Notes from Meeting at Reading University 27th May
Present were: Janet McDonnell, Peter Lloyd, Fraser Reid, and Rachael Luck
Form of data collection
The overall ideas behing the project were discussed. Two options for data collection were discussed. The first option was collecting data from a sequence of (3?) design meetings within one (or a number) of design organisations. Second option was to record just one meeting from a larger number (3?) of design organisations. The first option was more popular.
Website
PL noted that the difference between this workshop and the previous Delft protocols workshop was the advent of the internet. This might be used to support the data set, for example by researchers able to ask questions about the data, or obtain background material of participants. The data collected should not depend on such information, however.
Date for workshop
Initial thoughts (September 2004) were for late summer 2007, but the RAE might interfere with this with publications required to be in the public domain by July 31st 2007. With international participation that would only be a problem for UK based researchers, but it would be nice for publications arising from the workshop to count. June 2007 was also discussed.
A detailed plan needs to be produced with realistic targets.
Funding
One option is to apply for a research grant to cover the whole symposium. The other is to fund it 'bit by bit', with possible contributions from collaborators, universities, participants, the DRS, and software suppliers. A proposal should in any case be written to clarify all the goals and processes of the project.
Data
Rachael's architecture data was looked at to gain insight into how we might collect our own data. Quite a bit can be obtained using just one camera, but problems with lighting (contrast and type), space (narrow camera angle), audio, and large numbers of meeting participants were noted. Fraser showed similar data. Peter showed an excerpt from Design as filmed for television and all were pleased to note that this was not much of an improvement! Peter mentioned high quality equipment might soon be available from the OU, although too much equipment might provide unecessary intrusion. Ideally betwen 4-6 people would be appropriate to film.
Transcription
How complete does the transcription need to be? It was thought that a too detailed transcription might (a) take too long and (b) pre-judge some of the data. A skeleton transcription was agreed upon simply providing a text of words spoken and timings. The transcription should also help to quickly locate researchers in the data.
Conference Review Process
The nature of the symposium means that researchers would be commiting quite a bit of time towards producing a paper. It was though that rejection at a late stage might be upsetting. Several options were discussed. (1) participation by invitation only and no review at all, simply all papers accepted. (2) a formal review process drawn from an advisory board - often required by people travelling to conferences overseas. (3) a review of track record prior to acceptance of participation followed by acceptance of all papers.
Publisher
The Delft protocols workshop was published by Wiley. Open University Press was suggested. A special issue of Design Studies would be practically guaranteed.
To do:
1. Think about stuff
2. List all major activities required with an estimate of associated costs
3. Produce an outline timetable
Form of data collection
The overall ideas behing the project were discussed. Two options for data collection were discussed. The first option was collecting data from a sequence of (3?) design meetings within one (or a number) of design organisations. Second option was to record just one meeting from a larger number (3?) of design organisations. The first option was more popular.
Website
PL noted that the difference between this workshop and the previous Delft protocols workshop was the advent of the internet. This might be used to support the data set, for example by researchers able to ask questions about the data, or obtain background material of participants. The data collected should not depend on such information, however.
Date for workshop
Initial thoughts (September 2004) were for late summer 2007, but the RAE might interfere with this with publications required to be in the public domain by July 31st 2007. With international participation that would only be a problem for UK based researchers, but it would be nice for publications arising from the workshop to count. June 2007 was also discussed.
A detailed plan needs to be produced with realistic targets.
Funding
One option is to apply for a research grant to cover the whole symposium. The other is to fund it 'bit by bit', with possible contributions from collaborators, universities, participants, the DRS, and software suppliers. A proposal should in any case be written to clarify all the goals and processes of the project.
Data
Rachael's architecture data was looked at to gain insight into how we might collect our own data. Quite a bit can be obtained using just one camera, but problems with lighting (contrast and type), space (narrow camera angle), audio, and large numbers of meeting participants were noted. Fraser showed similar data. Peter showed an excerpt from Design as filmed for television and all were pleased to note that this was not much of an improvement! Peter mentioned high quality equipment might soon be available from the OU, although too much equipment might provide unecessary intrusion. Ideally betwen 4-6 people would be appropriate to film.
Transcription
How complete does the transcription need to be? It was thought that a too detailed transcription might (a) take too long and (b) pre-judge some of the data. A skeleton transcription was agreed upon simply providing a text of words spoken and timings. The transcription should also help to quickly locate researchers in the data.
Conference Review Process
The nature of the symposium means that researchers would be commiting quite a bit of time towards producing a paper. It was though that rejection at a late stage might be upsetting. Several options were discussed. (1) participation by invitation only and no review at all, simply all papers accepted. (2) a formal review process drawn from an advisory board - often required by people travelling to conferences overseas. (3) a review of track record prior to acceptance of participation followed by acceptance of all papers.
Publisher
The Delft protocols workshop was published by Wiley. Open University Press was suggested. A special issue of Design Studies would be practically guaranteed.
To do:
1. Think about stuff
2. List all major activities required with an estimate of associated costs
3. Produce an outline timetable
posted by Peter Lloyd at 3:46 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home