Description
You are a consultant with a large company that is designing and building a major public environment setting. Choose the setting you would like to discuss (e.g., office building, hospital, transportation system, school, hotel), and write a 2-3 page paper to the leaders of the company describing important aspects of that environment that should be considered in its design as it relates to human behavior and fires. Your paper should address any of the five social processes that you may find relevant to humans in that setting. For example, if you chose the hospital setting, you could discuss how appropriation, crowding, privacy, and personal space may affect the staff and the visitors. You would also give suggestions to the company regarding the design or policies that should be implemented in that setting if a fire were to occur. Please review the grading rubric for guidance on expectations.
Sample Solution
This interview consists of six questions (see Appendix). The first question aimed to be a relatively easy question to talk about (Robson 2002; Newing in press). The second question was related to the first question, so that it was able to lead the interviewees to main topic of the interview. This question was one of main questions of this interview as well as the third, fourth, and fifth question. These questions were set to understand Chinese studentsâ attitudes towards the giant panda. The final question was not directly related to the subject and it was supposed to be a simple question as a âcool-offâ question. However, it was found at the development stage of this interview that this sixth question invited the further discussion about the relationship between the giant panda and Chinese people. Therefore, the question was kept in each interview. Procedures This interview survey followed the procedure described by Robson (2002:277); âIntroduction, warm-up, main body of interview, cool-off, and closureâ. In the introduction stage, interviewers and the students were introduced each other, and talked about their own courses at University of Kent as âwarm-upâ. During the interview, it is weighted to elicit information to maximize the advantage of a semi-structured interview. Therefore, the depth of answer was varied between the questions and the answerers. It is also important to note that the interview was often stopped to clarify what the interviewee meant or answered. In some cases, it was confirmed at cool-off stage or after the interview by exchanging e-mail. Analysis During the data collection, the interviewer tried to record annotations, memos, coding (Newing in press). At an initial stage of an analysis, the coding procedure was conducted followed the instruction described by Newing (in press: 218). As top codes, several values from Kellertâs nine values (1996) (see Table 1) were employed as predefined codes. For sub-codes, the detailed information related to the defined top codes was identified. At next stage, the procedure suggested by Sarantakos (2005) was taken to develop from open-coding to the concept. However, the coding procedure for this interview description was not sufficient for axial, selective coding since top codes us>
This interview consists of six questions (see Appendix). The first question aimed to be a relatively easy question to talk about (Robson 2002; Newing in press). The second question was related to the first question, so that it was able to lead the interviewees to main topic of the interview. This question was one of main questions of this interview as well as the third, fourth, and fifth question. These questions were set to understand Chinese studentsâ attitudes towards the giant panda. The final question was not directly related to the subject and it was supposed to be a simple question as a âcool-offâ question. However, it was found at the development stage of this interview that this sixth question invited the further discussion about the relationship between the giant panda and Chinese people. Therefore, the question was kept in each interview. Procedures This interview survey followed the procedure described by Robson (2002:277); âIntroduction, warm-up, main body of interview, cool-off, and closureâ. In the introduction stage, interviewers and the students were introduced each other, and talked about their own courses at University of Kent as âwarm-upâ. During the interview, it is weighted to elicit information to maximize the advantage of a semi-structured interview. Therefore, the depth of answer was varied between the questions and the answerers. It is also important to note that the interview was often stopped to clarify what the interviewee meant or answered. In some cases, it was confirmed at cool-off stage or after the interview by exchanging e-mail. Analysis During the data collection, the interviewer tried to record annotations, memos, coding (Newing in press). At an initial stage of an analysis, the coding procedure was conducted followed the instruction described by Newing (in press: 218). As top codes, several values from Kellertâs nine values (1996) (see Table 1) were employed as predefined codes. For sub-codes, the detailed information related to the defined top codes was identified. At next stage, the procedure suggested by Sarantakos (2005) was taken to develop from open-coding to the concept. However, the coding procedure for this interview description was not sufficient for axial, selective coding since top codes us>
