همسوسازی ضوابط طراحی فضاهای آموزشی با اصول روان‌شناسی محیط: تحلیل تطبیقی و راهکارهای سیاستی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دکتری معماری دانشکده‌ی معماری و شهرسازی دانشگاه شهید رجایی، لویزان، تهران، ایران. (نویسنده مسئول)

2 استاد معماری دانشکده‌ی معماری و شهرسازی دانشگاه شهید رجایی، لویزان، تهران، ایران.

3 استادیار معماری دانشکده‌ی معماری و شهرسازی دانشگاه شهید رجایی، لویزان، تهران، ایران.

چکیده
این پژوهش با هدف تحلیل تطبیقی ضوابط طراحی فضاهای آموزشی کشور با استانداردهای بین‌المللی از منظر روان‌شناسی محیط انجام شد تا میزان هم‌پوشانی شاخص‌های کالبدی با نیازهای ادراکی و تربیتی فراگیران تبیین گردد. روش تحقیق از نوع ترکیبی کیفی–کمی بوده و بر پایه تحلیل محتوای هدایت‌شده و کمی‌سازی هم‌پوشانی میان شش سند ملی شامل نشریه‌های ۶۹۷، ۲۳۲، ۳۴۳، ۸۴۷، سند تحول بنیادین و زیرنظام فضا و فناوری، با چهار استاندارد جهانی LEED، WELL، OECD LEEP و DfE BB103 استوار است. در این پژوهش، بیش از ۳۵۰ بند و گزاره مرتبط با طراحی فضاهای آموزشی در فرآیند کدگذاری کیفی–کمی مورد تحلیل قرار گرفت. میزان هم‌پوشانی شاخص‌ها بر اساس فراوانی کدهای مشترک میان خوشه‌های روان‌شناسی محیط و بندهای ضوابط، و تبدیل آن‌ها به درصد پوشش نسبی محاسبه شد. چارچوب کدگذاری شامل پنج خوشه تعامل اجتماعی، ایمنی و کنترل، طبیعت و بهزیستی، خوانایی، و بار شناختی است. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد میانگین هم‌پوشانی ضوابط ملی با معیارهای جهانی حدود ۴۰٪ است؛ به‌طوری که خوشه ایمنی با ۷۰٪ بالاترین و بار شناختی با ۲۵٪ پایین‌ترین میزان پوشش را دارد که دلالت بر غلبه رویکرد کالبدی–کنترلی بر رویکرد ادراکی–تعاملی دارد. بر این اساس، پیامدهای سیاستی در سه سطح بازنگری راهبردی ضوابط ملی، طراحی مبتنی بر کیفیت‌های ادراکی و حس تعلق، و مدیریت انعطاف‌پذیر فضاهای آموزشی پیشنهاد می‌شود. نوآوری پژوهش در ارائه تحلیل تطبیقی نظام‌مند ضوابط طراحی فضاهای آموزشی کشور با استانداردهای معتبر جهانی و تبدیل مفاهیم نظری روان‌شناسی محیط به شاخص‌های قابل‌تحلیل در سطح سیاست‌گذاری آموزشی است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله English

Aligning Educational Space Design Standards with Environmental Psychology Principles: A Comparative Analysis and Policy Recommendations

نویسندگان English

Hesan ملاجعفری 1
Esmaeil Zarghami 2
Jamal-e-Din MahdiNejad 2
Shahnaz Pournaseri 3
1 Ph.D in architecture, Faculty of Architecture and Urban designing, Iran Shahid Rajaei teacher training University, Tehran, Iran. (Corresponding Author)
2 Professor, Faculty of Architecture and Urban designing, Iran Shahid Rajaei teacher training University, Tehran, Iran.
3 Associate Professor, Faculty of Architecture and Urban designing, Iran Shahid Rajaei teacher training University, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده English

This study aims to perform a comparative analysis of national educational facility design guidelines against international standards from the perspective of environmental psychology to determine the extent of overlap between physical design indicators and the cognitive and educational needs of learners. This research employs a mixed-methods approach based on directed content analysis and the quantification of overlaps. The study analyzes six national documents (including Planning and Budget Organization Codes No. 697, 232, 343, 847, the Fundamental Transformation Document, and the Sub-system of Space and Technology) against four international standards (LEED, WELL, OECD LEEP, and DfE BB103). Over 350 design clauses and propositions were subjected to qualitative-quantitative coding. The degree of overlap was calculated based on the frequency of shared codes between environmental psychology clusters and design clauses, subsequently converted into relative coverage percentages. The coding framework encompasses five clusters: Social Interaction, Safety and Control, Nature and Well-being, Legibility, and Cognitive Load. The results indicate that the average overlap between national guidelines and global criteria is approximately 40%. The ‘Safety’ cluster exhibits the highest coverage (70%), while the ‘Cognitive Load’ cluster shows the lowest (25%), suggesting a dominance of the “physical-control” approach over the “perceptual-interactive” approach in national standards.Based on these findings, policy recommendations are proposed at three levels: strategic revision of national guidelines, design focused on perceptual qualities and sense of belonging, and the implementation of flexible educational space management. The innovation of this research lies in its systematic comparative analysis of national design standards against authoritative global benchmarks, translating theoretical environmental psychology concepts into measurable indicators for educational policymaking.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Educational Space Design
Environmental Psychology
Global School Standards
Physical-Perceptual Overlap in Education
Comparative Analysis of National Guidelines
1-      Akkurt, E., & Akbulut, M. T. (2025). Interaction of In-between spaces in University campuses with informal learning and spatial design: a scoping review. Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/13467581.2025.2570039
2-      Barker, R. G. (1968). Ecological Psychology: Concepts and Methods for Studying the Environment of Human Behavior. Stanford University Press. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=1628180
3-      Barrett, P., Zhang, Y., Davies, F., & Barrett, L. (2015). The impact of classroom design on pupils’ learning: Final results of a holistic, multi-level analysis. Building and Environment, 89, 118–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.02.013.
4-      Barrett, P., Zhang, Y., Davies, F., & Barrett, L. (2019). The holistic impact of classroom design on learning. Building and Environment, 156, 14–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916516648735
5-      Barrett, P., Treves, A., Shmis, T., Ambasz, D., Ustinova, M. (2021). The Impact of School Infrastructure on Learning: A Synthesis of the Evidence. International Development in Focus, World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1378-8
6-      Birren, F. (1982). Color and Human Response: Aspects of Light and Color Bearing on the Reactions of Living Things and the Welfare of Human Beings. Van Nostrand Reinhold. https://www.wiley.com/en-us/shop/graphic-design/color-and-human-response-aspects-of-light-and-color-bearing-on-the-reactions-of-living-things-and-the-welfare-of-human-beings-p-9780471288640
7-      Chunyan, Y., Kun, W., Song, S., Xiao, M. (2025). Associations between green open spaces and social interaction in neighbourhoods: a systematic literature review, Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 113, 128991. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2025.128991.
8-      CHegini,S . (2025). Analysis of Biophilic Architectural Components in the Spatial Structure of Iranian Historical Gardens(Case Study: Shazdeh Garden, Mahan, Kerman). Architectural Technologies Studies, 5(3), 83-102. https://doi.org/10.22034/ats.2025.2073935.1013
9-     Carlos, V., Reses, G., & Soares, S. C. (2024). Active learning spaces design and assessment: a qualitative systematic literature review. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(6), 2925–2942. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2022.2163263
10-   Denzin, N.K. (2009). The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Sociological Methods (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315134543
11-   DfE (Department for Education UK). (2014). Building Bulletin: Designing for a changing climate. UK Government.
12-   Fajardo, M.L.N., Higuera-Trujillo, J.L., Llinares, C. (2023). Lighting, colour and geometry: Which has the greatest influence on students' cognitive processes?, Frontiers of Architectural Research, 12(4), 575-586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2023.02.003.
13-   Flick, U. (2018). An introduction to qualitative research (6th ed.). SAGE Publications. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=3277164
14-   Gifford, R. (2014). Environmental psychology: Principles and practice (5th ed.). Optimal Books. https://www.academia.edu/4978966/Robert_Giffords_Environmental_Psychology
15-   Gibson, J. J. (1979). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Houghton Mifflin. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=2231459
16-   He, Q., McNamara, T.P. & Brown, T.I. (2019). Manipulating the visibility of barriers to improve spatial navigation efficiency and cognitive mapping, 11567. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-48098-0
17-   Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687
18-   IWBI (International WELL Building Institute). (2020). WELL Building Standard v2. New York. https://v2.wellcertified.com/
19-   Iraji, J., & Gheshmi, S. (2024). Investigating the effect of environmental psychology on the architectural design of children's educational centers with the aim of promoting creativity. Interdisciplinary Studies of Iranian Architecture, 3(6), 133–148. (Persian) https://doi.org/10.22133/isia.2025.487593.1117
20-   Jing Li, Anne Warchold, Prajal Pradhan. (2025). Revisiting social foundations and well-being indicators for sustainability: Insights from a systematic literature review, Ecological Indicators, 178, 113890, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2025.113890.
21-   Kalfaoglu, H.H., Okkali A.M. (2023), "The reflection of Newman's defensible space theory on Turkey's neighbourhoods: typomorphological analysis of safe-space within an analytical framework". Open House International, 48 (3). 542–575. https://doi.org/10.1108/OHI-03-2022-0064
22-   Kaplan, R., & Kaplan, S. (1989). The Experience of Nature: A Psychological Perspective. Cambridge University Press. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=1536526
23-   Keshtkaran,P . (2026). The Effect of Light Intensity in Educational Environments on Students’ Stress Levels. Architectural Technologies Studies, 5(4), 65-79. https://doi.org/10.22034/ats.2026.2085292.1025
24-   Kellert, S. R. (2008). Dimensions, elements, and attributes of biophilic design. In S. Kellert, J. Heerwagen, & M. Mador (Eds.), Biophilic Design: The Theory, Science, and Practice of Bringing Buildings to Life (pp. 3–19). Wiley. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284608721_Dimensions_elements_and_attributes_of_biophilic_design
25-   Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=4108868
26-   Lamoreaux, D., & Sulkowski, M. L. (2020). An alternative to fortified schools: Using crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) to balance student safety and psychological well‐being. Psychology in the Schools, 57(1), 152–165. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22301
27-   Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 33(1), 74-159. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310
28-   Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. SAGE Publications.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0147-1767(85)90062-8
29-   Llorens-Gámez, M., Higuera-Trujillo, J.L., Omarrementeria, C.S., Llinares, C. (2022). The impact of the design of learning spaces on attention and memory from a neuroarchitectural approach: A systematic review, Frontiers of Architectural Research, 11(3), 542-560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2021.12.002.
30-   Lynch, K. (1960). The Image of the City. MIT Press. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=2109637
31-   Management and Planning Organization of Iran. (2003). Publication No. 232: Design criteria for educational buildings (architectural planning for standardized primary and middle schools). https://shaghool.ir/downloadarea.php?id=1688 (Persian)
32-   Management and Planning Organization of Iran. (2016). Publication No. 697: Design criteria for educational buildings. https://www.qdres.ir/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/magazin-697.pdf (Persian)
33-   Ministry of Education. (2011). Fundamental transformation document of education in the Islamic Republic of Iran. Tehran: Supreme Council of Education. https://rc.majlis.ir/fa/law/show/805637 (Persian)
34-   Ministry of Education. (2016). Subsystem of providing space, equipment, and technology. Tehran: Organization for Renovation, Development, and Equipping of Schools in Iran. https://www.qdres.ir/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/1562144977-.pdf  (Persian)
35-   Mirzaee,V and Labibzadeh,R . (2026). The Relationship Between Biophilic Architecture and the Reduction of Depressive Symptoms Among Middle-Aged Residents: A Case Study of Javan and Rose Residential Complexes in Tehran, Iran. Architectural Technologies Studies, 5(4), 35-50. https://doi.org/10.22034/ats.2026.2089375.1028
36-   Mollajafari, H., & Zarghami, E. (2025). Assessing the Perception of Architectural Stimuli Based on Personality Types: An Eye-Tracking Study. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 45(5), 512-532. https://doi.org/10.1177/02762366251406596
37-   Mozaffar, F., Mehdizadeh Saraj, F., & Mirmoradi, S. S. (2009). Recognizing the role of nature in educational spaces. Journal of Technology of Education, 3(4), 271–280. https://doi.org/10.22061/tej.2009.1334 (Persian)
38-   Newman, O. (1972). Defensible Space: Crime Prevention through Urban Design. Macmillan. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=1226050
39-   Niroumand Shishavan, M., Haghparast, F., Ghaffari, A., & Adabi, N. (2025). Investigating the internal architectural components and prioritizing them based on their effect on user emotion in educational spaces. Educational Innovations, 24(1). https://doi.org/10.22034/jei.2024.420709.2771 (Persian)
40-   Oldenburg, R. (1999). The Great Good Place: Cafés, Coffee Shops, Bookstores, Bars, Hair Salons, and Other Third Places as Community Builders. Marlowe & Company. https://raggeduniversity.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/1_x_ThegreatgoodplaceRayOldenburg2nded.-NewYork-compressed.pdf
41-   OECD .(2017). The OECD Learning Environments Evaluation Programme (LEEP): Designing for the Future of Learning. OECD Publishing. https://one.oecd.org/document/EDU/EDPC/GNEELE(2017)4/en/pdf
42-   Organization for Educational Research and Planning. (2021). Book of educational spaces. Tehran. https://elmnet.ir/doc/30438084-1542 (Persian)
43-   Plan and Budget Organization of Iran. (2006). Publication No. 343: Guidelines for acoustic design of educational spaces. Tehran: Deputy for Technical and Infrastructure Development. https://shaghool.ir/downloadarea.php?id=1847 (Persian)
44-   Plan and Budget Organization of Iran. (2021). Publication No. 847: Guide to green schools. Tehran: Deputy for Technical and Infrastructure Development. www.nezamfanni.ir (Persian)
45-   Razavipour, M. S., Mozaffar, F., & Talebi, Z. (2022). Content analysis of architectural criteria and standards for educational spaces of children with special needs based on the degree of attention to qualitative architectural indicators. Journal of Disability Studies, 55(12), 1–8. (Persian) https://jdisabilstud.org/article-1-2524-fa.html
46-   Razmi, H., Moradi, S., & Goodarzi, R. (2024). Studying the effect of environmental psychology factors on educational spaces and students' learning process (Case study: Gorgan schools). Research Approaches in Social Sciences, 39, 57–77. (Persian) https://rassjournal.ir/user/articles/3002
47-   Relph, E. (1976). Place and Placelessness. Pion. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=2785532
48-   Shafiepour, P. (2025). Investigating environmental factors of educational-recreational spaces in improving children's creative reactions. Skill Sciences and Creativity, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.48301/jssc.2025.480169.1024 (Persian)
49-   Sharifian, S. A., Moradinasab, H., Ghalamberdzofoli, M., & Mulasalehi Vadiheh. (2021). Explaining the influential components on the formation of sociable spaces in educational environments using factor analysis method (Case study: university spaces). Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 23(7), 207–222. (Persian) https://doi.org/10.30495/jest.2021.53276.5090
50-   Sobia, M.Ar., Umer M.M., & Neelum A. (2026). A Comparative Study of Biophilic Design and Mental Health Through 3D Visualization. Social Science Review Archives, 4(1), 5695–5731. https://doi.org/10.70670/sra.v4i1.2444
51-   Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications. https://methods.sagepub.com/book/mono/preview/basics-of-qualitative-research.pdf#_
52-   Sun, R. & Aziz, Firzan. (2024). Design guidelines for formal learning spaces: A narrative review. Multidisciplinary Reviews. 7. 2024070. https://doi.org/10.31893/multirev.2024070
53-   Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive Load Theory. Springer. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-1-4419-8126-4
54-   Tabaeian, S. M. (2021). A study on the necessity of optimal design of open spaces and green environment of educational physical spaces in order to improve students' perception and enhance the quality of the educational environment (Case study: girls' high schools in Isfahan). Iranian Architecture and Urban Planning, 12(1), 127–139. (Persian)  https://doi.org/10.30475/isau.2020.214757.1339
55-   USGBC (U.S. Green Building Council). (2020). LEED v4.1 for Schools: Design and Construction. Washington D.C. https://www.usgbc.org/sites/default/files/2021-03/LEED%20v4.1%20BDC%20200110_clean.pdf
56-   Ulrich, R. S. (1984). View through a window may influence recovery from surgery. Science, 224(4647), 420–421. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5128153ce4b000d46396eea9/t/515c788ce4b069d3c4fcfb12/1365014668115/Ulrich%2C+1984_surgeryrecovery.pdf
57-   Wolfe, M. (1981). Behavioral Settings: A Conceptual Framework for Research and Design. In D. Stokols & I. Altman (Eds.), Handbook of Environmental Psychology. Wiley. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Morteza_Taheri3/post/Any_material_here_on_the_matter_of_environmental_psychology/attachment/59d64d8a79197b80779a7149/AS%3A488574006108160%401493496528539/download/Handbook+of+Environmental+Psychology.pdf
58-   Wilson, E. O. (1984). Biophilia. Harvard University Press. https://www.hup.harvard.edu/books/9780674074422
59-   Woolner, P. (2010). The design of learning spaces. Continuum International Publishing Group. https://www.scribd.com/document/380215927/Pamela-Woolner-Design-of-Learning-Spaces-Future-Schools-Continuum-2010
60-   Zhang, J., Liu, C., & Chen, J. (2026). A Systematic Review on Social and Physical Factors Influencing Students’ Performance in Informal Learning Spaces. Buildings, 16(4), 712. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings16040712

  • تاریخ دریافت 02 خرداد 1405
  • تاریخ بازنگری 16 مرداد 1405
  • تاریخ پذیرش 18 مرداد 1405
  • تاریخ اولین انتشار 21 مرداد 1405
  • تاریخ انتشار 01 شهریور 1405