2021: Public Life Studies

In this seminar, students design and develop their own research project with the aim to identify similarities and differences of urban design and public space usage and accessibility in the US and Germany. It is an introduction to research methodologies in urban design with a focus of gaining fresh empiric data (e.g. observations, counting, interviews, comparative studies etc.). Research methods leading to a theoretical framework and allowing to contextualize the empiric findings will be applied by students. This site gives you a glimpse into the students' work in progress, their exercises and analysis.

The results of the seminar were summarized and reflected in an online publication.

First Task: Exploring Public Spaces

Streets, parks, plazas, alleys, transit, waterways, etc. – public spaces can be symbolic or ordinary, functional or broken, ostentatious or modest, fresh or worn, enduring or ephemeral. The students were asked to visit several public spaces in Darmstadt or Washington. Based on lectures and discussions in the first meeting, they examined and documented these spaces with a critical perspective. How are they structured, used, and oriented? And more specifically, how are they accessible and inclusive?

Collaborative Board: Introduction

Postcards from Darmstadt and Washington DC

Postcards serve multiple functions. Often used as an advertisement for a city, a way to document a journey, or to share experiences with someone else, they provide a graphic and personalized representation of a physical place. The students created a postcard of their own for a public space in either Darmstadt or Washington that highlights the spatial conditions and how the design of the space contributes to or counteracts objectives of inclusivity.

Collaborative Board: Filter & Select

As groups, students explored public spaces in each city — Darmstadt and Washington — and began to examine how public spaces can be inclusive and accessible. Collectively, they documented multiple spaces in each city, and through these investigations, themes have arisen as intriguing areas for further research. They met as teams, got to know each other, and began to filter and sort their past work and knowledge of public spaces in these two cities.

Workshop: “Inside-out Research”

During a two-day workshop with architect Hansel Bauman the students were exploring the complex, almost intangible, challenges in making public spaces that foster “welcomnes” and inclusion for ALL.

The workshop began with an introduction by guest lecturer Hansel Bauman.

In the first part, pairs of students commissioned one another to create an artifact: a graphic representation using the drawing process as a tool for exploration and expression of the perceived experience of the stories of personal meaning they were told by their partners.

In part two of the workshop personal stories of meaning, and translated graphic constructs were synthesized into a collective whole – in essence—scaled up from the personal to the community level revealing common themes, conflicts and generation of new ideas.

Lessons learned and outcomes from the collaborative process were documented and shared with the class along with the community-scale construct.

Research Methods: Local Survey

Student's call for feedback about George Washington Masonic Memorial at the local news. Link: www.alxnow.com
Student's call for feedback about George Washington Masonic Memorial at the local news. Link: www.alxnow.com

Final Presentation

With consideration of the comments from previous critiques, the students continued to refine the research question, methodologies, analysis, and began drawing conclusions. Some arrived at a specific defined answer to the research question, while others suggested how the work generates a foundation for new questions to be asked. In a final video conference with all participants they the students presented their research projects in short films and visualized them as posters.

Paul Schmidt, Wiebke Lea Bartels, MD Abu Baker Siddique and Max Fuangaromya examined parks in Darmstadt and Washington DC through visual impairment.

Bernadette Lang-Eurisch, Dirk Münning, Kennard Taylor and Brittney Sooksendao compared how the development histories of two parks impacted their use today.

Özge Tasar, Diego Andrade, Cihan Yusufoglu and Audrey Bolesta analyzed the accessibility of Mathildenplatz in Darmstadt and Dupont Circle in Washington.

Ingrid Husanu, Mariam Elhoussieny, Shelby Pollack and McKenna Reynolds compared the public spaces at the George Washington Masonic Temple in Alexandria with the Mathildenhöhe in Darmstadt through a public survey.

Ingrid Husanu, Mariam Elhoussieny, Shelby Pollack and McKenna Reynolds compared the public spaces at the George Washington Masonic Temple in Alexandria with the Mathildenhöhe in Darmstadt through a public survey.

Ingrid Husanu, Mariam Elhoussieny, Shelby Pollack and McKenna Reynolds compared the public spaces at the George Washington Masonic Temple in Alexandria with the Mathildenhöhe in Darmstadt through a public survey.

Ingunn H. Honne, Haya Al Bitar, Ameya Kaulaskar and Shayan Ghodousi visualized the movement in public spaces through speed analysis.

Valerie Kramer, Paula Tempel, Astha Bhavsar and Mona Koushkebaghi compared urban alleys in DC and Darmstadt.

Hanqi Zheng, Yingjia Hu, Roya Saeidi and Armond Dai focused their research on the elderly as a user group of public spaces.

Hannah Gerules, Carla Riechardt, Robert Hirsch, Eliezer Perez and Emily Ashworth focused on institutional public spaces, examplified through the Enid A. Haupt Garden of the Smithsonian Institution and the space around the university library of TU Darmstadt.