SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Mimarlık Bilimleri ve Uygulamaları Dergisi / 2023 / Cilt: 8 Sayı: 2

An Analysis on Learning Styles and Personality Types of Students in the Techniques of Architectural Presentation Course

Mimari Anlatim Teknikleri Dersinde Öğrencilerin Öğrenme Stilleri ve Kişilik Tipleri Üzerine Bir Analiz

Saliha TÜRKMENOĞLU BERKAN
Saniye KARAMAN ÖZTAŞ
Pages
793–810
Publication Date
2023-12-15
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

An increase in success rate in 3D studies indicates the importance of the development of syllabi with 3D applications.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Determining the learning styles of the students in the process of constructing curricula is significant for the development of architectural education.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between the learning style of first-year architecture students and their successful performance in "The Techniques of Architectural Presentation" course and to discuss the relationship between learning styles-gender and learning styles-course curriculum.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:An increase in success rate in 3D studies indicates the importance of the development of syllabi with 3D applications.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Mimarlık eğitimi · öğrenme stilleri · kişilik tipleri

Abstract

Determining the learning styles of the students in the process of constructing curricula is significant for the development of architectural education. This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between the learning style of first-year architecture students and their successful performance in "The Techniques of Architectural Presentation" course and to discuss the relationship between learning styles-gender and learning styles-course curriculum. Kolb and Briggs Myers learning style inventories were used in the study. It was determined that the students with a diverging style had a large share of participants, and no significant relationship was established between gender, course success, and Kolb’s learning style. According to the MBTI inventory, it was determined that the differences in the mean scores of the students' genders in the "Intuition", "Feeling," and "Perception" profiles were significant. An increase in success rate in 3D studies indicates the importance of the development of syllabi with 3D applications.

Özet

Öğrencilerin öğrenme stillerinin ders müfredatının oluşturma sürecinde belirlenmesi mimarlık eğitiminin gelişimi açısından önemlidir. Bu çalışma birinci sınıf mimarlık öğrencilerinin öğrenme stili ile “Mimari Anlatım Teknikleri” dersindeki başarı performansı ilişkisinin değerlendirilmesini; öğrenme stilleri-cinsiyet ile öğrenme stilleri-dersin müfredatı arasındaki ilişkinin tartışılmasını amaçlamıştır. Çalışmada Kolb ve Briggs Myers öğrenme stili envanterleri kullanılmıştır. Değiştiren stiline sahip olan öğrencilerin büyük paya sahip oldukları, ve cinsiyet, ders başarısı ve Kolb öğrenme stili arasında anlamlı bir ilişki kurulamadığı tespit edilmiştir. Briggs Myers envanteri öğrencilerin cinsiyet faktörü bağlamında değerlendirildiğinde “Sezgisel”, “Hisseden” ve “Algılayan” profillerindeki puan ortalamaları arasında anlamlı farklılıklar saptanmıştır. Üç boyutun dahil edildiği çalışmalarda başarı oranının artması ders izlencesinin üç boyutlu uygulamalar ile geliştirilmesinin önemini belirtmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

BERKAN, S. T., ÖZTAŞ, S. K. (2023). An Analysis on Learning Styles and Personality Types of Students in the Techniques of Architectural Presentation Course. Mimarlık Bilimleri ve Uygulamaları Dergisi, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 2, 793–810. https://ajindex.com/articles/1021563

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (9)

  1. Architect Magazine. (2011). Myers-Briggs Architect: A Difficult Character. Access Address (10.08.2023): https://www.architectmagazine.com/practice/myers-briggs-architect-a-difficult-character_o
  2. Brown, R. D., Hallett, M. E. & Stoltz, R. R. (1994). Student learning styles in landscape architecture education. Landscape and Urban Planning, 30 (3), 151-157.
  3. Coffield, F., Ecclestone, K., Moseley, D. & Hall, E. (2004). Learning Styles and Pedagogy in Post 16 Education: A Critical and Systematic Review. Learning & Skills Research Centre, London, UK. Demirbas Ö. O. & Demirkan H. (2003). Focus on architectural design process through learning styles. Design Studies, 24(5), 437-456. DOI: 10.1016/S0142-694X(03)00013-9
  4. Demirkan, H. & Demirbaş, Ö. O. (2010). The effects of learning style and gender on the academic performance of interior architecture students. Procedia Social and Behaviour Sciences, 2(2), 1390-1394. Access Address (10.08.2023): https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.205
  5. Dunn, R. (1983). Learning style and its relation to exceptionality at both ends of the spectrum. Exceptional Children, 49(6), 496–506. doi:10.1177/001440298304900602 Dunn, R. & Dunn, K. (1993). Teaching secondary students through their individual learning styles: Practical approach for grades 7-12. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Durling, D., Cross, N. & Johnson. J. (2019). Personality and learning preferences of students in design and design-related disciplines. IDATER 1996
  6. Conference, Loughborough: Loughborough University. Access Address (10.08.2023): https://hdl.handle.net/2134/1477
  7. Halpern, D. F. & Collaer, M. L. (2005). Sex differences in visuospatial abilities: More than meets the eye. In P. Shah & A. Miyake (Eds.) The Cambridge Handbook of Visuospatial Thinking, Cambridge University Press, pp. 170-212.
  8. Hemdan, J., Taha, D. S. & Cherif, I. A. (2023). Relationship between personality types and creativity: A study on novice architecture students. Alexandria Engineering Journal. 65. 847-857. 10.1016/j.aej.2022.09.041. Hodgkinson, K. (1994). Course guides for flexible learning. In Wade, W. et al. (Eds.). Flexible learning in Higher Education. London: Kogan Page. Jung, C. G. (1991). Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious. London: Routledge. Keirsey, D. & Bates, M. (1974)
  9. Please understand me. Del Mar, CA: Prometheus Nemesis Book Company. Kolb, D. A. (1981). Learning styles and disciplinary differences. In Chickering, A. W. And Associates (Eds.) The Modern American College. San Francisco, J