Professor Julienne Hanson, UCL Dr Kayvan Karimi, SSL

1. Doing Research with Space Syntax:a Morning Workshop for Doctoral Students5th International Space Syntax SymposiumUniversity of Delft, June 13th 200510.00 a.m. - 12.00 noon Professor Julienne Hanson, UCL Dr Kayvan Karimi, SSL

2. Welcome and Introduction • Welcome to this pre-symposium workshop, and thank you for coming along early to attend; • First of a pair of linked workshops; • This will cover generic issues common to most forms of Doctoral research; • For the afternoon session, 1.30 p.m. -3.00 p.m., we will split into two parallel sessions; • Kayvan will run a workshop on urban form and I will run one on domestic space; • Address detailed research design at these events.

3. Route Map • What this morning’s workshop will cover: • Welcome and Introductions, who the Workshop Leaders are (15 minutes); • The Challenges and Rewards of Doctoral Research (Breakout & Feedback, 30 minutes); • The PhD Process (Discussion, 30 minutes); • Making the Best Use of Space Syntax (Discussion, 30 minutes); • Question and Answer Session (15 minutes).

4. A Brief Biography - Julienne • Studied Architecture in the early 1970s; • M.Sc. AAS 1975-6; • Foundations of ‘space syntax’, 1976-8, also began teaching on AAS; • ‘The Social Logic of Space’, 1978-1984; • Ran 2nd year design studio at the Bartlett during the 1980s.

5. Teaching and Learning • Course Director, AAS, • 1980-1985 • 1988-1991 • 1998-2002 • PhD, 1989, ‘Order and Structure in Urban Space’; • Vice Dean (Teaching) and Director of Studies at the BSGS, 1990-1996; • Architectural education, ‘teaching the teachers of architecture’.

6. New Opportunities in Research • Readership in Architectural and Urban Morphology, 1996-2001; • Charged with putting the Bartlett ‘on the map’ in respect of housing; • ‘Decoding Homes and Houses’, 1996-1998, summarising 20 years personal research & scholarship; • Professor of House Form and Culture, 2001 to now.

7. Funded Research Portfolio • Difficult to get housing research externally funded in the UK. Market led; • EPSRC EQUAL & SUE; • Housing Corporation / TPT; • Working with end users of buildings to research their needs: • Older and disabled people; • Children; • Ethnic minorities. • Configuration & experience.

8. M.Sc. Housing Futures • Innovative course, running for the first time this September; • Learning together & from one another; • Holistic approach: • Constructability; • Sustainability; • Performance. • Raising design quality through evidence-based research & good practice.

9. Doctoral Supervisions • Graduated 16 Doctoral students, mainly but not exclusively with a space syntax focus; • Another 13 in the pipeline, at all stages on the way to a PhD; • External Advisor or Examiner for 8, from the UK, the USA and Europe; • 10+ Post Docs and Academic Visitors have come to UCL in recent years, to study with me.

10. Research Style • Creating a virtuous circle: • Interdisciplinary; • User-centred; • Practical, aimed at design outcomes and interventions; • Methodologically innovative, combining: • the formal spatial morphological analysis of samples of house plans; with • detailed first hand ethnographic studies of material culture; and • accounts of people’s housing and life histories.

11. A Brief Biography - Kayvan • Studied Architecture in the 1980s; • Practised architecture and urban design 1987-1993; • PhD in ‘urban morphology’, 1993-98, Bartlett; also working with Space Syntax Laboratory on research and consultancy projects • Began working full-time with Space Syntax Laboratory 1997 • Director at SSL 2004.

12. Teaching and Learning • BArch, MArch 1982-88; • PhD, 1998, Ph.D. In Architecture, UCL: Continuity And Change In Old Cities; An Analytical Investigation Of The Spatial Structure In Iranian And English Historic Cities Before And After Modernisation • Honorary senior researcher, the Bartlett, UCL, 2000 • Assistant Professor, The Graduate Faculty of Environment, Tehran University, 2000-02 • Guest lecturer, MSc in Advanced Architectural Studies, Bartlett, 1997-2005

13. Professional practise • Architecture and urban design, 1986-1992, several city master planning and historic centre regeneration projects in Iran. • Consultancy with Space Syntax Limited 1997-2005, more than 100 urban and complex building projects using space syntax methodology.

14. SSL Project Portfolio • Urban & Building Design • Planning & Policy Guidance • Property & Safety Analysis • Impact Assessment • Baseline Surveys • Research

15. SSL Clients

16. SSL Research Projects • AGORA, Cities for People, 2003-05: Development of an audit methodology for European cities to identify, analyse and re-design ‘Capital Routes’ with research and design teams from Barcelona, London, Malmo and Utrecht for European Commission under Framework 5 Research Programme. • Tourist Flows in London, the dynamics of tourist movement in London for London Development Agency (LDA), 2004-2005.

17. What is a PhD?Invite Definitions from Workshop Members(time check - 10.15 a.m.)

18. 3 tier system UK/Europe: Bachelor, Master & Doctorate. Licence to do research; Teach others, profess the subject; Supervise others, guide their work to a successful conclusion; Lead research teams, initiate projects, get the job done. What the PhD stands for: Leading authority in your subject; Command of the subject, knowing what is known in your field; Expanding the boundaries, making a useful contribution; Mastery of technique; Effective communicator; Member of an international research community. The Professional Researcher

19. Not Just a Measure of Intelligence • Personal qualities are demanded as well as academic ones, especially when the going gets tough: • Skills and intelligence; • Dedication, passion and commitment; • Maturity and self-awareness. • Achievement, life-long satisfaction; • Job of work not a life’s work; • Nevertheless, academic reputation, time lag, so make sure you can live long term with your chosen research topic.

20. Breakout Session • Split into smaller groups, getting to know one another, sharing experiences; • 20 minutes to introduce yourselves and share experiences in response to two key questions: • Each person in the group to come up with 3 ideas about “What do you find most rewarding about doing a PhD?”; • And ‘What 3 most important challenges do you face in achieving your PhD?” • Agree the most important 3 rewards and challenges of all, for each breakout group; • Rapporteur from each group to report back on group consensus to the workshop (a couple of minutes each).

21. Feedback From the GroupsClassify into Topics and Themes(time check - reconvene at 10.35 a.m.)

22. Exploration; Excitement; Challenge; Involvement; Passion; Achievement; Reward. But almost everybody also experiences problems during the course of a Ph.D; Academic; Financial; Personal; Health; Job. Highs and Lows of Doctoral Research

23. The PhD Process(time check - 10.45 a.m.) • Getting started, settling in; • Reading around the subject, recognising good research, data, samples, methods; • Pilot study; • Main study; • Data analysis; • Writing up; • Examination. Lots of impetus at the outset, but once you get to the later stages of the PhD it can become quite routine and it gets difficult to maintain enthusiasm. Bogged down in the data. “Can’t see the wood for the trees.”

24. Finding Out How Far People Are Along the Road to a PhD(Show of hands from audience)

25. Before you arrive: Define field and topic; Write initial proposal; Background reading. First six months: Read around topic; Audit courses for research training; Define problem. By month six you should have defined your problem. Months six - nine: Carry out a pilot study; Test assumptions, methods, data analysis; Write up results; Refine / redefine problem, methods, data analysis in the light of empirical research findings. In the UK, this work is used for ‘upgrading’, i.e., showing that you are at the ‘right level’ for a PhD. The Ideal Student’s Progress: First Year

26. By the beginning of year two you should have: Carried out a successful pilot study; be ready to carry out your main study. Throughout most or all of the second year you carry out the main empirical / first hand / original study; May need to go away from University on fieldwork. This may entail: Working with primary and / or secondary data sources; Using a variety of research methods; Fieldwork in one or more locations. By now you should be working confidently; You may decide to interleave data gathering and data analysis. The Ideal Student’s Progress: Second Year

27. First six months year 3: By now you should have embarked on data analysis; Search data for cross-cutting themes; Revisit the literature; Engage with explanatory theories. Identify and test your major and subsidiary research findings; Interpretation of findings. Last six months of third year to write-up: Write empirical chapters first; Then literature review and methodology; Then findings and generalisations; Finally, the problem definition. Viva could be four - six months from submission. The Ideal Student’s Progress: Third Year

28. Invite Open Discussion from Audience(time check -11.00 a.m. finish)

29. Characteristics of research: Intelligence gathering asks the ‘what’ questions; Research asks the ‘why’ questions. Three kinds of research Testing-out (easiest); Problem-solving (medium difficulty); Exploratory (hardest). Research requires analysis: Explanations; Relationships; Comparisons; Predictions; Generalisations; Theories; Independent, critical thought. What is Research?

30. Relevance: Does the research address an important question? Feasibility: Can you carry it out in the time and with the resources you have to hand? Coverage: Have you identified all the right issues? Originality: Will you be making a contribution to knowledge? Rigour: Will your data be accurate and your findings sound? Objectivity: Will your results by fair and unbiased? Drawbacks: Are there any? Ethics: Have you understood the ethical implications of your research, and has everyone involved given informed consent to participate? Questions to ask before you start

31. A PhD is like a fugue or Tai Chi! It has a ‘form’ which directs your energy and governs the output. There is a general consensus that by the time you finish your PhD you should be able to: Explain the purpose of your research; Describe how the research was done; Discuss and analyse the data or the evidence; Present the findings from the research; Arrive at some generalisable conclusions. Context; Focus; Data; Contribution to Knowledge. The Four Elements of the Form

32. This is the field of study within which you are situated and which you must know well, i.e., to a professional standard: Developments; Controversies; Breakthroughs. In other words, you have to be at the cutting edge of your subject matter. Usually demonstrated through literature review; Not done for its own sake but to show you are in control of your subject; Organise the material in an interesting and useful way: Evaluate contributions; Identify trends; Expose key strengths / weaknesses. Context

33. Here you spell out exactly what you are researching and why: What is your problem? How can you address and answer it? Are there key questions or hypotheses to test? What evidence (data) can you bring to bear on it? Thesis, supported by theory, evidence, analysis and interpretation in an unfolding sequence that advances understanding; Here you need a good ‘story line’ - this is what a ‘thesis’ is! Necessary and sufficient but not excessive content; Criterion for inclusion is “Does it advance my argument?” Focus

34. You need to say: What methods were used, (technical name, where people can find out more about it); When did the research take place, (year, duration); Where did it happen, (location, situation); Who or what was involved, (population, sample frame, precise numbers); How was access to subjects or data obtained, (how were they selected, sampling technique); Why these particular methods are appropriate to research your problem (past applications). You need to show that your methods were: Feasible (resources, time); Appropriate ( the best way of gathering the necessary evidence); Suitable (the right material to address the research question); Professional (rigorous, consistent, coherent); Representative (valid and reliable); Ethical (did not infringe people's rights); Good research evaluates the weaknesses as well as the strengths of its methodologies. Research Methods / Data

35. You need to say why your work is important: How it helps the development of the subject; Significance of findings; Limitations on argument; What further research needs to be done. How have the context and focus shifted as a result of your work? The assumption is that your successors will be starting at a different point as a result of your work; Not so much a summary and conclusions as: Findings; Generalisations. This is where the major effort is made in drawing the thesis together. Contribution to Knowledge

36. Francis 1976: Setting down new information for the first time; Extending a previously original piece of work; Carrying out an original research project; Inventing a new method or technique; Synthesising the ideas, methods or techniques of others; Showing originality in testing someone else’s ideas. Phillips, 1992: New empirical work; New synthesis that has not been made before; Trying out in this country something that has only been done elsewhere; Applying an existing technique to a new area; Bringing new evidence to an old issue; Combining methods from different disciplines; Opening up a new area for work in an existing field. Originality / Significance

37. Macro, Meso and Micro Research The fundamental relation between breadth and depth in the conduct of research - research has a ‘shape’. • Surveys (macro, large scale, representative); • Case studies (meso, smallish scale, a few well chosen examples); • Ethnography (micro, total immersion in the detailed social world).

38. Triangulationusing two or three different, independent methods to plot where trends in the data lie • Different methods of data collection have different strengths and weaknesses; • To minimise the problems that result from using just one method, a researcher should use two or more methods of data collection to test hypotheses and measure variables.

39. Non-maleficence Beneficence Autonomy Justice Do no harm Do positive good Show respect for rights of self-determination Treat people fairly Ethical Principles Guiding Research

40. Sciences: Large capital investment in equipment and lab space; Designated lines of research; Supervisor exercises strong control, ‘line management’ of students on projects; Apprenticeship model; ‘Dogsbody’ work; Joint ownership of work, joint papers; Low creativity, can student make original contribution? Possible exploitation. Humanities: Few resource implications entailed in research; Students come with topics; Student’s research has to compete for attention with supervisor’s own research; Supervisor as role model; Greater innovation; Student owns the work, supervisor has an interest; High creativity. Can the student pull it off? Possible neglect. Research Cultures

41. Open Discussion(time check - move on at 11.15 a.m.)

42. Making the Best Use of Space Syntax(time check - 11.15 a.m. to 11.55 a.m.) • Is space syntax a ‘theory’ (way of seeing) or a ‘method’ (toolbox of representations and techniques for spatial analysis)? • Both, but could be used as either!

43. Space Syntax & Theory Building • It’s a paradigm shift. It changes our ‘way of seeing’: • Architecture as a discipline in its own right (rather than a meeting ground for other disciplines such as building sciences or sociology); • The internal logic of space as a relational / configurational system (no need to use built form typologies based on appearances, or analogies from biology or linguistics); • Random background process (local to global processes, distributed design, emergent properties of evolving systems); • Society as a spatialised phenomenon (space & transpace, correspondence & non-correspondence, long and short models, the law of sufficient embodiment).

44. Space Syntax as a Toolbox • More pragmatic approach that avoids the complexity and uncertainty of a paradigm shift: • A very wide choice of tools, all fit for purpose. Too wide? • Triangulation almost impossible to avoid! Purely spatial data and measures (integration at various radii), across a range of different spatial representations (axial, convex, isovist) or with observed events (land use patterns, pedestrian flows) and increasingly with simulation (agent based modelling); • Orientated to pattern, ‘pattern language’. Essential for understanding architecture, which is all about about building patterns in space / volume. Representations are (now) almost all visual and therefore immediately accessible to / can be assimilated by architectural intuition.

45. Why Use Space Syntax? • Originality, significance: • Setting down new information or data on configurational analysis, through a new empirical study. At the moment, every new study generates new primary data; • Reworking an existing / previous study or architectural criticism of a building or settlement, to include syntactic analysis and shed new insight on an old issue or debate; • Extending the range of examples / case studies in a previously researched area within space syntax; • Inventing a new variation on a space syntax method, measure or technique, methodological innovation; • Combining space syntax with methods from different disciplines (triangulation) to make a new synthesis.

46. Rigour and objectivity: Conforms to accepted definitions of scientific objectivity, in that different people doing the same analysis should come up with the same results. Need to set down the protocols used for carrying out the analysis, levels of data resolution etc.; Possible to work across the range of spatial scales from the individual dwelling to the city, bringing a unified approach to the subject; Wide range of representations of space, measures and modelling / simulation techniques. Too wide? No applicability gap. Research translates seamlessly into intervention, important in an applied discipline like architecture. Why Use Space Syntax?

47. Why Use Space Syntax? • Research scope and ambition: • Allows researchers to engage in ‘problem-solving’ and ‘exploratory’ research as well as ‘testing-out’ of existing ideas, methods and hypotheses (normal science); • Provides a firm foundation for ‘explanatory’ research about the relation between space and human behaviour or society and culture, areas where it is often difficult to make inferences, find interpretations or show relationships; • Hard spatial data. Interpretations will often remain speculative but as methods and statistics become more sophisticated can begin to show a clear correlation between spatial factors and social outcomes (pedestrian flows, crime).

48. Limitations • Increasing trend to abstraction. Over-reliance on sophisticated graphic images. Feeling that its got to mean something! But what? Disconnection from ‘real world’. Are we in danger of forgetting that our subject matter is architecture and the built environment and the people who produce and use it? • Few mechanisms for data sharing apart from Space Syntax Symposia, which are too far apart for most PhD students to use as a way of getting ‘up to speed’. Difficult to find out what is actually going on. Much public domain information is 3-5 years behind the game. • Limited learning from research project to research project or from design scheme to design scheme. Limited investment in building the research databases that will allow comparative, cross cultural and or longitudinal studies to be done.

49. More Limitations • The missing link between analysis and design. The theory/methodology is robust in investigating given conditions, but less straight-forward in dealing with future conditions, if such conditions fall within the problem definition of the research. • Difficulty in getting access to spatial data, such as appropriate cartographic materials or GIS information, as well as difficulty in gathering first-hand observational data.

50. Open Discussion(finish at 11.55 a.m. for 12.00 noon) Wrap-up. Thank everyone for their contributions and insights. Will ensure the presentation is on the Symposium Website. Reconvene for Urban Form (Kayvan) and Domestic Space (Julienne) Workshops at 1.30 p.m.