Position piece means there will be a call to action!

This is an annotation about the entire piece: I find it strange that this entire article fails to mention the rise of online learning. Online learning from my personal experience requires even more direct attention than learning in a traditional classroom setting, thus making the need for nature restoration even more crucial.

What is their relevance to this topic? No title present means lack of credibility for the author.

It is not merely an "aesthetic" approach to campus design, is is enhancing educational value. This is important to remember when writing the summary.

Here is the call to action! We "need" and "there is a need."

I must have missed something because I read this article as a bunch of examples of how college campuses are designed to create a balance. I will have to reread to understand the aspect of unbalance.

This is so interesting. Going to school in the city, it is much harder achieve this because of constant stimulation. I struggle with this on a daily basis and often times be as drastic to leave the city on vacation in order to reset.

My theory is, the point in which people start to have trouble paying attention after a prolonged period of cognitive demands, reflects a bell curve in relevance to age. A young elementary aged child can only pay attention for so long before he/she becomes distracted. The length becomes longer and longer through adolescence and college age and most of adult life, and then once a person starts to become elderly, it declines.

Operational definition of nature

There is pretty much a subjective definition to everything. The definition of any single word can be defined subjectively based on a persons personal experience of that word.

This is shocking to me that the shift from classical learning to a more science based learning happened so early in history. I began to research classical learning in America and this article makes it seem as if the 19th century was still heavily practicing classical learning. Therefore, this paragraph is misleading.

This is the historical goal when planning and building campuses. Interesting to read while being a student at Georgia State University, a school placed in the middle of a busy city. The every day distractions brought about by being in the city may be hurting us more than most think. Also, the term "unlimited time" is particularly captivating. I cannot think of any person who devotes "unlimited time" to college and learning, which is quite sad!

The point of the article is to explain ways to "conceptualize future campus planning" remember this quote when writing summary

With the growing popularity of online learning, it is reasonable to conclude that the amount of time spent outside of the classroom will continue to increase. Thus increasing the importance of other campus space.

What makes a college campus effective? I would operationally define "effective" in this article as: a campus that facilitates learning and student social and academic engagement.

Did not know the definition of this word. Paradigmatic: adj. Something that is ideal or standard.

Rhetorical situation of this article: April of 2015, published in a scholarly journal. Audience is most likely people interested in academics, particularly in law or urban planning. The author is a Professor of Law at the University of Maine School of Law. The message is to expose the injustices brought about in the "built environment" by architectural exclusion.

Major road projects are typically voted upon by people in the community, are the people from lower-income areas not properly represented?

In my experience with public transport including cities in the US such as Chicago, and cities in Europe such as London, I personally find MARTA comparably hard to use and not easily accessible. Chicago's "L" is widely used among all people across very diverse socioeconomic groups. Practically everyone in London uses the "Tube" to get from point A to point B. Atlanta's public transport is subpar at best.

These examples vs other examples of exclusion are different in nature, and I don't fully agree that they are comparable. Jewish people being forced to live in a separate area is blatant racism. Whereas the vast majority of other examples of exclusion by architectural means in this article are not blatant acts of racism. I do not believe the other examples are justifiable, I just do not think they are comparable to this particular example.

An example of this is the context in which people from different socioeconomic groups use public transportation. Higher-income individuals typically use public transportation as means of getting to an entertainment event, such as a sporting event or concert. Whereas people from lower-income groups use public transportation as means of getting to and from work.

Another obstacle of finding means of transportation in affluent suburbs is the lack of taxi's. If the public transport doesn't take them to the exact location of where they need to be, the person would really have no other option than to walk. Whereas in a city, if you are not right were you need to be once departing public transport, there are taxi's readily available to take you that last leg.

GSU's campus is extremely not bike-friendly. I am not sure if everyone feels this way but in my experience, I find it hard to bike around campus. With parking being so expensive due to overcrowding, I would think bikes would be more encouraged as a means of transportation for students. I wonder how their lack of bike lanes relates to themes in this article?

What was Moses's claimed reason for designing the bridges this way? I looked up the year it was built, 1951. This is extremely important in terms of social context. WWII was over and suburban life was beginning to boom. Also, civil rights efforts were in full swing. The 50's was home to some of the most famous civil rights cases such as Brown v. Board of Education, where separate but equal was deemed inherently unequal. Moses used his "power as an architect" to establish Long Island as a suburb for middle class white people.

This is also the case in grocery stores. More expensive foods are at eye level, where the consumer is more likely to make their selection, resulting in the store making more money. This makes me curious if a particular food company can partner with a grocery store chain to pay and get their foods in particular locations in the store. Such as eye level of a shelf, or displayed up front by check out where everyone passes.

I am asking this NOT in response to the context to this exact case. Is it possible to remove race from a safety situation? Regardless of primary race in a neighborhood, if there is proven increased crime in that said area, is it racist or wrong to restrict a road leading to an area of reduced crime, in order to maintain reduced crime levels in that area? It is an enormous concept to understand, and I am not positive there is even a right answer to that question.

Within the past year, this exact thing happened in the town I am from, Johns Creek, GA. There was a proposed plan to have a Marta stop in our city to reduce traffic. It was shut down for this exact reason. Here is a link about the decision to not extend the Marta line into North Fulton.(http://raycomgroup.worldnow.com/story/30571840/johns-creek-says-no-to-marta)