Educational behavior of the students in the design studios during the pandemic time

Abstract

The main aim of this paper is to demonstrate the process of adapting architecture students to the pandemic condition in the design studios due to wearing face masks and social distance measures. An architectural design studio is different from a normal classroom due to the open space for open discussion and dialogue and group work. The methodology of the research was designed based on the quantitative method with the application of the Likert scale questionnaire and analyzing the data in SPSS. The findings of the research identified that three factors are important for the students in the activities in the design studios including desk-crits (critique), social interaction, and the physical environment of the design studios. The Chi-square analysis illustrated that the students preferred to use the individual desk-crits over group desk-crits during the pandemic time due to wearing face masks and social distance. Apparently, public activities such as presentations, communication, and discussion were replaced with the individual desk-crits as a more adapted form to wearing face masks and social distance for the students in terms of personalization of the learning process in design studios during the pandemic time.

Keywords

• Architecture
• Design studio
• Desk-crits
• Learning process
• Personalization
• The pandemic

References

1. Almquist, Y. B., Ashir, S., & Brännström, L. (2014). A guide to quantitative methods. Stockholm: Stockholm University, Sweden. Retrieved from www.chess.su.se/methods
2. Apriyanti, C. (2020). The parents’ role in guiding distance learning and the obstacle during covid-19 outbreak. Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Dasar, 7(2), 68-83. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.30659/pendas.7.2.68-83
3. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
4. Buldan, E. (2021). Situated learning in online architectural studio education. Journal of Design Studio, 3(1), 59-70. https://doi.org/10.46474/jds.930642
5. Chinn, C. A. (2011). Educational psychology: Understanding students’ thinking. Rutgers University: New Jersey.
6. De Campos, C. I., Pitombo, C. S., Delhomme, P., & Quintanilha, J. A. (2020). Comparative Analysis of Data Reduction Techniques for Questionnaire Validation Using Self-reported Driver Behaviors. Journal of Safety Research, 73, 133-142.
7. Delialioglu, O., & Yildirim, Z. (2007). Students’ perceptions on effective dimensions of interactive learning in a blended learning environment. Educational Technology & Society, 10(2), 133-146.
8. Dizdar, S. D. (2015). Architectural education, project design course and education process using examples. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, IETC 2014, 176, pp. 276 – 283.

9. DoA. (2012). Architecture program specification. Kigali : Department of Architecture, The University of Rwanda.
10. Draper, J. (1977). The Ecole des Beaux-Arts and the architectural profession in the United States: The case of John Galen Howard. In S. Kostof, The architect (pp. 209–238). New York: Oxford University Press.
11. Drexler, A. (1975). The architecture of the Ecole des Beaux Arts. New York: The Museum of Modern Art.
12. Ersin, P., Atay, D., & Mede, E. (2020). Boasting preservice teachers’ competence and online teaching readiness through e-practicum during the COVID-19 outbreak. International Journal of TESOL Studies, 2(2), 112-124. https://doi.org/10.46451/ijts.2020.09.09
13. FAED, F. (2009). Program specification of architecture. Kigali: the University of Rwanda.
14. Frankfort-Nachmias, C., Nachmias, D., & DeWaard, J. (2014). Research methods in the social sciences (8 ed.). New York: SAGE Publisher Ink.
15. Garric, J.‐P. (2017). The French Beaux‐Arts. In M. Bressani, & C. Contandriopoulos, The companions to the history of architecture, volume III, nineteenth century architecture, part I: Historicism, the Beaux‐Arts, and the Gothic (pp. 1-15). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
16. Goodwin, J. C. (2010). Research in psychology methods and design. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
17. Greenwood, C. R., Maheady, L., & Delquadri, J. (2002). Classwide peer tutoring programs. In M. R. Shinn, H. M. Walker, & G. Stoner, Interventions for academic and behavior problems II: Preventive and remedial approaches (pp. 611–649). Bethesda, MD.
18. Gulbahar, Y., & Madran, R. O. (2009). Communication and collaboration, satisfaction, equity, and autonomy in blended learning environments: A case from Turkey. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(2).
19. Hartley, J. (2014). Some Thoughts on Likert-type Scales. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology , 14(1), 83-86.
20. Huertas-Delgado, F. J., Garcia, M. J., Van Dyck, D., & Chillon, P. (2019). A Questionnaire to Assess Parental perception of Barriers towards Active Commuting to School (PABACS): Reliability and validity. Journal of Transport and Health, 12, 97-104.
21. Ion, G., Barrera-Corominas, A., & Tomàs-Folch, M. (2016). Written peer-feedback to enhance students’ current and future learning. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 13(15), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-016-0017-y
22. Joshi, A., Kale, S., Chandel, S., & Pal, D. K. (2015). Likert scale: Explored and explained. British Journal of Applied Science & Technology, 7(4), 396-403.
23. Lang, J. (1987). Creating architectural theory: The role of the behavioral sciences in environmental design. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
24. Lee, S. W. (2005). Encyclopedia of school psychology. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
25. Li, Q. (2013). A Novel Likert Scale Based on Fuzzy sets Theory. Expert System with Application , 40(5), 1906-1618.
26. Marinoni, G., Land, H., & Jensen, T. (2020). The impact of COVID-19 on higher education around the world. Published by the International Association of Universities.
27. Mckeever, A. (2022, Faberary 17). Do masks really harm kids? Here's what the science says. Retrieved from National Geography : https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/do-masks-really-harm-kids-heres-what-the-science-says
28. Naylor, D., & Nyanjom, J. (2020). Educators’ emotions involved in the transition to online teaching in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 40(6), 1236-1250. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1811645
29. Neuman, L. W. (2006). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. New York: Pearson Education.
30. O’Hagan, F., Capell, D., & Metaxas, C. (2022, April 26). Teaching with a mask. Retrieved from Trenttu: https://www.trentu.ca/teaching/teaching-mask
31. Peers, I. (1996). Statistical analysis for education and psychology researchers. London: The Falmer Press.
32. Proudfoot, P. R. (2000). Structuralism, phenomenology and hermeneutics in architectural education. International Journal of Architectural Theory, 2, 1-17.
33. Salkind, N. J. (2008). Encyclopedia of educational psychology. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
34. Schon, D. A. (1984). The architectural studio as an exemplar of education for reflection-in-action. Journal of Architecture Education, 38, 2-9.
35. Schon, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
36. Seifert, K., & Sutton, R. (2009). Educational psychology. Zurich, Switzerland: The Global Text Project.
37. Tafahomi, R. (2021a). Insight into a personalized procedure of design in concept generation by the students in architecture thesis projects. Journal of Design Studio, 3(1), 5-18. https://doi.org/10.46474/jds.910234
38. Tafahomi, R. (2021b). The preferences of the students to select the seating position in the architecture design studios. Erciyes Journal of Education, 5(2), 105-120. https://doi.org/10.32433/eje.940783
39. Tafahomi, R. (2021c). Application of Blended Learning through Practical Project-based Instruction: Opportunities and Constraints. Pedagogi: Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan, 21(2), 77-89. https://doi.org/10.24036/pedagogi.v21i2.1093
40. Tafahomi, R. (2021d). The Behavioral Patterns of the Student in the Position of Peer-Jury in Landscape Design Studio. EDUCATUM – Journal of Social Science, 7(2), 57-65. https://doi.org/10.37134/ejoss.vol7.2.6.2021
41. Tafahomi, R. (2021e). Learning activities of the students in peer-jury practices in the architecture design studio. AKSARA: Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan Nonformal, 7(3), 795-814. https://doi.org/10.37905/aksara.7.3.795-814
42. Tafahomi, R. (2022). Insight into Research Dilemma in Design Studios and Relationships with the Architecture Curriculum. Journal of Design Studio, 4(1), 93-112. https://doi.org/10.46474/jds.1102633
43. Tafahomi, R., & Nadi, R. (2021). The interpretation of graphical features applied to mapping SWOT by the architecture students in the design studio. Journal of Design Studio, 3(2), 205-221. https://doi.org/10.46474/jds.1019310
44. Webster. (2022, 04 13). A Guide to Coronavirus-Related Words. Retrieved 08 16, 2022, from Webster: https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/coronavirus-words-guide
45. WHO. (2022, 03 02). COVID-19 pandemic triggers 25% increase in prevalence of anxiety and depression worldwide. Retrieved 08 16, 2022, from World Health Organization: https://www.who.int/news/item/02-03-2022-covid-19-pandemic-triggers-25-increase-in-prevalence-of-anxiety-and-depression-worldwide
46. Williams, M., & Robert, L. B. (1997). Psychology for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
47. Woolfolk, A. (2016). Educational psychology. Boston: Pearson.
48. Xi, L., Yuan, Z., YunQui, B., & Chiang, F.-K. (2017). An investigation of university students’ classroom seating choices. Journal of Learning Spaces, 6(3), 13-22.
49. Yang, Z., Becerik-Gerber, B., & Mino, L. (2013). A study on student perceptions of higher education classrooms: Impact of classroom attributes on student satisfaction and performance. Building & Environment, 70(15), 171-188.