Sherringham field work
- Created by: Squirrel03
- Created on: 21-03-19 21:26
View mindmap
- Sherringham Fieldwork
- Physical
- Suitable location
- Good access
- Able to do in one day
- Clear processes
- Data presentation
- Method 2: located proportional arrow
- Weaknesses
- Scale needed to be representative
- Strengths
- Multiple sets of data in one image
- Clear visual representation
- Weaknesses
- Method 1: bar graph
- Weaknesses
- Requires explanation
- Can be manipulated to show false interpretations
- Strengths
- Can be interpreted for specific data
- Clear visual representation
- Easy to produce and see patterns or anomalies
- Weaknesses
- Method 2: located proportional arrow
- Risks
- Falling in water
- Take due care and attention
- Weather
- Take appropriate measures i.e. sun cream
- Slipping on rocks
- Wear appropriate footwear
- Falling in water
- Analysis
- Long shore drift
- Mean apples distance 12.41m
- Anomalies detected (probably human error) groynes 1&2 opposite direction
- Sediment height
- Large range of 45cm
- Most sediment in groynes 4-6 so more effective further up the beach
- Long shore drift
- Conclusion
- Evaluation
- Reliability
- Use a larger sample size
- Accuracy
- Use a more accurate measurementtool
- Validity
- Reduce errors by making these improvements
- Easy to produce and see patterns or anomalies
- Reliability
- Suitable location
- Human
- Data Presentation
- Method 2: pie charts for % land use
- Strengths
- easy to construct
- anomalies stand out
- Weaknesses
- doesnt show exact values
- Strengths
- Method 1: statistics - proportional circles
- Weaknesses
- hard to spot anomalies
- only a snapshot in time
- Strengths
- easy to calculate statistics
- good visual
- Weaknesses
- Method 2: pie charts for % land use
- Risk
- Crossing roads
- walk single file and use crossings
- Getting lost
- have an emergency phone number and meeting points
- Injuries
- carry first aid kit
- Travel
- wear seatbelts
- Crossing roads
- Collection
- Method 2: land use
- Description
- walk down high street and record use of each building
- use google maps for secondary data
- Justification
- whether or not the economy is aimed at tourists
- Weaknesses
- biased results
- Strengths
- quick and effiecient
- good coverage
- Description
- Method 1: footfall
- Justification
- how many people are present in which area
- to see a pattern in certain parts of town
- Description
- 1. visit three stratified sites
- 2. count for 5 minutes how many people walk past
- Weaknesses
- biased
- could have miscounted
- no way to tell if they are local or visiting
- Strengths
- safe and has good coverage
- Justification
- Method 2: land use
- Suitable location
- Slowly increasing population
- Physical and human attractions
- Evaluation
- Footfall
- use a gps app to use evenly distributed points along the transect
- Secondary
- limited as we can only assume that the rest of Sherringham follows this pattern
- Land use
- use an up to date base map
- Footfall
- Conclusions
- Land use
- 56% of buildings at the site near the promenade are tourist based
- local buildings are further in land
- Footfall
- area closest to promenade has more tourists
- overall
- popular destination because of beach AND services
- Land use
- Analysis
- Footfall
- site 2
- lowest footfall 9 people per minute
- area was off the high street and lack of tourist services
- site 1
- mean footfall of 15 per minute
- had tourist attractions and features
- site 3
- mean 13 people per minute
- on high street but moving towards residential areas
- site 2
- Land use
- mixed land use
- site 1 (near beach) stands out as most touristy
- Footfall
- Data Presentation
- Physical
Comments
No comments have yet been made