KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 39 Sayı: 4

Son sınıf mimarlık öğrencilerinde öğrenme süreçleri kişilik ve motivasyon arasındaki ilişki

Gökçe Ketizmen(Eskişsehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi)0000-0002-7603-7243
Sayfa
2525–2538
Yayın Tarihi
2024-05-20
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Sonuçlar, son sınıf mimarlık öğrencileri arasında birincil öğrenme yaklaşımının, vicdanlılık, keyif alma ve dış ödüllerle güçlü bir şekilde bağlantılı olan detaylı düşünme süreçleri olduğunu ortaya koymuştur.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Mimarlık eğitiminde öğrenme süreçleri, motivasyon ve kişilik özelliklerine odaklanan deneysel bir keşif olan bu araştırmanın temel odağı, bu üç kavramı tanımlamak ve mimarlık öğrenimi bağlamında bu olguları değerlendirmek için uygun envanterleri belirlemektir.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Mimarlığın çok boyutluluğunun yanı sıra diğer alanlardaki çok sayıda ortak metodoloji ve konudan farklılaşma kabiliyeti de eğitim üzerinde önemli bir etkiye sahiptir.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Sonuçlar, son sınıf mimarlık öğrencileri arasında birincil öğrenme yaklaşımının, vicdanlılık, keyif alma ve dış ödüllerle güçlü bir şekilde bağlantılı olan detaylı düşünme süreçleri olduğunu ortaya koymuştur.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:mimarlık eğitimi · Öğrenme süreci · kişilik özellikleri

Özet

Mimarlık eğitiminde öğrenme süreçleri, motivasyon ve kişilik özelliklerine odaklanan deneysel bir keşif olan bu araştırmanın temel odağı, bu üç kavramı tanımlamak ve mimarlık öğrenimi bağlamında bu olguları değerlendirmek için uygun envanterleri belirlemektir. Mimarlık eğitiminde, bilgiyi alma ve işlemedeki tercihler ve özellikler bağlamında öğrenme süreci, bilgi ile görsel ve sözel iş birliği kapasitesi ile ilişkilidir. Mimarlığın çok boyutluluğunun yanı sıra diğer alanlardaki çok sayıda ortak metodoloji ve konudan farklılaşma kabiliyeti de eğitim üzerinde önemli bir etkiye sahiptir. Bu nedenle mimarlık öğrencileri, mimarlık disiplininin tek bir yönüne dayalı öğrenme süreci gruplarına kolayca ayrılamaz. Bu çalışma, Öğrenme Süreçleri Envanteri (ILP), Beş Büyük Envanteri (BFI) ve İş Tercihi Envanteri (WPI) aracılığıyla 150 son sınıf mimarlık öğrencisi arasında öğrenme süreci, kişilik ve motivasyon arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Sonuçlar, son sınıf mimarlık öğrencileri arasında birincil öğrenme yaklaşımının, vicdanlılık, keyif alma ve dış ödüllerle güçlü bir şekilde bağlantılı olan detaylı düşünme süreçleri olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Bulgular, mimarlık öğrencilerinin öğrenme yaklaşımları ile ilişkili motivasyon ve kişilik özelliklerinin belirlenmesinin iyi bir eğitim müfredatı geliştirirken anlaşılmasının önemini vurgulamaktadır.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Ketizmen, G. (2024). Son sınıf mimarlık öğrencilerinde öğrenme süreçleri kişilik ve motivasyon arasındaki ilişki. Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 39 Sayı: 4, 2525–2538. https://doi.org/10.17341/gazimmfd.1349381

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (76)

  1. Busato, V.V., Prins, F. J., Elshout, J. J., Hamaker, C., The relation between learning styles, the Big Five personality traits and achievement motivation in higher education, Personality and Individual Differences, 26 (1), 129–140, 1999.
  2. Komarraju, M., Karau, S. J., Schmeck, R. R., Avdic, A., The Big Five personality traits, learning styles, and academic achievement, Personality and Individual Differences, 51 (4), 472–477, 2011.
  3. Komarraju, M., Karau, S. J.,The relationship between the big five personality traits and academic motivation, Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 557–567, 2005.
  4. Keshavarz, M, H., Hulus, A., The Effect of Students’ Personality and Learning Styles on Their Motivation for Using Blended Learning, Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 78-88, 2019.
  5. Moldasheva, G., Mahmood, M., Personality, learning strategies, and academic performance Evidence from post-Soviet Kazakhstan, Education and Training, 56 (4), 343-359, 2014.
  6. Moss, C. J., Academic Achievement and Individual in the Learning Processes of Basic Skills Students in the University, Applied Psychological Measurement, 6 (3), 291–296, 1982.
  7. Olivosa, P., Santos, A., Martínc, S., Canasc, M., Gómez-Lázaroc, E., Maya, Y., The relationship between learning styles and motivation to transfer of learning in a vocational training programme, Suma Psicológica, 23, 25–32, 2016.
  8. Wilson, J. I., A two-factor model of performance approach goals in student motivation for starting medical school, Educational Research, 19 (3), 271–281, 2009.
  9. URL-1 Web of Science, https://www,webofscience,com/wos/woscc/summary/b1d84ab9-c096-445c-853e-7184b622c2e1-9f4bc71d/relevance/1, Erişim tarihi Ağustos 24,2023
  10. URL-2 Web of Science, https://www,webofscience,com/wos/woscc/summary/37ffef97-7c79-46cf-b4da-23825e9a1467-9f4c0739/relevance/1, Erişim tarihi Ağustos 24,2023
  11. URL-3 Web of Science, https://www,webofscience,com/wos/woscc/summary/b19accd4-fb46-4c0b-b281-077de6ddc95e-9f4c8578/relevance/1, Erişim tarihi Ağustos 24,2023
  12. URL-4 Web of Science, https://www,webofscience,com/wos/woscc/summary/56c67e3b-0df5-4754-9d11-18e00d084c1e-9f4cc5ce/relevance/1, Erişim tarihi Ağustos 24,2023
  13. Geisler-Brenstein, R., Schmeck, R., Hetherington, J., An Individual Difference Perspective on Student Diversity, Higher Education, 31 (1), 73-96, 1996.
  14. Schmeck, R, R., Grove, E., Academic Achievement and Individual Differences in Learning Processes, Applied Psychological Measurement, 3 (1), 43-49,1979.
  15. Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Furnham, A., Lewis, M., Personality and approaches to learning predict preference for different teaching methods, Learning and Individual Differences, 17, 241–250, 2007.
  16. Olsson, C., Lachmann, H., Kalén, S., Ponzer, S., Mellstrand Navarro, C., Personality and learning styles in relation to attitudes towards interprofessional education: a cross-sectional study on undergraduate medical students during their clinical courses, BMC Med Educ, 20, 398, 2020.
  17. Siddiquei, N, L., Khalid, R., The relationship between Personality Traits, Learning Styles and Academic Performance of E-Learners, Open Praxis, 10 (3), 249–263, 2018.
  18. Li, M. Armstrong, S. J., The relationship between Kolb's experiential learning styles and Big Five personality traits in international managers, Personality and Individual Differences, 86, 422-426, 2015.
  19. Furnham, A., Personality and learning style: A study of three instruments, Personality and Individual Differences, 13 (4), 429–438, 1992.
  20. Mirmoradi, S. S., The study of architecture students' learning styles and their relationships with gender, academic performance, and duration of study in this discipline, Int. J. Architect. Eng. Urban Plan, 28 (2), 135-147, 2018.
  21. Feist, G. J., A Meta-Analysis of Personality in Scientific and Artistic Creativity, Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2 (4), 290–309, 1998.
  22. Strongman, L., Education for Creativity: Motivation and Learning, Journal of International Business Research and Marketing, 7 (2), 27-32, 2022.
  23. Tohidi, H., Jabbari, M. M., The effects of motivation in education, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 31, 820-824, 2012.
  24. Vero, E., Puka, E., The Importance of Motivation in an Educational Environment, Formazione & Insegnamento, 15 (1), 57–66, 2017.
  25. Tezel, E., Casakin, H., Learning Styles and Students performance in Design Problem Solving, International Journal of Architectural Research: Archnet-IJAR, 4 (2/3), 262-277, 2010.
  26. Demirbas, O, O., Demirkan, H., Focus on Architectural Design Process Through Learning Styles, Design Studies, 24 (5), 437-456, 2003.
  27. Mostafa, M., Mostafa, H. M., How Do Architects Think? Learning Styles and Architectural Education, International Journal of Architectural Research: Archnet-IJAR., 4 (2/3), 310-317, 2010.
  28. Demirkan,H., Demirbaş, O.O., The effects of learning styles and gender on the academic performance of interiorarchitecture students, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2 (2),1390-1394, 2010.
  29. Kvan, T., Yunyan, J., Students’ learning styles and their correlation with performance in architectural design studio, Design Studies, 26, 19-34, 2005.
  30. Felder, R.M., Matters of style,ASEE Prism, 6 (4),18–23,1996.
  31. Felder, R.M., Brent, R., Understanding student differences, J, Eng, Educ, 94 (1), 57–72, 2005.
  32. Bloom, B. S., Taxonomy of educational objectives – the classification of educational goals – handbook 1: Cognitive domain, London: Longman, 1956
  33. Dweck, C. S., Mindset: The new psychology of success, NY: Random House Publishing Group, New York, 2006.
  34. Pranitasari, D., Noersanti, L., Intrinsic and Extrinsic Factors to Affect Students Learning Motivation (Case Study on The First-Degree Students in STIE Indonesia), International Journal of Applied Business and Economic Research, 15 (25), 1-8, 2017.
  35. Prat-Sala, M., Redford, P., The interplay between motivation, self-efficacy, and approaches to studying” British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 283–305,2010.
  36. Zaccone, M, C., Pedrini, M., The effects of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation on students learning effectiveness, Exploring the moderating role of gender, International Journal of Educational Management, 33 (6), 1381-1394, 2019.
  37. Amabile, T., Motivation and creativity: Effects of motivational orientation on creative writers, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48 (2), 393-399, 1985.
  38. Barron, F., Harrington, D., Creativity, Intelligence and Personality, Annual Review of Psychology, 32, 439-476, 1981.
  39. John, O., Naumann, L., Soto, C., Paradigm shift to the integrative big-five trait taxonomy: history, measurement, and conceptual issues, Handbook of personality: Theory and research, O, P, John, R, W, Robins, & L, A, Pervin (Ed.), Guilford Press., New York, 114-158, 2008.
  40. Schmeck, R., Ribich, F., Ramanaiah, N.,Development of a Self-Report Inventory for Assessing Individual Differences in Learning Processes, Applied Psychological Measurement, 1 (3), 413-431, 1977.
  41. Amabile, T, M.,Hill, K, G., Hennessey, B, A., Tighe, E. M., The Work Preference Inventory: assessing intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations, Journal of personality and social psychology, 66 (5), 950-967, 1994.
  42. John, O, P., Donahue, E, M., Kentle, R., The Big Five Inventory version 4a and 54, Institute of Personality and Social Research, University of California, Berkeley, CA., 1991.
  43. Kozminsky, E., Cross-validation of the Inventory of Learning Processes: Some evidence from Israeli students”, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 48, 805- 814,1988.
  44. Schmeck, R, R., Geisler‐Brenstein, E., Cercy, S. P., Self-Concept and Learning, The revised Inventory of Learning Processes”, Educational Psychology, 11 (3-4), 343-362,1991.
  45. Schmeck, R.,Ribich, F., Construct validation of the inventory of learning processes”, Applied Psychological Measurement, 2, 551-562, 1978.
  46. Watters, P., Measuring the Creativity of Architecture Students, Doctor of Philosophy in Education, University of Rhode Island, 2017.
  47. Robinson, G., Switzer, G., Cohen, E., Primack, B., Kapoor, W., Seltzer, D., Rubio, D., Shortening the Work Preference Inventory for use with physician scientists: WPI-10, Clin Transl Sci., 7 (4), 324-328, 2014.
  48. Goldberg, L. R., The structure of phenotypic personality traits, American psychologist, 48 (1), 26-34, 1993.
  49. McCrae, R, R., Costa, P.T., Reinterpreting the Myers‐Briggs type indicator from the perspective of the five-factor model of personality, Journal of personality, 57 (1), 17–40, 1989.
  50. Ryan, R, M., Deci, E., Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions, Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25 (1), 54-67, 2000.
  51. İlhan,A., Coğrafya Öğretı̇mı̇ne Yönelı̇k Bı̇r Başarı Testı̇ Gelı̇ştı̇rme Çalışması, Eğitim Yayınevi, Konya, 2021. 52. Öztürk, N., The Relation of Metacognition, Personality, and Foreign Language Performance, International Journal of Psychology and Educational Studies, 8 (3), 103-115, 2021.
  52. Deci, E, L., Ryan, R.M., A motivational approach to self: Integration in personality, Nebraska Symposium on Motivation: Perspectives on motivation, R. A. Dienstbier (Ed.), University of Nebraska Press, USA, 237–288, 1991.
  53. Conrad, N., Patry, M. W., Conscientiousness and Academic Performance: A Mediational Analysis, International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 6 (1), Article 8, 2012.
  54. Bachorowski, A., Braaten, E., Emotional Intensity: Measurement and Theoretical Implications, Personality and Individual Differences, 17 (2), 191 -199, 1994.
  55. Yıldız, D., Uzunsakal E., Alan araştırmalarında güvenı̇lı̇rlı̇k testlerı̇nı̇n karşılaştırılması ve tarımsal verı̇ler üzerı̇ne bı̇r uygulama, Uygulamalı Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 2 (1), 14 – 28, 2018.
  56. Hayat, A, A., Salehi, A., Kojuri, J., Medical student's academic performance: The role of academic emotions and motivation, Journal of Advances in Medical Education & Professionalism, 6 (4), 168–175, 2018.
  57. Adamma, O, N., Ekwutosim, O, P., Unamba, E. C., Influence of Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation on Pupils Academic Performance in Mathematics, Supremum Journal of Mathematics Education, 2 (2), 52-59, 2018.
  58. Costa, P. T., McCrae, R.R., NEO PI-R professional manual, Psychological Assessment Resources, Odessa, FL, 1992.
  59. El Gammal, Y. O., Visualization in Architecture Education”, Journal of Al-Azhar University Engineering Sector, 3 (15), 1-8, 2008.
  60. Meier, S., McCarthy, P., Schmeck, R. R., Validity of self-efficacy as a predictor of writing performance, Cognitive Therapy and Research, 8, 107-120, 1984.
  61. Mills, J. S., Blankstein, K. R., Perfectionism, intrinsic vs extrinsic motivation, and motivated strategies for learning: a multidimensional analysis of university students”, Personality and Individual Differences, 29 (6), 1191-1204, 2000.
  62. Myers, I. B., McCaulley, M. H., Quenk, N. L., Hammer, A. L., MBTI Manual: A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (3rd ed.), Consulting Psychologists Press., California, 1986.
  63. Komarraju, M., Karau, S. J.,The relationship between the big five personality traits and academic motivation, Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 557–567, 2005.
  64. URL-1 Web of Science, https://www,webofscience,com/wos/woscc/summary/b1d84ab9-c096-445c-853e-7184b622c2e1-9f4bc71d/relevance/1, Erişim tarihi Ağustos 24,2023
  65. URL-2 Web of Science, https://www,webofscience,com/wos/woscc/summary/37ffef97-7c79-46cf-b4da-23825e9a1467-9f4c0739/relevance/1, Erişim tarihi Ağustos 24,2023
  66. URL-3 Web of Science, https://www,webofscience,com/wos/woscc/summary/b19accd4-fb46-4c0b-b281-077de6ddc95e-9f4c8578/relevance/1, Erişim tarihi Ağustos 24,2023
  67. URL-4 Web of Science, https://www,webofscience,com/wos/woscc/summary/56c67e3b-0df5-4754-9d11-18e00d084c1e-9f4cc5ce/relevance/1, Erişim tarihi Ağustos 24,2023
  68. Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Furnham, A., Lewis, M., Personality and approaches to learning predict preference for different teaching methods, Learning and Individual Differences, 17, 241–250, 2007.
  69. Olsson, C., Lachmann, H., Kalén, S., Ponzer, S., Mellstrand Navarro, C., Personality and learning styles in relation to attitudes towards interprofessional education: a cross-sectional study on undergraduate medical students during their clinical courses, BMC Med Educ, 20, 398, 2020.
  70. Mirmoradi, S. S., The study of architecture students' learning styles and their relationships with gender, academic performance, and duration of study in this discipline, Int. J. Architect. Eng. Urban Plan, 28 (2), 135-147, 2018.
  71. Kvan, T., Yunyan, J., Students’ learning styles and their correlation with performance in architectural design studio, Design Studies, 26, 19-34, 2005.
  72. Felder, R.M., Matters of style,ASEE Prism, 6 (4),18–23,1996.
  73. John, O., Naumann, L., Soto, C., Paradigm shift to the integrative big-five trait taxonomy: history, measurement, and conceptual issues, Handbook of personality: Theory and research, O, P, John, R, W, Robins, & L, A, Pervin (Ed.), Guilford Press., New York, 114-158, 2008.
  74. Amabile, T, M.,Hill, K, G., Hennessey, B, A., Tighe, E. M., The Work Preference Inventory: assessing intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations, Journal of personality and social psychology, 66 (5), 950-967, 1994.
  75. Schmeck, R, R., Geisler‐Brenstein, E., Cercy, S. P., Self-Concept and Learning, The revised Inventory of Learning Processes”, Educational Psychology, 11 (3-4), 343-362,1991.
  76. Watters, P., Measuring the Creativity of Architecture Students, Doctor of Philosophy in Education, University of Rhode Island, 2017.