gce geography examiners report - january 2010highlighting features of geographical importance. this...

GCE EXAMINERS' REPORTS

GEOGRAPHY AS/Advanced

JANUARY 2010

Statistical Information This booklet contains summary details for each unit: number entered; maximum mark available; mean mark achieved; grade ranges. N.B. These refer to 'raw marks' used in the initial assessment, rather than to the uniform marks reported when results are issued. Annual Statistical Report The annual Statistical Report (issued in the second half of the Autumn Term) gives overall outcomes of all examinations administered by WJEC.

Unit Page

G1 1

G2 5

G3 Section A 7

G3 Section B 15

G4 20

1

GEOGRAPHY

General Certificate of Education

JANUARY 2010

Advanced Subsidiary/Advanced

G1 – Changing Physical Environments

Principal Examiner: Mr Bob Adcock, Radyr Comprehensive School

Unit Statistics The following statistics include all candidates entered for the unit, whether or not they 'cashed in' for an award. The attention of centres is drawn to the fact that the statistics listed should be viewed strictly within the context of this unit and that differences will undoubtedly occur between one year and the next and also between subjects in the same year. Unit Entry Max Mark Mean Mark G1 2535 75 37.4 Grade Ranges A 47 B 42 C 37 D 32 E 27

N.B. The marks given above are raw marks and not uniform marks.

2

G1 General comments There were a number of general issues reported by examiners that, if addressed, may help to improve the future performance of candidates.

• Candidates would be well advised to pay attention to command words and key phrases in the questions in order to give focus to their answers. For example, giving explanations when the instruction is to describe or choosing human factors when the question requires physical. This has been reported before for both AS papers.

• Candidates need to realise that they must possess sufficient knowledge to meet the demands of the paper, particularly in the 10 mark elements of the paper. In some cases there was evidence that familiarity with the subject was lacking and so the quality of answers suffered.

• Timing issues were apparent in a number of scripts and a number of candidates failed to complete the paper. For a large number of candidates this was their first attempt at the paper and previous experience of sitting an examination of this length was evidently missing.

• There continues to be an issue with the practical element of the enquiry method which is examined in Question 3c. This will be addressed in the appropriate section of the report.

Specific questions Q.1 (a) Most candidates found this a straightforward starter and achieved between 3 and 5

marks. They used the adapted news resource effectively and were able to direct their answers with sound, extracted detail. The majority were able to make the link between changing temperature and distribution with a significant number referring to the possible impact of land use change alluded to in the textbox.

(b) There were some very good responses to this question where candidates

displayed the ability to describe and explain climate change. Responses that headed in the right direction tended to use the following examples of short term change: 'El Nino', volcanic activity and global warming. These answers were well organised and addressed both elements of the question giving detail in the description of climate change and development in the processes that lead to change. The use of examples was common amongst these responses with frequent reference to individual volcanic events, changing patterns of climate in the Pacific, and increased occurrence of extreme weather in Europe. However, a significant number of candidates misunderstood the question. There were two concerns associated with these candidates. Firstly, there was a failure to focus on short term climate changes and instead reference to the impacts of such a change. Hence there were many candidates who focused on changing ways of life in the tundra, the impacts of floods on communities, rising sea levels in Tuvalu and the changing distribution of habitats. Secondly, some candidates did attempt to answer the question as intended. They chose, for example, global warming or El Nino, but often demonstrated very little knowledge of climate change or had little understanding of the reasons for the changes.

3

(c) There were a number of confident responses to this question. Candidates had been generally well prepared and there was much evidence of well directed and relevant case studies such as Bangladesh, the Maldives and Tuvalu. There were a variety of impacts that were discussed ranging from the salinisation of soils and the consequent impact on agriculture, to the migration of large sections of the population to New Zealand. In some cases candidates were quite sophisticated in their answers with reference to social impacts such as loss of culture. Less successful answers were superficial, especially in the sense that the impacts identified were either not appropriate to the area nominated or were so general as to apply to any area affected by flooding. Statements such as 'millions will drown' do not inspire confidence in a candidate's knowledge and a number of examiners reported this lack of precision in the information presented as support for points made.

Q.2 (a) This was generally well done and most candidates were able to reach 4 out of the 5 marks. Candidates have been trained well to describe graphs and most picked up the marks available for pure description. The question did ask for an analysis of the links between the graphs and although this requirement was understood it was not always well executed. Some answers were long and repetitive, noting the same changes in 1984 and 1991. This element needs to be addressed as too much time taken on the skills section of a question can lead to issues of completion at the end of the examination. There were also some inaccuracies in graph reading.

(b) Examiners reported that success in this section of the examination was noticeably

centre-specific. Good answers were able to identify appropriate physical factors such as shape, slope, vegetation, geology, precipitation and antecedent conditions. Size was used by a number of candidates but addressed in a manner that was too simplistic to gain a great deal of credit. The best answers clearly identified the characteristics and detailed the processes that would lead to rapid transfers of large quantities of water into the river. Many did this in a reverse fashion that looked at how the selected feature could limit flooding and in doing this established the operation of the factor within the drainage basin. These answers then went on to explain how the factor could increase flooding. This approach was acceptable but did tend to produce lengthy and repetitive answers that sometimes resulted in problems of completion. Candidates should be advised to produce answers that are direct to avoid this problem. A significant number identified human characteristics such as agriculture, deforestation and urbanisation and explained how they caused flooding. This approach failed to gain any credit, as it did not address the question. There were some who attempted the answer using an example of flooding such as Boscastle, and where they focused on the factors they scored well. Some, however, drifted into the impacts of flooding and so failed to maintain the focus of the question.

(c) Examiners reported that this question was generally well answered with the majority of candidates gaining at least Level 2 credit. The best answers showed knowledge of the strategies and how they worked to lower the flood impact and there were a number of excellent case studies of the Rhine, Mississippi, River Severn, Boscastle and Cumbria, with some appropriately located examples of coastal flooding. The better responses obviously gave detail concerning the operation of the selected strategies but these usually made reference to their effectiveness as well. This was done in a variety of ways making both positive and negative points. Evaluation was usually done with reference to the ability of the strategy to stop flooding but other comments examined the cost effectiveness, the

4

ability to control floods of different magnitudes and the social impacts of the strategies employed. Some answers took an LEDC v MEDC stance; these only achieved good credit where the strategies were analysed rather than the ability to institute them. Weaker candidates wrote simply about flooding events in places such as Tewkesbury, Boscastle or Cumbria, stressing the impacts rather than the strategies in place.

Q.3 (a) There were many answers of good Level 2 standard but relatively few at Level 3. Only a few candidates were prepared to try and quantify proportions of damage (60% of buildings) or give precise locations (areas to the north of the main river) that showed a detailed use of the resource. Many candidates were able to produce lists of changes between the photographs but quality description was often lacking. Candidates should be aware that this is a 7 mark question and as such a detailed description is required to gain high marks. There were too many sweeping statements such as 'all the forest' or 'all the buildings had been destroyed'. Some candidates saw this as an opportunity to discuss the impacts of tsunami in general such as deaths, loss of jobs, tourism and income.

(b) Many referred to 3a in their answers and were able to develop the important

element of addressing the question in terms of a series of photographs. This gave candidates the opportunity of considering change over time and/or space, and all that could stem from making such an important geographical observation. Alternative approaches referred to other strengths such as the use of colour, clarity, the value of photographs as evidence and the ability to analyse photographs back in the classroom. Sketches were not examined in such a confident manner but a number of answers did consider the value of the sketch in highlighting features of geographical importance. This was sometimes developed by comments that saw the importance of annotations on the sketch. A number of centres had incorporated the technique into fieldwork and here candidates could draw on their own experiences to illustrate their answers. Weaker answers tended to be lacking in ideas of the value of the techniques and thus provided only vague responses. It is disappointing to note that a number of candidates failed to attempt this question.

(c) Responses were very variable to this question. The best had a clear grasp of what was expected, related it well to their studies, and illustrated their answers with clear diagrams. These answers were direct and focused on the methods of presentation which included tabulation, photographs and sketches as well as a variety of different graphs. These answers also incorporated comment on the usefulness and limitations of the techniques themselves. However, some candidates wrote, often at length, about the methods used to collect data in the field and the strengths and limitations of these, making no reference whatsoever to presentation techniques. Candidates need to be reminded of the five elements of the enquiry approach and understand that this question cannot address all of these elements. Too many were willing to provide a full account of all elements of their study and thus the result is too frequently rather general. Again it is disappointing to record that there were a number of candidates who failed to address this question.

5

GEOGRAPHY


JANUARY 2010


G2 – Changing Human Environments

Principal Examiner: Mr Richard Rowbottom, Wyggeston and Queen Elizabeth I College, Leicester

Unit Statistics The following statistics include all candidates entered for the unit, whether or not they 'cashed in' for an award. The attention of centres is drawn to the fact that the statistics listed should be viewed strictly within the context of this unit and that differences will undoubtedly occur between one year and the next and also between subjects in the same year. Unit Entry Max Mark Mean Mark G2 1619 75 39.8 Grade Ranges A 49 B 44 C 39 D 34 E 29


6

G2 General comments � The responses in this third examination were, in the main, very positive. Candidates,

and by extension, teachers, as expected, are now more familiar with the structure and demands of the new style of questions.

� The opportunity for rubric errors is small, and most candidates attempted all

questions, but with some gaps in Questions 3(b) and 3(c). There are possibly two reasons for these gaps; the weaker candidates did not grasp the concept of the fieldwork/research idea and the better candidates, after wonderful responses in Questions 1 and 2, ran out of time.

� Question 1 appeared to achieve higher scores than Question 2. Question 3 was most

often the poorest scoring question, but with several outstanding answers. � Many candidates fail to appreciate how they should approach Question 3. The

specification assumes that a piece of fieldwork/research will have been completed and that candidates are schooled in fieldwork/research skills and techniques as prescribed in the specification. There was considerable variation in the approach to this question by centres. Some centres had prepared their candidates very well indeed. Some high scores were achieved as candidates answered Question 3(c) by rote as if having practised writing the answer to that specific question! Other candidates from other centres, however, appeared to flounder and not realise what was being asked of them.

� The open ended questions allowed the better candidates to display their wealth of knowledge and understanding which was impressive in many cases. The weaker candidates provided short, generalised responses.

� The use of case study material will always, if relevant, generate higher marks. Some

candidates managed to complete the entire examination without mentioning any real places; hopefully such a trait can be discouraged.

� The use of maps and illustrations was rare and tended to vary by centre, some

centres encouraging this inclusion to good effect. Some candidates within these centres, however, were determined to do their prepared map and then completely ignored any reference to it and/or failed to justify its inclusion.

� Only weaker candidates had issues with misinterpreting some questions.

� The vast majority completed their answers within the 12 page answer booklet provided; exceptionally good candidates required extra sheets.

� Most candidates started their answers at 1(a) and finished with 3(c). A minority

completed all part (a)s first and some began the examination by completing Question 3.

� The three part (a) skills questions all demanded a description of different pieces of

geographical information; many candidates attempted reasoning within their answers and so wasted valuable time.

7

Specific Questions Q.1 (a) The majority of candidates were able to demonstrate their skill of description,

with the better ones combining information from the map with relevant locational comment. Weaker candidates simply lifted information from the resource without locational comment. A significant minority referred to the areas on the map as countries.

(b) The majority of candidates clearly appreciated this question and answered from the correct perspective. Poland was a very popular case study and the impact of out-migration on that country appeared to be very well known by the better candidates. Mexico and rural China were also popular case studies. The weaker candidates did not provide sufficient elaboration of their basically correct points and/or wrote at length about the impact on the importing country.

(c) Encouragingly many candidates had learnt some up to date birth and death

rate statistics and used them to good effect in their answers. Many candidates drew their version of the Demographic Transition Model and then described and explained how birth and death rate variations over time influence population changes. This was one way to achieve 10 marks if completed accurately, with statistics. There were several issues, however. Firstly, whilst the birth and death rate variations were being described and explained, candidates completely ignored how such changes affected population changes and so limited their answer to Level 2, a maximum of 7 marks. Secondly, the word 'naturally' was not appreciated and many candidates included migration case studies in their answer; some candidates exclusively used migration which would have limited the mark to a Level 1 response. Thirdly the words 'over time' were liberally interpreted to mean a few seconds as in the Haiti earthquake which featured in a large minority of answers. To develop the impact on Haiti's population over a longer period of time following the earthquake would have added more relevance to the answer.

Q.2 (a) Photographic interpretation was a regular task set in the old GG2 and now in the new G2, and most candidates appreciate the skill required to use evidence from the photograph provided. Weaker candidates use very generalised phrases such as 'the buildings look modern' without justifying how. Some description of what the photograph is showing is required. Some candidates used the word 'regenerated' to begin a lengthy description of a case study of a regenerated area they had studied. The better candidates had little difficulty with the answer and scores of 4/5 were very common.

(b) There is often more than one aspect to a question, and many candidates just

focus on one of those aspects to the exclusion of the others. In this question, the aspects are migration; within an urban area; different groups of people; different areas (the old specification segregation). These four different aspects proved too many for many candidates. The main focus of many answers was on different groups in different areas and lots of good description and explanations were given for studentification, ghettoisation, wealthy areas and poorer areas. Migration within urban areas was given scant regard by many, although filtering and suburbanisation were popular inclusions amongst the better candidates. Migration from outside an urban area was a popular inclusion.

8

(c) The better candidates were able to answer lucidly with real examples of real village changes. The main issues here were that firstly, many candidates answered the question of how settlements are changing and not the reasons why. Secondly, many candidates gave some very general reasons as to why rural areas are changing and name dropped the name of a random village or two, but essentially the answer was not on settlements it was on areas. Thirdly, a significant minority did not include any reality information about any particular places; anonymous geography with vague generalities.

Q.3 (a) Goad plans are specifically mentioned in the specification and this question simply requires locational description of two types of shopping unit. The better candidates had little difficulty using good terminology to describe the distribution, a very appropriate geographical skill. Such candidates used the points of the compass and scale to good effect and mentioned words such as dispersed, clustered, and nucleated appropriately. The weaker candidates decided to answer completely different questions as to why certain shops were vacant and the advantages and disadvantages of location.

(b) Most candidates did not appreciate that a full account of two methods of data

collection were required. A simple mention of a questionnaire was perhaps the most popular response, but with no mention of the process of setting up and executing that questionnaire. A very limited breadth of imagination or experience was displayed. The second method given was often an interview with great similarities to a questionnaire. Unrealistic collections of data such as the profits of each shop were mentioned, but with no indication of the method used to achieve this collection. The question also asked for a justification of the methods; this was often very brief and very often limitations were provided instead of justifications. Overall, candidates did not appreciate the ideas of fieldwork/research methods to practically collect data, primary and/or secondary.

(c) The answers varied greatly, as expected, in accordance with what each

centre had covered for their fieldwork/research topic. The better candidates fully appreciated the task and many centres appeared to have practised the answer to such a question. The marks were limited, however, by many valid, but superficial, simplistic, predictable and perhaps generic limitations such as 'the weather was bad'; 'not enough time'; 'I lost my notes!' Sometimes, if limitations were provided, then suggestions for overcoming them were ignored. Weaker candidates simply wrote about a study they had completed form start to finish, and may, incidentally, have included some limitations. This trait was far less noticeable, however, than in previous examinations.

9

GEOGRAPHY


JANUARY 2010


G3 – Contemporary Themes and Research in Geography

Principal Examiner: Mrs Nicky King, St Michael's, Llanelli

Unit Statistics The following statistics include all candidates entered for the unit, whether or not they 'cashed in' for an award. The attention of centres is drawn to the fact that the statistics listed should be viewed strictly within the context of this unit and that differences will undoubtedly occur between one year and the next and also between subjects in the same year. Unit Entry Max Mark Mean Mark G3 2412 75 41.7

Grade Ranges A 50 B 44 C 38 D 33 E 28

N.B. The marks given above are raw marks and not uniform marks. SECTION A Contemporary Themes

Unit Entry Max Mark Mean Mark G3 Section A 2412 50 29.1



10

G3 : Section A – Contemporary Themes in Geography

General Comments The consensus was that the paper was clearly structured and appropriate for this level, with an even balance between questions and parity across the six themes. It was felt that the A2 commands of 'examine, account for, assess and discuss' provided the necessary 'stretch and challenge' required and that the questions were firmly rooted in the specification. It is clear from the range of responses seen that the majority of candidates had been well prepared for the rigours of the paper, as their case study knowledge and ability to synthesise large amounts of information was often impressive. Overall, candidates responded effectively to this paper. One concern was that there were many weaker candidates, and even some moderate ones, did not seem to have made the transition to the demands of A2 level. Essay skills were sometimes weak, with candidates failing to address the question set, with their answers lacking structure or even paragraphs and few with effective conclusions. The command words were frequently ignored, with the candidate simply selecting the Key Idea, describing what they knew about the topic and not applying their knowledge to the question set. One concern expressed by a number of examiners was the failure by candidates to write in the numbers of the questions answered on the front of their answer books and a few did not label their answers appropriately inside the booklets. Disappointingly there were also several instances of rubric error. Specific Questions Q.1 It is encouraging to see a number of centres embracing this new theme and answers

were generally of a competent to very good standard, showing sound knowledge of relevant characteristics of arctic and alpine tundra environments. Better answers focused clearly on the identification of a range of features, effectively linking them to the concept of 'extreme', differentiating between alpine and arctic systems, explaining the inter-relationships between abiotic and biotic components and the adaptations of a range of species. Many were able to support their answers with useful place specific details and supporting diagrams and data, such as soil profiles, climate statistics, sketch maps and details of depth of permafrost. Weaker responses tended to be more descriptive and lacked specific details and exemplar support.

A grade scripts were characterised by sound knowledge of relevant characteristics of arctic and alpine tundra environments and the ability to link these characteristics and E grade scripts were partial in terms of their coverage of characteristics, weakly exemplified and with vague or implied reference to the concept of extreme.

Q.2 This was a less popular question than Question 1. However, there were some very

good responses with excellent coverage of a wide range of located examples of human activity in desert environments ranging from Utah to Namibia, Botswana, Dubai and Australia and a variety of management schemes to manage these activities. The best responses were characterised by assessment of specific strategies throughout with sound and effective case study support. Weaker responses lacked place specific detail and, as a result, evaluation of strategies was rather superficial.

11

A grade scripts were balanced, structured and in the top examples, precisely evaluative with clear and well-located strategies. E grade candidates provided answers that were partial in terms of their coverage of strategies, weakly exemplified and with a lack of assessment.

Q.3 It is important to emphasise that the command word in the question is 'examine'

which requires candidates to 'investigate in detail'. Better candidates were well informed on glacial landforms and approached the question with fieldwork experience, clearly differentiating between macro, meso and micro scale landforms and consistent in showing a detailed range of glacial erosion processes which were fully explained, well illustrated and accurately related to landform features. Some very good candidates were able to bring an evaluative slant to their response and explore the role of erosional processes in relation to other factors and agents. Their answers also contained well-integrated and well annotated diagrams of accurately located examples. Weaker candidates were much less precise in describing glacial processes and produced many descriptive accounts of erosional features of GCSE standard with a consistent failure to develop the link between glacial processes and the characteristic landform features they produce.

A grade scripts were characterised by a sound understanding of glacial processes which were clearly linked to the development of landforms. E grade candidates provided answers that were partial in terms of their coverage of processes, with little or no linkage.

Q.4 The range of performance for this question was wider than for the previous question.

There were some very good, well-directed responses with wide ranging exemplar material. Better candidates able to place their response in the context of a particular example and discuss constraints and opportunities with reference to a specific glacial environment. Weaker scripts were often simplistic, vague and generalised and unable to draw on any substantial study of the topic. These scripts were more narrowly focused on tourism and skiing with limited detail and locational support and a drift to management strategies. Inverting the question was another approach that limited the marks for a number of candidates.

A grade scripts were characterised by specific detail of the opportunities for and constraints on human activities in glacial environments. E grade scripts were superficial and vague, often with a loss of focus on question requirements.

Q.5 This was a very popular question. Better candidates were able to name and explain

the role of a range of erosional processes and link these effectively to the creation of a range of erosional landforms. Examples were strong in the centres who had possibly studied features in the field. Some of the stronger responses examined the role of other factors and agents, such as sea-level change, geological controls and human interference. In weaker responses erosion processes were generally described and explained adequately, but links to landform development were often omitted entirely or mentioned without being linked to the terms of the question. Some candidates described weathering processes as erosion, rather than explaining how weathering facilitates erosion.

A grade scripts were characterised by a sound understanding of coastal processes which were clearly linked to the development of landforms. E grade candidates provided answers that were partial in terms of their coverage of processes, with little or no linkage.

12

Q.6 As with Q.4 the question set this way round proved troublesome for most candidates and a high proportion of candidates inverted the question. Better candidates approached the question from the strength of fieldwork or case study experience and there were some excellent answers that reviewed the outcomes along the coast between Chesil Beach and the Solent. For weaker candidates the focus was almost entirely on tourism, as if the wider importance of coastal environments had not been taught. Drifting irrelevantly into coastal management strategies was another approach that limited the marks for a number of candidates.

A grade scripts were characterised by specific detail of the opportunities for and constraints on human activities in coastal environments. E grade scripts were superficial and vague, often with a loss of focus on question requirements.

Q.7 It is important to remind centres that, although candidates need to have a broad appreciation of the main climatic types in both tropical and temperate regions, detailed reference only needs to be made to one climatic type chosen from either a tropical or temperate region. Some of the stronger responses were based on the monsoon climate and demonstrated a good understanding of causal mechanisms together with detailed statistical support. Weaker responses tended to be over-ambitious in their coverage of a range of climatic types or were unclear about which climatic type to write about, giving rise to a lack of depth and a noticeable lack of climatic data.

A grade candidates were able to provide detailed knowledge of climatic characteristics together with explanations that were specific to the climatic type chosen. E grade candidates provided answers that were descriptive rather than explanatory, and where there was some limited explanation, there was often evidence of basic errors in understanding.

Q.8 The majority of candidates found this question very accessible and examined hurricanes or sub-tropical high pressure as climatic hazards, using precise case study material, although a few also examined strategies in the context of a very generalised perspective, lacking any locational information. Better responses were well founded in case studies and scored high marks as they were precisely analysed and assessed strategies, sometimes contrasting LEDC/MEDC locations and also incorporating advances in strategy developments. Many candidates fell into the trap of describing an event, (usually Katrina), but did not assess impact reducing strategies. Some responses were able to relate to the current UK winter that lent themselves effectively to assessment.

Q.9 A grade scripts developed a substantial and comprehensive overall assessment based on real case studies, whereas E grade scripts often focused on describing one event, with inadequate coverage of strategies and assessment.

This was a popular question and some impressive answers were seen. Candidates clearly had an excellent grasp of the reasons for the uneven nature of world development, with many using Brandt's 'North/South' as the basis for their discussion. The structure of many essays was particularly good, with candidates organising their responses carefully and categorising a number of factors ranging from geographical endowment/climatic factors to social and cultural factors and economic factors such as the burden of debt and the impact of trace blocs.

13

Case study material was used effectively. However, with weaker candidates the dreaded phrase 'countries like Africa' appeared frequently. There was also much regurgitation of development models without linking them effectively to the question, or using economic indicators to illustrate the gap between rich and poor again, without accounting for the uneven nature. Responses to this question more than any other were supported and supplemented effectively by exemplar material and statistics.

A grade scripts were characterised by a range of exemplified factors whereas E grade scripts often drifted from the question's central focus.

Q.10 This question was generally answered well, with the candidature well differentiated as stronger candidates demonstrated a detailed knowledge of processes and initiatives designed to close the development gap. The best answers were thoroughly and precisely evaluative and impressive in their exemplification. In weaker responses the strategies selected were not well developed and as a result candidates struggled with assessing effectiveness as their case study materials were not developed to a stage where their effectiveness could be assessed.

A grade scripts were characterised by sound knowledge of a range of initiatives that were exemplified and assessed. In E grade scripts strategies were not well developed and usually lacked assessment.

Q.11 This was a popular and accessible question. The majority of candidates tackled the

question well and were comprehensive in their examination of the main factors responsible for globalisation and their inter-relationships. Exemplification was often thorough and in most cases clear understanding was evident. Better candidates extended their discussion to look at aspects as varied as the emerging strength of the BRIC economies and the special additional dimension of China's growing domination in this field. Weaker responses were characterised by limited detail and development.

In A grade scripts there was good knowledge of a range of factors responsible for globalisation which were well exemplified, in E grade scripts coverage of the relevant factors was only partial and lacked exemplification.

Q.12 This question was less popular and tended to be poorly executed. Some candidates

struggled to find sufficient case study material to apply to cultural and political globalisation and to achieve the necessary balance between causes and effects and political and cultural globalisation. The examples cited were often vague or highly generalised and were therefore insufficient to provide the substantial support required for higher marks.

A grade scripts were characterised by sound, but not necessarily balanced, exemplified coverage of the causes and effects of political and cultural globalisation. In E grade scripts the coverage was vague and partial.

Q.13 As with Theme 1, it was encouraging to see that a number of centres have risen to

the challenge of a new topic. This question produced a number of high marks with candidates providing some excellent chronological and spatial detail. Many candidates clearly understood the reasons for changes in China's economy, discussing issues such as the decline of SOEs, FDI, the 'Open Door' policy and SEZs in great depth. Answers were factual, analytical and well-exemplified.

A grade scripts were characterised by a range of reasons for change whereas E grade scripts often drifted from the question's central focus.

14

Q.14 Candidates were generally good at identifying pressing issues in China's cities, but were often unable to offer any depth or detail, or focused on only one city in their discussion. The approach was primarily descriptive, with mainly partial coverage and the distinction between economic and social challenges was often not made clear. In a number of instances the challenges referred to in the responses did not have a specific urban focus.

A grade scripts were characterised by sound, but not necessarily balanced, coverage of social and economic challenges and E grade scripts by descriptive accounts of problems that were not necessarily urban based.

Q.15 As with Theme 1, it was encouraging to see that a number of centres have risen to

the challenge of a new topic. In general the responses to this question were encouraging and there was evidence that candidates had been taught well and were interested in the rapid progress that India has made. It was evident that candidates clearly understand the range of reasons responsible for changes in India's economy and these were often discussed logically and fluently and in great depth. Better candidates gave perspective to the changes, with perception and evaluation.

A grade scripts were characterised by a range of reasons for change whereas E grade scripts often drifted from the question's central focus.

Q.16 Candidates were generally good at identifying pressing issues in India's cities, but

were often unable to offer any depth or detail, or focused on only one city in their discussion. The approach was primarily descriptive, with mainly partial coverage and the distinction between economic and social challenges was often not made clear. In a number of instances the challenges referred to in the responses did not have a specific urban focus.

A grade scripts were characterised by sound, but not necessarily balanced, coverage of social and economic challenges and E grade scripts by descriptive accounts of problems that were not necessarily urban based.

15

GEOGRAPHY


JANUARY 2010


G3 – Section B – Research Investigation

Principal Examiner: David Burtenshaw

Unit Statistics The following statistics include all candidates entered for the unit, whether or not they 'cashed in' for an award. The attention of centres is drawn to the fact that the statistics listed should be viewed strictly within the context of this unit and that differences will undoubtedly occur between one year and the next and also between subjects in the same year. Unit Entry Max Mark Mean Mark G3b 2412 25 12.7 Grade Ranges A 16 B 14 C 12 D 10 E 8


16

G3 : Section B Research General Comments

This report is the first on this part of the paper. It is both a report on the examination itself and the preparation for the paper which is partly based on pre-released topics for the 10 themes in the specification. Centres are reminded that the topics for each year are released well in advance and those for 2011 are already on the WJEC web site. Part (a)

There were two commands in this question asking the candidates to describe the methods of acquiring information that could be used in investigations into the topic area and to justify the selected methods. Two approaches were adopted by the candidates. The more common approach was to describe the methods used in their own research investigation whereas some took a more generic approach and looked at methods of acquiring data for that topic area. The best candidates described a wide range of valid methods and explained why the method would be useful in an/their investigation. Average responses gave some description of methods which was often partial and incomplete demonstrating that they did not know why they had acquired the information. At this level justification became intermittent or over simplistic. The weaker candidates only knew of vague methods and rarely made wrote justification.

Good responses recognised the distinction between primary and secondary sources and were able to demonstrate that they had used or knew about a range of methods. At the other extreme fell formulaic answers that reflected what had been recalled from lessons or what they had been told to do as a part of their research. These candidates gave the impression that they did not know why a method was useful. Some indeed said “we were told to do it” or “I was shown the census”. The candidates should be encouraged to select methods that are appropriate rather than merely apply a formulaic approach no matter what the topic area. Many gave the reader the impression that they still had not understood the Route to Enquiry which is a foundation of research for this paper. Some aspects which need tightening up by candidates are as follows:

• Some candidates made vague comments about resources that are on the Internet. Many just said “I would use Google”. It is not a source. Better students actually named the web sites that they used.

• Reference to Wikipedia as a reliable source reflects a lack of rigour in the process.

• Candidates should be encouraged to use Ordnance Survey map sources before they go to Google maps. Some students used Google Earth and Streetwise which are more effective sources of data.

• A surprising number made no reference to looking up in geography text books or journals, especially for those topics which relied more heavily on secondary sources.

At all stages of acquiring information, candidates should be schooled into knowing where to find information and why that information may be useful. Normally one should not focus on the errors, but there are too many errors endemic in some centres particularly where all are doing the same topic and have been schooled into answers. These included:

i. sampling only three buildings in an area for a crime study; ii. sampling only two pebbles at two sites 150 metres apart in a study of sediment;

17

iii. comparing two areas but not visiting one of them because it would take too long; iv. interviewing a single shopkeeper – which was “almost like a chat but you can make it

flow off the top of your head”; v. using single transects as a method when rigour would demand at least two.

Part (b) This part gave candidates the opportunity to summarise or tell the reader about the conclusions of their own individual research (group research was not discounted) and to evaluate their conclusions. The marks that candidates achieved did depend to a certain extent on the rigour with which they and their centre approached the topic which is equivalent to 33% of this paper or 10% of the overall A Level. Almost every candidate wrote out their title or hypothesis. However, there were those whose titles should not have been permitted because they did not address the topic. Golf courses are not an aspect of urban regeneration and looking at vegetation along a 15 metre transect from the edge of a pond will not demonstrate succession. Markers commented that some studies had been carried out in April of the AS year at a time when the candidates were probably not mature enough to approach an A2 research theme. Other markers noted that many candidates talked about the lack of time either in the field or doing the topic. While one accepts that candidates may naively make excuses, they should be given enough overall study time to approach the research. It is suggested that up to 33% of study time for this paper, much of it outside the classroom, should be devoted to the research. It was pleasing to see those centres that had supported a range of themes. Many candidates in these centres did show that they had worked individually and that they had been in receipt of guided learning. Other centres appear to have 'taught' the research because all of the candidates wrote about variants of the same study. Most acknowledged group work but phrases such as 'we were told to do' do indicate a lack of individuality. There was some very good group work especially where 4or 5 candidates worked on a theme and pooled background reading and data collection prior to writing up their own report. Candidates who conclude that their conclusions totally met the title or hypothesis have not approached the topic with enough rigour. Every conclusion can be open to further research, comparative studies, and reflection on results which did not meet expectations, and improved topic titles. Those candidates, who had completed the process of research, including writing up their study, were more able to answer the question. Examiners were made aware of centres where students had not been required to write up their research. This does the candidates a disservice because the written report, although not examined, should be an excellent revision tool for the paper. Evaluation is a high order skill and it was logical that those who did evaluate their conclusions scored more highly than those who merely outlined some conclusions. The latter in turn scored more highly than those who merely described the whole process often in the first person. Part of evaluation is assessing the results against what is in existing literature. Only the very top candidates made effective use of reading prior to doing their research. Therefore, many missed the opportunity to evaluate their work against the benchmark of the existing literature.

18

Distribution of crime Studies of aspects of crime were popular, which inevitably resulted in a wide range in the quality of response. Most had used secondary data on which they based their conclusions. The average and below average studies often had been set up for predictable success. For instance, a candidate would look at the distribution in two or three pre-selected wards with high, middling and low crime rates to test the hypothesis that there was a relationship between crime and 'the type of area'. Success was claimed because the relationship was as in the hypothesis. Such studies did lead to sloppy conclusions which were not evaluated because, in the eyes of the candidate, they had proved their hypothesis. Better examples of this genre did look at anomalies and drew attention to these. Some of the best studies looked at a single crime and demonstrated some excellent personal research on e.g. vandalism and graffiti. Deprivation in rural areas The conclusions and their evaluation were a complete spectrum from those who drew conclusions based on excellent data such as that for a set of settlements in North Wales, to general essays that could almost have been about anywhere. The spread of a human disease This topic more than any other, required that candidates made good use of secondary resources. Those who decided to examine the global spread of AIDS had often taken on too large a topic because of the methodology that they had adopted. Consequently conclusions were simplistic. The spread of Swine Flu was also popular but the responses lacked rigour because the parameters were too large and/or the desk research needed more careful guidance. It was surprising that few candidates made reference to the copious literature on the spread of disease either in (a) or as a part of the evaluation. Malaria proved to be a research area that produced some good responses. Areas of residential preference There is less background material on this topic, but that did not deter good candidates from a range of studies utilising a variety of sources of information to examine why some areas were more or less desirable than others. Marks tended to reflect the degree of rigour that was displayed in the conclusions and the ability of the candidates to assess the veracity of their conclusions. Leisure and recreation and urban regeneration Many were based on very short field visits, inadequate data collection methods and little background work. Average responses often drew good conclusions concerning before and after regeneration but did little to evaluate the veracity of their conclusions. In making conclusions the best did think about the drawbacks of timing, the time of the year and other variables on the results they obtained. There were centres that looked at leisure in a town and neglected regeneration. Urban microclimates This is topic where students with a more scientific approach can shine. Many managed to conclude quite well using group collection of data along several transects. Better studies did note how the conclusions reflected the literature.

19

River pollution Almost all studies were of water pollution. This was a topic where rigorous data collection could lead to valid conclusions which could be evaluated against existing knowledge. Changing retailing in rural areas From the conclusions it was possible to note that many neglected the title and just discussed what was there now. Before and after studies drew conclusions concerning the impact of new retail developments on rural retailing. River sediments This topic led to a more scientific approach which many candidates followed. It is also a topic that lends itself to group work for safety reasons among others. Many did not evaluate their conclusions, especially when they had used a very limited number of sample sites. Succession Various aspects of succession on sand dunes featured among those who had researched succession although quite a few confuse succession with zonation. Responses ranged from weak discussion of the whole study to evaluations of the conclusions reached as a result of the research.

20

GEOGRAPHY


JANUARY 2010


G4 – Sustainability

Principal Examiner: Mr Robert Walker

Unit Statistics The following statistics include all candidates entered for the unit, whether or not they 'cashed in' for an award. The attention of centres is drawn to the fact that the statistics listed should be viewed strictly within the context of this unit and that differences will undoubtedly occur between one year and the next and also between subjects in the same year. Unit Entry Max Mark Mean Mark G4 337 80 46.2



21

G4 General Comments This was the first time that G4 has been examined. As less than 10% of candidates who intend to take G4 this year took it in this session, they may not be representative of larger entries, so any generalisations drawn from this session should be treated with caution.

Questions for the new unit were intended to present 'stretch and challenge' whilst giving opportunities for all candidates to approach them. This was certainly the outcome for this winter entry. There were some excellent sets of answers that showed high quality responses to all the demands of the questions, grounded in an impressive factual knowledge. Very few candidates seemed to be inappropriately prepared. Almost all sets of answers had some good qualities and scored marks which reflected preparation and ability.

There were some candidates who did not complete their final answer. This was often costly when it happened to be one of the 25 mark answers (usually Question 5). Quite a large proportion of candidates attempted at least one of the 25 mark answers first, almost always being Question 5. Those opting for the Section B question first usually took the Section A questions in sequence so did not avoid attempting a 25 mark answer last. A small number did avoid answering the high tariff questions last, and such candidates experiencing time problems lost fewer marks as a result.

It was good to note that hardly any candidates wrote unduly long answers to the ten mark questions. Answers to the twenty-five mark answers were usually much longer unless time had been misjudged resulting in an unfinished or rushed answer.

The best answers usually showed evidence of planning. One good example of this was noted where for Question 4, the candidate had rewritten the question, circled the key elements and underlined the command word. Lines had been drawn from the key elements linking them to phrases that were indicators of content or of points to be made. The resulting answer was logically structured, addressed all the required elements, and satisfied the demands of the command word and scored full marks.

Quality of written expression is taken into consideration in assessment of candidates. This was not a handicap for most candidates, but where grammar was so poor that examiners had to guess what was intended, this did not help in achieving good marks. At the other extreme, there were candidates who wrote with fluency and such clarity of expression that they gained the benefit of the doubt where other qualities were marginal. Examiners marking scripts from candidates using Welsh reported that they were comparable in the quality of language to those answering in English. Specific Questions Q.1 Use information from your own studies, and Figure 1 of the Resource Folder,

to explain how cities might be classified. [10]

Some very good answers were seen using Resource Folder material alone, and there was no bar to achieving full marks if this approach was taken. There were also some good answers from candidates who had investigated the City Development Index, Some had used other ways that classifications may be made based on from their classroom teaching, for instance, contrasting growth or decline in population in relation to rural-urban migration and counter-urbanisation, along with examples. The best answers established classes, explained the basis of them, and then supported them, usually from Resource Folder material. There were a number of candidates who identified a higher, a middle and a lower band, and these were often based on a pair of the indicators shown in the table. Such classes, supported by evidence, achieved high marks. Sound, but weaker answers often selected extremes to contrast rather than actually identify any classes.

22

Some candidates gave measures or terms that could be the basis of possible classifications, but did not explain what they were or give any illustration in support. A few candidates referred to primate cities but did not elaborate further. References to Edge cities and World cities were usually much better defined and were used to identify a class. A very small number of candidates took the question to mean how could settlements be defined as cities rather than how they could be put into classes. Such answers stated, 'they are places that have a cathedral' or similar. A very small number of answers took the approach of how different parts of a city (CBD, suburbs etc.) could be defined.

Q.2 Explain how disparities in wealth, and other economic factors, can influence food supplies in cities throughout the world. [10]

This was quite a demanding question requiring some consideration of disparity in wealth, another economic factor, food supplies, some city context and these to be examined with some degree of 'throughout the world'. A number of able candidates responded to all these and scored full marks. Other high scoring answers covered most of these, neglecting just one. The most common omission was not to bring the answer back to cities in particular, and answer all the other elements of the question with a focus on how food supplies in general were affected. Disparities in wealth were usually addressed by contrasting an MEDC city with and LEDC city, which automatically satisfied the 'throughout the world' element. A good range of other economic factors were introduced. The most common were (1) concerned with a switch from staple crops to commercial farming in LEDCs and the associated difficulties in trading terms, and (2) related to increasing transport costs and their impact on food prices in cities, and who could afford them. Many good answers contrasted levels of wealth in emerging economies, taking earlier stages before much development had occurred along with greater wealth in more recent times. Named Chinese cities, or often China as a country, were often given as examples. These answers usually gave details of the impact of growing wealth on the nature of diets, and how these had implications for food supplies. Some other excellent answers contrasted areas of differing wealth within cities and identified their impact on food supplies in those parts of the city. Weaker answers often included some of the elements already stated, but did not make clear links with food supplies. There were not many very poor answers to the question. The small number that did fall into this category often just repeated phrases from the Resource Folder, or quoted figures, with little attempt to use them to provide an answer to the question.

Q.3 Explain why are there concerns over future food supplies for cities? [10]

This question had a narrower range of demands than Question 3. Good answers needed to explain concerns, clearly relate these to future food supplies and have a clear focus on cities. Once more, there was no shortage of very good answers that dealt with all three elements and provided plenty of support material. Where one element was missing or neglected, it was usually the focus on cities. There were no particular concerns which were expected for full marks. However, some of the best answers took data from the Resource Folder which illustrated the trend of the rapid growth of some cities, and the increasing proportion of the population of the world which lives in cities. Some of these took up ideas of increasing amounts of rural land being built upon, rural-urban migration and its impact on agriculture in remote rural areas, or the impact of counter-urbanisation, and then emphasised how these created concerns.

23

Other good answers linked increasing demand to the necessity to intensify agricultural methods and the environmental concerns that this would bring about. Others demonstrated the increasing demand and went on to show that this may need to be met whilst at the same time there will be a reduced area of agricultural land as a result of climate change. Many able candidates demonstrated synopticity in this answer which was pleasing to see and was clearly creditable. Once again, very poor answers were rare. There was no common thread of type of approach linking the poorer quality answers. The weaker answers tended to be short, giving information for the reader to interpret rather than offering any explanation, and gave little, if any support to points made.

Q.4 Assess the extent to which food supplies can be increased and made more

sustainable throughout the world. [25]

The twenty-five mark questions have stretch and challenge built into them, and this often comes from linking several demanding elements together. The focus was on increasing food supplies, with a need to consider this in more than one kind of location, and lastly, assessing the sustainability in each instance. The majority of candidates recognised these demands and attempted to deal with them. A number of very good answers were seen that satisfied all the demands at a competent level and full marks were awarded several times. Most candidates used the GM debate from the Resource Folder, and also included vertical farms and city farms from the same source. Used well, such answers could gain full marks. Some candidates used material not provided in the Resource Folder. Although knowledge was usually sound, it was no guarantee of high marks, as the material sometimes lacked any evaluative content. However, there were high-scoring answers based on case studies from class or prior research. Answers that did not achieve high marks failed to respond to one of the elements in a significant way. The most common was failing to 'assess the extent'. Many candidates identified negative (usually) elements of GM farming techniques without mentioning possible benefits. Other methods of increasing food production, if given, suffered equally from an imbalance of positives and negatives. Other answers falling short of high marks sometimes named a good range of ways of increase, and briefly stated one positive and one negative for each, but without showing any range of evaluative points. Some mid-range answers dealt with just one way in which food supplies might be increased, giving some assessment, but considered no other way. Some candidates identified positive and negative points, but did not show how these related to sustainability. Once more, there were very few very poor answers. Most of those that were poor were either very short with little content, or were unfinished or hurried.

Q.5 'For all countries, future energy needs are not sustainable without a lower

standard of living. 'How far do you agree? [25]

The focus of the question switched from food and cities to energy. Once again there was an evaluative element to the question involving sustainability and standards of living. It was pleasing to see a considerable number of candidates responding to all these elements well, and several were able to score full marks. Those who achieved this mark considered a number of ways that energy might be supplied in the future, and examined in some detail in what ways they may or may not be sustainable. They included a range of countries in their assessment, and showed how this would impact on the standard of living.

24

Those achieving below this level were either shallow in all the elements, or more usually, did not address one or more elements of the question. The most common element that was missing was the standard of living. This was, however, accepted in a fairly broad way, and references, for example, to people being forced to move out of an area about to be flooded behind a dam generating HEP, were recognised as satisfying this element. Although some candidates considered positive and negative aspects of sources of energy, not all linked these to sustainability. The next most common element that tended to be missing was considering 'for all countries'. There were some otherwise excellent answers that only considered the UK (usually) and so tended to be rather narrow. However, from this entry, there were very few very poor answers, and very low marks usually resulted from the answer being a final, hurried attempt, often over-brief, in note form or unfinished. The Section B question will always focus on a topic that is not the centre of attention in the Resource Folder. However, it is likely to be quite a broad question, and it may well be possible to introduce information from the Resource Folder and, provided it is relevant to the question, would be rewarded. There were a very small number of candidates who did think that they were expected to answer the question based on the Resource Folder. One candidate wrote explicitly of her/his difficulty in relating an answer to the resources, taking the line that people would lack energy if they could not eat sufficient food. Although they were not as overt as this, it was clear that some other candidates also thought they must answer from the Resource Folder only.

GCE Geography Examiners report – January 2010/HJ 22 03 10

WJEC 245 Western Avenue Cardiff CF5 2YX Tel No 029 2026 5000 Fax 029 2057 5994 E-mail: [email protected] website: www.wjec.co.uk

gce geography examiners report - january 2010highlighting features of geographical importance. this...

Documents