geog study skillz

Aim: to investigate the differences between protected and unprotected stretches of coastline

uses of ICT

• maps
• research prior to investigation
• images
• tide time tables
• data presentation

Evaluation

• 4 areas of the coastline used for transect
• all along one strech of coastline so less likely to have anomolous results
• 9 different readings for the vegetation
• 10 readings done for the cliff angles

• stood at some distance from cliff for the quadrat
• all started in the same place for the beach transect
• 3 pebbles taken from each area

Criticisms

• places of transects 3 in an area of protected coastline, 1 in an area of unprotected coastline
• paces unreliable soucre of measure for distance
• approximation used for the quadrat and cliff angle
• no compass used
• field sketches could have involved a cross profile/section being drawn
• some areas were restricted by water-pools and runnels etc
• only on one stretch of coast so results couldn't be vaired with another stretch
• there wasn't a distance measured from the cliff when doing the cliff angles which could have affected the results

1:

• More erosion at unprotected than protected
• Proven
• Done by field sketh of area which shows differences in vegetation, beach slant, cliff retreat etc

2:

• More vegetation at protected than unprotected
• Proven
• 9 readings of each area, equidistant from cliff
• avearage found and put into a piechart
• used a kite diagram to show range between the 2 areas
• this is due to more impact of subaerial weathering

3:

• steeper cliff angles on protected than unprotected
• disproven
• used mean, median and IQR only showed a larger spread for unportected but didn't clarify much of difference in steepness
• used box and whisker diagrams
• 10 readings taken randomly on the cliff at 2 differnet areas (5 per area)

4:

• protected beaches are more sloped than unprotected
• wider range and more sloping for protected, unportected was more gentle, less sloping and smaller range in angles
• used a clinometre in 4 different areas
• proven
• showed by using a transect graph

5:

• Nul hypothesis: no correlation between sediment size and distance from cliff
• proven
• measured 3 pebbles every 5 paces, average was taken
• Used spearmas rank which showed 0.1 correlation therefore no correlation
• checked against conidence levels
• plotted on a scatter graph

Health and saftey risks

• Rock fall from cliffs
• drowning
• entering deep water to measure
• slipping off rocks or groyne