To evaluate an action, judge it against each stated criterion with a reason, then give an overall judgement. A list of advantages alone is not an evaluation.
This lesson is part of environmental sustainability. It builds on the data skills from interpreting conservation data.
What are the four steps?
- Write down the criteria from the question.
- Judge each option against each criterion, with a reason.
- Weigh the results and choose.
- State one limit of your choice.
Worked example: two actions for a polluted river
This case is invented. A river receives fertiliser runoff from farms. Option A plants a strip of grass and shrubs along the bank. Option B builds a treatment plant at the river mouth.
| Criterion | A: bank vegetation | B: treatment plant |
|---|---|---|
| Effectiveness | Plants absorb nutrients before they reach the river | Treats water after pollution has entered |
| Side effects | Habitat for wildlife | Uses energy and chemicals |
| Cost | Low | High |
| Time to work | A few growing seasons | Quick once built |
Conclusion: Option A is the better choice because it stops nutrients at the source, costs less and helps wildlife. However, it takes time to establish, so during that period the river would still be polluted.
The mistake that costs marks
The common error is an answer with only benefits: “planting is good because it helps the environment.” That is an opinion, and it uses no criterion.
A second error is to choose and then ignore the weakness. Naming the limit shows the judgement is balanced.
How do you word a balanced conclusion?
Use a pattern: “Option A is better because [criterion 1] and [criterion 2]. However, [limit].” The word “however” signals that you weighed both sides.
Check yourself
Criteria: effectiveness and cost. Option C fences a forest to stop logging and costs a lot to patrol. Option D replants a cleared area and costs less but leaves the remaining forest unprotected. Write a two-sentence judgement.
Answer
One good answer: “Option C is more effective because it protects the forest that remains, but it costs more to patrol. Option D costs less but does not stop further logging, so overall C is better if protection is the priority.”
Any choice is acceptable when it follows from the criteria and names a limit.
What to study next
Go on to avoiding unsupported environmental claims. The biological data interpretation trainer has more data to evaluate, and the mistake log is a place to note criteria you missed.
If you want a teacher to question your reasons until every criterion is covered, see online one-to-one Biology tuition.