Archives

  • 2018-07
  • 2018-10
  • 2018-11
  • 2019-04
  • 2019-05
  • 2019-06
  • 2019-07
  • 2019-08
  • 2019-09
  • 2019-10
  • 2019-11
  • 2019-12
  • 2020-01
  • 2020-02
  • 2020-03
  • 2020-04
  • 2020-05
  • 2020-06
  • 2020-07
  • 2020-08
  • 2020-09
  • 2020-10
  • 2020-11
  • 2020-12
  • 2021-01
  • 2021-02
  • 2021-03
  • 2021-04
  • 2021-05
  • 2021-06
  • 2021-07
  • 2021-08
  • 2021-09
  • 2021-10
  • 2021-11
  • 2021-12
  • 2022-01
  • 2022-02
  • 2022-03
  • 2022-04
  • 2022-05
  • 2022-06
  • 2022-07
  • 2022-08
  • 2022-09
  • 2022-10
  • 2022-11
  • 2022-12
  • 2023-01
  • 2023-02
  • 2023-03
  • 2023-04
  • 2023-05
  • 2023-06
  • 2023-07
  • 2023-08
  • 2023-09
  • 2023-10
  • 2023-11
  • 2023-12
  • 2024-01
  • 2024-02
  • 2024-03
  • 2024-04
  • br Conclusion Second results were presented

    2018-11-12


    Conclusion Second, results were presented of a test with 14 students participating in a graduate architecture workshop. The workshop served as a venue to evaluate the capacity of 7 targeted tools to demonstrate whether the inherent features of the hybrid tools made them more likely to improve the knowledge and skills of designers. The tools were tested by students while they were designing a residential complex that had to be adapted to the actual and future climate of Québec City, a region located in the cold mid-latitudes. The findings from the analysis of 7 projects developed during the semester, combined to the results of a web-based questionnaire and two focus groups highlighted the utility of DSTs and confirmed the relevance of hybrid approaches. Designers actually appreciated the tools that they found to be:These findings also shed new light on the real needs of architects and urban designers during the design process. They prefer selecting DSTs by considering:This evidence seems irreconcilable with the idea that a single DST, even if focused specifically on the issue of climate change adaptation, could be able to meet their individual and multiple needs. Creating a roadmap for architects and urban designers is an idea worthy of further exploration. It could assist them in steering a course between various sources of information, references and existing DSTs to improve their knowledge and skills relative to climate change adaptation, while allowing them the freedom to choose and create.
    Acknowledgements This research was supported by Ouranos, the Fonds Vert Québec, Natural Resources Canada and the Hydro-Quebec Institute for the Environment, Development and Society (EDS Institute). The authors express their special gratitude to the students who participated in the architecture design studio.
    Introduction The home environment is conceptualized in numerous ways in the academic literature. Some authors conceive a home in terms of the rich interdependent psychological meaning it Apoptosis Compound Library holds for its occupants (Stafford, 2011; Moore, 2000; Sixsmith, 1986). Other scholars propose that a home expresses a symbolic social communication that defines interpersonal creative expression and style, as well as represents the social network and social class of its owner (Heathcote, 2012; Altman and Chemers, 1984). Heathcote (2012) notes that the interior decor or the arrangement of the furniture and artifacts in a home reflects the lifestyle and ambitions, as well as the personal life journey, of the owner. Rybczynski (1987) conceptualizes home as a symbolic place that offers notions of domesticity, comfort, and well-being through domestic intimacy and privacy. Heathcote (2012) identified spatial and architectural elements such as doors, windows, and bedrooms as features that are functional but also exert substantial influence on human domestic behaviors and interactions within the home environment. Regardless of the size, number of available rooms, architectural style, or real estate value, each home provides its dwellers or owners with meanings that serve both their personal and social needs. Sixsmith (1986) suggests that a home is composed of three main structures: (a) the personal home (an extension of oneself with central emotional expression), (b) the social home (a place to share, entertain, and build relationships), and (c) the physical home (the physical structure, space, and architectural style). The above mentioned authors provide insights into the micro-level symbolic meaning of home from a universal perspective. By contrast, other authors including Altman and Chemers (1984) highlight the importance of macro-level factors, such as climate, culture, socioeconomic factors, and religion in shaping individual perceptions of home. One macro-level factor that requires considerable attention is the influence of other cultural traditions on home perception, space utilization, home design, and domestic behaviors. The migration of large numbers of people to countries with cultural and religious traditions that markedly differ from those of their country of origin is now commonplace. Home building in foreign lands that can meet particular individual needs presents an array of opportunities and challenges.