Understanding the Role of Spatial Configuration on Social Behavior in Educational Buildings

Mine Tunçok Sarıberberoğlu; Alper Ünlü

doi:10.15320/ICONARP.2024.310

Authors

Mine Tunçok Sarıberberoğlu Bolu Abant İzzet Baysal University https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6931-0539
Alper Ünlü Özyeğin University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2024.310

Keywords:

Architectural programming, Educational buildings, Spatial configuration, Spatial behavior, Space Syntax

Abstract

Educational buildings, which appear as a design problem when viewed through the historical process, appear as a whole of structures consisting of educational units of different functions and sizes, shaped through a main corridor space and attached to this main space. On the other hand, when educational buildings are considered through their plan schemes or spatial layouts, it is possible to say that they positively or negatively affect different but interrelated parameters such as students' potential to come together, their motivation in crowds, and their involvement with each other in social relations. In the space syntax theory, buildings are separated from each other in terms of programming; that behavior is shaped and determined by the configuration (strong programming) or possible new forms of behavioral patterns occurring against the layout (weak programming). This study uses a comparative methodology to investigate the effect of the spatial layout of educational buildings on how social interaction is generated and motivated in the relations of 'syntactic programs' in school settings. The study focuses on recess time behavior in relation to the spatial layout and uses behavior maps and space syntax methods to examine the effects of the spatial setups programming parameters in educational buildings. Results show that if an educational building has a flexible structure (weak programming) with its spatial organization, socialization is oriented naturally by the layout with enriched behavioral patterns. However, when the design starts to behave strongly programmed, social behavior becomes monotonous and prevented. As a result, this study shows the importance of understanding social logic in the architectural design of educational buildings in structuring social relationships. Revealing the relationships between these concepts is thought to guide the evaluation of the design criteria of educational buildings and the contents presented for new designs.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Author Biographies

Mine Tunçok Sarıberberoğlu, Bolu Abant İzzet Baysal University

Mine TUNÇOK SARIBERBEROĞLU received her B.Arch (2007) degree from Yeditepe University (YU) Faculty of Architecture, MSc. (2010) and PhD. (2018) degrees from İstanbul Technical University (ITU) Faculty of Architecture. Currently works as an assistant professor at Bolu Abant İzzet Baysal University. She investigates human-space interactions to understand the behavior and cognition relations with architectural programming. Major research interests include architectural design theory, cognitive psychology, environmental psychology, environment and behavior theories, and space syntax.

Alper Ünlü, Özyeğin University

ALPER ÜNLÜ obtained his B.Arch. from Istanbul Technical University, Faculty of Architecture in 1979 and M.Sc. in Architecture from ITU-MMLS Program in Architecture in 1980. He attended the “Ph.D. Program in Environment-Behavior Studies” at the University of Wisconsin Milwaukee between 1984 and 1985 as an “Aga Khan Award for Architecture” scholar and obtained his Ph.D. in Architecture from ITU Science and Technology Institute in 1987. He taught architectural design and theory courses at ITU as an assistant and associate professor between 1988 and 1990, as well as architectural design and post-occupancy evaluation between 1991 and 1993 at King Faisal University, KSA. He continued to teach architectural design at the undergraduate level, environment-behavior theories, architecture, and epistemology at the postgraduate level between 2002-2018 as a professor in Architecture at ITU. Currently works as a professor at Özyeğin University. His research focuses on architectural design theories, environment-behavior studies and theories, space syntax theory, and epistemology.

References

Aelbrecht, S.P. (2016). ‘Fourth places’: the contemporary public settings for informal social interaction among strangers. Journal of Urban Design, 21(1), 124-152.

Aliakbari, M., Faraji, E., & Pourshakibaee, P. (2011). Investigation of the proxemic behavior of Iranian professors and university students: Effects of gender and status. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(5), 1392-1402.

Backman, Y., Alerby, E., Bergmark, U., Gardelli, Å., Hertting, K., Kostenius, C. & Öhrling, K. (2012). Improving the school environment from a student perspective: Tensions and opportunities. Education Inquiry, 3(1), 19-35. https://doi.org/10.3402/edui.v3i1.22011

Barker, R. G. (1968). Ecological Psychology; Concepts and Methods for Studying Human Behavior, Stanford University Press.

Barker, R. G., & Wright, H. F. (1955). Midwest and its children: the psychological ecology of an American town. Row, Peterson.

Bechtel, R. B. (2000). Assumptions, methods, and research problems of ecological psychology. In Theoretical Perspectives in Environment-Behavior Research (pp. 61-66). Springer.

Bell, P. A., Greene, T. C., Fisher, J. D., & Baum, A. (2001). Environmental Psychology, 5thed.Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Group/Thomson Learning.

Benedikt, M. L. (1979). To take hold of space: isovists and isovist fields. Environment and Planning B: Planning and design, 6(1), 47-65 https://doi.org/10.1068/b060047

Brubaker, C.W. (1998). Planning and Designing Schools. New York: McGraw-Hill

Coelho, C., Cordeiro, A., Alcoforado, L., & Moniz, G. C. (2022). Survey on Student School Spaces: An Inclusive Design Tool for a Better School. Buildings, 12(4), 392.

Cotterell, J. (1996). Social networks and social influences in adolescence. Routledge Rowton. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6807(200011)37:6<558: AID-PITS9>3.0.CO;2-6

Do, D. T., Nguyen, V. X., & Nguyen, N. L. G. (2019). Impact Of the Physical Environment on User Behavioral Psychology In Urban District Park. Journal of Urban & Environmental Engineering, 13(2).

Eyüboğlu, H., & Zorlu, T. (2021). İç mekânda mekânsal davranış üzerine bir değerlendirme: Kütüphane örneği. Sanat ve Tasarım Dergisi, (27), 223-241.

Finnan, C. (1982). The ethnography of children's spontaneous play. In G. Spindler (Ed.), Doing the ethnography of schooling- pp. 355-381 Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Gao, Y. (2020). Landscape Design for Crime Prevention in Commercial Districts (Doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia).

Gibson, J.J. (1986). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315740218

Golshan, H. H., Motalebi, G., & Behzadfar, M. (2021). The Relationship between Spatial Configuration and Social Interaction in Tehran Residential Areas: Bridging the Space Syntax Theory and Behavior Settings Theory. Int. J. Archit. Eng. Urban Plan, 31(4).

Grajewski, T., Miller, J. & Xu, J. (1992). Building structure - social possibility or handicap. An analysis of a research organization and its building. Swedish Council for Building Research.

Gür, Ş. Ö. & Düzenli, H. İ. (2004). İlköğretim Okullarının Tasarımında Yer Seçimi Kararları ve Dersliklerin Yönlenmesi İle İlgili Öneriler- İlköğretim Okullarında “Boş Zaman” Kavramı. Dosya: Ana ve İlkokul Yapıları, Mimar.ist. 2004/1. S.46-53.

Haq, S., & Zimring, C. (2003). Just Down The Road A Piece: The Development of Topological Knowledge of Building Layouts. Environment and Behavior, 35(1), 132–160. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916502238868

Hall, E. T. (1966). The Hidden Dimension, Man’s Use of Space in Public and Private. The Bodley Head.

Harper, L. V., & Sanders, K. M. (1975). Preschool children's use of space: Sex differences in outdoor play. Developmental Psychology, 11(1), 119. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076135

Heo, Y., Choudhary, R., Bafna, S., Hendrich, A., & Chow, M. P. (2009). A modeling approach for estimating the impact of spatial configuration on nurses’ movement. In Proceedings of the 7th International Space Syntax Symposium (Vol. 1, No. 1, p. 41).

Hillier, B. (2007) Space is the machine: a configurational theory of architecture. Space Syntax. https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/3881

Hillier, B., & Grajewski, T. (1990). The application of space syntax to work environments inside buildings: second phase: towards a predictive model. Unit for Architectural Studies, The Bartlett School of Architecture and Planning, University College London.

Hillier, B., & Hanson, J. (1989). The Social Logic of Space. Cambridge University Press.

Itoh, S. (2001). Children and the physical environment in school settings. Danish Building and Urban Research (By og Byg), 1-32.

Kıncal, R. Y., & Genç, S. Z. (2002). İlköğretimde Teneffüsün Yeri ve Önemi. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, (9), 86-94.

Koch, D., & Steen, J. (2012). Analysis of Strongly Programmed Workplace Environments: Architectural configuration and time-space properties of hospital work. Proceedings: 8th International Space Syntax Symposium, 8146:1-8146:14. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-59975

Koch, D., & Steen, J. (2012). Decomposing programmes : Re-coding hospital work with spatially syntactic information. Proceedings: 8th International Space Syntax Symposium, 8145:1-8145:22. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-53143

Kohlberg, L. (1971). Stages of Moral Development. Moral Education, 1(51), 23-92.

Lang, J. (1987). Creating Architectural Theory: The Role of the Behavioral Sciences in Environmental Design, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company.

Lawson, B. (2007). Language of Space. Routledge.

Lever, J. (1976). Sex Differences in the Games Children Play, Social Problems, Volume 23, Issue 4, P. 478–487, https://doi.org/10.2307/799857

Lippman, P.C. (2010). Evidence-Based Design of Elementary and Secondary Schools, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Lu, Y., Peponis, J. & Zimring, C. (2009). Targeted Visibility Analysis in Buildings Correlating targeted visibility analysis with distribution of people and their interactions within an intensive care unit. In Proceedings of the 7th International Space Syntax Symposium.

Marquardt, N., & Greenberg, S. (2012). Informing the design of proxemic interactions. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 11(2), 14-23.

Öğülmüş, Y. D. D. S., & Özdemir, Y. D. D. S. (1995). Sınıf ve Okul Büyüklüğünün Öğrenciler Üzerindeki Etkisi. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 2(2), 261-273.

Pellegrini, A. (1992). Preference for outdoor play during early adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 15, 241-254. https://doi.org/10.1016/0140-1971(92)90028-4

Penn, A., Desyllas, J., & Vaughan, L. (1999). The Space of Innovation: Interaction and Communication in the Work Environment. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 26(2), 193–218. https://doi.org/10.1068/b4225

Peponis, J. & Wineman, J. (2002). "Spatial structure of environment and behavior", in Handbook of environmental psychology Eds R Bechtel, A Churchman (John Wiley and Sons, New York) pp 271-291

Perkins, B. (2002). Building Type Basics for Elementary and Secondary Schools. John Wiley & Sons.

Proshansky, H. M., Fabian, A. K. & Kaminoff, R. (1983). Place-identity: Physical world socialization of the self. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 3 (1983), pp. 57-83.

Proshansky, E. & Wolfe, M. (1974). The physical setting and open education. The School Review, 82(4), 557-574.

Polat, H., Ünişen, A. (2014). Okulun Mekânsal Anlamı: Pedo-Mimari. Erzincan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 7(2), 65-84.

Raje, R., & Ojha, S. (2022, December). Role Of Natural Environment As Stimulating Outdoor Play Space For Children–A Study Of Bhopal, India. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (Vol. 1122, No. 1, p. 012004). IOP Publishing.

Ramstetter, C. L., Murray, R., & Garner, A. S. (2010). The crucial role of recess in schools. Journal of School Health, 80(11), 517-526.

Rhea, D. J. (2016). Recess: The forgotten Classroom. Instructional Leader Journal, 29(1), 2-6.

Ridwana, R., Prayitno, B., & Hatmoko, A. U. (2018). The Relationship Between Spatial Configuration and Social Interaction in High-Rise Flats: A Case Study On The Jatinegara Barat in Jakarta. In SHS Web of Conferences (Vol. 41, p. 07003). EDP Sciences.

Saeki, Y. (1995). The Meaning of Learning. Iwanami Shoten.

Sailer, K. (2010). The Space-Organisation Relationship. On the Shape of the Relationship between Spatial Configuration and Collective Organisational Behaviours. Doctoral thesis.

Sailer, K. (2015). The dynamics and diversity of space use in the British Library. A| Z ITU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 12(3), 23-39.

Sailer, K., Pachilova, R., Kostopoulou, E., Pradinuk, R., MacKinnon, D., & Hoofwijk, T. (2013). How strongly programmed is a strong programme building? A comparative analysis of outpatient clinics in two hospitals. In 9th International Space Syntax Symposium. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-5227-3_9

Skinner, B. F. (1972). Beyond Freedom and Dignity. Alfred A Knopf.

Steadman, P. (1983). Architectural Morphology: An Introduction to The Geometry of Building Plans. Taylor & Francis.

Sommer, R. (1969). Personal Space the Behavioral Basis of Design. Prentice Hall.

Şalgamcıoğlu, M. E. (2013). İstanbul'da çoklu konut gelişiminin semantik ve sentaktik olarak irdelenmesi: 1930-1980 Dönemi, (Doktora Tezi), İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İstanbul.

Tarçın Turgay, Z., & Ünlü, A. (2017). Yere bağlılık ile mekân ilişkisinin bina ölçeğinde irdelenmesi: İstanbul Erkek Lisesi örneği. Uluslararası Hakemli Tasarım ve Mimarlık Dergisi, Aralık, (12), 40-74.

Ünlü, A. (1998). Çevresel Tasarımda İlk Kavramlar. İTÜ Mimarlık Fakültesi Baskı Atölyesi.

Wąs, J. (2010, June). Crowd dynamics modeling in the light of proxemic theories. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Soft Computing (pp. 683-688). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Woolner, P., Clark, J., Laing, K., Thomas, U., & Tiplady, L. (2012). Changing spaces: Preparing students and teachers for a new learning environment. Children, Youth and Environments, 22(1), 52-74.

Wu, X., Law, S., Heath, T., & Borsi, K. (2017). Spatial configuration shapes student social and informal learning activities in educational complexes. In Proceedings-11th International Space Syntax Symposium, SSS 2017 (pp. 33-1). SSS.