means the loudest voices are the best funded.

5.4 Participation debates and the UK comparison

Important How healthy US democracy is, compared with the UK.

The specification
5.4Interpretations and debates of US democracy and participation
Key terminology - tick the terms you can define:
advantages and disadvantages of the electoral process and the Electoral College and the debate around reform
the role of campaign finance and difficulty in achieving effective reform
the role of incumbency in elections
the ways in which interest groups can influence the three branches of government and policy creation, including the role of PACs and Super PACs and their impact on democracy.

Wording above is the Pearson specification, unchanged. Tick a line only when you could answer a question on it without notes.

Past questions - how it has been examined
  • Directly: 2021 Q3a (voting behaviour); 2019 Q3c (electoral procedures).
  • Partially: the elections and parties essays.
  • Also asked (2023 on): 2023 Q3c (low turnout the biggest problem); 2024 Q1b (campaign finance and party funding); 2024 Q3b (voters or lobbies influencing legislators).
What examiners reward and penalise
  • Stronger: weigh participation against distortion by money.
  • Weaker: describe without comparing to the UK.
One way to get high marks
  • Credited: the US has more elected offices but lower, uneven turnout than many democracies.
  • Evidence: voter ID laws and turnout; Citizens United and super PACs.

The 30-mark essays (Section C). Marks split 10/10/10 across AO1 (knowledge), AO2 (analysis) and AO3 (evaluation), so an answer that describes without judging gives away a third of the marks. Examiners reward "a clear and consistent line of argument": decide your answer before you write, argue it in every paragraph, weigh the counter-argument as you go, and reach "fully substantiated" judgements. A one-sided essay is capped at Level 2 however much it knows. Structure by theme, never by date and never as a list of examples.

The 12-mark questions (Q1 and Q2). Marked on AO1 and AO2 only, 6 marks each. There is no AO3, so no introduction, no conclusion and no overall judgement. Write three short, dense paragraphs, each making a direct US-UK comparison: "in the US... whereas in the UK...". Describing the two systems side by side without comparing them loses the AO2 marks, and discussing only one country caps the answer at Level 1. On Q2 you must also apply one of the three comparative theories (rational, cultural, structural); leaving theory out caps the answer at Level 3.

Arguments and counter-arguments

Is US democracy healthier than the UK's?

Yes

  • Point. The US has more elected offices than the UK and uses primaries. Explanation. This gives American voters wider opportunities to take part in politics than UK voters get. Example. Through primaries, voters directly choose the candidates who will stand for each party. Evaluation. Yet turnout in US elections is often lower, so these extra opportunities are not always used.

No

  • Point. Money and the Electoral College distort US democracy. Explanation. Election outcomes can end up defying what the majority of voters wanted. Example. Super PACs pour unlimited money into campaigns, and in 2016 the candidate who lost the popular vote won the presidency. Evaluation. However, the UK has its own distortions, because first-past-the-post can also skew results.
Best judgement. US democracy offers more direct participation but is more distorted by money and the Electoral College; each system is democratic but flawed in different ways.
Using it in essays
  • 30-mark: US electoral procedures are democratic.
  • Topic sentence: "The US offers more participation but more distortion by money than the UK."
Wider context
Helpful context

This comparison is best framed culturally and structurally (Area 6).

Examination priority

Important The democratic-health comparison recurs.

Map Timeline (interactive roller)
Helpful context

Elections and participation since 2000.

Roll through the timeline1 / 6
2000Bush v Gore
2008Obama
2010Citizens U.
2016EC split
2020Turnout
2022Midterms
2000

Bush v Gore. A contested result decided by the Court; the Electoral College under scrutiny.

2008

Obama 2008. High turnout and grassroots mobilisation widen participation.

2010

Citizens United. Unleashes super PAC spending, reshaping campaigns.

2016

Electoral College split. A candidate wins the presidency while losing the popular vote.

2020

2020 turnout. Record turnout and mail voting; also disputes over the process.

2022

2022 midterms. Divided government returns, deepening gridlock.

Roll up and down: the arrows, scroll or swipe inside the box, the up and down keys, or click a year above. Full interactive timeline on Panther →

Diag Map: the Electoral College, 2024 result
The Electoral College in 2024: Trump 312, Harris 226Equal-sized tiles, arranged roughly geographically. Numbers are each state's electoral votes.AK3ME4WI10VT3NH4WA12ID4MT4ND3MN10IL19MI15NY28MA11RI4OR8NV6WY3SD3IA6IN11OH17PA19NJ14CT7CA54UT6CO10NE5MO10KY8WV4VA13MD10DE3AZ11NM5KS6AR6TN11NC16SC9DC3OK7LA8MS6AL9GA16HI4TX40FL30Trump 2024 - 312 EVHarris 2024 - 226 EVbattleground state(all seven went Trump)split state: ME and NEaward some votes by district538 electoral votes in total; 270 needed to win. 48 states use winner-takes-all.

Exam use: Trump won 312 to 226 and, unusually, the popular vote too, the first Republican to do both since 2004. The seven gold-ringed battlegrounds, all won by Trump, are where the whole campaign happened: the College's defenders point to 2024's alignment, its critics to the inversions of 2000 and 2016 and to every grey tile being ignored.

Diag Diagram: the road to the White House
The road to the White House: a two-year obstacle course Invisible primary year before any vote: money, endorsements, polls, debates Primaries + caucuses January to June, state by state - delegates won Conventions summer: nominee crowned, VP named, platform agreed General campaign September to November: debates, ads, and the battleground states Election Day first Tuesday in November Electoral College votes December - 270 to win; Congress certifies on 6 January Inauguration 20 January What the examiners reward you for arguing about each stage Invisible primary: money as a gatekeeper - most candidates are gone before a single vote. Primaries: voters, not parties, choose; frontloading rewards early money and fame. Conventions: now coronations for TV, but 2024 proved they still matter - Harris was confirmed by delegates without a single primary win. General: fought in seven states. College: the only vote that legally counts. Length and cost are the standing criticisms: the 2024 cycle ran almost two years and cost several billion dollars across all races. Defenders answer: no system tests candidates more thoroughly, in public, twice over.

Exam use: one stage per paragraph builds the "elections are not fit for purpose" essay; the 2024 Harris exception is the freshest evidence that the party, not just the process, still decides.

Plan Where the essays come from

Each row takes an evaluative demand the specification makes in this area, quoted word for word, and shows the 30-mark question it tends to become. Learn both sides for every row.

The spec wordingThe question this becomesThe two sides in one line
"advantages and disadvantages of the electoral process and the Electoral College and the debate around reform"Evaluate the view that the Electoral College should be abolished.Yes: it can elect the popular-vote loser and shrinks the campaign to swing states. No: it protects federalism and delivers clear, legitimate outcomes.
"the role of campaign finance and difficulty in achieving effective reform"Evaluate the view that money is the deciding factor in US elections.Yes: Citizens United opened the door to unlimited Super PAC spending. No: the better-funded candidate still loses; 2016 proved money has limits.
"The importance of incumbency on a president seeking a second term"Evaluate the view that incumbency is the most important factor in presidential elections.Yes: name recognition, fundraising and the office itself give sitting presidents the edge. No: 1992 and 2020 show incumbents lose when conditions turn against them.
"how the following factors are likely to influence voting patterns"Evaluate the view that race is the most significant influence on US voting behaviour.Yes: voting splits by race more sharply than by any other factor. No: education and religion now divide the electorate just as deeply.
"The current conflicts and tendencies and the changing power and influence that exist within the parties"Evaluate the view that the two main US parties are no longer united parties.Yes: each party is an uneasy coalition of factions pulling in different directions. No: polarisation has made each party more disciplined and more distinct than ever.
"the ways in which interest groups can influence the three branches of government"Evaluate the view that interest groups damage democracy in the USA.Yes: money and lobbying buy access that ordinary voters never get. No: groups inform debate, mobilise citizens and check government between elections.
Sum Section summary - the must-knows
1Facts most worth memorising
  • The President is elected by the Electoral College.
  • A candidate can win the presidency while losing the popular vote (2000, 2016).
  • Primaries and caucuses choose party candidates.
  • Citizens United (2010) enabled super PAC spending.
  • Incumbents win re-election at high rates, though Paxton's defeat of Cornyn in the 2026 Texas runoff (see 5.2) shows a primary can still unseat them.
  • The US has a two-party system entrenched by winner-take-all rules.
  • Parties are broad coalitions with weaker discipline than the UK.
  • Pressure groups lobby, fund and litigate.
  • An iron triangle links an agency, a committee and an interest group.
  • US elections feature far more elected offices and money than the UK.
2Examples most worth memorising
  • The Electoral College (2000, 2016)
  • Citizens United and super PACs
  • Primaries and caucuses
  • Incumbency advantage
  • The NRA
  • Party polarisation
  • Iron triangles
  • Gerrymandering
3Evaluation points most worth memorising
  • The Electoral College can distort the popular will.
  • Money raises concerns about unequal influence.
  • Polarisation deepens gridlock.
  • Pressure groups widen participation but favour the organised and wealthy.
  • US participation is broad in offices but uneven in turnout.
4Examiner warnings to act on
  • Use the Electoral College and Citizens United precisely.
  • Distinguish parties, pressure groups and elections.
  • Weigh participation against distortion by money.
  • Compare clearly with the UK.
  • Reach a clear judgement.
5Strongest essay arguments
  • The Electoral College and money distort representation.
  • Pressure groups both widen and skew participation.
  • Polarisation makes the two-party system more gridlocked.
  • US elections are more open in offices but more money-driven than the UK's.
Test Section test - 12 questions

Twelve mixed questions covering the whole section. Your most recent score is shown in the top bar.

Practise this topic on Panther
← Area 4Area 6 →