A Report On
SOCIAL SCIENCES RESEARCH A study of Social Interactive spaces at IIT Bombay
Submitted by Mohini Joshi Roshan Shivan
CONTENTS 1. Social Sciences Research Introduction 2. Definition and Analysis of the problem
3
Purpose of research Title Objectives Literature Review Research Questions 3. Data Collection
4
Universe /Research Setting Sampling Sample size
6
Stakeholder Analysis Semi structured interview Findings of the semi structured s tructured interview Parameters Definition 4. Data Analysis and Report Findings
10
3 4 4 4 4 5 6 9 9 11 12 18 20
1. SOCIAL SCIENCES RESEARCH
SOCIAL SCIENCES RESEARCH Social Sciences Research is concerned with collecting of data and systematic analysis of it to help solve problems related to the social scene that concern us. A common research project would involve the below four stages. We have followed the same strategy while conducting our research project.
Definition and Analysis of the problem
Report findings and Action
SSR
Research Methodology
2. Definition and Analysis of the problem This is the first stage to decide the topic of interest and then narrow down to a smaller aspect that can be studied studied in the available time. After the topic has been selected and its scope is finalized a literature review is performed to see if the problem has already been studied and to understand the former methods of approaching the problem. Based on understanding of this stage we have the below structure of our research problem. Purpose of research Space management is one of the most important, most challenging, and perhaps most contentious issue in IIT Bombay campus. The core of the problem is the complexity of balancing the diverse interests of the many users of space on and off the campus and the diverse types and qualities of space on the campus. A study of Social Interactive spaces at IIT Bombay is carried out under the topic of social science research. It was observed that many places meant for interactions did not serve the purpose. Also other places which were not
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 learning’s from the literature review for study of interactive spaces in IITB. We tried to identify what are the different types of
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 GARDEN
THE CAMPUS HUB
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
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?
Canteen Workers
When, where and how many students interact in the canteen area on a week basis (weekdays +weekends)? +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:How often do you interact with your peers in the campus? Q) Student 1 Daily basis, more on weekends Student 2 Regularly ; almost daily Student
Student 2 Student 3 Student 4 Student 5
Q) Student 1 Student 2 Student 3 Student 4 Student 5
Mostly I have my classmates in the same hostel, so its either the rooms or in the mess halls or in i n 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 it’s a mixed group of boys and girls meeting late at nights then we sit in mess halls or cafeterias
When do you prefer to have discussion? Is the timing of discussion considered? Yes the timing is considered. For casual discussuion d iscussuion mostly evening timing post lectures is preferred. Its difficult to have any interaction during the day times due to lectures, so we normally sit together in evenings or at night Not really thought about this but mostly seek the time when most of us are free I mostly meet my hostel mates during lunch and dinner and for the academic stuff we prefer after the classes or post dinner Mostly after the class
5 Q) Student 1 Student 2 Student 3 Student 4 Student 5 Q) Student 1 Student 2 Student 3 Student
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
Are you satisfied with them? Yes Yes Yes though mosquitoes are a problem everywhere in the campus
4 Student 5 No not any changes from the design point of view Q) Student 1 Student 2 Student 3 Student 4 Student 5
Are you satisfied with the number of places available? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Semi Structured Questions for MESS Workers:-
Q)
When, where and how long does students interact in the mess hall (during mess timings) on a week basis (weekdays+weekends)?
Mess worker(H12)
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.
Mess worker(H2)
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.
Mess worker(H5)
They interact in the tv room,lounge room, indoor games.they interact for about 40mins/day,after 40mins/day,after 8pm. They interact more on weekends, about more than 2hour.
Mess worker(H11)
They interact in the tv room,lounge room, indoor games.they interact for about 30mins/day,after 30mins/day,after 9pm. They interact more on weekends, about more than 2hour.
Q)
In your observation, which are the most and least favoured interaction spaces in the mess area?
Mess worker(H9)
Reading room- Most favoured interactive space. Gardensleast favoured interactive spaces
Mess TV room- Most favoured interactive space. Terrace- least worker(H12) favoured interactive spaces
Semi Structured Questions for CANTEEN Workers:-
Q) Canteen worker(H9) Canteen worker(H12)
Q) Canteen worker(H9) Canteen worker(H12)
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.
How long do they interact after having food? 0.5hrs 45mins.
Semi Structured Questions for CAMPUS CANTEEN:-
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
the places. It also seeks a subjective answer to as to why would they have such a preference. Preferences of interaction:-
Reason for prefernce:-
SAC SAC Playground Hostel Grounds Hostel Indoor Hostel Canteens Mess Hall Lounge Rooms Hostel Rooms Hostel Coridoor Hostel Terrace Hostel Gardens Campus canteens
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
4. Data Analysis and Report Findings Data collected has been organized and analysed as per their qualitative and quantitative nature. We had used measurement scales of intervals to have the opinions scored as from 1-10 and of ordinals to have a ranking of preference of choice of place. We performed the analysis for types of interactions, spatial factors, facilities required and ranking of places of choice and have the below findings. Data analysis has been done on three different domains:1) Hostel wise data analysis 2) Curriculum wise(PG/UG) analysis 3) Department wise analysis
Plot 1:- Hostel 1, 2, 3, 4- Men’s Hostels, Dhaba - Shridhar K
Spatial factor gradings(/10)8 Academic
10
4.5 5
2.5
2.5 1
0
S / g g n n i i t d h a g i h L
e c n e i b m A
s e n i l n s a e l C
e s i o N
y c a v i r P
2.25
1.5
t g r n f o i t a m e S o C
H1,2,3,4
y t i l a u Q r i A
Order of preferences for academic interaction in H1,2,3,4: Hostel room Order of 1 preference
Hostel Canteens
Mess Hall
Campus canteens
Lounge Rooms
Hostel Corridor
Hostel Garden
Hostel Terrace
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Facilities/Amenities grading(/10) 8
Spatial factor grading(/10)- Non Academic 10 8 6 4 2 0
a h S / g g n n i i t d h g i L
e c n e i b m A
s s e n i l n a e l C
e s i o N
y c a v i r P
H1,2,3,4
t y g r t i n o l i f a t a m u e Q S o C i r A
Order of preferences for non-academic interaction in H1,2,3,4:
Order of preference
C A S
d n u o r g C y a A l S P
s l d e n t s u o o r H G
s s n s n l r l e u e e o t e e p e t t o s t s d n m n o n o a a a H I H C C c
l l a H s s e M
l s e m t s o o o H R
s n l e e t d s r o a H G
r o o l d e i t s r r o o H C
e l c e a t r s r o e H T
e s g n m u o o o L R
1
2
3
4
7
8
9
10
11
12
5
6
Students- Btech students, Mtech students, Project Staff Hostel capacity- approx. 300
Academic interactions:-
Spatial factor gradings(/10)-
Facilities/Amenities grading(/10) 8 6 4 2 0
Non Academic interaction:-
Spatial factor grading(/10)- Non Academic
For the non-academic kind of interactions privacy and cleanliness are considered as the major points
Plot 3:- Hostel 6,7,9 – Men’s Hostels -Roshan Shivan
Students: - PG (1sr year) and UG students. Hostel capacity: - 350 approx.
Facilities/Amenities grading(/10) 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
H6,7,9
Non Academic interaction:-
Spatial factor grading(/10)- Non Academic
For the non-academic kind of interactions privacy and cleanliness are considered as the major points
Plot 4:- Hostel 12,13,14 12,13,14 (Men’s Hostels) -Vishal Singh
Students: - Mtech (2nd /3rd year), PhD, and UG students (4 th year). Hostel capacity: - 1300 approx (H12+H13+H14).
Facilities/Amenities grading(/10) 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
H12,13,14
Non Academic interaction:-
Spatial factor grading(/10)- Non Academic 8
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.
Plot 5:- Hostel 11 (Ladies Hostel), Brewberry’s Cafeteria , Campus Hub -Mohini Joshi
Non-Academic Interaction:-
Spatial factor grading(/10)- Non Academic 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
g n i d a h S / g n i t h g i L
s s e n i l n a e l C
e c n e i b m A
e s i o N
y c a v i r P
t r o f m o C g n i t a e S
H11
y t i l a u Q r i A
Order of preferences for non-academic interaction in H11:-
s s n
s
d n u
s
l l a
s n
r
Spatial factor grading (/10) -
9 8 7 6 5
H1,2,3,4
4
H5,8,Tansa
3
H6,7,9
2
H11
1 0
g n i d a h S / g n i t h g i L
e c n e i b m A
s s e n i l n a e l C
e s i o N
y c a v i r P
t r o f m o C g n i t a e S
H12,13,14 y t i l a u Q r i A
Overall order of preferences for academic interaction:-
Overall students 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) –
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
H1,2,3,4 H5,8,Tansa H6,7,9 g n i d a h S
e c n e i b m
s s e n i l n a
e s i o N
y c a v i r P
t r o f m o C
y t i l a u Q
H11 H12,13,14
8 6 4 BTECH(avg)
2
MTECH(avg)
0
) g v a ( H C E T B
) g v a ( H C E T M
) g v a ( D H P
PHD(avg)
Department Wise Analysis – (Only M Tech departments are analysed)
Inferences: The department wise analysis provided a glimpse of the effects of department culture on the interactions interactions students have have during the course. course. It showed that the core departments like the electrical, mechanical and civil and non-core departments like the CTARA, IDC
5. Conclusions and Future Scope IIT Bombay campus has an enormous resource in the amount of land and real estate space it possesses it is one of our greatest assets as an institution. There is a system which distributes responsibility between the campus administration and the academic and research units. It is our perspective based on interviews with semi structured questionnaire that significant local control at the department and college level is necessary to meet the needs of faculty and staff who are carrying out research work in campus, but additional oversight and management at the campus level is needed to ensure optimal use of space and to promote the overall campus strategic plan. As a result, we support retaining elements of our existing, relatively decentralized structure while implementing some centralization of space planning and overall allocation. Every major academic unit should be assisted in the development of an academic master plan for its space these will be used to maintain and evolve the Campus Master Plan. The study conducted demonstrates the pattern of interactions, usage of the different areas under study, typical preferences of the people while making a
use of space and an increase in the overall quality of our space for the faculty, staff, and students at IIT Bombay.
ANNEXURE 1:SAMPLE QUESTIONNAIRE:Personal Info:Name:Age:Gender:Languages spoken:Region/State of origin:-
Suranjana Gupta 24 Female English, Hindi, Kannada West Bengal
Hostel No:Department Name:Degree:-
11 BSBE M tech 1st yr
Bengali,
Academic Details:Details:Years spent in the campus:Academic Schedule(Working hours in a week):Type of Academic Interaction(Topics):-
8 months 30
Assignment
Frequency ( hours per week) 6
37
Project Discussion Quiz
12 9
Exam
12
Lighting/Shading Ambience Cleanliness Noise Privacy Seating Comfort Air Quality
Impact on interaction (points/10) 9 7 10 8 10 8 10
Internet Facilities Plug points(Electricity) points(Electricity) Eateries Toilets/Laterines Library
Impact on interaction(points/10) 10 10 7 7 6
Qualitative impacts a) Spatial factors
b) Facilities/Amenities Facilities/Amenities
Quantitative impacts
38
Time of discussion:after snacks - after dinner Duration involved in Academic 8 hrs Interaction(hours Interaction(hours in a week):Place of interaction: & relaeted parameters-
Hostel Canteens Mess Hall
Preferences interaction:7 2
Lounge Rooms Hostel Rooms
8 1
Hostel Coridoor
4
Hostel Terrace
5
Hostel Gardens Campus canteens
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)
Non-Academic Details:Interests & Hobbies:Hours spent on hobby:-
Listening to music 7
Location of activity:activity: No. of peers involved:-
room, roads 3
39
Type of Non-Academic Non-Academic Interaction(Topics):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 Facilities/Amenities
Internet Facilities Plug points(Electricity) points(Electricity) Eateries Toilets/Laterines
Impact on interaction(points/10) 8 9 10 10
Quantitative impacts
Time of discussion:-
during meals
40
Duration involved in Interaction(hours in a 1.5hrs week):Place of interaction: & relaeted parametersPreferences interaction:-
of Reason for prefernce:-
SAC SAC Playground Hostel Grounds Hostel Indoor
12 11 9 10
Never been there that often Never been there that often Never been there that often Never been there that often
Hostel Canteens Mess Hall Lounge Rooms Hostel Rooms Hostel Coridoor
6 3 7 1 8
not enough space to sit and chat Spacious. Noisy Comfortable to sit and chat Neighbouring room inmates might be disturbed
Hostel Terrace Hostel Gardens Campus canteens
5 4 2
Only if the weather is good When weather is good Group chat (girls and guys)
41
