Affiliation:
1. National School of Architecture and Urban Planning (ENAU), University of Carthage, Tunis, Tunisia
Abstract
This paper presents an architecture teaching approach intended to final year architecture students, which is based on a human-centered design perspective, while respecting environment in all its compounds. The present work claims, as a hypothesis, that to design inclusive projects, it is worthy to develop in future architects’ capacity to analyze and reconcile both environment requirements and users’ needs as well. The large array of environment key elements and the complexity of users’ global apprehension, make it crucial for the future architects and urban planners to control the appropriate set of analysis methodologies and put to contribution the most efficient design tools. The pedagogical approach we deal with in this article, educates students in empathy, listening, and developing an open-mindedness that according to this study, allows them design better inclusive spaces. I am adopting such a vision for several years now, and I am experimenting pedagogical strategies and tools accordingly, either within the final year Architectural Design Studio I share with other colleagues, or during the Seminar I offer to the same audience. In trying to subscribe to a perspective of action research and reflexivity, I chose to present in this paper the analysis of four architectural dissertations addressing inclusive design concerns. This analysis aims to fathom how experienced analysis tools, such as SWOT grid, urban transect and qualitative social survey, as well as design tools, such as sequential approach of space, functional analysis and value creation tools, may help final year architecture students better analyze and design inclusive projects.
Reference25 articles.
1. Abd Elrahman A. S, Asaad M (2020), Urban design & urban planning: A critical analysis to the theoretical relationship gap, Ain Shams Engineering Journal, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2020.04.020
2. AL-Girl TAN, National Institute of education, Nanyang Technological. (2007). Creativity, a hand book for teachers. Syngapore: World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.
3. Ana L. Alvarez, Daniela Müller-Eie. (September 2017). Quality of urban life and its relationship to spatial conditions. Sustainable city 2017 (pp. 285-296). WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment. https://doi.org/10.2495/SC170251
4. Ataman C., Tincer B. (2021), Urban Interventions and Participation Tools in Urban Design Processes: A Systematic Review and Thematic Analysis (1995 – 2021), Sustainable Cities and Society, Sustainable Cities and Society 76(1): 103462, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.103462
5. Cengiz Haksever, Ronald G. Cook, Radha Chaganti. (2004). A Model of Value Creation: Strategic View. Journal of Business Ethics, 291–305. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:busi.0000017968.21563.05