Structure of the Analysis

The issues and problems stated by the interviewees; i.e. teachers and students in ITU and teachers in MSUFA; in relation to the reflective interactions and

individual departments refer to 5 major limitations in ITU and 4 limitations in MSUFA. These limitations constitute the analysis of the second and the third cycles of the implementation. The aim of the implementation is to test, whether and how, the uses of the Facebook group in individual studio courses address these limitations.

Therefore, the findings of the implementation, which consist of the actual uses of the Facebook groups, answers to the questionnaires and the interviews are analysed on the basis of these limitations. Below is the detailed structure of the analysis in relation to the limitations identified. It involves the already introduced aspects of each limitation, together with how Facebook group is aimed to address the limitation.

As the first step of structuring the analysis, different types of acitivites – i.e. posts – by teachers and students in the group pages are defined and classified. These definitions and classifications are based on the tools and features of the site, which are used, and the functions and purposes, which these tools and features serve. There are three main categories, under which all posts fall: the critique-posts, the project-posts and the non-critique project-posts. The critique-project-posts are defined as any reflective interaction performed by teachers and students (1) on the subject of the given assignment in general, (2) on the student projects, or (3) on the critiques themselves already made on the given assignment or the student projects. The project posts are any project material posted by students, i.e. students’ works on their personal projects. The non-critique posts are all the other interactions and communication about studio or non-studio matters, such as announcements, questions, casual talks, small talks. Where there is a question in determining whether a post is a critique or not, Uluoğlu’s (2000; 1996) classification of the “representational forms” or

“moulds” of studio critiques are taken as reference. As discussed in the previous chapters, Uluoğlu (2000; 1996) defines 14 moulds of studio critiques, which are

“interpretation, coaching, questions, demonstration, description, completions, examples, reminders, positive evaluation, analogies, problem statement, scenarios, conflict statement, and finally, negative evaluation”. Below is the classification and definition of the types of posts by teachers and students in the Facebook groups.

Verbal Critique Posts: These are the reflective written posts and written comments made by teachers and students about the assignment brief, student projects, or the critiques made. They include both the written posts made directly on the group wall, and the written comments made under existing posts.

Image Critique Posts: Image critique posts are the photos posted by teachers and students in order to reflect on the assignment brief, student projects, or the critiques made. They include both the photo posts made directly on the group wall, or the photos posted under existing posts.

Video Critique Posts: Video critique posts are the videos posted by teachers and students in relation to the project assignment, the student projects or the critiques made. They are the posts where a video is directly posted on the group page or under existing posts. Video links, such as YouTube links, are not included in the Video Critique Posts.

Link Critique Posts: Link critique posts are defined as the posts, where teachers and students share links with related information such as examples, relevant webpages, etc. All links posted in the group, including webpages, YouTube or other video links, and any other online (or offline) addresses are all referred to as Link Critique Posts.

Project Image Posts: These are the single still image posts, i.e. photo posts, made by students, which are part of the students’ works on their projects.

Project Image Folder Posts: These are the image folder posts, i.e. photo albums posts, made by students, which consist of the still images of the students’ works on their projects.

Project Video Posts: These are the video posts made by students, which are part of the students’ works on their projects.

Verbal Non-Critique Posts: These are the written posts by teachers and students, either on the group page or under existing posts, which are not reflections on the brief, students’ works, or the existing critiques; but announcements and other similar comments on the course process or on any other subject.

Image Non-Critique Posts: These are the photo posts by teachers and students, either on the group page or under existing posts, which are not reflections on the brief, students’ works, or the existing critiques; but other still image metarials related to the course process or any other subject.

Doc Posts: The doc posts are the verbal documents posted on the group page using the Doc feature in Facebook groups, including the assignment briefs, or other written documents about the course or any other subject.

Event Posts: Event posts are the invitations created using the Event feature of the groups, in order to mark the course events such as juries, and any other event.

In addition, the critique and non-critique threads are identified individually. A critique thread is a group of posts, which consists of any kind of critique posts and/or project posts (as defined above) on which the critiques are made. Any critique posts and the comments on it constitute a critique thread. A thread, which starts with a students’ project work and goes on with critiques made on it is defined as a critique thread, too. A non-critique thread is a group of posts, which includes any kind of non-critique posts, as explained above. These 11 individual types of posts, and 2 types of threads, are identified and analysed in the Facebook groups used in the studio courses in ITU, in terms of the 5 limitations specific to that department.

Similarly, they are identified and analysed in the Facebook group used in MSUFA, on the basis of the 4 limitations specific to the studio courses in that department.

Below is the structure of content analysis built under each limitation, including the designation of the analysis questions, populations, sampling units, recording units and variables. First of all, the population in the content analysis within all limitations is the specific type of studio course of each department. In other words, in the content analysis of the Facebook group used in the 3^rd year studio course in ITU, the population is all the 3^rd year studio courses in ITU. In the content analysis of the Facebook group used in the 4^th year studio course in ITU, the population is all the 4^th year studio courses in that department. Finally, in the content analysis of the Facebook group used in the vertical project studio course in MSUFA, the population is all the vertical project studio courses given in the department. Consequently, the units of sampling are the Facebook groups, which are used within the processes of these specific studio courses.

Temporal Flexibility to Address Temporal Limitations: A platform of temporal flexibility; where all teachers, students, their works and ideas, are connected and accessible to each other for reflective interactions and communications, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

Under this topic, the content analysis of each type of post aims at finding out if the Facebook group was used for its temporal flexibility. As discussed in the previous section, there are two aspects identified under temporal limitations. Each aspect

holds its own designations of terms of content analysis, which are explained below in detail.

Limited Hours of Studio vs 24/7 Design Process:

This aspect of temporal limitations investigates if the Facebook group was used within flexible times of day and week, in other words outside studio hours. The questions, on which the analysis is based, are “Was the Facebook group used by teachers and students outside studio hours? For which purposes was the group used by teachers and students outside studio hours? What was the frequency and/or patterns of the use of the group by teachers and students outside studio hours?”. On the basis of this question, the content of the Facebook group pages are analysed in terms of the times of activities by teachers and students to see if and for what reasons the groups were used outside studio hours. In order to analyse the content of the Facebook groups in terms of the type of activities executed during certain intervals of time, definition and categorisation of these time intervals are necessary. The definitions of the time intervals constitute the variables of the content analysis. The recording unit under this aspect of temporal limitations is each post by any member of the group. Each recording unit, in other words post, is analysed on the basis of its recorded date and time, in order to see if temporal flexibility was used for that specific post. Below is the explanation of such categorisation, where the temporal dimension is fragmented on the basis of intervals, namely the hours of the day and days of the week.

Studio Days: These are the days when the studio classes are held. They include both the regular studio class days and the jury and/or project submission days.

Studio Hours: Studio hours in studio days are the official hours in which the studio classes are held.

Working Hours: Working hours in studio days are the official working hours except the studio hours. Normally, studio hours are within the working hours. However, as studio hours are a special interval of time within the context of study, they are treated separately. Thus, within the studio days, the working hours are defined as; “All Working Hours – Studio Hours = Working Hours”.

Non-Working Hours: Non-working hours in studio days are the hours outside studio and working hours; “All Hours – (All Working Hours + Studio Hours) = Non-Working Hours”

Non-Studio Weekdays: These are the working days during the week, where no studio classes or juries and/or submissions are held.

Working Hours: The working hours include all official working hours of a working day. As there are no studio classes held in these days there is no need to distinguish between the studio and working days.

Non-Working Hours: These are all the hours outside the offocial working hours of the day.

Weekends: They are weekend days. The hours are not categorised because all hours during the weekends are non-working hours.”

Limited Hours of Studio vs Duration of Critique Situations:

Under this aspect, the analysis focuses on the limited time intervals of different critique situations; and if the Facebook group was used for its temporal flexibility to exchange critiques outside these time intervals. The questions of analysis specific to this aspect are “Was the Facebook group used by teachers and students to exchange critiques outside the given critique durations in desk, wall and jury critique situations, in order to have flexible critique sessions extended over time? For which critique situations was the temporal flexibility of the group used?” In order to address this question, each critique thread is analysed in terms of the comparative dates and times of the posts it includes. If the posts in the critique thread are made within the time interval of the critique situation they belong to, then temporal flexibility of the group is not made use of. If any of the posts in a critique thread is made outside the time interval of the critique situation, then the temporal flexibility if used wihin that thread. The recording unit under this topic is each critique thread. The variables are the specific time intervals of different critique situations within individual studio courses where Facebook groups were used. In other words, the desk critique, wall critique, jury critique sitautions in each studio course are identified, their time intervals are indicated, and the recording units are analysed in terms of these specific time intervals. The general critique situations are not included in the analysis, as they are by definition without temporal limitations.

Virtual Space to Address Physical (Spatial) Limitations: A mutual virtual space;

where students can represent their project processes, and their designer identities to teachers and other students, and where teachers can share ideas and material with a group of or all the students without the limitations of the physical studio space.

Here, the content analysis focuses on the virtual physical space created within the Facebook groups. The aim is to find out if these spaces functioned to address the two aspects of the physical limitations in the studio courses, as explained in the previous section.

Physical Features of and Facilities in Studio Classrooms:

This aspect investigates if students were able to create their own personal virtual spaces, which represented their project processes and designer identities, while using the Facebook groups. The question of analysis in relation to this aspect is; “Was the Facebook group used as a virtual space by students to present their project processes and represent their designer identities, functioning as the students’ personal studio areas?” The content of the Facebook group pages are analysed in order to find out if a virtual space for each individual student was formed, including information about the student and her/his project process from start to end. The project process from end to start includes all the submission material by any students, and any additional project work such as sketches etc. The designer identity of a student is described as any personal information about the student, such as interests, moods, etc (Cross, 2011). In terms of the project process, the recording units are the collection of project materials posted by each student, separately. The variable is each student. All project posts are classified on the basis of each student, and the project material under each student is classified to understand if the project process of any given student is recorded in the virtual space of the group. In addition, in terms of the designer identities of the students, the recording unit is the personal information available about each student in her/his profile. The variable is each student. The Facebook groups do not provide profile pages for members, so the information about each member is limited to the content in the members page. Such information include their profile names, profile pictures, and their background information; i.e.

affiliations.

Physical Space vs Virtual Space

In this topic, the focus is on the use of the virtual physical space of the groups to share visual and verbal content, which is difficult to share with all the people in the studio class at the same time. The question of analysis is “Was the Facebook group used as a virtual space by teachers and students to share their ideas, exemplary material, and other information addressing all students and teachers?” The group pages are analysed in terms of the collective interactions and communications by teachers and students to share ideas and material with all the studio people. The recording unit is each post in the group wall. The variable is the addressee of each post; the aim is to identify the posts that address all the students and teachers. The variable is applied to each post in the group to find out if the post is addressing all the people in the studio.

Online Record Keeping to Address Archival Limitations: A collective online archive; where regular records of students’ project processes, critique exchanges among teachers and students, and also the studio course processes are kept.

The third limitation focuses on the archival properties of the Facebook groups and if they function to keep records of the studio processes. Content analysis is aimed at finding out if there are records of three types kept in the groups, as discussed below.

Keeping Records of Students’ Project Processes:

The first aspect focuses on keeping record of the project processes of students; i.e.

their project works from start to end. The analysis aims to find out what project material was recorded by which students. The questions of analysis are “Was the Facebook group used as an online archive of students’ project processes? Which parts of the project processes were kept of which students?”. In order to analyse if regular records of students’ project processes are kept, the individual project process of each student is tracked down, from the early stages of research to the final submissions. The aim is to find out how much process of how many students is kept in the group page, by the regular use of the group. Here again, the recording units are the project posts by students. The variable is each student. The project posts are classified under each student to find out how much process is kept in the group page under each student.

Keeping Records of Critique Exchanges:

The focus of content analysis here is to find out if the critique exchanges were recorded in the group page. The analysis investigates what kind of critiques was recorded by which teachers and students in what critique situations or contexts. The questions of analysis are “Was the Facebook group used as an online archive of critique exchanges among teachers and students? Which type of critiques were recorded by teachers and students in which critique situations?” In order to track the records of critiques by teachers and students, the critiques are classified in terms of the person who posted them, and the critique situation, which they were posted within, such as desk, wall, jury and general critique situations. The recording units are all the critique posts, including verbal, image, video, etc. The variables are the person who posted the critique, and also, the critique situation in which the critiques were posted.

Keeping Records of Studio Course Processes:

The archives of the studio course processes in the group pages are the focus of the third aspect. The analysis is based on the record keeping properties of Facebook groups in terms of course material, such as briefs, visual and verbal announcements, and other course related non-critique content. The questions of analysis are “Was the Facebook group used as an online archive of studio course processes? Which type of course related non-critique material were kept in the group page, and by who?” The records of studio course processes are analysed by finding out which course materials were documented in the group pages, such as project briefs, assessment criteria, grading, and announcements about the studio processes by teachers and

The archives of the studio course processes in the group pages are the focus of the third aspect. The analysis is based on the record keeping properties of Facebook groups in terms of course material, such as briefs, visual and verbal announcements, and other course related non-critique content. The questions of analysis are “Was the Facebook group used as an online archive of studio course processes? Which type of course related non-critique material were kept in the group page, and by who?” The records of studio course processes are analysed by finding out which course materials were documented in the group pages, such as project briefs, assessment criteria, grading, and announcements about the studio processes by teachers and