A Case Study on the Urban Perception of Disabled Students in Samsun (Turkey)

Abstract

Individual differences, especially physical disabilities, play a significant role in people’s perception of their living spaces and their attitudes in these environments. Accordingly, the starting point of the present research is based on the possible contributions and developments of the implementations and studies partly eliminating the negative aspects of individual disabilities to the perceptions and information of the disabled people regarding the physical and social environment that they live in. The research aims to determine the impacts of time and experience on the recognition of the historical, cultural, and natural heritage properties of Samsun by the disabled students, on the analysis-based acquisition process of this information, and on the development and alteration of the disabled students’ knowledge and perceptions regarding these properties. Within the scope of this purpose, the study has been carried out with a one-group pretest-posttest design recognized as the weak experimental design in the category of the experimental method. The mental mapping technique has been used as the data collection tool of the study. In the research, it has been observed that the theme contents of the posttest mental maps of the disabled students regarding the values symbolizing Samsun city are richer than the theme contents of their pretest mental maps. In other words, it has been detected that time and experience create a positive effect on the knowledge and perception of the disabled students regarding Samsun. It is considered that the increase in the projects that are designed for the disabled, travel-observation activities, and tools that enable the disabled to reach the natural, historical and cultural values will make positive contributions to their knowledge and perceptions regarding the cities that they live in.

Keywords

• Disabled students,Samsun,provincial perception,travel-observation,mental mapping

References

1. Açar, S. (2010). The effects of expedition in social studies lesson in primary school on the field of trip students? critical thinking skill and environmental sensitivity (Master dissertation). Onsekiz Mart University, Çanakkale. Retrieved from https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezSorguSonucYeni.jsp
2. Akbaş, Y., & Toros, S. (2016). Pre-service elementary teachers’ geographic information sources and world images in their mental maps. Eastern Geographical Review, 21(36), 201-224.
3. Akgün, A., Duruk, Ü., & Tokur, F. (2017). Investigation of the field trip methods’ effectiveness: As a way of improving preservice teachers’ views on environmental education, Route Educational and Social Science Journal, 4(2), 65-82.
4. Aliağaoğlu, A. (2007). An example to behavioral geography: Student centered Balıkesir city image. Fırat University Journal of Social Science, 17, 17-44.
5. Aliağaoğlu, A., & Uğur, A. (2010). Şehir coğrafyası. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım,
6. Arı, Y. (2017). From environmental determinizm to political ecology: Approaches in human-environment geography in the world and in Turkey during the last 100 years. Eastern Geographical Review, 22(37), 1-34.
7. Aytaç, A. (2014). The place and importance of the field trip method for the social science teacher candidates education. HAYEF: Journal of Education, 11(1), 55-69.
8. Balım, A. G., Aydın, G. & Evrekli, E. (2006 Nisan). The importance of using mind maps and concept maps in science and technologyteaching. In H. Yaratan, (Eds.), VI. International Educational Technologies Conference (213-224). Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC): Eastern Mediterranean University in Gazimagusa.

9. Baltacı, A. (2017). Miles-Huberman Model in Qualitative Data Analysis. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (3) 1, 1-15.
10. Başkonak, M. (2019). Türkiye’de işitme engellilerin din eğitimi. Konya: Eğitim Yayınevi.
11. Blades, M. (1990). The reliability of data collected from sketch maps. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 10(4), 327-339.
12. Boschmann, E. E. & Cubbon, E. (2014). Sketch maps and qualitative GIS: Using cartographies of individual spatial narratives in geographic research. The Professional Geographer, 66(2), 236-248.
13. Brennan-Horley C. (2010). Mental mapping the “creative city”. Journal of Maps. 6(1), 250-259. DOI : 10.4113/jom.2010.1082
14. Canbazoğlu Bilici, S. (2019). Örnekleme yöntemleri. In H. Özmen & O. Karamustafaoğlu (Eds.). Eğitimde araştırma yöntemleri (55-80). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
15. Cengiz Gökçe, G. & Açıksöz , S. (2017). The evaluation of the rural landscape identity by mind mapping method: The case of Nallihan Beydili, Uluslararası Hakemli Tasarım ve Mimarlık Dergisi, 10, 37-55.
16. Chouinard, V. (2001). Disability, Geography of. In J. Neil Smelser and P. B. Baltes (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (pp. 3701–3704). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
17. Corazon, S. S., Stigsdotter, U. K., Moeller, M. S., & Rasmussen, S. M. (2012). Nature as therapist: Integrating permaculture with mindfulness-and acceptance-based therapy in the Danish Healing Forest Garden Nacadia. European Journal of Psychotherapy & Counselling, 14(4), 335-347.
18. Da Vinha, L. (2012). Charting geographic mental maps in foreign policy analysis: A literature review. Human Geographies-Journal of Studies & Research in Human Geography, 6(1), 6-17. DOI: 10.5719/hgeo.2012.61.5
19. Dernat, S., Johany, F., & Lardon, S. (2016). Identifying choremes in mental maps to better understand socio-spatial representations. Cybergeo: European Journal of Geography. DOI : 10.4000/cybergeo.27867
20. Downs, R. M., & Stea, D. (1973). Cognitive maps and spatial behavior: Process and products. In R. M. Downs, & D. Stea (Eds.), Image and environment (pp. 8–26). Chicago: Aldine.
21. Downs, R. M. & Stea, D. (1977). Maps in minds: Reflections on cognitive mapping. Newyork: HarperCollins Publishers.
22. Genç, Y. &, Çat, G. (2013). Employment of disabled people and social inclusion relationship. Journal of Academic Inquiries, (8)1, 363-393.
23. Genç, Y. (2015). Social problems and expectations of disabled people. Sosyal Politika Çalışmaları Dergisi, (35)2, 65-92.
24. Gieseking, J. J. (2013). Where we go from here: The mental sketch mapping method and its analytic components. Qualitative Inquiry, 19(9), 712-724.
25. Gleeson, B. (1999). Geographies of disability. New York and London: Routledge,
26. Gold, J.R. (2019). Behavioural geography. In A. Kobayashi (Eds.) International Encyclopedia of Human Geography, second edition, volume 1. (pp. 1-21). Oxford: Elsevier.
27. Golledge, R. G. (1993). Geography and the disabled: a survey with special reference to vision impaired and blind populations. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers,18,1, 63-85.
28. Golledge, R. G. (1997). On reassembling one's life: overcoming disability in the academic environment. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 15(4), 391-409.
29. Goodier C.I., & Soetanto R. (2013). Building future scenarios using cognitive mapping. Journal of Maps, 9(2), 203-217. DOI:10.1080/17445647.2013.770997
30. Göregenli, M. (2015). Çevre psikolojisi: insan mekan ilişkileri. İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, İstanbul: Matris Matbaa.
31. Gueben-Venière S. (2011). How can mental maps, applied to the coast environment, help in collecting and analyzing spatial representations?, EchoGéo, 17, 1-11. DOI : 10.4000/echogeo.12625
32. Gürbüz, S., & Şahin, F. (2014). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
33. Haas V., Levasseur E., Béal A., Charrier L., Demoures A., Kalampalikis N., … & Rampon J.M. (2011). Villeurbanne, à la croisée des mémoires (Araştırma raporu), Université Lumière de, Lyon.
34. Hartig, T., Mitchell, R., De Vries, S., & Frumkin, H. (2014). Nature and health. Annual review of public health, 35, 207-228.
35. Hasol, D. (1999). Mimari İzlenimler. İstanbul: Yem Yayınları.
36. Jacobson , D. (2016). Geography of disability. In Oxford Bibliographies. Retrieved from https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199874002/obo-9780199874002-0064.xml
37. Jacobson, D. (2006). Behavioral geography. In B. Warf (Eds.), Encyclo‐ pedia of human geography (pp. 17-18). London: Sage
38. Karadeniz, O., Tangülü, Z. & Melike, F. (2013). The effects of using mind mapping technique in secondary 6.th grade social studies lesson to the students' academic achievements. Karadeniz Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 5(8), 131-142.
39. Karataş, S.(2010). The analysis of computer education and instructional technologies prospective teachers’ mind maps relating to their profession (The case of Gazi University) Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(1), 159-173
40. Lynch, K. (1960). The imaj of city. MIT Press Cambridge, MASS.
41. Marvin Levine, E. (1980). Cognitive maps, ımagery and memory for street directions, (Doctoral dissertation), Microfilms International University, England.
42. Miles, M, B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded Sourcebook. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
43. Montello, D. R. (2016). Behavioral Geography. In B. Warf (Eds.), Oxford bibliographies in geography, New York: Oxford University Press.
44. Mülayim, A., & Özşahin, B. (2010). Suggestions for solving problems which disabled people face ataccommodations. Öz-Veri Dergisi, 7(2), 1663-1684.
45. Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning to learn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
46. Okamoto, K. (1998). History of behavioral geography and its future. Japanese Journal of Human Geography, 50(1), 23-42.
47. Özmen, H. (2019). Deneysel araştırma yöntemi. In H. Özmen & O. Karamustafaoğlu (Eds.). Eğitimde araştırma yöntemleri (pp. 197-227). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
48. Park, D. C., Radford, J. P., & Vickers, M. H. (1998). Disability studies in human geography. Progress in human geography,22(2), 208-233.
49. Pouya, S , Demirel, Ö . (2018). Positive health effects of the natural environment on children with disability. Journal of Agriculture and Nature, 21 (5), 786-799.
50. Pouya, S., Bayramoğlu, E. and Demirel, Ö. (2015). Investigation of Healing Garden Design Methods, Kastamonu Unıversity, Journal of Forestry Faculty, 15 (1): 15-25.
51. Rediscovering Geography Committee (1997). Rediscovering geography: New relevance for science and society. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
52. Reuchamps M., Kavadias D. ve Deschouwer, K. (2014). Drawing Belgium: using mental maps to measure territorial conflict. Territory, Politics, Governance. 2(1), 30-51. DOI : 10.1080/21622671.2013.814549
53. Siochos, V. & Papatheodorou, C. (2011). Developing a formal model for mind maps. First Workshop on Digital Information Management, 39-44. http://eprints.rclis.org/15842/1/04.Sioc hos.pdf
54. Sözbilir, M. (2012). Deneysel araştırma desenleri. Retrieved from https://fenicay.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/hafta-4-deneysel-arac59ftc4b1rma-desenleri.pdf
55. Südaş, İ., & Öz, İ. (2018). Cognitive maps in behavioural geography: The case of Ege University Campus, Turkish Geographical Review, 71, 81-92.
56. Temurçin K., & Keçeli, K. (2015) A study of behavioral geography: A case study on the spatial perception of the international students in Isparta. SDU Faculty of Arts and Sciences Journal of Social Sciences, 36, 117-138.
57. Tümertekin, E., & Özgüç. N. (2009). Beşeri coğrafya insan-kültür-mekân. İstanbul: Çantay Kitabevi.
58. Tunçel, H. (2002). Islamic countries images of Turkish geography students. Fırat University Journal of Social Science, 12(2), 83-103.
59. Türkyılmaz, H. (2017). Mind mapping as an innovative teaching method and its usage in religious education. International Journal of Education Technology and Scientific Researches, 2(3), 148-161.
60. Üçışık Erbilen, S. (2012). An example for urban space perception: Famagusta (Ismet Inonu Boulevard), H. U. Journal of Education), Special Issue, 1, 157-166.
61. Varnacı Uzun, F., & Altaş A. (2018). Perceptions of Aksaray University students about food-beverage places in the city center of Aksaray. Coğrafi Bilimler Dergisi CBD. 16 (1), 121 -134.
62. Wartmann, F. & Purves, R. (2017). What’s (not) on the map: landscape features from participatory sketch mapping differ from local categories used in Language. Land, 6 (4), 1-16. DOI:10.3390/land6040079.
63. Wise, N., & Heckley-Kon, J. (1990) Assessing geographic knowledge with sketch maps. Journal of Geography. 89(3), 123-129.
64. Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2008). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (6. Baskı). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
65. Zajadacz, A. (2015). The contribution of the geography of disability to the development of ‘accessible tourism’. Turyzm,25(1), 19-27.