Again how does this idea apply to Atlanta specifically? What political goals could have shaped the urban environment of this city to:

1. become so dependent on transportation by car
2. distric the city into fairly defined neighborhoods (little five points, cabbage town, grantpark, old forth ward, etc.)

Is this merely the bi product of a political agenda, or the natural evolution of grouping based on exclusion?

What is lacking in this field of study that is holding it back from being recognized within legal literature and applied to legislation? Social sciences are a generally new concept in the grand scheme of discovery, and despite their important contributions on the subject of human interaction they are not viewed with the same validity as other sciences. Support and evidence backing the claims of social sciences can also be misconstrued as subjective even if accurate

Perfect example of how even the specific details of design all have purpose behind them. An increase in passive hostility towards the homeless has been a public trend lately, and is displayed in how we shift the built environment of an area to benefit one group over another. Removal or alteration of park benches for example affects the general public minimally, yet could be the difference of comfort vs concrete for the poor.

Continued evidence supporting the idea that broad government interactions obviously barring people from accessing certain locations are the easiest to create legislature over, yet the real modern issue stems from urban design which is incredibly hard to govern considering all the micro details that go into restricting communities.

In what way can exclusion based built environment be beneficial? The typical scenario of urban design being utilized for discrimination is seen as pimarily white upper middle class workers barring the poor and african americans from easy access to their communities. Exclusion generally only benefits the richer community with control over the scenario. I can only imagine exclusion being beneficial in a situation where rival communities are separated from one another through design due to a necessity for separation based on violence/safety rather than socio-economic differences.

Racial equality within the law expands as far as civil rights, suffrage, and other broad laws designed to protect against discrimination.These broad laws however, were created without built environment in mind, and fail to address how the positioning of roads, neighborhoods, and general urban design play in to the equal opportunity promised through civil rights. Even if design came largely into the limelight as a source of inequality, it would become an incredible obstacle to establish laws around considering the intense variability of scenarios that could favor one community over another.

At what point does urban design become racist?

This claim forced me to think about more than just the current built environment of Atlanta and how MARTA is terribly limited, but rather towards how Atlanta functioned prior to MARTA's expansion. How did a city with generally low socio-economic status civilians build itself to become so centric around automobile transportation? Was this a deeper product of built environment favoring the wealthier city planners and influential individuals?

Legislation to protect against broad and obvious racist restriction tactics can only go so far in their prevention methods. Built Environment is an incredibly complicated subject that takes countless variable into account, many seemingly harmless alone, but manipulative in conjunction with other physical limitations or obstructions. Specific communities can be blocked in or heavily inconvenienced from interacting or even existing within the space of a neighboring district based on racial difference alone.

Incredibly applicable to the current situation at hand between Atlanta and the North Metro areas of the greater city. North metro Atlanta boasts a significantly higher average income and consists of primarily upper middle class white workers. Marta is unable to efficently service this part of town as it would enable greater work opportunity for less fortunate inner city civilians at the expense of the comfort of racist white collar workers.

Before even beginning this article, the title itself at base value appears as a confusing concept that woulds require excessive support to prove. Schindler breaks down the basis of her argument and provides a prime example in conjunction to summarize the general direction of this article simply and efficently.

In contrast with the concept of "involuntary attention". Both types of attention utilize different sections of the brain and perform their tasks with incredible difference. Despite GSU students generally lacking a space to induce involuntary attention for rejuvination, I'd like to question and understand how our urban environment shapes the brains of our students differently than those with access to green spaces. How has prolonged direct attention created a difference in urban campus students compared to classic university students.

defined as, "suggests that mental fatigue and concentration can be improved by time spent in, or looking at nature."

Regardless of the parks avaliable to GSU students, none seem to specifically meet the standards set by Kaplan to maximize benefit: "-Extent (the scope to feel immersed in the environment)

-Being away (providing an escape from habitual activities)

-Soft fascination (aspects of the environment that capture attention effortlessly)

-Compatibility (individuals must want to be exposed to, and appreciate, the environment"

Immediatley avaliable green spaces within Atlanta hardly separate themselves from their own city envirlonment and meerly provide a small area recreational area rather than an escape. http://www.ecehh.org/research-projects/attention-restoration-theory-a-systematic-review/

In relation to GSU's severe lack of student avaliable green space, "The natural world has previously been depicted as a restorative environment that replenishes ones resources and urban environments such as cityscapes have been seen to potentially reduce attentional capacity."

https://positivepsychologyprogram.com/attention-restoration-theory-nature-lets-solve-problems/

This idea sums up the focus of this paper; the impact of natural spaces on the mind of students and how open green space revigorates mental fatigue. Many large closed campus schools (UGA, Georgia Tech, Berry, etc) feature the beauty and vigor of their campus' alongside their academic triumphs. The campus of a university must allow itself to create differentiated spaces based on necessities for relaxation versus work. Georgia State struggles with this concept by consistently immersing it's students within a bustling city life with fairly little down time.

What quality of open spaces replenishes cognitive function? How does this tie into Georgia States "cramped" campus?

REVISION & RESPONSE: open, specifically natural, spaces replenish cognitive function by relaxing the brain and thought processes of a student. These spaces are less visually intensive than the typical information overload of a student's standard day. Georgia State, despite a severe lack of open space, does offer Hurt and Woodruff parks as alternative green areas to relax within. This lack of open space is an important issue within the built environment of GSU, as we lack a scientifically backed attribute of student success that most closed campus universities can offer.

Arguably bold claim; regardless of backing source for information, how do students perform on average with an explosion of technological progress over the past 20 years compared to before smartphones were widely popularized?

Technology absolutely depletes student's "attentional resource", yet we see an increased trend in technological innovation within classroom spaces; is this setting students up for failure by providing distractions from their work?

Technology has arguably also greatly enhanced the students ability to learn, share resources, and more accurately/timely locate information beneficial to their success rather than simply create distraction.

Does GSU conform to this standard? Is it necessary/true? How does GSU make up for a lack of "open spaces" utilizing it's built environment to establish a holistic learning space?

Georiga State strays from Scholl/Gulwadi's ideals; establishing an interconnected learning environment through downtown Atlanta by creating a community of students who not only share like minded goals but also campus space together. Although the city lacks the natural relaxation nature can provide to alleviate stress, I believe students find solace in the student body culture of the university.

What role does technology play in the promotion or degradation of our learning and how does this tie in with how our attention is directed?

Revision + Response: As technology becomes increasingly intertwined with all aspects of life, including education, concern should be raised as to how being consistently connected to an online space not only distracts us, but prevents natural attention rejuvination from students specifically, furthering levels of fatigue. As the evolution of education ties itself closer to technology and reliance on online spaces, it seems like the system is setting itself up for failure in the long run by breaking the division between educational spaces and natural/recreational ones.

This is extremely important to the general thesis of the piece and summarizes all the information before this statement well. How is learning facilitated outside of classrooms on campus? What creates a "holistic" learning space? How does a campus teach outside of it's classrooms?

Revision + Response: A holistic learning space/experience details the entire daily process of a student's day, and their interactions in space between classrooms + nature. The process of learning expands beyond taking in information; internalizing ideas through natural experiences. Holistic learning experiences create a balance between work, extra curricular activities, and student social lives which allows them to continue education through an optimal, healthy process.

Thesis statement of the piece. What is an "attentional learning resource"? What is a "natural landscape" How do these concepts interact with one another.

Revision + Response: The natural landscape of a university refers to the "green space" of a campus and it's relationship with the buildings that surround it. The natural landscape being an attentional learning resource outlines how learning and attention are facilitated outside of a classroom; the greenspace of a campus rejuvinates the mind allowing for students to relax but also mentally prepares them to continue their learning experience with less fatigue. The natural landscape of a campus is integral to the continued learning experience of it's students as it subconciously decompiles stress/depression.

Describes what I am currently struggling with

How does this relate to the "perfect" built environment for learning? How does GSU defy these standards? How does GSU refute this claim

In this sense architecture is easily comparable to the cultural history that art and painting styles have created a story for us. Both change in traceable trends which reflect the culture and people creating them. Art history may focus on an even more abstract concept than vernacular architecture does by analyzing the highs and lows of an era based upon what their art depicted.

Buildings and structures have an incredible longevity about them, that in an academic perspective, allows researchers to avoid possible biases and second hand records left by authors or records of the path. Buildings are the most honest of story tellers.

Quality over quantity is more important when drawing from and citing sources.The best solution to a problem is often the simplest one in similar philosophical terms

This is applicable in a sense to science as a whole. No one different subject holds more significant weight over another in the end because they all must interact to expand their own personal fields. Intellect breeds and thrives from similar intellect

Building types indicate trends within society. Changing ideals are reflected within what we build; minimalism for example is a rising trend both artistically and architecturally currently.

Due to vernacular architectures lack of being a "library" science, it is largely based on an observer utilizing their deduction skills to piece together a much larger picture of how a building fit in and told it's own story. The only truth is the one you establish about it

Vernacular Architecture focuses on a much more abstract and larger question than the typical elements that seem to make it up. The studied buildings are meant to speak for themselves rather than be given relevance based upon other events, people, or things attributed to them.

What is the difference in physical and material presences? Physical existence is an obvious concept, but material existence may refer in this case to the value and relevance we assign to objects we surround ourselves with.

This section implies a generally repeating theme for the tools of survival, or artifacts, found throughout different cultures

What does this represent or look like? Material culture outlines the larger picture of the world in detail; the differences between Roman and Modern architecture for example, due to two entirely different value systems.