فصلنامه علمی

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه معماری، دانشکده هنر و معماری صبا، هیات علمی دانشگاه شهید باهنر کرمان، کرمان، ایران

2 گروه معماری،دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران

چکیده

پیشینه و اهداف: در فرایند طراحی، تصاویر به عنوان محرک بصری ابزار مهمی در رسیدن به ایده­های خلاق طراحی هستند. این موضوع باعث شده تا در حوزه فناوری آموزش، مطالعات وسیعی در خصوص روش­های استفاده از محرک­های بصری به عنوان ابزاری آموزشی انجام شود. از آنجا که محرک می‌تواند بر اساس نوع تشابه با مسأله طراحی و کیفیت(واضح، مبهم) تقسیم‌بندی شود؛ در برخی از پژوهش­ها تأثیر انواع محرک بصری بر خلاقیت طراحی دانشجویان مورد بررسی قرار گرفته است. سطح دانشجویان موضوع دیگری بوده که در خلاقیت دانشجویان هنگام استفاده از انواع محرک، اثرگذار بوده است. همچنین برخی از مطالعات، ارتباط نوع تکلیف طراحی و محرک بصری را مورد کنکاش قرار داده‌اند.  با این حال ارزیابی جامعی از اثربخشی  این روش­ها در حوزه آموزش طراحی معماری صورت نگرفته است.  بنابراین هدف پژوهش حاضر بررسی میزان اثربخشی روش­های استفاده از محرک­های بصری  در آموزش طراحی است.
روش‌ها: در این پژوهش ابتدا چارچوبی برای استفاده از محرک بصری براساس پژوهش­های قبلی تدوین می‌شود که شامل دو بخش است: در بخش اول ارتباط انواع محرک با وجوه مربوط به خلاقیت مشخص شد؛  بخش دوم شامل مواردی بود که بر شیوه استفاده از محرک توسط دانشجویان اثر می­گذارد و شامل سطح دانشجویان­، نوع تکلیف و مسأله طراحی می­شد. سپس از  روش مرور همقطاران برای سنجش میزان اثربخشی روش­های استفاده از محرک­های بصری  در آموزش طراحی گرفت. بنابراین مدرسین با تجربه معماری از دو کشور ایران و ایالات متحده، متن تدوین شده را ارزیابی کردند. در این راستا، نظرات مدرسان از طریق مصاحبه ضبط و سپس نظرات آنها نگاشته شد، و به روش کیفی و از طریق کدگذاری مورد تحلیل قرار گرفت. بنابراین نظرات شرکت‌کنندگان براساس بخش­های مختلف تفکیک شد و در مرحله بعد محتوای آن در ارتباط با تأیید، تجربیات مشابه، نقد و یا پیشنهادات، کدگذاری شد.
یافته‌ها: نظرات معلمین باتجربه در خصوص دو بخش روش­های استفاده از محرک؛ و همین‌طور شرایط تأثیرگذار دراستفاده از آنها مورد تحلیل قرار گرفت. شرکت‌کنندگان ضمن تأیید موضوعات مربوط به انواع محرک و تکلیف طراحی، تجربیات متعددی در خصوص برداشت صحیح از انواع محرک ارائه نمودند. در بخش دوم، در ارتباط با تأثیر سطح دانشجو و نوع مسأله طراحی، ضمن تأیید نقش این دو عامل، برخی از معلمین نقدها و پیشنهاداتی به دسته‌بندی موضوع داشتند.
نتیجه‌گیری:  نتایج حاصل از مرور همقطاران علاوه بر تأیید شیوه­های استفاده از محرک­های بصری، روش­هایی ارائه می­کند که می­تواند اثربخشی  از محرک­های بصری را در آموزش طراحی بالا ببرد. همچنین معلمین باتجربه نقدها و پیشنهاداتی نسبت به برخی موضوعات داشتند. به‌طور مثال محرکی که تشابه بیشتری با مسأله طراحی دارد؛ تأثیر بیشتری نسبت به  تصاویری دارد که تشابه کمتری با مسأله طراحی دارد و یا هنگام استفاده از ترسیمات مبهم مربوط به طراحان باتجربه، باید به این نکته توجه داشت که آنها چگونه از ترسیماتشان استفاده می‌کنند و طی چه فرایندی آن ترسیمات تبدیل به ایده نهایی می‌شود و این موضوع لازم است به دانشجویان آموزش داده شود. همچنین تقسیم مسائل به فرمی و عملکردی ابهاماتی دارد و باید از روش‌های دیگر برای تقسیم مسائل استفاده نمود. نتایج حاصل از تحلیل نظرات معلمین با تجربه می­تواند علاوه بر توسعه موضوع، برای پژوهش­های بعدی استفاده شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Evaluating the effectiveness of methods of using visual stimuli in the design creativity of architecture students

نویسندگان [English]

  • M. Ashrafganjouei 1
  • H. Nadimi 2

1 Department of Architecture, Saba Faculty of Art and Architecture, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman

2 Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism, Shahid Behesti University, Tehran, Iran

چکیده [English]

Background and Objectives: During design process, images as visual stimuli are significant tools in reaching creative design ideas. So this issue has resulted in conducting extensive studies in the field of education technology on the methods of using visual stimuli as an educational tool. Since the visual stimuli can be categorized based on their similarity to the design problem or their quality (clear, ambiguous), in some of the studies, the impact of various types of visual stimuli on students’ design creativity have been examined. The level of students is another factor which could have an influence on students’ creativity when they were using visual stimuli. Also, in some studies, the relationship between the type of the design task and the visual stimuli have been investigated.  However, there is no comprehensive evaluation of the effectiveness of these methods in the field of architecture design education. As a result, the purpose of the present research is examining the effectiveness of the methods of using visual stimuli in design training.   
Methods: In the present study, first, a frame work for using visual stimuli based on previous studies was suggested which consisted of two sections: in the first section, the relationship between different types of visual stimuli and different aspects of creativity was determined; the second section, the factors influencing the methods of using the visual stimuli by the students were determined and it consisted of students’ level, the type of the design task, and the design problem. Then,the methodofpeer review was applied to evaluate the effectiveness of the methods of using the visual stimuli in the design training. As a result, expert teachers in architecture from Iran and the United States evaluated the compiled text. In this regard, the teachers’ opinions were recorded through interviews and then their opinions were written and analyzed by a qualitative coding method. Peer review as the method of analysis was applied to investigate the validity of those methods. First participants’ ideas were gathered by interview. All their utterances were audio recorded and transcribed. In the next step the data was analyzed by a qualitative coding method. So the utterances of the participants were segmented based on the different sections then, in the next stage, their content were codified in terms of validation, similar experience; criticism or suggestions.
Findings: The opinions of the expert teachers were examined according to two sections of methods of using visual stimuli and also the effective conditions for using them in design education. Besides confirming the methods related to the types of stimulus and design task, the participants also provided numerous educational experiences on the proper interpretation of various types of stimuli. In the second section, besides confirming the impact of the students’ level, and the type of the design problem, some of the teachers offered criticisms and suggestions regarding the classifications of these problems.
Conclusion: The results of peer review, besides confirming the methods of using visual stimuli, provide approaches that can improve the effectiveness of the methods of using visual stimuli n design education. Moreover, the expert teachers offered criticisms and suggestions regarding some problems. and also add some suggestions. For example, the visual stimulus which has more similarity to the design problem has more effect on students’ design creativity than those images which have less similarity to the design problem.  Or when using the ambiguous sketches related to the expert designers, the way they use their sketches and the stages through which these sketches are transformed into the final idea should be taken into consideration and these processes should also be taught to the students. In other words, students need to know how expert designers transform those ambiguous images to final design solution. Also, categorizing the design problems into formal and functional has ambiguities and other methods of categorization should be used.   The results of analyzing the opinions of the expert teachers can be used for future research besides the development of the subject.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • "Evaluating "
  • "Visual Stimuli "
  • "Creativity of Architecture Students "
  • "Visual Stimuli and Design Education "

[1] Ashraf Ganjouei, M.  A Study of the methods to elicit imagery by visual stimuli to improve design creativity for architecture students [dissertation]. Isfahan: Art University of Isfahan; 2017. Persian.

 [2] Goldschmidt G. Not from scratch: The DMS model of design creativity. In Design Creativity 2010 2011 (pp. 63-70). Springer, London.

 [3] Finke R A, WardTB, & Smith S M. Creative cognition: Theory, research, and applications. Mass: MIT press; 1992.

 [4] Sio UN, Kotovsky K, Cagan J. Fixation or inspiration? A meta-analytic review of the role of examples on design processes. Design Studies. 2015 July;39:70-99.

 [5] Vasconcelos LA, Crilly N. Inspiration and fixation: Questions, methods, findings, and challenges. Design Studies. 2016 Jan 1;42:1-32.

 [6] Schon DA, Wiggins G. Kinds of seeing and their functions in designing. Design studies. 1992 Apr 1;13(2):135-156.

 [7] Goel V. Sketches of thought. Mass: MIT press; 1995.

 [8] Goldschmidt G, Smolkov M. Variances in the impact of visual stimuli on design problem solving performance. Design Studies. 2006; 27(5): 549–569.

 [9] Dixon RA. Experts and novices: Differences in their use of mental representation and metacognition in engineering design ] [dissertation], University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign).

 [10] Ozkan O, & Dogan F. Cognitive strategies of analogical reasoning in design: Differences between expert and novice designers. Design Studies. 2013; 34(2): 161–192.

 [11] Verstijnen I, Heylighen A, Wagemans J, & NeuckmansH.  Sketching, analogies, and creativity on the shared research interests of psychologists and designers. 2nd International Conference on Visual and Spatial reasoning in Design, VR’01: 2001: Bellagio, Lake Como, Italy.

 [12] Christensen B T, SchunnC D. The relationship of analogical distance to analogical function and preinventive structure: The case of engineering design. Memory & Cognition. 2007; 35(1): 29–38.

 [13] Vosniadov S, Ortony, A. Similarity and analogical reasoning: a synthesis. Similarity and Analogical Reasoning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1989.

 [14] Heylighen A, Verstijnen I M. Close encounters of the architectural kind. Design Studies. 2003; 24(4): 313–326.

 [15] Tversky B, Chou JY. Creativity: depth and breadth. In Design Creativity 2010 2011 (pp. 209-214). London: Springer.  

 [16] Goldschmidt G. The dialectics of sketching. Creativity Research Journal. 1991; 4(2): 123–143.

 [17] Purcell A, Gero J S. Drawings and the design process: A review of protocol studies in design and other disciplines and related research in cognitive psychology. Design Studies. 1998; 19(4): 389–430.

 [18] Tseng WS, Ball L J. How uncertainty helps sketch interpretation in a design task. In Design creativity 2010. Springer; 2010, p. 257–264.

[19] Zahner D, Nickerson J V, Tversky B, Corter J E, & Ma J AI EDAM. 2010; 24(2): 231–244.

 [20] Hocking D. The brief in art and design education: A multi-perspectival and mixed-methodological study. [dissertation]. Department of Linguistics, Macquarie University: Sydney; 2014.

 [21] Williams C B, Lee Y, Gero J, Paretti M C. Exploring the effects of the design prompt on students’ design cognition. In ASME 2013 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference; 2013: American Society of Mechanical Engineers.

 [22] Casakin H. Metaphors in the design studio: Implications for education. In DS 33: Proceedings of E & PDE 2004, the 7th International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education; 2004: Delft, the Netherlands.

[23] Casakin H. Visual analogy, visual displays, and the nature of design problems: the effect of expertise. Environment and Planning: Planning and Design. 2010; 37(1): 170–188.

 [24] Casakin H, Goldschmidt G. Expertise and the use of visual analogy: implications for design education. Design Studies. 1999; 20(2): 153–175.

 [25] Tversky B, Suwa M. Thinking with sketches. In: A. Markman (ed.), Tools for innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2009. p.75-84.

 [26] Casakin H. Design aided by visual displays: a cognitive approach. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research. 2005;22: 250–265.

 [27] Schriver K A. Evaluating text quality: The continuum from text-focused to reader-focused methods. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication. 1989; 32(4): 238–255.

 [28] Berk R. A Survey of 12 strategies to measure teaching effectiveness. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. 2005; 17(1): 48–62.

[29] Özbek G, “The development of  a model for tablet pc usage in education: expectations to realities”, 2014. (unpublished).

 [30] Thomas S, Chie Q T, Abraham M, Jalarajan Raj S, Beh, L S.  A qualitative review of literature on peer review of teaching in higher education: An application of the SWOT framework. Review of Educational Research; 2014, 84(1): 112–159.

 [31] NadimiH. Conceptualizing a framework for integrity in architectural education: with some references to Iran. University of York. 1996.

 [32] Gall M D, Borg WR, and Gall J P. Educational research: An introduction. New York: Longman Publishing. 1996.