Geographical Inquiry and Skills
The inquiry sequence
Every QCAA Geography response is built on a repeatable inquiry sequence: formulate a question, collect primary and secondary data, process and represent it, analyse patterns, evaluate, then conclude and communicate. Know the difference between primary data (fieldwork you collected: transects, surveys, photo points) and secondary data (ABS census, BoM records, satellite imagery). Questions often ask you to justify a method, not just name it - a justified method links the technique to the question and the scale.
Processing and representation
Be fluent in choosing a representation that fits the data type: choropleth for density/rates across regions, isoline maps for continuous gradients, scatter graphs for correlation, radial or kite diagrams for directional data, cross-sections for transects. Always state the pattern, then the evidence (figures, locations, trends), then the explanation. Correlation is not causation - a common trap is being asked to explain a relationship when the data only shows association.
Traps to watch
- Mixing absolute and relative values (counts versus rates per 100 000).
- Describing a map instead of analysing it.
- Ignoring scale: a local conclusion cannot be generalised nationally without justification.
- Confusing accuracy (closeness to true value) with reliability (consistency of repeated measurement).
- Forgetting limitations and improvements - evaluation marks live here.
Rule of thumb
Use S-E-E: Statement of the pattern, Evidence from the data (specific figures, places, dates), Explanation linking to a process or concept. If a question says "to what extent", you must give both supporting and limiting evidence before judging.
Worked example
A question gives rainfall totals for five suburbs and asks which is most flood-prone. Weak answer: "Suburb C because it rained most." Strong answer: "Suburb C recorded the highest total (412 mm), but flood risk also depends on impervious surface cover, slope and drainage capacity; without those variables the rainfall data alone cannot determine risk."