Human

• Title

  Urban challenges in Stratford
• Two locations

  1. Carpenters Estate

  2. East Village
• Theory


  Deprivation exists in urban areas:

  HEHE - housing health employment education

  Also: Crime Environment Income

  Urban areas are unequal. We are going to look in a regenerated area and an

  area that has not undergone this to see if there are any differences
• Why was this a good questio to investigate!

  We know from secondary data that urban challenges exist

  Good scale and focus. Stratford and urban challenges were answerable

  in the day

  We were able to collect appropriate data

  Clear geographical links
• How was your chosen location appropriate?

  Access: Could travel there in a day from school.

  Accessible on public transport

  Free to enter

  2 locations are walkable from each other

  variation: . Two locations with differences

  East Village has been regenerated as part of the Olympic Legacy

  Carpenters Estate is an area of social housing
• How did we use a map?

  What did we do? We made a map showing the locations in different colours using Google my maps. We faded the background

  Why did we do this? So we could see the locations with a clear visual. This enabled us to compare the different locations, and see connections and relationships between places
• What did we investigate?

  Main question: how do urban challenges vary across Stratford?

  Sub-question 1: how are services different?

  Sub-question 2: howis housing quality different?

  Sub-questich 3: how is crime different. ?
• Why did we do a field sketch?

  Visually represents the data and the location of the site

  Able to compare the locations

  Gives an appreciation of the data

  Easy to identify important features of the landscape

  Easy to refer back to
• Method 1: Building Quality Survey

  What did we do?

  We went to Carpenters Estate and East Village. We did it 3 times in each

  location. Considering the surfaces, roofs, windows, doors, stairs, driveways.

  What sampling?

  Stratified - within 2 varying locations to see the contrast.

  Random within the location

  Why did we do it?

  See the building quality difference. We know housing deprivation is a key

  indicator of urban challenge.

  Quickly able to see impacts

  Collect numerical data - easy to understand and access.

  Able to take an average across the 3 locations. Representative

  What
• Positives and negatives of building quality survey?

  Positives:

  Easy to compare across multiple locations

  Easy to conduct

  Negatives:

  Subjective

  Open to bias

  We did not have a control location
• Method 2: service tally

  What did we do? As we walked around, we counted and recorded the number of services in each place

  What sampling? Opportunistic stratified

  We did it when we could in certain locations

  Why did we do it? See what access to services is like in clear links to the question

  Very up to date - more so than online

  in both quantity and type
• Positives and negatives of service tally?

  Positives: Simple

  Independent

  Made specific to the question - we counted services not

  pedestrians for example

  Easy to repeat

  Negatives: Human error - can we see them all? Did we know exactly what each thing was?

  Time consuming
• Method 3: questionnaire


  What did we do?We asked people their opinions on the services in the area

  Quality of Housing, green space, public transport, shopping,

  leisure facilities, community and crime

  What sampling? Random - we asked people based on convenience and who we thought would respond.

  Why did we do it? Get people's opinions.

  To see what lived experience is like
• Positives and negatives of questionnaire?

  Positives: Variety of people

  Give new insights

  Get a wider representation of views

  Negatives: People don't want to be stopped

  Time consuming

  Didn't ask people about 2 different places - just Stratford in

  general
• Risk assessment - how to avoid hazards

  Pickpocketing = valuables being stolen. to reduce we can avoid crime hotspots and keep valuables in pockets

  Cars= being hit by a car. to reduce risk we walked on pavement and crossed the roads at crossing. there was also a first aider on the trip in case of injury

  Tripping and slipping = injury. to reduce risk we wore sensible footwear and avoided uneven surfaces
• Data presentation for Environmental Quality Survey

  Presentation method - Radar graphs

  The data was plotted on a radar graph to show the various

  different scores. We plotted all of the different locations in

  different colours so that they could be compared. We used the

  same scale 1-5.

  This made it really visual and easy to compare as we could

  see who had the smallest circle and so the lowest scores and

  building quality really easily.

  We did not use a bar chart as it would not have shown the data

  We did not use a line graph as the data was not

  by site. continuous.

  How could this be improved?

  We could have represented the data on a map by overlaying the radar graphs onto a map to see the changes across different places.
• Data presentation for service tally

  Presentation method - Bar chart

  The data was plotted so that the type of service was along the

  x axis and the quantity was along the y axis.

  This was easily understood and so we could understand the

  patterns

  We used a bar chart as it is discrete data in categories, which

  are separate and different.

  We used a bar chart instead of a pie chart as we were

  interested in the quantity of the services, not the proportion of

  which services were in which category .

  How could this be improved?.

  We could have represented the data on a map by colouring different areas the colour of the service with proportional symbols. This would have enabled us to see the variations across different areas. We could have done a stacked bar chart, grouping the bar chart by sectors.
• Data analysis and conclusion -building quality impacts

  Conclusion - The building quality was worse on Carpenters Estate

  Reliable

  Same scoring system used consistently

  Felt rushed sometimes

  Sites are easy to return to so could perform a second tally to

  make sure that it wasn't a one-off

  Could have been affected by the weather - it was very cold so

  this will potentially have made us more negative.

  Accuracy

  bias

  Based on individual student judgement. Open to subjectivity and

  Validity

  We needed to see two locations in Stratford - visit more sites.

  We went to 2 sites overall.
• Data analysis and conclusion - service tally

  Conclusion- There are a range of services available in Stratford

  Reliable

  We do not know how reliable as we did not perform the method

  multiple times - should have repeated!

  Scaffolding and higher up services may have been missed due

  to visual barriers

  Accuracy

  HUMAN ERROR - Did not give service tally full focus and so

  potentially missed services. In a rush

  Students may have miscategorised services as they came up

  with their own categories.

  Validity

  We did not see the area properly before - unable to as it was 20

  years ago!

  Not enough sampling collected - could have been performed

  systematically along a transect (line) through Stratford
• Data analysis and conclusion - questionnaire

  Conclusion -People think that Stratford has a range of services available

  Reliable

  Could have asked more people, however as a group we

  collectively asked over 20. Difficult within the constraints.

  Could have asked in a different location within Stratford to get

  more of an overview.

  Accuracy

  One student asked the questions whilst another noted down the

  answers. Improving accuracy!

  Same questions asked to every interviewee.

  Validity

  Very valid - questions were of the people