You are viewing a free preview of this lesson.
Subscribe to unlock all 13 lessons in this course and every other course on LearningBro.
Geographical enquiry lies at the heart of the Edexcel B GCSE Geography specification. It is through enquiry that geographers move beyond simply describing what happens to understanding why it happens and what can be done about it. Whether you are investigating coastal erosion on a beach or quality of life in a town centre, the enquiry process provides a structured framework that helps you plan, collect, analyse and evaluate your findings in a rigorous and systematic way.
In the Edexcel B Paper 2 exam, you will be asked questions about your own fieldwork experience. Examiners want to see that you understand not just what you did in the field, but why you made the choices you did and how you could improve your investigation. This lesson takes you through the entire enquiry process from start to finish.
A geographical enquiry is a structured investigation into a geographical question or issue. It follows a logical sequence of steps that mirrors the scientific method but is adapted specifically for geography. The purpose is to gather evidence, analyse it and reach a conclusion that is supported by data rather than opinion.
Geographical enquiry is important because it develops your ability to:
Exam Tip: In the exam, you may be asked to describe the stages of the enquiry process. Use the mnemonic Q-P-C-P-A-C-E: Question, Plan, Collect, Present, Analyse, Conclude, Evaluate. Learn this sequence thoroughly.
Every enquiry begins with a question or a hypothesis. This is the driving force behind the entire investigation and must be focused, testable and geographical in nature.
A good enquiry question should be:
| Feature | Explanation | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Geographical | Relates to a place, process, pattern or issue studied in geography | "How does river velocity change downstream?" |
| Focused | Specific enough to investigate in a limited time and area | "How does pebble size change along the 2 km stretch of Easedale Beck?" |
| Testable | Can be answered using data that you can realistically collect | "Is there a correlation between distance from the CBD and environmental quality?" |
| Open-ended | Does not have a simple yes/no answer | "To what extent does the Bradshaw model apply to the River Exe?" |
A hypothesis is a statement that predicts what you expect to find. It is written as a testable prediction rather than a question:
The null hypothesis states that there is no relationship or pattern. You will attempt to reject the null hypothesis using your data and statistical tests.
Exam Tip: Examiners look for hypotheses that are rooted in geographical theory. For a river study, link your hypothesis to the Bradshaw model. For a coastal study, link to longshore drift theory. For an urban study, link to the Burgess or Hoyt land use models. Always show the theory behind your prediction.
Large enquiry questions are often broken into sub-questions that help structure the investigation:
Main question: "How and why does the River Exe change downstream?"
Sub-questions:
Sub-questions make the investigation manageable, ensure you collect a range of data, and help structure your final write-up.
Once you have your question and hypothesis, you need to plan how you will collect data. This is your methodology and it should be described clearly enough that someone else could repeat your investigation.
| Decision | What to Consider |
|---|---|
| Location | Why this particular site? Is it accessible? Is it representative? |
| Timing | What time of day, week or year? Will weather affect results? |
| Sampling strategy | Random, systematic or stratified? How many sites? |
| Data types | Quantitative (numerical) or qualitative (descriptive)? Primary or secondary? |
| Equipment | What do you need? Is it available? Do you know how to use it? |
| Recording | How will you record data? Tally charts, tables, photographs, sketches? |
| Personnel | How many people are needed? What roles will they take? |
Primary data is data you collect yourself in the field. Examples include river width measurements, pedestrian counts and environmental quality surveys.
Secondary data is data collected by someone else that you use in your investigation. Examples include census data, Environment Agency flood records, Ordnance Survey maps, climate data from the Met Office, and historical photographs.
A strong investigation uses both primary and secondary data. Secondary data provides context and allows comparisons with your primary findings.
A risk assessment is a formal evaluation of the hazards you might encounter during fieldwork and the steps you will take to minimise them. This is a legal and ethical requirement for all fieldwork.
A risk assessment identifies:
| Hazard | Risk | Control Measure |
|---|---|---|
| Fast-flowing river water | Drowning, slipping | Never enter water above knee height; wear waterproof boots with grip; work in pairs; check Environment Agency flood warnings before visiting |
| Uneven terrain on riverbank | Trips and falls | Wear sturdy footwear; move carefully; carry a first-aid kit |
| Road traffic near survey sites | Vehicle collision | Wear high-visibility jackets; use pavements where possible; have a designated lookout |
| Cold or wet weather | Hypothermia, discomfort | Check weather forecast; bring waterproof clothing and warm layers; carry hot drinks |
| Tidal changes on coastal fieldwork | Being cut off by the tide | Check tide tables before visiting; plan fieldwork during falling tide; know escape routes |
| Interacting with the public (questionnaires) | Confrontation, safeguarding | Work in pairs; approach people politely; have a teacher nearby; carry school ID |
Exam Tip: In the exam, you might be asked to identify risks for a fieldwork investigation you have not done yourself. Apply your knowledge of generic fieldwork hazards to the scenario described. Always include three elements: the hazard, who is at risk, and how the risk can be reduced.
Ethical considerations are increasingly important in geographical fieldwork, particularly when human subjects are involved.
flowchart TD
A["1. QUESTION<br/>Formulate a geographical question or hypothesis"] --> B["2. PLAN<br/>Design methodology, sampling, risk assessment"]
B --> C["3. COLLECT<br/>Gather primary and secondary data in the field"]
C --> D["4. PRESENT<br/>Display data using graphs, maps and tables"]
D --> E["5. ANALYSE<br/>Identify patterns, use statistical techniques"]
E --> F["6. CONCLUDE<br/>Return to hypothesis, state findings"]
F --> G["7. EVALUATE<br/>Assess reliability, suggest improvements"]
G -.->|"Refine and repeat"| A
Each stage of the process feeds into the next, but it is also cyclical — evaluation often leads to new questions, refined methods and further investigation.
In Paper 2, you will be asked about your own fieldwork experience. Questions may ask you to:
You need to write about fieldwork you have actually done (or been taught about in class). Examiners can spot generic answers that do not refer to specific places, methods or data.
| Exam Question Type | What the Examiner Wants | Marks |
|---|---|---|
| "State your enquiry question" | A clear, focused, geographical question | 1–2 |
| "Explain why you chose this sampling method" | Name the method + justify with reference to your site | 2–4 |
| "Describe one risk and explain how it was managed" | Identify hazard + control measure | 2–3 |
| "Evaluate your data collection method" | Strengths, weaknesses, improvements, reliability | 4–6 |
| "Suggest how your investigation could be improved" | Specific, practical improvements with justification | 3–4 |
Exam Tip: When writing about your own fieldwork, always include specific details — the name of the river or town, the number of sites, the equipment you used, the date you visited. Generic answers score poorly. Examiners want to see evidence that you actually carried out the fieldwork.
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| Geographical enquiry | A structured investigation into a geographical question using a systematic process |
| Hypothesis | A testable prediction about what you expect to find |
| Null hypothesis | A statement that there is no significant relationship or pattern |
| Methodology | The detailed plan for how an investigation will be carried out |
| Primary data | Data collected first-hand by the investigator in the field |
| Secondary data | Data collected by someone else, used to support or compare with primary data |
| Risk assessment | A formal evaluation of hazards and control measures for fieldwork |
| Ethical considerations | Principles ensuring fieldwork is conducted responsibly, respectfully and legally |
| Informed consent | Agreement from participants who understand how their data will be used |
| GDPR | General Data Protection Regulation — UK law governing the use of personal data |
This worked example carries a single enquiry through every stage of the Edexcel enquiry process, showing how the steps link together to produce defensible conclusions.
Enquiry question: "How and why does the River Exe change downstream between Exmoor and Tiverton?"
Hypothesis: "Channel width, depth, velocity and discharge will increase with distance downstream, while mean pebble size and gradient will decrease, supporting the Bradshaw model."
Null hypothesis: "There is no significant correlation between distance downstream and any of these variables."
Plan and methods (justified): Systematic sampling at eight sites every 500 m along a 4 km reach, selected from a 1:25,000 OS map using 6-figure grid references. At each site: width measured with tape; depth measured at 0.5 m intervals across the channel and averaged; velocity measured three times with a digital flow meter at 0.6 x depth and averaged; gradient measured with clinometer over 10 m; 30 pebbles selected by random grid coordinates and measured along the long axis. Primary data was supplemented with secondary Environment Agency gauging-station records. Risk assessment identified fast-flowing water, slippery rocks and cold weather as hazards with control measures (never entering above knee height, wearing hi-vis and waterproofs, working in pairs with a designated leader). Ethical considerations included landowner permission for bank access and minimising riverbank disturbance.
Data collection and recording: A pre-prepared recording sheet with pencil in a waterproof folder was used at each site. Photographs were taken of each cross-section for context. Time, weather and observer names were logged at each site for reproducibility.
Data presentation: Line graphs of width, depth, velocity and discharge against distance; scatter graph of distance vs pebble size with line of best fit; cross-sectional diagrams for Sites 1, 4 and 8; located bar chart of discharge on an OS base map.
Analysis: Spearman's rank for distance vs pebble size gave rs = -0.95 (n = 8, critical value 0.738), significant at 0.05. Distance vs depth gave rs = +0.96, also significant. Mean pebble size fell from 85 mm to 18 mm over 4 km; mean depth rose from 0.08 to 0.54 m. Site 4 was a justified anomaly with pebble size 12 mm above the trend line, explained by a tributary joining 150 m upstream.
Conclusion: The hypothesis is supported for pebble size, depth, velocity and discharge, consistent with the Bradshaw model. Attrition and abrasion explain sediment reduction; hydraulic radius increase explains velocity rise despite falling gradient.
Evaluation: Reliability supported by three repeats per variable and n = 30 pebbles per site. Validity limited by single-day sampling conditions and by not measuring wetted perimeter directly. Sources of error: flow meter resolution +/- 0.01 m/s; tape sag +/- 0.1 m on wide sites; ruler placement on rocky bed +/- 0.03 m. Improvements: repeat in different flow states; add wetted-perimeter measurement; extend n to 12 sites.
A common misconception is that the enquiry process is a rigid one-way sequence — candidates sometimes write as if question, plan, collect, present, analyse, conclude and evaluate must be completed in strict order and never revisited. In fact Edexcel examiners expect you to understand the process as cyclical and iterative: evaluation of one enquiry feeds new questions, the pilot study can revise the methodology before full data collection, and anomalies identified during analysis often require returning to the field or the secondary data. Top answers show awareness that methods are justified in the plan stage, tested in the pilot, applied in collection, and critiqued in evaluation — all feeding into further enquiry.
Question: Describe how you planned your fieldwork investigation, including sampling, methods and risk assessment, and justify your choices. (6 marks)
Grade 3-4 response:
"I planned my fieldwork by choosing a river. I measured it in different places. I was careful not to fall in. I wore wellies."
Examiner comment: No enquiry question, no named sampling, no justified methods, no formal risk assessment. Bottom of Level 1.
Grade 5-6 response:
"My enquiry was about how the River Exe changes downstream. I used systematic sampling with sites every 500 m because I wanted to see the gradient predicted by the Bradshaw model. I measured width with a tape, depth with a ruler, velocity with a flow meter, and pebble size with random sampling. My risk assessment identified fast water and slippery rocks, so I wore wellies, worked in pairs and checked the Environment Agency flood warnings. I chose the flow meter over the float because it measures at 0.6 x depth for a more accurate mean velocity."
Examiner comment: Named methods, justified sampling and equipment choice, substantive risk assessment. Clear Level 2.
Grade 7-9 response:
"My enquiry tested the hypothesis that channel width, depth, velocity and discharge increase downstream along the River Exe while pebble size and gradient decrease, following Bradshaw. I used systematic sampling with eight sites every 500 m selected from a 1:25,000 OS map because the hypothesis specifically predicts a downstream gradient, so random sampling could miss the trend and stratified sampling was not needed without distinct sub-groups. At each site I measured width (tape, perpendicular), depth (ruler at 0.5 m intervals, averaged), velocity (digital flow meter at 0.6 x depth, three repeats averaged), gradient (clinometer over 10 m) and pebble size (30 pebbles by random grid coordinates). Three repeats per variable addressed reliability and calibration of the flow meter addressed accuracy. A pilot study at Site 1 confirmed 30 pebbles was adequate for a stable mean and 10 depth readings was adequate for cross-sectional area calculation. My risk assessment identified fast-flowing water (control: never above knee height; check Environment Agency flood warnings), slippery rocks (waterproof boots; work in pairs), cold weather (layers and waterproofs; hot drinks), and road access to Site 1 (hi-vis; lookout). Ethical considerations included landowner permission for riverbank access and minimising bankside disturbance. Primary data was supplemented with secondary gauging-station records as triangulation. Validity was supported by measuring the variables the hypothesis names directly rather than using proxies."
Examiner comment: Links sampling to hypothesis, justifies against alternatives, step-by-step method with repeats for reliability, detailed risk assessment, ethics, triangulation with secondary data. Top of Level 3.
This content is aligned with the Edexcel GCSE Geography B (1GB0) specification, Paper 3: Geographical investigations — fieldwork skills. For the most accurate and up-to-date information, please refer to the official Pearson Edexcel specification document.