What is a PhD?
The journey is a process of analytical and critical thinking. It is a sacrifice against you norms or routines.
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
Viva-voce
Research Conceptualization; Preparation of Research Proposal; Literature Review, Problem Definition
Data collection and analysis
Thesis writing
CP1 CP2
CP3 JP1 JP2
Submit thesis
The Journey
CP4 JP3
Day 1
What is PhD Research?
• Doing PhD study is putting yourself into a world of investigating new ideas and knowledge of a subject. And, to attain the new knowledge, you always link your research field with others. (Theoretical framework)
• Doing a PhD research may not solving a dubious problem that is it is not a rocket science. Neither, it is a breakthrough. It may investigate an obvious inquiry. (Quorum sensing, Higgs boson)
AFFORDANCES OF SCHOOL GROUNDS FOR CHILDREN'S OUTDOOR PLAY AND ENVIRONMENTAL LEARNING
There is a good engagement with the academic literature throughout the thesis and the candidate demonstrates a good knowledge of the debates – although I think a more critical take on the work would have really strengthened the thesis.
AFFORDANCES OF SCHOOL GROUNDS FOR CHILDREN'S OUTDOOR PLAY AND ENVIRONMENTAL LEARNING
RESEARCH AIM
To identify the influential factors affecting the actualisation of
affordances and children’s preferences regarding the use of school
grounds for outdoor play and environmental learning
AFFORDANCES OF SCHOOL GROUNDS FOR CHILDREN'S OUTDOOR PLAY AND ENVIRONMENTAL LEARNING
Research Objectives
1. To explore the affordances of the school grounds from the children’s perspective
2. To identify the factors that influence the level of actualised affordances in the school grounds
3. To explore the perceptions of children and teachers on the use of school grounds for environmental learning
4. To distinguish the meaning of ideal school grounds that permit environmental learning
Research Objectives
1. To explore the affordances of the school grounds from the children’s perspective
2. To identify the factors that influence the level of actualised affordances in the school grounds
3. To explore the perceptions of children and teachers on the use of school grounds for environmental learning
4. To distinguish the meaning of ideal school grounds that permit environmental learning
What is a literature review?
• Literature is a body of information that has conceptual relevance for a particular topic of inquiry.
• A critical look at the existing research. • It is not a summary or annotated bibliography. • It is synthesizing a subject from a set of previous
studies in your own stance. • Evaluate the work, show the relationships
between different work, and show how it relates to your work.
11
2 Overview
1. Model of Architectural
Quality
2. Model of Behavioral-
based Simulation
12 /120
Pedestrian movement
Understanding Crowd
Behavior & environmental design
Conway
Crowd modeling
Introducing AI
Reynolds
Behavior& automata
Way-finding
Fruin
Handerson
Okazaki
Matsuda
Ortony
Hiido
Kuwahara
Watanabe
80s 90s 70s
Particle & flow-based sim.
Decision Support sys.
Synthetic perception
Interaction & emotion-based sys.
Social & cognitive emergence
Crowd dynamics
Reasoning model
AI
00s Rao & Georgeff
Tyrell
Yoshida
Ebihara
Terzepoulos
Thalmann
Renault
Bates
Thalmann
Palechano
Watanabe
Monzani
Mussee
understanding- behavior, crowd of
pedestrian, Limited- computer
power
Modeling using- AI, cellular automata,
Development of- way finding alg.
More modeling, AI using physics,
emergence, cognitive models
AI with reasoning model, model
based on dynamic vars.
2 Overview
Model of Architectural Quality Model of Behavioral-based Simulation
Situating a research with current status quo of a subject
Urban Morphology
Environmental Psychology
Conservation Preservation
Urban
Element
Urban
Structure
Change
Urban
Setting
Place
Attachment Image of
the city
City
Marketing
Culture
Conzen, 1960; Lynch, 1960; Kostof, 1991; Wikantyoso,1997; Hillier, 2001; Ikaputra,
et. Al, 2000; Fattahi and Kobayashi,
2009a, 2009b
Whitehand and Morton, 2004; Rapoport, 2004;
Samant, 2004; Tweed
and Sutherland, 2007; Smith, 2008; Rabady,
2010; Ragab, 2011, Kim,
2011
Boblic, 1990; Hall, 1997; Purwanto, 2005; Hanh, 2006;
Hara, et.al (2008)
Schuller, 1898; Geisler, 1918; Whitby, 1951; Conzen, 1960; Muratori, 1960; Hillier aand Hanson, 1984;
Forties; 1989; Kropt, 1996; Hall, 1997; Levy, 1999;
Canigia, 2001; Jiang and Claramunt, 2002; Chapman, 2006; james and Bound, 2009; Tian et.al, 2010; Topcu
and Kubat, 2012
Rodwel, 2007; Kolzlowski and Bowen, 1997; Sevinc, 2009;
Wei and Kiang, 2009;
Whitehand and Gu, 2010; Albert and Hanzen, 2010; Hillier, 2001
Inn, 2004;Gospodini, 2004, 2011; Doralti, 2004;Watson, 2006; Plaza, 2006, 2008; Butina,
2006; Niebrzydowski, 2007; Novickas, 2007;
Lewicka, 2008; Handal, 2009;Chen, 2011; Sainz, 2012
Tuan, 1974; Steele, 1981; Altman and Low, 1992; Hummon, 1992; Jackson,
1994; Cross, 2001; Guillani, 2003;
Willian and Vaske, 2003; Smaldone, 2006; Handal. 2006; Beidler, 2007;
Hernandez, 2007; Brown and
raymond, 2007; Watson and Bentley, 2007; White et.al, 2008; Liu, 2009;
Raymod et.al, 2010; Najafi and
Kamal, 2011
Rebuilding City Identity
Place
Familiarity
Sense of
Place Identity
Authenticity
Urban
Reminder
City's Identity
Place Character
Identity of Place
Place Identity
Your research framework is generated from review of subjects from different disciplines. Your task is to cogently write the materials into a pattern of regularity. It must present a composite of past findings related to your
research subject. The composition is like making this salad. It is a mixture of vegetables and spices that only fit for Briyani Hyderabad that I prepared for
Eidul Adha.
Research Underpinnings
Environmental
Affordances Person-
environment fit
z
Environmental
Preferences
U2 U1
U3
Gibson, 1979; Heft, 1988, 2010; Reed, 1996; Miller et al., 1998; Kyttä, 2003, 2004, 2006; Powel, 2007; Kernan 2010; Storli and Hagen, 2010; Laaksoharju et al., 2012
Muchinsky and Monahan, 1987;
Caplan and Harrisson, 1993; Kristof, 1996;
Edwards et al., 1998; Ozdemir and Yilmaz,
2008; Eccles et al., 1991; Stokols, 1979;
Bonnes and Secciaroli, 1995;
Haikkola et al., 2007 Kyttä, 2003
Ulrich, 1983 ; Kaplan, 1987; van Andel, 1990; Eubanks Owens, 1994; Malinowski and Thurbert, 1996; Korpela et al., 2002; Hartig and Staats, 2005; Matsuoka and Kaplan, 2008
Research Underpinnings
Environmental
Affordances Person-
environment fit
z
Environmental
Preferences
U2 U1
U3
Gibson, 1979; Heft, 1988, 2010; Reed, 1996; Miller et al., 1998; Kyttä, 2003, 2004, 2006; Powel, 2007; Kernan 2010; Storli and Hagen, 2010; Laaksoharju et al., 2012
Muchinsky and Monahan, 1987;
Caplan and Harrisson, 1993; Kristof, 1996;
Edwards et al., 1998; Ozdemir and Yilmaz,
2008; Eccles et al., 1991; Stokols, 1979;
Bonnes and Secciaroli, 1995;
Haikkola et al., 2007 Kyttä, 2003
Ulrich, 1983 ; Kaplan, 1987; van Andel, 1990; Eubanks Owens, 1994; Malinowski and Thurbert, 1996; Korpela et al., 2002; Hartig and Staats, 2005; Matsuoka and Kaplan, 2008
Variables of the Study
DIMENSION VARIABLES ITEMS
1. Properties and attributes of school grounds
(ENVIRONMENT)
a) Physical environmental properties
b) Physical environmental attributes
c) Social/cultural properties and attributes
d) Accessibility
Features – natural and man-made features Design – spaces, size, space connectivity
Availability, functionality, adequacy, aesthetic quality, safety
Policies, regulations, social dynamics
Physical – location, easily access Socially – permitted/restricted
2. Behavioural responses
(ACTION)
e) Opportunities for outdoor play
f) Actualisation of affordances
Use, activities, types of play, play behaviour pattern, social interaction, performance
Place affordances, level and taxonomy of affordances, fields of free, promoted and constrained action
3. Perceptual responses
(EXPERIENCE)
g) Place preferences
h) Perception of environmental learning
i) Conception of ideal school grounds
j) Emotional effects
Favourite and disliked places in school grounds
Potentials and barriers of environmental learning in school grounds
Needs – Communal, physical, emotional and educational needs Preferences – Features and design patterns
Positive and negative feelings from interaction with school grounds environment
Environmental
Learning
Children’s
Outdoor Play
Actualisation of
Affordances
potential site for
Preferences
School Grounds
Environment
Pe
rce
pti
on
an
d
att
itu
de
to
wa
rds
Co
nc
ep
tio
n o
f id
ea
l
sch
oo
l gro
un
ds
offered
affordances
perceived
affordances
offered
affordances
BOTTOM
UP
Children’s
interactions
Children’s
needs
CHILDREN’S BEHAVIOURAL AND PERCEPTUAL RESPONSES
PLANNING AND DESIGN OF SCHOOL GROUNDS
Children’s
emotions
Interrelationship between Variables
D1 D2
D3
Research Methodology
Research Design
Exploratory
research
Mixed methods design
(Concurrent nested strategy)
Transactional approach in a
phenomenology study
Qualitative
(Predominant method)
Quantitative
(Embedded method)
Children
(Stratified purposeful
sampling)
Teachers
(Simple random
sampling)
Data analysis and triangulation
Findings
Measurement Strategies
STRATEGY RESPONDENT OBJECTIVE
a) Walkabout interview and mapping
Children (n=80)
RO#1
b) Photography and discussion
RO#2
c) Drawing
RO#4
d) Preference survey
RO#3
e) Survey questionnaire
Teachers (n=71)
RO#3 RO#4
RO #1 Affordances of school grounds
Children’s walkabout interview &
mapping (n=80)
Children’s photography &
discussion (n=80)
RO #2 Factors that influence level of affordances
RO #3 Environmental learning
in school grounds
Children’s preference
survey (n=80)
RO #4 Ideal school grounds for environmental learning
Outdoor play
activities
The use of school grounds environment
Play behaviour patterns & children’s performances
Place preferences
Children’s affection & evaluation towards the environment
Properties & attributes of school grounds
Person-environment relationship
(“ACTUAL” environment)
Needs &
preferences
The potentials & barriers of school grounds for environmental learning
Beliefs, preferences & needs
Meaning and understanding on the potential affordances of school grounds
Features, design patterns & aspects considered
Perceptual & conception
(“IDEAL” environment)
Physical &
social
factors
Theoretical & design implication in enhancing school grounds’ potentials
Teacher’s survey
questionnaire (n=71)
Children’s drawing
(n=80)
Descriptive statistics (Univariate) Spatial analysis (Hotspots)
Content analysis (Interpretative)
Descriptive statistics
Descriptive statistics
RASCH Model
Descriptive statistics Content analysis
TRIANGULATION
Perceptions &
attitudes
Research Objectives
The Model of Child-Environment Transactional Process
1. P-E fit
2. Affordances
3. Environmental preferences
Conclusion & Theoretical Implications
AFFORDANCES OF HOME-SCHOOL JOURNEY AS A PLAY AND LEARNING ENVIRONMENT
FOR MIDDLE CHILHOOD CHILDREN
NOOR AIN YATIMAN : MB113011 SUPERVISOR: ASSOC. PROF. DR. ISMAIL SAID
‘
The study found that the children were engaged with continuous activities along the journey and perceived the home-school journey as their play and
learning space.
However, the study found that physical setting of the journey and children's mobility to school are factors that influence their physical, social and cognitive
performance.
OF HOME-SCHOOL JOURNEY AS PLAY AND LEARNING ENVIRONMENT CHILDREN’S EXPERIENCES
OF HOME-SCHOOL JOURNEY AS PLAY AND LEARNING ENVIRONMENT CHILDREN’S EXPERIENCES
‘ The experiences include walking on shifting topography (uphill and downhill), feeling
tired walking uphill, seeing the silhouetted figure of oil palm tree, walking on different texture of the road (sand and asphalt), feeling calm by the birdsong, hearing the noisy
sound of a machine, seeing orchard, seeing squirrel, seeing and feeling afraid of monkeys, seeing dying durian tree and seeing flower dropping.