Happy Place
Group members
1) Eva Otoničar
2) Eva Taradi
3) Emina Pandžić
4) Jure Klasinc
5) Marta Rojko
Distribution of roles
1) Chair: Eva O.
2) Secretary: Eva T.
3) Progress chaser: Emina
4) Timekeeper: Jure
5) Reserve person: Marta
Discussion of issues
Issue 1: PBL PROBLEM
All: We discuss about our problem with the subject teacher
memeber 2 (name): dicuss here
memeber 3 (name): dicuss here
memeber 4 (name): dicuss here
memeber 5 (name): dicuss here
Decision 1: Coordination, mobility and inequality
Issue 2: Redefining our PBL problem
Decision 2: We will study the differences between mobility in past and present time.
Mobility systems
In today’s modern time mobility is very complex and we spend less time to get
from one place to another. Now we too have a lot of different means of transport.
In comparison to past time when there was less spatial mobility, less means of
transport, travelling time between places was longer.
Questions:
1. How social science view mobility?
2. Does less spatial and temporal mobility mean higher social exclusion?
3. Did the quality of life change due to higher evolved mobility?
4. Meaning of time and distance in the past and in the present?
5. Ways of mobility in the past and in the present?
6. How does growth of mass mobilities impact the environment?
7. How many people travel nowadays and how many did travel in the year 1950?
8. When has Europe become so "mobilised"?
9. Daily mobility in Slovenia (of workers)?
10. Do we know any other type of mobility without any kind of phisical transport and what are its characteristics?
Literature:
http://uit.no/getfile.php?PageId=5468&FileId=7 (17 November, 2006)
http://www.hup.harvard.edu/pdf/LATPON_excerpt.pdf (17 November, 2006)
http://www.transport.uwe.ac.uk/research/projects/travel-time-use/Lyons-UTSG-2003.pdf ( 17 November, 2006)
http://www.transport.uwe.ac.uk/research/projects/travel-time-use/lyons-urry-travel%20time%20use-2004.pdf (17 November, 2006)
http://www.transport.uwe.ac.uk/research/projects/travel-time-use/jain-lyons-utsg-2005.pdf (17 November, 2006)
http://www.transport.uwe.ac.uk/research/projects/travel-time-use/lyons-ltt-2005.pdf (17 November, 2006)
http://www.trg.soton.ac.uk/vm/v-m.htm (5 December, 2006)
http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fss/sociology/cemore/horizons/horizons%20report%20final.doc (5 December, 2006)
http://www.zrc-sazu.si/giam/zbornik/Bole_44_1.pdf (5 December, 2006)
Task distribution:
Jure will research first two questions.
Eva O.: Questions 3 and 4.
Eva T.: Questions 5 and 6.
Marta: Questions 7 and 8.
Emina: Questions 9 and 10.
Minutes of the 1st group meeting
held on 9 November, 2006 at America coffee bar
Present: Eva O., Eva T., Emina P., Jure K., Marta R.
Agenda:
1. Review of the article
2. Refining the PBL problem
3. Any other business
Item 1:
We were all acquainted with contents of the article.
Item 2:
Emina suggested that we write about the temporal aspects of mobility.
Eva O. proposed that we focus on social-spatial exclusion/inclusion.
Eva T. and Marta agreed with Emina.
Jure recommended that we look on good and bad sides of the temporal aspects of mobility.
Decision:
We will focus on the temporal aspects of mobility, researching the problem of co-ordination, an interdependence of time and space - (in)significance of distance and time.
Assignments:
Until next meeting either of us should write two questions about the topic.
Item 3:
Decision:
We will consult with our subject teacher Mr. Hočevar.
The next meeting will be held on Wednesday, 15 November, 2006 at 4 PM at FDV.
Minutes taker: Eva Otoničar
Chair: Eva Otoničar
Minutes of the 2nd group meeting
Held on 15 November, 2006 at FDV faculty
Present: Eva O., Eva T., Emina P., Jure K., Marta R.
Agenda:
1. Redefining PBL problem
2. Presenting and division of ten questions
3. Any other business
Item 1.
We have redefined our PBL problem.
Item 2.
Everybody presented 3 resarch questions from which we selected 10 questions.
We devided 10 questions among the group members.
Decision 1: We all agreed with the selected questions.
Decision 2: We agreed with the devisioned questions.
Item 3.
Decision:
We will consult to our subject teacher Mr. Hočevar about our literature for solving our PBL problem.
The next meeting will be held on 16 November, 2006 at 12 o’clock at FDV.
Minutes taker: Jure K.
Chair: Eva O.
Minutes of the 3rd group meeting
Held on 21 November, 2006 at FDV faculty
Present: Eva O., Eva T., Emina P., Jure K., Marta R.
Agenda:
1. Action-item follow-up
2. Redefining the research questions
3. Any other business
Item 1
All: together with Mr. Hočevar we decided to change our basic literature.
Decision 1: We all decided to start our research from the article of John Urry:Mobility Systems.
The theme and problem is the same.
Item 2
Discussion:
Emina P.: We should change some of our questions.
All: We agree.
Decision: We decided to change 4 questions.
Item 3
Decision: Our next meeting will be held on Wednesday 22 of November 2006 at 3PM.
Minutes taker: Jure K.
Chair: Eva O.
Minutes of the 4th group meeting
Held on 22 November, 2006 at America coffee bar
Present: Emina, Jure, Eva 0., Marta, Eva T.
Agenda:
1. Distribution of tasks
2. Any other business
Item 1
Discussion:
We discussed about ten research questions. Marta suggested that she is going to research questions 7 and 8, Jure the first two questions, Eva O. questions 3 and 4, Eva T. questions 5 and 6 and Emina questions 9 and 10.
Decision:
We all agreed with Marta’s idea.
Assignments:
Every one should research two of their questions and write summary a page and a half long till the next meeting.
Item 2
The next meeting will be held on Wednesday, 29 November, 2006 at 4 o’clock at FDV.
Minutes taker: Eva Taradi
Chair: Eva Otoničar
Minutes of the 5th meeting
Held on 6 December, 2006 at Net coffee bar
Present: Emina, Jure, Eva O., Marta, Eva T.
Agenda:
1. Action-item follow-up
2. Any other business
Item 1
We all read what everyone had to write about given questions.
Discussion:
Eva O. and Eva T. pointed out that bought had written about environmental problems.
Jure said that Eva O. should change or shorten that part.
Emina and Marta agreed with that.
Decision:
Eva O. will short her part about environmental issues.
Item 2
Discussion:
Jure offered to do the Power Point presentation.
Marta suggested that she write the conclusion, Eva O. and Eva T. the introduction and minutes.
Decision:
Jure will do the Power Point presentation and present the introduction.
Eva O. and Eva T. will write the introduction and minutes of the meeting.
Marta will write the conclusion and Emina will present it.
Minutes taker: Eva O.
Chair: Eva O.
Comments (1)
Anonymous said
at 12:28 pm on Nov 18, 2006
Glad that you are making progress :-) Make sure that, aprat from the minutes, you also add a separate document with the problem title, its definiton, 10 questions, sources and ditribution of tasks. You don't include this information in the minutes.
You don't have permission to comment on this page.