2025 NYJC H1 Geo 8834 P1 Answers (for sharing)

NANYANG JUNIOR COLLEGE Year 2 Preliminary Examination H1 GEOGRAPHY 8834/01 17 Sept 2025 3 hours Additional Materials: Insert READ THESE INSTRUCTIONS FIRST If you have been given an Answer Booklet, follow the instructions on the front cover of the Booklet. Write your Centre number, index number and name on the work you hand in. Write in dark blue or black pen on both sides of the paper. You may use an HB pencil for any diagrams or graphs. Do not use staples, paper clips, glue or correction fluid. DO NOT WRITE ON ANY BARCODES. Answer Question 1 in Section A. Answer both questions in Section B. Answer two questions in Section C. At the end of the examination, fasten all your work securely together. The number of marks is given in brackets [ ] at the end of each question or part question. This document consists of 4 printed pages. [Turn over

2 2 Section A Cluster 2 Fieldwork Responding to Climate Change in Punggol, Singapore 1 A group of four 18-year-old students in Singapore conducted a fieldwork investigation to examine how local communities in Punggol respond to climate change through climate- adaptive initiatives organised for residents. The students proposed the following hypothesis: “The presence of community climate initiatives in Punggol has enhanced residents’ awareness of and participation in sustainable practices as part of their response to climate change.” To support their investigation, the students gathered secondary data from online sources and the Punggol Town Council on community initiatives that promote sustainable living and environmentally friendly practices. Based on preliminary research and observed community activity, they selected four sites for detailed study: a. Punggol Waterway Park – Tree planting (50 trees) and organic mulching by NurtureStars Punggol. b. One Punggol – MakeIT space at Punggol Regional Library offering upcycling workshops (e.g., sewing, crafting). c. Oasis Terraces – Community participation in rooftop gardening. d. City Sprouts @ Punggol – Residents exploring a pop- up urban farming stall that promotes sustainable living. The students conducted surveys with 25 respondents using random sampling at Punggol MRT during a weekday in June. The responses were then tabulated and presented in a results table. Resource 1 shows a map of Punggol highlighting the four sites investigated. Resources 2A to 2D provide photographs of the four sites and their associated sustainable practices. Resource 3 is the questionnaire survey used to collect fieldwork data. Resource 4 presents the tabulated results of the survey questions. (a) With reference to Resource 1, explain why the investigation is appropriate. [3] Award 1 mark for each explanation of why the investigation is appropriate, to a maximum of 3 marks. Award a maximum of 1 additional mark for further development of each explanation, where applicable. • Suitable  The site is easily accessible via Punggol MRT. [1] The investigation is also of a suitable scale – it is practical for four students to survey 25 residents during a weekday in June. [1]

3 3 • Capable of Research  The four sites (Punggol Waterway Park, One Punggol, Oasis Terraces, City Sprouts) represent a diversity of climate-adaptive initiatives, including tree planting, upcycling, rooftop gardening, and urban farming. [1] This variety allows students to investigate if such initiatives have been useful in increasing awareness and participation [additional 1 mark]. • Clearly defined  independent variable: presence of community climate initiatives at the four sites ; dependent variable: residents’ awareness and participation in sustainable practices which is measurable through survey responses. [1] (b) Explain three benefits of using surveys as a tool for data collection. [6] Award 1 mark for each explanation of the benefits of using surveys as a tool for data collection. Award a maximum of 1 additional mark for further development of each explanation, where applicable. 1) Efficient and systematic – Surveys allow a relatively large number of respondents to be sampled in a short period of time, making data collection more time- efficient compared to interviews. [1] Surveys also specify which areas the investigation requires attention, as questions target only what the investigation needs. [additional 1 mark] 2) Captures perceptions and attitudes – Surveys can collect respondents’ views on awareness, motivation, and challenges towards climate initiatives, which may not be visible through observation alone [1]. They also allow similar questions to be asked to different respondents to capture variability in responses [additional 1 mark]. 3) Quantifiable and comparable data – Responses can be easily coded and tabulated (as in Resource 4) [1], enabling patterns and trends (e.g., level of awareness, motivations) to be easily analysed, compared, and represented graphically [additional 1 mark]. (c) With reference to Resource 3, explain the strengths and weaknesses of the survey design. [6] Award 1 mark for each explanation of the strengths and weaknesses of the survey design. Award a maximum of 1 additional mark for further development of each explanation, where applicable. Award a maximum of 3 marks for either strengths or weaknesses Strengths • The survey used in Resource 3 covers a range of relevant questions (Q2–Q6) on awareness, participation, motivation, and challenges, directly linked to the hypothesis. [1] • Clear demographic segmentation (Age groups) as the inclusion of age categories allows analysis of how awareness, participation, and motivations vary across different age cohorts, enabling comparative insights. [1] It makes findings more meaningful by identifying which age groups are more engaged in climate initiatives. [additional 1 mark]

4 4 • Use of closed -ended questions with pre- set options (e.g., “Very aware / Somewhat aware”) makes responses easier to quantify and analyse.[1] • Questions are short and straightforward, making them suitable for a random street survey with limited respondent time.[1] • The number of questions (6 only) makes it doable for respondents who need not spend too much time on the answers, which may otherwise compromise the quality of the answers [1]. Weaknesses • No question to determine if the respondent is a resident of Punggol as they are the target group. [1] • The age group in Q1 is not evenly distributed, with those under 18, 18- 30 (only 13 years) as compared to 31-50 and 51-70 which has 19 years each. [1] • The level of awareness in Q2 is vague , with different persons having different standards to what is “somewhat aware” and “not sure”. This can create inaccuracy in data collection. [1] • Qn. 3 is a doubled barreled question as it asked respondent if they have participated in/heard of before the various adaptative initiatives but only allows for one answer. [1] This leads to confusion, unreliable data and frustration for the respondent. [additional 1 mark] • No option for “None of the above” is provided in Q3, which reduces clarity for respondents who have not participated in or heard of any of the listed initiatives. [1] • Q5 motivations may not fully capture all possible drivers (e.g., health benefits, financial incentives). [1] (d) Using a suitable data representation method, present the results to Question 5 from the survey shown in Resource 4, and justify your choice. [5] Award a maximum of 3 marks for the suitable data representation method. Award a maximum o