A good conclusion answers the question with evidence, explains its limits and identifies an improvement that addresses a real weakness.
A conclusion answers the original question with evidence. Say whether the results support the hypothesis, give relevant figures or accounts, and explain exceptions. "Our six practice cases generally show fewer visits at greater distances" fits the scatter graph. "Distance is the only reason all residents visit parks" goes beyond it.
Reliability concerns consistency. Repeating observations under comparable conditions helps you check whether measurements and results are stable. Validity concerns whether the method measures what the question asks and supports the conclusion. A leading question can be asked in exactly the same way each time, yet still be invalid for finding people's genuine views.
For each weakness, explain its effect and propose a matching improvement. Missing non-users requires a sample that includes them. Unclear answer categories need revised wording and a pilot. A larger sample does not repair every problem.
Full Geography includes extended fieldwork over 10 weeks. One possible plan uses weeks 1-2 for the question, background, ethics and risk planning; weeks 3-4 for sampling and a pilot; and weeks 5-6 for approved data collection. Weeks 7-8 can cover processing and analysis, followed by conclusions, presentation and reflection in weeks 9-10. Adapt this plan with your teacher.
Elective Geography uses shorter investigations within topics, such as designing a questionnaire or mapping a local area. This lesson explains the fieldwork process, but your school's actual investigation still needs its own plan and teacher guidance.
Step by step
Answer with evidence
Address the hypothesis using the pattern, figures and important exceptions.
Check the conclusion
Consider consistent measurements, a valid method, missing groups and other possible explanations.
Fix a specific weakness
Choose a practical change that addresses the problem you identified.
Worked example: A complete limitation statement
"Only one weekday lunchtime was sampled, so evening users may be underrepresented. Repeat the same procedure during selected evenings and weekends." This explains the weakness, its effect and a matching improvement. "More time was needed" does not explain any of those links.
Watch out for this
A large dataset makes every conclusion valid.
Size does not repair the wrong measure, a missing group or unsupported causal inference. Evaluate how the evidence was produced and what it can establish.
Check your understanding
Which improvement directly addresses a leading questionnaire item?
- Ask the same leading item to twice as many people.
- Rewrite it neutrally, separate any combined ideas and pilot the revision.
- Use a brighter colour for the final graph.