Human Geography Fieldwork Flashcards
(20 cards)
What was the enquiry question?
is the quality of life in East London improving as a result of regeneration?
What ideas did the fieldwork investigate?
urban change
deindustrialisation
regeneration
Name 2 risks and how they can be reduced.
crossing busy roads - use pedestrian crossings
getting lost - stay in groups
hot weather leading to sun burn - wear sun cream, stay in the shade
Why was the location appropriate?
carpenter’s estate (E15) and East Village (E20) provided a good contrast between older area of London and a newer regenerated area
short journey time between areas - 15min walk
easy access and relatively safe
What is primary data?
data you collect yourself
What primary data was collected?
questionnaires
environmental quality analysis (EQA)
What is secondary data?
data collected by others
What secondary data was collected?
house prices from zoopla
Why were the data collection techniques appropriate?
quick, easy
minimal equipment required so cost-effective
allowed us to gain insight on people’s opinions
Which method was used to show the result from EQA?
3D column graphs
Which method was used to show results from questionnaires?
radar graphs
Why were the data representation methods appropriate?
easy to construct
clear visual data
allows comparison
easy to interpret
Which place had a greater positive score in the EQA results?
East Village (E20)
Which place had a greater negative score in the questionnaire?
Carpenter’s Estate (E15)
Give a conclusion for the fieldwork.
regeneration has improved quality of life due to higher EQA and questionnaire scores in East Village (E20)
however, regeneration may not improve quality of life for everyone as it could be argued that it benefits richer people but not people on low incomes who may not be able to afford the property prices in regenerated areas
Is the conclusion weak or strong and why?
it is weak because:
we only went to 2 places in East London
we only visited at one particular time/day
EQA scored were subjective
we didn’t have time to find out detailed local opinions - questionnaires were quite simple
Name 2 limitations encountered while collecting data.
EQA was subjective
hard to judge certain categories like noise and crime
hard to do stratified sampling and get representative sample of all types of people in the questionnaire
Name 2 limitations encountered while presenting the data.
eight categories on the radar graphs for the questionnaires which made it slightly crowded and confusing
12 categories hard to interpret for the EQA on the 3D column graphs and the scales were not the same making comparison difficult
Name 2 limitations of the conclusion.
data collection was mainly subjective , so results differ from person to person
limited sample size
not reliable
