AQA GCE Geography Unit 3- 7th June 2013

if the question's on trade vs aid in LDCs but doesn't explicitly say that, can you still get a reasonably high mark by talking about just aid? (the question was about how they need assistance from other countries or something like that), i talked about a few things outside of the syllabus which i found out whilst researching if that might help! - thanks

like none of that. I just talked about how as places become more economically developed they move away from agriculture and stuff then improvements in public health and sanitation like in the industrial revolution. We literally did one single lesson on that stuff

i asked my teacher and he said you have to be able to talk about more than one area of your spec and i said i didnt talk about trade and he said that i really should have
and then i checked the mark scheme someone posted on here which was for exactly the ame essay question set in 2011 i think, and it said that maximum you could get was 20 if your argument was imbalanced which mine was im really hoping i wrote enough good stuff on aid to help me get more marks and praying that my stuctured q's went well but im really not sure anymore as i dont think the world cities one went particularly well as i only talked about 1 casetudy when it clearly said 'using examples'

please aqa be nice too me

Overall the exam was good, the weather essay was pretty good, talked about Milankovitch cycles, sun spots and volcanoes, the global warming myth that global warming is a myth setup by developed countries to halt development of developing countries, the kyoto protocol failing and a synoptic link to world cities about how a local response with recycling is the way forward.

Missed out Ice Cores Cry.... But said about the lag time between CO2 increase and ice caps melting...

World cities was terrible, and the tectonics mann whitney U was a bit bleh, I feel sorry for anyone who has done paper 4B rather than 4A they would of been clueless. The managing seismic events question was a god send, easily blasted out 2 pages on planning, preperation and prediction.

Don't think i did brilliantly, hoping for just a C xD

i covered more than one by talking about why they're classed as LDCs so hopefully that gains me a few marks! i wish they made the question more clearer! i talked about Mumbai and Rio De Janeiro, but i felt as if i was just repeating myself for them /: how many marks do you need for an A overall?

://// I forgot about the Kyoto protocol... I should have said what can be done on a local, national and international scale instead of just listing some responses, yeah I should have worded it differently. T_T

I sometimes think I did pretty well and then I go on TSR and notice all my mistakes.

same :P, but only wrote like half a page on responses. thought the question was more about evidence for

I did it like this too! Said about Mumbai being more sustainable than São Paulo because they're an LIC and it's fuelling their economic growth. I also linked it to suburbanisation as a result of urbanisation being unsustainable in LA. I told my teacher this an she said that what I wrote sounded good but other people wrote about transport and waste management and she said ok could write about that too.

after the exam i had a look at canals in the text book and there was like 1 sentance on it =/

I heard that you can still get 40/40 even if you only talk about transport or waste in relation to urbanisation. You don't have to talk about both. The conclusion is quite important I have been told but if you evaluated throughout and explained why something is not sustainable you should be fine mate!

what did you talk about in the essay? I need 68/90

um I started by separating sustainability into economic, environmental and social, and drew a lil diagram showing how they interlinked, and basically said that my argument was that developed were more sustainable than undeveloped...
looked at london, brazil and mumbai... spoke about how brazilian government were trying to manage urbanisation in brazil.. said that it was now becoming sustainable and in relation to mmumbai it was developed (silly thing to have said) then said about how image isn't as much a factor in medcs.. brazil having olympics etc

then said about health care, compared london and brazil... ultimately sustainability is about resources/needs and i said medcs have the ability to meet the needs of the population sustainably whereas mumbai doesn't...

then said abuot reurbanisation in london... it's in a medcs interest to encourage people to come to the cities, where the most jobs are etc, economy can sustain itself more, whereas there's a surplus in mumbai so can't be effectively managed, reurbanisation shows how urbanisation is a good thing in some developed countries, and arguably because it's cyclical it's more sustainable because the chain sustains itself...

sounds crap but it made sense when I wrote it ha. Just glad it was over. Don't think I got my A*

Man I still feel a bit crappy about the exam, really wish I did the cities essay and the challenges structured. The 8 marker was so horrid, I've checked in the textbook and there's the tiniest of paragraphs on 'World Cities' and at no point do they elaborate further than economics. How can you squeeze 8 marks from that!?!

what even was that statistical test about? Are we meant to have learnt about it? I figured I'd choose that over the having to do the 10 mark routeways quesiton.

It is on the skills syllabus, so I assume we should! My teacher really drummed it into us after it came up on our skills paper mock so I didn't feel too bad about it, and there's nothing to say it can't come up on this paper instead.

Anyway, it's to show whether there's a significant difference between two sets of data - in this case, there was.