The Impact of Meta-cognitive Training on Design Bio complexes Student's Success (Case Study: Design process Analytical Writing)

Subject Areas :

Vahid Ghobadian ¹ , houbeh tahvildari ² , mahmud rezaei ³ , reza afhami ⁴

1 - Department of Architecture & Urbanism, Central Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2 - Ph.D. Student, Department of Architecture, UAE Branch, Islamic Azad University, Dubai, United Arab Emirates
3 - Assistant Professor, Department of Architecture & Urbanism, Central Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
4 - Associate Professor, Department of Art research, School of Art & Architecture, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

Received: 2018-10-23 Accepted : 2018-11-04 Published : 2018-09-23

Keywords: Problem solving, education, Metacognitive strategies, Architectural design, writing and critique of the design process,

Abstract :

architectural design as core subject in architectural undergraduate curriculum are both a reflection of students cognitive abilities about other subjects in the field as well as their application skills,and their ability to design in general.Hence the success of this course involves having a meta-cognitive skills that prepare the students to apply his/her own skills in the pursuit of their professional life.
Meta-cognition is considered as awareness,active monitoring,organizing cognitive processes,and control learning of areas,including problem solving.
Architectural design education is a problem-centered process.Therefore purpose of this study was investigates the role of meta-cognitive skills enhancement in improving the understanding and reinforcement of students architectural skills from process and design concept. For this purpose,the process of writing and critique of designing themselves and others have been used as tools for fostering the meta-cognitive power of individuals.From the past researchers point of view,the ability to write about design by linking two areas of design and writing thinking increases the ability of the students to control their learning processes.
The present study was conducted on a group of 30 students of design studio 5(Design Bio complexes),including a test and control group, and the target group was asked to design and review the process and critique of design and others, and the control group their own design process.
The results of this study indicate that the process has a positive effect on the three meta-cognitive strategies of planning,monitoring,and evaluation;also, teaching meta-cognitive strategies to the test group had a significant positive effect on their academic performance

References:

1-      حجت، عیسی. (1383). آموزش خلاق-تجربه1381. فصلنامههنرهایزیبا- معماریوشهرسازی، 18، 36- 25.

2-      سیدیان، علی. و تقوی، الهام. (1394). رابطه میزان استفاده از راهبردهای شناختی و فراشناختی طراحان در آموزش معماری. اولینکنفرانسبینالمللیعمران،معماریوتوسعهاقتصادشهری، شیراز، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد علوم و تحقیقات فارس. www.civilica.com/Paper-CIVILED01-CIVILED01_004.html

3-      صادقی، زینب. و محتشمی، رضا. (1389). نقش فراشناخت در فرآیند یادگیری. فصلنامهراهبردهایآموزش، 3(4)، 148 – 143.

4-      عباسیان، غزاله. و بلانیان، ندا. (1387). ایجاد آتلیه ی تجربی به منظور بهبود سیستم آموزش معماری. سومینهمایشآموزشمعماری، تهران، دانشگاه تهران، پردیس هنرهای زیبا. www.civilica.com/Paper -MEMARIEDU03_004.html

5-      عزیزی، شادی. (1387). بررسی آموزش معماری ازمنظرسیستم فکری- نظریSIGGS با تمرکز بر انتخاب محتوای دروس.  سومینهمایشآموزشمعماری، دانشگاه تهران 270- 253.

6-      علی­الحسابی، مهران. و نوروزیان ملکی، سعید. (1387). مدارس معماری ، مکان آموزش یا محل تعلیم؟ نگاهی به تجربه ی آموزشی طراحی معماری. سومینهمایشآموزشمعماری، تهران، دانشگاه تهران، پردیس هنرهای زیبا. www.civilica.com/Paper- MEMARIEDU03_017.html

7-      گرجی مهلبانی، یوسف. (1389). آموزش معماری امروز و چالش­های آینده.نشریهعلمیپژوهشیفناوریآموزش(جلد 4)، 4 (3)، 227 – 223.

8-      محمدی, مریم. (1393).  بیان‌های نقد معماری؛ نقد اساتید از پروژه های دانشجویان معماری در دانشکده های معماری. اولینهمایشملیعمران،معماریوتوسعهپایدار، یزد، دانشگاه پیام نور یزد.5- 1.

9-      محمودی، امیر سعید. (1381). چالش های آموزش طراحی معماری در ایران.  نشریههنرهایزیبا، 12، 79- 70.

10-  Allan, E.G. (2013). Multimodal rhetorics in the disciplines: Available means of persuasion in an undergraduate architecture studio. Across the Disciplines, 10(2),1-25.

11-  Ayersman, D. J. (1995). "Effects of Knowledge Representation Format and Hypermedia Instruction on Metacognitive Accuracy". Computers in Human Behavior, 11(3-4),533-555.

12-  Brown, A. L. (1978). “Knowing When, Where and How to Remember: A Problem of metacognition”, In Glaser R. (Ed.). Advances in Instructional Psychology, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale,77-165.

13-  Caballero, R. (2014). Thinking, drawing, and writing architecture through metaphor. Ibérica,  28, 155-180.

14-  Flateby, T. (2009). Developments and changes resulting from writing and thinking assessment. Research and Practice in Assessment, (4), 15-16.

15-  Flateby, T. (2010).A system for fostering and assessing writing and critical thinking skills. Assessment Update, 22(3), 1-16.

16-  Flavell, J.H. (1976).“Metacognitive Aspects of Problem Solving”. In Resnick L. (Ed.). The Nature of Intelligence, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, 231-236.

17-  Georghiades, P. (2004). “From the General to the Situated: Three Decades of Metacognition”. International Journal of Science Education, 26(3), 365-383.

18-  Hannafin, M., Land, S., & Oliver, K. (1999). Open learning environments: Foundations, methods, and models. Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (2),115-140.

19-  Havenga, M., Breed, B., & Mentz, E. (2013). "Metacognitive and problem-solving skills to promote self-directed learning in computer programming: teachers’ experiences." SA-eDUC10, (2),1-14.

20-  Jacobse A. E, Harskamp E. G. (2012). “Towards efficient measurement of metacognition in mathematical problem solving”.  Metacognition Learning, 7,133–149.

21-  Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational psychologist,  41(2), 75-86.

22-  Kurt, M., & Kurt, S. (2017). Improving design understandings and skills through enhanced metacognition: Reflective design journals. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 36(2), 226-238.

23-  Oda, C. W. (2015). The impact of dual-processing metacognitive scaffolding on architectural student writing.(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of  Capella.

24-  Paivio, A. (1990). Mental representations. Oxford, UK: Oxford University.

25-  Sternberg R. J, Sternberg K. (2012). Cognitive psychology. Wadsworth: Belmont.

26-  Wiseman, C. (2014). Writing architecture. San Antonio: Trinity University.

27-  Wilson, J. 1998.Assessing Metacognition: Legitimizing Metacognition as a Teaching Goal. Reflect, 4 (1), 14-20.