Edexcel Geog Unit 4 6GE04 01 - 9th June 2017 - Tectonic Hazards [Exam Discussion]

Original post by Ed coe

Can i refer to myself in the report? Meaning like in the conclusion for example can i say: I have broken it down into 4 main factors which i believe are....

I have done that in previous mocks and my teacher has said it is fine.

Reply 102

bob_1999

Original post by chelseafc10

I plan on splitting my analysis into human factors, e.g. economic development, governance and community preparedess, and physical factors, e.g. type of hazard (magnitude, frequency, etc) and topology/climate. And doing one or two case studies for each sub factor (depending on time). Assuming timing is fine, do you guys think that that's a good structure to do?

I'm only planning on doing 4 factors in my main analysis because otherwise I will run out of time and my points will not be detailed enough.

If you can write really fast then it sounds good to me :smile:

Reply 103

LucyCox

Anyone else still mega stuck on this? Ahhh

Reply 104

Original post by bob_1999

I'm only planning on doing 4 factors in my main analysis because otherwise I will run out of time and my points will not be detailed enough.

If you can write really fast then it sounds good to me :smile:

Yh, how many case studies are you going to do for each of your 4 points?
E.g. one case study per point or two, etc?

Reply 105

schoolboyproject

Original post by bob_1999

I have done that in previous mocks and my teacher has said it is fine.

I would actually heavily advise you to not refer to yourself. It's not going to push you down a grade and it's only a tiny factor of writing style, but saying 'I've done this/that...' seems unprofessional. Using terms such as, 'the report follows a 4 step approach' as opposed to, 'I have used 4 approaches' will set you out as a strong essay.

As well as in evaluative points (e.g. in 6GE03), the phrase 'I believe' or 'I think' actually can come across quite weakly. One of my fav teachers the other day joked to me that 'who actually cares what 'you' think...', if you are making a truly summative point, your argument should be definite, regardless of whether just you or other people think it i.e., implying there is no possible, logical, other explanation BECAUSE of the points this essay outlines...

For example, instead of 'In conclusion, I believe economic factors are more important in effective management than physical factors because of x and x and x...'. Rephrase as, 'In conclusion, while physical factors do play a pertinent role in the management, it is indeed, the economic factors that are most salient in bla bla bla...'.

Hope this helps - as I say, only a minor point...but may help! :smile:

Reply 106

Theawesomejem

14

Original post by Imaluza

Here is the example essay. I hope this makes sense?

Overall your report is good but I have a few recommendations :smile:

1) Research and Methodology should go after your introduction and you need to mention-age of source like if it's older it may be out of date, reliability, bias, triangulate and peer reviewed" and how this impacts your findings.
2) Analysis should go after R & M and should be separated into 3.1, 3.2,3.3,3.4 with subconclusions e.g. 3.1.1. The only way you can score full marks in QWC/on structure and in the conclusion is if you do subconclusions throughout

Your figures are really well used and help your report, I also did one based on the spectrum of response for mocks :smile:

btw the fact you've used so many figures could be a hindrance as you might not finish but if you can draw it in time should be fine! (2-3 is recommended by examiners)

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 107

Imaluza

5

Original post by Theawesomejem

Overall your report is good but I have a few recommendations :smile:

1) Research and Methodology should go after your introduction and you need to mention-age of source like if it's older it may be out of date, reliability, bias, triangulate and peer reviewed" and how this impacts your findings.
2) Analysis should go after R & M and should be separated into 3.1, 3.2,3.3,3.4 with subconclusions e.g. 3.1.1. The only way you can score full marks in QWC/on structure and in the conclusion is if you do subconclusions throughout

Your figures are really well used and help your report, I also did one based on the spectrum of response for mocks :smile:

btw the fact you've used so many figures could be a hindrance as you might not finish but if you can draw it in time should be fine! (2-3 is recommended by examiners)

Posted from TSR Mobile

Ahhh thank you, my teacher said that this was the structure that we should use - but I guess if you can only score the top marks if its in that order, Ill change it around.
I just did a mock for this essay, with all the diagrams, and finished with about 5 minutes to spare, so I I think the amount of diagrams is not hurting my writing time too much.
Thanks for the advice!

Reply 108

Theawesomejem

14

Original post by Theawesomejem

Overall your report is good but I have a few recommendations :smile:

1) Research and Methodology should go after your introduction and you need to mention-age of source like if it's older it may be out of date, reliability, bias, triangulate and peer reviewed" and how this impacts your findings.
2) Analysis should go after R & M and should be separated into 3.1, 3.2,3.3,3.4 with subconclusions e.g. 3.1.1. The only way you can score full marks in QWC/on structure and in the conclusion is if you do subconclusions throughout

Your figures are really well used and help your report, I also did one based on the spectrum of response for mocks :smile:

btw the fact you've used so many figures could be a hindrance as you might not finish but if you can draw it in time should be fine! (2-3 is recommended by examiners)

Posted from TSR Mobile

Original post by Imaluza

Ahhh thank you, my teacher said that this was the structure that we should use - but I guess if you can only score the top marks if its in that order, Ill change it around.
I just did a mock for this essay, with all the diagrams, and finished with about 5 minutes to spare, so I I think the amount of diagrams is not hurting my writing time too much.
Thanks for the advice!

There's nothing wrong with it tbh that would easily be an A imo just nitpicking! I am in awe that you finished in time😂I prewrote my conclusion and the end of my analysis is barely readable (got 63) but still 1h 30mins is not enough time!!!

Reply 109

Imaluza

5

Original post by Theawesomejem

There's nothing wrong with it tbh that would easily be an A imo just nitpicking! I am in awe that you finished in time😂I prewrote my conclusion and the end of my analysis is barely readable (got 63) but still 1h 30mins is not enough time!!!

Okay, I don't mind - I'm very open to the criticisms!
Tbh, my hand cramped so hard by the end of it, it felt like the cramp was up to my elbow! And i've been 'training', I always try and write so much that I have just managed to develop a handwriting that is quite quick and not totally illegible!

Reply 110

The pre release this year says 'hazards' not 'tectonic hazards' which it has never done before.
Has anyone got any thoughts about this as to maybe prepare a couple of HM hazard case studies too?

(edited 6 years ago)

Reply 111

username1896979

13

anybody know example where good international relations had increased the response to a hazard

Reply 112

Original post by halliethestudent

anybody know example where good international relations had increased the response to a hazard

The management of the eruption in Mount Pinatubo, Philippines in 1991 was largely helped by US interventions who provided a lot of aid and did a lot in the response

Reply 113

Does anyone know if you need to talk at all about hydrometeorological hazards, like hurricanes, at all (like in the intro or through case studies)?

I was under the impression you do need to, but my friend says you definitely don't.

Please let me know!!!

Thanks

Reply 114

saft

8

Original post by chelseafc10

Does anyone know if you need to talk at all about hydrometeorological hazards, like hurricanes, at all (like in the intro or through case studies)?

I was under the impression you do need to, but my friend says you definitely don't.

Please let me know!!!

Thanks

Hi, no I don't believe we do.

Reply 115

Original post by saft

Hi, no I don't believe we do.

Oh right.
Thanks for the reply.

How come that is because the pre release said 'hazards' which is unusual as it usually says 'tectonic hazards' suggesting this year it HM hazards might be valid?

Reply 116

Imaluza

5

Original post by chelseafc10

Oh right.
Thanks for the reply.

How come that is because the pre release said 'hazards' which is unusual as it usually says 'tectonic hazards' suggesting this year it HM hazards might be valid?

The pre-release says 'Option 1: Tectonic Activity and Hazards' so I really don't think we need any HM examples

Reply 117

Original post by Imaluza

The pre-release says 'Option 1: Tectonic Activity and Hazards' so I really don't think we need any HM examples

That's a good point, I just thought it was a bit peculiar that it didn't say 'tectonic hazards' specifically in the pre-release whereas it usually does.
But yh, I think you're right.

Reply 118