Stratford fieldwork: How did environmental quality differ in...

Stratford fieldwork: How did environmental quality differ in unregenerated and regenerated areas in Stratford?

Why was this a good question?

Fieldwork questions should be SMART:

Simple

In Stratford we only investigated one small aspect of regeneration.

Measurable

We used an environmental quality survey to measure the quality of the environment

Achievable

The places were close enough together (sites were 600m apart) for us to visit 4 in one day

Realistic

We could collect enough results to answer our aim.

Timed

Stratford was close enough to complete our fieldwork in one day in the time available


Why was Stratford a good location to do our fieldwork?

1. We could reach the fieldwork location in 45 minutes down the A 12from our school so the area was accessible to us.

2. Some areas of Stratford had been regenerated for the Olympic games in 2012, however other areas close by had not been regenerated therefore it was a good location to compare regenerated places with non regenerated places.

Risk assessment:

Before doing any fieldwork it is important to do a risk assessment to identify possible risks and to put measures in place toreduce those risks. Some examples of risks in urban areas are…

1. Traffic. (Control measure – use zebras crossings and always wait for the green man.

2. Speaking to strangers when doing questionnaires. (Control measure – always stay in groups.)

3. Becoming separated from the group. (Control measure – have your phone and a phone number to contact in an emergency)


What is primary data?

Data you collect yourself.

Examples are anything you count or measure.

Primary data we collected in Stratford – environmental quality scores, photographs

What is secondary data?

Data collected and manipulated by someone else.

Examples are…

Maps, newspaper reports, textbooks, documentaries.

Secondary data we used in our fieldwork:

Maps – we studied maps to show us the route we needed to take so we knew where we were going. We also looked at maps that showed the area before and after regeneration to understand the context of our fieldwork (how the area has changed and what it was like before.)

Textbook information – we used this to give us background information about regeneration in Stratford so we could explain our findings.


Sampling – we didn’t have time to visit everywhere in Straford so we had to use a sampling technique to choose our sites.

What are the three main types of sampling method we could use?

1. Random – using random number tables to choose an area at random. An advantage of this would be…

You cant be biased when choosing the location. A disadvantage of this would be…

You might end up with 4 regenerated places and no regenerated places therefore you couldn’t answer your aim.

2. Systematic – going to places at equal points along a transect (imaginary line across Stratford)

This removed bias but again you might not end up with regenerated and unregenerated places.

3. Stratified – separating a place into categories and making sure you visit laces in each category – e.g. regenerated and unregenerated.

Which sampling method(s) did we use?


We used both systematic and stratified sampling.

Our 4 sites were 600m apart along an imaginary line (transect) across Stratford (see next slide) This is systematic sampling.

We also used stratified sampling by making sure we had 2 regenerated areas and 2 unregenerated areas.


Which sites did we visit?

Site 1: New Town –an area of unregeneratedhousing

Site 2: East Village. An area of regenerated housing that was originally build as the Olympic athletes village. The areas had lots of greenery and posh shops beneath the flats.

Site 3: The Olympic Park – regenerated.

London’s first new part to be built in 100 years

Site 4 – Hackney Wick –unregenerated. An area that has a long history of industry and creative industries. There is a lot of conflict between those that want to develop it and those who want it to retain its character.


Exam questions on your fieldwork:

All the information I have covered so far will be in short questions (2-3marks)

Then you will need to answer a 6 mark question. Examples are…

• Assess the effectiveness of your data collecting methods. (6marks)

• Assess the effectiveness of your data presentation methods in representing the data collected in your enquiry. (6marks)

• To what extent was the data collected useful in satisfying the original aims of the enquiry? (6marks)

• To what extent were the data presentation techniques you used useful in satisfying the original aims of the enquiry? (6marks)

These look really horrible but in reality are asking you to do something quite simple – What were the advantages of your data collection/presentation methods, what were the disadvantages and overall what is your conclusion about how good they were.

Where will you lose marks on these questions?

• You will write about data collection when the question asks you to write about data presentation and vice versa.

• You will forget to refer to examples from your own fieldwork.

• You will forget to write a conclusion


Remember…

Which are you supposed to write about? Data presentation or data collection?

Add examples from your own fieldwork.

Remember to write a conclusion.

(All questions with the following command words in any of your exams require a conclusion:

To what extent, Evaluate, Discuss, Assess )


Data Collection methods:

1. Environmental quality survey:

• We visited 4 areas in Stratford and gave the area a score for different aspects of environmental quality. We added up the scores which gave us a total for that area.

Advantages:

• Giving a score to environmental quality allows us to easily compare the two areas. For example Newtown got a low score of 18 and the Olympic park scored 28 which showed us that environmental quality was better in the regenerated area of the Olympic Park.

• We can show the scores on graphs or maps which is an easier way to visualise the data.

• It enabled us to take into account lots of different aspects of environmental quality such as litter, building quality and street furniture.

• It was quick and easy to do.

Disadvantages:

• It is subjective (based on people’s opinions) so different people might come up with different scores. For example in Hackney Wick, some would have liked the graffiti whereas some wouldn’t which could make the scores misleading.

• The environmental quality score didn’t have graffiti on it which changed the results for Hackney Wick.

• We only visited part of each area on one day so this may have affected the results (it was the day after the streets had been cleaned in New Town therefore the day before there could have been much more litter.)


Data Collection methods 2: Photographs.

We took photographs to show the environmental quality in each location.

Advantages:

This gives us visual evidence of the quality of the environment.

We can use this to back up our environmental quality scores.

Disadvantages:

A photograph only gives one view – a very different environmental quality may be shown if the photographer was to turn around.

Photographs are often bias – you are more likely to take a photo of lots of litter than the area next to it that has none.


Data presentation methods 1:

Located bar graph using google Earth

We used google Earth and the software package, GE graphs to plot a bar graph on google Earth to show environmental quality at each site.

Advantages:

Putting data on a map shows the location of the data.

Doing this allows you to see distributions or patterns in the data – we could see that the regenerated areas with a high score for environmental quality were in the centre and the low scoring unregenerated areas were on the edges.

We can easily compare environmental quality in the areas.

It showed how we sampled our sites using systematic sampling along a transect.

Disadvantages:

The software was temperamental and difficult to use. Producing our graphs was time consuming.

The actual scores were not shown on the map so data could not be read off it.


Data Presentation method 2: Annotated photographs

We stuck photographs around the google earth graph to show evidence of environmental quality at each place.

Advantages:

• This provided visual evidence of what the environmental quality was like. We could highlight key features with our labels.

Disadvantages:

• We could only use one photo from each area which may be bias and not give a good representation of the environmental quality in each area.


After the 6 mark question, you need to answer a 9 mark question.

Key words to use and understand:

Reliable:

whether you can trust your results. If you were to repeat your investigation would you get the same results?

Accurate:

were your measurements correct? (Please don’t talk about your environmental quality scores being accurate as they are subjective – there is no right or wrong answer)

Representative:

do your results cover the whole area of Stratford?


Examples of 9 mark questions:

• For one of your geographical enquiries, to what extent were the results of this enquiry helpful in reaching a reliable conclusion? (9marks)

• With reference to your methods, results and conclusions, suggest how one of your geographical enquiries could be improved. (9marks)


The question is likely to have the words results and conclusions in.

What are your results?

These are the actual data (in this case environmental quality scores) you collected.

New Town (Unregenerated) – 18

East Village (regenerated) -28

Olympic Park (regenerated) – 26

Hackney Wick (unregenerated) – 20

These were reliable because we used an environmental quality survey to collect data in the same way at each site and took photos as further evidence for our scores.

These were unreliable because we visited the day after the streets were cleaned in New Town so if we were to go earlier in the week, the scores could be much different. If we visited East Village in the evening rather than the afternoon there could be a lot more litter which would affect the environmental quality score.

We tried to make these representative of Stratford by going to more than one regenerated and unregenerated location however we only had time to visit 4 sites which could be very different from lots of other areas in Stratford.


What were our conclusions?

Overall, using the data from the four sites we visited, we could see that the environmental quality was much better in the regenerated areas than the unregenerated areas of Stratford. This was because they had been recently improved through the Olympic Games in 2012 and are well looked after by the council who are encouraging people to move into the area.

The regenerated areas were largely in the centre of Stratford and unregenerated areas were on the edges and received little investment to improve them.

Our conclusions were reliable because (see reasons why our results were reliable)

However there are many ways in which they were not reliable such as…

Because of the subjective nature of the environmental quality survey, other people may get different results for the same area (use Hackney Wick as your example) (See other problems to do with our environmental quality survey)

There were many limitations to our investigation – we only collected data in one part of each area, we only went to 4 sites in the whole of Stratford, we only visited on one day of the year and at one time of day. This suggests that our results may be unrepresentative of the whole area which could have affected our conclusions.


How can we improve our investigation?

How could we improve our methods?

• Make EQS more detailed with more categories

• Take panoramic photos to capture more of the area.

• Visit more locations in each site and take an average of the scores collected.

• Visit more locations in Stratford.

How can we improve our results?

• See above – results are linked with how good your methods are.

How can we improve our conclusions?

• Visit more locations in each site and take an average of the scores collected.

• Visit more locations in Stratford.

• Collect data on different days or at different times of the day.

• Collect data on more than one day of the year.

All these would serve to increase the amount of data collected which would make it more likely that you have reliable (trustworthy results)

Stratford fieldwork: How did environmental quality differ in...

Documents

Transcript of Stratford fieldwork: How did environmental quality differ in...