Category: Reflection #2

Reflection #2

Throughout this first semester, my project ideas have gone through a decent amount of change. In the beginning, I had hoped that my research would revolve around visiting sites that are displaying an area of water equity issues that I could encourage young adults to get engaged in. However, finding sites that both relate to my topic and match my goals has proven to be rather challenging. I am currently in the process of restructuring my project in order to match the sites that are available. The sites that I did find originated from different sources and were vastly different from one another. 

Originally, I found several organizations that promoted their contributions to fixing water equity and agriculture issues. The first organization I came across was Open Space STL, which advertises themselves as the first conservation group in the St. Louis region. What stood out to me about this organization was that its environmental programs had led to the creation of several green spaces, including Queeny Park, Bee Tree County Park, and Castlewood State Park. My goal is to promote their volunteer opportunities with watershed planning and river restoration to young adults. Fortunately, even if young adults in the St. Louis Region are not influenced enough to participate in these events, Open Space STL also hosts fundraisers in the form of auctions and boating events. The Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District was another organization I found that often hosts events related to stormwater and wastewater through Project Clear. On top of that, I found Tower Grove Park, which acts as a site for both public activities and conservation efforts. 

I decided to also look into sites that Heartlands Conservancy had a direct connection to, so my community partner could help me spread the word to young adults. The difficulty I ran into on this portion of my research is being able to connect these places back to my main goal. I found several public sites, which mainly consisted of parks or attractions for people who lived in the same area. While these sites are good for people who are looking for natural spaces in their region, they do not give the young adult population anything to participate or engage in. Eventually, the Heartlands website took me to newer sites that were bought by or given to Heartlands Conservancy. I originally thought these sites would be better, since there is still lots of work that needs to be put into them. However, they were not made open to the general public, and attempting to set up a tour date is an extra step that the average adult my age is not going to take to get involved. 

In the end, I want to find sites that Heartlands is involved with, because I know that will make it easier for future research. Unfortunately, I am not confident that the sites I found on their website will truly make adults my age want to take action. The organizations I found outside of Heartlands would match my goals for the project, but it would be a lot harder to promote them on my own. Through these next couple weeks, I will work on revising my topic and finding sites that best match my ideas in order to begin advertising these causes to adults my age. 

Reflection #2

One of the main problems with data cleaning, as it is, is the connotation that the words give off. Data cleaning refers to the process of wiping away data that is different to the trend already being set up by the rest of the data. The name does not exactly give it justice for how crucial it is in the research process. It gives off the impression that data needs to be “fixed” or “altered” in order to be correct. The best way to phrase this practice would be to compare it to something more similar. Something such as “data-keeping” works better since it relates to housekeeping, which is a better description of what is actually being done during data cleaning. 

Unfortunately, the one difference between housekeeping and data cleaning is that data cleaning does not just remove “bad” data. The data cleaning process can often eliminate data that is significant because of its uniqueness. This could cause the results of a study to be less accurate to the real world. 

A possible solution for this would be to highlight the unique sets of data, instead of hiding them. This could be done by putting a spotlight on regional or even spatial differences. The researchers may not know why these differences are occurring, but that just leaves room for more research to be conducted on this topic in the future. This gives us more possibilities for future discoveries that we might not have had if the original study was “cleaned”. 

© 2025 Jaiden DeBoe

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑