Download Investigations in Environmental Science June 2016

GCSE
Environmental Science
44402: Investigations in Environmental Science
Report on the Examination
4440
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 – GCSE ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE – 44402 – JUNE 2016
ISA 1 – Fieldwork Investigation. Insects and plants.
ISA 2 – Laboratory Investigation. Sea level rise.
This year saw the sixth examination of ISAs in GCSE Environmental Science. Moderators
received the same training as last year and the same guidelines on the administration of the
examination in schools were published. The moderator team for 2016 was two experienced
moderators. Continuity of quality in marking standards was maintained by attendance at a
Moderator Standardisation Meeting and re-marking of selected samples from moderators by the
Principal Moderator. This year saw the introduction of the new eSubmissions method of centre
mark submission.
More students attempted the Laboratory ISA than the Fieldwork ISA this year (about 20% doing
the Fieldwork ISA). Some schools may have perceived the laboratory work to be an easier
investigation to organise, but at the extreme some over-simplistic work was done which limited the
opportunity of some students to do well. Teachers who did best with their investigations appeared
to be those who shared the challenge with colleagues in the science departments in their schools.
As last year, because no complete school-based investigation was seen, it was difficult at times to
interpret some of the selective comments made in answers which referred to their own
investigation portfolio. This was especially so where a few schools submitted tables and graphs
which did not relate to written answers in Part 1 of each paper. The moderators were satisfied that
the marking guidelines allowed teacher-markers to fairly reflect the ability of their students through
the published mark scheme. There was some deviation by teachers from the suggested mark
scheme. For about half of schools all of the submitted student marks were ‘out of tolerance’.
Administration of the ISA examination
There were fewer administration problems with schools this year. Only a couple of schools
submitted work after the published deadline. The new eSubmissions system speeded up the
delivery of samples to moderators and enabled a more rapid delivery of moderated marks to AQA.
Several schools did not send a fully completed Centre Declaration Sheet with the sample scripts.
All schools should note that separate Candidate Record Forms are not needed for the
Environmental Science GCSE. There were fewer cases where schools sent scripts signed by
neither schools, nor teachers, nor both.
Once received, the ISA papers were generally in good order. Apart from a few schools, where the
presentation was untidy and the work of some students difficult to read, the scripts were generally
well produced and based on some good school-based investigations. Fewer schools submitted
unbound work this year which made the physical processing of the moderation work easier. Some
teachers failed to write their marks on the scripts or wrote insufficient annotations to assist the
moderators in finding evidence to award marks. Markers are asked to identify all evidence used to
justify their marks. Teachers are asked to review all scripts closely before sending them off for
moderation to ensure that the scripts are acceptable.
There were still several teachers who did not keep strictly to the marking guidelines and were too
generous in their allocation of marks. Many implied but unclear answers were awarded marks.
Some nonsensical statements were given marks as well as some which were plainly incorrect
according to the marking guidelines. There was some leniency with the marking of tables and
3 of 10
REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION –GCSE ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE – 44402 – JUNE 2016
graphs with some poor labelling and plotting given undeserved credit. It is recommended that if
teachers are unsure how to allocate marks they contact their Coursework Adviser.
This year, more accurate totals of marks were submitted and all schools included PSA marks on
the main mark sheet. Teachers are encouraged to contact their Coursework Adviser if they have
any difficulties, or attend one of the online Autumn Term training courses or arrange in-school CPD
from AQA.
General comments on both Fieldwork and Laboratory ISAs
•
In general the graph work was tidy this year. This made it easier to verify the accuracy of
work. However, there was still a lack of complete titles to graph axes and tables in the
work of many students. This is a cause for concern because marks can be too easily lost.
A particular omission was reference to ‘mean’ values and ‘per cm3’ on the dependent axis
labels. The word ‘amount’ was used by some instead of the correct quantity
measurement. In a few cases table contents did not match with the graph plots. Some
marking was too lenient for the table and graph. Marks were awarded in some cases for
points which were plotted incorrectly . Only a small minority of schools submitted the
original tables created by students (and marked by teachers before the data collection was
started). which made it difficult for moderators to confirm marks.
•
In a few cases students crossed out part of their answers without replacement with a new
statement. Sometimes the original negated statement was correct. It is important that
students submit a clear replacement answer.
•
Several students referred in their answers to variables and data which were not in the
graphs and tables they submitted.
•
Many basic terms need to be learnt more thoroughly by students. For example, the words
‘accuracy’ and ‘reliability’ are not interchangeable.
•
There was a lack of quantification in answers which required evidence for showing links
between variables. Many students did not refer to their own investigative data when asked
to do so and did not gain marks.
•
Moderators would welcome more information from some schools on the work done by
students in their investigations. This would give moderators a better understanding of the
answers given on the ISA papers. Some schools did this and it was a great help in
interpreting work and awarding marks where student comments were not sufficiently
detailed. One school sent complete sets of fieldwork notes, which was helpful.
•
Most investigations done by schools were straightforward and well organised. Most
students appeared to have understood the work they had done. This made it easier for
them to tackle Part 2 of each paper successfully.
4 of 10
REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION –GCSE ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE – 44402 – JUNE 2016
Specific comments – ISA 1 Fieldwork Investigation
Question 1
Most students identified the independent variable. Not all answers were qualified by units used (as
on their graphs and data tables) eg ‘size of flower’ should be qualified by ‘in cm2’.
Question 2
Many answers were too brief. More detail was needed on the method used to collect the data.
Question 2
The Teachers’ Notes required students to investigate the relationship between insects and plants.
A couple of schools did not use plants as the basis for their work and students entered 0 here. It is
important that teachers follow the guidelines closely so that students are not disadvantaged.
Question 3
(a)
Most students gave good reasons here. Simple responses like ‘there was not enough class
time to do any more’ were allowed, but they needed to be qualified statements.
(b)
Some students struggled with this but most gave good reasons eg.’this gave us enough to
work out an average which made the results more reliable’.
Question 4
(a)
Most students answered this well. There was some confusion over the meaning of
‘pattern’. A pattern is a relationship between individual items of information. It is not
enough to simply state two values of data from their observations.
(b)
This answer required reference to numerical data from the students’ own work. Describing
data only gained one mark here but any form of data manipulation (eg % change, range,
mean value etc.) was accepted to gain the second mark.
Question 5
(a)
Generally good ideas here.
(b)
Poorly answered. Students need to be more aware of the difference between the two words
‘reliable’ and ‘accurate’. It is not enough to say ‘you would get better data’.
5 of 10
REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION –GCSE ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE – 44402 – JUNE 2016
Question 6
Quality of graph and table construction was generally reasonable. However, more care and
accuracy is required at this level. If points need to be joined on the graph then they should be on a
smooth, clear line. Labelling of axes was generally weak and many graphs had inaccurate axial
scales. Commonly, the word ‘mean’ was omitted from the graph y axis where eg Mean insect
number values were plotted. Students lost marks if the table could not be identified as the
student’s own work and that this was drawn and marked by their teacher before they collected data
in the field.
Question 7
(a)
Not well answered. Almost any unbiased method was acceptable. For example: use of
random number tables to apply to a map grid.
(b)
Not enough here to say ‘it reduces bias’. The statement needs to be qualified.
Question 8
The answer needed to refer to non-continuous data or categories of data. Several students said ‘it
is easiest to see the information on a bar graph’ which is not acceptable. Students are expected to
know the principal types of graphs and their applications.
Question 9
(a)
The pattern must describe a period of activity. Simply stating high and low points in the
data is not demonstrating a pattern. Several students discussed patterns of inactivity which
was not what the question asked.
(b)
Several students quoted figures to describe the pattern and missed the point of the
question. They were expected to use information in the table or from their own knowledge
to explain the pattern of activity.
Question 10
Only a handful of students did not give the correct answer.
Question 11
(a)
Most students named a suitable control variable. It is important to remind students that the
control variable cannot be the independent or dependent variable already identified.
(b)
Most students wrote simple statements to show the link between the variable
and the bee activity. Only about half of the students qualified the statement with a
6 of 10
REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION –GCSE ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE – 44402 – JUNE 2016
higher level statement to gain full marks, eg brighter conditions are found around midday
which increase bee activity (first mark) because flowers are open fully and nectar is easier
to reach (second mark).
Question 12
Few students gained more than two marks. Most did not follow the key indicator words – ‘reliable
results’. Many were too vague. Some invented methods which were not practical eg following
bees from the hive to see where they land. There needs to be considerable detail in the method to
be used (eg type of sampling, how many observations, likely control variables, accuracy of
measurements etc.) The quality of written English was reasonable throughout, but more technical
words should have been used by more students.
Question 13
(a)
Generally well answered. The best answers here were those which suggested that there
would be more pollination of plants, a higher fruit yield and more food supplies for wildlife.
(b)
Many students incorrectly answered this question by referring to people getting stung by
bees. That is not relevant to the question which expected an answer related to changes in
ecological balance if more bees are suddenly introduced.
Specific comments – ISA 2 Laboratory Investigation
Question 1
Almost all students had the correct answer although the word ‘temperature’ was commonly
misspelt.
Question 2
(a)
This was well answered but some students did not include the units.
(b)
This was generally well done. Many students identified the hazard of heating to a point
where the water boiled.
Question 3
Most students saw that they needed to have sufficient data to calculate mean values which were
more reliable to work with.
7 of 10
REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION –GCSE ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE – 44402 – JUNE 2016
Question 4
Most students gave good answers to this. Vague answers were not accepted eg ‘because it might
be helpful’.
Question 5
(a)
Mostly done well. Almost all identified a relationship correctly.
(b)
Most students quoted figures from their graphs. To gain the second mark it was important
to do some data manipulation to give added value to the data.
Question 6
(a)
Most students wrote about ‘reliability’ and not ‘accuracy’ and therefore did not gain marks
here. Some students successfully referred to replacing glass thermometers with digital
thermometers which were more accurate and were easier to read.
(b)
Not all students linked their answer with their response in part (a). It is important that
students are aware of links between questions so that they do not lose marks.
Question 7
Only a small number did not identify the correct answer.
Question 8
Quality of graph and table construction was generally poor. More care and accuracy is required at
this level. If points need to be joined on the graph then they should be on a smooth, clear line.
Labelling of axes was generally weak and many graphs had inaccurate axial scales. Commonly,
the word ‘mean’ was omitted from the graph y axis where mean water height change values were
plotted. Few students successfully drew best-fit lines.
Question 9
(a) and (b)
Most students identified a hazard and mitigation measure successfully. There were some
vague answers eg ‘wear protective clothing if a hazard from hot pipes’, which were not
sufficiently specific (should be ‘wear protective gloves’).
Question 10
Almost all correctly calculated and identified the values here.
8 of 10
REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION –GCSE ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE – 44402 – JUNE 2016
Question 11
(a)
Almost all correctly calculated and identified the values here.
(b)
Most identified a cause for the anomaly, but several students did not gain marks due to lack
of clarity of expressing their ideas.
Question 12
(a)
Most students got this right.
(b)
Most students stated that the sensors were needed because of variations in water
temperature
throughout the pool. Fewer expanded this to reason that convection currents caused the
temperature variations.
Question 13
Most students gave the correct answer.
Question 14
Few students gained more than two marks. Most did not follow the key indicator words – ‘Clear
methods’ and ‘reliable results’. Many were too vague. Too many just gave a list of questions to be
asked if they selected a questionnaire survey. Some elected to build a model of the sea wall to
investigate effects. Much more was needed on methodology – eg number of people to be
questioned, what, where and when to be surveyed, sampling methods etc. The quality of written
English was reasonable throughout, but more technical words should have been used by more
students.
Question 15
Answers to this question were, generally, disappointing. Some did not relate to ‘quality of life’ or
‘local environment’. Several students stated ‘lower house prices’ as an effect, but did not identify
the related effect on quality of life. ’More flooding’ was not an answer unless it was clear what the
actual environmental effect of this was.
9 of 10
REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION –GCSE ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE – 44402 – JUNE 2016
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
10 of 10