Qualifications and subject knowledge matter, but they are rarely what separates a First from a 2:1. Structure usually is. Two students with near-identical research can land in different degree classifications purely based on how that material is organised and argued.
Describing versus arguing
A 2:1-level answer often describes: it lays out relevant theories, evidence and perspectives clearly and accurately. A First-level answer argues: it takes a position, uses that same material as evidence for it, and directly engages with the strongest objections to that position, rather than avoiding them.
The PEEL-C approach to paragraph structure
A reliable way to build this kind of argument at paragraph level is Point, Evidence, Explanation, Link, Critique: state the point clearly, support it with genuine evidence, explain why that evidence supports the point, link it back to the overall argument, and then critique it — acknowledging a limitation, a counter-argument, or a condition under which the point would not hold. That final critique step is very often the one students skip, and very often the one markers are most looking for.
Counter-argument as strength, not weakness
Many students avoid raising objections to their own argument, worried it will look like backtracking. In practice, examiners read the opposite way: an essay that anticipates and directly addresses the strongest counter-argument demonstrates a stronger grasp of the debate than one that ignores it entirely.
Academic voice and register
First-class writing tends to be precise rather than dense — it avoids both casual language and unnecessarily complex phrasing used purely to sound academic. Clarity of argument, not complexity of vocabulary, is what is actually being rewarded.
This structure applies whether the module is Economics, Accounting, Business Management or Company Law — the discipline changes the content, but the underlying standard of argument stays consistent across degree-level marking.