Project Guidelines for pupils and teachers.

Chapter 1 – Write a sub-heading ‘Purpose of the study’

Location maps.

Location maps must have

1 Title and labels.

2 Annotations describing location, spatially with features.

3 Grid References

To be marked at level 3.

Write technical terms in bold and explain them in a glossary format.

Chapter 2 – Methodology

There should be at least 6 methods to be marked at level 3. You can count Questionnaire, pedestrian count, traffic count, Facility survey, Bi-Polar semantic differential survey of quality of environment, Tax disc survey, Shopping Basket survey as primary sources of data. You can also count the appropriate use of the Internet and text books as a further two methods of data collection. These latter methods are secondary sources of information.

Chapter 3 – Results

PRESENTATION

You need at least 2 complex diagrams to receive a level 3 mark.

Examples of complex diagrams are :-

• Located bar charts/pie charts set out on a base map with Grid References.
• Desire line diagrams showing overlays of sphere of influence of two competing stores.
• Photos that are annotated appropriately.
• Choropleth maps with supplementary information.
• Located flow charts supported by base maps.

ANALYSIS

Analysis should follow each diagram.

Analysis should take the form of three paragraphs.

• Paragraph one explains in words what is shown by the diagram – level 1.
• Paragraph two analyses the diagram with respect to the hypothesis underpinning the investigation – level 2.
• Paragraph three discusses the findings represented by the diagram with respect to other diagrams and findings in the chapter. These LINKS will ensure a level 3 mark.

Chapter 4 – Evaluation.

Systematically evaluate each method. Show clear sub headings.

Include a summary sentence in this order but appropriate to your individual project.

I collected – questionnaires on a wet day therefore my results are not representative and my conclusion is invalid/inappropriate.

Remember to explain why and how the study could be improved and/or extended.

General

Candidate MUST number every page.

Teachers.

Remember a perfect study is not required. Ignore what is wrong and do not deduct marks. Mark what is right – is there enough to get maximum marks?

Mark each page with a tick to show it has been read. Annotate evidence in pencil as L1, L2 or L3. Mark closely to the mark scheme.

Applied Understanding

Mark in the context of what the candidate has set out to do ie the purpose of the study. Six technical terms used appropriately will satisfy criterion if used effectively. The candidate must use appropriate theory to provide a theoretical rationale.

Methodology

The new specification places greater evidence on WHY the candidate uses a particular method. There must be a clear TITLE and a clear HYPOTHESIS (singular).

1. Selection.

They must justify why they are doing research into a particular topic. This may be because it is on the syllabus or topical or because of the ease of collecting the data.

2. Observation and collection.

Methodology can be put in the form of a table in landscape format. Headings would be METHOD (WHAT), HOW, WHY, WHEN, WHERE.

3. Range of data.

Remember the word limit of 2,500 words. The range of methods should be at least 3 up to a maximum of 6. There must be two tables for primary and secondary data methods of data collection.

4. Show evidence of originality.

Candidate should provide an A3 sheet of an annotated questionnaire that they have constructed. The questionnaire should be unique in form and question to each candidate. Candidates should look for an original form of data collection. The concept of originality only applies to the methodology.

5.Level marks

Level 1 is BASIC, Level 2 is CLEAR and Level 3 is DETAILED.

Data Presentation.

1 ICT

There should be 2 pieces of evidence of the use of ICT. At its simplest this could be the title page which has been word processed and has within in it a piece of inserted clip art. A table inserted into WORD is 2 pieces of evidence.

2 Range of presentations.

This depends upon the topic but they must be accurate. They must show a title and a key.

3. Complexity.

There should be at least 2 complex diagrams. Discourage all graphs done on a computer. Most of the graphs in Excel are ‘simple’. The marker should assess the appropriateness. If the candidate adds a trend line it becomes complex. There should be nothing without something added. See notes above for examples of complex diagrams.

4.QWC

No more SPAG. Having read the whole project you mark to take off for poor English. This is fine-tuning of a mark or two.

Data Interpretation.

There must be a conclusion. Credit the conclusion chapter here. The conclusion must be based on the data they have collected even if the data does not fit the model.

Levels

Level 1 is description by repeating in words what the diagram shows.

Level 2 offers explanation for what is shown. The explanation should have a ‘because’.

Level 3 is when ‘links’ between different sets of data are compared and analysed.

Evaluation

Not all methods need to be evaluated. However a methodical evaluation of each method set out clearly with sub-headings displays to the examiner clear organisation.

This chapter is an evaluation of what they did. They need to suggest how they can improve what they did. They need to suggest how they could have improved their enquiry. This improvement should not be a simple wish list – credit comes if the improvement reasons are explained.

Eg ‘If I did this again I would ask more people because………. and if……….’

This section should be a critique.

Levels

Level 1 – excuses and simple criticisms of method.

Level 2 – Evaluation of methods and/or results. Discussion of results should trigger level 2, e.g. ‘…..the sample size of 10 was small therefore the results could be biased.’

Level 3 - The candidate needs to show evidence of a critique of methods, results and conclusion. This would get them straight to 5 marks. It could be in one sentence e.g.’ I went to the lowest gauging point on a wet day therefore results are not representative and therefore the conclusion is inappropriate’