Dear John and List,
First let me thank you all for your comments and suggestions. They've been
useful as I finished constructing my research design and have begun my data
collection. One of the primary points that has come out of this discussion
so far is what is the appropriate time and level of study required to get
dependable S/s results? I will try to address this first issue through
personal example right now, and then I'll ask some of my more technical
questions about my project in a separate email.
For clarity's sake, I am completing this thesis project for my
undergraduate degree. The university I attend has no Space Syntax program
or classes, and my primary advisors are in Urban Studies and Anthropology.
Everything I've learned about S/s has been self-taught and has usually
entailed teaching my professors as well! Alan, John Peponis and John
O'Flynn have all suggested that S/s research project of this scale should
really be done at the PhD or masters level. John O'Flynn made the point
that an adequate understanding of the nuances of Space Syntax really
requires more dedicated study and/or tutelage. I wholeheartedly agree with
both of these assessments! Given my choice, I would much rather have the
funding, time and academic support which a PhD program would provide.
Unfortunately, this isn't a possibility for me yet. As far as I can tell,
Prof. Peponis is the only person teaching Space Syntax here in the U.S. He
has given me some good advice by email, but he is busy with his own
projects and his own students to teach. My advisors offer excellent
support and encouragement, but they are not familiar enough with the method
to give me accurate and detailed advice. Because of this, I've had to
teach myself through reading and trial-and-error experimentation.
My case aside, the broader question is can people learn and use Space
Syntax if they don't have access to the full UCL facilities? For my own
sake, I should certainly hope so! Can they learn S/s on their own, outside
of an academic context? Probably not to any level that would be useful.
But if the configurational effects on human movement and behavior which
have been measured and reported are true (i.e., not just some measurement
error or methodological artifact), than it shouldn't matter what level of
training you've got. If spatial configuration -really- does exert some
type of statistical, deterministic influence on patterns of behavior, than
these effects will exist before and after they are measured, regardless of
the quality of a researcher's study.
Where experimental design, experience, and the art of S/s probably comes
into play is in detecting and interpreting these effects. I agree that it
takes the right education to conduct a project which will accurately
measure configurational effects, and enough background knowledge to
interpret your findings correctly. But I disagree with you John when you
say that we cannot hope to apply S/s to real-life and academic situations
without this training. Our results 'instrument might be cruder, but we
should nevertheless be able to detect configurational effects and draw
conclusions for our work.
In my particular case, there is no doubt that I'd be able to conduct a
better study if I had the full S/s training. I would relish the help of an
experienced mentor to give me guidance and suggestions. Actually, that is
the reason I sent my research design to this list in the first place! ;-)
But without these, all we can do is email the people who know what they're
doing, read as many articles and other studies as we can, and try and
figure out what we're doing the old fashioned way - through trial and error
experimentation. The jury is definitely still out whether it will work
with my particularly project, but I have to believe that S/s is powerful
enough to withstand a little ignorance and hubris on the part of the
researcher. If it weren't, what would it be worth anyway? ;-)
What do you think?
Thanks,
Noah Raford
PS - technical S/s questions in the next email.
**************
>Dear Noah & Alan,
>
>I only read Alan's response to Naoh request for advice today, though I had
>intended to write a note after I first read noah's message.
>
>I am not completely sure at what level Noah is completing his study later
>this year, whether it is PhD, Masters, post -grad or what. I completed my
>B.Arch. last year, which you might say is the equivalent of a post.-grad
>diploma (or a masters?-or is it just a peculiar architectural thing?!) and I
>used some space syntax theory and attended the day course at UCL to obtain
>the software and the training. However I was careful to limit its use in my
>year's study, because really I don't think devoting a whole year to it or
>basing a project completely on it would have been supported or appreciated
>in my faculty.
>
>But my overall impression was, (and I don't want to be too discouraging to
>Noah)and continues to be now that I am working in practice and wondering
>from time to time what the application of Space Syntax analysis might be in
>some of the projects I am working on, is that one really needs to have
>probably done the Masters at UCL or have studied Space Syntax under or with
>some group or tutor that has done so if one is to make any constructive use
>of it at the level of real input into a project or real understanding or
>insight in an academic situation. The overwhelming impression I was left
>with is that Space Syntax is as much an art as a science; an analysis takes
>a lot of time to set up methodically, the parameters need to be very
>carefully drawn with alot of background knowledge of what has worked before
>and where the pitfalls are; and equally the interpretation of the results is
>based on a lot of in-depth knowledge and is fraught with nuances of
>interpretation.
>
>Those of us who haven't been trained in S/s cannot really apply it with
>authority to either real -life or academic situations.
>
>Is this correct?
>
>John O'Flynn
>Dublin
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|