Analysis of Architectural students' Conceptual Sketches based on Systemic Thinking and Information Processing Styles in the Design Process

Subject Areas : architecture

Farhad Karvan ¹ ( Department of Architecture, Hamedan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Hamedan, Iran. )

Received: 2023-04-16 Accepted : 2023-12-31 Published : 2024-01-06

Keywords: Hamedan, Faculty of art and architecture, Conceptual Sketches, Design Process, Research design, Architecture education,

Abstract :

Sketches are one of the manifestations of architectural education and tell the designer's cognitive power. In other words, visual representations in the form of sketches are the most important means of expressing ideas and generating concepts for designers and architecture students. Examining the types and methods of drawing of design students shows that each of them uses a unique method and structure in drawing, and it is also a representation of mental ideas.Due to the wide use of hand-drawings in architecture, its growth and improvement are always the attention of designers. To achieve this goal, it is necessary to examine the factors related to it. Among the variables related to it is the cognitive power of the designer or architecture student in thinking and cognitive processing. Systemic thinking is a high-level thinking skill and one of the complex cognitive processes whose goal is to develop cognitive skills appropriate for the 21st century. Having systematic thinking along with understanding the relationships between social-environmental factors and variables gives students the power and the possibility to use learning opportunities optimally, therefore, students who have systemic thinking, the ability to understand the intricacies. In order to deal with it, it is necessary to examine the cognitive power of the designer or architecture student in thinking and cognitive processing. The purpose of this research was to investigate the relationship between architectural students' conceptual sketches based on systemic thinking and information processing styles in the design process. The research method is a combination of quantitative (descriptive-correlation) and qualitative (analyzing samples of students' Sketches). The statistical population of this research included all students of the Faculty of Art and Architecture of Hamedan Universities. 162 students were selected as a sample in an accessible and purposeful way and answered the questionnaires of systemic thinking and information processing styles. Conceptual sketches were also evaluated by two judges. The data were analyzed by descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation, skewness and skewness statistics) and inferential statistics (Pearson's correlation and path analysis). The results showed that experimental processing style cannot predict conceptual diagrams, but rationalist processing style and systemic thinking can predict conceptual diagrams. According to the findings of the research, the importance of rational information processing style in the design process was proved; Therefore, in this regard, it is suggested to teach this type of information processing style in addition to design education programs in order to optimize architectural education and train designers and promote conceptual sketches. In line with this research finding, which shows the importance of systemic thinking in the design process; It is suggested to teach this type of thinking and processing style in educational planning, and since thinking is a system of complex cognitive processes, it can be taught with suitable and competent curricula. By implementing curricula based on systemic thinking, students can be helped to become knowledgeable, self-directed and innovative people. Acquiring systemic thinking skills in universities can be the basis for the development of systemic thinking and the ability to understand complexity to provide training in people

References:

. اسماعیل¬زاده، نیره. (1401). تفکر سیستمی در شناسایی و حل مسئله. بهورز، 33(114)، 7-9.
2. افتخارزاده، ساناز. (1392). از آشوب ادراک تا شناخت معماری: نظریه¬ای نوین برای آفرینش معماری انسان¬مدار بر¬اساس قوانین آشوب. تهران: علم معماررویال.
3. حسینی¬مهدی¬آبادی، سیدمهدی؛ رستمی، چنگیز؛ و یاراحمدی، یحیی. (1395). بررسي رابطه سبك¬هاي پردازش اطلاعات و ناگويي خلقي (مطالعه موردی زنان تحت پوشش کمیته امام خمینی(ره) شهر کرمانشاه). علوم پزشکي زانکو، 17(55)، 32- 45.
SISID.https://sid.ir/paper/113094/fa.
4. دلاور، علی. (1391). مبانی نظری و عملی پژوهش در علوم انسانی و اجتماعی، تهران: انتشارات رشد.
5. سولتیس، جوناس؛ و فنستر‌میچر، گری‌دی. (1390). رویکردهای تدریس. (هدایت‌الله اعتمادی‌زاده، فریدون شریفیان، احمدرضا نصر، محمدرضا نیلی، مترجمان). تهران: مهرویستا.
6. سولسو، رابرت ال. (1381). روانشناسی شناختی. (فرهاد ماهر، مترجم). تهران: انتشارات رشد.
7. شریف، حمیدرضا؛ و ندیمى، حمید. (1392). تعامل بین ایده یابى و پردازش ایده در تفکر طراحى معمارى. صفه، 23(3)، 19-26.
8. شفیعی، ناهید؛ بهروزی، ناصر؛ شهنی ییلاق، منیجه؛ و ابوالقاسمی، محمود. (1397). رابطه علی ادراک از محیط یادگیری سازنده‌گرا و تفکر سیستمی با گرایش به یادگیری مادام‌العمر از طریق میانجی‌گری انگیزش درونی دانشجویان کارشناسی دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز. علوم تربیتی، 25(2)، 109-130. doi: 10.22055/edu.2019.23512.2328
9. علی پور، لیلا. (1398). ارتقای ایده آفرینی در طراحی معماری مبتنی بر پیشینه ها به روش اقدام پژوهی. نشریه هنرهای زیبا: معماری و شهرسازی، 24(3)، 47-60. doi: 10.22059/jfaup.2019.275696.672219
10. کاروان، فرهاد. (1400). فرایند طراحی: از ایده تا عرضه بر اساس تفکر تأملی و سبک¬های یادگیری در هنرجویان معماری. صفه، 31(2)، 38-23. doi: 10.52547/sofeh.31.2.23
11. محمودی، سیدامیرسعید. (1383). تفکر در طراحی: معرفی الگوی "تفکر تعاملی" در آموزش طراحی . هنرهای زیبا، 20(20)، 27-36.
https://www.sid.ir/paper/5617/fa
12. میاحی، مائده؛ میرریاحی، سعید؛ مظهری؛ محمد ابراهیم؛ و مهرعلی زاده؛ یداله. (1400). بررسی تغییرات جهانی‌شدن آموزش عالی بر آموزش معماری و داوری طرح‌های معماری در دانشگاه‌های ایران. فصلنامه علمی کارافن، 18(4)، 265-295.
doi: 10.48301/kssa.2022.294204.1611
13. ندیمی، حمید؛ و شریعت¬راد، فرهاد. (1391). منابع ایده‌پردازی معماری جستاری در فرایند ایده¬پردازی چند معمار از جامعة حرفه‌ای کشور. نشریه هنرهای زیبا: معماری و شهرسازی، 17(2)، 5-14.
14. وحدت¬طلب، مسعود؛ و کبودی، مهدی. (1399). دست نگاره¬های مفهومی بازنمای شخصیت دانشجویان رشته معماری (مطالعه موردی دانشجویان دانشگاه بوعلی سینا). فناوری آموزش، 14(2), 303-314.
15. Abdullayev, S., & Shukhratovich, S. (2023). The Role and Importance of Sketches and Drawings as a Driver of Modern, Creative Training of Future Artists-Pedagogues. Web of Semantic: Universal Journal on Innovative Education, 2(6).
16. Abdyrov, A., Galiyev, T., Yessekeshova, U., Aldabergenova, S., & Alshynbayeva, Z. (2016). On systems thinking and ways of building it in learning. International Journal of Environmental and Science Educatio, 11(18), 11149- 11161.
17. Akcaoglu, M., & Green, L. S. (2018). Teaching systems thinking through game design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67, 1-19.
18. Cabrera, L., Sokolow, J., & Cabrera, D. (2021). Developing and validating a measurement of systems thinking: The systems thinking and metacognitive inventory (STMI). Routledge handbook of systems thinking, 1-42.
19. Dolansky, M. A., Moore, S. M., Palmieri, P. A., & Singh, M. K. (2020). Development and validation of the Systems Thinking Scale. Journal of general internal medicine, 35(8), 2314-2320.
20. Epstein, S., & Pacini, R. (1999). Some basic issues regarding dual-process theories from the perspective of Cognitive Experiential Self-theory. In: Chaiken S, Trope Y, editors. Dual-process theories in social psychology. New York: Guilford Press, 462-82.
21. Freire, C., Ferrads MD., Nٌْez JC., Valle A., & Vallejo G. (2019). Eudaimonic well-being and coping with stress in university students:The mediating/moderating role of self-efficacy. International journal of environmental research and public health,16(1), 48.
22. Gadzella, B. M., & Baloglu, M. (2001). Confirmatory factor analysis and internal consistency of the Student-life Stress Inventory. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 28(2), 84–94.
23. Habashy, N. W., Saber, H. M., & Ahmad, G., A. (2021).The Effect of Training in Systemic Thinking Skills on Performance and Perceived Mental Effort When Dealing with Difficult Tasks, .Journal of Modern Research, 3(1), 1-9.
24. Hunter, S., Fears, S. K., Jones, D., & Rennie, N. (2018). The Impact of Motivation on the Relationship of Academic Stress and Psychological Well-being Among College Students. Gainesville: Brenau University.
25. Ja.ko, K., Czernatowicz-Kukuczka, A., Kossowska, M., & Czarna, A.Z. (2015). Individual differences in response to uncertainty and decision making: The role of behavioral inhibition system and need for closure. Motivation and Emotion, 39(4), 541-52.
26. Lee, W. K., & Kim, M. (2019). Latent Profiles of Children’s Relationships with Parents, Teachers, and Peers: Relations with Mental Health, Academic Stress, Academic Motivation, and Academic Achievement. Korean Journal of Child Studies, 40(3),105-121.
27. Maani, K. E., & Maharaj, V. (2004). Links between systems thinking and complex decision making. System Dynamics Review, 20(1), 20- 48.
28. Mekhriban, B. (2023). In the Pencil Drawing Features of Working with Sketches and Drawings. International Interdisciplinary Research Journal, 2(4),841-845.
29. Nedelkoska, L., & Neffke, F. (2019). Skill mismatch and skill transferability: review of concepts and measurements. Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG).
30. Nieścioruk, K.(2022). Evaluating individual cartographic skills using mental sketches. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 50(3), 306-320.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15230406.2023.2176929
31. Pysal, D., Abdulkadir, S. J., Shukri, S. R. M., & Alhussian, H. (2021). Classification of children’s drawing strategies on touch-screen of seriation objects using a novel deep learning hybrid model. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 60(1), 115–129.
32. Salama, A. (2005). A Process Oriented Design Pedagogy: KFUPM Sophomore Studio. CEBE Transactions, 2(2), 16-31.
33. Sternberg, R. J. (1986). Critical thinking: its nature, measurement, and improvement. Washington: National institute of education.
34. Suvankulov, S. M., & Soliyeva, M. I. (2023). The role of pencil painting in architecture, applied and fine arts, its main laws. International Journal of Education, Social Science & Humanities,11(5),547-551.
35. Tang, M. (2020). Systems thinking as a cognitive mode for knowledge organization and transformation. Campus Denver: College of Engineering, Design and Computing University of Colorado.
36. MARACHA, V. (2018). Systems thinking and collective problem solving practices. In System analysis in economics-2018 (pp. 269-272).
37. Xinfa, Y., Jonathan, P., & Guo, J. (2015). Modeling influences on divergent thinking and artistic creativity. Journal of Thinking Skills and Creativity, 16, 62-68.
38. Zhang, R., & Cook, A. (2012). Solving complex problems convergent approach to cognitive load. Journal of Educational Technology, 43(2), 233- 246.