architecture and me

The voyage for me to the world of architecture has been almost over. There were ups and many downs, there were sorrows and many joys. Each path led to the new experience and encounter with new perspective of life. Things I’ve never observed or experienced were now known to me and sufficiently well known of course. Places I use to visit become the places I now observe, places I used to hang out are now the places of my research. Every single thing changed their perspective and way they use to be in my view.

Gathering the experiences my memories still lingers to the first day when I entered entirely a whole and new community of architecture. New friends, new style of studying and totally new environment. Big desks, long scale and a different infatuation with fevicol well that must be the very beginning to this world.

Time sweep by so were the pattern. Promotion from the drafting to the computer drawing was the major improvement. Years pass by many case studies, many projects and the degree of satisfaction after each submission. And comes the exam time, time to movie, time to party and time for all cool stuffs waiting till the end of each semester.

All the precious memories to treasure forever.

CASE STUDY

Introduction

A case study is one of several ways of doing research whether it is social science related or even socially related. It is an intensive study of a single group, incident, or community. Other ways include experiments, surveys, or analysis of archival information .

Rather than using samples and following a rigid protocol to examine limited number of variables, case study methods involve an in-depth, longitudinal examination of a single instance or event: a case. They provide a systematic way of looking at events, collecting data, analyzing information, and reporting the results. As a result the researcher may gain a sharpened understanding of why the instance happened as it did, and what might become important to look at more extensively in future research. Case studies lend themselves to both generating and testing hypotheses .

Another suggestion is that case study should be defined as a research strategy, an empirical inquiry that investigates a phenomenon within its real-life context. Case study research means single and multiple case studies, can include quantitative evidence, relies on multiple sources of evidence and benefits from the prior development of theoretical propositions. Case studies should not be confused with qualitative research and they can be based on any mix of quantitative and qualitative evidence. Single-subject research provides the statistical framework for making inferences from quantitative case-study data.This is also supported and well-formulated in (Lamnek, 2005): "The case study is a research approach, situated between concrete data taking techniques and methodologic paradigms."

History of the case study

As a distinct approach to research, use of the case study originated only in the early 20th century. The Oxford English Dictionary traces the phrase case study or case-study back as far as 1934, influenced by the much older concept of a case history in medicine.

The use of case studies for the creation of new theory in social sciences has been further developed by the sociologists Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss who presented their research method, Grounded theory, in 1967.

The popularity of case studies in testing hypotheses has developed only in recent decades. One of the areas in which case studies have been gaining popularity is education and in particular educational evaluation.

Case studies have also been used as a teaching method and as part of professional development, especially in business and legal education. The problem-based learning (PBL) movement is such an example. When used in (non-business) education and professional development, case studies are often referred to as critical incidents.

Case selection

Yin (2005) suggested that researchers should decide whether to do single-case or multiple-case studies and chose to keep the case holistic or have embedded sub-cases. This two-by-two combination can produce four basic designs for case studies.

When selecting a case for a case study, researchers often use information-oriented sampling , as opposed to random sampling . This is because an average case is often not the richest in information. Extreme or atypical cases reveal more information because they activate more basic mechanisms and more actors in the situation studied. In addition, from both an understanding-oriented and an action-oriented perspective, it is often more important to clarify the deeper causes behind a given problem and its consequences than to describe the symptoms of the problem and how frequently they occur. Random samples emphasizing representativeness will seldom be able to produce this kind of insight; it is more appropriate to select some few cases chosen for their validity.

Three types of information-oriented cases may be distinguished:

1. Extreme or deviant cases
2. Critical cases
3. Paradigmatic cases.

Generalizing from case studies

The case study is effective for generalizing using the type of test that Karl Popper called falsification, which forms part of critical reflexivity . Falsification is one of the most rigorous tests to which a scientific proposition can be subjected: if just one observation does not fit with the proposition it is considered not valid generally and must therefore be either revised or rejected. Popper himself used the now famous example of, "All swans are white," and proposed that just one observation of a single black swan would falsify this proposition and in this way have general significance and stimulate further investigations and theory-building.

Assumptions

1. Cases selected based on dimensions of a theory (pattern-matching) or on diversity on a dependent phenomenon (explanation-building).

2. No generalization to a population beyond cases similar to those studied.

3. Conclusions should be phrased in terms of model elimination, not model validation. Numerous alternative theories may be consistent with data gathered from a case study.

4. Case study approaches have difficulty in terms of evaluation of low-probability causal paths in a model as any given case selected for study may fail to display such a path, even when it exists in the larger population of potential cases.

litreature review in architecture

Introduction

A literature review is a piece of discursive prose, that not only summarize the published information in a particular subject area accredited scholars and researchers within a certain time period but has an organizational pattern and combines both summary and synthesis. A summary is a recap of the important information of the source, but a synthesis is a re-organization, or a reshuffling, of that information. It might give a new interpretation of old material or combine new with old interpretations. Or it might trace the intellectual progression of the field, including major debates. And depending on the situation, the literature review may evaluate the sources and advise the reader on the most pertinent or relevant.

Literature review hence should have sections that present themes or identify trends, including relevant theory. Its objective is not to list all the material published, but to synthesize and evaluate it according to the guiding concept of your thesis or research question.

If you are writing an annotated bibliography, you may need to summarize each item briefly, but should still follow through themes and concepts and do some critical assessment of material. Use an overall introduction and conclusion to state the scope of your coverage and to formulate the question, problem, or concept your chosen material illuminates. Usually you will have the option of grouping items into sections—this helps you indicate comparisons and relationships. You may be able to write a paragraph or so to introduce the focus of each section

Besides enlarging your knowledge about the topic, writing a literature review lets you gain and demonstrate skills in two areas

1. information seeking: the ability to scan the literature efficiently, using manual or computerized methods, to identify a set of useful articles and books
2. Critical appraisal: the ability to apply principles of analysis to identify unbiased and valid studies.

Objective of literature review:

A literature review must do these things

1. be organized around and related directly to the thesis or research question you are developing
2. synthesize results into a summary of what is and is not known
3. identify areas of controversy in the literature
4. formulate questions that need further research

Difference between literature review and academic research paper

While the main focus of an academic research paper is to support your own argument, the focus of a literature review is to summarize and synthesize the arguments and ideas of others. The academic research paper also covers a range of sources, but it is usually a select number of sources, because the emphasis is on the argument. Likewise, a literature review can also have an "argument," but it is not as important as covering a number of sources. In short, an academic research paper and a literature review contain some of the same elements. In fact, many academic research papers will contain a literature review section. But it is the aspect of the study (the argument or the sources) that is emphasized that determines what type of document it is.

Importance of literature review

Literature reviews provide you with a handy guide to a particular topic. If you have limited time to conduct research, literature reviews can give you an overview or act as a stepping stone. For professionals, they are useful reports that keep them up to date with what is current in the field. For scholars, the depth and breadth of the literature review emphasizes the credibility of the writer in his or her field. Literature reviews also provide a solid background for a research paper's investigation. Comprehensive knowledge of the literature of the field is essential to most research papers.

Prerequisite for writing the literature review

Clarify

If your assignment is not very specific, seek clarification from your instructor:

• Roughly how many sources should you include?
• What types of sources (books, journal articles, websites)?
• Should you summarize, synthesize, or critique your sources by discussing a common theme or issue?
• Should you evaluate your sources?
• Should you provide subheadings and other background information, such as definitions and/or a history?

Find models

Look for other literature reviews in your area of interest or in the discipline and read them to get a sense of the types of themes you might want to look for in your own research or ways to organize your final review. You can simply put the word "review" in your search engine along with your other topic terms to find articles of this type on the Internet or in an electronic database. The bibliography or reference section of sources you've already read are also excellent entry points into your own research.

Narrow your topic

There are hundreds or even thousands of articles and books on most areas of study. The narrower your topic, the easier it will be to limit the number of sources you need to read in order to get a good survey of the material. Your instructor will probably not expect you to read everything that's out there on the topic, but you'll make your job easier if you first limit your scope.

Consider whether your sources are current

Some disciplines require that you use information that is as current as possible. In the sciences, for instance, treatments for medical problems are constantly changing according to the latest studies. Information even two years old could be obsolete. However, if you are writing a review in the humanities, history, or social sciences, a survey of the history of the literature may be what is needed, because what is important is how perspectives have changed through the years or within a certain time period. Try sorting through some other current bibliographies or literature reviews in the field to get a sense of what your discipline expects. You can also use this method to consider what is "hot" and what is not.

Strategies for writing the literature review

Find a focus

A literature review must be organized around a central idea that focuses on the themes or issues and the solution they commonly directs and not the sources themselves as an annotated bibliography would be organized.

Construct a working thesis statement

Then use the focus you've found to construct a thesis statement that not necessarily argue for a position or an opinion; rather it will argue for a particular perspective on the material..

Consider organization

Develop an organization for your review at both a global and local level including important topics,subtopics,etc in proper order.

Cover the basic categories

Just like most academic papers, literature reviews also must contain at least three basic elements: an introduction or background information section; the body of the review containing the discussion of sources; and, finally, a conclusion and/or recommendations section to end the paper.

Introduction: Gives a quick idea of the topic of the literature review, such as the central theme or organizational pattern.

Body: Contains your discussion of sources and is organized either chronologically, thematically, or methodologically.

Conclusions/Recommendations: Discuss what you have drawn from reviewing literature so far. Where might the discussion proceed?

Organizing the body

Once you have the basic categories in place, then you must consider how you will present the sources themselves within the body of your paper. Create an organizational method to focus this section even further.There are three typical ways of organizing the sources into a review:

1. Chronological

By publication: Order your sources by publication chronology, then, only if the order demonstrates a more important trend. 

By trend: A better way to organize the above sources chronologically is to examine the sources under another trend.

2. Thematic:

Thematic reviews of literature are organized around a topic or issue, rather than the progression of time. However, progression of time may still be an important factor in a thematic review. But more authentic thematic reviews tend to break away from chronological order. The only difference here between a "chronological" and a "thematic" approach is what is emphasized the most: the development of the harpoon or the harpoon technology.

3.      Methodological :

A methodological approach differs from the two above in that the focusing factor usually does not have to do with the content of the material. Instead, it focuses on the "methods" of the researcher or writer. A methodological scope will influence either the types of documents in the review or the way in which these documents are discussed.

Once you've decided on the organizational method for the body of the review, the sections you need to include in the paper should be easy to figure out. They should arise out of your organizational strategy. In other words, a chronological review would have subsections for each vital time period. A thematic review would have subtopics based upon factors that relate to the theme or issue.

Sometimes, few other sections  might be considered such as:

Current Situation: Information necessary to understand the topic or focus of the literature review.

History: The chronological progression of the field, the literature, or an idea that is necessary to understand the literature review, if the body of the literature review is not already a chronology.

Methods and/or Standards: The criteria you used to select the sources in your literature review or the way in which you present your information. For instance, you might explain that your review includes only peer-reviewed articles and journals.

Questions for Further Research: What questions about the field has the review sparked? How will you further your research as a result of the review?

Begin composing

Once you've settled on a general pattern of organization, you're ready to write each section. There are a few guidelines you should follow during the writing stage as well.

Use evidence: Your interpretation of the available sources must be backed up with evidence to show that what you are saying is valid.

Be selective: Select only the most important points in each source to highlight in the review. The type of information you choose to mention should relate directly to the review's focus, whether it is thematic, methodological, or chronological.

Use quotes sparingly: literature review does not allow for in-depth discussion or detailed quotes from the text but some short quotes here and there are okay, though, if you want to emphasize a point, or if what the author said just cannot be rewritten in your own words.

Summarize and synthesize: Remember to summarize and synthesize your sources within each paragraph as well as throughout the review.

Keep your own voice: While the literature review presents others' ideas, your voice (the writer's) should remain front and center.

Use caution when paraphrasing: When paraphrasing a source that is not your own, be sure to represent the author's information or opinions accurately and in your own words.

Revise, revise, revise : once the draft is in hand revise it again and again so as to make sure that you have presented your information in the most concise manner possible. Be sure to use terminology familiar to your audience; get rid of unnecessary jargon or slang. Finally, double check that you've documented your sources and formatted the review appropriately for your discipline.