GCSE Geography: How to Answer the 9-Mark 'Assess' Question Without Losing Half the Marks

The 9-mark question at the end of each GCSE Geography paper is where most of the marks are won or lost. Students who know their case studies inside out still routinely score 4 or 5 out of 9, not because they lack knowledge, but because they describe when the examiner wants them to judge.

Here's what the mark scheme actually rewards, and how to help your child practise the one skill that separates a Level 2 answer from a Level 3.

What the question is really asking

Both AQA and Edexcel use a small family of command words for the 9-mark question:

• Assess — weigh up the relative importance of different factors
• Evaluate — judge how successful or effective something has been
• To what extent — decide how far you agree with a statement
• Discuss — consider different viewpoints and reach a conclusion

They look different but the underlying demand is identical: make a judgement and support it. The mark schemes for both boards allocate marks across three broad strands — knowledge, application (usually of a case study), and evaluation. It's that third strand where the gap opens up.

Level 1 answers describe. Level 2 answers explain. Level 3 answers judge. If your child stops at "explain", the ceiling is roughly 6 out of 9, no matter how much detail they cram in.

Both boards also award up to 3 additional marks for SPaG (spelling, punctuation and grammar) on some 9-mark questions — worth knowing, because rushed handwriting under time pressure quietly costs marks.

The move most students miss

The evaluative move is a specific sentence pattern, and once your child can hear it, they can produce it. It usually contains:

1. A comparative or ranking word (more significant, less important, the main reason, outweighs, only in the short term)
2. A reason grounded in evidence (because in Rio's favelas…)
3. An acknowledgement of the other side (although flood defences did reduce damage in the immediate area…)

Without that pattern, an answer is just a well-organised description. With it, the answer is doing what the question asked.

A before-and-after example

Take a typical AQA-style question:

"Assess the extent to which the effects of tropical storms are more severe in low-income countries than in high-income countries." (9 marks)

Before — a Level 2 answer

Tropical storms have serious effects in low-income countries. In Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines in 2013, over 6,000 people died and 4 million were made homeless. Buildings were destroyed because they were poorly constructed. In contrast, Hurricane Katrina hit the USA in 2005 and although it caused $125 billion of damage, fewer people died because there were better warning systems. This shows that low-income countries suffer worse effects from tropical storms.

This is organised, uses two case studies, and reaches a conclusion. It would likely score around 5. The problem: every sentence describes or explains. Nothing weighs.

After — a Level 3 answer

The social effects of tropical storms are clearly more severe in low-income countries, and this is the strongest evidence for the statement. Typhoon Haiyan killed over 6,000 people in the Philippines because poorly constructed housing in coastal areas like Tacloban could not withstand the storm surge, and evacuation was hampered by weak infrastructure. Hurricane Katrina, by contrast, killed around 1,800 in a high-income country with far greater resources — a significant loss, but an order of magnitude smaller. However, the picture is more mixed when we consider economic effects. Katrina caused roughly $125 billion of damage, far more in absolute terms than Haiyan, because high-income areas contain more valuable infrastructure and insured property. So while the human cost falls disproportionately on low-income countries, the financial cost can actually be greater in high-income ones. Overall, the statement is largely correct if we focus on loss of life and long-term recovery, which are the effects that matter most to ordinary people — but it oversimplifies the economic dimension.

Same case studies. Same facts. But the answer now categorises effects (social vs economic), directly compares them, acknowledges a counter-example, and lands a judgement that qualifies the original statement rather than just agreeing with it. This is Level 3 territory.

What to look for when your child practises

You don't need to know the geography to help. You need to know what a judgement sounds like. Read your child's answer and ask:

• Where is the comparative language? Underline every word like more, less, greater, main, outweighs, only, however, whereas.
• Is there a paragraph or sentence that considers the other side of the argument?
• Does the conclusion say something different from the introduction — a genuine judgement — or does it just restate?
• Have they used at least one specific place, figure or named example per point?

If the underlining is sparse, the answer is describing, not assessing.

A practical routine for home

Fifteen minutes, twice a week, is more useful than an hour on a Sunday.

1. Pick one past 9-mark question. AQA and Edexcel both publish past papers freely on their websites. Pearson's Edexcel and AQA's own site are the places to look.
2. Give your child five minutes to plan only — no writing. The plan should list two or three factors and, next to each, a one-word judgement: strong, weak, short-term, main.
3. Twenty minutes to write.
4. Five minutes to self-mark against the mark scheme. Both boards publish these. Your child highlights every evaluative phrase in one colour and every piece of case study evidence in another. If the page is mostly one colour, they know what to fix.

Repetition of this cycle — plan, write, mark, notice — builds the habit far faster than writing full essays without feedback.

When to bring in extra help

Most students can make the jump from Level 2 to Level 3 with practice and honest self-marking. If your child understands the content but consistently scores 5 or 6 on the 9-markers across mock papers, a few sessions with a specialist GCSE Geography tutor to model the evaluative move — and to mark answers as an examiner would — can shift results quickly. It's a narrow, coachable skill rather than a knowledge gap.

The short version

The 9-mark question rewards judgement, not knowledge. Your child almost certainly knows enough. What they need to practise is the specific sentence pattern that weighs one factor against another and lands a qualified conclusion. Fifteen minutes of focused planning-and-marking, twice a week, is the fastest route there.