A minor point- you say you have "solved"- do remember that an IRSE question does not just have one correct answer, there is not an unique solution. However you have offered one very valid response.
I liked the table approach; it was very clearly set out.
I think that it dealt well with the differences.
Some confusion between the various different type of possible crossing with full barriers and those various ones with half barriers. Better to have chosen one of each for comparison and then perhaps refer briefly to the variants later.
It was not so good at identifying the various factors- many were there but not so clearly identified.
I have made some alterations in track changes and also embedded comments in the attached.
It was definitely a good effort and a clear pass even as it stood. To have raised it above that did not need more material (there was plenty) but to have demonstrated a little more understanding of the rationale. Instead of as many lines of entry, a little more text within each that explained how the particular feature contributes to safety / results in a safety hazard would have improved markedly and thus be a better use of time. Similarly the factors need to be made more obvious; to avoid needless repetition given your initial answer then I think a separate table with minimum text within it tacked onto the end as shown would be effective; this only worked because you had the foresight to number the lines of your table; that is a good tip for others as enables easy cross-refs!
I liked the table approach; it was very clearly set out.
I think that it dealt well with the differences.
Some confusion between the various different type of possible crossing with full barriers and those various ones with half barriers. Better to have chosen one of each for comparison and then perhaps refer briefly to the variants later.
It was not so good at identifying the various factors- many were there but not so clearly identified.
I have made some alterations in track changes and also embedded comments in the attached.
It was definitely a good effort and a clear pass even as it stood. To have raised it above that did not need more material (there was plenty) but to have demonstrated a little more understanding of the rationale. Instead of as many lines of entry, a little more text within each that explained how the particular feature contributes to safety / results in a safety hazard would have improved markedly and thus be a better use of time. Similarly the factors need to be made more obvious; to avoid needless repetition given your initial answer then I think a separate table with minimum text within it tacked onto the end as shown would be effective; this only worked because you had the foresight to number the lines of your table; that is a good tip for others as enables easy cross-refs!
(07-08-2011, 06:57 AM)vinoth0106 Wrote: Hi,
I have solved 2010 Module 5 Level Crossing Question. Herewith i have attached the answer. Pls give your commends and suggestions to improve further in Level Crossing topic.
Regards,
Vinoth R
PJW