پرورش توانایی طراحی طراحان مبتدی معماری طراحی، کاربست و آزمون یک محیط یادگیری سازنده‌گرا
Nurturing Design Ability of Novice Architecture Designers* Designing, Implementation and Testing a Constructivist Learning Environment
اشتراک گذاری
اشتراک در شبکه های اجتماعی :
گزارش خطا
هدف تحقیق حاضر، طراحی، کاربست و آزمون راهکاری تربیتی برای پرورش توانایی طراحی دانشجویان مبتدی معماری است. این راهکار تربیتی، یک محیط یادگیری است که محصول یک طراحی آموزشی سازنده گرا، و متضمن دلالت های تربیتی یک مدل توصیفی رشد توانایی طراحی است. کانون توجه این محیط، اشتغال دانشجویان به تکالیف اصیل و واقعی مسئله گشایی طراحی معماری است که توسط رویارویی ساختاریافته و روایتگرانه با پیشینه های ذیربط معماری پشتیبانی میشوند. همچنین، بهره گیری از منابع اطلاعات و ابزارهایی به مسئله گشایی طراحی دانشجویان مبتدی کمک میکنند. مربیان نیز از طریق فعالیت های آموزشی سرمشق شدن، راهنمایی/ راهبری و حمایت/ مراقبت فعالیتهای مسئله گشایی دانشجویان را پشتیبانی میکنند. آزمون کاربست این محیط با استفاده از یک طرح تحقیق شبه آزمایشی پیش آزمون- پس آزمون با گروه گواه انجام شد. داده های تحقیق با استفاده از روش سنجش عملکردی و از طریق تعیین رتبه های فراورده های طراحی دانشجویان توسط هیئت داوران مجرب گردآوری شدند. یافته های تحقیق نشان میدهند که محیط یادگیری سازنده گرای طراحی معماری رشد توانایی طراحی دانشجویان مبتدی را تسهیل میکند و خلاقیت طراحی ایشان را بهبود میبخشد. نتایج تحقیق مؤید تأثیر مثبت کسب دانش رویدادی طراحی و توسعه طرحواره های طراحی در رشد توانایی طراحی طراحان مبتدی است؛ همچنین، نشاندهنده توفیق رویکرد طراحی آموزشی سازنده گرا در توسعه روشهای آموزشی معماری است.
This research aims to design, implement and test a pedagogical method for facilitating design ability development of novice students of architecture. The pedagogical method is the resultant of a constructivist instructional design approach and educational implications of a descriptive model of design ability development. The descriptive model fundamentally is based on the Dreyfus model of skill acquisition and adapted from a primary model of acquiring design expertise developed by Lawson and Dorst. Based on descriptive model, novice designers? design ability development results, basically, from design schemata development through structured familiarization with design precedents and acquiring episodic design knowledge. Based on constructivist instructional design approach, the educational method provides a constructivist learning environment that supports student-centered, situated and collaborative Learning. In this study, the Jonassen model is used for designing a constructivist learning environment due to its significant similarities in principles and components with learning and teaching processes in the architectural design studio. Finally, the educational approach is a Constructivist Architectural Design Learning Environment (CADLE). The focus of CADLE is authentic design problem-solving tasks that are supported by structured familiarization with related design precedents and architectural information sources. Cognitive and other supportive tools support problem-solving processes and social interactions within this environment. Design tutors support students? problem-solving through instructional activities that consist of ‘coaching’, ‘modeling’ and ‘scaffolding’. The CADLE is implemented and tested through a quasi-experimental pretest-posttest control group design. The statistical population of this study includes all junior undergraduate students of architecture in Iran. Instructional method is independent variable, and students'' design ability development is dependent variable of our research. The experiment was conducted during the first semester of the 2008-2009 academic year in the Architectural Design Studio (2) in the undergraduate program of architecture in Bu-Ali Sina University. The dependent variable was measured by students’ design performance. Towards that goal, a panel of judges composed of experienced educators of architecture ranked qualities of students'' design products based on seven criteria. Data analysis was carried out by means of Mann - Whitney U test to see if a statistically significant difference existed between the two groups. The findings show that design performance of the test group is better than the control group, and the difference is statistically significant. Consequently, constructivist architectural learning environment showed to have a positive effect on novice student's design ability development. Concerning fixation risk of familiarization with design precedent, findings showed that design problem solving under conditions of CADLE positively affected student`s creativity. The results showed that constructivist instructional design approach is suitable for developing architecture educational methods, which in turn confirms the appropriateness of constructivist learning theories for describing learning mechanisms in architectural education. Finally, results indicated that structured familiarization with design precedents within CADLE could facilitate the acquisition of design episodic knowledge and development of architectural design schemata of novice designers, which in turn has a positive effect on their design ability.
(2.0 مگابایت)
دانلود مقاله
مشخصات مقاله
حافظ‌نیا، محمدرضا (1387)، مقدمه‌ای بر روش تحقیق در علوم انسانی، چاپ چهاردهم، سازمان مطالعه و تدوین کتب علوم انسانی دانشگاه‌ها (سمت)، تهران.
سرمد، زهره، بازرگان، عباس، و حجازی، الهه (1387)، روشهای تحقیق در علوم رفتاری، چاپ پانزدهم، انتشارات آگه، تهران.
سیف، علی‌اکبر (1384)، روان‌شناسی پرورشی: روان‌شناسی یادگیری و آموزش، ویرایش ششم، نشر آگاه، تهران.
سیف، علی‌اکبر (1385)، اندازه‌گیری، سنجش و ارزشیابی آموزشی، ویرایش چهارم، نشر دوران، تهران.
شورای عالی برنامه‌ریزی (1379)، مشخصات کلی، برنامه و سرفصل دروس دوره کارشناسی مهندسی معماری، وزارت فرهنگ وآموزش عالی.
کریستنسن، لاری (1387)، روش‌شناسی آزمایشی، ترجمه علی دلاور، انتشارات رشد، تهران.
لاوسون، برایان (1384)، طراحان چگونه می‌اندیشند: ابهام‌زدایی از فرایند طراحی، ترجمه حمید ندیمی، انتشارات دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران.
ندیمی، حمید (1389)، روش استاد و شاگردی، از نگاهی دیگر، نشریه هنرهای زیبا- معماری و شهرسازی، دوره 2، شماره 44، صص27-36.
Anthony, K (1991), Design juries on trial: the renaissance of design studio, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
Bartlett, F. C. (1932), Remebering, Cambridge Unvirsity Press, Cambridge.
Cross, N. (1990), The nature and nurture of design ability, Design Studies, 11(3), 127-140.
Cross, N. (1995), ‘Discovering design ability’, In R. Buchanan and V. Margolin (Eds.), Discovering Design, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Cross, N. (1999), Design Research: A Disciplined Conversation, Design Issues, 15(2), 5-10.
Dreyfus, H. and Dreyfus, S. (1986), Mind Over Machine: The power of human intuition and expertise in the era of the computer, Free Press, New York.
Eysenck, M. W., & Keane, M. T. (2000), Cognitive psychology: A student’s handbook (4th ed.), Psychology Press, Hove, UK.
Heylighen, A. (2000), In case of architectural design, Critique and praise of Case-Based Design in architecture, PhD thesis, K.U.Leuven - Faculty of Applied Sciences, Leuven.
Jonassen, D. H. (1991), Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm? Educational Technology Research and Development 39(3), 5-14.
Jonassen, D. H. (1999), Designing consructivist learning environments, In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.). Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, (Vol. II), (pp. 215-239), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey.
Jonassen, D. H., & Hernandez-Serrano, J. (2002), Case-based reasoning and instructional design: Using stories to support problem solving, Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(2), 65-77.
Kinsella, E. A. (2006), Constructivist underpinnings in Schön’s theory of reflective practice. Reflective Practice, 7(3), 277-286.
Kommers, P., Jonassen, D. H. and Mayes T. (1992), Cognitive tools for learning, FRG: Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg.
Kolodner, J. L., Owensby, J. N., & Guzdial, M. (2004), Case-based learning aids, Handbook of research on educational communications and technology, 2, 829-861.
Lawson, B. (2004a), What designers know, Oxford: Architectural Press.
Lawson, B. (2004b), Schemata, gambits and precedent: some factors in design expertise, Design Studies, 25(5), 443-457.
Lawson, B. and Dorst, K. (2005), ‘Acuiring Design Expertise’, In J. S. Gero and M. L. Maher, (Eds). Computational and cognitive models of creative design VI, (pp. 213-229), The University of Sydney, Key Centre of Design Computing and Cognition, Australia.
Lawson, B. (2006), How designers think, Architectural Press, Oxford.
Lawson, B. and Dorst, K. (2009), Design Expertise, Architectural Press, Oxford.
Lowe, J. B. (1970), The assessment of students' architectural design drawings (part 1), Architectural Research and Teaching,2(1), 37–45.
Lowe, J. B. (1972), The assessment of students' architectural design drawings (part 2), Architectural Research and Teaching, 2(2), 96–103.
Menezes, A., & Lawson, B. (2006), How designers perceive sketches, Design Studies, 27(5), 571-585.
Reigeluth, C. M. (1983), Instructional Design Theories and Models: An overview of their current status, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale.
Schön, D. (1987), Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Wilson, B. (Ed.), (1996), Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design, Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs.
مسابقات
جوایز
نشریات
https://jfaup.ut.ac.ir
