Investigating the Correlation between Creative Student – Creative Educational Environment – Creative Educational Method on the Academic Performance of Architecture Students

Document Type : Original

Authors

1 Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Architecture, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University

2 Associate Professor, School of Architecture, College of Fine Arts, University of Tehran

3 Professor, Faculty of Arts, Tarbiyat Modares University

Abstract

One of the expectations of architecture students is to be "creative" in their academic performance and, later, in their professional activities. One way to improve creativity in architecture students is through creative education, and in order to teach creatively, teachers are supposed to use creative teaching methods. The findings of this article indicate that interaction between three elements of creative man/student, creative environment, and creative education can improve creativity in architectural education. In order to improve creativity, a variety of thinking styles should be engaged in educational methods. This research investigates the theoretical aspects of each of the three elements. It measures the correlation between these elements and the level of creativity in the performance of the architecture students at the School of Architecture at the University of Tehran, entering between 2019 and 2023. Data analysis by Smart PLS software indicates that in terms of satisfaction with the content of courses, all students believed that General Courses were ineffective in promoting their creativity, while 69% considered Design Studios had a considerable influence on their creativity. Students' satisfaction with their educational environment was 50%, and educators’ creative teaching method was less than 50%. The D brain-quadrant dominance group reported poor satisfaction with creative teaching methods. The non-significant correlation between satisfaction with teaching creative methods and the students’ success rate indicates that educators have not yet been able to use appropriate teaching methods compatible with their students' capabilities. The non-significance of the correlation between the educational environment and creativity in teaching with the success rate in group D indicates that most students have been able to have a positive academic performance by relying on their abilities. This research suggests that adopting a creative educational environment and a creative teaching method can significantly impact the student's academic performance.

Keywords

References

 آصفی، مازیار، و صفا سلخی خسرقی. 1396. ارائۀ الگویی برای افزایش خلاقیت در آموزش کارگاه‌های طراحی رشتۀ مهندسی معماری. فصلنامۀ آموزش مهندسی ایران 19(73): 67ـ87.
 آیسنک، مایکل. 1379. فرهنگ توصیفی روان‌شناسی شناخت. ترجمۀ علی‌نقی خرازی، محسن رئیس قاسم، رمضان دولتی و حسین کمالی. ویراستۀ محمد کریمی زنجانی اصل. چ۱. تهران: نی.
 ادواردز، بتی. 1377. طراحی با سمت راست مغز. ترجمۀ عرب علی شروه (چ۳، 1386). تهران: عفاف.
 اسلامی، غلامرضا، و فریبا شاپوریان. 1392. نظریه‌ها و روش‌های آموزش خلاقیت در روان‌شناسی معاصر غرب. دوفصلنامۀ علمی‌پژوهشی مطالعات تطبیقی هنر 3(6): 113ـ124.
 پالاسما، یوهانی. 1395. دست متفکر، حکمت وجود متجسد در معماری. ترجمۀ علی اکبری. تهران: نقش پرهام نقش.
 حسینی، الهه السادات، محمد منصور فلامکی، و عیسی حجت. 1398. نقش تفکر خلاق و سبک‌های یادگیری در آموزش طراحی معماری. نشریۀ علمی‌پژوهشی اندیشۀ معماری 3(5): 125ـ140.
 حسینی، الهه السادات، محمد منصور فلامکی، و عیسی حجت. 1400. تبیین الگوی فرایند طراحی فردمحور و مدل آموزش طراحی معماری بر مبنای تفاوت‌های شناختی یادگیرندگان. هویت شهر 15(47): 43ـ58.
 خرّمی، فؤاد، سید امیر سعید محمودی، و مصطفی مختاباد. 1400. ارزیابی میزان خلاقیت و موفقیت تحصیلی دانشجویان معماری دانشگاه تهران از منظر ربع‌های چهارگانۀ مغزی ند هرمان. مطالعات معماری ایران 10(20): 117ـ133.
 داریس جی، شلکراس. 1394. آموزش رفتار خلاق و استعدادهای درخشان در دانش‌آموزان. ترجمۀ مجتبی جوادیان. چ۷. مشهد: انتشارات آستان قدس رضوی.
 دانشجو، خسرو، آرش علمداری حسینی، و محمد معینی. 1398. ارزیابی موفقیت آموزش معماری ایران بر ارتقای خلاقیت و تصور خلاق دانشجویان، مطالعۀ موردی: دانشگاه ملایر. فناوری آموزش 14(1): 197ـ189.
 زارع، حسین، و لطف‌الله فروزنده. 1387. خلاقیت، حل مسئله و تفکر راهبردی. چ۴. تهران: دانشگاه پیام نور (کتاب اصلی در سال 1387 منتشر شده است.)
 سیف، علی‌اکبر. 1390. روان‌شناسی تربیتی. تهران: دانشگاه پیام نور.
 صدرام، وحید. ۱۳۹۶. تقلید درست، پیش‌نیاز خلاقیت، یادگیری تقلیدی در آموزش فرایند طراحی معماری. صفه 27 (76): 5ـ۱۶.
 کریمی مشاور، مهرداد. 1391. رابطۀ سبک‌های یادگیری و عملکرد دانشجویان در کارگاه طراحی معماری. نشریۀ علمی‌پژوهشی باغ نظر 9(20): 3ـ12.
 کفایت، محمد. 1373. بررسی ارتباط شیوه‌ها و نگرش‌های فرزندپروری با خلاقیت و رابطۀ متغیر اخیر باهوش و پیشرفت تحصیلی دانش‌آموزان سال اول دبیرستان‌های پسرانۀ اهواز. پایان‌نامۀ کارشناسی ارشد علوم تربیتی. دانشگاه شهید چمران اهواز. واحد علوم و تحقیقات.
 لاوسون، برایان. 1392. طراحان چگونه می‌اندیشند؟. ترجمۀ حمید ندیمی. تهران: دانشگاه شهید بهشتی.
 لنگ، جان. 1398. آفرینش نظریۀ معماری؛ نقش علوم رفتاری در طراحی محیط. ترجمۀ علیرضا عینی‌فر. چ11. تهران: دانشگاه تهران.
 محمودی، سید امیرسعید .1383. تفکر در طراحی: معرفی الگوی تفکر تعاملی در آموزش طراحی. فصلنامۀ علمی‌پژوهشی هنرهای زیبا، ش. 20: 27ـ۳۶.
 ممتحن، مهدی، عیسی حجت، و مسعود ناری قمی. 1396. تأملی در مفهوم و ارزش خلاقیت: ارزش خلاقانۀ معماری مبتنی‌بر الگو (مقایسۀ چارچوب ارزشی سنتی، معاصر و اسلامی). مطالعات معماری ایران 6(11): 63ـ84.
 منصورنژاد،‌ هانی. 1396. ارتباط آموزش معماری و رجحان فکری دانشجویان. صفه 27 (77): 35ـ48.
مؤیدنیا، فریبا. ۱۳۸۴. بررسی انگیزۀ نوآوری معلمان و ارتباط ساختار سازمانی مدرسه در مدارس دخترانۀ شهرستان خوی. تهران: سازمان انجمن اولیا و مربیان.
 مهدوی‌نژاد، محمدجواد. 1384. آفرینشگری و روند آموزش خلاقانه در طراحی معماری. فصلنامۀ هنرهای زیبا، ش. 21: 57ـ66.
Achim, M., T. Popescu, M. Kadar, and, M. Muntean. 2013. Developing engineering students’ creative thinking across the curriculum. A case-study of romanian university students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, No. 83. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.022
Aderonmu, P.A., P.O. Awoyera, A.B. Sholanke, and M.E. Erebor. 2017. Professional methods of assessments in architectural design projects: A focus on the relevant parametric measures in selected Nigerian universities. Cogent Social Sciences 3(1).
Amabile, T.M. and M.G. Pratt. 2016. The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: Making progress, making meaning. Research in organizational behavior, No. 36: 157-183.
Anderson, J.R. 2000. Learning and Memory: An Integrated Approach: Wiley.
Asefi, M. and E. Imani. 2018. Effects of Active Strategic Teaching Model (astm) in Creative and Critical Thinking Skills of Architecture Students. Archnet IJAR Int. J. Archit. Res., No. 12: 209-222.
Batey, M., and Furnham, A. 2009. The Relationship Between Creativity, Schizotypy and Intelligence. Individual Differences Research 7(4).
Bunderson, C. V. 1995. The validity of the Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument, in Herrmann, N (ed) The creative brain. (2nd edition). USA: Quebecor Printing. Appendix A: 337-379.
Casakin, H., and A. Wodehouse. 2021. A Systematic Review of Design Creativity in the Architectural Design Studio. Buildings, 11, 31.
Casakin, H., and S. Kreitler. 2008. Motivational aspects of creativity in students and architects: Implications for education. In DS 46: Proceedings of E&PDE 2008, the 10th International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education, Barcelona, Spain, 04.-05.09. 2008 (pp. 49-54).
Cho, J.Y. 2017. An Investigation of Design Studio Performance in Relation to Creativity, Spatial Ability, and Visual Cognitive Style. Think. Skills and creativity, No. 23: 67-78.
Cowdroy, R., and E. de Graaff. 2005. Assessing highly creative ability1. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 30(5): 507-518. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930500187113.
Cowdroy, R., M. Ostwald, and A. Williams. 2006. A new look at design thinking: Research in progress.
Cross, N. 2011. Design thinking: Understanding how designers think and work.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. 1998. Fruitless polarities. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21(3): 411-411.
Danaci, H. 2015. Creativity and knowledge in architectural education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, No. 174, 1309-1312. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.752
Doheim, R. and N. Yousof. 2020. Creativity in Architecture Design Studio. Assessing S tudents’ and instructors’ perception. Journal of Cleaner Production (249): 1-23.
Faruque, Omar. (1984). Graphic Communication as a Design Tool . Van Nostrand Reinhold: NY.Feldman, D.H. and A.C. Benjamin. 2006. Creativity and education: An American retrospective. Cambridge Journal of Education 36(3): 319-336.
Feldman, D.H. and A.C. Benjamin. 2006. Creativity and education: An American retrospective. Cambridge Journal of Education 36(3): 319-336.
Fleith, D. D. S. and E. M. L. S. D. Alencar. 2012. Autoconceito e clima criativo em sala de aula na percepção de alunos do ensino fundamental. Psico-usf, No. 17: 195-203.
Glăveanu, V. P. (2013). Rewriting the language of creativity: The five A’s framework. Review of General Psychology, No. 17: 69–81.
Guerrini, A. 2000. David Hartley on Human Nature.
Haner, U.-. E. 2005. Spaces for creativity and innovation in two established organizations. Creativity and Innovation Management 14(3): 288–298.
Herrmann, N. 1996 . The whole brain business book. New York: McGraw Hill.
Isaksen, S. G. 1995. CPS: Linking creativity and problem solving. Problem solving and cognitive processes: A festschrift in honour of Kjell Raaheim, 145-181.
Kılıçaslan, H. and S. Vural. 2018. The Effects of Creative Drama Teaching Methods on Academic Success in Architectural Education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 14(6): 2157-2167. https://doi.org/10.29333.
Kowaltowski, D.C.C.K., G. Bianchi, and V.T. de Paiva. 2010. Methods That May Stimulate Creativity and Their Use in Architectural Design Education. Int. J. Technol. Des. Educ 20: 453-476.
Lee, J.H. and S. Lee. 2023. Relationships between physical environments and creativity: A scoping review. Thinking Skills and Creativity, No. 48: 101276. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101276
Martens, Y. 2011. Creative workplace: Instrumental and symbolic support for creativity. Facilities, 29(1/2), 63–79.
Onsman, A. 2015. Assessing creativity in a ‘new generation’ architecture degree. Thinking Skills and Creativity, No. 19. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2015.07.001
Paoli, E. Sauer and A. Ropo. 2019. The spatial context of organizations: A critique of ‘creative workspaces. Journal of Management & Organization 25(2): 331-352
Pavlović, Je. and S. Maksić. 2019. Implicit Theories of Creativity in Higher Education: A Constructivist Study. Journal of Constructivist Psychology 32(3): 254-273. https://doi.org/10.1080/10720537.2018.1477639.
Rapoport, A. 2004. The Congress Themes in an Environment-Behavior Perspective, in J. Muntañola (ed.), Architecture 3000 (The Architecture of In Difference), Proceedings of the Third International Congress, Barcelona UPC (June – July), Khôra II, 5, pp. 85-98 (Out 2006).
Rhodes, M. 1961. An analysis of creativity. The Phi delta kappan 42(7): 305-310.
Saif Rashid, A.M.R. and A. Mama. 2021. Patterns of brain thinking by ned hermann among students of post-basic education in the province of south eastern oman. IJASOS- International E-journal of Advances in Social Sciences 7(19): 232-250. doi: 10.18769/ijasos.929081
Salama, A. 1995. New Trends in Architectural Education: Designing the Design Studio. United States of America: Tailored Text and Unlimited Potential Publishing.
Sawyer, R.K. 2017. Teaching creativity in art and design studio classes: A systematic literature review. Educational Research Review, No. 22: 99-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.07.002
Schmidt, S. and V. Brinks. 2017. Open creative labs: Spatial settings at the intersection of communities and organizations. Creativity Innovation Management, No. 26: 291-299.
Schön, D.A. 1983. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Basic Books, New York and reprinted Aldershot, Hants: Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 1991, 2003
Suh, J. and J.Y. Cho. 2018. Analyzing individual differences in creative performance: A case study on the combinational ideation method in the interior design process. Journal of Interior Design 43(3): 9-23. https://doi.org/10.1111/joid.12124
Vasianovych, H. and O. Budnyk. 2017. The Category of freedom in the written heritage of John Amos Comenius and Hryhoriy Skovoroda. Advanced Education, No. 7: 85-89. doi:10.20535/2410-8286.93517
Yürekli, İ. and Yürekli, H. 2004. Mimari tasarım eğitiminde enformellik. İTÜ Dergisi/a mimarlık, planlama, tasarım 3(1): 53-62.
Journal of Iranian Architecture Studies
Volume 13, Issue 25
August 2024
Pages 193-210

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics