Evaluate the extent to which large-scale water transfer schemes are more effective than local, sustainable approaches in ensuring water security. [12 marks]
AO1 (published assessment objective): Identify and interpret explicit and implicit information and ideas; select and synthesise evidence from different texts (English Language). For Literature: read, understand and respond to texts, maintaining a critical style, developing an informed personal response, and using textual references including quotations to support and illustrate interpretations. For Geography: demonstrate knowledge of locations, places, processes, environments and different scales. For History: demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the key features and characteristics of the periods studied.
AO2 (published assessment objective): Explain, comment on and analyse how writers use language and structure to achieve effects and influence readers, using relevant subject terminology to support their views (English). For Geography: demonstrate geographical understanding of concepts and how they are used in relation to places, environments and processes, and the interrelationships between places, environments and processes. For History: explain and analyse historical events and periods studied using second-order historical concepts.
AO3 (published assessment objective): Compare writers' ideas and perspectives, as well as how these are conveyed, across two or more texts (English Language). For Literature: show understanding of the relationships between texts and the contexts in which they were written. For Geography: apply knowledge and understanding to interpret, analyse and evaluate geographical information and issues to make judgements. For History: analyse, evaluate and use sources (contemporary to the period) to make substantiated judgements.
Assessed against AO1, AO2, AO3 using Revision Robin's own level descriptors below. These are not the exam board's mark scheme. Every quotation in the feedback is checked against your answer before you see it, and a teacher's mark overrides ours.
| Level 4 · 10 to 12 | Demonstrates a thorough and detailed understanding of the geographical issue or process. Develops a sustained and consistently logical line of reasoning, which is fully justified and shows clear insight. Selects and applies a wide range of accurate and detailed geographical information and ideas. Presents a comprehensive and well-balanced argument or explanation, demonstrating a clear awareness of differing viewpoints, factors or scales. Uses relevant and specific case studies/examples effectively and integrally to support the answer. Draws clear, cogent and well-substantiated conclusions. |
| Level 3 · 7 to 9 | Demonstrates a good understanding of the geographical issue or process. Develops a clear and mostly logical line of reasoning, which is generally justified. Selects and applies a range of accurate geographical information and ideas. Presents a balanced argument or explanation, showing awareness of more than one viewpoint, factor or scale. Uses relevant case studies/examples to support the answer. Draws clear and mostly substantiated conclusions. |
| Level 2 · 4 to 6 | Demonstrates some understanding of the geographical issue or process. Presents a line of reasoning which has some structure, but may lack depth or full justification. Selects and applies some geographical information and ideas, which may lack detail or precision. Presents a partially balanced argument or explanation, or focuses mainly on one viewpoint, factor or scale. Uses some limited case studies/examples, but these may lack detail or direct relevance. Draws basic conclusions, which may not be fully substantiated. |
| Level 1 · 1 to 3 | Demonstrates a limited or superficial understanding of the geographical issue or process. Presents an undeveloped or unorganised line of reasoning. Uses limited and/or inaccurate geographical information or ideas. Presents a very limited or no attempt at a balanced argument or explanation, often focusing on superficial observations. Uses very limited or no case studies/examples, or they are irrelevant. Draws superficial or no conclusions. |