Download A-level Environmental Studies Examiner report Unit 01 - The

A-LEVEL
Environmental Studies
ENVS1: The Living Environment
Report on the Examination
2440
June 2016
Version: 1.0
Further copies of this Report are available from aqa.org.uk
Copyright © 2016 AQA and its licensors. All rights reserved.
AQA retains the copyright on all its publications. However, registered schools/colleges for AQA are permitted to copy material from this
booklet for their own internal use, with the following important exception: AQA cannot give permission to schools/colleges to photocopy any
material that is acknowledged to a third party even for internal use within the centre.
REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – A-LEVEL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES ENVS1 – JUNE 2016
General
The standard seemed comparable to other years, possibly slightly easier. The paper performed
well and the questions were straightforward and accessible to the full ability range. There were
fewer problems of answers being written in the wrong answer space and of questions not
attempted and, on the whole, the allocated space seemed adequate for answers to be written.
As always there was some poor spelling of important terminology, such as respirate, pollonate,
quadrate, quadrant, however usually the terms were recognisable enough to gain credit. There
were some easy marks to be gained by candidates who had learned definitions of terms such as
‘biome’ and ‘plagioclimax’ but many did not learn the precise factual detail needed.
Question 1
On average students achieved three marks for this first question and very few achieved the full five
marks. Cost Benefit Analysis was well answered, as was Greenbelt, although some answers
stated that no development is allowed or development is banned on greenbelts. Development may
still take place, but is restricted. Public Inquiry was not very well answered with students
commonly incorrectly answering with an environmental impact assessment. The Leopold matrix
was well answered, with only a minority of students who did not make reference to it being a
quantitative assessment failing to gain the marks. Time Zoning was very well answered by the
majority of students.
Question 2
(a)(i)
Good answers referred to the data in the table or the students calculated a reduction value
(17.96%) of carbon dioxide. Although many students gained the two marks available, this
question demonstrated that there is some lack of understanding of the mechanics of the
greenhouse effect. Common inaccuracies included the type of radiation that is absorbed
and where this takes place. This is fundamental knowledge at AS level. Heat was
sometimes used in the wrong context. Infrared radiation is absorbed and retained by
greenhouse gases not heat. This led to about one third of students gaining only one mark
for correctly identifying CO2 as a greenhouse gas but then inaccurately describing how this
led to a temperature change. Some students suggested that temperature conditions were
due to the increase of ozone which absorbed more UV radiation, reducing (ground level)
temperatures. Although this is good logic, the temperature characteristics on Earth include
those within the entire Earth-atmospheric system, which includes the stratosphere.
(a)(ii) Some weaker answers referred to oxygen being needed for photosynthesis or to breathe.
The use of the correct terminology was important in this question. Oxygen is not needed
for all types of respiration; therefore simply stating that it is essential for respiration on land
was not enough. Anaerobically respiring organisms can successfully survive on land
without oxygen. Oxygen is essential for aerobic respiration on land. UV radiation is
absorbed not deflected or reflected by ozone. Weaker answers included general
unscientific descriptions of conditions being more suitable for life with oxygen. Stronger
students often included three mark points on this two mark question by using the correct
scientific terminology demonstrating that this was an accessible question.
3 of 7
REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – A-LEVEL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES ENVS1 – JUNE 2016
(b)
A well answered question, where students often gave a property and the reason the
property results in suitable conditions for life on Earth, demonstrating a good understanding
of this topic. The majority of students gained full marks and very few did not achieve any
marks on this question. High heat capacity and solvent were the most common answers.
Some students gave answers which are important for life but not properties eg a habitat
which is a result of a property (water being liquid) or regulates temperature, which is also a
result of a property (high heat capacity) and are not properties themselves.
(c)(i)
A very poorly answered question. Less than a quarter of students achieved the one mark
available for defining the term biome. Each year questions on ecological definitions are not
well answered. This is surprising since they are simple recall questions. Students often
only included one element of the definition instead of both climate and community. Both
are essential since ‘bio’ indicates the living element, which has been determined by the
climate (geographically). Biome is a key term which encompasses the principle of
adaptation to the environment and is a fundamental concept to be used in more complex
answers related to many other topics within the specification eg climate change.
(c)(ii) It was well understood by the majority of students that low ecological stability was linked to
low species diversity. However, only a small number gained the additional mark for
demonstrating the understanding that low diversity increases species vulnerability to
population change.
(d)
Over half of students answered correctly, with habitat provision and removal of parasites
being the most common answers. Symbiotic relationship did not gain a mark as the actual
relationship needed to be detailed eg nutrient acquisition.
Question 3
(a)
Generally well answered. Some students answered the competition mark point but failed to
name a resource that would be competed for eg food. Competition for habitat is too
general. Students needed to state specifically what it is within the habitat that the organism
is competing for. If the word habitat is being used to reference space, then nesting site or
shelter from predators are much more specific answers. Some students stated that the
harlequin ladybird may be more tolerant to a disease rather than stating that the harlequin
may have brought a disease with it. Some students answered that the ladybirds had the
same niche. This answer needed further explanation that this would result in competition
for food/breeding sites/territory. Just under half of students gained two marks on this
question and a substantial number gained all three marks.
(b)
Well answered by most students, but apparent inadequate reading of the question caused
problem answers. These included answers such as pollination and the role of ladybirds in
the food chain, which needed to be related to an economic benefit to humans for the mark
to be awarded.
(c)(i)
A very well answered question where most students answered the correct year that the
ladybird population reached carrying capacity.
(c)(ii) A small percentage of students did not understand the context of the question and a range
of unsuitable factors were suggested, including density independent factors, as well as
selective breeding, competition, captivity, and habitat management: These attained no
4 of 7
REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – A-LEVEL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES ENVS1 – JUNE 2016
marks. Those who correctly identified a density dependent factor most commonly only
attained one more mark by describing that a population will decrease when their named
factor becomes more limiting above the carrying capacity. Maintaining population around
carrying capacity also includes how the population can increase again when it falls below
this level. However this was generally a well answered question with a small number
gaining the full four marks and over half of students achieving half marks or more. A few
students did not attempt this question at all.
Question 4
(a)(i)
Students were required to use Figure 5 and Figure 6 in their answer. For example, they
needed to explain why the absence of thyme at 25 cm (Figure 6) would affect the butterfly
population (Figure 5). Without both pieces of information the marks were not given. Most
students did not receive a mark for the 3 cm point since they did not explain why the wild
thyme absence affected the population.
(a)(ii) Most students gained one mark for stating there would be too much competition for food.
Some clear ideas about niche overlap were demonstrated, however students who
mentioned that the ants had similar ecological niches did not gain a mark since this
information was given to them in the question. Some failed to state what they would
compete for eg food or nesting sites, or the specific factor linked to their range of tolerance
eg temperature. Over half of students attained only one of the two marks available and
only the better students attained full marks.
(b)
This was generally well answered. Some students failed to mention succession and some
failed to mention that human management is involved. Since this was only a one mark
question, failure to reference both parts, meant that no marks were awarded. This is a
definition question and students should be able to recall important terms accurately and
precisely.
(c)(i)
The majority of students calculated the answer correctly.
(c)(ii) This question was well answered with an even distribution of marks. Some students
mentioned they would carry out systematic sampling and then went on to say they would do
it randomly, or that they would randomly sample using a belt transect. This demonstrates
that there is some confusion over these practical techniques. While the mark scheme
allows both random and systematic methods of sample location, it is preferable for students
to state only one method, to prevent contradiction. Some students still chose throwing
quadrats to achieve random sampling. This method is not appropriate for random at
A-level. Some students did not pay enough attention to the information in the question and
included elements such as count the individual plants and count the number of species
present, when they were asked to determine percentage cover. There was some confusion
with Lincoln Index, Simpson’s Diversity Index or even the Leopold Matrix among weaker
candidates.
(d)
Just under half of students achieved maximum marks on this question. Students who did
not know the meaning of the term abiotic did not achieve any marks, since they mainly
discussed biotic changes during succession. Some students identified correct abiotic
factors but only stated that they would change; they did not state the direction of change
and therefore missed a mark.
5 of 7
REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – A-LEVEL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES ENVS1 – JUNE 2016
Question 5
(a)
This appeared to be an accessible question with over three quarters of students attaining
the mark. The most frequent answer given was urbanisation.
(b)
Most students attained this mark with biological corridors being the most frequent answer
by far. Habitat was too vague for credit and shelter needed to be qualified.
(c)(i)
This question scored reasonably well although only the best candidates attained all five
marks. Some candidates gave alternative methods eg Tüllgren funnel or pitfall traps. It is
inappropriate to list answers in this way, expecting examiners to choose the correct answer.
Some gave vague methods such as random sampling with quadrats along a transect.
Many had not read that the question related to soil invertebrates, so a large number used
pitfall traps, which would be inappropriate. Even if the Tüllgren funnel was correctly
identified as suitable apparatus, some described using it in the field rather than taking soil
samples to the laboratory or, inexplicably, used leaf litter rather than soil. Many lost
potential marks by not clearly stating that the number of species must be counted together
with the number of individuals of each species in order to calculate a diversity index.
Statements such as count and identify the species are too vague. Some students correctly
used a transect but suggested taking soil samples at inappropriate intervals eg every
5 metres despite the total length of the buffer strip being only 4 metres.
(c)(ii) This question proved challenging, requiring students to recall where soil invertebrates live
and what they eat. Many gave responses that were not related to organisms that live under
the surface and eat DOM that had been incorporated into the soil. Instead they focused on
how the hedge would change abiotic factors above the surface of the ground eg protection
from predation or shelter from climate, provision of berries or nesting sites. Stronger
candidates related their answer to soil conditions, such as soil moisture or increased DOM.
This resulted in one third of students attaining one mark and very few attaining the
maximum two marks.
Question 6
(a)(i)
This question was well answered with well over half of students attaining the one mark
available, showing students have a good understanding of the aims of a National Park.
(a)(ii) This question was not quite as well answered as part (a)(i). This was mainly due to the
language used in the answers, which did not adequately describe the conflict. This was
usually with respect to wildlife conservation conflicts. Poor language included vague
statements such as damage to the environment.
(b)
This was a broad and open question which enabled students to draw on a wide range of
conservation methods from the specification. As such, it was expected that the answers
would reflect this large topic area. Many candidates gained maximum marks for content
with relative ease. Those who did not gain many marks tended to write at great length
about only one method of conservation eg the designation of areas, and therefore their
answer was entirely composed of a catalogue of designations such as SSSI, SPA, SAC,
NNR. Some strong answers were seen with some specific examples of designated areas
and species protected. Only a few candidates gained full QWC marks and a substantial
6 of 7
REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION – A-LEVEL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES ENVS1 – JUNE 2016
number of students did not achieve any QWC marks. Common problems in this area
included poor capitalisation of names of legislation, designations and organisations, the use
of informal language and poor grammar.
Mark Ranges and Award of Grades
Grade boundaries and cumulative percentage grades are available on the Results Statistics
page of the AQA Website.
Converting Marks into UMS marks
Convert raw marks into Uniform Mark Scale (UMS) marks by using the link below.
UMS conversion calculator
7 of 7