Place Case Studies and Fieldwork

The AQA A-Level Geography specification requires students to study places at a range of scales and to develop fieldwork skills through independent investigation. This lesson provides a comprehensive framework for conducting place case studies, comparing contrasting places, and linking fieldwork to the Non-Examined Assessment (NEA). It covers methodology, data collection, presentation, analysis, and evaluation.

---

The Local Place Study

Purpose

The local place study requires students to investigate a place they know — their home area, school neighbourhood, or a nearby community — using both quantitative and qualitative methods. The aim is to develop a deep, multi-dimensional understanding of the place, drawing on the theoretical frameworks covered in earlier lessons.

Methodology

A rigorous place study follows a systematic approach:

1. Define the study area — establish clear boundaries (ward, parish, LSOA, or a defined neighbourhood)
2. Research question or hypothesis — frame the investigation around a specific question (e.g., "To what extent does the sense of place in [area] vary between long-term residents and recent arrivals?")
3. Background research — compile existing data (census, IMD, historical maps, local history sources)
4. Primary data collection — gather original data through fieldwork
5. Data presentation — display data using appropriate techniques
6. Analysis — interpret patterns, relationships, and anomalies
7. Conclusions — answer the research question, linking findings to geographical theory
8. Evaluation — assess the reliability, validity, and limitations of the study

Selecting a Research Question

Strong place study questions:

• Are specific enough to investigate within the time and resources available
• Allow both quantitative and qualitative investigation
• Link to theoretical frameworks from the specification (Tuan, Relph, Massey, etc.)
• Enable comparison between different groups, time periods, or places

Weak Question	Strong Question
"What is my local area like?"	"How has gentrification changed the sense of place in [neighbourhood] since 2010?"
"Is my area deprived?"	"To what extent do IMD indicators align with residents' perceptions of deprivation in [LSOA]?"
"Do people like living here?"	"How do insider and outsider perspectives of [place] differ, and what factors explain these differences?"

---

Primary Data Collection Methods

Quantitative Primary Data

Method	What It Measures	How to Conduct
Environmental quality survey	Physical quality of the built environment	Score features (litter, graffiti, building condition, green space, noise) on a scale at multiple locations
Land use mapping	Types of activity in an area	Walk systematically through the area, recording the use of every building/plot on a base map
Pedestrian count	Footfall and activity levels	Count pedestrians passing a fixed point during a set time period; repeat at different times/locations
Traffic count	Vehicle volumes and types	Count vehicles passing a fixed point; classify by type (car, bus, HGV, bicycle)
Building age/condition survey	Physical character of the built environment	Record architectural style, building materials, approximate age, and condition
Perception survey	Quantified subjective responses	Administer structured questionnaires with Likert scales and semantic differentials
House price data	Economic value of property	Record estate agent asking prices for a sample of properties; compare across areas

Qualitative Primary Data

Method	What It Captures	How to Conduct
Semi-structured interviews	Individual perspectives and experiences	Prepare a topic guide with 5-8 open-ended questions; record and transcribe responses
Walking interviews	Place-based memories and perceptions	Walk through the study area with a participant, using the environment as a prompt for conversation
Mental maps	Cognitive representations of place	Ask participants to draw a map of the area from memory; analyse what is included/excluded
Photography	Visual evidence of place character	Systematic photographic survey of the area; photo-voice with participants
Oral histories	Long-term change and memory	Record older residents' memories of the area; focus on change over time
Field sketches	Visual recording with annotation	Sketch key views/features; annotate with observations about land use, building condition, activity

Sampling Strategies

Strategy	Description	When to Use
Random	Every location/person has an equal chance of selection	When you want to avoid bias; requires a sampling frame
Systematic	Select at regular intervals (e.g., every 5th house, every 50m along a transect)	When you want even spatial coverage
Stratified	Divide population into subgroups and sample from each	When you want to compare groups (e.g., by age, length of residence)
Purposive	Select participants who can provide specific insights	When you want expert or specialised knowledge
Opportunity	Select whoever is available and willing	When time is limited; risk of bias

---

The Contrasting Place Comparison

Purpose

The specification requires comparison of places with contrasting demographic, socio-economic, cultural, and place-identity characteristics. This might involve:

• An urban neighbourhood vs. a rural village
• A deprived area vs. an affluent area
• A local place vs. a distant place
• A place experiencing growth vs. one experiencing decline

Near and Far Places

Dimension	Near Place	Far Place
Personal connection	Direct experience; insider knowledge	Known through media, data, or brief visits
Data availability	Primary data collection possible	Reliance on secondary data
Cultural familiarity	Shared cultural context	May involve cross-cultural interpretation
Research methods	Full range of primary methods	Secondary data; virtual fieldwork; limited primary data

Structuring the Comparison

A systematic comparison should address: