Lesson video

Hello, my name is Chloe and I'm a geography field studies tutor.

This lesson is called "Fieldwork: analysing, concluding, and evaluating survey data" and it forms part of a unit of work called "Geography: what makes a geographer?" In this lesson, we're going to be concluding our study into environmental quality around a school site and going to be thinking a little bit more about how we can critique and evaluate our own inquiry practise.

Let's get started.

By the end of this lesson, you will be able to analyse and reflect on your survey data to create meaningful conclusions and an evaluation.

There are some keywords to think about, first of all.

Analysis, this is the process which makes sense of the data that was collected.

A conclusion is a summary of your main findings in an investigation.

The evaluation is a judgement on your fieldwork and the accuracy and reliability of your results.

And finally, subjective data.

This is data that is based on opinion rather than facts.

The lesson today is in three parts.

We're going to be looking at analysing survey data, concluding it, and then evaluating the entire geographical inquiry.

Let's start with that first one all about analysing our survey data.

So here we are in the inquiry cycle now.

We have had our question, we've collected data, we've presented it.

We're now getting down to the nitty gritty of analysing it and trying to work out what it all means.

Analysing data involves different processes.

It can be looking at the data in detail, it could be describing, or it could be explaining, probably both.

It could be about connecting the data together, connecting the data to different places, and connecting the data to itself.

Now don't worry if that doesn't make sense yet.

We'll be going through that in a moment.

First of all, we're going to be looking at describing and explaining.

So geographers often start their analysis by making some simple descriptions such as commenting on the most or the least of something.

So here we've got a bar chart which should be familiar now, it's about our data across our six sites for environmental quality.

Jacob here is gonna be commenting on it.

He says, "The site with the highest environmental quality was site 4." Yep, he's correct.

"And the site with the lowest total score was site 3." So he's commented on the fact that site 4 has the tallest bar and site 3 has the shortest.

A very straightforward description there.

Geographers will also try to note any simple patterns in the data or any distinct differences.

So Andeep here says, "All the sites scored fairly well in terms of smell.

While for litter, there was a much larger variety of scores." Again, he's just keeping it at description level now, so let's just check what he's saying.

He's saying, "All the sites scored fairly well in terms of smells." If we look across our different radial graphs there, yeah, maybe that's pretty much right, yeah, most of the sites were fairly consistent in terms of their smell score.

But when we then look at litter, which is on a different axis of our radiograph, yep, you can see it goes from being the highest to the lowest very quickly, so there's much more variety there.

Geographers then try to explain their data, and importantly, geographers may not know exactly why their data has a certain pattern, but what they do is use their knowledge to make suggestions.

They won't necessarily know the reason, but they know enough about geography to be able to think, "Hmm, I think that might be the reason why the data's like that," and geographers are doing that all the time.

So here's Izzy, she's looking at this particular radial graph.

She says, "Site two had similar scores across all the categories." Note that that is a description.

Now let's move on to the explanation part.

"This could be because the site was close to both buildings and green space, meaning it didn't have a distinctive identity." Note to Izzy's language here.

She says, "This could be because.

." She doesn't know for certain why the scores are like that, but she's come up with a really reasonable idea there for why the scores were really similar across the different sites.

Let's check our understanding so far.

Which of these would you not find in a description of results? Is it a statement about the highest value, a comment about any similarities in the data, a reason explaining the nature of a value, or a discussion on how the results are different to each other? Have a think about the question particular there.

What would you not find in a description of results? Pause the video, come back to me.

Hopefully you recognised that the point here is C.

C is talking about a reason explaining the nature of data.

Yes, that would be part of an analysis, but it's not part of a description.

A description would definitely have a statement about the highest value, it would be comments on the similarities in the data, and there would be a discussion about how the results are different from each other.

When geographers analyse spatial data, they try to find links between the data and specific places or features.

One method is to think about how characteristics might change with the distance from something.

How might the environmental quality scores for noise be affected by the road, which runs along the top of our map there? How might they be affected by things like the netball courts? How might noise levels be affected by the school building? Remember, with spatial data, it's all about location having an influence on something.

So what we're thinking here is, how would noise be affected by certain spatial features? Now, Alex here has been thinking about those ideas.

He says, "The sites that are furthest from the road have the highest scores for environmental quality.

These areas are the quietest." So we can see here we've got a score of five and a score of four in the two sites that are furthest away from the road.

So that's a fairly decent piece of analysis there from Alex.

"Therefore, we can reason that the road is the main cause of noise on the school site." That's a pretty reasonable explanation as well.

He's recognised that there's a difference spatially in some of the data.

He's come up with a reasonable explanation for it as well.

Now, Sam is thinking about litter.

"The best scores for litter are those furthest from the school building." Yes, we can see a score of five there way out in the playing field that's very far away from the main building.

She says, "This could be because the area immediately surrounding the building will have the highest footfall, so it's likely to have the most litter too." Again, a really good reasonable explanation.

There's lots of people moving around the school building itself, just outside it, and therefore, yeah, it kinda makes sense, that's where most litter is going to be.

Whereas if you go right to the other side of the school site and you're going to the far end of the playing fields, yes, there's probably gonna be less litter there because there's just generally fewer people there, makes sense.

Geographers may try to look at how one element of the data is connected to another.

Now look really carefully at these three radial graphs.

What do you notice about the scores given for litter and the scores given for views? Look carefully.

Can you spot it? Well done if you recognised what Sofia has seen.

"The scores for litter and for views are often the same value." Site 2, look, litter has a score of two, views have a score of two.

At site 3, litter has a score of one, views have a score of one.

And at site 5, litter has a score of four and views have a score of four.

This could mean that people judge the quality of the view on how much litter they see.

Now let's check our understanding.

Complete the sentences with the missing words.

There's a paragraph here with two missing words in it.

Do pause the video so you can have a read through and see if you can work out what they are.

Right, should we see what your answers are? Geographers who are analysing spatial data will try to find links between the data and places or features.

They may think about how the data changes as the distance from something increases.

Our first practise task.

Look at the environmental quality data that you collected on your own school site.

Describe the data using simple statements.

And then for one of your descriptive statements, write a potential reason for that data, so you're adding in the explanation for one of your descriptive statements.

Pause the video so you can have a go at this.

Check your answer carefully that you have made very clear distinction between the description in task one and your explanation in task.

Right, let's have a look at your descriptions.

First of all, here's some examples of the kind of thing you could include.

Site 4 had the highest total score, indicating the highest environmental quality.

As one moved away from the school building, the scores for views, noise, and litter got better.

You can see that it's simply a description.

I have offered no reasoning yet as to why that might be the case.

Now let's look at the explanation.

So your answer might include something a little bit like this.

Site 4 potentially had the highest environmental quality because it was at the far end of the playing field.

This means it was furthest from the noisy road and had the best views as it was close to the woodland at the edge of the school site.

Look very carefully at the word potentially there.

I've not said this is definitely the reason why my data is like this, but I've offered some really sensible suggestions as to why my data is as it is.

Let's move on to the second part of the lesson.

We're now gonna be thinking about our conclusion.

Concluding data involves different processes again.

It might be that we are summarising the main points.

We need to answer our inquiry question.

And we need to respond to the original hypotheses that we made right at the start of our inquiry.

Geographers begin their conclusion by reviewing the main points of their analysis.

They need to decide which of their observations are most important, which have the strongest evidence to support them.

For example, if they've done a survey at six sites and all six sites appear to have the same data as we've got in the example here, then this is strong conclusive evidence.

Geographers can then answer their inquiry question.

So this is our inquiry question, remember? How does environmental quality vary around our school site? Lucas is reviewing his analysis and the strength of his evidence, and he makes some notes along the way.

So he says, "Here's the things which are my strongest evidence.

Noise.

This had the worst environmental quality score when it was nearest to the road." Litter has also got strong evidence.

"Most litter was seen close to the school building and there was very little on the school playing field." He also notes that areas with good view scores tended to have good smell scores as well.

Then he kind of looks at his weaker evidence.

He notes that with maintenance, there was little variety around the school and there was no clear spatial pattern.

It didn't seem to matter where he was, maintenance was pretty much the same across all of his sites.

By drawing on the data that produces the strongest evidence, Lucas is now ready to write his conclusion.

But before we do, let's check our understanding of conclusions so far.

True or false? When writing a conclusion, geographers should focus on the areas of their data analysis that provided the strongest evidence.

Is that true or false? Have a think, pause the video, and I'll tell you the right answer in a moment.

Well done, yep, it is true.

Now, why is that a true statement? Yeah, so geographers should try to answer their inquiry question as accurately as possible, so they need to focus on the strongest evidence in order to do so.

Well done if you got that.

The conclusion then addresses any hypotheses made at the start of the inquiry.

So let's go and turn our minds back and remember that Aisha had this hypothesis.

She said, "I believe the area with the best environmental quality will be near the sports field because it is away from the noise of the main building." Now let's look at the radial graph that was on the sports field, that's site number 4, and we can see that Aisha's hypothesis can be accepted as at that site it scored some of the highest values in every environmental quality category.

Let's remind ourselves of Jun's hypothesis.

He said, "I believe the area with the worst environmental quality will be next to the canteen because that's where everyone has their snacks, and so there is likely to be a lot of litter." Now, site 2 was our site that was nearest to the school canteen in our example.

Jun's hypothesis can only be partially accepted.

The canteen, which is closest to site 2, did not have the worst litter score, but it was one of the worst.

So you can see that litter here has got a score of two, so that's not great, but it wasn't the worst across the whole site, so we can partially accept Jun's hypothesis as being true.

So what does it mean to partially accept a hypothesis? Is it A, that there is evidence that the hypothesis is true; B, there is some evidence that the hypothesis is true but it is not strong evidence; C, that there's no evidence that the hypothesis is either true or false; or D, that there's actually evidence that the hypothesis is false? Which one of those is the right answer? Do pause the video and have a really close look at the wording that's been used here, and I'll come back to you.

Well, hopefully you recognise that the answer is B.

Yes, there's some evidence that the hypothesis is true, but it's not strong evidence.

So we accept the hypothesis, but only partially.

Your second practise task today.

Write a conclusion in relation to your own data analysis.

State whether any hypotheses you made are accepted, partially accepted or rejected.

Again, you're going to need to pause the video and have a really good think about your conclusion here.

Remember, it hasn't got to be very long.

It just needs to be summarising the main data, what you found out, and then relating it to your hypotheses.

Come back to me when you're ready.

Well, all of your conclusions are going to be slightly different because of course you've got very different data to the data that I have, but there are some elements that your answers should include.

Your answers should have a statement that actually answers your inquiry question.

There should be something in your conclusion which actually directly tries to answer that question.

You should have a summary of the strongest evidence that your data gives you.

And you should have a statement that says whether your hypothesis has been accepted, whether it's been partially accepted, or whether it's been rejected.

And finally, importantly, why you have made that conclusion.

Let's now move on to the final part of today's lesson, it's all about how we evaluate a geographical inquiry.

So here we are at the final stage of our inquiry cycle.

We have raised a question, we've collected some data, presented it, analysed it, created a conclusion.

We now need to evaluate the whole process.

Evaluating an inquiry involves different processes.

You need to be able to reflect on what went well, think about what you would do differently if you were to do the inquiry again, and also reflect on the quality and the amount of the data.

In every fieldwork inquiry, there are things that go well and, as expected, hopefully lots of them.

But there's also other things that do not go to plan.

Laura and Andeep are reflecting on their fieldwork inquiry.

Let's listen in on their conversation.

Laura says, "I think it was good how we worked together to decide on the scores we gave.

We weren't just relying on one person's opinion." Laura's reflecting on something really positive there.

She's picked out something which went really well in her inquiry.

Andeep says, "I think the data collection went well, but my data presentation map was quite messy in the end.

I was trying to fit too much information on it and it became difficult to read." So Andeep has picked up on a different part of the inquiry process and he's thinking, "Hmm, I could do that differently next time." Being a good geographer means being honest about the shortfalls in a field inquiry.

What is most important is that you say what you would change to make the inquiry even better.

What you don't do is try and hide those mistakes that you've made.

Good geographers really reflect hard on what they've done and what they're going to be doing differently next time to improve it.

Laura here says, "If I repeated this inquiry, I might change the criteria I used to also allow me to score the sites of things like wildlife and vandalism." Those are two things we didn't look at in our environmental quality survey, but Laura thinks actually that could produce some good data, so she'd like to extend her study to do some more of that.

Let's check our understanding.

What kind of attitude should a geographer have as they evaluate their fieldwork inquiry? One where they are open and honest about things that did not go well.

One that only highlights the good things about the inquiry.

One that thinks about changes they would make if they were to do it again.

Or one that avoids reflective opinions and only focuses on facts.

Which one is the best kind of attitude for a geographer to have? Pause the video, read them again, and then come back to me.

Well done if you picked out A, yes, we want geographers to be open and honest about things that didn't go very well in the fieldwork inquiry.

It means they're being really reflective about their practise and it makes them excellent geographers.

But also, yeah, well done if you noticed that it's C as well.

We want geographers to think about changes they would make if they were to do it again.

Again, a fantastic attribute to be as a geographer.

Geographers also reflect on the data itself.

They're gonna ask questions like, was there enough data? Was the data fair and reliable? In this inquiry, the data was subjective.

This means it was based on opinions.

Remind yourself how you actually collected the data.

You went to certain sites and you looked and observed around you, and then came up with an opinion for the score that you were going to record.

Different people may have recorded different environmental quality scores depending on how they saw the sites.

Alex then says, "Well, how can we trust this data if everyone has different scores?" He's a little bit worried about this.

He thinks it's not gonna be very fair.

Though the data is subjective, it does not mean it's invalid.

Geographers value people's opinions and they learn from them.

Izzy says, "The interesting bit is not that we have different scores.

It is why we have different scores." So yes, it's fine to have different scores between yourself and somebody else nearby.

The interesting bit is to think, well, why is that person given that score and I've given a different one? That's what makes interesting geography.

So, true or false? Subjective data is automatically invalid and should be ignored.

True or false? Pause the video and then come back to me when you're ready.

Well, I hope you could see that that was false.

Now tell me why that is a false statement.

Yes, so geographers use subjective data a lot as they value people's opinions and indeed their own opinions about things.

Geographers think that's a really important part of understanding the way the world works.

We now move on to our final task of this lesson, and yes, you guessed it, you're going to be asked to write an evaluation based on your environmental quality fieldwork.

Include the following points in your evaluation.

Make sure you have a discussion about something that went well in your fieldwork inquiry.

Of course, you also then need to have a discussion about something that you would change and why.

So talk about something that did not go to plan or did not work as well as you thought it might.

Finally, have a discussion about the quality of the data as well.

That might mean how much data was collected, or it might be about the nature of the data itself.

Do spend some time being reflective and I really would encourage you at this stage to talk to other people, maybe the people that you worked with or other people who did the same inquiry as you, to see what their opinions are about what went well and what did not go so well.

So pause the video, have a discussion with those around you, and then have a go at writing your evaluation.

Okay, so you've had a go at writing your evaluation.

Your answer may include the following type of language.

Here's one that I've written about my inquiry.

"The locations that were chosen for the environmental quality surveys were spread out over the whole site.

This was good as it meant that I could really see how quality changed from one place to another." There I've written about something which I felt was really well designed about my piece of fieldwork.

"If I were to do the inquiry again, I would present the data using a map rather than a bar chart, as on the bar chart I can't see how close the different sites were to different features around the school." So I've recognised that maybe I didn't choose quite the right data presentation technique to give me enough to discuss afterwards.

Finally, I've said, "There was enough data to make a conclusion, but if I had surveyed even more sites, I would've possibly been able to make even more detailed conclusions." So I've recognised the fact that I only had six sites that I was looking at.

Maybe actually if I'd gone to eight, nine, or 10, maybe I actually would've had better conclusions at the end of it.

I then say, "Though the data is subjective, we asked each other's opinions and came to an agreement before recording it, so it is still valid." I've talked about the type of data, but I've said I'm happy with that, I value people's opinions, and that's what I've recorded.

Now let's summarise today's learning.

Geographers analyse by describing and explaining the possible reasons for data.

Geographers conclude survey data by summarising the findings and answering their inquiry question.

They also reflect on their hypotheses.

Geographers evaluate things that went well and things that they would change about their inquiry.

They reflect on the quality of data collected.

Well done on your analysis, conclusion, and evaluation of your fieldwork inquiry.

It means that you have now managed to find an answer to that initial inquiry question.

I hope it'll give you the confidence next time you have some fieldwork to do, knowing that you can do every stage of the inquiry process.