HUMAN fieldwork

ENQUIRY QUESTION

How and why are there variations in deprivation for different areas within Bournemouth?

Why Boscombe?

• there is an area in Boscombe which has very high levels of deprivation to observe → SHELLEY PARK VS. CHURCHILL GARDENS

• area that is easily accessible and easy to move around

• the two places are close together so for ease it was good to compare the two in one day

Where is Boscombe? Describe its location?

• Eastern side of Bournemouth

• South Coast of England

• It is in the county of Dorset

How did you plan the enquiry and what did you take into consideration?

• based on its location

• easily accessible

RISK HAZARDS:

• we had to take into consideration the risks and hazards and act accordingly

• getting lost from groups - we reduced this risk by keeping students in groups of 3 at all times

• traffic - crossing the road at appropriate times, always waiting for green man

• weather - wearing appropriate clothing

PRIMARY METHODS (that we did) to look at deprivation in Boscombe

1. BIPOLAR SURVEY

   • QUANTITATIVE

   • it was a method to judge the EQA - environmental quality assessment

   • Shelley park and Churchill gardens

2. MOOD MAPPING

   • QUALITATIVE method

   • about feelings and personal feelings and judgements

   • being in a location and judging how you feel about that

   • we did it based on colors and emotions

3. HOUSING SURVEY

   • QUANTITATIVE

   • looking at two houses

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ASSESSMENT (USING THE BIPOLAR SURVEY)

Description of the method:

• we walked down each of our chosen streets

• we then answered questions such as “safety if alone” and “evidence of drug/alcohol abuse” and gave each category a score from -2 (poor) to +2 (good)

• then we added these scores up for each street and gave each street a total score and total color

JUSTIFY

• the subcategories that we collected data about are relevant for the enquiry question about deprivation to collect data that would then allow us to draw conclusions

LIMITATIONS

• there were quite limited categories that don’t assess ALL TYPES of deprivation

• some categories don’t particularly mean that a place is deprived or not, there can be a vape or a wine bottle without the area being very deprived → they aren’t always directly correlated

• the greenery and open space depends on the season

• the safety if alone can also depends on the weather or season and thus your mood

SAMPLING

• systematic QUANTITATIVE sampling because data is collected after every 100m

DATA PRESENTATION:

• associate each score and mood with a color

• put the EQA scores on a choropleth graph of the transect

• its easier to interpret by looking at colors that are associated with moods

MOOD MAPPING

METHOD:

• we would walk around our chosen location and take in our environment in order to generate a MOOD for that location

• mapping moods can indicate how a place makes us feel to build up a picture of what that place is like

• we then used a MOOD METER which categorizes emotions based on energy and positivity and allocates specific colors to these moods.

JUSTIFY

• there is a huge variety of moods in the mood meter which can be used to indicate how an area is making us feel, and usually an area that is deprived would be associated with the more negative emotions of the mood meter

  • helps us answer the enquiry question by adding to other data we have collected and seeing if they align

LIMITATIONS:

• mood is very effected by the weather and season

• can cloud your judgement and mood and draws the attention away from the deprivation

SAMPLING:

• systematic sampling because you are moving every 100m

DATA PRESENTATION:

• we would use a CHOROPLETH MAP on the transect map

• you can really easily tell using colors how you felt moving down the map

HOUSING SURVEY (USING BIPOLAR SURVEY)

METHOD:

• in smaller working groups we observed our surrounding built environment and similar to the EQA, used a bipolar survey to SCORE EACH AREA from a category of -2 to +2

JUSTIFY:

• housing is a good way of assessing deprivation as it is correlated to how deprived and area is based on the affluence and the quality of the housing

• good way to answer our enquiry question as it is RELATED directly to things like income

LIMITATIONS:

• we didn’t go INSIDE the houses, made a judgement from the outside when the inside could be completely different and change the rating significantly

SAMPLING:

• stratified sampling because you aren’t moving you are looking at one house and then another house individually

DATA PRESENTATION:

• clustered bar chart (comparative bar chart) with a different colored bar for each of the two houses

• good because we can compare it to secondary data

What secondary data did you refer to?

• we did NOT refer to any secondary data

• ISSUE that should have been resolved to find out things like crime statistics in Churchill Gardens vs. Shelley park

Ways to improve data presentation?

• geolocate onto a map when it is to do with location to make the presentation more accurate

DATA ANALYSIS OF housing survey method (needed for conclusion)

• PEEL —> point, evidence, explain, link

• POINT my data shows that the quality of the housing elements were generally scoring BETTER in Shelley park than Churchill gardens (windows, garden, driveway, security)

• on every score, Shelley park scored better than Churchill gardens

• EVIDENCE give fake examples like window was -2 in Churchill gardens and it was +2 in Shelley park

• EXPLAIN —> this is because Shelley park is an area of higher affluence and lower deprivation as people have more money to look after their homes, repair windows, clean graffiti etc

DATA ANALYSIS - EQA

DATA ANALYSIS - MOOD MAPPING

CONCLUSION

• use the description and data analysis from all the different methods

• answer the WHY —> the bigger question

• How and why are there variations in deprivation for different areas in Boscombe?

• come to a conclusion and include some limitations

MY RESULTS:

EQA:

—> Shelley park

—> Churchill gardens (more deprived)

Mood mapping:

EVALUATION

were you ACTUALLY able to come up with a valid answer

• yes we were able to draw up some conclusion

did we find out anything new?

• secondary data shows that people were already aware of the deprivation

  → we didn’t exactly discover anything NEW

• there is MORE to deprivation that we didn’t have to opportunity to analyze or observe

• it is also has OTHER components like crime and income which we didn’t do surveys on or investigate