La scuola per l'infanzia e primaria in Italia tra architettura e pedagogia. Proposte per la trasformazione degli spazi di apprendimento

Abstract

Starting from the recent law provisions contained in the MIUR (Italian Ministry of Education) Plan - and aimed to revamp school buildings, this Ph.D. thesis has investigated methods and preliminary criteria applicable to the transformation of learning spaces for preschool and primary school, presuming an interconnection among “pedagogy”, “architecture” and “technical regulations”. The results of the research are therefore to be found in both pedagogy and architecture, which have characterized the Ph.D. activities. That is to say, identifying meta-project guidelines for the transformation of existing spaces for preschools and primary schools in Italy – after analyzing a complex critical apparatus divided into working phases validated by the choice and analysis of case histories and by the selection of general and technical bibliographies. This made possible the development of a research based on the widespread knowledge of the phenomenology of the first-level school-system, through the understanding of pedagogical, architectural and legislative values and parameters that have served as the basis of its founding elements, as time passed by. As a result of such an interaction, several concept proposals have been put forward to scientifically implement the ongoing debate on the themes of strategic connections for models of “school regeneration”, that can affect the quality and organization of the architectural space at the service of Science of Education. It is clear that such a work presents some critical method- and content-related points. In the first case, it comes to acknowledging that the research identifies different procedures aiming to offer designers a technical and cultural argument-based framework, which is expressed above all through general operational guidelines. A sort of “evaluation and conceptual manual” apart from current “literature”, and therefore subject to changes in the parameters adopted. The second case complements the first one: namely, this Ph.D. experience could have continued subsequently as an “applied research” field activity, so as to verify the theses assumed in the foreword and gathered from meta-project results. Due to the general purposes of the different phases of the research, such a goal could not be achieved in this work and is therefore addressed to other and subsequent scientific research activities... [edited by author]