Windsor fieldwork enquiry Flashcards
What was the goal of the fieldwork?
To find out if Windsor’s CBD has a clear core (busy center) and frame (less busy edge) pattern.
What idea supported this fieldwork?
Shops and services compete for space in the town center, creating a core with high activity and a frame with lower activity.
This pattern is shown by differences in land values and how busy areas are.
Why was Windsor a good location for this study?
It’s a medium-sized town with a population of about 20,000, plus many visitors from nearby areas.
Popular with tourists, making it diverse and lively. Safe and easy to walk around.
What research was done before the fieldwork?
Used online maps to choose areas to study, collected data about property values from government sources, and shared data collected by classmates.
What risks were involved, and how were they managed?
Risks included traffic, getting lost, or upsetting locals.
Solutions: Used pedestrian crossings, worked in groups with maps, and stayed in touch with teachers using mobile phones.
What sampling methods were used? Why?
- Systematic sampling: Measured environmental quality at fixed points on transects to cover the whole area evenly.
- Random sampling: Used in one area (Royal Station) to avoid accidental bias.
How was environmental quality measured?
Rated places using an 8-point scale (-4 to +4) for things like building quality, cleanliness, and amenities (e.g., benches, lights).
Gave an overall score based on impressions of the area.
How was footfall (pedestrian activity) measured?
Counted people walking past in 5-minute periods at each sampling point.
Two people stood back-to-back and tallied one direction each, then added totals.
Why were these methods chosen?
Environmental quality: Helped identify differences between areas in a clear, comparable way.
Footfall: Showed how busy different parts of the town were, supporting the core/frame idea.
How was the data presented?
- Environmental Quality Assessment (EQA): Bar charts placed on maps to show quality changes across the town.
- Footfall counts: Displayed on maps using proportional symbols (bigger symbols = more people).
Why was this presentation effective?
Maps with bar charts/symbols made it easy to see patterns of quality and footfall across Windsor.
Graphs showed how environmental quality and activity changed with distance from the CBD core.
What results were expected?
Environmental quality and footfall would be highest in the busy areas like Peascod Street and Windsor Royal Station.
These scores would gradually drop moving towards the edges of the CBD.
Were there any unexpected results or issues?
Differences in how groups collected data might cause small errors.
Personal opinions could affect environmental quality scores.
What conclusions were drawn?
Windsor’s CBD core (Peascod Street and Royal Station) showed higher quality and activity.
The transition to the frame wasn’t a sharp boundary but a gradual change.
What were the challenges and limitations of the study?
Challenges included subjective environmental scores and confusion in identifying land use.
Limitations: Results only represent the time of year and day they were collected; some areas may have been missed.
