Middle Eastern Journal of Disability Studies

fa تحلیل محتوای ضوابط و استانداردهای معماری فضاهای آموزشی کودکان دارای نیازهای ویژه براساس میزان توجه به شاخص‌های کیفی معماری Content Analysis of Architectural Criteria and Standards of Educational Spaces for Children With Special Needs Basing on the Degree of Attention to the Qualitative Indicators of Architecture معماری و شهرسازی Architecture مقاله پژوهشی اصیل Original Research Article <div style="text-align: justify;">زمینه و هدف: توجه به شاخص‌های کیفی معماری در تدوین ضوابط و استانداردهای مربوط به افراد دارای نیازهای ویژه به‌عنوان اولین مراجع طراحان برای دستیابی به فضای باکیفیت، ضروری است. پژوهش حاضر با هدف تحلیل محتوای ضوابط و استانداردهای معماری فضاهای آموزشی کودکان دارای نیازهای ویژه براساس میزان توجه به شاخص‌های کیفی معماری انجام شد. روش‌بررسی: روش مطالعه، توصیفی و به‌لحاظ هدف در زمرهٔ پژوهش‌های کاربردی بود که با روش تحلیل محتوا صورت گرفت. جامعهٔ آماری تحقیق، نشریهٔ ۷۳۴ سازمان برنامه و بودجه بود. حجم نمونه، کل متن فصل چهار (توصیه‌های طراحی فضاهای آموزشی) انتخاب شد. واحد تحلیل در متن، جمله و پاراگراف و واحد مشاهده، کلمات و اصطلاحات کلیدی مرتبط با هر مقوله بود. به‌منظور گردآوری داده‌ها از سیاههٔ وارسی محتوا استفاده شد که روایی آن به تأیید متخصصان رسید و پایایی آن به‌کمک فرمول اسکات و ضریب قابلیت اعتماد بیش از ۶۵درصد به‌دست آمد. در تجزیه‌وتحلیل داده‌ها، نرم‌افزار SPSS و آمار توصیفی و جداول به‌کار رفت. یافته‌ها: نتایج نشان داد، شاخص‌‌های کیفی معماری در دو مقولهٔ کلی شاخص‌های عینی شامل زیرمقولات کالبد، عملکرد و ساخت و شاخص‌های ذهنی شامل زیرمقولات کیفیت محیطی و کیفیت معنایی، توصیف‌شدنی است. از مجموع ۴۶۶ مطلب کدگذاری‌شده، بر معیارهای عینی با ۹۵٫۱درصد به‌مراتب بیشتر از معیارهای ذهنی با ۴٫۹درصد تأکید شد. توجه به معیار عملکرد به‌عنوان یکی از زیرمقوله‌های معیار عینی با ۵۱درصد بیش از سایر زیرمقولات بود و در حیطهٔ معیارهای ذهنی بر کیفیت محیطی ۱۰۰درصد بیش از کیفیت معنایی تأکید شد. زیرمقولات کیفیت محیطی، آرامش و مسائل روان‌شناسی هر دو با ۳۹٫۱درصد بیش از سایر زیرمقولات کیفیت محیطی مدنظر قرار گرفت. نتیجه‌گیری: در تدوین ضوابط و استانداردهای معماری برای کودکان دارای نیازهای ویژه، به معیارهای عینی توجه شده است و به معیارهای ذهنی به‌عنوان یکی از عوامل بسیار مهم‌ مؤثر بر کیفیت معماری، کم‌توجهی و غفلت روی داده است.</div>   <div> <div><div id="_com_2" uage="JavaScript"></div></div> </div> Background & Objectives: Standards are the first reference designers use to make high–quality spaces. Hence, it is necessary to pay attention to the quality indicators of architecture in formulating criteria and standards. Since people with special needs experience many barriers and discriminations in the building environment, architectural standards and design criteria related to these people must regard all aspects of qualitative architectural indicators to meet their special needs. This issue is more important in designing educational spaces because children spend much time in schools, and the physical environment must be appropriate for achieving educational goals. Therefore, to maintain and improve the quality of the educational spaces and achieve the goals of the educational system, critique and evaluation of standards and design criteria are necessary to eliminate existing defects. Therefore, the primary objective of this study is to investigate architectural quality indicators and the second one is to analyze the degree of attention to each indicator with regard to the educational spaces standards for children with special needs. Methods: The present research method is descriptive and, in terms of purpose, applied research conducted with content analysis method. At the first step, based on the library resources and nine architecture experts views, the quality indicators of architecture were identified and classified according to their characteristics and dimensions. Then, a researcher–made checklist was prepared and finalized after a comprehensive evaluation and supervision of experts in this field. They eliminated similar or duplicate cases and reached 34 sub–components and categorized them under 5 general concepts. The study’s statistical population was the 734 issue of the Planning and Budget Organization journal. The sample size of the whole text was Chapter 4 (educational space design recommendations). To analyze the qualitative data, coding was done in three stages: open coding, axial coding, and selective coding. William Scott’s formula was used to measure the reliability of the research tool. The reliability coefficient for all components was more than 65%. The formal validity of the research was also confirmed by nine professors of architecture. The coding was performed in SPSS software and the obtained data were analyzed using descriptive statistics (frequency calculation, percentage, valid percent, cumulative percentage). <a name="_Hlk107167333">Results:</a> Findings showed that the qualitative indicators of architecture could be described in two general categories of objective indicators with subcategories of physical properties, performance, and construction, and subjective indicators with subcategories of environmental quality and semantic quality. From 466 coded content, objective criteria with 95.1% were far more emphasized than subjective criteria with 4.9%. Attention to function criteria as one of the sub–categories of objective indicators was 51% more than other sub–categories, i.e., physical properties and construction in this field. Of 226 coded content assigned to performance as one of the objective criteria, safety was considered one of the sub–categories of performance criteria with 26.1%, which was much higher than other subcategories. Of 120 coded content assigned to construction as one of the objective criteria, attention to equipment and construction facilities as one of the subcategories of construction with 64.2% was much greater than other subcategories. Of 97 coded content assigned to the physical properties as one of the objective criteria, attention to dimensions and size (geometry and proportions) as one of the subcategories of the body criterion with 61.9% was much greater than the other subcategories. In subjective criteria, environmental quality was emphasized 100% more than semantic quality. The subcategories of environmental quality such as exceptional child psychology and peace were referred to with 39.1%, much more than safety, aesthetics, and happiness with 4.3%. Also, cultural and social values were ignored. The category of semantic quality and its subcategories such as the sense of place, individual identity, and spiritual aspect of place that puts architecture at the service of elevating the human soul and giving it originality and spirituality was neglected totally. Conclusion: In architectural regulations and standards codification for children with special needs, attention has been paid to objective criteria and quantitative and functional aspects of space design. However, subjective criteria such as environmental quality and semantic quality as one of the most important factors affecting the quality of architecture, received less attention. ضوابط و استانداردهای معماری, شاخص‌های کیفی معماری, فضاهای آموزشی, کودکان دارای نیازهای ویژه Architectural criteria and standards, Qualitative indicators of architecture, Educational spaces, Children with special needs 55 55 http://jdisabilstud.org/browse.php?a_code=A-10-2505-2&slc_lang=fa&sid=1 Maryam Sadat Razavipour مریم سادات رضوی پور razavipour_ms@yahoo.com 100319475328460049016 100319475328460049016 No Department of Architecture, Najafabad branch, Islamic Azad University گروه معماری، واحد نجف‌آباد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی Farhang Mozaffar فرهنگ مظفر f.mozaffar@aui.ac.ir 100319475328460049017 100319475328460049017 Yes Department of Architecture, Najafabad branch, Islamic Azad University; Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Iran University of Science and Technology گروه معماری، واحد نجف‌آباد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی؛ دانشکدهٔ معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه علم و صنعت Zeinab Talebi زینب طالبی z.talebi@par.iaun.ac.ir 100319475328460049018 100319475328460049018 No Department of Architecture, Najafabad branch, Islamic Azad University گروه معماری، واحد نجف‌آباد، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی