DIFFERENT WAYS TO COLLECT DATA
Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago Pages:5-10 Instructions:
DIFFERENT WAYS TO COLLECT DATA
Lesson Week 2
Data can be collected in many ways. In our NPS example the visitors are generally counted by car, not individually, unless it is easy to do. Some visitor’s centers have electronic laser beam counters on the door. Others have a simple “clicker” behind the counter that the Park employees trigger each time someone enters. For the purposes of our work here though, let’s look at how NPS instructs its employees to count vehicles and estimate visits from traffic counts. Vehicles can be cars, water vessels, motorcycles, horses or bikes. These “vehicle” counts are combined with person per vehicle multipliers. Considerations include:
- Manual counting… visitor centers, historic homes, monuments & memorials
- Mathematical relationships
–Estimate number of visitors in one area based on visitor counts in another area – good for remote places or areas that are difficult to count
- Automated counters on travel corridors
–Traffic counters
–Trail counters
–Door counters
It is important to only count visitors once so counters must pay attention to those that come in and out more than once if possible.
As an example, the reported count for Mesa Verde National Park, a standard park, in July of 2014 was totaled in this way:
- Single main entrance to park by road
- Some visitors will be missed by traffic counter
–Bicycles are the most likely visitors that are missed
- Use traffic count as the ‘base’ for estimating recreation visits
- Non-recreation vehicles, buses and bus passengers are counted by hand at the entrance station
- Raw Traffic Count at Main Entrance
–31,063 vehicles
- Reduce traffic count for non-reportable park vehicles (1,500 traffic counter crossings per month)
–31,063 – 1,500 = 29,563 vehicles
- Reduce traffic count for non-recreation vehicles (commuters, inholders, etc.) (575)
–29,563 – 575 = 28,988 vehicles
- Reduce traffic count by number of buses (161)
–28,988 – 161 = 28,827
- There were 28,827 private passenger vehicles at Mesa Verde in July 2014
- Add 10% for those who entered park but were not detected by the traffic counter (this is ‘expanding’ the traffic count)
–28,827 * 1.1 = 31,709.7
- Covert expanded traffic count to visit count
–Use multiplier of 3.2 persons-per-vehicle
–31,709.7 * 3.2 = 101,471 recreation visits by passenger vehicle
- Add in bus passengers (2,115)
–101,471 + 2,115 =
–103,586 recreation visits in July 2014
- Usually, expansion values such as the ‘10% extra’ for Mesa Verde NP are established using some form of
–Observational study (observation only – no questions to visitors), or
–Survey with questions to visitors
- Person-per vehicle multipliers are estimated from observational study conducted by the park over the course of a year
(examples provided by NPS Social Science section as part of a larger brief shared with APUS for this class. More information can be found on each of these and other stats athttps://irma.nps.gov/Stats/Reports/Park/MEVE)
Other examples follow in the next sections.
It is also possible to conduct phone surveys. For an example see the Golden Gate study done in
2002 on Pet Management Issues
at http://www.nps.gov/goga/learn/management/upload/GGNRA%20telephone%20
eport%20-%20complete.pdf . Review the methodology and see how it differs from the
individual or vehicle surveys above. Note the use of graphs as they explain the results and the
decision tree type of “if yes then.. if no then… instructions in the instrument itself.
It is also important to have a specific timeframe for data collection, particularly if you are doing
it across a large sector of parks that are located across the country. An example of a calendar
that would be distributed to the park employees collecting the data would look like this:
- M
November2014
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Survey PM Survey AM 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Survey AM Survey PM 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Survey AM 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Survey PM Survey PM 30
Data Counting Example Lincoln Memorial
Data Counting Example Lincoln Memorial
Data Collection National Wildlife Refuge Area Survey
National Wildlife Refuge Area Survey
Part Four Lesson Week Two
When looking for and at data, a good way to go about it is through the use of a Geographical Information System (GIS) which captures data on the earth’s surface to better understand and visualize it. Please watch this video to better understand the GIS and its use.
Just as a caution, when you start to work with so much data, make sure to watch for bias and distractions that may or may not affect the outcome.
RUBRIC
Excellent Quality
95-100%
Introduction 45-41 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Literature Support
91-84 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Methodology
58-53 points
Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score
50-85%
40-38 points
More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.
83-76 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.
52-49 points
Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality
0-45%
37-1 points
The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.
75-1 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.
48-1 points
There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow DIFFERENT WAYS TO COLLECT DATA