| Summary: | 碩士 === 朝陽科技大學 === 建築系建築及都市設計碩博士班 === 102 === The concept of ‘in-between space’ was propounded by Aldo Van Eyck in the early 1960s for harmonizing the dichotomized distinction between the external and internal spaces of buildings . The in-between spaces exist in all types of buildings, and this study delved into the impact of the elementary school buildings and campus in-between spaces on the primary school children’s activity behaviors. In this study, three research methods were employed: 1. the Fuzzy Theory was applied to interpret the primary school in-between spaces and their variables; 2. the Analytic Network Process (ANP) was used to determine respective weighting of each variable; 3. Finally, a statistic research method was devised to analyze the primary school children’s activity behaviors. The study was concluded with an empirical case of Neipu Primary School, Houli District, Taichung City, where: (1) a space membership function value ranging 0-0.2 was defined as an ‘external space’, in which the schoolchildren’s activity behaviors were of an extreme public or dynamic nature; (2) a space membership function value ranging 0.2-0.4 was defined as a ‘public-oriented in-between space’, in which the space exhibited a public or dynamic nature and the schoolchildren displayed comprehensive activity behaviors; (3) a space membership function value ranging 0.4-0.6 was defined as an ‘in-between space’, in which the space was attributed to the half-private and half-public nature and the activity behaviors were leaning toward multiplicity; (4) a space membership function value ranging 0.6-0.8 was defined as a ‘privacy-oriented in-between space’, in which the space was of a private nature and the schoolchildren’s activity behaviors were prone to be static or private; (5) a space membership function value ranging 0.8-1.0 was defined as an ‘internal space’, in which the school children’s activity behaviors were of an extreme private nature. The study conclusion would not only provide a useful reference to architects for their future planning and design on primary school buildings and campus, but also present collating information reflecting schoolchildren’s spatial needs and the frequencies of spaces used. It is hoped that a school spatial planning and design may be compliant with the end-user participation principle so as to achieve the educational objectives of a school planning and design.
|
|---|
