مقایسه تأثیر آموزش تلفیقی‌وتفکیکی بر مهارت‌های ترسیمی و ارتقاء انگیزه تحصیلی نوآموزان معماری

مطیعی, بابک

doi:10.22061/tej.2023.10122.2945

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

بابک مطیعی

گروه معماری، واحد ارومیه، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، ارومیه، ایران

https://doi.org/10.22061/tej.2023.10122.2945

چکیده

پیشینه و اهداف: آموزش دروس پایه در رشته معماری از اهمیت ویژهای برخوردار است و آموزش صحیح این دروس، نوآموزان معماری را در جهت یادگیری بهتر و طراحی خلاقانه در دروس طراحی معماری، هدایت خواهد نمود. با توجه به شیوه های آموزشی متفاوت و تغییرات ایجاده شده در سرفصل مقطع کارشناسی معماری و تفکیک دروس پایه، شاهد ناهماهنگی میان اساتید در آموزش مهارتهای اولیه آموزش معماری هستیم. با توجه به اهمیت مبحث نقشه کشی در رشته مهندسی معماری نیاز به بررسی تأثیر آموزش تلفیقی و تفکیکی بر کیفیت آموزش این مبحث است. انگیزش، از جمله مفاهیم رایج در مسائل آموزشی است. وقتی در سیستم آموزشی مشکلاتی همچون افت تحصیلی رخ می دهد، از انگیزه یادگیرنده به‌عنوان یکی از علل مهم آن یاد میشود. هدف اصلی این پژوهش، بررسی تأثیر آموزش تلفیقی و تفکیکی بر آموزش مهارتهای ترسیمی و ارتقاء انگیزه تحصیلی دانشجویان معماری است. سؤالات این پژوهش عبارتند از این‌که کدام‌یک از شیوه های تلفیقی و تفکیکی تأثیر بیشتری بر ارتقاء مهارت‌های ترسیمی دانشجویان معماری دارند؟ و این‌که کدام‌یک از این دو شیوه، تأثیر بیشتری بر ارتقاء انگیزه تحصیلی دانشجویان معماری دارند؟
روش‌ها‌: این پژوهش، از نظر هدف کاربردی و از نظر روش از نوع توصیفی- تحلیلی و علّی- مقایسه ای است. جامعه آماری، شامل دو گروه 30 نفره از دانشجویان مهندسی معماری دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد ارومیه در نظر گرفته شد. یک گروه 30 نفره به‌صورت آموزش تلفیقی در دانشگاه آزاد ارومیه در نیمسال اول 1401 و یک گروه 30 نفره دیگر، به صورت آموزش تفکیکی در دانشگاه آزاد ارومیه در نیمسال اول 1401 انتخاب شدند. در درس مقدمات طراحی معماری (1) برای آموزش تلفیقی در قالب (آتلیه الف) و آموزش تفکیکی در قالب (آتلیه ب)، آموزش های مربوط به نقشه کشی معماری ارائه شد. در انتهای آموزش برای چهار مبحث اصلی سه نما، پلان، مقطع و نما از دانشجویان آزمونهای ترسیمی گرفته شد. در انتهای دوره نیز، پرسشنامه انگیزش تحصیلی دانشجویان والرند در میان دانشجویان توزیع گردید. در این پژوهش کمّی از آزمون t برای گروه های مستقل و آزمون میانگین برای تجزیه و تحلیل داده ها استفاده شده است.
یافته‌ها: با توجه به داده های به دست آمده از مطالعه، مشخص میشود که آموزش تلفیقی در آموزش هر چهار مبحث نقشه کشی، موفق تر عمل نموده و دانشجویان نمرات بیشتری را کسب کردهاند. همسو بودن نتایج در دو قسمت مطالعه، شامل آزمون نقشه کشی و پرسشنامه انگیزه تحصیلی تأکیدی بر عملکرد بهتر آموزش تلفیقی در مبحث نقشه کشی است. کسب بیشترین امتیازات در مبحث سه نما و بعد از آن، ترسیم نما، ترسیم پلان و ترسیم مقطع در شیوه آموزش تلفیقی مؤید عملکرد بهتر این شیوه آموزشی میباشد. بالا بودن انگیزه تحصیلی در شیوه آموزش تلفیقی و تعامل بیشتر دانشجویان با یکدیگر بر یادگیری بیشتر دانشجویان تأثیرگذارتر بوده و باعث عملکرد بهتر آن‌ها می شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

فناوری آموزش- آموزش مهندسی

عنوان مقاله [English]

Comparison the effect of blended and differentiated education on drawing skills and improving the academic motivation of architecture novices

نویسنده [English]

B. Motiei

Department of Architecture, Urmia Branch, Islamic Azad University, Urmia, Iran

چکیده [English]

Background and Objectives: Teaching basic courses is of utmost importance in architecture and the proper teaching of these courses would guide architecture novices toward better learning and creative designing in architectural design courses. An inconsistency is observable among professors teaching the basic skills of architecture due to the different teaching methods and the changes made in the architecture bachelor's degree syllabus as well as the basic course differentiation. Considering the significance of the drawing course in the architectural engineering, it is required to investigate the effect of blended and differentiated instructions on the quality of teaching this topic. Motivation is one of the common concepts in educational issues. When problems, such as academic failure, occur in the educational system, the learner's motivation is mentioned as one of the major causes. The main objective of this research was to investigate the effect of blended education and differentiated instruction on teaching drawing skills and improving architecture students' academic motivation. The questions of the present research included: which of the blended education and differentiated instructions has more effect on improving the drawing skills of architecture students? And which of these two instructions has a greater effect on improving the architecture students' academic motivation?
Methods: This study was an applied descriptive-analytical and causal-comparative research. The statistical population included two 30-student groups of architectural engineering students of the Islamic Azad University of Urmia. A 30-student group was selected for blended instruction and another 30-student group was selected for differentiated instruction at the Islamic Azad University of Urmia in the first half of the academic year 2022. In the introductory course of architectural design (1), the architectural drawing course was presented in the format of Atelier A for the blended instruction group and it was separately presented in the format of Atelier B for the differentiated instruction group. At the end of the training, drawing tests were taken from the students regarding four main topics of three-view drawing, plan, section, and façade. At the end of the course, Wallerand's academic motivation questionnaire was distributed among the students. In this research, the t-test was used for evaluating the independent groups. Further, the mean values were considered for data analysis.
Findings: According to the obtained research data, it was obvious that blended instruction was more effective in teaching all four subjects of the drawing course and students obtained higher scores. The consistency of the results in the two sections of the research, including the drawing test and the academic motivation questionnaire, confirmed the better performance of blended education in the course of drawing. The higher scores of students in the case of three-view drawing and, then, façade, plan, and section in the blended teaching method confirmed the better performance of this instruction. The high academic motivation in the blended instruction and students' further interaction with each other was more effective in students' learning and made them perform better.
Conclusion: The results revealed that the blended instruction was more effective in teaching the three-view drawing, plan, section, and façade, and the scores of students who participated in the blended training atelier were higher in a specific exercise in comparison to those of the differentiated training atelier, and it can be concluded that blended instruction has a significantly greater average than differentiated instruction in all four exercises. Moreover, blended instruction improves the students' internal and external motivation.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

Blended Education
Differentiated Education
Academic Motivation
Architecture
Drawing Skill

COPYRIGHTS
© 2024 The Author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)

مراجع

[1] Zarei Zavaraki E, Salehi V. [Translation of A practical guide to integrated learning and teaching in face-to-face and distance education systems]. MacDonald J (Author). Tehran: Allameh Tabatabai Publications; 2006. P.1- 250. [In Persian].

[2] Dua S, Chahal K. Scenario of architectural education in India. Journal of the Institution of Engineers (India): Series A. 2014; 95(3): 185-194.

[3] Mohammed M, Elbelkasy, M. Digital modeling as a design tool in architecture studios. 13th conference in learning and technology (L&T): 2016 April 10-11: Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

[4] McDonnell J. Scaffolding practices: A study of design practitioner engagement in design education. Design Studies. 2016; 45: 9-29.

[5] Gozen G, Acer D. Measuring the architectural design skills of children aged 6-11. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2012; 46: 2225-2231.

[6] Afacan Y. Blended learning for non-studio courses: Interior architecture student experiences. Procedia-social and behavioral sciences. 2014; 116: 1599-1603.

[7] Ibrahim N, Utaberta N. Learning in Architecture design studio. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences.2012; 60: 30-35.

[8] Dayaratne R. Environment-behavior research and the teaching of Architecture in the design studio: An experiment in Bahrain. Procedia-social and behavioral sciences. 2013; 105: 314-324.

[9] Ormecioglu H, Ucar A. First design studio experience in education of interior architecture: an example of Akdeniz University. Procedia-social and behavioral sciences. 2012; 51: 1107-1111.

[10] Safari Y, Azizi K, Mohammadi Galini E, Yousefpour N. [Promoting academic achievement motivation in english and arabic courses using multimedia instruction]. Journal of Instruction and Evaluation, 2016; 9(33): 123-135. [In Persian].

[11] Khakpour A, Darvishi H. [The role of professional ethics of teachers in improving student achievement motivation]. Journal of Research in Teaching. 2017; 4(3): 47-62. [In Persian].

[12] Najafi M, Nosrati Heshi K, Hatami M, Motaghi Z. [Effects of faculty members positive character and its indices on educational motivation of students at the university of Isfahan]. New Educational Approaches. 2015; 10(1): 1-22. [In Persian].

[13] Sepahvandi M, Sabzian S, Geravand Y, Bayranvand S, Pirjavid F. [Effectiveness of cognitive techniques on academic motivation and academic performance of female high school students in Isfahan]. New Educational Approaches. 2016; 11(1): 63-80. [In Persian].

[14] Beirami M, Hashemi Nosrat Abadi T, Farhadi A, Movahedi Y. (2014). [The relationship between meaning and purpose of life and academic motivation with flexibility in female students]. Journal of women and family cultural – educational. 2014; 9(27): 183-201. [In Persian].

[15] Aghaei S, Shahbazi Y, Pirbabaei M, Beyti H. A hybrid SEM-neural network method for modeling the academic satisfaction factors of architecture students. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence. 2023; 4: 1-18.‏

[16] Ibrahim A, Attia A, Asma'M B, Ali H. Evaluation of the online teaching of architectural design and basic design courses case study: College of Architecture at JUST, Jordan. Ain Shams Engineering Journal. 2021; 12(2): 2345-2353.

[17] Darwish M, Kamel S, Assem A. Extended reality for enhancing spatial ability in architecture design education. Ain Shams Engineering Journal. 2023; 14(6): 1-13.‏

[18] Priya R, Shabitha P, Radhakrishnan S. Collaborative and participatory design approach in architectural design studios. Social Sciences & Humanities Open. 2020; 2(1): 1-12.‏

[19] Hossain S, Zaman K. Introducing BIM in outcome based curriculum in undergraduate program of architecture: Based on students perception and lecture-lab combination. Social Sciences & Humanities Open. 2022; 6(1): 100301.‏

[20] Zarei Zavaraki E. [Designing and validating the blended learning model with emphasis on digital technologies for students with special educational needs]. Psychology of Exceptional Individuals. 2019; 9(34): 51-78. [In Persian].

[21] Zarei Zavaraki E. [A blended approach to instructional design and learning environment: Critique of previous models and development of a new model]. Educational Psychology. 2012; 8(24): 29-50. [In Persian].

[22] Zarei Zavaraki E, Toofanineja Zarei E. [Blended learning: A new approach in educational system]. Higher Education Letter. 2011; 4(14): 71-87. [In Persian].

[23] Alizadeh Miandouab A, Akrami G, Nejati P. [A review of critical training in architectural design]. The Monthly Scientific Journal of Bagh-e Nazar. 2022; 19(111): 37-50. [In Persian].

[24] Sedaghati A, Hojjat E. [The instructional content of the architecture education in Iran and the success rate of the bachelors’ degree course in the transfer of this content]. JIAS. 2019; 8 (15):91-112. [In Persian].

[25] Mahdizadeh Saradj F, Motiei B. [The influence of education duration and course continuity on the emotional intelligence and creativity of graduates; An exploration of architectural education systems]. Journal of Armanshahr Architecture & Urban Development. 2023; 15(41): 169-180. [In Persian].

[26] Gharibpour A, Toutounchi Moghaddam M. [Comparative revising the curriculum of basic design studios in undergraduate studies of architecture]. Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba: Memary Va Shahrsazi. 2016; 20(4): 59-72. [In Persian].

[27] Motiei B, Mehdizadeh Saradj F, Bayzidi G. [The role of concurrent training in basic design courses on enhancing emotional intelligence, creativity and motivation of architecture students, case study: Second preliminary architectural design]. Research in Teaching. 2019; 7(3): 117-139. [In Persian].

[28] Saghafi M, Mozaffar F, Moosavi S. Investigating the impact of DCIS teaching method (direct collaboration of instructor and student) on the learning process of architectural design basics. Journal of Maremat & Me'mari-e Iran. 2016; 1(10): 79 – 90. [In Persian].

[29] Davoodeh H, Vasiq B, Mazhari M. [Life-based architecture training: A narrative-based approach in design by scenario planning]. Islamic Art Studies. 2022; 19(45): 187-204. [In Persian].

[30] Motiei B, Mehdizadeh Saradj F, Bayzidi Q. [An approach to dynamic and targeted education of architecture basic courses]. Technology of Education Journal (TEJ). 2018; 13(1): 191-202. [In Persian].

[31] Mahmoudabadi A, Nadimi H. [The educational function of caricature and its effect on the students’ educational motivation and satisfaction]. Technology of Education Journal (TEJ). 2015; 9(3): 145-153. [In Persian].

[32] Nikkar M, Hojjat I, Izadi A. [An Explanation to the goal construct and its application in generating motivation in architecture novice]. Journal of Iranian Architectural Studies.2013; 2(3): 85-106. [In Persian].

[33] Rahimi Kinchaa D, Abbaspour A, Taheri M, Zaraii Zavaraki E, Khorsandi A. [Challenges of professional development of faculty members of Allameh Tabataba'i University in online teaching]. Technology of Education Journal (TEJ). 2021; 15(3): 479-490. [In Persian].

[34] Ghasemi A, Shahriarifard A. [Identifying and ranking of effecting factors on E-learning qualities]. Technology of Education Journal (TEJ). 2016; 10(3): 207-218. [In Persian].

[35] Khaki Ghasr A, Pour Mehdi Ghayem Maghami H. [Educational experience of architectural elements design with a holistic or “whole-driven component” approach, design task: Window design at 1st-year courses]. Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba: Memary Va Shahrsazi. 2019; 23(4): 81-94. [In Persian].

[36] Khaki Ghasr A, Pour Mehdi Ghayem Maghami H. [Analyze of an educational experience at courses of architecture in first year of education, referring to nature in case of sunflower exercise]. Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba: Memary Va Shahrsazi. 2018; 23(1): 93-104. [In Persian].

[37] Vahabi S, Hojjat I. [Assessing the possibility of using constructive educational implications in teaching basic architectural design courses]. Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba: Memary Va Shahrsazi. 2022; 27(1): 35-50. [In Persian].

[38] Hosseini M, hosseini S, Mozafar F. [The effect of assessment along with reflection on improving the quality of learning for architecture students]. Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba: Memary Va Shahrsazi. 2021; 26(2): 17-24. Persian.

[39] Sadeghi fereshteh R, Dezhdar O, Jalalian S, Ardalani H. [Pathology of design studio education with a constructive approach to the nature of design knowledge]. Honar-Ha-Ye-Ziba: Memary Va Shahrsazi. 2021; 25(4): 43-54. [In Persian].

[40] Beladi Dehbozorg S, Kaboli M, Heidari A. [Investigating the role of student's teaching method on promoting their creativity Case studies: students of "Understanding and expressing the environment" course in the field of architecture1]. Technology of Education Journal (TEJ). 2019; 13(2): 428-438. [In Persian].

[41] Khosh Akhlagh H, Eslami M. [Presenting a model to strengthen the academic motivation of elementary school students with emphasis on educational technologies (interpretive modeling approach)]. Technology of Education Journal (TEJ). 2022; 16(4): 681-694. [In Persian].

[42] Mosavi Shafigh M, Khoshneshin Z, Mahdavi Nasab Y, Mojadam M. [The effect of teacher and student-based concept mapping on the motivation and learning of eighth grade high school students]. Technology of Education Journal (TEJ). 2023; 17(2): 279-292. [In Persian].

نامه به سردبیر

سر دبیر نشریه فناوری آموزش، با تواضع انتشار نامه های واصله از نویسندگان و خوانندگان و بحث در سامانه نشریه را ظرف 3 ماه از تاریخ انتشار آنلاین مقاله در سامانه و یا قبل از انتشار چاپی نشریه، به منظور اصلاح و نظردهی امکان پذیر نموده است.، البته این شامل نقد در مورد تحقیقات اصلی مقاله نمی باشد.

توچه به موارد ذیل پیش از ارسال نامه به سردبیر لازم است در نظر گرفته شود:

[1]نامه هایی که شامل گزارش از آمار، واقعیت ها، تحقیقات یا نظریه ها هستند، لازم است همراه با منابع معتبر و مناسب باشند، اگرچه ارسال بیش از زمان 3 نامه توصیه نمی گردد

[2] نامه هایی که بجای انتقاد سازنده به ایده های تحقیق، مشتمل بر حملات شخصی به نویسنده باشند، توجه و چاپ نمی شود

[3] نامه ها نباید بیش از 300 کلمه باشد

[4] نویسندگان نامه لازم است در ابتدای نامه تمایل یا عدم تمایل خود را نسبت به چاپ نظریه ارسالی نسبت به یک مقاله خاص اعلام نمایند

[5] به نامه های ناشناس ترتیب اثر داده نمی شود

[6] شهر، کشور و محل سکونت نویسندگان نامه باید در نامه مشخص باشد.

[7] به منظور شفافیت بیشتر و محدودیت حجم نامه، ویرایش بر روی آن انجام می پذیرد.