klm GCSE Geography New Specification B Teacher Standardisation Autumn 2009/Spring 2010 Script A

Transcription

1 klm GCSE Geography New Specification B Teacher Standardisation Autumn 009/Spring 00 Script A Task The Urban Environment Investigate the management of traffic in an urban area

2 Specification B Local Investigation - Controlled Assessment Marking Record Sheet Tick and comment as appropriate: Circle appropriate Criteria Evidence Level Marks Geographical Understanding To gain L, students must fulfil all of L. To gain L, students must fulfil all of L. Methodology If there is no primary data (i.e. they miss the trip then, they cannot go beyond L) To gain L, students must fulfil all of L. To gain L, students must fulfil all of L Presentation If there is no ICT present they cannot access L at all. To gain L, students must fulfil all of L. ICT =YES/NO Interpretation and QWC Key concepts or processes are identified Key concepts or processes are defined Key concepts or processes correctly incorporated into data collection Key concepts or processes correctly applied to the interpretation of results Key concepts or processes correctly incorporated into the conclusions Key concepts or processes correctly incorporated into the evaluations Context of investigation outlined Evidence that some material has been collected Describes the sequence of investigation Describes and carries out methods stated Some information is collected through fieldwork Evidence of organisation and planning Methods selected to collect the information are clearly justified The work is well organised and planned e.g. Locations/Times Level Basic Level Limited Range/ Appropriate/Accurate/ Complete Level Wider Range/Complex Location (basic) Location (clear) Location (detailed) Brief description of findings Basic reasons may be given for findings QWC Limited range of key terms and reasonable accuracy with SPG Describes results clearly Attempts to analyse results by basic numerical data manipulation Conclusions drawn relating to original purpose of investigation QWC Good range of key terms used appropriately and considerable accuracy with SPG Describes and analyses the findings in detail Valid conclusions are reached in relation to original purpose of investigation QWC Wide range of key terms used appropriately. Ideas are expressed clearly/logically/fluently with accurate use of SPG H O W W H Y Evaluation To gain L, students must fulfil all of L. To gain L, students must fulfil all of L. Reflects on effectiveness of investigation and methods of collection Suggests improvements Specific problems with methods identified Explains how these problems may have affected the results The effect of problems with the methods and results on the validity of conclusions is discussed Where an answer fails to meet Level, zero marks should be awarded. Final Mark = /

3 The Urban Environment Investigate the management of traffic in an urban area The Metrolink should run through Baguley My school is in Baguley in Wythenshawe, on the southern edge of the City of Manchester (Map ) and is km from the city centre. To the south of Wythenshawe is Manchester airport. All through the day the roads around my school are congested and noisy. It is very busy during the rush hour when people are commuting to work in the CBDs of Manchester, Altrincham and Stockport (Map ). They also go to work in out of town developments like the Trafford Centre. This daily migration of people causes congestion and noise. The city council should try to reduce the number of vehicles on the roads by improving public transport. Key terms: Congestion slowing of traffic because there are too many vehicles on the road. Commuter a person who travels into the city centre each day to get to work. Public transport - passenger services that are available for use by the general public.

4 Methods: Method Description Reasons for choice Traffic survey Tally all traffic on A0 in both directions for minutes ( & map ) and on Moor Road ( & map ) Record vehicles that pass (Table ). Do surveys at 8.0 am* and pm. Calculate the PCU values for each road and find the index of congestion. * = morning commuter time This will show the levels of congestion which will help me see if the roads are dangerously busy. This will help me to find out whether more public transport like Metrolink is needed. Noise survey Photo of decibel meter used. Secondary data Use a noise meter to find the number of decibels. At each of the two survey points (Map ) take 0 readings, each reading is taken minute apart to avoid anomalies. Take an average of the readings. Search to find information on improvements to the Light Rapid Transit public transport system. This will show the levels of noise pollution caused by the traffic. It will help me to find out what people have to put up with and whether more public transport like Metrolink would improve quality of life. This will show where the Metrolink might run in the future and I can then decide whether it would be an improvement for people. The results from these methods will be processed and interpreted to provide an answer for my investigation.

5 Table Traffic survey results = raw results () = PCU values 8.0 am results for 0/0/09 Survey point HGV Bus LGV Car Cycle TOTAL Index of congestion (inward) () (0) 9 (8) 9 (9) 8 () (9) (outward) 8 () (8) () 7 (7) (.) (7.) (outward) (8) (0) (0) 9 (9) () 0 () (inward) () (8) () 7 (7) () 87 (0) (9 +7.) X = 8 ( +0) X = 98.00pm results for 0/0/09 Survey point HGV Bus LGV Car Cycle TOTAL Index of congestion (inward) () () () () 8 () 0 (7) (outward) 7 () 0 (0) 7 () () () 99 (8) (outward) () () (0) 80 (80) (.) 9 (.) (inward) (8) () (8) () () 7 (8) (7 +8) X = 0 (. +8) X = 78

6 Table Noise survey results (decibels) Survey point Sample number Average Altrincham Road Moor Road Interpretation During the morning rush hour on Altrincham Road, 8% of all traffic was cars and on Moor Road this was 8%. This is even higher during the afternoon with 88% on Altrincham Road, so most of the traffic was the movement of people, not goods as less than % were HGVs and LGVs (Graph ). Metrolink would reduce this flow of traffic. I worked out the Passenger Car Units by giving each type of vehicle a score (HGV, Bus-, LGV-, Car-, Cycle-0.) and then multiplied the total by (as we only did the survey for minutes) to find the hourly index of congestion (Graph ).

7 All survey points were above the saturation levels set by the DfT. This is 000 PCUs for a dual carriageway and Altrincham Road 8 was PCUs above this (a.m.) and 0 PCUs above (p.m.). For a lane road it is 70 PCUs and Moor Road was 8 PCUs above this (a.m.) and 8 PCUs above (p.m.). This shows that even out of the rush hour the roads are congested and supports my idea that public transport should be improved and that the Metrolink should run through Baguley. My noise survey shows that Altrincham Road was the noisiest with an average of 7.9 Db and Moor Road was 70. Db (Graph 7). 7

8 A noise level of 70Db is uncomfortable for people and 80Db could damage hearing. There were times when Altrincham Road was over 80Db and the majority of the readings were over 70 Db, so there is constant background traffic noise and on Altrincham Road this is.9 Db above the recommended level. This supports my idea that public transport should carry more commuters and that the Metrolink would help to reduce noise. Conclusion Over 80% of traffic is commuter traffic so if Metrolink was built it would take a lot of these cars off the road. Each Metrolink tram can carry 00 people. Just trams each hour would reduce the number of cars by %. Roads around school are very congested, see fig.. This causes long queues and makes commuters late for work and pupils late for school. Metrolink would improve journey times and allow buses to get to their destinations quicker. Roads around school are very noisy all day, but worst in the rush hour. The Metrolink would also be a bit noisy when it passed, but it wouldn t be constant noise. The Council should alter the Metrolink route taking it through Baguley. Many problems are caused by traffic so improving public transport would help to reduce these problems. 8

9 Evaluation The traffic survey worked well but was not totally accurate. It was so busy we might have missed some cars. This would mean that our results could show that the roads were even busier and more congested with commuters than we thought. We should have done more traffic counts and counted in pairs to compare answers and improve the accuracy of these results. The PCUs were not accurate as we only counted for minutes and not an hour. When we counted it could have been a busy period, or even a quiet period! This would have affected my conclusion because the saturation points may have been exceeded by even more PCUs. The noise survey worked well but this too was not guaranteed to be accurate as we only did 0 readings and this is too small a sample, we should have done at least 0. I think that some of the 80+Db readings were not traffic, but planes landing. This makes my conclusions less valid as maybe it was not as noisy as we said. The secondary data was helpful but it may not be totally up to date, so getting the latest public transport proposal from the council would have been helpful. 9