Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Sınıfların çevresel faktörlerinin öğrencilerin fonksiyonel ve algısal değerlendirmeleri üzerindeki etkisi

Year 2025, Volume: 40 Issue: 2, 967 - 978
https://doi.org/10.17341/gazimmfd.1460280

Abstract

Bu çalışmada, dörtlü amfi sıra kullanılan sınıfların çevresel faktörlerinin öğrencilerin oturma yeri tercihleri ile fonksiyonel ve algısal değerlendirmeleri üzerindeki etkilerinin belirlenmesine odaklanılmıştır. Bu amaçla, Gazi Üniversitesi Teknoloji Fakültesi A-Blok binasında bulunan sınıflar araştırma ortamı olarak seçilmiş olup, bu sınıfları kullanan 201 öğrenciye sınıfların çevresel faktörlerine yönelik değerlendirme anketi uygulanmıştır. Anket sonuçlarına göre, kız öğrencilerin %68’inin, erkek öğrencilerin ise %49,2’sinin oturmak için pencereye yakın yerleri tercih ettiği, ayrıca kız öğrencilerin %61,3’ünün ve erkek öğrencilerin %67,5’inin ise oturmak için dörtlü amfi sıraların kenar kısımlarını tercih ettiği belirlenmiştir. Diğer taraftan, kız ve erkek öğrencilerin sınıfların geçiş ve dolaşım alanlarını, yazı tahtasının uzaklığını, sıranın çalışma yüzeyinin boyutunu, sıranın çalışma yüzeyinin yerden yüksekliğini, sıranın oturma yüzeyinin boyutunu, sıranın oturma yüzeyinin yerden yüksekliğini, sıranın oturma yerine geçiş kolaylığını ve sıranın oturma rahatlığını yeterli bulmadığı tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca, öğrencilerin sınıfların çevresel faktörlerine yönelik algısal değerlendirmelerinde güzel/çirkin, özgür/kısıtlı-sınırlı, iyi planlanmış/kötü planlanmış, ferah/kasvetli, huzur verici/huzursuz edici, seyrek/sıkışık ve sıcak/soğuk sıfat çiftleri için kısmen olumsuz bir yaklaşımda bulunduğu belirlenmiştir.

Thanks

Araştırma anketlerini gönüllü olarak dolduran değerli öğrencilere ve anketlerin 28.02.2023 tarihli E-77082166-302.08.01-596766 sayılı izni ile Gazi Üniversitesi Etik Komisyonuna çok teşekkür ederiz.

References

  • 1. Walden R., Schools for the Future: Design Proposals from Architectural Psychology. Germany, Hogrefe & Huber, 2009.
  • 2. Lackney J.A. Assessing School Facilities for Learning/Assessing the Impact of the Physical Environment on the Educational Process: Integrating Theoretical Issues with Practical Concerns. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED441330. Yayın tarihi Eylül 17, 1999. Erişim tarihi Temmuz 12, 2023.
  • 3. Banning J. H., The physical environment of the college classroom: an instructional aide, Campus Ecologist, 11 (4), 1993.
  • 4. Yıldırım K., Capanoglu A., Cagatay K., The effects of physical environmental factors on students’ perceptions in computer classrooms, Indoor and Built Environment, 20 (5), 501-510, 2011.
  • 5. Baker J., The role of the environment in marketing services: The consumer perspective. In: Czepiel J, Congram C and Shanahan J. (eds). The services challenge: Integrating for competitive advantage (America Marketing Association Proceedings Series). Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association, 79–84, 1986.
  • 6. Niemeyer D.C., Hard facts on smart classroom design: Ideas, guidelines, and layouts. Rowman & Littlefield, 2003.
  • 7. Hill M.C., Epps K.K., The impact of physical classroom environment on student satisfaction and student evaluation of teaching in the university environment, Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 14 (4), 65-79, 2010.
  • 8. Fadamiro J.A., Akinbogun T.L., Functional analysis of effective and affective space setting for industrial design programs in Nigerian higher institutions, Indoor Built Environment, 18 (6), 562–568, 2009.
  • 9. Gifford R., Environmental Numbness in the Classroom, Journal of Experimental Education, 44 (3), 4–7, 1976.
  • 10. Emmons M., Wilkinson F.C., Designing the Electronic Classroom: Applying Learning Theory and Ergonomic Design Principles: Library High Tech, 19 (1), 77–87, 2001.
  • 11. Waktola D.K., Visualizing the spatial dynamics of student success, Applied Geography, 60, 77-83, 2015.
  • 12. Coppola J., Thomas B.A., Beyond "Chalk and Talk": A Model for E-Classroom Design, T H E Journal, 27 (6), 30–36, 2000.
  • 13. Pichierri M., Guido G., When the row predicts the grade: Differences in marketing students' performance as a function of seating location, Learning and Individual Differences, 49, 437-441, 2016.
  • 14. Wotten E., Blackwell H., Wallis D., Barkow B., An investigation of the effects of windows and lighting in offices. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Department of National Health and Welfare, 1982.
  • 15. Vischer J.C., Workspace strategies: Environment as a tool for work. New York, NY: Chapman & Hall, 1996.
  • 16. Leder S, Newsham G.R, Veitch J.A., Mancini S., Charles K.E., Effects of office environment on employee satisfaction: A new analysis, Building Research and Information, 44 (1), 34–50, 2016.
  • 17. Yıldırım K., Akalin-Baskaya A., Celebi M., The effects of window proximity, partition height, and gender on perceptions of open-plan offices, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27 (2), 154–165, 2007.
  • 18. Yıldırım K., Ozkan A., Gunes E., Mestan, A., Effects of window proximity on perceptions of employees in the call center offices, Facilities, 38 (7/8), 577–594, 2020.
  • 19. Zomorodian Z.S., Tahsildoost M., Assessing the effectiveness of dynamic metrics in predicting daylight availability and visual comfort in classrooms, Renewable Energy, 134, 669–680, 2019.
  • 20. Çağatay K., Yıldırım K., Yıldırım İ., Başoğlu K., Impacts of light direction and window properties on students’ perceptual evaluations in design studios, Indoor and Built Environment. 31(4), 1079-1090, 2022.
  • 21. Çelebi Yazıcıoğlu N.M., Gün ışığının iç mimarlık ve mimarlık öğrencilerinin biliş ve başarı performansına etkisinin değerlendirilmesi, Doktora Tezi, Selçuk Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Konya, 2018.
  • 22. Loftin C., Davis L.A., Hartin V., Classroom participation: A student perspective, Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 5 (3), 119–124, 2010.
  • 23. Lim T.K., Perceptions of classroom environment, school types, gender and learning styles of secondary school students, Educational Psychology, 15 (2), 161-169, 1995.
  • 24. Crombie G., Pyke S. W., Silverthorn N., Jones A., Piccinin S., Students’ perceptions of their classroom participation and instructor as a function of gender and context, The Journal of Higher Education, 74 (1), 51-76, 2003.
  • 25. Howe C., Gender and classroom interaction, Great Britain, SCRE, 1997.
  • 26. Wigfield A., Battle A., Keller L.B., Eccles J.S., Sex differences in motivation, self-concept, career aspiration, and career choice: Implications for cognitive development. In A. V. McGillicuddy, R. De Lisi (Eds.), Biology, society, and behavior: The development of sex differences in cognition, 21, 93–124, 2002.
  • 27. Montello D.R., Classroom seating location and its effect on course achievement, participation, and attitudes, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 8 (2), 149–157, 1988.
  • 28. Safer A.M., Farmer L.S., Segalla A., Elhoubi A.F., Does the Distance from the Teacher Influence Student Evaluations?, Educational Research Quarterly, 28 (3), 27-34, 2005.
  • 29. Van den Berg Y.H., Cillessen A.H., Peer status and classroom seating arrangements: A social relations analysis, Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 130, 19-34, 2015.
  • 30. Kong Z., Jakubiec J.A., Instantaneous lighting quality within higher educational classrooms in Singapore, Frontiers of Architectural Research, 10 (4), 787-802, 2021.
  • 31. Nolé M.L., Higuera-Trujillo J.L., Llinares C., Effects of classroom design on the memory of university students: from a gender perspective, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18 (17), 9391, 2021.
  • 32. Imamoglu V., Spaciousness of interiors, its meaning, measurement and relationship to some architectural variables. Doktora Tezi. University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, 1975.
  • 33. Yıldırım K., The effect of differences in customer characteristics on the evaluation of a store image, Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 20 (4), 473-481, 2005.
  • 34. Yıldırım K., Capanoglu A., Cagatay K., Hidayetoglu M.L., Effect of wall colour on the perception of hairdressing salons, JAIC-Journal of the International Colour Association, 7, 51-63, 2012.
  • 35. Yıldırım K., Günçıktı M., Çelebi Yazıcıoğlu N.M., Farklı Sosyo-Ekonomik Düzeye (SED) Sahip Konut Kullanıcılarının İç Mekân Donatılarını Değiştirme Süreçlerinin İncelenmesi. Gazi University Journal of Science Part C: Design and Technology, 8(1), 40-50, 2020.
  • 36. Yıldırım K., Cagatay, K., Hidayetoğlu, M.L., The effect of age, gender and education level on customer evaluations of retail furniture store atmospheric attributes, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 43(8), 712-726, 2015.
  • 37. Akalin A., Yildirim K., Wilson C., Saylan A., Users' evaluations of house façades: preference, complexity and impressiveness, Open House International, 35 (1), 57-65, 2010.
  • 38. Erdogan E., Akalın A., Yıldırım K., Erdogan H.A., Aesthetic Differences between Freshmen and Pre-architects, G.U. Journal of Science, 23 (4), 501-509, 2010.
  • 39. Çağatay K, Hidayetoğlu M.L., Yıldırım K., Lise koridor duvarlarında kullanılan renklerin öğrencilerin algısal değerlendirmeleri üzerindeki etkileri, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 32(2), 466–479, 2017.
  • 40. Ergün B., Yıldırım K., Hidayetoğlu M.L., The effects of colors used in wall and equipment elements of open offices on perceptual evaluations of users, Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 38 (4), 2465-2476, 2023.
  • 41. Cronbach L.J., Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests, Psychometrika, 16 (3), 297–334, 1951.
  • 42. Selwyn, N. The modern classroom chair: Exploring the ‘coercive design’of contemporary schoolin, Power and Education, 16 (1), 63-77, 2024.
  • 43. Hille, T., Modern schools: a century of design for education, John Wiley & Sons, 2011.
  • 44. Kaya, N., Burgess, B., Territoriality: Seat Preference in Different Type of Classroom Arrangements. Environment and Behavior, 39 (6), 859-876, 2007.
  • 45. Altun, İ.K., Zorlu, T. (2022). İlkokul öğrencilerinin sınıf algısı ve memnuniyetleri üzerine bir çalışma: Trabzon Bedri Rahmi Eyüboğlu İlkokulu örneği, Sanat ve Tasarım Dergisi, 12 (1), 169-190, 2022.
  • 46. Yang, Z., Burcin B.G., Laura M., A study on student perceptions of higher education classrooms: Impact of classroom attributes on student satisfaction and performance, Building and environment, 70, 171-188, 2013.
Year 2025, Volume: 40 Issue: 2, 967 - 978
https://doi.org/10.17341/gazimmfd.1460280

Abstract

References

  • 1. Walden R., Schools for the Future: Design Proposals from Architectural Psychology. Germany, Hogrefe & Huber, 2009.
  • 2. Lackney J.A. Assessing School Facilities for Learning/Assessing the Impact of the Physical Environment on the Educational Process: Integrating Theoretical Issues with Practical Concerns. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED441330. Yayın tarihi Eylül 17, 1999. Erişim tarihi Temmuz 12, 2023.
  • 3. Banning J. H., The physical environment of the college classroom: an instructional aide, Campus Ecologist, 11 (4), 1993.
  • 4. Yıldırım K., Capanoglu A., Cagatay K., The effects of physical environmental factors on students’ perceptions in computer classrooms, Indoor and Built Environment, 20 (5), 501-510, 2011.
  • 5. Baker J., The role of the environment in marketing services: The consumer perspective. In: Czepiel J, Congram C and Shanahan J. (eds). The services challenge: Integrating for competitive advantage (America Marketing Association Proceedings Series). Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association, 79–84, 1986.
  • 6. Niemeyer D.C., Hard facts on smart classroom design: Ideas, guidelines, and layouts. Rowman & Littlefield, 2003.
  • 7. Hill M.C., Epps K.K., The impact of physical classroom environment on student satisfaction and student evaluation of teaching in the university environment, Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 14 (4), 65-79, 2010.
  • 8. Fadamiro J.A., Akinbogun T.L., Functional analysis of effective and affective space setting for industrial design programs in Nigerian higher institutions, Indoor Built Environment, 18 (6), 562–568, 2009.
  • 9. Gifford R., Environmental Numbness in the Classroom, Journal of Experimental Education, 44 (3), 4–7, 1976.
  • 10. Emmons M., Wilkinson F.C., Designing the Electronic Classroom: Applying Learning Theory and Ergonomic Design Principles: Library High Tech, 19 (1), 77–87, 2001.
  • 11. Waktola D.K., Visualizing the spatial dynamics of student success, Applied Geography, 60, 77-83, 2015.
  • 12. Coppola J., Thomas B.A., Beyond "Chalk and Talk": A Model for E-Classroom Design, T H E Journal, 27 (6), 30–36, 2000.
  • 13. Pichierri M., Guido G., When the row predicts the grade: Differences in marketing students' performance as a function of seating location, Learning and Individual Differences, 49, 437-441, 2016.
  • 14. Wotten E., Blackwell H., Wallis D., Barkow B., An investigation of the effects of windows and lighting in offices. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Department of National Health and Welfare, 1982.
  • 15. Vischer J.C., Workspace strategies: Environment as a tool for work. New York, NY: Chapman & Hall, 1996.
  • 16. Leder S, Newsham G.R, Veitch J.A., Mancini S., Charles K.E., Effects of office environment on employee satisfaction: A new analysis, Building Research and Information, 44 (1), 34–50, 2016.
  • 17. Yıldırım K., Akalin-Baskaya A., Celebi M., The effects of window proximity, partition height, and gender on perceptions of open-plan offices, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27 (2), 154–165, 2007.
  • 18. Yıldırım K., Ozkan A., Gunes E., Mestan, A., Effects of window proximity on perceptions of employees in the call center offices, Facilities, 38 (7/8), 577–594, 2020.
  • 19. Zomorodian Z.S., Tahsildoost M., Assessing the effectiveness of dynamic metrics in predicting daylight availability and visual comfort in classrooms, Renewable Energy, 134, 669–680, 2019.
  • 20. Çağatay K., Yıldırım K., Yıldırım İ., Başoğlu K., Impacts of light direction and window properties on students’ perceptual evaluations in design studios, Indoor and Built Environment. 31(4), 1079-1090, 2022.
  • 21. Çelebi Yazıcıoğlu N.M., Gün ışığının iç mimarlık ve mimarlık öğrencilerinin biliş ve başarı performansına etkisinin değerlendirilmesi, Doktora Tezi, Selçuk Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Konya, 2018.
  • 22. Loftin C., Davis L.A., Hartin V., Classroom participation: A student perspective, Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 5 (3), 119–124, 2010.
  • 23. Lim T.K., Perceptions of classroom environment, school types, gender and learning styles of secondary school students, Educational Psychology, 15 (2), 161-169, 1995.
  • 24. Crombie G., Pyke S. W., Silverthorn N., Jones A., Piccinin S., Students’ perceptions of their classroom participation and instructor as a function of gender and context, The Journal of Higher Education, 74 (1), 51-76, 2003.
  • 25. Howe C., Gender and classroom interaction, Great Britain, SCRE, 1997.
  • 26. Wigfield A., Battle A., Keller L.B., Eccles J.S., Sex differences in motivation, self-concept, career aspiration, and career choice: Implications for cognitive development. In A. V. McGillicuddy, R. De Lisi (Eds.), Biology, society, and behavior: The development of sex differences in cognition, 21, 93–124, 2002.
  • 27. Montello D.R., Classroom seating location and its effect on course achievement, participation, and attitudes, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 8 (2), 149–157, 1988.
  • 28. Safer A.M., Farmer L.S., Segalla A., Elhoubi A.F., Does the Distance from the Teacher Influence Student Evaluations?, Educational Research Quarterly, 28 (3), 27-34, 2005.
  • 29. Van den Berg Y.H., Cillessen A.H., Peer status and classroom seating arrangements: A social relations analysis, Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 130, 19-34, 2015.
  • 30. Kong Z., Jakubiec J.A., Instantaneous lighting quality within higher educational classrooms in Singapore, Frontiers of Architectural Research, 10 (4), 787-802, 2021.
  • 31. Nolé M.L., Higuera-Trujillo J.L., Llinares C., Effects of classroom design on the memory of university students: from a gender perspective, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18 (17), 9391, 2021.
  • 32. Imamoglu V., Spaciousness of interiors, its meaning, measurement and relationship to some architectural variables. Doktora Tezi. University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, 1975.
  • 33. Yıldırım K., The effect of differences in customer characteristics on the evaluation of a store image, Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 20 (4), 473-481, 2005.
  • 34. Yıldırım K., Capanoglu A., Cagatay K., Hidayetoglu M.L., Effect of wall colour on the perception of hairdressing salons, JAIC-Journal of the International Colour Association, 7, 51-63, 2012.
  • 35. Yıldırım K., Günçıktı M., Çelebi Yazıcıoğlu N.M., Farklı Sosyo-Ekonomik Düzeye (SED) Sahip Konut Kullanıcılarının İç Mekân Donatılarını Değiştirme Süreçlerinin İncelenmesi. Gazi University Journal of Science Part C: Design and Technology, 8(1), 40-50, 2020.
  • 36. Yıldırım K., Cagatay, K., Hidayetoğlu, M.L., The effect of age, gender and education level on customer evaluations of retail furniture store atmospheric attributes, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 43(8), 712-726, 2015.
  • 37. Akalin A., Yildirim K., Wilson C., Saylan A., Users' evaluations of house façades: preference, complexity and impressiveness, Open House International, 35 (1), 57-65, 2010.
  • 38. Erdogan E., Akalın A., Yıldırım K., Erdogan H.A., Aesthetic Differences between Freshmen and Pre-architects, G.U. Journal of Science, 23 (4), 501-509, 2010.
  • 39. Çağatay K, Hidayetoğlu M.L., Yıldırım K., Lise koridor duvarlarında kullanılan renklerin öğrencilerin algısal değerlendirmeleri üzerindeki etkileri, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 32(2), 466–479, 2017.
  • 40. Ergün B., Yıldırım K., Hidayetoğlu M.L., The effects of colors used in wall and equipment elements of open offices on perceptual evaluations of users, Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 38 (4), 2465-2476, 2023.
  • 41. Cronbach L.J., Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests, Psychometrika, 16 (3), 297–334, 1951.
  • 42. Selwyn, N. The modern classroom chair: Exploring the ‘coercive design’of contemporary schoolin, Power and Education, 16 (1), 63-77, 2024.
  • 43. Hille, T., Modern schools: a century of design for education, John Wiley & Sons, 2011.
  • 44. Kaya, N., Burgess, B., Territoriality: Seat Preference in Different Type of Classroom Arrangements. Environment and Behavior, 39 (6), 859-876, 2007.
  • 45. Altun, İ.K., Zorlu, T. (2022). İlkokul öğrencilerinin sınıf algısı ve memnuniyetleri üzerine bir çalışma: Trabzon Bedri Rahmi Eyüboğlu İlkokulu örneği, Sanat ve Tasarım Dergisi, 12 (1), 169-190, 2022.
  • 46. Yang, Z., Burcin B.G., Laura M., A study on student perceptions of higher education classrooms: Impact of classroom attributes on student satisfaction and performance, Building and environment, 70, 171-188, 2013.
There are 46 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Interior Architecture
Journal Section Makaleler
Authors

Kemal Yıldırım 0000-0001-5447-1201

Ayşen Özkan 0000-0003-2677-6133

Hatice Taşcı 0009-0001-5717-906X

Early Pub Date November 6, 2024
Publication Date
Submission Date March 28, 2024
Acceptance Date August 16, 2024
Published in Issue Year 2025 Volume: 40 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Yıldırım, K., Özkan, A., & Taşcı, H. (2024). Sınıfların çevresel faktörlerinin öğrencilerin fonksiyonel ve algısal değerlendirmeleri üzerindeki etkisi. Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 40(2), 967-978. https://doi.org/10.17341/gazimmfd.1460280
AMA Yıldırım K, Özkan A, Taşcı H. Sınıfların çevresel faktörlerinin öğrencilerin fonksiyonel ve algısal değerlendirmeleri üzerindeki etkisi. GUMMFD. November 2024;40(2):967-978. doi:10.17341/gazimmfd.1460280
Chicago Yıldırım, Kemal, Ayşen Özkan, and Hatice Taşcı. “Sınıfların çevresel faktörlerinin öğrencilerin Fonksiyonel Ve algısal değerlendirmeleri üzerindeki Etkisi”. Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi 40, no. 2 (November 2024): 967-78. https://doi.org/10.17341/gazimmfd.1460280.
EndNote Yıldırım K, Özkan A, Taşcı H (November 1, 2024) Sınıfların çevresel faktörlerinin öğrencilerin fonksiyonel ve algısal değerlendirmeleri üzerindeki etkisi. Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi 40 2 967–978.
IEEE K. Yıldırım, A. Özkan, and H. Taşcı, “Sınıfların çevresel faktörlerinin öğrencilerin fonksiyonel ve algısal değerlendirmeleri üzerindeki etkisi”, GUMMFD, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 967–978, 2024, doi: 10.17341/gazimmfd.1460280.
ISNAD Yıldırım, Kemal et al. “Sınıfların çevresel faktörlerinin öğrencilerin Fonksiyonel Ve algısal değerlendirmeleri üzerindeki Etkisi”. Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi 40/2 (November 2024), 967-978. https://doi.org/10.17341/gazimmfd.1460280.
JAMA Yıldırım K, Özkan A, Taşcı H. Sınıfların çevresel faktörlerinin öğrencilerin fonksiyonel ve algısal değerlendirmeleri üzerindeki etkisi. GUMMFD. 2024;40:967–978.
MLA Yıldırım, Kemal et al. “Sınıfların çevresel faktörlerinin öğrencilerin Fonksiyonel Ve algısal değerlendirmeleri üzerindeki Etkisi”. Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, vol. 40, no. 2, 2024, pp. 967-78, doi:10.17341/gazimmfd.1460280.
Vancouver Yıldırım K, Özkan A, Taşcı H. Sınıfların çevresel faktörlerinin öğrencilerin fonksiyonel ve algısal değerlendirmeleri üzerindeki etkisi. GUMMFD. 2024;40(2):967-78.