1. Home
  2. HSC
  3. HSC Exams
  4. 2010 HSC Exam papers
  5. 2010 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre — Geography
Print this page Reduce font size Increase font size

2010 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 2010 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 2010 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.

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 marks allocated to the question and the answer space (where this is provided on the examination paper), are guides to the length of the required response. A longer response will not in itself lead to higher marks. Writing in excess of the space allocated 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 are reminded that:

  • the Stimulus Booklet may provide useful information and/or illustrate material for use in a variety of their responses
  • appropriate case studies and/or examples should be used to illustrate or give relevance to the geographic information in the extended response questions
  • the rubric and the set question should be considered when attempting extended response questions.

Section II

Question 21

  1. In better responses, candidates had a clear understanding of the nature of the economic activity and the factors related to it. The factor was clearly identified and named. Factual information and statistics were used to support answers.

    In weaker responses, candidates did not name a factor.

  2. In better responses, candidates identified both positive and negative impacts. They understood that the question required an environmental impact of the activity, not an environmental constraint on the activity and gave examples of the consequences of this impact.

    In weaker responses, candidates included reference to a different photograph for each part of the question. Some candidates confused environmental impacts and environmental constraints. The answers were either very general with no application of relevant examples or the examples and language used were simplistic: for example pollution, trampling plants, killing animals. Some candidates did not recognise the fact that part (b) related to the economic activity identified in part (a).

Question 22

Candidates in the better responses showed a clear understanding of the requirements of the key word ‘justify’ and provided strong arguments, clearly supported by a range of supporting evidence. Evidence of field work was often well used. These candidates showed good use of geographical terminology and clearly understood their chosen factor, including the concepts of ‘intrinsic value’ and ‘heritage value’. They often made reference to the consequences of failing to manage or protect ecosystems at risk.

In the weaker responses, candidates showed a poor understanding of the factors given in the diagram, sometimes confusing one factor for another. They made general reference to management and protection, rather than one specific factor and some simply described ecosystems or field trip activities. Some candidates attempted to cover all factors and hence did not respond correctly to the requirements of the question. Some responses were factually incorrect while other candidates displayed great knowledge of the subject but failed to answer the question set.

Question 23

In better responses, candidates understood the concept of dominance and provided supporting examples that were linked to other urban centres. Better responses included some statistical data on the dominance of world cities, for example the number of financial institutions, trade and business transactions. Many of these candidates referred to economic and cultural authority and included reasons for the dominance.

In weaker responses, candidates did not understand the concept of world cities or the dominance they have over other urban centres. There were no supporting examples and candidates made no or limited reference to economic and cultural authority. Some candidates used poor examples of world cities, for example Adelaide or Dubbo or gave a limited explanation of economic authority, for example discussing the role of the Sydney CBD in relation to other suburbs.

Question 24

In better responses, candidates clearly identified the nature or type of economic activity that was studied. Spatial patterns of an agricultural activity such as viticulture, dairying and rice farming were explained better than a broad example such as tourism. Better responses also included many illustrative examples, diagrams and maps.

In some weaker responses, candidates did not state or mention what type of economic activity was studied. Many candidates did not understand the term ‘spatial patterns’ and tried to respond by covering everything that they knew about the economic activity. In other weaker responses, candidates only described the activity and did not explain the spatial patterns. Some candidates discussed an economic enterprise rather than an economic activity.

Question 25

  1. In better responses, candidates provided examples to support their argument. They related the stimulus on the Kimberley region to other examples in support of their argument. In better responses, candidates clearly indicated the difference between traditional and contemporary management strategies. These answers included the use of geographical terminology throughout their response.

    Candidates in weaker responses simply re-wrote the question and did not understand the difference between traditional and contemporary management strategies. These candidates did not refer to the stimulus material or other examples and the use of key terminology was lacking.

  2. In better responses, candidates demonstrated knowledge of ecosystems and could describe the use of one traditional and one contemporary management strategy. They also used geographical terminology in a highly sophisticated manner.

    In weaker responses, candidates misinterpreted the question and were confused about the difference between traditional and contemporary strategies, some mixing the two together. Some candidates did not name or mention an ecosystem. There was limited or no reference to examples and elementary use of geographical terminology.

Question 26

  1. Candidates in better responses used appropriate geographical terms and concepts to answer the question, and included relevant examples. Relevant examples included statistical evidence and correct factual content. They identified a number of features that demonstrated the character of mega cities.

    In weaker responses, candidates often misinterpreted the question or gave simplistic outlines or descriptions. They also showed little understanding of the concepts of ‘nature and character’. Examples were sometimes inaccurate or inappropriate. Some weaker responses confused countries with cities and world cities with mega cities.

  2. In better responses, candidates provided examples supported by statistics from a number of mega cities, often from different continents. Use of geographical concepts, for example the informal sector and squatter settlements, was a feature of the better responses.

    In weaker responses, candidates often made generalisations about challenges that are relevant to all cities in both the developed and developing world. They lacked examples and/or gave a definition. Some candidates confused world cities with mega cities. Many outlined some challenges rather than describing one challenge in detail.

Section III

Question 27

In better responses, candidates made judgments and explained the impact of global changes on their selected enterprise. These judgments were supported with statistics and current information. Candidates quantified ‘to what extent’ by either using terms such as moderately, substantial or used statistics, for example, increased by 10%.

Candidates who presented a cohesive, sustained and logical response and used appropriate geographical terminology gave a better understanding of the intent of the question.

Some weaker responses were simplistic, poorly structured or inaccurate. Many candidates only described the changes and impacts or described the factors affecting the enterprise. Some candidates responded with a prepared answer, disregarding the question.

Question 28

In the better responses, candidates addressed all aspects of the statement in their discussion and reinforced their points by referring to appropriate illustrative examples. These candidates communicated ideas and information using appropriate geographic terminology, including ‘biophysical components’, ‘nutrient cycling’, ‘biodiversity’, ‘symbiotic relationships’, ‘amplitude’, ‘malleability’ and ‘genetic diversity’. In better responses, candidates selected the most appropriate examples which clearly linked the degree of vulnerability and resilience resulting from the impact of natural stress and human-induced modifications.

In weaker responses, candidates failed to develop any linkages or relationships between natural stress/human induced modifications and the vulnerability and resilience of ecosystems at risk. Some responses only addressed some of the concepts. They also failed to refer to any case studies or illustrative examples, and demonstrated little understanding of ecosystems at risk and a limited knowledge of geographical terms/concepts.

Question 29

In the better responses, candidates used sophisticated language, geographical terms and presented logical and sustained answers. They included a variety of illustrative examples and relevant statistics to identify and highlight detailed relationships. Better responses demonstrated clear analysis of the impacts and implications of one urban dynamic and showed its relationship to other urban dynamics.

In weaker responses, the candidates demonstrated a limited understanding of the urban dynamic creating change. Some responses used locations that were neither a country town nor a suburb, such as regional centres and metropolitan areas. Some candidates described or recounted rather than analysed the urban dynamic causing change. This often took the form of describing the history of the area. Other candidates described the mechanism for change. There was a limited use of geographical information. Some candidates responded with a prepared answer on the demise of the small town rather than an urban dynamic on a global scale.

20110104

Print this page Reduce font size Increase font size