[stef33]

I was wondering whether anyone would be able to help me as I did a model report and structured it by different factors . Though when looking at this thread some say that the question might be discuss how different groups of people determine the effectiveness of responses . But if this was the question would I structure it by different groups of people as I've tried to do that but am finding it quite hard as for every disaster there's been so many people involved so am just confused . How likely do you think the question is going to relate to factors ??

[brighteyes123]

(Original post by stef33)
I was wondering whether anyone would be able to help me as I did a model report and structured it by different factors . Though when looking at this thread some say that the question might be discuss how different groups of people determine the effectiveness of responses . But if this was the question would I structure it by different groups of people as I've tried to do that but am finding it quite hard as for every disaster there's been so many people involved so am just confused . How likely do you think the question is going to relate to factors ??

i think it's fine to do it by factors that's what i'm doing, you just have to be really careful to remember to keep dropping in what individual groups did as that is explicitly mentioned in the question, which factors have you used?

[ch119]

If the question were: 'Evaluate the effectiveness of a range of responses used by different groups of people to deal with tectonic hazards in a variety of locations' how would the main body of paragraphs be structured? Would it be using the hazard response model and constructing paragraphs on do nothing, loss, vulnerability, event + leave? Thanks

[brighteyes123]

(Original post by conniewd)
a possible question could be to what extent does a country's level of development affect the effectiveness of response

do you think if we got something like this we could base it on 'political development' 'social dev' 'economic dev' etc????

[stef33]

Oh thanks!! and I've structured it by both physical and human factors. Physical factors being plate tectonics and magnitude and human factor being development and education and training wbu??

[brighteyes123]

(Original post by stef33)
Oh thanks!! and I've structured it by both physical and human factors. Physical factors being plate tectonics and magnitude and human factor being development and education and training wbu??

oh mine's completely different haha i thought nature of the hazard (volcs more easy to predict than EQs) and then political economic and social stability.just 1 thing how do plate tectonics affect the effectiveness of response? i'd wanna drop in a tectonics diagram but i can't find relevance

[Flyteryder]

(Original post by brighteyes123)
do you think if we got something like this we could base it on 'political development' 'social dev' 'economic dev' etc????

Yeah, that would be a good way of exploring development.

[stef33]

like at a destructive plate boundary mainly explosive eruptions are evident which may mean that a larger reponse is neeeded. As well the effectivenes of the response may need to much higher as higher magnitude events occur at destructive plate boundarys like the montserrat volcanic eruption

[RossE94]

I'm also structuring this through factors like level of development, politics etc. Would you say it would be ok to use the same case study maybe twice, as often they overlap into different factors affecting response?
Also any advice on timings? How long should you spend on the introduction and conclusion?

[oli2wd]

Really struggling with this! Would anybody mind reading a paragraph I have drafted and give me a bit of guidance..not sure whether I am on the right lines. I plan on structuring around the disaster risk equation..so three sections in main analysis (Hazard profile, vulnerability, capacity to cope) - this is a paragraph from the vulnerability section.


Another factor which influences the effectiveness of responses by different groups of people is the population. If the population is vulnerable, in the event of a disaster they become heavily reliant on international aid in the form of supplies such as food, water and shelter. This was the case in the 2010 Haiti earthquake where 76% of the population live below the poverty line on less than $2 per day. This severely influenced the effectiveness of the response as it meant they did not have access to healthcare and education which are vital when coping with tectonic events such as the 2010 earthquake. Individuals and communities did not know how to effectively respond to the earthquake due to this lack of education and the effectiveness of aid agencies was limited as there was a lack of infrastructure such as hospitals.
NGO response was made less effective as time had to be taken to improve the area by building hospitals and importing large supplies of equipment which meant aid distribution could not start immediately. It has been estimated that $234 million worth of food rations had to be supplied by relief agencies due to the slow re-opening of local markets and the inability of subsistence farmers in the area to increase production due to the widespread destruction of farmland. Further influencing the effectiveness of the response was the fact that 80% of the population were living in slums which were constructed on polluted, steep and marshy land. A combination of the earthquake, high population densities and slum conditions caused landslides to occur and water to become contaminated which lead to the rapid spread of water borne diseases such as cholera which influenced the effectiveness of responses as it meant that aid agencies also had to deal with this secondary impact.
Japan on the other hand was much more in control of its population and the high levels of education and awareness about such tectonic hazards was a hugely influential factor which allowed the responses by individuals, the Japanese government, international governments and aid agencies to be much more effective. Every year on the 1st September Japan holds an earthquake awareness day which aims to educate people on how to respond to tectonic hazards. This resulted in individuals knowing how to respond to the 9.0 magnitude earthquake which struck on 11th March 2011 and therefore contributed to a much more effective response as the number of people affected was reduced. The knowledgeable government, unlike in Haitian government, was able to co-ordinate the aid supplied by internal and external bodies effectively to those who needed it thus creating an effective response. This is evident in that fact that the 30,000 of the Japanese military were mobilised within 20 minutes of the earthquake striking and had re-established communication systems within 3 days. In Haiti this same response took 2 weeks due to poor infrastructure which resulted in the port and roads being damaged. A factor related to population however that decreased the effectiveness of the response was the fact that Japan has an aging population. This reduces the effectiveness as older people are much more vulnerable to a hazard which was evident as 60% of the death toll was people aged over 60.

[RLT]

(Original post by oli2wd)
Really struggling with this! Would anybody mind reading a paragraph I have drafted and give me a bit of guidance..not sure whether I am on the right lines. I plan on structuring around the disaster risk equation..so three sections in main analysis (Hazard profile, vulnerability, capacity to cope) - this is a paragraph from the vulnerability section.


Another factor which influences the effectiveness of responses by different groups of people is the population. If the population is vulnerable, in the event of a disaster they become heavily reliant on international aid in the form of supplies such as food, water and shelter. This was the case in the 2010 Haiti earthquake where 76% of the population live below the poverty line on less than $2 per day. This severely influenced the effectiveness of the response as it meant they did not have access to healthcare and education which are vital when coping with tectonic events such as the 2010 earthquake. Individuals and communities did not know how to effectively respond to the earthquake due to this lack of education and the effectiveness of aid agencies was limited as there was a lack of infrastructure such as hospitals.
NGO response was made less effective as time had to be taken to improve the area by building hospitals and importing large supplies of equipment which meant aid distribution could not start immediately. It has been estimated that $234 million worth of food rations had to be supplied by relief agencies due to the slow re-opening of local markets and the inability of subsistence farmers in the area to increase production due to the widespread destruction of farmland. Further influencing the effectiveness of the response was the fact that 80% of the population were living in slums which were constructed on polluted, steep and marshy land. A combination of the earthquake, high population densities and slum conditions caused landslides to occur and water to become contaminated which lead to the rapid spread of water borne diseases such as cholera which influenced the effectiveness of responses as it meant that aid agencies also had to deal with this secondary impact.
Japan on the other hand was much more in control of its population and the high levels of education and awareness about such tectonic hazards was a hugely influential factor which allowed the responses by individuals, the Japanese government, international governments and aid agencies to be much more effective. Every year on the 1st September Japan holds an earthquake awareness day which aims to educate people on how to respond to tectonic hazards. This resulted in individuals knowing how to respond to the 9.0 magnitude earthquake which struck on 11th March 2011 and therefore contributed to a much more effective response as the number of people affected was reduced. The knowledgeable government, unlike in Haitian government, was able to co-ordinate the aid supplied by internal and external bodies effectively to those who needed it thus creating an effective response. This is evident in that fact that the 30,000 of the Japanese military were mobilised within 20 minutes of the earthquake striking and had re-established communication systems within 3 days. In Haiti this same response took 2 weeks due to poor infrastructure which resulted in the port and roads being damaged. A factor related to population however that decreased the effectiveness of the response was the fact that Japan has an aging population. This reduces the effectiveness as older people are much more vulnerable to a hazard which was evident as 60% of the death toll was people aged over 60.

I think this is a pretty effective paragraph.
Just a few things: it is quite long, so you'll want to cut it down a bit, otherwise there is no way you'll be able to reproduce it in the exam. This could be achieved by cutting down sentence size - when I was reading through the paragraph, I noticed how some sentences did drag on a bit.
Also, a bit more referencing to the essay title throughout would give the paragraph more focus.
Have you written a sub conclusion for this paragraph? It is quite important to do this as it shows constant assessing of factors throughout. It is also important in these sub conclusions to show how one factor is more important/the same as another. E.g. taking your structure of the disaster risk equation, 'Vulnerability can be seen as 'influencing the effectiveness of responses used by different groups of people' to a greater extent that hazard profiles. This is due to x ....
Also, you may need to be a bit more specific/add a bit more detail on the 'different groups of people', just in case the the question is asking about the effectiveness of these people. Then you can adapt your report more easily for the exam.

Hope this helps. I'm more than happy to read through your other paragraphs if you want some help as I'm following the same disaster risk equation structure as you!

[oli2wd]

(Original post by RLT)
I think this is a pretty effective paragraph.
Just a few things: it is quite long, so you'll want to cut it down a bit, otherwise there is no way you'll be able to reproduce it in the exam. This could be achieved by cutting down sentence size - when I was reading through the paragraph, I noticed how some sentences did drag on a bit.
Also, a bit more referencing to the essay title throughout would give the paragraph more focus.
Have you written a sub conclusion for this paragraph? It is quite important to do this as it shows constant assessing of factors throughout. It is also important in these sub conclusions to show how one factor is more important/the same as another. E.g. taking your structure of the disaster risk equation, 'Vulnerability can be seen as 'influencing the effectiveness of responses used by different groups of people' to a greater extent that hazard profiles. This is due to x ....
Also, you may need to be a bit more specific/add a bit more detail on the 'different groups of people', just in case the the question is asking about the effectiveness of these people. Then you can adapt your report more easily for the exam.

Hope this helps. I'm more than happy to read through your other paragraphs if you want some help as I'm following the same disaster risk equation structure as you!

THANK YOU, that's really helpful!! Yeah I am a bit of a 'waffler'!!
What factors are you talking about under each heading?
Yeah I do sub-conclusions at the end of each section to bring together and asses which factor/s is most important to different physical and human settings.

[RLT]

(Original post by oli2wd)
THANK YOU, that's really helpful!! Yeah I am a bit of a 'waffler'!!
What factors are you talking about under each heading?
Yeah I do sub-conclusions at the end of each section to bring together and asses which factor/s is most important to different physical and human settings.

I'm actually using the heading itself as a factor and discussing how that influences the effectiveness of responses. If I started putting factors under the heading, I'd start waffling, so I'm just picking up on points that refer to each section if that makes sense. For example, when talking about the hazard profiles, I've picked up on a few of the headings on the diagram (e.g. magnitude, areal extent etc) and explained how these influence the effectiveness of responses. What kind of factors have you put under the headings?

Oh, and I've been using this question ("The effectiveness of responses used by different groups of people to cope with tectonic hazards is influenced by a range of factors." Discuss) to create my model report as I feel that the content is generic enough to apply to the exam question.

Oh and don't worry, I waffle very badly too! I've never finished a geography exam in my life because of this!

[flying_ifan]

(Original post by stef33)
Oh thanks!! and I've structured it by both physical and human factors. Physical factors being plate tectonics and magnitude and human factor being development and education and training wbu??

I've done this too.

But I've also done suheadings under human and physical in order to help structure it
e.g

PHYSICAL FACTORS:
• magnitude and frequency
• location
• extent
• other factors

HUMAN FACTORS:
i) economic:
- development
- emergency services
- response time
- transport and infrastructure
- quality of buildings
ii) Political
iii) communications

Regarding the methodology, my teacher went on some sort of Edexcel talk about this unit and they strongly recommended that we use a table. This is because the mark scheme asks you to evaluate the sources you use - and be critical on some of them. My table goes like this:

Source: | Used to: | Evaluation:

[hannahc16]

(Original post by conniewd)
Seens as I got an E on the last paper, I can't really advise anyone on what to do but I got my paper back and can tell you what NOT to do

1) do not forget to quote where you got your definitions from
2) do NOT spend too long on methodology.... mine was at least half a page...there are other marks available in the research and methodology section (relevant concepts/models/case studies) do 5 mins max for this i spent way too long on mine last time which didnt give me enough time to develop the main body argument
3) do NOT try to cover too many factors. I did way too many factors last time, this time im going to chose fewer but go into more detail about them

also just a suggestion for the physical factors affecting response, instead of using Kashmir 2005 for isolated region therefore slow responses by rescue teams, you could use the more recent earthquake in Baghlan, Afganistan which reflects similar problems
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-18394720)

How many factors are you thinking then? I'm worried i'm gonna do too many

[RLT]

(Original post by hannahc16)
How many factors are you thinking then? I'm worried i'm gonna do too many

I'm structuring my report using the disaster risk equation.
I'm actually using the terms of this equation (so hazard profile, vulnerability and capacity to cope) as the factor and discussing how they individually influence the effectiveness of responses. I'm just picking up on points that refer to each heading if that makes sense. For example, when talking about the hazard profiles, I've picked up on a few of the headings on the diagram (e.g. magnitude, areal extent etc) and explained how these influence the effectiveness of responses.

This should stop you from doing too many factors and wasting too much time.

[silvertoes]

What case studies are you pairing for the different factors to use as examples?
Eg. Certain areas being mountainous and inaccessible could be Sichuan (2008) and Kashmir (2005)

[ak!]

stupid question probably but...

in my methodology table do i just write like Textbooks, Newspaper articles, NGOs and then in the bibliography actually name each source specifically?

I'm trying to write a practise answer as i haven't had chance to do this yet, ah so scared for this paper!

[RLT]

(Original post by ak!)
stupid question probably but...

in my methodology table do i just write like Textbooks, Newspaper articles, NGOs and then in the bibliography actually name each source specifically?

I'm trying to write a practise answer as i haven't had chance to do this yet, ah so scared for this paper!

I've been told that your methodology table can be your bibliography, so you don't have to do both.

[Yan_w]

so where does this methodology table go?
can we do it as we write the report?
like...

blah blah blah blah blahhh... for example, in Montserrat, 19 people were killed as they refused to leave to watch over their crops in 1995 according to the geography review March 2012. this source is not likely to be particularly biased and is likely to be correct because...

oh wait, why is the geography review a reliable source??????????