LEARNING STYLES AND STUDENTS’ PERFORMANCE IN DESIGN PROBLEM SOLVING

Elçin Tezel, Hernan Casakin

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.26687/archnet-ijar.v4i2/3.110

Abstract

Design curricula and all core design studio courses are prepared for performance attainment by giving theoretical and professional training. However students’ performance may be affected by both the constraints set on a design problem, and their learning styles. This study explores the performance of interior architectural students in relation to their learning styles (as proposed by Kolb’s Experiential Learning Theory), and different types of constraints set on design problems. Design performance, measured as conceptual development, form and spatial configuration, structural innovation and ergonomics, and craftsmanship, was found to change throughout the two bipolar continuum of the learning cycle with regard to two design conditions characterized by different types of constraint use.


Keywords

Design education; design constraints; experiential learning

Full Text:

PDF

References

Ashton, P. (1998). Learning theory through practice: Encouraging appropriate learning. Design Management Learning, 9(2), 64-68.

Beckman, S. L., & Barry M. (2010). Innovation as a learning process: Embedding design thinking. California Management Review, 50(1), 25-56.

Bruner, J. (1966). Towards a theory of instruction. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

Brown, R. D., Hallett, M. E., & Stoltz, R. R. (1994). Learning and teaching landscape architecture: Student learning styles in landscape architecture education. Landscape and Urban Planning, 30, 151- 157.

Cross, N. (2001). Design cognition: Results from protocol and other empirical studies of design activity. In C. M. Eastman, W. M. McCracken and W. C. Newstetter (Eds.), Design knowing and learning: Cognition in design education (79-103). Amsterdam: Elsevier Ltd.

Demirbaş, O. O., & Demirkan, H. (2003). Focus on architectural design process through learning styles. Design Studies, 24(5), 437-456

Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. Boston, Mass: D. C. Health and Co.

Harfield, S. (2007). On design ‘problematization’: Theorizing differences in designed outcomes. Design Studies, 28, 159-173.

Heylighen, A., & Verstijnen, I. M. (2003). Close encounters of the architectural kind. Design Studies, 24, 313–326.

Kelly, J. B. (1955). The psychology of personal construct theory, 1-2. New York, NY: Norton.

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Kolb, D. A. (2005). The Kolb learning style inventory version 3.1. London, UK: Hay Group.

Kolb, A. Y. & Kolb, D. A. (2005a). The Kolb learning style inventory-Ver.3.1 technical specifications. Retrieved from http://www.learningfromexperience.com/images/uploads/Tech_spec_LSI.pdf

Kolb, A. Y. & Kolb, D. A. (2005b). Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 4, 193-212.

Kroes, P. (2002). Design methodology and the nature of technical artifacts. Design Studies, 23, 287-302.

Kvan, T., & Yunyan, J. (2005). Student’s learning styles and their correlation with performance in architectural design studio. Design Studies, 26(1), 19-34.

Ledewitz, S. (1985). Models of design in studio teaching. Journal of Architectural Education, 38(2), 2-8.

Lewis, W. P. & Bonollo, E. (2002). An analysis of professional skills in design: Implications for education and research. Design Studies, 23(4), 385-406.

Lin, L. & Chen, C. (2002). Constraints modeling in product design. Journal of Engineering Design, 13, 205-214.

Mc Caullay, M. H. (1990). The MBTI and individual pathways in engineering design. Engineering Education, 80(5), 537-542.

Newland, P., Powell, J. A., & Creed, C. (1987). Understanding architectural designers’ selective information handling. Design Studies, 8(1), 1-17.

Nilson, L. B. (2003). Teaching at its best: A research based resource for college instructors (2nd ed.). Boston: Anker.

Özkaya, ., & Akin, Ö. (2004). Requirement-driven design: Assistance for information tracebility in design computing. Design Studies, 27(4), 381-398.

Philippou, S. (2001). On a paradox in design studio: Teaching or the centrality of the periphery. In Proceedings of Architectural Education Exchange Conference. Retrieved from http://cebe.cf.ac.uk/aee/sessions/dis4b.html

Portillo, M., & Dohr, J. H. (1994). Bridging process and structure through criteria. Design Studies, 15(4), 403-416.

Roberts, A. (2006). Cognitive styles and studio progression in architectural design education. Design Studies, 27(2), 167-181.

Rogers, C. (1961). On becoming a person (9th ed.). London: Routledge.

Rosenman, M. A., & Gero, J. S. (1998). Purpose and function in design: From the socio-cultural to the techno-physical. Design Studies, 19(2), 161-186.

Shön, D. A . (1983). The reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Shön, D. A . (1984). The Architectural studio as an exemplar of education for reflection-in-action. Journal of Architectural Education, 38(1), 2-9

Schon, D. A. (1985). The design studio: an exploration of its traditions and potentials. London: RIBA Publications for RIBA Building Trust.

Shön, D. A. (1988). Design: Rules, types and worlds. Design Studies, 9(3), 181-190.

Schön, D. A. & Rein, M. (1994). Frame reflection: Toward the resolution of interactable policy controversies. New York: Basic Books.

Simon, H. A. (1984). The structure of ill-structured problems. In N. Cross (Ed.), Developments in Design Methodology (28-41). Chichester, UK: Wiley.

Stumpf, S. C. & McDonnell, J. T. (2002). Talking about team framing: Using argumentation to analyse and support experiential learning in early design episodes. Design Studies, 23(1), 5-23.

Teymur, N. A. (1996). Architectural history as ‘educational object’. In A. Hardy and N. Teymur (Eds.), Architectural History and Studio (26-66). London: Question Press.

Uluoğlu, B. (2000). Design knowledge communicated in studio critiques. Design Studies, 21(1), 33-58.

Webster, H. (2001). The design diary: Promoting reflective practice in the design studio. In Proceedings of Architectural Education Exchange Conference. Retrieved from http://cebe.cf.ac.uk/aee/sessions/dis3a.html

Wu, C., Dale, N. B., & Bethel, L. J. (1998) Conceptual models and cognitive learning styles in teaching recursion. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 30(1), 292-296.

Yürekli , H. (2007). The design studio: A black hole in the design studio. In G. Sağlamer, (Ed.), The Design Studio, A Black Hole: Architectural Design Education: Views (17-34). stanbul: Yapı Endüstri Merkezi.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Copyright (c) 2015 International Journal of Architectural Research: ArchNet-IJAR



ABOUT US


- ISSN (Online) #1938 7806 - ArchNet-IJAR is covered by ArchNet@ MIT Libraries, Avery Index to Architectural Periodicals, EBSCO, CNKI, Pro-Quest, Scopus-Elsevier, Web of Science.

- Published work in ArchNet-IJAR is licensed under Creative Commons: CC-BY--NC-ND license, see http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/

Copyrights © Archnet-IJAR 2007-2018

 
 

Hit Counter
Visitor Hits Since 15 Jan 2014