YES! This slide show is making the right moves. The image on slide 4 doesn't make sense without explanation though. And what do you mean by "do-good" feelings? And why does it matter? Don't we want people to want to "do good"? Do you mean patrons feel that by going to the aquarium they are doing good?

This needs to come EARLY; your introduction should focus on this. maybe this is your first slide show after the intro.

Slide 4: Where do you get your information? And what does this have to do with the built environment?

Slide 2: "spread apart" and "one general area" contradict. What are you trying to say here?

Where do you get your demographic info?

Slide 4 here takes the discussion OFF TOPIC. This is not an argument about beluga whales or conservation; it's an argument about how the built environment affects human behavior. Slide 5, too, is off topic.

The slide reading "Protect Us" doesn't make sense without some explanation. Is this one of the slides in the slide show? It can't be, right? Then where does it come from? Why do you have it here? Why does the claim "Beluga whales in human care..." matter? And most importantly, what does it have to do with the built environment?????

Is the Beluga Whale exhibit typical of displays throughout the Aquarium? Why are you focusing on this particular display? Could you use a digital drawing tool to "point" to the part of the image you're talking about? It's difficult to see or tell what is digital in the image.

If I'm Dr. Tennenbaum from NYU, I have no idea what this "title" means. Who is your audience? What is your purpose with this text?

This is incomplete, right? There's no mention of your thesis or writing to tie this history into your thesis. And there's no introduction to "built environments." I expected more slides...

You need twice as many

It's never a good idea, I think, to end with "it's a lost cause." if things aren't likely to change, then why are you writing this? Write this project as though you WANT change to happen. Who could make it happen? Write to that person/people. This imagination for a specific audience and a real/specific purpose might help you focus the project and get you full credit.

This conclusion is likely going to get stronger if you make the case for Memorial Drive being typical of many urban thoroughfares that could be beneficial if design to encourage more pedestrian traffic.

What are the sidewalks like along Memorial. You really need to go there; do a thick description of the space.

This is more like it. Memorial Drive needs to be in the claim you're developing. Move it to the first sentence of all your sections; this might help.

What kind of advertising happens along Memorial Drive? This project simply lacks focus. It makes the right moves, just not substantially in terms of meaning.

Nothing here seems to support the idea that the design of Memorial drive (the stretch you're observing) discourages pedestrian culture.

Instead: How do urban designers design for pedestrian traffic? How does Memorial drive enact these designs or not?

Hmmm. What does increased population, increased car use, dealerships, have to do with a "coersion" away from the pedestrian. This work seems to have veered off track.

Is the area pedestrian friendly?

Nice use of affordance: linking.

What do you mean? You mean more people are living in the area, but you don't see those people along the streets? Along memorial? Maybe these people aren't moving into the area you're focusing on...

Great claim, but what happens when you take out the "I feel"? Does the claim become more forceful? valuable? impactful? (in terms of objectivity, the perception of)

Okay, so as discussed you need a title that reflects the focus of your thesis and research. At this point I don't even know what street you're talking about. I mean... do you mean "the street" as in like "mean streets"? Like, he's so "street"? (Do people say that?)

Don't forget the metadata

Why should we believe Reed? What evidence is there that investment is happening/going to happen? And what evidence is there that the invenstment will be good for the people of the neighborhood? Just because Reed says so doesn't make it so.

Who is Terry Shropshire? and why should we listen to him? Is there any evidence to support that claim?

Like what merchants? What kind of parking? What kind of money? This is confusing because you begin mid 19th century with the Civil War and then all of a sudden you're talking about Turner Field.... That's like over a hundred years....

Maybe wait to compose the conclusion until after you've done more research. This point of view doesn't seem to take into consideration all of the controversies. Consider this question: Why should your reader care about the thesis? What's important about your thesis?

I suggest giving a "B" part to this title so we know what the project is... Something like this: "Protest Politics: An analysis of the built environment of the Georgia State Capitol building as protest facilitator/obstructor" Or something like that...

This very personal tone is compelling and can be a part of an academic effort, for sure. But in order for it to work, not only do you need to include the great details of your personal experience researching the space, you need to include outside sources. Who has studied the demographics of visitors to the mall?

This resource is a professional example of what you're trying to do with your site:

http://www.spacesyntax.net/symposia-archive/SSS1/SpSx%201st%20Symposium%2097%20-2003%20pdf/1st%20Symposium%20Vol%20I%20pdf/4%20-%20Complex%20buildings/17%20Rashid%20300.pdf

This contradicts the question at the end of your introduction. Why?

Where is all of this information coming from? Cit your sources!!!

Is this part of the mall? I'm not sure. This section might be better purposed as a thick description of the mall itself and a bit of the history of how it came to be.

This project isn't about the city, right? It's about the specific mall?

Unless this very general, wikipedia-like, gloss over ATL is relevant to your thesis, take it out. I suggest starting with the image and then "Peachtree Center was created..."

Although... is a mall really created? That word seems a bit off... What do you think?

So nothing yet in this introduction suggests that people don't go to Peachtree Center. In fact we don't know what Peachtree Center is. Is it a mall? If so, where? Is it having problems? Are malls in general in Atlanta having problems? Are malls nation-wide having problems? How does Atl and Peachtree Center in particular compare?

And what does this have to do with the DESIGN, the built environment, of the mall itself?

Fill in these questions with researched responses and you'll have a nicely substantial introduction!

This is a very personal and personable voice, which is good I think. It's engaging. But if you're going to speak from your own experience, it makes sense to tell us a little more about you. Are you typical? Do many people who move to Atlanta or visit Atlanta do so to go shopping? If so, we need those numbers.

What is the title of the photo? Is this the text you'll link to the original?

Also incomplete parenthetical citation. Do you see what's missing?

This in-text citation is missing something. If your source doesn't have an author's name, then in the parentheses, you need to include the title of the document (or a phrase from that title, if it's really long.)

Try having a "main page" for your project, identifiable via the title of your argument. Remember: your audience isn't me, so "built environment analysis" doesn't really work. Having a main page, under which you can subjugate other pages in your argument (by making submenus), enables you to organize your work in a way that guides your readers through your argument. As is, "history of the city" reads as though it's a separate text from "introduction." it isn't, right?

You mean the DESIGN of the museum?

How does this impact visitors of the NCfCHR? Who can get there? Who can't? why? HOw does this support your argument that this museum is really a museum for white people, not for all people?

Without citing your sources and quoting sources when the words/ideas aren't yours, this falls into pits of plagiarism.

Essentially your entire argument seems to be here, in this page somewhere. But without clear claims, evidence explanation, and considerations of other pov's, this isn't convincing yet.

Maybe answer the question: Does Atlanta's design meet its mission goals? Always? sometimes?

The connection here isn't clear. There is much missing in this ... intro? What about race? age? are other demographics important? What kind of places lie along this route? Why do pedestrians matter? What does that have to do with working class people?

By whom? why?

Is this history relevant to your thesis? How? It seems unrelated and not so useful. Do you find it interesting?

AWESOME sound embed!!! This really works to create an ambiance.

The problem is I have no idea why you're talking about layout and design. There's no thesis yet and layout and design of the museum doesn't seem to have anything to do with why people should go to the museum.

Okay.... Perhaps the conclusion of this work might call for people to go to the museum, but not here. This can't be an advertisement for the museum. Instead, the focus should be about the design of the museum.

Hmmmm... This sounds a bit cliche. What is the museum's mission? Seems like this is a good place for that info.

Who goes there? Whare are its visitors, mainly? (source?)

Only in Atlanta? Why is this museum here and not in D.C.?

It's over? Why the past tense here?

Title of post?

How about include links too?

The images list is very difficult to make sense of. Rethink the spacing of information here. The WC list itself is much more readable/manageable.

Try "Conclusions" instead... How does making this change shift meaning/thinking?

I think these synopses here in the table of contents work really nicely! Include them with all chapters. You can leave off the periods if they're sentence fragments.

Nice attribution and photo choice. Can you imagine a photo here that would shift the focus to built environments instead of the homeless? Or could you use linguistic text to shift the focus to built environments?

No period in a title. Also, can you make this a more academic title, one that places the focus on built environment? As is it sounds like this is a piece about the homeless. It's not, right? It's about built environments...?

How much of this is directly quoted from the source? It's difficult to tell. How can you make this clear by using the affordances of the medium?

And what does this have to do with the built environment? How does the law SHAPE the built environment, or vice versa?

"argument" spelling... I'd give this a more descriptive subtitle...

Okay. so this section will develop answers to some of these questions: 1) Who is Joel Hurt 2) Who designed this park? 3) What was the park's original intent? 4) Where is the park in relationship to GSU, other entities (Grady will be important here, I think, as will MARTA, as you've noted in the intro) 5) What laws? (history) 6)What values? (history) 7)relationship with surrounding neighborhoods? (Who else lives in this space?)

"community's"?

How about inserting some "Next" or "Previous" types of "buttons" here so we can navigate from the end of a section? If not in the footer, then on the bottom of the page?

Okay. So your thesis is doing this drawing together of built environment and ignorance of the homeless. Try moving that up before the last paragraph... Maybe that will help with focus?

This paragraph seems here to be veering off topic. The focus is built environments, not ignorance of the homeless. If you're arguing that the built environment encourages ignorance of the homeless, bring this in earlier maybe?

This paragraph sets us up for discussion, but then closes up. Your audience asks, "How does the furniture and placement encourage homeless populations to migrate there?" But the end of the paragraph answers with an oversimplified, "...because lots of other people travel through the space and the homeless can beg." This response stereotypes the homeless needlessly and probably wrongly. Not all homeless people beg, for instance, or use the space for begging. Take some time here. Stick with the more interesting, less "obvious" discussions: how does the built environment cultivate homeless presence in the park?

Really nice transition here. I think asking the question and then answering it sets us up nicely for the focus of your interest.

What does GSU have to do with Hurt Park? The first half of the first sentence is about GSU, but the second half is about "residents of Atlanta"... Try a different focus: What is Hurt Park? Where is it? Where is it in relationship to the University and why does that matter?

Which people? what kind of interaction? This would be a good place for a break.

Why?

Can you use links instead of URLs here? Would you want to?

Is this about the customers?

"ignoring" is a loaded term; objective?

This is drawing a conclusion, right? Maybe they are just dressed up as employees from E.H.

Why?

Note: this is an academic journal, and it's fairly recent. Who are the authors? What is their ethos? What makes them qualified to speak on this topic?

What are those needs? In what ways are they "diverse" and "evolving"? This sentence assumes "holistic learning spaces" are "good." Here's a source that outlines a debate about "holistic education"

Why the exclamation point?

Why these commas at the ends of these lines?

Really work on verb tense consistency.

Give attribution to these images. And consider the spatial mode of this post. Right now the spacing seems awkward and unintentional.

Do you mean BED too?

Where are you in the Aquarium here? It's a big, busy, diverse space.

This sentence exemplifies work needed on the sentence level. Work with me in office hours or with Writing Studio tutors.

Different from whose?

Really good question. Now... what is the purpose of this post? It seems short. Underdeveloped. Is there a thesis? A focus? I'd like to see this revised to be a full post! (And maybe some sound too? See me for help if needed!)

Do you mean this as a question?

This category needs an "s" at the end.

How can you make this more specific so that someone from outside of the class might find it interesting or useful?

Why show us this?

Fascinating comparison. This might make a great argument!

What are its flaws?

Why would you expect something new?

YAY! And nice title, too!

The images need explanation and attribution.

What time are you observing? What day? This is important information. Can you imagine why?

objective?

Is this objective description?

In Atlanta? Your writing needs to imagine an audience of researchers outside of this class, city, state...

A paraphrase is going to answer this question (succinctly and neutrally, without interpretation): What does the quoted passage mean?

The solid writing here is more of explanation and illustration.

Where exactly are you? What day/time? Did you stick to one part of Atlantic Station? Multiple? This needs an introduction.

Metadata needed! Especially since the focus on color and signs wouldn't be obvious to anyone outside of class.

This is a good example of a rich sentence that deserves to be worked on. See me in office hours and we'll craft it!

Why "uncategorized"? Why no tags? Are you thinking about metadata?

If I'm a researcher from Detroit interested in studying perceptions about malls in Atlanta, am I going to understand this title?

Does this post need a "conclusion"? If so, maybe a statement about the limitations of the observations is warranted, but something more conclusive would be more effective. Maybe end with some questions the details perhaps evoke.

This paragraph assumes a college degree puts someone in the middle or upper class. It doesn't. Especially graduate students... We generally live in poverty.

AWESOME that you got permission. Bravo!

This is based in fact or your understanding?

How do you know the clothes were "name brand/high end"?

What is the market? Describe it to a researcher who has never been to Atlanta?

This assumes an audience familiar with this assignment/project. How can you revise with a larger audience of potential researchers in mind?

What is "vernacular architecture"?

;aj b;aja;bv pawoe[apweokf[wpeomfwape

This is not what Felsten claims!!!! Check it out yourself just in the abstract of the article! (below) The study asked students essentially about what they were attracted to. To jump to the conclusion from this study that their "attention" was "restored" by the nature they "liked" perceiving is silly!

["In the present study, college students, instructed to imagine themselves cognitively fatigued, rated the perceived restorativeness of indoor campus settings that varied by view of nature: some had no views of nature, some had window views of nature with built structures present, and some had views of simulated nature depicted as large nature murals. Students rated settings with views of dramatic nature murals, especially those with water, more restorative than settings with window views of real, but mundane nature with built structures present. Students rated settings that lacked views of real or simulated nature least restorative. The findings suggest that large nature murals in indoor settings used for study breaks may provide attentionally fatigued students with opportunities for restoration when views of nature are unavailable or limited in restorative potential."]

(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272494408000996)

A whole paragraph of a thesis!

But what happens to them when they don't get to hand the homeless guy who stands at the intersection of Decatur and Peachtree a mocha because it's a cold cold day and you have an extra 3 bucks? Maybe that's a different kind of deficit...?

How does this resonate (or dissonate) with the discussion of attention in chapter 8 of FYG?

How romantic! This kind of naturalist determinism makes me deeply suspicious. I liken it to technological determinism. Just because we have technology doesn't mean our lives are better or easier (or the other).

It's important to define key terms. Without doing that here, anyone who has a problem with the discussion as it's been unfolding (like, maybe, me) would have trouble reading on. Now that I know how they define "nature" I can read to see if their argument holds in the context of how they define the terms.

Oh Good... Those redwoods in the quad... "nature"? Can the quad be said to be "natural space"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_deficit_disorder

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4665933

Some recent conversations surrounding this idea...

So being an "integrated community"-- a designed space that mingles students, faculty, homeless people, doctors, businessmen, city police, campus police, and others--isn't valuable as a "learning experience"? Hmmmm.... This seems strange to me.

I would hardly think that being smack dab in the center of the city itself, without the "green space" walls that define typical B&M universities, feels like a "lure."

Ah... exigency. This is the "gap in the research" these authors aim to address.

Can you find this?

So this Part provides specific examples....? Remember only to read parts I and II

This is what's called the writing's "exigency" or "reason for being"... Why write this? because...

Who, then, is this author's target audience?

This is one of her main claims then in Part I. She'll provide evidence of this.

Who is Lawrence Lessig?

This is the heart of her thesis?

Describe this author's ethos. Who is her audience (as indicated by this "about me" paragraph)?

An abstract is a kind of summary. What is its purpose? Of what genre are abstracts conventional? Why? What makes an abstract different from different kinds of summaries? What do you notice about this abstract?