Piaget and Vygotsky: Differences ίη Environmental Knowing and Implications for Design

Τι::χν. Χρον. Επωτ. Έκδ. ΤE~, Π, τεύχ. Ι 2 1996 Tcch. Chωη. ~ί. J. TCO, ΙΤ, Νο 1-2 7 Piaget and Vygotsky: Differences ίη Environmental Knowing and Implications for Design K.TSOUKALA Dr. Architect, Assistant Professor, ArisΙOιJe University of Thessaloniki. AbsIrIJct This paper has Iwo liims: {ίπ/, 10 out/ine the simjjarities and differences ίπ Ρί8ΙΒl and Vygolsky's theories llboul environmenlal cognilion contriburing ro 11 belfer comprehension ο! rhe semllnlic make-up ο! C()mmon conceprs' Second. 10 discuss Ihe imp/icsrions ο! rhese rh80ries for research inro environmenrij/ YIJ/Ues which consrirure componenrs ο! archirecrura! Bnd υγbιιπ design. The srudy οι rhe fl/jrure ο! srrucrure and elemenrs rbsr compose env;ronmenra! values ίι imporran/, mainly their mareri81 inscriprion in rhree dimensiona/ spιιce.. Which are these environmenta/ Vll/Ues and rhe facrors rhar condirion them? What is the impscr οι rhese va/ues on design? The answers Ιο these questions suggesr direcrions for further research ίπιο environmenta/ ya/ues, rheir link 10 PJ~1geti8n Rnd Vygotskian theories and architecruro/ / urban design. 1. INTRODUCTION The present paper has two aims. FirstIy, ιο uutline the similarities and differences between Piaget's and Vigotsk.y's theories about environmental cognition contributing Ιο a better comprehension of the semantic make-up of common concepts. Secondly, ιο discuss the implications of these theοrίes for re~earch into environmental values and their material inscription ίπ three- dimensiunai space. Ιπ the domain of environmental k.nowledge. research has been carried ουι ίπιο the ΓεlΒιίοη of Piaget's theory of chίld cognitive deveiopment Ιο buildscape qualitie!;. This line of research, οπ principles of design based οπ the one hand, has involved general the findings of Piaget's theory. Οτ οη its extension ίηιο the domajn of macroenvironmental knowing, and, οη the other hand, has ΟΟεη reiated to applίcations of general principles of design Ιο special function spaces designed for child care, education and ΡΙΒΥ, 's well.s appiications Ιο objects "!;ed by the child ίπ the educarional process and ίπ rhe course of free ΡΙ'Υ. Th.e influence οι Vygoιsky 's theory οη this Ιίηε οι research is οπlυ observed βι a Ιβιετ stage, confined, at least θι present. 10 Ihe domain of gene,ral principies of design. Given rhese facts, the fol1owing questions are posed: Which are these environmental values and the factors that condition them? Are they silllilar, complementary οτ opposite values? What ί5 their impact οπ design? ιπ Answers ιο these questions are traced ίπ the literature 1, published works either exclusively examining the τειθιίοπ of the two theories with planning, or ίη general discussing the ΓεΙΒιίοη between cognitive development and design, with reference Ιο the theories ίπ question. 2. SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES ΟΡ ΤΗΕ TWO THBORIBS Το begin with the simίlarities, borh theories belong Ιο the interacrionist approach. They borh argue for a subjecr-object τεlβιίοπ through a system of dependencies and interactions, of balances and equivalences between the parties involved ίη the relatίonship. Their difference lies ίη that Piaget belongs Ιο individualistic interactionism, while Vygotsky belongs ΙΟ social interactionism. Ιπ his book 'ΎΥgοtskΥ (1985) obserνed: aqd the social formation of mind" Wertsch HThe nolion of inleraclionism prec/udes Ihe possibijjty of reducing Vygo/sky~ approach /0 Piager's. Even if one 8xpands the nolion ΟΙ ΠΒΙυΓΒ/ devejopment 10 encompass Piagel's anajysis of sensorimolor inte/lίgence, the two approaches sιπι differ beαιuse of Vygo/sky~ BSSumption Submilttιd JUJ. 11, Ι996 AcctJpttκJ: ΜιιΥ 10, 1996

Τεχν. ΧΡΩ\'. Επωτ. 'ΕΥ.δ. Τι2Ε.IΙ, τιιτ,(. ] 2 ]1)46 Τc ι: h. CΙHoη. Sci. J. Τ Ι; Ο, 11, Nn 1-2 that a fundamentajly new set ο! explanatory principles is required when lhe chi1d enters into certain levels ο! social Jife ίπ a cujιure" (ρ. 47). The difference Iies ίπ the egocentric perception that Piaget (1923, 1935, 1937) defines os ΙΓοποίιίοπ.1 form of thought which constitutes the lίπk between autistic and ΓβιίΟΠΒΙ perceprion, from a genetic, functional and structural ροί πι of view. Ιπ other words, Piaget's fundamental theoretical assertion is that sensorimotor inteiiigence develops ιπ the cour.se of the child's interaction with physical realίty which arises from the child's individual physicai action ίπ the world of physicai objects. The chiid's cognitive developrnent before he becomes 8 years of age has, ίη this sense. θπ individual, ποι a social character. ΥΥισΙΟΧΥ (1978\ οπ the other hond, Ire.ts soci_1 interaction as a forrnative factor ίη the deveioprηent of 8 nurnber of psychological functions. He argues that child cognition does ποι proceed from the individuai Ιο the social, but that ίι follows the reverse procedure. from social Ιο individual. According 10 his theory, the individua! does ποι merely find ίπ society the externa! conditions Ιο which he has Ιο adapt his activity to, but he 8150 finds the motives and the incentives, the means and the rnanner of action. Ιπ other words. society ίη itself determines and produces the activity of the individual to a great extent. None of the following precede society: consciousness, cognitive processes, personalίty. They are a11 crelιted through processes of materίal productiol1, throngh sociahsation and civilisation, tjhrough language acquisitίon, the acquisition of habits, through Iearning the skilful use of [OOI~. ΑΙΙ of rhese concepts constitute and 8t the same time circumscribe sociai interactionism (Sehneuwly & Bronckart: 1985~ Ιι is worth noting that the!\econd difference between the two theories lίes ιη the fact that the egocentric language is considered by Piaget a transitional form of cognition, observed ιη ti,e secund stage of chίld deveioprnent, whereas ίι is treated by V)gotsky us a transitional form of cognition passing from the externai ιο the inner langu_ge, equ.iiy observed ίπ adnlts (Piaget: 1923; Vygotsky: 1986). Although ίι concerns laπguage, this difference rnust be stressed because, as Piaget argues, the egocentric stage also holds for the process of space perception, while Moore's research Οη cognitive representations of rnacro-environrnent has shown that, egocentric space ί5 81so observed ίπ adults under certain circumstances. This ροί"! wίll be futher eiaborated ίο the next secrion. The third difference belween the two theories observed relates to the meaning attached Ιο Pi'get's (1969, 1974) focus οπ the concept of activity. the young child's interaction wirh Iphysical reality led him Ιο examine the repre"entational systems required 10 manipulate objects. As a resuit he viewed internalίsation ρτίαιθγίlυ ίη terms of schemata that refiect the regularities of βπ physic_1.ction ΟΓ individual's proctical octivity. Vygotsky (Vygotsky: 1986; Stetsenko: 1993; Dovydov: 1993), οπ the other h.nd, considered 8Ctiviry ιο be related 10 the social environinent and argued that the process of internalization presupρoses 8 goai-directed Ο Τ tool-mediated activity which incorρorates the ~emant ic make-up of the concept of octivity. Such θπ activity takes place when a need arίse..ι;. The Iatter )s activuted only through the ex.istence of θη ubject. ]η other words. the object-need relation which will ίη this paper be ca lied a rnοtίνe. focilίtates the c:ιppcara"ce οι the ~ctivity, ίη particular of socίσ-ροιitίcal activity. Let ΙΙ!oιi " ο Ι forget that for Vygotsky the object is historicoculturaliy and socially defined. Activity is a, systematic formation with its own cu!turo! history and inner ueveiomentai dynarnics. The rnain 'levels of activity are activity itself, actioll anu operation, os reiated 10 rnotives, goals and conditions respectively. Tl1is cornparison of the two theories can be sumined ιφ ίπ the fol!owing differences: 1. For Piaget social factors have πο constructive role ίη early rnenta! developrnent. Sensorimotor inteiligence has its origin οπlυ ίπ the child's individual action οη physical reality. For Vygotsky, οη the other hand, the bosis for lnan's eognitive development is forrned by the qualίtative change ίη their sociai positions., (he change of their sociocuitural activities ΟΓ of their ιool-rnediated actions. 2. For Piaget egocentric perception constitutes a stage of the process of cognition, while for Vygotsky ίι developmentai stage ίη ίηπεγ situ8tion. is a the transition from external Ιο 3. For Piaget activity is related Ιο rhe physicai environrnent and the individual's physical action, while for Vygotsky ίι is related ιο the social environment as a systemic formation with ίι5 own culturai history and inner developmental dynamics.

Τε.χν. Χρον. Ε:ηοτ. 'Exh. Τf:Ξ.E, 11, τειίχ. 1-2 1996 T~Cll. C:hnJn. Sci. J. Τ(;(ί, 11, Νο 1-2 9 3. ΡΙΑΟΕΤ AND IMPLICA TIONS FOR DESIGN According ιο Piaget (1947), the stages ίη the space perceprion of the child are the following: Stages Ι and ΙΙ ίη which the child has ηο coherent ΟΓ hoiistic view of its enνίrοnmenι The abiiity ιο waik, that is autonomy of movement and abiliry Ιο expjore, as well as experience help the child ρerreive space Β! a primitive stage cailed sensori-motor. Α! this stage the chiid only perceives cert.ain characteristics of space that corresρond 10 the primary 1OpologicaI relations of objects such as proximity and coηιίπυίιυ. Ιη the ηεχι stage of pre-oρerational cognition (stage Π), the appearance of symbolίc function allows. spatiai representation. This representational space is static and irreversible. The system of reference is egocentric. The representational Euclidean space is formed ίπ nex t stage (stage ΙΙΙ) the and is characterised by a more sophisticated concepιuaj handjίng of spatial objects and Iheir features., such as quantity preservation, categorjsation, metήc relations, etc. lndependent reference systems are co-ordinated. forming a unified system ίπ which the child ηο Jonger holds a central ρosition, but only holds one that is reievant ιο other ob jects. Ιι is worth noting as Piaget himself has observed, that the recognition and knowledge of objects and of spatiai characteristics is a consequence of the chίld's activity ίη space and of his exploration of the environment. Α considerable section of the research literaιure οπ the re]ation that exists between cognitive development and physica! environment has fed οη these two concepts. As ννίl1 be showh below, these ιννο concepts have led ιο the formulation of principles of space organiz.ation and structure. Piaget's views οη space perception devetopment and evolution, as set ουι ίπ his renowned "'Representations οροιίοιβ' chez Ι' enfant'" (Ι947~ have influenced research οη the process of perception and macro-environmental knowing. Particularly significant ίη this lίπe of research has ΟΟεη the contribution of ΗΟΓΙ and Moore (1976), According Ιο them, ίη order 10 develop ίι coherent environmental represent.ation, the chiid goes through a succession of stages, each of which coπstitutes a partial environmental representation corresponding 10 the reference system used by the chίld for orient.ation. These differeπt reference systems as well as their coaesρoπding cognitive representation appear ίη the foliowing order: The egocenric syslem ο! reference. The child orient.ates himseif according ιο the axes of his body an'd he has a sense of ρosition ίη space only through his movements. Αη equivalent cognitive representation can be considered βπ imperfect and irregular radial pattern centered οη the chiid. Τhe next stage 1S that of the fixed syslem οι reference.. The child orientates himself οη the basis of certain particular reference ρoints other than himself, unjike ίη the previous st.age. He can now relate objects but he cannot discover all of their interrelations. Focused οη every ροίηι of reference, the child sets υρ subdivisions of the eπνίrοnmeηι, the totaiity of which he stίll cannot cope with. Τhese are pafh represent8lions, formed through the child's personal experience with some elements of the enνίrοπmenι. The (ίηβι stage ίη the devejopment of cognitive representations of the macro-environment relates ιο the oompletion of a co-ordinated sysfem οι reference. Ιι is Φe stage of representatjons that Jink and correlate the specific environmentai subdivision. Moore's exρeriments (1976) were ποι restricted 10 chίldren ίη the fjrst three stages of cognitive deveiopmenl Similar exρeriments were carried ουι οπ chίldren of 15-19 years of ag~ as well as οη adults. Τhe comparative study of their results led Ιο some very originai conclusions. Path representations and survey representalions are ποι only stages of space representation in children but aiso ίη adujts. Jη the case of adults path representations constitute the initial phase of their coming-to-know unfamilίar environment. lπ βω other words, both chίldren and adults organize their knowledge and images of the environment ίη line with major cognitive devejopmental shifts from in(ancy through adolescence. There is a temporal parallel between the understanding of the order of spatial environment and that of the roles and activities played ου! ίnsίde ί1. There is a conceptuaj parajlei between on1ogeneric developmental progressiqns through childhood. adujt short-term microgenetic developmental progressions ίη coming ιο know a new environment, development.al differences between individuals of roughiy the same age and general intelligence, and deveiopmentai variations ία the same individual wiιh regard ιο his Or her knowledge of different environments. According 10 Moore there exist

IQ Τ ι:: χν. X\!(1V, επιστ. -Ι::κδ. Τ Ε Ε. ΙΙ τε ύχ. 1-2 199f) Ί' Ι: C]l. Ι :Ιπο η. Sci. J. TCG. II, Νσ 1-2 three essentia! leνeιs of development ίπ each progression undifferenlj8ied egocen/ric, differentillted and partillj1y co-ordinated ίηιο subgroups around fixed reference points, and ορεγβlίοπιιπυ co-ordinaled and hierarchictιiiy ίπ/εκγ8ιed. This observation, that macro-environinenal knowing is simj)ariy organized ίη both children and adulιs is ο! great signiricance. Ιι is θπ observation that has been verified by numerous other researchers, such as Shemyakin, AppJeyard, Follini, etc. These observations set υρ a further ΒΧί! of cognitive deveiopment, besides the vertical one, the horizontal axis, equivaient 10 that of Vygotsky, as far as the transition from external 10 internal language is concerned. The difference is that Vygotsky'lI horizontai ΒΧί! concerns the invariabie cognitive forms of the stages of this transition from the external ιο the internalίzed situation, whereas Moore's horizontal axis relates Ιο evolutionary stages ο! the process of pe rception of the environment. It should be noted that these forms are invariables as far a.!i the manner of the transition is concerned, but ΒΙ the same time they Qre also dynainic ίη terms of their qualitative features, whicll depend ση various factors, such Β5 sociaiized Jίnguistic activity. Α diherent interpretation of Moore's conc lusions could al50 be attempted. The ( Ο ΙΙΓ stages which Moore refers 10 could be considered as quanfjtative variations 4.1Π the cognitive output (ίη terms of the coherence and coordination of its components) which results froin the internalization of the socio-spatiai uctivity of the individual. Age is, therefore, ηο 10nger the most significant factor ί π the nlanner ο! organization of the individuai's knowledge and νθγίου!) forms of activily. This subjective space can be re ferred Ιο Β!) egocentric. ίη the sense that ίl is formed οπ the basis of the types of activity the individual ί!) engaged ίπ, that ί~ οη the basis ο! ίι!) necessity for movement and action ίη space. The interpretation of the aιιthοr of this paper ί~ that aclivaled space constitutes the transitiona! eiement between the external and internal situation (Tsoukala: 1994). Ιι is stressed, however, that θι this ροίηι the object of concern of the paper does π ο ι lie ίη the quahtative differentiation of activated spaee, but rather ίη the function of activated space as a place of organizing spatial knowiedge. The influence ογ Piaget's theory οη environmentai design research concerns both general principies, such as the formulation of environ,roental values, β!) well θ!) more sρecific domains, such as the aplίcation of these qualities 10 the meso- and micro- scale of architecture. Ulvund (1981~ ίη Ihis study of the role of physical environmenta! parameters ίη the child's cognitive development, examines buίltscaρe parameters οη the basis of Piaget's hyρothesis that the infant's manipulatίon and exploration of physical ol>jects are.fundamental ίη the deveiopment of early cognjtive competence. According to hίm, the physical environmental ρarameters, variety, compjexily, and responsiveness, have a ρositive correiation with cognitive development. CompJexily, defined as "the degree of spatial heterogeneity ίπ a stimulus pattern". or "the amount of diversity ίη a stimuius pattern" is closely related to WohlwiII's ο ρlίlπ_1 "ίlπυlθlίοπ hypolhesis (Ulvund: 1981Χ According 10 him the physical environment presents a problem Ιοτ _ psychology of Slimulalion. DiHerenl dim e nsion~ of stimulatio n constitute the optimai stitnuiation hypothesis. The concept ο! the physical environment as a source of stimulation emerges from the ηοιί ο η that the environment functions as u context for the in(lividual's resρonses θ!; weii as a ροιεηιίθι feedback ίη the interactio n between the individual and the environment2. The re~'p0nsiveness criterion conld be defined as '''the ob je ct'~ capat ity ι ο re s ρond contingentiy 10 the infant's InanipuIation. 50 that the infant receives feebac k ίη the form ο! changes ίη visual, auditory, or tactiie stimulation" (Yarrow ει ιl: 1975~ Four dimensions of responsiveness are proposed: Ι. moving parts. 2. refiected image, 2. change ίη shaρe and contour and 4. noise production. Objects which are characterized by one σγ more of the four resρonsiveness criteria may. through the infant's ΓηθηίρulθΙίοη, bring about changes ίη the environment V8riely is ciosely related both Ιο complexity and responsiveness. Referring Ιο variety as. "the ri chnes.!i and non-repetitive character of inanimate environment". Yarrow el -Ι. (1975) h_ve suggested Ihal ίl should be assessed according ιο the number of different play objects available to the ίηιβnι' Evans, Kliewer and MtιΓΙίη, ίη their article entitled "The role ο! the physical environment ίη the health and wellbeing of children" (1991), consider variely and reιφοηsίνeness as the two principai djmensions of complexity:.. Variely referes 10 Ihe number of differenl charachterislic5 of an objecl. Thus a funclionbljy compjex

Tt:xv. Χρον, Eπιrπ. Ε κ δ. ΤΕ[';, ΙΤ, ΤEιJχ. 1-2 l/)96 Τc ι.;ιι. CΙπon, Sci. J. TC'G, 11. Νυ 1 2 ιι object might consist of muiiip/e coiors, shape,fo and IexΙUrtJS. Sti" greater comp/exiiy would lje added by ΒΠ object that moves οτ ehanges ίπ some otjιθt way, Responsiveness is Ihe degree 10 which physicai stimu/ί provide feedback ιο Ihe child about Ihe effects of his aeiions. When 8 young chiid manipuiales ΒΠ objecl Ihal responds differenii8//y ιο variab/e ίπρυ( IhaI object ί. responsivιj' (ρ. 137). Researchers Iike οιαι and Moore have sιudied the transfer of these concepts to the meso-scale of architecrure and ίη particular to day-care centers and oυtdoor play areas. Moore and his associates (1994) have proposed and developed a number of patterns for day~re centers and outdoor ΡΙθΥ areas based οπ the developmental theories of Piaget and Werner, Some of the concepts related ιο child care centers and ίη particular. the principles of the building's organiz8tion are; activityshaped spaces, modified οροη space, home bases for 8-16 children, resource-rich activity pockets for 2-5 children, barrier-free environment., interior visibility, child-scaled environments, Bnd θπ environment that responds. Simίlarly, for the organization of play areas thcy have proposed the fol1owing general principles of design related Ιο Piaget's theory: ambiguous settings and objects. loose parts. paced alternatives. challenging environments, variety of threedimensionai spaces, baπίer free environment., repetition and muitiple coding. imageability and orient8tion, clear accomplishment ροίηι. 0Μ. (1968, 1989) places more emphasis οη variety as a principle of spatial organizatiod within the framework of Piage's theory. She suggests different scales fol' activity areas. different fioor-ceiling and boundary height as varied leνels of stimυlation for the senses. Ιπ her view, the νβγίειυ of things to do. the variety of places ίη which ιο do them and Ihe ΟΓΙθΩίΖβιίοη and acccssibhity of these things and spaces within the overaii space Cβn satisfy the chiid's basic needs ιο move, Ιο work comρetentiy and to control his environment ParaIIel to Vβriety, privacy, predictabiiity 8nd orientation are proposed as components of Ihe "bilίly of Ihe child 10 control his immediate environment. The criticism received by these views relates to the distinctiod between physical and sociaj environment One argument 8gainst such a distinction is that certain aspects ίη the physical environments which promote the development of cognitive competence may have a paraiiei ίπ the sociai enviro~ment., while asρects of the physical environment may aiso, ίπ certain cases, promote deveiopment Another argument against making a distinction between the physical and (he socia! environment is that 'cognitive and social development are probably closely connecied Uzgiris (19790, 1979b) argued for this interconnection between cognitive and' social development, for the superiority, even, of social experience. ίπ view of the fact that the infant's interaction with things takes place ίπ β social context Referring ιο Vygotsky who has stressed that man-made objects have a cultural significance, Uzgiris maintains that the infant's exρerience with objects is social ίη two senses: firstly. because the infant's way of dealing with objects is often closely referred to the way he interacts with people. SecondJy, because the infant deais with objects that have a cultura! significance, Βurneιιe (1972) "lso worked οη Ρί"ιοΙ'. Iheory and ίι. implίcations for design_ Ιπ his articie "Design to reinforce the mental irnage" he writes that his intention is to formujate pianning values for a pre-school education environment that will support the chiid's cognitive development "as evidenced ίη the psychologicai lίteraιure, partίcularly that of Piaget''. He argues that there Ίs a correlatjon between the stages of the chijd's cognitive development and the forms recognised by Kevin Lynch ίη his study of macro-environmental representations (1960). Burnette maintains that these forms do ποι constitute prirnitive categories of 8 symbolic visual Ianguage. but elements of the sequence through which the child experiences his environment and ori'entates himself within ίι Ιη his framework the organization he proposes in,cludes the ''nesting place" scaled ιο the child, bounding the sensorimotor domain of the infant., and limiting the visual field ιο provide a stable background against which activity patterns and sense stimuli may be ρerceived. This bounding of environment a1so foreshadows the fίxed systems of reference which foiiow the egocentric stage ίη the sense that once the child has a coherent representation of his nesting place he is ίη a position to transfer the center, the node of his organization ιο some fixe.d reference object ΟΓ landmark. Later the child's own nest becomes the node οτ place ίπ the path of route presentation which the infant subsequently develops.. The Iearning. environment surrounding the node-cave of the chίld is comρosed of other distinct form-places which he απ visit and learπ as he did his origina1 nesting place. Thus, his universe is

12 ΤΓχν. Χt_ον. Ε.:nιπ. ΊΞ)'1\. TlΞE, 11, πυχ. 1-2 ΙΙ;<;6 TcctI. CΙ non. St:i. J. τα~. 11, Νο 1-2 expanded and his sense of himseif as 8Π 8ctor ίη 8 stabie world containing other actors lik:e himsejf is reinforced. This environment ίβ organized according Ιο the acquisirion and integration of the sequence of elements, ίoe. fίrst the egocentered node, then the action-continuous path from the egocenter, theη the edge. boundary or surface of rhe object acted upon, succeeded by the area ΟΓ district, as the conceptuaiiy bounded abstractiy known sensorimoιor domain, and the landmark, as the fixed reference ροίπι 10 which this objectified image is transferred. While Olds and Moore primarily base Iheir proposed vaiues of organization οη the concept of activity which, οη the οηε hand, aiiows transformations οπ the object of the child's operation, and at the same time functions as the principai factor ίπ the cognitive process, BurneHe bases his categones οπ the stages of formation of reference systems, the transfer from the subjective 10 the objective system of reference. The concept of activity he uses and 10 which the concept of path corresponds. as βπ element of architecturai environment Iearning, ίς Iίmitcd Ιο ίις sensorimotor character, without incjuding the sense of transformation of rhe object whίι:h the chίld act!) υροπ. Furthermore, the hypothesis he formuiates concerning the transfer from the egocentric 10 the objective system of reference through the existence of nαjes and landntar"s has (Ο be exanlined and verified through empίricai research. Otherwise, this theoreticai modei of correlating the cognirive process and deveiopmenr with Lynch's eiements may appear arbitrary. This necessity of experimeniai verification ίs also stressed by Burl1ette himself. The other major research project οη ριθυ objects was conducled by Gehiback (1980, 1991). Discussing Piaget',. later theoretical work: οπ cognitive adopiion ίη his article ''[nstructional PIay: Some Theoretical Prerequisites 10 Systematic Research and Development" he suggests regarding ρlβυ as ordinary adaptive interactive behavior between βπ organism and paγι of his environment. Ιη this CJlse, both Ihe play-objecl and the player behave wilh respect ΙΟ one another, the piayer behavior controiiing (he play-objecl usuaily by direcl physical manipulalion and piay-object behavior controlling the player as changed stimuius οι βς feedbac". According ιο him, the most important way ίη which a play-object controls the objectives of the player, explίcit ΟΓ implίcit, relates 10 its responsiveness Ιο piayer behaviors. Ιπ this respect, rhe features ίπ ΡΙθΥ materials that must be secure" 8re those which guarantee sustained interaction between the piayer and the ΡΙθΥ ntateriais. Ιπ a more recent article, he aιιenφts 10 formυjare some practical guidejines for the design of chίldren's ΡΙβΥ environments ίη 5uch a way that chίldren's creativity during play wiii be optimized. The instructional desjgn proposed has the form of specific pre-piay organization of the environment ίπ which ρlθυ is 10 occur. His "shoulder-levej wall" ίς conceived ίπ order 10 lead 10 the cognitive anticipation of events Ιο produce the assimilalory aclivity. 4. VYGOTSKY AND IMPLICA TIONS FOR BNVIRONMBNT AL DBSIGN RBSBARCH WhiJe the infiuence of Piaget's theory οη EnvironmentaI Design Research diltes back: ιο the seventies, ίι was ποι υηιίl recenlly Ihal Vygotsky's Iheory began 10 be examined. Social interactionism emerges β1 ίι. much later date ίπ the philosophicai approaches of this line of research. Basic notionai categories of Vygotsk:y's Iheory, such as sign, psych%gj"ca/ /oo~ and RctiVity~ have not beeen used ίπ research βς units of data analysis aod any reference 10 I1is theory 11as been fragmentary, primariiy col1cerning the concept of education. Α sign is, according 10 Vygolsky (1978\ a 'ymbol Ihal has a specific meaning created during the history of civiiization. Λ sign is any 1001 used by man ίη his activities, one of the most outstanding being Ianguage. Τhe conccpt of sίgn as a psychoiogical 100] constitutes θπ interesting appjication of scmiotics 10 psychology. With the Ierm p.,ych%gica/ /004 Vygotsky attempts 10 convey Ihe complicated, unified nature of external and internal functions. The Ιοοl suggesis a Iocation of accumuiated historico-social activity, a means of reconciling needs and objects, a means of setting υρ a networ1c of social relations. The tool ίπ itseif does not only affect βπ object, fashioning ίι according 10 tl.e individual's needs, but ίι aiso influences the shaping and function of cognitive processes, by means of its meaning ίη combination Wίtl1 its interaction wiih the objecl The ιοοl interacts with the object through the individual's activity, something which presupposes θη objective that relates to the functioning of society. It is the implementational character of activity as well as its inclusion ίη ιο the system of social rejations that determine, a Iarge extent, man's cognitive representations. Of

T r. XV. Χρον. E:τL.(Π. Έκδ. ΤΕΕ, 11, τε ύχ. 1-2 1996 Τcch. Chloon. Sc ί. J. TCG. 11. ~o 1-2 1.1 par1icular importance ίη the data analysis of a research are micro-strucιural characteristics of actjvity, 8crjons and operalions. Activity is related Ιο the motive, action is related to the objective and the ΟΡοτβιίοη ί. related ιο the par1icular circumst.ιιnce (Lektorsky: 1993~ Now how can this analysis be related ιο the physical environment and ίη par1icuiar Ιο its representations? Ροτ οπε thing, ίι is common knowiedge that the builtscape is a resuit of historico-socia! and culιurai processes and as such ίι is invested with meanings that determine to some extent the individuai's spatial behavior. These meanings, however, are created by the individual through his activity ίο the par1icular space οτ ίη relation Ιο ίι As an object with symbolic value, space could be considered tool, and, by extension, a psychologicai Ιοοl that contributes Ιο the formation of cognitive representations. As was stressed earjier, this process can οπlυ be achieved by the combination of the tool and the activity of the individuals. lη her research to date the coocept the author of the present paper has tried Ιο examine most closely has been that of activity. The basic is8ue raised ίη such research is whether θηυ activity ίπ space can at the same time be considered as spatial activity ίπ the sense attributed Ιο ίι ίπ the theory of the hίstοήcο-cultural approach. For instarιce. when a child arranges a space having as rnotive its ΡΓoρeΓ.fuoction, then this arrangement could be considered ΒΠ activity composed of many different 8ctions. If, however, the motive for this arrangement is the favourable assessment of the child by the teacher, then the organization of space does ποι constitute a child activity but ΒΠ actioo with a specific objective. subsumed under another activity. Τhe organization of space couid even be a means for the resolution of a geometric probiem. Ιπ this ca~ spatiai organiz8tion is Βη operarion. Such fine differences ore significant for social interactionism. This ροίπι will be illustrsted with examples from research conducted by the author of this paper (Tsoukala: 1994, 1995). Before this is done. some more issues will be raised related ιο the previous one: what is the relation of all this dirrerentiation Ιο the formation of meso- ΟΤ macro=environmental representations? Does ίι affect the nature and number of the codes used by the individual ίη his attempt Ιο represent the environment? Ιπ a study of the representotions of school environment ίη chίldren of 10-11 yea" of "ge, a significanl difference was obserνed between teams of chίldren set υρ οη the b"sis of the ΙΥΡΟ and degree of the involvemenl of school space ίη the educ"tional process (Tsoukala: 1994). The grouping of the teams was facilitated by the selection of two pedagogic systems, diametric.ally opposed ίη terms of the position of the child ίη the school community and the τεlβιίοη of the child to the educ.ationol tools. These two systems were the conventional one and the Freinet system. Their oppositions concern: (1) the child's roie ίη the education"1 process (passive/active~ (2) the child's relation Ιο Lhe education"1 tools (observer/user), (3) the teacher's ΓοΙε ίη the organization of schoo! life (teacher-organized sch~ol Iife/seIf-organization of student groups). as well 8S (4) the pl"ce of space ίη the education"1 system (sp_ce as sheil of activity/space as element of activities~ The conclusions of the present paper, set forth ίη the form of hypotheses ίπ the introduction, refer to the positive correlation between the noture of the represented spatial element and the form of activity, as well as to the ρositive correlation between the structure of the image, and the social framework of the activities. The author WOs led ιο these conclusions through the qualitative analysis she odopted ίπ order to process and interpret the. topographic and verbal represent.ιιtions of the child She termed this representational space that deviates from objective space according ιο the degree of its involvement ΟΓ distance from the educatίonal process 8ctivated space, conceived as a transition betweeo the external objective space and the internalized one. The author of this paper seems Ιο be led 10 similar conciusions by her findings from research she has carried ουι οπ representations of public space, ranging from the scale of the city ιο th"l of the school-home path (Tsoukala: 1993; Tsoukala et _Ι: 1993). Of cours", ίη these later researches greater difficujιy was encountered as 10 the determination of the sampie, as ίι is quite difficult ιο identify public spaces ίπ which spatial activity. ίπ the sense this has ίη Vygotsky's theory, ί. developed. Going through the international literature οη cognitive representations of urban space ίη children and adults, ίπ porticular the experimental research ίη the area, ίι became apparent that activity figures among the factors influencing the forrnation of representations β1 a much greater frequency. What remains ιο be examined is, then, the formation of representations ίη rel8tion ιο the finer differentiation of

14 ΤΕχν. xvo\'. Eπ,nt.. ΕΥ-δ. ΤΕ.ιΖ, 11, n: ι'οχ. 1 2 1!J~() Tcch. Ωιrol1. Sci. J. τι:α 11. Νο 1-2 activity, and ίπ particular ίπ relatίοn Ιο the sρatial activity of the individusl. From this anaiysis 8cIjy.Ied sρoce (TsoukaIa: Ι995) emerges as θπ environmental vaiue simi1ar to responsivenes,s deveioped above, but also different from ίι concerning the context within which both the action of the child and the response οι the physicai environment take place. [π Ihis case, the action of Ihe child has a social aim, a constίtuent οι which is the physical environment, object οι the child's operation. s. DISCUSSION The comparison of the two theories of cognitive development attempted ίπ this paper can be summed υρ ίπ the fol1owing points: Ι According to Piaget's and Vygotsky's theories, chίldren develop by interacting with the environment and by observing the conseqence of their operations υροπ materials and events. [π this framework Ihe physical settίngs ΡΙθΥ θπ imρortant role ίη Ihe chiid'~ cognitive develoρmenl 2. While for Piagel lhe first deveiopmenlai slages of cognition have their origin οπlυ ίπ the child's individual action οη physicoi realiiy, Ιοτ Vygotsky the individual's cognitίve development is formed by the qualitative change ίπ its social position, the change ίπ it,s socio-cultural θcιίνίιυ οτ ίπ its tool-rnediated actions.. Ιπ the foriner ca~e the action is limited 10 its sensorimotor character, while ίπ the latιer case ίι is social, related Ιο the culιural significance of objects the ίπιβπι deais with, as weii as ιο the way the chiid interacts with peopie during his contact with lhe Qbjecl. 3..The perccived word is considered by PiIIget a stage ίη the IIgc axis ογ the development οι the individual, while for Vygotsky the represented environrnent ί5 Inainly the product ογ the transition froin the external social ιο the internalized individual environment. ίπ Τhese two theories have influenced reseach conducted the field of Environmental Design Research, concerning the relation of cognitive processes ιο the physical environment. Returning to the questions raised ίη the introduction, ίι is concluded rhat spatioi qualities formulated under the influence of Piagel's theory have been rendered with the Ierms complexiiy, variety and responsiveness,. further analysed ίηιο more specifίc parameters,. while the term activated space apρears 8S an extension of Vygotsky's theory οπ design. This latter term can be considered equivalent to the term responsiveness. though broader than that ίη the sense that ίt also includes socio-culturai frameworks and the meanings of both the child's activίtίes and the physical environment wiihin which the particuiar aciivities take piace. Activated space, therefore, ποι only signifies the ability οι the environment ιο mechanistically respond Ιο the action of the child οπ ίι. but ίι a..lso signifies the abilίty of the environment ιο be impiicated as socio-cultural object ίπ the motives and the aims of the child's activity ίπ a given socia! f ramework. It is also observed that these sp8tial qualities caηποt be considered opρosite. They have certain parameters ίπ common, whi1e others are complementary. The ability of the environment Ιο respond to the chi Id's action οη ίι is ποι entirely due Ιο ils physicai qualίties. but also 10 its socio--cuitural ones, as well as 10 the sociai framework within the particular activity takes place. The reinforcement ογ the sensorirnotor action of the child θι the expense οι his social action, as well as the reinforcement οι the physical quajities of the environment ΒΙ the expense οι its cultural significance, rnay prove tn be ΗΠ impeditnent ίπ the cl1ild-physicoi environinel11 interaction. M.knowIedg= Ι wish ιο aknnowiedge Prof. Moore's contribution Ιο Ihis paper, for addilions he offered Ιο lhe bibiiography, and for reviewing θπ earlier version_ RBFERBNCBS Ι. The sources οη which [ based the first section of the present paper entitled HSimilarities ΒΠι;!. differences ογ the two theories" are, apart from Piaget's and Vygotsky's own translated work ίη English and Frence, Activity Theory Journal, Schneuwly and Bronckart publications., Valsiner's work, as well as Moore's ίπίιίβi studies published ίπ the voiume entitled EnvironInentaI Knowing. The work that WOS decisive is chapter ΙΙ οι Vygot~ky's '''Language and Thoughl" enlilled "The probiem of child Ianguage and cognition according Ιο the Iheory οι Jean Piaget" as weii as Piaget's HCommentaires sur les remarkes critiques de Vygotsky' Ιι ίο worlh noling lhal the I.tter had been

Τεχν. Χρο\'. Eπιtτt. Έκδ. τt:::ε. li, τι::ύχ. Ι-2 191)6 Tcc.h. Chrnn. Sci..1. TCG. 11. Νο 1-2 IS written before Piage1 had 1he chance 10 read the aforementioned critique by Vygoιsky. 2. As a physicai environmental parameter, complexity may represent a qua!ity of the physica! setting ίη which the individuai lives, as well as of one of the objects contained wiιh ίι Relating the complexity of ΒΩ object Ιο "the amount of information ίι provides the infant through sensory modalities", some researchers have suggested basing the degree of complexity of an infant's toys οη the fol1owing criteria: a. the number of different colors, b_ the βαιουηι of visual and tactile pattern, c. the number of different shapes and the extent of νβγίβιίοη ίη the COntours of the object, d the size (amount of the area ιο be looked 8t and touched), e. the extent of responsiveness of the object BIBLIOORAPHY Ι Blakey Κ., Ιβηι ΜΑ and H.arι, R.. Oettίa, Ι. Tooc:h wlth ΡΙΙΥ: Croati.. ρlιυ Eovlroom.eot. Ιοι Chl1dre. w.ith Vi.DI. Impalrm.e.t., The Lighthouse Inc., United States, 1991. 2. Burnette Ch.H., "'Oesignmg 10 reinforce Ihe mentbi image, ιιη infant learning environment", BDRA 3 Procoedia, Bavlroameatal DoIIp: Roιearch aad Pr.ctice, UniversiIY of Ca1ifornla, Ιαι AngeIes., 1972 3. Davydof ν.ν., "The Ρerspec!ίveδ of aciiviiy theory", Activity Theory 13/14, 1993. 4. Ενοαι 0., K1iewer W., and Μιιπίη J.. "The roie of physicaj environment ίη the health 3nd well-being of children" ίη Η.Ε. Schroeder (ed.), Ne.,.Dlrectioo. Ιο tho Hea1th P.yc:hololy A...meot, HemΊSphere Publishing Corp~ New York, 1991. ρρ. 127~S7. 5. GehJbach R.D., ~ InsIructional play: some theoreticai prerequίsifes Το s)'stemiitic resδiirch and development", Edocι.tioaal PaycholoJiIt 15,2, 1980, ρρ. 112-24. 6. Gehlbach R.D., "PJa)', Piaget and creaiivii)': The promi.ιe of design", 'oorn_1 οι Creative Behavior 25:2, 1991, ρρ. 137-44. 7. Hart R.. Ch.ildrea'a ExperIence οι 'Ι_ο., Pub I ΊSben' lοc., New York, I979..8. Hart R. Moore G., Le d.veioppe.edt de Ι. (:ou.t..aoco.pati_le et app1ic:atlod. ιaχ tyi.d. eavuoaaeaιeat.:..evoe critiqoe, UniversitA de Montr&al: Ct:otre de Recherches ei dίnnoνaιίοn Urbaine, 1976 9. LekIonk)' ν.α.. "Remarques 00 δome phijosophical probleπu of ac1ivity theory", Aotlvlty Theory 13/14. 1993. 10. L)'nch Κ., The Im.,e οι the Clty, The Μ. Ι!. Preu, Loodon, 1960. ΙΙ Moore ΟΤ, ~evolopmental νογίιιιίομ betwee.n and within individua1s ίο Ihe cognitive represeouιtion of l.llrge sc;ι.ιe SΡ;ι.tίa! environments~, MaD-EnvlroDmeat SyatoDII 4, 1974, ρρ. 55-57. 12 Moore Ο,Τ, "Theory and Γesearch ίη the development of environmental knowing" ίn O.T.Moore, R. Colledge (eds.), Baviroamaatat Σaοwlaι, Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross Publishing Company, 1976. ρρ. 138-72 13. Moore Ο.Τ., 'Ί'he.ιate-o'-the-art ίο ΡΙΒΥ environment reseaγch and applicatίonι* ίο Ι. Ι. Frosl & Β. SuoderIio (eds..), Where oh11dred ΡΙΙΥ: ProceaCΙJap froaι ισ Iateraatioa_l CoιιIereace ΟΩ ΡΙ_Υ d ΡΙΙΥ ΒσνiΙΟ.ΜΙΙΩΙΙ, MD Association for ChiIdhood I!ducatioo InternationaJ, WheatoD, 1985, ρρ. 171-9Ι 14. Moore α.τ.. "'The, phys.ίcal environment and oognitive developmenr ίη chίld c.re cenien~ ίη C,S. Weinstein and T.G. David (eds.). Spaoe. Ιοι Chίldrea: the Built Eaviroameat aad Ch.Ud Devetopmeat, PJenum Prcss, Ncw York, 1987. 15. Moore α. Τ., Piwoni 1.Ι. and Keonedy 0., ~Designing child care ceniers w.ίηι the childrens' environments' piiitern Ianguage: The Northern Michigan UniversiI)' chίldrens' center", Childreu' Boviroamoata Qoarterly 6:4, 1989, ρρ. 54-63. 16. Moore α.τ., Lane G.o., Ηίll A.B~ Cohen U. Rnd McGίnty Τ.. R,ecolDDIondatioΩl Ιοτ c:hίld care ceatera, University of Wisoonsin: Center for Architecture and υγνη ΡΙιιηηίηι Research, Milwaukee, 11)94. 17. Moore G.T., Lane 0.0, Ηίll Α,Β.. Cohen U. and McGίnty Τ.. R.cοαιαιο.d_ιiοu for c:hild ΡΙΙΥ ΙΙΟ_Ι, Universiry of Wi.sconsίn: Center for ArchitecIure and Urban ΡΙΒηηίπι Reseβ.rch, Milwaukee, Ι994. 18. NicoΡOUlou Α.. "Play. oogailive deve)opment aad rhe sociiii worid: Ρίβ.geι, Vygotsky.IInd beyood", ΚσΜ.Ο Devalopmeat 36:1, 1993, ρρ. ι-χι 19. 01& A.R.. "Desigaing 8ettings for ίπ'βηιι and toddlers" ίn C.S. WeiΙUΙlein. Th. G. D.IIvid (eds.). Sp.ce. Ιοι ChildreD, PIenum Presa. New York, 1988, ρρ. 117-38. 20. 01& A,R.. "PsychoIogica! and physiologicai harmony ίη child ca.re cenier debign", Chlldre..' BDviroa.meat.' Qa_rte.. Iy 6:4, 1989, ΡΡ. 8-16. 2Ι Pi.set J~ Le Ιιaιuι,ιι et lι pena. c:hez l'edfaat, DeI_chaux et NiesIIι!ι, ΡΙΓίι, 1923. 22 PiageI 1., La aai aace de l'jatew,e.c8 ohej: l'eafaat, Delachaux ei NiesIlβ, Paris. 1935. 23. Piager 1., La coaatracιloa da r",1 chej: l'aaιιat, Detachaux er Niestliι, Paris, 1935. 24. Pi.ιιget J., ΡΙΙΥI. Dream. aad Imitatioa 10 chlldhood, H.arcourt Brace, New York, 1951.. 25. Piaget 1., PIIycholoιie et pωιιoιiιι, Den.seL Paris, 1969, 26. Piaget 1., Adaptatloa vlt_le et pιycholope de t'jatel1iaeac:o, Hermarm, ΡΙΓίΙ>, 1974. 27. Piaget J. and Inheldr Β., La reρr6ιοοtιtiοa de l'eap_co c:hez Ι' eofa.t, PUF, PIIris., 1947. 28. Schneuwly Β. Iίnd Bronckart J.P. (eds.), Vy,otaky aujoard' hni, DeIachaux et Niestl8, NeuchaIeL Ι985. 29. SteIsenko Α., "V)'goIsky: RefIectioιu οη Ihe reoeptioo and furfber devejopmeoi of tύs th<.ιughι Η, Activity Theory 13/14, 1993, 30. Strίoute Ν. Α. and Moore Rc., "earl)' chίldhood outdooiτ LiIeture revίew related 10 Ihe design οι child care environmeot.s", ChHdreo'a BDvI"oDaιeata QaΙήerΙΥ 6:4, 1989, ρρ. 25-31. 31. TsoukaIa κ.. "Morphoses verbalu, metamorphoscs Iipati.llles. Les ωι;. de lιι reprtseniaiίon de Ι ' espace urbain che2 Ι' eώa n"'. ίη Α. M.IIzΊS and Κ. KaraleIsou (ed.s.), Bavirocun.eataI IILItaa:ιorpho.ea ; BaIltιc:_pe. Iaa.cape, ethdo,cape. earoιcape. Ac:t.a d'8 Coa..rίI Jatern_tioD.I de Ι' lλps 12, Arι of Text, Theιsalooiki. 1993, ρρ. 351-$7. 32. Tsoukala Κ, "Perceptioo de Ι ' t:.$pace $Colaire par Ie.s ίcolierι., eιude comparative, pθdagogie formelle - pedagogie Freinef" ίn p.cιanch6, Β. Debarbieux and 1. TesIar:liere (ed.s), Acte. du Coaar" d. Bord ax, Presses Universitaires de Borde_ux, Bordeaux, 1990, ρρ. 361-70.

16 Τεχν. Χιιον. ΕπIIΠ. Ί::;,κδ. Τ[,[" 11, τεύχ. 1-2 ΙΥ96 Tecll. 01Ton. Sci..1. TCG. ΤΙ, Νο Ι 2 33. Tsoukala Κ.., "La ville en ΙΜΙ qu' environncment d' exρeriences pour Ι' eώant", Achitectore _ι Cοιι:ι.ΡοrΙemeΩΙ 10:4 ei ll:l (numilro 5pΘcial: la ville et I'enfant), 1995, ρρ. 6Ι-65. 34. Tsoukal.a Κ. ei al.., "Children's menia! meιamorphoses of a famίjiac route" ίη Α. Mazis and KKaraIetsou (ed.s), EnviroDm.ental meιamorpboiei: boilticape, landivape. etbnoicape, 8oroIcape. AcI.. do Congreι ]nternatiooal do Ι" IAPS 12, Ατ! of Text, The&SaIonik~ 1993, ρρ. 359-66. 3:5. Tudge J.R.H. and WinIerhoff ΡΑ, "'Vygotsky, PίageΙ llnd Bll[]dura: Perspeclives ση Ihe relaiions between Ihe socia! word and cognitive development", Human Development 36, 1993, ρρ. 611-81. 36. UIvund S.E~ "The psychoiogical basis for Ihe indentification ο( physical environmeniai parameiers ίη the developmenc of eoriy cognitίve competence/t, Scaodioavian Joora.al of Edocatiooal Reaearcb 253, 1981, ρρ. 125-40. 37. Uzgiris I.C~ NExρerience and development during infancy", Invited address to the USC-UAP conference οη Piagetian Iheory and Ihe heiping professions, ΙΟδ Ange1es, 1979a. 38. Uzgiris I.C., ''Experience ίη the socίil1 context: ΙlηίΙβιίοη and ριαυ", Papet presented οι Ihe Conference οη language intervention, SΙUrbridge, 1979b. 39, ν al5ίηcγ J.. Cbi1d Development within C1ιltaral1y Stractared B.avironme.ata. Social Co-conatruction and Environme.atal Ooidance ίω Develpment, AbIex PubIΊShing Corρoration, Ne Yersey, 1988. 40. Vaisiner 1., Haman Development and Colture. Tbe Soclal Natore οι Peraonality aod iti Stady, Lexington Books., Massachusetts, 1989. 41. Vygotsky L.S., Mia.d i.!l Society: Tbe Developmeot οι Hίgher PsychoIogicaI Prooe.a.I, Μ. Co1e, V.J. SIeiner, S. Scrihner and Ε. Souherman (eds.), ΜΑ: HarVilrd University Press, Cambrisge, 1978. 42. Vygotsky L.S.. Tboogbt and Laagoage, ΜΑ: M.LT. Press., Cambridge, 1986. 43. Vygotsky L.S., The Col1ected Worb of L.S. Vygotsky: νοι 1 Probl.m. of ΟοηΟΙΑΙ Psycbology, PIenum Press, New York, 1987. 44. Wertsch J.V., Tbe Social Formation of Mind: λ Vygotιk1an Approacb, ΜΑ: Harvard University Press, New York, 1985. 45. Yarrow L.J., Rubenstein 1.Ι. and Pedersen F-A., lnfaot and Ea.viroa.mea.t. εαγιυ Cogn.itive and MoιiνAιioηAΙ Developmeo~ Wiley, New York, 1975. Kyria.ki TIIoukala, Assistant Professor, AristoUe UniverBity of Thessaloniki, School of Architecture, 540 06 ThessaIoniki.

Τεχ\'. ΧΙΜ ) ν, [nhjt. Έκδ. Τ ΕΕ, 11. ιt"ύ)ι. 1-2 1996 Tcch. ('Ι ι ωπ. SCI. J. TCU, 11.. l'ιi 1-2 17 Εκτεταμένη πεpfληψη Piaget και Vygotsky: Οι Διαφορές των Δύο Θεωριών 1ια την Περιβαλλοντική Γνώση και οι Προεκτάσεις τους στο Σχεδιασμό Κ.ΤΣΟΥΚΑΛΑ Δρ. Αρχιτέκτων, Επίκ. Καθηγήτρια Α. Π.Θ. Πεpfληψη Το κειμενο αυτό έχει δύο στόχους: KaT'σρχή~ να υπουραμμισει τις ομοιότητες και διαφoρiς των θι:ωριώ ν Τ((1ν PiageI και VygOlsky Υ,α την περιβαλλοντική Υνώση oυμβdλλoντας μόυτόν τον τρόπο (Jίην καλ ύτερη κατανό ηοη των νοηματικών διαφορών που παρουσιάζουν κοινές cvvotolorlkl; κατηυορίες. Κατό &ύτερον. να θέσει υπd συζήτηση τις προεκτάσεις τους στην ΠεριβαλλΟΥΤΙκή ΨυχολΟΥΙα και την έρευνα Υια τον σχεδιασμό. Στον τoμiα της περιβαλλ ο ντικής yy(!jσης ένας σημαυτικός αριθμός ερευνητών μελέ τησε τη θεωρι'α του Pi<Jget Υια τη voητική ανάπτυξη του ατόμου σε σχέση με τις ποr6τητες του Kτισμiνoυ περιβάλλουτος. Το αποτέλεσμα ήταν η διατύπωση περtβαλλοvτικώv αξιώ ν στο επ(πεδο των ΥεΥικώι' αρχών ορ-υάνωσης του χώρου καθώς και στο ε ιδικότερο επιπεδο των συyκεkριμiνων διαστάσεων και χαρακτηριστικών των χώρων ή αvτιkεψέvω ν ειδικής Ζρήσης. Η επιρροή του Vygotsky ι:κδηλώνεται πολύ αρυό τερα και ο ι περιβαλλοντικές αξίες που trρorε;vc!vτot στα ιιλaίσ,ατων θεωριώ ν του παραμένουν σε επιπεδο Υενικώ ν aρxών. Η σύυκριοη των αρχ({}ν αυτών με τις αντιστοlχες που προκύπτουν από τη θεωρία του Pίaget παρουσιάζει ενδιαφiρoν στο βαθμ ό που εξετάζεται η όμοιο, αυtlόετη ή συμπληρωματική φύση TOut; στόχος του κειμένου είναι να υπ ο γραμμίσε ι τις διαφορές των δύο θεωριών και δεύτερος στόχος να θέσει υπό συζήτηση τις προεκτάσεις τους στη θεωρία του σχεδιασμού. Οι διαφορές και 'ομοιότητες τω ν δύο θ εωριών μπορούν να συνοψιστού ν στα παρακάτω τρία σημεία : 1. Και οι δύο θεωρίες ανήκουν στο ρεύμα του ιντεραξιοναλ.ισμού. Υποστηρίζ ο υν τη ν αλ λ ηλεπίδραση υποκειμένου-αντικειμένου μέσα από ένα σύστημα επιδράσεων και εξαρτήσεων, ισορροπιών και ισοδύναμων ρόλων των επί μέρους μελών της σχέσης. Ωστόσο, ο μεν Piaget τοποθετείται στον ατομικό ιντεραξιοναλισμό, ενώ ο Vygotsky στον κοινωνικό ιντεραξωναλισμό. Κι αυτό επειδή ο μεν Piaget θεωρε ί ότι η αισθησιοκινητική νόηση αναπτύσσεται κατά τη διάρκεια της διαντiδρασης του παιδιού με τη φυ σική /τεχνητή πραγματικότητα, δηλαδή έχει κυρίως ατομικό Κι όχι κοινωνικοποιημένο χαρακτήρα, ενώ αντίθετα ο V ygoιsky θεωρεί την κοι νωνική διαντίδραση σημαντικό διαμορφωτικό παράγοντα στην εξέλιξη των νοητικών δ ιαδικασιών. Το γεγονός της σ ύγκρουσης και αντιπαράθεσης δύο ιστορικής σημασίας ψυχο λόγων, των Pi.get και Vygotsky, σε θέματα που άπτονται της αντιληπτικής διαδικασίας του περιβάλλοντος αξίζε ι την ιδιαίτερη προσοχή μας. Από τη μια, ο Piaget αφιέρωσε ένα σημαντικό κομμάτι της δραστηριότητάς του στη μελέτη και διερεύνηση φαινομένων γνώσης του περιβάλλοντος και από την άλλη, ο Vygotsky έ θεσε υπό αμφισβήτηση ορισμένα από τα θεμέλια της αντιληπτικής θεωρίας του PiageL Πρώτος 2 Η εγωκεντρική γλώσσα από μεν τον Piaget θεωρείται μεταβατική μορφή νόησης και παρατηρείται στο 20 στάδιο ανάπτυξης του παιδιού, ενώ από τ ο ν Vygotsky θεωρείται μεταβατική μορφή νόησης από την εξωτερική στην εσωτερική γλώσσα και παρατηρείται ακόμη και στους ενήλικες. Τονίζω αυτή την διαφορά παρόλο που αφορά τη γλώσσα γιατί το εγωκεντρικό στάδιο υποστηρίζεται από τον Piaget και για την αντιληπτική δ ιαδικασία του χώρου, ενώ οι έρευνες του Yιro/lλιlθηKE: ILlJ996 ΈΥn -ε &KΤιt 10.5.1996

18 Τεχ \'. Χρυν. En:IU't, Ί~,κδ. ΤΕ Ε, 11, τ εύχ. J-2 Ι Ψ)() Tcch. ΟΠΙ1π, :χ. ί J. Tcιr, 11. Νο 1 2 Moore με θέμα τις νοητικές αναπαραστάσεις του μακροπεριβάλλοντος δειχνουν ότι ο εγωκεντρικός χώρος παρατηρείται και στους ενήλικες και εξαρτάται από το βαθμό οικειοποί ησης του περιβάλλοντος. 3. Η έννοια της δραστηριότητας αποτελεί κοινή κατηγορία και αποκτά ιδιαίτερο βάρος και στις δύο θεωρίες. Αλλά, ο PiageI αναφέρεται κυριως στην πρακτική δραστηριότητα που συνδέει το παιδί με τη φυσική/τεχνητή πραγματικότητα, ενώ ο VygoL,ky συσχετίζει τη δραστηριότητα με το κοινωνικό περιβάλλον. ΣυγKεKριμtνα, ο Pi.get υποστηρίζει ότι τα αναπαριστώμενα σχήματα του αντικειμένου διαμορφώνονται μέσα από τη δράση που ασκεί το παιδί πάνω σ'αυτό. Με άλλα λόγια, η γνώση θεωρείται ως η εσωτερίκευση των χειρισμών του ανηκειμένου από το παιδί. Αντίθετα, ο VygoIsky υποστηρίζει ότι τα νοητικά αυτά σχήματα διαμορφώνονται μtσα από τη δραστηριότητα εκείνη που κα τευθύνεται από συγκεκριμένο κοινωνικό στόχο και υλοποιείται με τη μεσολάβηση εργαλείων. Οι έρευνες που διεξήχθησαν στα πλαίσια της Περιβαλλοντικής ΨυχολογΙας με αντικείμενο τη διερεύνηση του ρόλου του KτισμtνOυ περιβάλλοντος στις γνωστtkές διαδικασίες και εμπνεύστηκαν από τη θεωρία του Piage~ στηρί'lθηκαν κυρίως σ'αυτό που ο Piaget τoνίζε~ στο ότ~ δηλαδή, η γνώση των αντικειμένων και σύστημα ερεθισμάτων ή ως ο βαθμός ετερογένειας του συστήματος ερεθισμάτων. Η "ανταποκρισιμότητα" ορίζεται ως η ικανότητα του αντικειμένου να αντιδρά στη δράση που ασκεί τό παιδί πάνω του, έτσι ώστε το παιδί να προσλαμβάνει την αντίδραση αυτή με τη μορφή αλλαγών στα οπτικά, ακουστικά και απτικά ερεθίσματα. Και τέλος η "ποιηλια" συνδέεται άμεόα με την πολυπλοκότητα και την ανταποκρισιμότητα.. Μπορεί να οριστεί ως ο πλούτος και ο μη επαναληπτικός χαρακτήρας του περιβάλλοντος. Οι αρχές αυτές για συγκεκριμένους χιίφους οδηγούν σε ένα corpus εννοιών όπως είνα~ για παράδειγμα, στην περίπτωση των παιδικών κέντρων, οι έννοιες "περιοχές δραστηριοτήτων-, "ανοικτοί μετατρέψιμοι χώροι", " παιδική κλίμακα", "ελεύθερο περιβάλλον', "περιβάλλον που ανταποκρίνεται", Αυτές οι προτάσεις όμως για το χώρο αγνοούν την ισχύ των κοινωνικών παραγόντων στη διαντίδραση παιδιού KτισμtνOυ περιβάλλοντος. Τους κοινωνικούς αυτούς παράγοντες δεν αγνοεί ο Vygotsky που υποστηρίζει ότι η σχέση παιδιούαντιkειμtνoυ ρυθμίζεται σε σημαντικό βαθμό από τον τρόπο που το παιδί διαντιδρά με τους ανθρώπους όπως επίσης και από τα μηνύματα που εkπtμπoυν τα.αντικείμενα ως προϊόντα ιστορικο-κοινωνικών και πολιτισμικών διαδικασιών. Οι ερευνητές που μελέτησαν τη σχέση παιδιού - κτισμένου περιβάλλοντος στα πλαίσια των ιδωτήτων τους είναι το αποτέλεσμα της δράσης του της θf.ωρίας του Vygot,ky, θεωρούν τον κτισμένο χώρο παιδιού στον χώρο και της εξερεύνησης του περιβάλλοντος. Εξ άλλου, αποδείχθηκε από ερευνητές ότι η δραστηριότητα στο χώρο παίζει σημαντικό ρόλο στην κατασκευή συστημάτων αναφοράς, κι αυτό ισχύει για τα παιδιά και τους ενήλικες. Δηλαδή, αποδείχθηκε ότι οι "αναπαραστάσεις διαδρομήςι και οι "εποπτικές αναπαραστάσεις" δεν αποτελούν στάδια εξέλιξης της αναπαράστασης του χώρου μόνο στα παιδιά αλλά και στα άτομα μεγαλύτερης ηλικίας. Στους ενήλικες οι "αναπαραστάσεις διαδρομής' αποτελούν το αρχικό στάδιο γνωριμίας τους με ένα ανοίκειο περιβάλλον. Παρατηρήθηκε ότι η πολυπλοκότητα και η ακρίβεια της αναπαρόστασης αυξάνει ανάλογα με την κίνηση και τη δραστrριότητα του ατόμου στο συγkεkριμtνo περιβάλλον. Οι ε ρευνητές σ'αυτό το θεωρητικό πλαίσ\ο προτείνουν την "ποικιλία", "πολυπλοκότητα" και "ανταποκρισιμότητα" ως τις περιβαλλοντικές εκείνες αξιες που συμβάλλουν στη νοητική ανάσττυξη του ατόμου. Η "πολυπλοκότητα" ως ανηκείμενο με ιστορικο-πολιτισμική αξία και ως στόχο της δραστηριότητας του παιδιού. Στην τελευταία αυτή περίπτωση, ο χώρος θεωρείται συστατικό στοιχείο της δραστηριότητας του παιδιού, εμπλέκεται στα κίνητρα και στους στόχους της δράσης του. Ο όρος που προτείνεται είναι η "χωρική δραστηριότητα" η οποία και θεωρείτα, σημαντικός διαμορφωτικός παράγοντας των αναπαραστάσεων του χώρου. Από την προσέγγιση αυτή προκύπτει ο όρος "ενεργησιμότητα του χώρου" που ορίζεται ως το περιβάλλον που δεν ανταποκρίνεται μηχανιστικά στη δράση που ασκεί το παιδί σ'αυτό αλλά, εμπλέκεται ως κοινωνικο-πολιτιστικό αντικείμενο στα κίνητρα και τους στόχους της δραστηριότητας του παιδιού. Οι ποιότητες αυτές του χώρου που συνδέονται με τη νοητική ανάπτυξη του παιδιού όπως αυτή ορίζεται και από τις δύο θεωρίες δεν μπορούμε να πούμε ότι είναι αντίθετες. Έχουν μερικές παραμέτρους κοινές ενώ άλλες ορίζεται ως, η ποσότητα της διαφορετικότητας σε ένα

Τεχν. Χουν. ε.,- I σt. Έ )'.δ. Τ ΕΕ., 11, ΤΕύχ. 1-2 "1 996 Τcι:Ιι. (]lron. Sci. J. TC~G, τι, ~:o 1-2 19 μπορούν να θεωρηθούν συμπληρωματικές. Είναι αναμφισβήτητα δύσκολο να αποτιμηθεί το σχετικό βάρος του 'Χώρου 11 αξία της " ανταποκρισιμότητας" συνεπικουρούμενη α"ό εκείνη της "ενεργησιμότητας" του χώρου. Η των επί μέρους περιβαλλοντικών αξιών στο πλαίσιο του συνόλου των σχεδιαστικών αρχών που προτάθηκαν ή / και εφαρμόστηκαν σε oρισμtνες περιπτώσεις. Ωστόσο, φαίνεται.. από την θεωρητική ανάλυση, να αποκτά μεγαλύτερο βάρος στις διαδικασίες αντίληψης και γνώσης ενίσχυση, από τη μια, της αισθησιοκινητικής πράξης του παιδιού με κοινωνικούς στόχους και κίνητρα στα οποία θα εμπλέκεται και ο ίδιος ο χώρος και από την άλλτι της δυνατότητας του χώρου να μεταλλάσσεται και να "αντιδρά", μπορεί να αποδειχθεί καταλύτης της σχέσης παιδιού - κτισμένου mφιβάλλοντος. Kυριαιcή Tσoυιcαλά, Επ(κ. Καθηγήτρια Α.ηΘ.. Αριστοτέλειο Πανεπιστήμιο ΘεσσαλονΙκης. Πολυτεχνική Σχολή. Τμ.ήμα Αρχιτcκτόνων, 540 06 Θεσσαλον(κη.