2009 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre – Geography
Contents
Introduction
This document has been produced for the teachers and candidates of the Stage 6 course in Geography. It contains comments on candidate responses to the 2009 Higher School Certificate examination, indicating the quality of the responses and highlighting their relative strengths and weaknesses.
This document should be read along with the relevant syllabus, the 2009 Higher School Certificate examination, the marking guidelines and other support documents which have been developed by the Board of Studies to assist in the teaching and learning of Geography.
Teachers and students are advised that, in December 2008, the Board of Studies approved changes to the examination specifications and assessment requirements for a number of courses. These changes will be implemented for the 2010 HSC cohort. Information on a course-by-course basis is available on the Board’s website.
General Comments
Teachers and candidates should be aware that examiners may ask questions that address the syllabus outcomes in a manner that requires candidates to respond by integrating the knowledge, understanding and skills they developed through studying the course. It is important to understand that the Preliminary course is assumed knowledge for the HSC course.
Candidates need to be aware that the mark allocated to the question and the answer space (where this is provided on the examination paper), are a guide to the length of the required response. A longer response will not in itself lead to higher marks. Writing far beyond the indicated space may reduce the time available for answering other questions.
Candidates need to be familiar with the Board’s Glossary of Key Words but they should also be aware that questions will not always start with any key word from the glossary. Questions such as ‘how?’, ‘why?’ or ‘to what extent?’ may be asked, or verbs which are not included in the glossary may be used, for example ‘design’, ‘translate’ or ‘list’.
Teachers are reminded that pages 16 and 17 of the syllabus outline the geographical skills and tools, including fieldwork skills, which must be covered during the Stage 6 course.
Candidates should address the rubric as well as the set question when attempting extended response questions. Appropriate case studies and/or examples need to be used to illustrate or give relevance to the geographical information. Candidates need to remember that the Stimulus Booklet may provide useful information and/or illustrative material for use in a variety of their responses. Each section of the examination paper includes suggested times. Candidates should be encouraged to remain within these time limits so as to maximise their potential marks in all sections.
Section II
Question 16
In better responses, candidates identified both an ecosystem and an economic enterprise through accurately interpreting the stimulus booklet. These candidates distinguished between an economic enterprise and an economic activity.
Weaker responses did not provide examples from Source C.
In better responses, candidates applied their knowledge of their case study to the stimulus material. Many linked both parts of the question and used geographical terminology correctly.
Weaker responses gave only one reason when the question asked for reasons (plural).
In better responses, candidates explained the process of data collection and showed how it could be used to investigate one urban dynamic. Candidates that clearly had carried out fieldwork understood the difference between primary and secondary data and knew how to develop focus questions. Many understood the different urban dynamics and explained in detail various primary research methodologies.
Weaker responses did not generate a focus question and did not incorporate an urban dynamic. Some candidates could not distinguish between primary and secondary data.
Question 17
In the better responses, candidates clearly interpreted the photo and the map and distinguished between the three land-use categories in the legend. Use of colour or simple shading by these candidates enabled them to accurately delineate the respective areas.
Weaker responses did not complete part or all of the key. Many did not understand terms such as ‘built-up area’ or ‘reclaimed land’. Some candidates found it hard to combine sandbanks and coral reefs together.
In the better responses, candidates included both cause and effect of the identified change on the ecosystem in the area shown on the précis map. Many addressed the change then the impact to the ecosystem (eg coral reef ) and linked it to the functioning of the ecosystem, with the best responses using correct geographical terminology.
Weaker responses only dealt with the cause of the identified change and not the effects of this change on the ecosystem. Some of these responses referred to areas outside the précis map area.
In the better responses, candidates referred to and linked sea level rise to the effect on ecosystem functioning using terminology and examples such as nutrient recycling, energy flows or changes in the ability of the ecosystem to photosynthesise. These responses made sound judgements based on knowledge about ecosystems and understanding of the stimulus material.
Weaker responses referred to a general geographic change and did not focus on the ecosystem, for example flooding. Many referred to ecosystems not associated with the stimulus.
Question 18
Better responses referred to the seasons and used statistics for temperature and rainfall to support their statements about the pattern of the climate. Detailed analysis of the graph enhanced these responses. The best responses used information on the map to identify outdoor activities that would be seasonally affected, for example sailing club (sailing), racecourse (horse racing), coral reefs (tourism, diving, fishing), national stadium (field sports) and golf course (golf).
Weaker responses did not recognise that this location was in the northern hemisphere. They also failed to state ‘how’ the climate would affect outdoor tourist activities just stating that ‘it affected it’. Reference to specific temperature and rainfall statistics was limited.
Question 19
Better responses knew the formula for calculating vertical exaggeration and correctly identified the horizontal scale and the vertical scale of the cross-section. In the best responses, students stated the formula and showed their working to get the correct VE, which was 12.5 times.
Most candidates, however, attempted the question but used incorrect figures from the cross-section, eg Vertical Scale = 1:1000 m rather than 1:2000 m. Many confused their conversion of 1:25 km into metres.
In the better answers, candidates correctly described the lake’s environment and then related these characteristics to latitude, altitude, precipitation and vegetation. They stated latitude correctly and recognised that it was in a temperate zone of the northern hemisphere but the rainfall and temperature were moderated by the high altitude of the lake. Better responses used phrases to show relationships, eg ‘resulting in’, ‘led to’, ‘produced’ rather than just inferring that there was a relationship. There was extensive use of evidence found in the three sources. The better responses demonstrated knowledge and understanding beyond what was evident in the stimulus material and incorporated their knowledge of ecosystems and world environments.
Weaker responses gave a general description of Lake Rara or just stated that there was a relationship between latitude, altitude, precipitation and vegetation without showing the effects of the relationships. Many of these candidates misinterpreted data or did not use the sources to provide specific information about the lake’s environment.
Section III
Question 20
In better responses, candidates demonstrated a very clear link between geographical content and detailed case studies and data. There was a clear appreciation of the concepts of world city theory and the relationships between the theory and world city development. The better responses also had a considerable understanding of a range of world cities. Common examples of New York, London and Tokyo were supplemented with others like Sydney. Another facet of the better responses was their use of accurate data; for example, it was common to see not just names of transnational corporations but numbers, names of leaders and the volume of business they carried out. These were sophisticated responses showing knowledge and understanding of flows, linkages and hierarchical relationships. There was clear evidence of higher-order thinking and explicit explanation of why world cities are powerful centres of economic and cultural authority.
Weaker responses simply described world cities with little or no links to the nature of economic or cultural authority. Many gave superficial reasons which often had little relevance to the question. Many candidates could not explain and illustrate ‘why’ world cities exhibit authority. Cultural authority proved more difficult for many, some students interpreted this as a demographic of their sample city’s population, others interpreted it as the role the city generates, eg museums, galleries, events, sport and fashion/art. Some candidates confused the question with culture of place in a large city.
Question 21
The best responses evaluated the importance of ecosystem management and protection, not just management strategies or practices. Many made judgements based on criteria – sustainability, intergenerational equity, cost/benefit, biodiversity, survival and other relevant criteria. These responses integrated the five reasons for management and protection of ecosystems: heritage, utility, genetic diversity, intrinsic and allowing natural change. They made judgements about the relative importance of each factor, with some using a table to do this. Some responses made comparisons and value judgements as to the effectiveness of traditional and contemporary management strategies in protecting ecosystems. The use of appropriate diagrams and maps and reference to them to evaluate the importance of management and protection was also a feature of these responses. Some made reference to current issues and information, for example the Copenhagen Summit on climate change. These responses made good use of geographical terminology and syllabus concepts with reference to case study/studies/illustrative examples.
In weaker responses, candidates wrote a general discussion about ecosystems without referring to specific examples. Geographical terms were used but responses showed little evidence of understanding the reasons for the management of ecosystems or their constituent parts. Some responses were very long but did not evaluate to any degree. Many focused only on human impacts and not management and protection. There was little or no use of case studies/illustrative examples. Maps and diagrams were used but many were not relevant or referred to in the essay. Many responses did not address all parts of the question.
Question 22
Better responses displayed a deep knowledge and understanding of a global economic activity with reference to three of the factors shown in the diagram and provided evidence of a comprehensive knowledge of how and why each of the factors influences the future direction of the economic activity. These candidates made reasonable predictions, projections and forecasts, and looked for trends into the future at a global scale. These responses referred to relevant cases studies, illustrative examples and the stimulus booklet where appropriate, and used a range of sample studies and fieldwork references. The better responses presented a well-structured, logical discussion displaying strong analytical skills and applying appropriate geographical terminology.
Weaker responses tended to be descriptive, lacking depth and detail, with limited use of appropriate geographical terminology. In some cases, the economic activity was not identified. In others, candidates confused ‘economic activity’ with ‘economic enterprise’. Weaker responses often discussed the impacts of the chosen factors without examining the future directions of the economic activity. Many of these responses were characterised by a lack of scope, limiting discussion to Australian examples rather than the global scale.
2010039
NSW Government