TGAU Daearyddiaeth A CBAC Marcio’r Ymholiad Gwaith Maes Gwersi a ddysgwyd o safoni’r asesiad dan reolaeth yn 2013 Most centres mark the Fieldwork Enquiry accurately and award marks in the correct level. Some centres tend to award marks at the top of a level where moderators feel that marking has been generous within the level – especially in AO2 and AO3 and this can result in an adjustment of centre marks. There have been no amendments to the mark scheme for the Fieldwork Enquiry.

AA1 – Gwybodaeth a Dealltwriaeth Caiff AA1 ei farcio’n gyson ar y cyfan er bod rhai canolfannau’n marcio’n hael ar lefel 4. Mae angen i ymgeiswyr wneud y canlynol: ‘Ffurfio casgliadau manwl sy’n gyfan gwbl gyson â’r dystiolaeth’ yn hytrach na chasgliadau lefel 3 ‘cadarn’. Moderation of the 2013 sample shows that, on the whole, AO1 marks are awarded in the correct level. However, some centres over mark AO1 with work that shows insufficient detail of background knowledge and understanding being awarded level four. ie For level 4 candidates need to have reached conclusions that are fully consistent with the evidence that was collected on the fieldtrip. For example, candidates might have reached conclusions that are consistent with evidence about: patterns (eg distribution of a particular type of retail activity) trends (eg changing visitor trends) or correlations observed in their primary or secondary data. Some candidates make relatively sound conclusions about what they expected to see rather than what the evidence has actually told them – and are still rewarded at level 4. In some centres candidates could be encouraged to provide better location information e.g. a labelled or annotated location map.

AA2 – Cymhwyso Mae nifer o ymgeiswyr yn dal i ddarparu tystiolaeth fyrhoedlog yn unig o ddeall y cysyniadau ehangach sy’n sail i’w ymholiad penodol. O ganlyniad, mae’r marcio’n hael pan mae canolfannau’n dyfarnu marciau ar lefel 4 lle mae casgliadau’n syml ac uniongyrchol yn hytrach na chraff a gwybodus. There is evidence that more centres are now teaching relevant concepts before the fieldtrip and that candidates are then able to relate their findings to this wider understanding. However, in some centres this important aspect is not considered prior to the fieldtrip. Candidates then make only fleeting references to their wider geographical understanding but marked still award marks in level 4. This will result in the centre marks being adjusted downwards. Candidates need to be aware of the concepts / theories / issues that underpin their enquiry. Only then will they be able to apply knowledge and understanding of, for example tourist honeypot sites to their findings at the fieldwork location. Some centres awarded marks at level four where conclusions were simple and straightforward rather than perceptive and informed. This issue probably occurs in centres where insufficient thought has gone into planning the task – both the teacher and candidates need to be clear about why they are engaged in the enquiry process – what are the concepts and theories that underpin this enquiry?

Nid yw pob afon yn nodweddiadol Many of you will remember that Andy used this river in the Lyngen Alps, Norway in last year’s CPD as an example of AO2. The presentation, with notes, is on the WJEC website. Delegates at the CPD events were able to guess the order that these photos were taken as Andy walked along the river from source to mouth – because teachers do have the wider geographical experience and are able to relate unique places to that wider knowledge and understanding.

AA3 – Sgiliau Daearyddol Mewn rhai canolfannau, mae tueddiad i farcio’n hael lle mae’r athro/athrawes wedi dylunio a strwythuro’r ymholiad a lle nad yw’r ymgeiswyr wedi gallu dangos tystiolaeth o weithio’n annibynnol. Mae ymgeiswyr angen y cyfle i allu gofyn eu cwestiynau daearyddol eu hunain er mwyn cyrraedd lefel 3 a 4. The moderators saw a number of centres where candidates lack of evidence of independence. The structure of some of the tasks is over prescriptive leaving little scope for candidates to achieve marks at the higher levels. We will examine how greater independence can be given to candidates in the next presentation.

AA3 – Sgiliau Daearyddol Mae marcio hael yn cynnwys rhoi marciau i’r canlynol: Ymgeiswyr sydd wedi prosesu data (yn aml gan ddefnyddio ystod gyfyngedig o dechnegau) yn hytrach na dethol data perthnasol a dethol amrywiaeth o dechnegau priodol. Ymgeiswyr nad ydynt wedi gallu adlewyrchu ar ddilysrwydd a chyfyngiadau’r dystiolaeth. Some candidates process all the data (often using a repeated technique) rather than selecting the data that is relevant to their enquiry question. Candidates often fail to reflect on the validity and limitations of the evidence. AO3 contains a number of strands and moderators see evidence that individual candidates perform better in some strands than in others. Careful annotation of the work is important to highlight the achievements of each candidate.

Anodi Mae anodi’n helpu i safoni asesiad crynodol. Marciwch y gair gan ddefnydio’r grid neu’r cynllun marcio sydd wedi’i gyhoeddi. Os ydych yn defnyddio’r grid – defnyddiwch amlygwyr. Nodwch rif y dudalen yn yr adroddiad. Nodwch y dystiolaeth yn yr adroddiad ar ymyl y dudalen e.e AA2 L3. Mae’r anodi hwn yn helpu’r safonwr. Mewn canolfannau mawr a fyddech cystal â safoni o fewn yr adran os gwelwch yn dda. Please annotate the work – it greatly assists moderation. Remember that the annotation justifies the mark to the moderator. It should not be written for the student as this must not become an AfL exercise. The use of the marking grid is recommended. It is available on the WJEC website. As the work is assessed, the use of a highlighter pen is recommended to enable the teacher assessor to see the overall pattern of achievement. Cross referencing to page numbers on the marking grid is helpful to the moderator, along with annotation of AO and Level in the margin. There is still evidence of a lack of moderation within larger centres where a number of teacher assessors mark the work. Do all the teachers assessing the work understand the assessment criteria? In larger centres are there ways of ensuring more consistency within the centre?