15
Sep 21

The Value of Social Design

[Photograph of the stramp at Robson Square] (2018)

Take a look at the above photograph taken at Robson Square. While most architects design ramps to go aroundtheir stairs, the ramp here is integrated into the stairs (a combination known as a “stramp”) so that wheelchair users can go the same way as non-wheelchair users. It’s a nice way to reduce barriers and increase accessibility in an aesthetically pleasing way, right? Unfortunately, there are a few issues when considering how people will actuallyuse the stramp, such as how the steepness of the ramp parts and the lack of handrails make it more difficult for wheelchair users to ascend (Steenhout, 2018). These problems were likely the result of a disconnect between the architect’s vision and the reality on the ground. As discussed by Gruman et al. (2017), these disconnects happen because of role specialization, which often narrows people down to a specific part of a project and decreases their communication with those involved with other parts of the project (pg. 372). How can we address these disconnections? Perhaps we can take an approach known as social design to facilitate communication and improve people’s experiences with those buildings.

What is social design? Social design, as defined by Gruman et al. (2017), “is a process by which any building […] may be designed in collaboration with those who will actually use that building.” (pg. 352) When architects design a building on their own, they often focus more on its aesthetics than its everyday functionality. After all, they’re often not the ones who will actually be using the building. Social design essentially gives the people who will be affected by a project a say in its design. For example, in the stramp example above, one could imagine wheelchair users being quick to point out that the ramp is very steep for them and that without handrails to help pull themselves up, it would be exhausting going up. Involving their perspectives could have likely helped make the stramp more accessible to them and better fulfill the purpose of the design. Social design can help prevent practical problems from coming up after building a project. But it is not just limited to preventing problems. Social design can also improve our lives, such as through our sense of personal control.

Photo of a crowded high school by [LuigiSaysKachow], (2019)

It feels nice to feel like you are in control of your current situation, right? Most people do, and social design can help people feel like they are in control. As stated by Gruman et al. (2017), “good social design will provide building occupants with real options to control their proximate environment.” (pg. 374) Consider the above photo of a crowded high school building by Reddit user LuigiSaysKachow (2019), presumably taken between class periods as students are walking to their next class. With so many students walking in so many directions converging in one location, would you feel like you are in control? Probably not, considering there does not seem to be a way to escape the crowd when walking through this building, which can lead to stress. Gruman et al. (2017) state that “noise, unwanted social contact, congestion, and a lack of places of refuge are examples of primary sources of stress,” (pg. 375) all of which seem to be present in this photo. Unfortunately, when there are a lot of students at a given school, going through crowds like these can be inevitable. What can social design do to help a school with a lot of students feel like they are more in control of their environment?

Screenshots from Sensiba (2014)’s video Centennial High School Aerial Video

I would actually like to nominate my high school as a great example of how good social design can increase one’s sense of personal control. I had to deal with similar amounts of crowding as shown in the picture from the Reddit post, but I maintained a strong sense of personal control walking through those crowds. If you watch the video “Centennial High School Aerial Video” by Jennifer Sensiba (2014), a drone video of my high school, you may notice many tables and seats spread across the campus (also shown in the screenshots). Across the school, students could choose to sit down away from crowds to stop and talk with friends or to take a break from the stress. Additionally, with how the school was designed, there were usually multiple paths one could take to get from one class to another. When one path was too crowded, I would take an alternative path with fewer students walking through. Even though I still had to deal with crowding in my high school, it felt very manageable and less stressful thanks to the options I had to avoid the crowds. Clearly, the architects of the school had kept the perspective of the student in mind when designing it, using social design to give students personal control over some of their daily experiences.

In conclusion, social design is important because it improves the experiences of everyday people. Involving the people in the design process of a project that will affect them can help prevent problems that architects alone may not see, such as those involved in the stramp at Robson Square. But social design is more than just preventing problems. It can help improve the lives of people even if it doesn’t fully solve a problem. The tables and chairs spread across my high school did not solve crowding, but they did reduce the impact and stress crowding has on me and likely many other students over the years. Thus, when designing something that will impact other people, such as a new public space, it is good to take the social design approach and get them involved. Using their perspective can help prevent problems before they happen and, in some cases, improve people’s everyday lives for years to come.

 

References

Gruman, J. A., Schneider, F. W., & Coutts, L. M. (2017). Applied social psychology: Understanding and addressing social and practical problems. Los Angeles: SAGE.

Sensiba, J. (2014, August 27) Centennial High School Aerial Video [Video]. Youtube. https://youtu.be/SgNiDaDUDK4

[LuigiSaysKachow] (2019, August 22). The absolute crap design of my school. This is the place where every hallway intersects [Online forum post]. Reddit. https://reddit.com/r/CrappyDesign/comments/cu8dho/the_absolute_crap_design_of_my_school_this_is_the/

[Photograph of the stairs and ramp at Robson Square]. (2018). Part of a Whole. https://incl.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/robson-square.jpg

Steenhout, N. (2018, 11 May). The Problems With Ramps Blended Into Stairs. Part of a Whole. https://incl.ca/the-problems-with-ramps-blended-into-stairs/

 


31
Oct 16

School Violence: Bullying and Shootings at Columbine

Sociological research about school shootings indicate that in the majority of the cases, the violence is in retaliation to bullying and harassment perpetrated by the school elite on the school outcasts (Larkin, 2012). This blog will look at adolescent bullying and violence, and then conclude with interventions that might help prevent devastating incidents of school shootings like Columbine.

If we take the case of Columbine, Larkin (2007) observes that the school was pervaded by a sort of “cult of the athlete,” revolving in particular around football, such that athletes or “jocks” ruled the school and perpetrated violence and harassment upon outcasts. This bullying was tolerated and even encouraged by peer bystanders, who claimed that the outcasts were morally disgusting to the entire school.

Bullying increases beginning in middle school (Pellegrini, 2001), when peer relationships become unstable, such as during the transition from middle school to high school. Social hierarchies are in the midst of being established, and given the long-standing tradition of athleticism and physical domination as being signs of the elite, hierarchies are established through violence and intimidation, especially in the case of male students. Adolescent peer groups can be grouped into the jock elite, burnout outcasts, and the rest in the middle (Larkin, 2007). In Columbine, the jock elite was composed of members of the Columbine Sports Association, whereas the burnouts were called “goths,” some of whom went around in trench coats and called themselves “The Trenchcoat Mafia.”

Milner (2006) observes that peer groups can be unforgiving, in that though everyone knows who falls in what peer group, the wrong word or association can lead to an immediate fall in status. The formation of peer groups in the beginning of junior high or high school is therefore a conflict-fueled process, as social status begins in flux and then slowly crystalizes.

Bullying exists in an environment where it leads to rewards from peers and tolerance from school authorities. Brown and Merritt (2002) observed that in Columbine, the teachers would look upon bullying as “boys will be boys” and then look the other way. Bullies establish their higher social status and power by intimidating their victims, and thus are rewarded by rises in self-esteem and social competence.

What does bullying have to do with school shootings? Everything. Of 38 school shootings analyzed by Larkin (2009), at least 20 were in retaliation for bullying. Bullying and harassment ranged from small cruelties to near torture, with incidents of being burned by cigarette lighters. Prevention of school shootings therefore naturally ties into prevention of bullying.

Suggestions for prevention of school shootings have been compiled by Bondü and Scheithauer (2009). At the school level, the researchers recommend the development of a positive school climate, with a zero tolerance policy towards bullying, prevention and response procedures for bullying, and an increase in the number of mental health service providers like school counselors on campus. At the individual level, the researchers recommend concentrating on developing social and emotional competencies, limiting violent media consumption, implementing conflict resolution/mediation programs, and fostering social integration to prevent social exclusion.

References:

Böckler, N. (2013;2012;). School shootings: International research, case studies, and concepts for prevention (1. Aufl.;1; ed.). New York: Springer.

Bondü, R., & Scheithauer, H. (2009). Aktuelle Ansätze zur Prävention von School Shootings in Deutschland. Praxis der Kinderpsychologie und Kinderpsychiatrie, 58, 685–701.

Brown, B., & Merritt, R. (2002). No easy answers: The truth behind death at Columbine. New York: Lantern.

Larkin, R. W. (2007). Comprehending columbine. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

Larkin, R. W. (2009). The Columbine legacy: Rampage shootings as political acts. The American Behavioral Scientist, 52(9), 1309–1326.

Milner, M., Jr. (2006). Freaks, geeks, and cool kids: American teenagers, schools, and the culture of consumption. New York: Routledge.

Pellegrini, A. D. (2001). The roles of dominance and bullying in the development of early heterosexual relationships. Journal of Emotional Abuse, 2(2/3), 63–73.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


03
Oct 15

Mind If I Join You?

I love lists. I especially love “to-do” lists – not because I want to have many tasks, but because I get a certain thrill from crossing something off of my “to-do” list. I feel accomplished and a great deal of satisfaction comes over me. I find that this is consistent with my equal love for organizers. Looking at photos in the Crate & Barrel and Ikea catalogs makes me very happy. They often show idyllic office workspaces in imaginary homes. There are baskets tagged with pieces of slate and labeled in chalk for things like “Bills”, “School”, “Receipts”, etc.  I covet those offices and maybe if I win the lottery I will be able to live out my dream of a perfectly coordinated and organized workspace.  If I dig a bit deeper into why I like those images, I can see that I really prefer things to be ordered over things that are chaotic. If I look a little further and peel back the onion of my psyche even more, I can see that I often search for not only where to put things, but where to put myself. Where do I fit in?

Social psychology has developed theories about group dynamics and how people relate within a group. Social Identity Theory involves both how a person interacts as a result of their individuality (their Personal Identity), and how the individual interacts based on their awareness of their position within a group (their Social Identity) (The Pennsylvania State University World Campus, L6 P4, 2015).  Yet a different theory is that of Social Dominance. This theory suggests that humans naturally form different hierarchies across cultural and socioeconomic boundaries and that those at the top of each hierarchy gain a preponderance of the good that comes to the group (Sidanius & Pratto, 2012).  As such, those at the top of the group are eager to keep things the same within their hierarchy. After all, the top group people reap great rewards and benefits in the form of things like wealth, better education, modern conveniences, etc. Interestingly, research shows that those in the low group population within a hierarchy will accept their position within the group. The low group individuals see the value in being in the low group of a dominant hierarchy over being in the top group of a lesser hierarchy (The Pennsylvania State University World Campus L6 P5, 2015).

Thinking back to my family of origin, I can see that our roles and our “proper places” were imposed on us mostly by our parents. I am the oldest of three. My parents were careful not to assign a favorite, but each of us interacted with our parents differently. I was the peacemaker, my brother was the instigator/rebel and my sister was the free spirit. The hierarchy was clear, my parents were at the top of the pyramid and my siblings and I were the subordinates. I knew my role and where I fit in the group.  As I moved into adolescence and high school, I became part of more groups, both socially and academically. High school is where the group delineations were most clear – complete with labels such as “Goths”, “Techs”, “Band Geeks”, “Jocks”, “Richies”, etc.  Within those cliques, there were pecking orders and hierarchies. For example, since the Jocks were more popular than the Band Geeks at my school, if you were low in the hierarchy of the Band Geeks, you were exponentially less popular than the Jocks. I was a Band Geek (and I still am – but now I get paid to be one!).  As a sophomore, it was clear that the seniors were in charge of the group – even going so far as to pass along duties like sorting music and cleaning the practice field after rehearsals so that they could spend more time socializing with their peers. It was easy to tolerate the grunt work because I knew that I wouldn’t remain a sophomore forever. One day, I would be a senior and the power would shift.  Fortunately for me, Hollywood created a movie that perfectly (yes, perfectly) described my high school experience: (warning: this clip contains some graphic language)

 

(Hughes, 1985)

Little did I know, these cliques would linger into adulthood. They changed names and appearances – the cliques became hierarchies. As I got older, I could see that everywhere I turned, there were more dividing lines. I could see it between people of wealth and people with less financial stability. I could see it between those of certain ethnic backgrounds and those that identified as Caucasian. I could see it between upper management and entry-level employees. I could see it between those in political power and those that were oppressed. I could see it between those that follow a certain spiritual path and those that have a different experience of human existence. In all of those groups, some individuals rise to the top (the in-group) and some are rank-and-file members (the out-group). At first, it was difficult to determine where I belonged. The world is a big place and how would I determine which clique or hierarchy I would join? I came to realize though that no matter what hierarchy or clique I was in, I had a choice. I could choose to pursue the in-group status or remain in the out-group. If neither of those choices appealed to me, I could start my own group. Social dominance is only as limiting as you make it.  It is essential to determine your own path, regardless of the hierarchy to which you belong, for that is where you will find the most joy.

Hughes, J. (Director). (1985). The Breakfast Club [Motion Picture].

Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (2012). Social Dominance Thoery. In P. A. Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins, Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology: Volume Two (pp. 418-438). London: Sage.

The Pennsylvania State University World Campus L6 P5. (2015). Lesson 6: Intergroup Relations: Social Dominance Theory. Retrieved from PSYCH424: Applied Social Psychology: https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/fa15/psych424/001/content/07_lesson/05_page.html

The Pennsylvania State University World Campus, L6 P4. (2015). Lesson 6: Intergroup Relations Social Identity Theory. Retrieved from PSYCH424: Applied Social Psychology: https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/fa15/psych424/001/content/07_lesson/04_page.html

 


Skip to toolbar