Study of architecture students’ learning styles

Subject Areas : architecture

seyede somayeh mirmoradi ¹

1 - استادیار گروه معماری، دانشگاه صنعتی نوشیروانی بابل، بابل، ایران

Received: 2017-07-18 Accepted : 2018-07-03 Published : 2018-11-22

Keywords: learning styles, experiential learning, Kolb's learning cycle, architectural education,

Abstract :

Learning style is the person's desire to receive and organize information with a particular method or set of methods, and specifically points to the differences in the preferences of the methods of receiving, organizing and processing information and experiences in learning new concepts. Cognitive learning styles are more widely used than other styles and are divided into different categories, one of which is the Kolb’s experimental learning style. The purpose of this study is to determine the students' learning styles in undergraduate architecture students based on Kolb's experimental learning theory. This research begins with the original question of whether a dominant learning style can be described as a common learning style for students of architecture, and the question is whether students' learning styles of architecture are appropriate to the needs and goals of the architecture. Current research is a descriptive-analytic study that was done in a cross-sectional study in 2017. The research community of all students of Architecture Engineering of Babol Noshirvani university of technology in the first to last grade that was 85 students. The results of the research show that the distribution of architectural students is in the order of priority of divergent learning styles of 60.5% and Accommodate is 25%. Given that the characteristics of learners with a divergent learning style are more in line with the artistic and humanitarian aspects of architecture, and these learners have a strong imagination and great creativity, it can be said to largely correspond to the educational conditions prevailing in this field. But architecture is a multidisciplinary field, and in addition to the artistic and human aspects, its technical aspect is also important, as well as in architecture design courses that cover half of the undergraduate units, due to the dual characteristics of the divergence and the convergence of the design process, It is necessary to strengthen the learning style of these students and to use the many abilities of divergent students in this field, the professors will try to choose methods to cover the weaknesses of students with opposite styles. It can be said that a successful learner in multidisciplinary architecture should be able to strengthen the ability to move in the whole experimental Kolb’s learning cycle and use different learning styles in different stages of design. Different solutions can be used to achieve this goal. It is necessary for the professors of this field, while recognizing the dominant learning styles of students, to remind students the importance of each of the abilities associated with each learning style in different aspects of architectural design and help them to identify their strengths and weaknesses. Also, by recognizing the differences between different style learners, professors can provide students with the appropriate educational opportunities with different educational methods in time intervals, proportional to the prevailing percentages of each style. Also, performing architectural design projects in a group consisting of different style students is the perfect solution for further engagement and identification of weaknesses and efforts to strengthen them in a team work.

References:

1. اسکندری، حسین؛ اشرف ابادی، مسعود؛ عرب بافرانی، حمیدرضا؛ و نقوی، محمد. (1391). رابطه شیوه‌های یادگیری کلب با صفات شخصیتی و عملکرد تحصیلی دانشجویان. پژوهش در برنامه‌ریزی درسی, 2(8), 96-109.
2. آصفی، مازیار؛ و خسرقی، صفا. (1396). ارائه الگویی برای افزایش خلاقیت در آموزش کارگاه‌های طراحی رشته مهندسی معماری. فصلنامه آموزش مهندسی ایران، (73)، 67-87.
3. ایزدی، عباسعلی. (1382). انتخاب دانشجو برای تحصیل در رشته معماری، ضرورت بازنگری و مطالعه جامع تر. دومین همایش آموزش معماری. تهران.
4. ایمانی، الهام؛ رسولی، مریم؛ و زاغری تفرشی، منصوره. (1393). مروری بر سبک‌های یادگیری تجربی در آموزش پرستاری. نشریه آموزش پرستاری ، ۳ (۳) ،۲۳-۳۳ .
5. پازارگادی، مهرنوش؛ و طهماسبی، سیمین. (1389). سبک‌های یادگیری و کاربرد آنها در پرستاری. دوماهنامه علمی- پژوهشی راهبردهای آموزش در علوم پزشکی، ۳ (۲) ، ۷۳-۷۶.
6. تقوایی، ناصر. (1381) . مقایسه سبک‌های یادگیری معلمان و دانش آموزان مراکز پیش‌دانشگاهی پسرانه، رشته‌های علوم انسانی، علوم تجربی و ریاضی فیزیک شهرستان ورامین. پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد ، دانشگاه تربیت‌معلم، تهران.
7. رحمانی شمس، حسن. (1379). بررسی رابطه بین سبک‌های شناختی چهار رشته مختلف علوم انسانی، پزشکی، مهندسی و هنر با ویژگی‌های شخصیتی آن‌ها. پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد ، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی، تهران.
8. حسینی لرگانی، مریم. (1377) . مقایسه سبک‌های یادگیری دانشجویان کارشناسی و کارشناسی ارشد و دکتری زن و مرد ضعیف سه رشته علوم انسانی، پزشکی و فنی مهندسی دانشگاه‌های تهران. پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد ، دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی، تهران.
9. سیف، علی‌اکبر. (1395) . روانشناسی پرورشی نوین، روانشناسی یادگیری و آموزش. (ویرایش هفتم). تهران: نشر دوران.
10. لاوسون، برایان. (1384). طراحان چگونه می‌اندیشند. (حمید ندیمی، مترجم). تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه شهید بهشتی.
11. ولی زاده، لیلا؛ فتحی آذر، اسکندر؛ و زمان زاده، وحید. (1386). ارتباط ویژگی‌های یادگیری با پیشرفت تحصیلی دانشجویان پرستاری و مامایی. مجله ایرانی آموزش در علوم پزشکی، 7 (2)، 443-450.

12. Abbey, D. S., Hunt, D. E., & Weiser, J. C. (1985). Variations on a theme by Kolb: a new perspective for unders‌tanding counseling and supervision. The Counseling Psychologis‌t, 13, 477-501.
13. Akinyode, B., & Khan, T. (2016). S‌tudents’ Learning S‌tyle among Planning S‌tudents in Nigeria using Kolb’s Learning S‌tyle Inventory. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 9.
14. Demirbas, O. O., & Demirkan, H. (2003). focus on architectural design process through learning s‌tyles. Design s‌tudies, 24, 437-456.
15. Demirbas, O. O., & Demirkan, H. (2007). learning s‌tyles of design s‌tudents and relationship of academic performance and gender in design education. learning and ins‌truction, 17 ,345-359.
16. Demirkan, H., & Demirbas, O. O. (2008). Focus on the learning s‌tyles of freshman design s‌tudents. design s‌tudies, 29(3), 254-266.
17. Hsu, C. H. C. (1999). Learning s‌tyles of hospitality s‌tudents: nature or nurture? Hospitality Management, 18, 17-30.
18. Hunt, D. E. (1987). Beginning with ourselves in practice, theory and human affairs. Cambridge MA: Brookline Books.
19. Kayes, D. C. (2002). Experiential learning and its critics: preserving the role of experience in management education. Academy of Management. Learning and Education, 1, 137-149.
20. Kolb, D. A. (2014). Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development. (2th ed.) Pearson education.
21. Kolb, A. Y,. & Kolb, D. A. (2005a). Learning s‌tyles and learning spaces: enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Academy of Management. Learning and Education, 4, 193-212.
22. Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2005b). The Kolb learning s‌tyle inventory. (version 3). Bos‌ton, MA: Hay Resources Direct.
23. Kvan, T., & Yunyan, J. (2005). S‌tudents’ learning s‌tyles and their correlation with performance in architectural design s‌tudio. Design S‌tudies, 26, 19-34.
24. Mainemelis, C., Boyatzis, R., & Kolb, D. A. (2002). Learning s‌tyles and adaptive flexibility: tes‌ting experiential learning theory. Management Learning, 33, 5- 33.
25. Maturakarn, C., & Moorapun, C. (2017). Design Thinking: Interior Architecture and Interior Design in Thailand. Environment-Behaviour Proceedings Journal, 2(6) ,71-79.
26. Newland, P., Powell, J., & Creed, C. (1987). Unders‌tanding architectural designers’ selective information handling. Design S‌tudies, 8, 1-17.
27. Schon, D. A. (1984). The architectural s‌tudio as an exemplar of education for reflection-in action. Journal of Architectural Education,38, 2-9.
28. Schon, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: towards a new design for teaching in the professions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
29. Sharp, J. E. (2001). Teaching teamwork communication with Kolb learning s‌tyle theory. Frontiers in education conference, 31s‌t annual, F2c-1.
30. Smith, P., Dalton, J. (2005). Getting to grips with learning s‌tyles, vol.1. Aus‌tralian: NCVER publication.
31. Zanich, M. L. (1991). Kolb Learning s‌tyle inventory. Learning s‌tyle/teaching s‌tyles unpublished manuscript. Indiana, PA: Indiana university of Pennsylvania.