Submitted by
Mohini Joshi Roshan Shivan Shridhar Kumbhar Vishal Singh Karteek K Arunabha Majumdar
Centre for Technology Alternatives for Rural Areas (CTARA) Indian Institute of Technology, Mumbai, Powai 400076 March 2013
1
CONTENTS
1. Social Sciences Research Introduction 2. Definition and Analysis of the problem Purpose of research Title Objectives Literature Review Research Questions 3. Data Collection Universe /Research Setting Sampling Sample size Stakeholder Analysis Semi structured interview Findings of the semi structured interview Parameters Definition 4. Data Analysis and Report Findings 5. Conclusions and Future Scope
ANNEXURE 1:- Sample Questionnaire 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 6 6 9 9 10 11 12 18 20 35 37
SSR
Data Collection and Analysis
Research Methodology
INTRODUCTION
IITB campus has been organized into different sections as academic areas, residential areas, hostel areas etc. Each of the sections has a different setup so as to cater to its purposes. Academic buildings have bigger spaces to accommodate many students at the same time; hostel areas are surrounded by stationery shops, private cafeterias to facilitate the students. These places serve a ground for the different types of interactions occurring in the campus and help evolve a culture for social interactions on their own. However, it was observed that many places meant for interactions did not serve the purpose. Also other places which were not designed as an interactive space supported a large crowd. So the urge to study the effects of the space design on the social interactions. A study of the effect of spaces on social interaction would be very interesting to understand how a culture is formed in the institute
Literature Review: To understand if any past research was conducted in this domain a literature review was performed to identify the below articles. Articles A design study of pedestrian space as an interactive space An Evaluation of Social Interactive Spaces Campus Planning 4
Open Spaces Space and Place setting the stage for social interaction : Eva Hornecker Physical Space and Social Interaction: Jay L. Brand Social Science Research: Principles, Methods, and Practices : Anol Bhattacherjee
The concept of space refers to the structural, geometrical qualities of a physical environment, and the living experience, interaction and use of a space by its inhabitants. A different study performed indicates that an interaction among the occupants of a particular place is largely affected by the special design characteristics. Parameters like size, proximity, ambience, density of occupancy etc. influence space usage and the resulting interaction culture. Many universities while designing their campuses give importance open spaces, naturally lit and ventilated spaces, and pedestrian pathways so as to encourage interaction among the inhabitants. They also look into comfortable sitting arrangements, privacy requirements, and group conversational requirements. We tried to align the learnings from the literature review for study of interactive spaces in IITB. We tried to identify what are the different types of interactions that occur in campus, who all are involved in them, where do they prefer to meet often and where they would avoid, are they satisfied with the given space design or do they seek in revisions or changes in it? Research Questions: To drive the research and specify the scope of it we come out with research questions which need to be answered by the study conducted. What are the interaction patterns in the campus? Does architecture have an impact on the interactions?
3. Data Collection
Universe /Research Setting In order to collect the data for the study we choose the below sections of the campus. Hostels Mess Canteen Lounge TV Room Computer Rooms Private Cafeterias Student Activity Centre (SAC) and SAC Playground HOSTEL ROOM
MESS HALL
HOSTEL CANTEEN
HOSTEL GARDEN
BREWBERRY CAFETERIA
Sampling The sampling methodology followed was systematic sampling. Owing to similarities in the structures and practises followed we grouped the hostels as below. Further while choosing from the below settings we have considered their degree level as well. But from choosing beyond this groups was pure random sampling. Area Hostel 1, 2, 3, 4- Mens Hostels, Dhaba Handled by Shridhar
Hostel 5, SAC playgrnd ,Tansa House Karteek Hostel 6,7,9 Mens Hostels Roshan Arunabh Hostel-8, SAC Hostel 11 (Ladies Hostel), and Brewberrys Mohini Cafeteria, Campus Hub Hostel 12,13,14 (Mens Hostels) Vishal
Sample size It depends on many factors including the purpose of the study, the size of the universe and the research techniques used. Considering these factors and the availability of time, we have decided for 20 samples per plot. With diverse sampling practiced across all possible departments and also considering the curriculum (PG/UG), we have taken 4 samples from each department with BTECH, MTECH, PHD correspondingly.
Research Setting Stakeholder Analysis The above areas are visited on a regularly by students, and to some extent by faculty and their family members. Therefore individual students would be the prime stake holder. The private cafeterias and SAC areas also witness faculty and family members presence. Hence a few samples of the faculty and their family members will also help in getting a different perspective of the same areas. The workers managing the canteens and cafeterias spend their work timings in these places making them more aware of the space in terms of people occupancy, peak timings, reason for visiting the place, the time spent by the people, individual or group occupancy, any complaints registered from the people about the place. Therefore capturing these views would be essential from the point of view of the study. So the stakeholders involved in this exercise would include the below.
10
Students Ph D MTech BTech Mess workers Canteen workers Semi structured interview In order to gather the general perceptions of the stakeholders towards interactive spaces a semi structured questionnaire with a focus on different groups is designed and interviews conducted with the aid of those questions. A questionnaire specific to the student group was developed and the results of the same are listed below. In the following stages the same procedure will be adapted for the remaining focus groups. Focus groups Students, Worker Semi structured interviews:Students How often do you interact with your peers in the campus? What are the topics of discussion? How do you decide on the location? When do you prefer to have discussion? Is the timing of discussion considered? Do you feel that there are interactive spaces available in the campus? Do you have any preference for locations around the campus? What do you particularly like about those places? Are you satisfied with them? Are they serving their purpose well? Do they need any changes in their design? Are you satisfied with the number of places available? Mess workers When, where and how long does students interact in the mess hall (during mess timings) on a week basis (weekdays +weekends)? When, where and how long does students interact in the mess hall (during non-mess timings) on a week basis (weekdays +weekends)? In your observation, which are the most and least favoured interaction spaces in the mess area? What in your opinion could be the factors that affect the interaction patterns among students?
11
Canteen Workers When, where and how many students interact in the canteen area on a week basis (weekdays +weekends)? How long do they interact after having food? Has the shortage in seating arrangements affect the selection of interaction spaces? If so where do they interact? In your observation, which are the most and least favoured interaction spaces in the mess area? What in your opinion could be the factors that affect the interaction patterns among students? Findings of the semi structured interview Semi Structured Questions for Students:Q) Student 1 Student 2 Student 3 Student 4 Student 5 How often do you interact with your peers in the campus? Daily basis, more on weekends Regularly ; almost daily Daily Mostly on weekdays as I am away on weekends Daily
Q) Student 1
12
Mostly I have my classmates in the same hostel, so its either the rooms or in the mess halls or in the canteen Mostly rooms, hostel gardens, mess. Time issues,purpose of meeting Nothing specific but suiting to the convenience of everybody Time to meet, if its a mixed group of boys and girls meeting late at nights then we sit in mess halls or cafeterias
Do you feel that there are interacive spaces available in the campus?
Yes I do feel there enough places like libraries, hostel rooms, TV rooms, cafeterias, SAC Yes there are enough Yes there is more than enough spaces available in the campus Yes, if not the rooms, then libraries, classrooms and TV rooms are good enough places Yes the hostel places, gardens are good enough
13
5 Q) Student 1 Student 2 Student 3 Student 4 Student 5 Q) Student 1 Student 2 Student 3 Student 4 Student 5 What do you particularly like about those places?
The space available, not much noise, cleanliness , not much travelling Proximity to my hostel Easily agrees upon by everyone Good snacking items, suitable for group meets Should be spacious enough
14
Semi Structured Questions for MESS Workers:When, where and how long does students interact in the mess hall (during mess timings) on a week basis Q) (weekdays+weekends)? They interact in the tv room.They interact for about 20mins/day, while having food. They interact more on Mess weekends, about more than 1hour, if some interesting worker(H9) movies, football matches are telecasted. They interact in the mess hall.They interact for about Mess 30mins/day, while having food. They interact more on worker(H12) weekends, about more than 1.5hour. They interact in the mess hall.They interact for about Mess 25mins/day, while having food. They interact more on worker(H2) weekends, about more than 1 hour. They interact in the mess hall.They interact for about Mess 25mins/day, while having food. They interact more on worker(H5) weekends, about more than 1 hour. They interact in the canteens,TV room.They interact for about Mess 25mins/day, while having food. They interact more on worker(H11) weekends, about more than 1 hour.
Q) Mess worker(H9)
When, where and how long does students interact in the mess hall (during non-mess timings) on a week basis (weekdays+weekends)? They interact in the tv room,lounge room, indoor games.they interact for about 40mins/day,after 8pm. They interact more on weekends, about more than 2hour. 15
They interact in the tv room,lounge room, indoor games.they interact for about 25mins/day,after 8.30pm. They interact more on weekends, about more than 1.5hour. They interact in the tv room,lounge room, indoor games.they interact for about 30mins/day,after 9pm. They interact more on weekends, about more than 2hour. They interact in the tv room,lounge room, indoor games.they interact for about 40mins/day,after 8pm. They interact more on weekends, about more than 2hour. They interact in the tv room,lounge room, indoor games.they interact for about 30mins/day,after 9pm. They interact more on weekends, about more than 2hour.
Q) Mess worker(H9) Mess worker(H12) Mess worker(H2) Mess worker(H5) Mess worker(H11)
In your observation, which are the most and least favoured interaction spaces in the mess area? Reading room- Most favoured interactive space. Gardensleast favoured interactive spaces TV room- Most favoured interactive space. Terrace- least favoured interactive spaces Lounge room- Most favoured interactive space. Terraceleast favoured interactive spaces TV room- Most favoured interactive space. Terrace- least favoured interactive spaces TV room- Most favoured interactive space. Terrace- least favoured interactive spaces
Q) Mess worker(H9) Mess worker(H12) Mess worker(H2) Mess worker(H5) Mess worker(H11)
What in your opinion could be the factors that affect the interaction patterns among students? Lack of time, poor seating capacity No idea Noise, poor seating capacity ,cleanliness Poor seating capacity No idea
16
Semi Structured Questions for CANTEEN Workers:When, where and how many students interact in the canteen area on a week basis (weekdays+weekends)? They interact in the canteen itself.They interact for about 30mins/day, while having food. They interact more on weekends, about more than 1.5hour. They interact in the canteen itself.Interact for about 20mins/day, while having food. They interact more on weekends, about more than 2hour.
When, where and how many students interact in the canteen area on a week basis (weekdays+weekends)? They interact for about 15mins/day, while having food. They interact more on weekends, about more than 1hour. They interact for about 20mins/day, while having food. They interact more on weekends, about more than 1.5hour. They interact in the mess hall. They interact for about 30mins/day, while having food. They interact more on weekends, about more than 1hour.
How long do they interact after having food? Q) Dhaba 45mins. Campus Hub 0.5hrs Brewberrys 1hour From the semi structured interview conducted it was observed that students do not find many issues with the spaces available in the above research setting. Most of the discussions are centered on academic needs and few casual discussions take place in the free time. A few parameters they consider for the 17
space are sitting arrangements, comfort, topics of discussion , purpose for visiting the place, location proximity, environmental and duration of interaction, time of interaction ,crowd density. These findings would be considered while framing the detailed level questionnaire. Based on the semi structured interviews conducted and their findings we came up with a questionnaire to capture the quantitative and qualitative factors to be studied. We identified that the basic types of interaction that happen on the campus were Academic and Non-Academic. Hence data was collected separately for them as they had different needs, timings of occurrence and a different feel of the space. The parameters of interest identified from the semi structured interview were:
Parameters Definition
Spatial factors Lighting/Shading - This parameter would describe if the amount of lighting they require or if they feel want of some shade in the open spaces Ambience The overall appeal a place would stir in them of pleasantness or unpleasantness Cleanliness If they consider cleanliness of the place they choose Noise - If they opt for some quiet isolated places or noisy places can be adjusted Privacy If they prefer to have some privacy for their interaction or crowded places are not so much a discomfort Seating Comfort - While deciding a place do they seek for good seating arrangements of benches, desks etc Air Quality If places which are well ventilated are preferred over closed atmospheres Facilities/Amenities This determines what are the facilities they consider before deciding to meet at a place which will help them achieve their goal. Internet Facilities Plug points (Electricity) Eateries Toilets/Laterines Library Place of interaction: & related parametersThis part allows them to rank the existing places available to them in the order of the preference. This gives us a very direct measure about how they decide upon 18
the places. It also seeks a subjective answer to as to why would they have such a preference.
Preferences of interaction:SAC SAC Playground Hostel Grounds Hostel Indoor Hostel Canteens Mess Hall Lounge Rooms Hostel Rooms Hostel Coridoor Hostel Terrace Hostel Gardens Campus canteens Reason for prefernce:-
The questionnaire included some open ended questions like the years spent in the campus, preferred time of interactions, duration of the same etc. We also organized some questions to capture the preference of the quality of the interaction space such as lighting, air ventilation, seating arrangements which would reflect the comfort zones of the users of these places. Depending on the convenience of the responders we got the questionnaires filled from them either in person or we had created an internet form, which we circulated through email. We kept the questionnaire to a minimum length so as to encourage the responders to fill them.
19
Students- Btech students, PhD students Hostel capacity- approx. 600 Academic interactions:-
20
10 5 0
Order of preference
Facilities/Amenities grading(/10)
8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
H1,2,3,4
21
H1,2,3,4
Hostel Corridoor
Mess Hall
Hostel Canteens
Campus canteens
Hostel Grounds
Hostel Gardens
Hostel Terrace 11
Order of preference
10
Inferences: With analysis performed for the above research setting observed the below: In the academic kind of interactions the students considered noise and ambience as their major spatial factors while making a choice of meeting place and they feel the need of internet facilities at those places. For the non-academic kind of interactions privacy and cleanliness are considered as the major points.
Plot 2:(i) (ii) Hostel 5, Tansa House, SAC playground -Kartheek K. Hostel 8, SAC -Arunabha Majumdhar
Lounge Rooms 12
Hostel Rooms
Hostel Indoor
SAC
22
Students- Btech students, Mtech students, Project Staff Hostel capacity- approx. 300
Academic interactions:-
H5,8,Tansa
Air Quality
Ambience
Privacy
Noise
23
Facilities/Amenities grading(/10)
8 6 4 2 0
H5,8,Tansa
Order of preferences
SAC
Air Quality
Ambience
Noise
10
Inferences: In the academic kind of interactions the students considered noise and air quality as their major spatial factors while making a choice of meeting place and they feel the need of internet facilities at those places. 24
For the non-academic kind of interactions privacy and cleanliness are considered as the major points
Academic Interaction:-
H6,7,9
Seating Comfort
Ambience
Lighting/Shading
Order of preferences for academic interaction in H6,7,9:Hostel Canteen 2 Hostel Room 4 Mess Hall 3 Lounge Rooms 1 Campus anteen 5 Hostel Coridoor 8 Hostel Garden 7 Hostel Terrace 6
H6,7,9
Air Quality
Noise
25
Facilities/Amenities grading(/10)
8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
H6,7,9
H6,7,9
Hostel Corridoor
Mess Hall
Hostel Canteens
Campus canteens
Hostel Grounds
Hostel Gardens 9
Order of preference
Inferences In the academic kind of interactions the students considered noise and air quality as their major spatial factors while making a choice of meeting place and they feel the need of internet facilities at those places. 26
Hostel Indoor
SAC
For the non-academic kind of interactions privacy and cleanliness are considered as the major points
Students: - Mtech (2nd /3rd year), PhD, and UG students (4th year). Hostel capacity: - 1300 approx (H12+H13+H14).
Academic Interaction:-
H12,13,14
Lighting/Shading
Order of preferences for academic interaction in H12, 13, H14:Lounge Rooms 1 Campus canteen 2 Hostel Canteen 3 Hostel Terrace 4 Hostel Rooms 5 Mess Hall 6 Hostel Corridor 7 Hostel Gardens 8
H12,13,14
Seating Comfort
Air Quality
Noise
27
Facilities/Amenities grading(/10)
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
H12,13,14
H12,13,14
Hostel Corridoor
Mess Hall
Hostel Canteens
Campus canteens
Hostel Grounds
Hostel Gardens
Hostel Terrace
Lounge Rooms
Hostel Rooms 10
Hostel Indoor
H12,13,14
Inferences: With analysis performed for the above research setting observed the below: In the academic kind of interactions the students considered seating arrangements their main spatial factor while making a choice of meeting place. Similar to findings reported from other places noise was not a 28
SAC 11
major concern for them. They did feel the need of internet facilities at such places but though that availability of clean lavatories should be a major facility needed. For the non-academic kind of interactions ambience was required more by them.
Academic Interaction:-
H11
Order of preferences for academic interaction in H11:Hostel Rooms H11 1 Hostel Gardens 2 Campus canteens 3 Mess Hall 4 Hostel Canteens 5 Lounge Rooms 6 Hostel Coridoor 7 Hostel Terrace 8
29
Non-Academic Interaction:-
H11
Mess Hall
Hostel Canteens
Campus canteens
Hostel Grounds
Hostel Gardens
Hostel Corridor
Order of preferences
10
11
Inferences: This was the only female hostel in the research setting. With analysis performed for the above research setting observed the below: In the academic kind of interactions the students considered noise as their major spatial factors but preferred good ventilated areas with comfortable seating arrangements while making a choice of meeting place and they feel the need of internet facilities at those places. For the non-academic kind of interactions privacy and cleanliness are considered as the major points.
Overall: - Academic
This is a combination of all previous data analysed.
Hostel Terrace 12
Lounge Rooms
Hostel Rooms
Hostel Indoor
SAC
30
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Cleanliness Ambience Privacy Lighting/Shading Seating Comfort Air Quality Noise H1,2,3,4 H5,8,Tansa H6,7,9 H11 H12,13,14
Mess Hall
Hostel Canteens
Campus canteens
Hostel Corridor
of
SAC Playground
Mess Hall
Hostel Canteens
Campus canteens
Hostel Grounds
Hostel Gardens
order of preferences
Inferences: With the analysis of overall research setting we identified some general trends on how students think about the places where they interact. Again it comes to light their preferences have a good dependency on the purpose of their meetings as in for some explicit work demands of completing assignments, projects or just as to unwind with friends after the academic activities. 31
Hostel Terrace 12
Lounge Rooms
Hostel Indoor
SAC
Hostel Terrace 8
Lounge Rooms
Hostel Rooms
Overall students feel that during academic kind of interactions the major distraction is due to noises and not so comfortable spaces , so they prefer places where they deal with less noises and a good ambiences. They also felt the need of internet facilities as they can have easy access to the study materials they need.
Overall Non-Academic
Spatial factor grading (/10)
Noise
Lighting/Shading
Seating Comfort
Air Quality
H12,13,14
For the non-academic kind of interactions privacy and seating comfort were the most important felt needs as they interacted mostly with their close friends and needed the freedom of expression. Curriculum Wise Analysis (Btech/Mtech/PhD) - No. of hours spent/week for subject wise interaction Inferences: According to data analysis, it was observed that Ph.Ds have more of project discussion type of interaction and less of assignment or quiz based because of their course structure and the MTech and BTech mostly spend their time in assignments and project work.
32
BTECH(avg)
DEPARTMENT NAME
33
Inferences: The department wise analysis provided a glimpse of the effects of department culture on the interactions students have during the course. It showed that the core departments like the electrical, mechanical and civil and non-core departments like the CTARA, IDC
34
35
use of space and an increase in the overall quality of our space for the faculty, staff, and students at IIT Bombay.
36
ANNEXURE 1:SAMPLE QUESTIONNAIRE:Personal Info:Name:Age:Gender:Languages spoken:Region/State of origin:Hostel No:Department Name:Degree:Academic Details:Years spent in the campus:8 months Academic Schedule(Working hours in a 30 week):Type of Academic Interaction(Topics):Frequency ( hours per week) 6 Suranjana Gupta 24 Female English, Hindi, Kannada West Bengal 11 BSBE M tech 1st yr
Bengali,
Assignment
37
12 9 12
Lighting/Shading Ambience Cleanliness Noise Privacy Seating Comfort Air Quality b) Facilities/Amenities
Impact on interaction(points/10) 10 10 7 7 6
38
Time of discussion:after snacks - after dinner Duration involved in Academic 8 hrs Interaction(hours in a week):Place of interaction: & relaeted parametersPreferences interaction:7 2 8 1 4 5 6 3 of Reason for prefernce:Because we go there to eat. Spacious, with plug points, and reqd privacy Too noisy Spacious, Plug points, net connection, overall comfort zone privacy (but for just about a few min discussion) Not stuffy. Is an option when the weather is good Mosquitoes For group study (guys and girls)
Hostel Canteens Mess Hall Lounge Rooms Hostel Rooms Hostel Coridoor Hostel Terrace Hostel Gardens Campus canteens Non-Academic Details:Interests & Hobbies:Hours spent on hobby:Location of activity:No. of peers involved:Listening to music 7 room, roads 3
39
Type of Non-Academic Interaction(Topics):- trips, fests, cultural events, classmates, Qualitative impacts a) Spatial factors Impact on interaction(points/10) Lighting/Shading Ambience Cleanliness Noise Privacy Seating Comfort Air Quality b) Facilities/Amenities Impact on interaction(points/10) 8 9 10 10
Internet Facilities Plug points(Electricity) Eateries Toilets/Laterines Quantitative impacts Time of discussion:during meals
40
Duration involved in Interaction(hours in a 1.5hrs week):Place of interaction: & relaeted parametersPreferences interaction:12 11 9 10 6 3 7 1 8 5 4 2 of Reason for prefernce:Never been there that often Never been there that often Never been there that often Never been there that often not enough space to sit and chat Spacious. Noisy Comfortable to sit and chat Neighbouring room inmates might be disturbed Only if the weather is good When weather is good Group chat (girls and guys)
SAC SAC Playground Hostel Grounds Hostel Indoor Hostel Canteens Mess Hall Lounge Rooms Hostel Rooms Hostel Coridoor Hostel Terrace Hostel Gardens Campus canteens
41