Unit 4: Overall comments

1. Unit 4: Overall comments • Most answers now in report style, pure essays lose marks in QWC. • Recent material/ examples / news seen often, can be useful for some questions e.g. food, health • Most have plan to work from – important to set aside thinking / planning time • Methodology required for 11 + marks section R of mark scheme (most now have this) • Diagrams common and usually used well • Models / theory common butneeds more than name dropping / drawing • Majority include ongoing evaluation

2. The generic mark scheme and its importance • Very different from the mark schemes used in Units 1, 2 and 3. • In these Units the totality of their work is considered and then a Level is decided on – here specific sections of their Report are marked using Levels • Can’t give an overall ‘impression’ mark

3. Thinking about the question, spotting opportunities: Question interpretation very important, but can be a problem: • The pre-release can make students pre-judge the focus of the question. • Mock exams, homework questions etc can reinforce this if not carefully handled i.e. lots of possible questions are discussed. • Students will tend to focus on one part / clause of the actual question at the expense of others. Good students? Danger of over-preparation. Can’t see the wood for the trees Reluctant to jettison lovingly researched case studies ‘just’ because they don’t fit the question. Most likely to take advice, so if the teachers ‘guess’ is wrong……

4. What to expect from the question? • Most questions are complex i.e. have more than one side / perspective: • ....many are controversial, but some are not and the degree of controversy varies. • Most questions demand discussion of more than one view. ....the reference to ‘players’ is a clear hint to discuss the views of different players. • Many questions have no ‘answer’, but rather a spectrum

5. A good way to understand some questions is to simplify them, to show that the original question is actually more complex than some students think: A simpler version is: • “Explain why some cultures and cultural landscapes are vulnerable and threatened.” • If a candidate answered this question, they would only be answering part of the original question. Many do this of course A simpler version: • “Tectonic activity poses a challenge to the communities experiencing it. Discuss.” • The answer to this question is really ‘yes, it does’, whereas the answer to the actual question is much more of a spectrum from ‘no challenge’ to ‘very serious challenge’.

6. Common Issues: Pre-release dangers • Over –analysing it; getting ‘hung up’ on the meaning of one word. • Focusing on one aspect at the expense of others. • Negative interpretations e.g. impacts, challenges, effects, consequences. • Pre-judging the question • Actual question: “Evaluate the importance of different factors which influence how successfully people and organisations cope with tectonic hazards.” Different groups i.e. contrasts + ‘cope’ is crucial i.e. not ‘impacts’ Effectiveness of responses – steer towards evaluation. Range and contrasting also important Volcanic and seismic:important to avoid a narrow answer

7. Developing criteria and making judgments • Reports based on case studies / case studies as sub-headings – tends to be a very descriptive ‘product’ • Candidates need to develop more conceptual Report sub-sections. • On way to develop this is to develop some criteria during the pre-release phase • Can be applied to the question in the exam: Costs and benefits? • Economic costs & benefits • Social costs & benefits • Environmental costs & benefits Examples and case studies can then be applied to these costs and benefits, beginning the process of selection of the relevant material.

8. Planning frames • Option during teaching is to give students a planning frame to help them develop a clear idea of what their report should ‘look like’. • An example is given here • Probably works best when given to students on A3 paper • They can scribble on it and flesh out a structure for their whole Report.

9. ...the other approach.. • The alternative approach is to organise by case study e.g. GM crops in Argentina The GR in India Irrigation in Egypt Magic Stones in Mali • This approach tends to be much more descriptive, • More hit and miss in terms of costs and benefits • Danger of repeating very similar costs 3 or 4 times. In the exam the costs and benefits from the pre-release become the controversy i.e. degree of soc/ eco / env controversy.

10. Conclusions? This more conceptual approach might lead to conclusions such as: • Most attempts to increase food production are environmentally controversial e.g. GM, GR, Large scale irrigation – exception might be small-scale, local, intermediate schemes. • Socially, many attempts increase production but not food security for local people i.e. focus on cash crops, exports and non-food crops. • Small scale schemes more socially beneficial in terms of food security, but have a small footprint in relation to the scale of the problem. • Economically, many attempts have high initial costs which exclude many, or have elements of dependency i.e. on TNCs, Governments or NGOs.

11. Introductions • There are 3 important elements in an introduction: • Focus (direction, argument, criteria used to make judgements) • Definitions (from the title) • Framework (structure, parameters, scope) • Many answers had incomplete coverage of these aspects • Better candidates referenced definitions, often giving quotes and incorporated these into a clear focus using key words. • Often the use of a model / theory provides a framework – as long as it is referred to again in the analysis / conclusion. • Justifying particular examples / case studies usually helps the Report flow more successfully.

12. Methodologies • Introduction often leads on naturally to a Methodology. • It should be specific to the pre-release/title set. • Many styles possible – paragraph or table most common • Issues with the following if used in an entirely uncritical way: • Wikipedia • Youtube • Blogs etc • Issues with: • ‘the one with the parrot’ or ‘ book with green cover

13. Analysis and Application

14. Conclusions: • Good test of a good conclusion is whether you can identify the title question from it alone • What is needed? • Recall / summary of main content – what does is show / prove? • Group of examples/ CS rather than list them. • 3 or 4 general concluding statements need to be teased out, linked back to the Report title • Identify possible anomalies • Refer back to the models / theory - essential • Identify complexity in the question / more than one viewpoint i.e. there is no single ‘answer’ . • Last few lines need to answer the Report title directly, using words from it

15. Diagram use: • Useful – especially if adapted like this Park model; it is also linked in with the text but note the key is not fully clear. • Sometimes they add very little and are rather pointless e.g. basic location maps: