Paper 3 Taunton Regeneration

Question 1

What was the title of this enquiry?

Answer 1

An investigation to show the success of the regeneration of Taunton town centre

Question 2

Why was the location suitable for us?

Answer 2

-close to the FSC-short journey required
-area had footpaths and crossing points
-nearby public toilets and car park
-recently undergone regeneration
-previous school’s had studied there- safe and legal

Question 3

What were 3 risks we assessed before?

Answer 3

Risk 1: Slipping / tripping
-wear sensible footwear, follow footpaths, don’t run
Risk 2: Being run over
-stick to footpaths and safe crossing points
Risk 3: Getting lost
-remain in groups of 3 at all times, use google maps to plan route before, have mobile phone for communication.

Question 4

What was the geographical theory we followed?

Answer 4

Regeneration is the social, economic and environmental improvement of an area.

-we would expect an increase in environmental quality, greater quality of life and standard of living.
-this can lead to gentrification, as they can displace existing residents and house prices can increase, as well as the cost of living.

Question 5

What were the 3 enquiry questions we had?

Answer 5

Areas that have regenerated will:
1. have a higher environmental quality
2. have a stronger economy
3. be socially successful

Question 6

What sampling strategy did we use?
Why?

Answer 6

we used a stratified sampling strategy, this meant we could identify sites that had undergone regeneration
we used these 4 sites:
-Castle Green
-Somerset Square
-Station Boulevard
-Firepool Lock

we could not have evaluated all of the town centre, so we chose these based on prior research and google maps to locate these areas on a map

Question 7

What quantitative method did we use?

Answer 7

We scored the environmental quality that included 6 elements;
-litter
-vandalism
-green spaces
-noise pollution
-street furniture
-traffic + congestion

scored it from -5 to +5, on each factor. in total it was out of 30 points- high score meant higher environmental quality

Question 8

What first qualitative method did we use?

Answer 8

We used word epitomes- three words that bets summed up each area.
They were recorded and created into a ‘wordle’ as a collecitve, which we compared the general feelings, as well as different views from different years and from local’s views.

Castle green:
green, historical and open

Somerset Square:
quiet, modern, wildlife

Station Boulevard:
loud, open, wildlife

Firepool Lock:
appealing, green, modern

Question 9

What second qualitative method did we use?

Answer 9

we used annotated photographs
-at each site we took a photo and looked at different factors
-when returning to school we outlined evidence and suggested the impacts regernation had had on each area.
-for example, change in building type

Question 10

What secondary data did we use?

Answer 10

-Google maps was used to plan routes and idenify sites to research
-Census data helped us understand the demography of the area-comparing effects
-Zoopla was used to show changes in house prices before and after regeneration

Question 11

What data presentation method did we use?

Answer 11

Radar diagrams

-presented our Environmental Quality data
-allowed us to visually compare each site
-each factor was a stem in the diagram
-the larger the area created, the better the quality

Question 12

Discuss some advantages and disadvantages of using Radar diagrams to present data.

Answer 12

Advantages:
-in one place
-easy to compare
-visually effective

Disadvantages
-chaotic and it looks unorganised
-small- need to enlarge it
-overlapping looks unclear
-is subjective data

Question 13

What other data presentation did we use?

Answer 13

-word cloud for epitome words

Question 14

Discuss some advantages and disadvantages of using word clouds and ‘wordles’ to present data.

Answer 14

Advantages:
-clear
-results from many people
-we could compare and find patterns of words used

Disadvantages:
-no quantitative data shown

Question 15

What analysis did we do?

Answer 15

-entered EQ scores onto data sheets and issues with our collection
-we calculated an average of our total EQ scores and radar diagram to visually display each EQ factor
-we looked at any patterns in the areas and the distance from the centre

-we compared them results from previous groups to see if they were a good representative of the area
-took into consideration any anomalies due to the time of day and weather conditions.

Question 16

Why was GIS used?

Answer 16

to locate our total environmental quality scores on a map using proportional symbols to visually see how the environment changed over the regenerated areas of Taunton
-to see which areas had greater success.

Question 17

What results did we gather?

Answer 17

areas that had undergone regernation had a positive environmental quality score
-it had been environmentally successful

Station boulevard had the lowest score
-near train station
-busy and noisy, centre of town

Question 18

What did we conclude?

Answer 18

-in areas that regeneration occurred, there was evidence of positive environmental quality, particularly in Somerset Square and Castle Green.
-it was poor in busy areas
-there was evidence of rising house prices, changes to land and services for local people.

Question 19

How was our accuracy?

Answer 19

-sites were large in scale, therefore itwas difficult to know exactly where to access- inaccuracy

-the time of day and season impacted the EQ e.g. rush hour is busier and warmer weather is more popular, less cars used.

-the EQ score is subjective- opinions differed
-EQ score range was large- some were hard to decide.

Question 20

How was the reliability?

Answer 20

-only collected data on one day- not as reliable

-there were roadworks which could have impacted our EQ scores at that site- affecting reliability

-at the end of the day, schools were leaving which affected noise and environmental scores.

Question 21

What was our evaluation?

Answer 21

-conclusions were valid as we used sampling to gain a representative view of the area and to reduce bias

-it was a subjective measure- comparing to previous results increased reliability

-secondary data helped support our conclusion

Question 22

Were there any improvments?

Answer 22

-we could have decided exactly where to record the EQ score and taken an average

-The EQ score is subjective-opinions vary greatly

-returning at different times of day and year will increase reliability