Context Section (6 marks)

Some people think (I mean ESS teachers) that it is hard to score well using secondary data. This doesn't have to be true as long as you don't fall in to some of the common traps other students do. The most important thing to establish is a relevant, coherent and focused research question. You can't just start finding data on the websites below without a good understanding of what you want to achieve. In order to do this you must have a face to face session with me so you can be confident in your IA choice. Here is Malik's IA which score 22/30. You can have a read through this to see what a good (but not perfect) IA looks like

Throughout your IA you should use your checklist wisely to make sure you have all the elements needed for a good IA score

Here are all the great data websites - they should provide you will all the information you need to complete your IA

Methodology

The method section is a set of instructions that can be followed by someone else so they can repeat what you have done to get the same or similar data. For secondary data collection it should look something like this

1. To collect data for (x) go to the following website www.______.com

2. countries will be selected after being ranked from lowest to highest GDP per capita, then every 10th country will be selected for sampling

3. collect data on gdp per capita for the countries selected through the systematic sampling method detailed above

4. repeat this data collection for two additional websites (list them) and record in the table 1

5. If there is no data available for a selected country the country below this will be selected

6. to collect data for (y) go to the following website

7. record the data in table 1

8. repeat for the following websites

9. once data collection has been finalised average, standard deviation, anomalies and further r squared correlation coefficients will be calculated.

The highlighted sections below give a model for a highly scoring secondary data IA

Justification of methodology

Ethical and risk assessment

Use three reliable websites to collect your data if possible - this will decrease the risk of unreliable data.

Safety: Screen time - not spending too much time at the computer - take regular breaks and stand up stretch - wear a visor to reduce glare and headaches.

You should use the following 4 subheadings for this section.

1. Evaluation of conclusion

   • start with the research question and answer it clearly - "the evidence presented in this investigation support/do not support the hypothesis. There is evidence to suggest a there is a correlation between x and y. AND - how does is it link to the environmental issue - what light does it throw onto the subject

2. Evaluation of method; You must mention strengths and weaknesses of method and limitations

3. Modifications to method; show how you could address each weakness with an improvement to the method

4. Further research: Explain what else could be studied and what research should be done to improve the understanding of the EI more

There are 3 aspects in this section

1. evaluates the conclusion in the context of the environmental issue

2. discusses strengths, weaknesses and limitations within the method used

3. suggests modifications addressing one or more significant weaknesses with large effect and further areas of research.

1. What is the examiner looking for in the evaluation?

• evaluation of the conclusion with respect to the RQ and EI

• Discussion: strengths, weaknesses and limitations of the method

• Evaluation of the investigation

• proposed modifications

You have to discuss and evaluate the conclusion separately from stating them in the RAC. You must start with the original RQ then see if secondary data/research to support/refutes the conclusion. Is there evidence to suggest the conclusion is in agreement with what else you have read. Is the conclusion surprising? Are there reasons why?

2. Strengths and weaknesses and limitations

What is the examiner looking for in the evaluation?

• a discussion of strengths - this might be general or refer to specific parts that worked well.

• discussion of the reliability of the data

• identification of weaknesses in the method

• the evaluation of the relative impact of a weakness in the investigation

If you only address practical issues by saying just carrying out the procedure better, then you can only get a maximum 4. If you only give one element of strengths, weaknesses and limitations is completely missed out then the maximum is a 4 in this aspect. So give strengths, weaknesses and limitations.

3. Modifications and further research

What is the examiner looking for in the modifications and further research section?

• suggestions of modifications

• Focus on one or two significant issues

• Further areas of research

Suggestions modifications/further research should be precise, focused and relevant to the investigation. You must discuss how the modifications you suggest might bring the experimental results closer to what is expected.

so;

1. suggest a modification that is related to one of the weaknesses you have identified

2. then say how this modification will contribute to the reliability, precision and accuracy of the results

3. do this for two modifications

The further research suggested should follow on from the research in a meaningful way and go beyond the original method of investigation to show how it will enhance understanding of the EI or RQ

Here is what the examiner said about the Malaysian stream investigation; this only scored a 3 so the weakest part of the investigation.

" Discussion is more a link to, a continuation or repetition of the CXT. Very little connection between the conclusion and the EI. No strengths, weaknesses/limitations described. Suggests modifications and further areas of research. No strengths so max 4 in that band; in 1-2 for modifications, and further research is weak. Overall a 3"