نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 گروه طراحی شهری، دانشکده مهندسی معماری و شهرسازی دانشگاه تربیت دبیر شهید رجائی ، تهران، ایران
2 گروه معماری، دانشکده هنر و معماری، دانشگاه آزاد واحد شهرکرد، شهرکرد، ایران
چکیده
برنامه‌های آموزشی دانشگاهی ازجمله آموزشمعماریمتأثر از کیفیت آموزشی و استفاده از اساتید برجسته بوده و شامل واحدهای نظری، عملی و پژوهشی است. یکی از معیارهای ارزش گزاری برنامه‌های آموزشی در سطح بین‌المللی میزان بروندادهای پژوهشی در رده‌بندی بین‌المللی یا QSاست. عدم شناخت ارتباط بین ساختار برنامه آموزشی و میزان بروندادهای پژوهشی در سطح جهانی باعث عدم هماهنگی برنامه‌های آموزشی با بروندادهای پژوهشی و درنتیجه رتبه‌بندی پایین‌تر دانشگاه‌ها می‌شود. لذا برای نخستین بار در این مقاله این مسئله بررسی شد. جهت گردآوری داده ابتدا 10 دانشکده برتر معماری جهان و سه دانشکده برتر ایران که داری ضریب تأثیر بالاتر در رده‌بندی جهانی بودند انتخاب و سپس معنی‌داری سطوح بالادست و پایین‌دست ساختار برنامه آموزشی آنها ازجمله کیفیت آموزشی، استفاده از اساتید برجسته و هر یک از ساعت واحدهای عملی، نظری و پژوهشی با میزان بروندادهای پژوهشی بررسی شد. نتایج این مقاله نشان می‌دهد که ارتباط بین استفاده از اساتید برجسته و ساعت واحد آموزش عملی و نظری با بروندادهای پژوهشی در تمامی این 13 دانشگاه برتر وجود ندارد. دیگر یافته این مقاله مبین نبود ارتباط بین ساعت واحدهای پژوهشی با بروندادهای پژوهشی سه دانشکده برتر معماری ایران است.
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
Investigating the Relationship between the Structure of Educational Program and Research Outputs in Top Iranian and international Architectural Schools
نویسندگان [English]
- S. Razzaghi Asl 1
- M. Farhadian 2
1 Department of Urban Design, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Engineering, Tarbiat Dabir Shahid Rajaei University, Tehran, Iran
2 Department of Architecture, Faculty of Art and Architecture, Azad University, Shahrekord Branch, Shahrekord, Iran
چکیده [English]
Academic educational programs such as architectural programs are all influenced by the quality of education and Premier academic staff. They also consist of theoretical, practical and experimental units. One of the criteria for evaluating such international educational programs is the rate of their research outputs in an international ranking called QS. The lack of knowledge about the relationship between the structure of educational programs and the rate of their research outputs in an international scale causes the inconsistency between educational programs and research outputs. This matter consequently leads to a lower international ranking of universities. Thus, the current article aimed at addressing this issue for the first time. To collect data, the thirteen and three top international and Iranian architectural faculties with higher impact factors in the global rankings were selected. Then, the meaningful relationship between the research outputs and their educational systems upstream and downstream levels, including the relationship between the quality of education, educational programs, faculty members and allotted hours to theoretical, practical and experimental units and the research outputs were investigated. The results revealed that there is no relationship between having top academic staff and allotted hours to theoretical, practical and experimental units and the research outputs in all top international faculties. In addition, the results showed that there is no relationship between the hours allotted to research units and the research outputs of top three Iranian architectural faculties.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
- The structure of architecture's educational program
- research outputs
- QS ranking
- top architectural faculties of Iran and the world
[1] G. Harman, Quality Assurance for Education: Developing and Managing Quality Assurance for Education Systems and Institutions in Asia on the Pacific, Wiley, New York, (2006).
[2] S.E. Pariseau, and Mc. Daniel, “an Integrated Framework for Quality in Education: Application of Quality Function Deployment, Interpretive Structural Modeling and Path Analysis”, Total Quality Management, Vol. 17, No .2, pp. 121-134, (1997).
[3] C. M. Reigeluth, “The imperative for systemic change”, Systemic change in education, Eds. C. M. Reigeluth & R. J. Garfinkle, Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs, pp. 3-11, (1994).
[4] M. Mozayeni, since time and architecture, Center for Urban Studies and Architecture of Iran, Tehran, pp. 43-54, (2005).
[5] Jl. Goodlad, the development of conceptual system for dealing with problems of curriculum and instruction, cooperative program USOE project no, University of California, Los Angeles, PP.123-125, (1996).
[6] M. Kentgen, the Bauhaus and the America. Massachusetts, Cambridge, pp. 222, (1999).
[7] H. Shabani, Skills training Teaching Methods and Technology, The study, designing books Humanities University, Tehran, PP.127, (2007).
[8] J. brunner, the culture of education, Harvard Univercity Press, Cambridge, PP.136-142, (1996).
[9] A. Nafisi, “Analysis Higher Education Report No. 6”, Institution Research and Planning in Higher Education, Ministry of Science, Research and Technology , pp. 309, (2001).
[10] J. Cheol Shin, K. Robert and T. U. Teichler, “University Rankings Theoretical Basis, Methodology and Impacts on Global Higher Education. The Changing Academy – The Changing Academic Profession in International Comparative Perspective 3”, University of Georgia Institute of Higher Education, pp.286, (2011).
[11] V.R. Yeravdekar and G. Tiwari, “Global Rankings of Higher Education Institutions and India’s Effective Non-Presence: Why Have World-Class Universities Eluded the Indian Higher Education System? And, How Worthwhile is the Indian Government’s Captivation to Launch World Class Universities?”, Proc of Social and Behavioral Sciences 157,pp. 63 – 83, (2014).
[12] Ministry of Higher Education, “General specifications, program and Architectural engineering graduate headlines”, Tehran, p. 3, (1998).
[13] http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/university-subject-rankings/2015/architecture#sorting=rank+region=+country=+faculty=+stars=false+search
[14] https://www.ethz.ch/en/studies/prospective-masters-degree-students.html
[15] https://architecture.mit.edu/
[16] http://www.bk.tudelft.nl/en/
[17] www.bartlett.ucl.ac.uk/architecture
[18]http://ced.berkeley.edu/academics/architecture/programs/master-of-architecture
[19]www.arch.tsinghua.edu.cn/qhqt/homePage/homePage.html
[20] www.msa.ac.uk/study/march/
[21] fac.arch.hku.hk/
[22] https://www.arch.nus.edu.sg/
[23] https://www.arch.columbia.edu/programs/1-master-of-architecture
[24] www.msrt.ir
[25] A. Eini far, “Open Engineering PhD courses and the importance of research”, Engineers Education in Iran, vol8, N29, pp. 97-114, (1998).
[26] M. Yaghobi & K. Azizan, “Cash on courses PhD in Architecture”, Journal of Fine Arts, N3, pp. 90-92, (2006).
)
ارسال نظر در مورد این مقاله