Comparison of Technical Drawing Course Education Model; The Case of Selcuk University Department of Interior Architecture
Abstract
In the wake of the February 2023 earthquake in Turkey, many educational institutions, including Selcuk University, adopted a partially distance education system for various courses. This study aims to assess the course performance of 70 students enrolled in the Technical Drawing-2 course, delivered via distance education in the spring semester, in comparison to their performance in the Technical Drawing-1 course, which was conducted in person during the fall semester of the same academic year. The study employed a psychometric measurement technique. The datas were converted into numerical data using SPSS version 29. The survey was designed using a 5-point Likert-type measurement model. The survey used a single group pre-test (Distance Education Model)-post-test (Face to Face Education Model) design. The data was analyzed using the dependent t-test, frequency analysis, normality test, and Cronbach Alpha reliability analysis. The survey results indicate that students who took the Technical Drawing-2 course through both distance learning and face-to-face methods found the distance learning approach beneficial for sharing information about the course material. However, they also expressed a preference for face-to-face lessons. Moreover, they can better articulate their thoughts in a traditional classroom setting compared to a remote learning environment.
Keywords
Interior Architecture, Technical Drawing, Application Method, Distance Education.
Supporting Institution
This study supported by Selçuk University Rectorate Scientific Research Projects (BAP) Coordinatorship.
References
- Altawalbeh, K., & Al-Ajlouni, A. (2022). The impact of distance learning on science education during the pandemic. International Journal of Technology in Education (IJTE), 5(1), 43-66. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijte.195.
- Aristeidou, M., & Cross, S. (2021). The impact of the covid-19 disruption on distance learning higher education students and activities. 7th International Conference on Higher Education Advances (HEAd’21) (pp. 695-702). Valencia: Universitat Politecnica de Valencia.
- Carlson, L. E., & Sullivan, J. F. (1999). Hands-on engineering: learning by doing in the integrated teaching and learning program. International Journal of Engineering Education, 20-31.
- Cridlin, L. D. (2007). The İmportance of Hands-On Learning. Journal of Laser Applications, 151-156.
- Çalışkan, S., & Ozcan, D. (2017). Determining student satisfaction in distance education courses. Science Direct Available Procedia Computer Science. 120 (2017) 529–538.
- Faresta, R. A. (2024). Book review, onlıne postgraduate educatıon: re-imagınıng openness, dıstance and interactıon. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education-TOJDE, 260-263.
- Fırat, M., Kılınç, H., & Yüzer, V. (2018). Level of intrinsic motivation of distance education students in e-learning environments. Journal of Computer Assited Learning, (34):63–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12214.
- Gaidelys, V., Čiutienė, R., & Cibulskas, G. (2023). An assessment of the impact of distance learning on pupils’ performance. Education Science., 14, 3. https://doi.org/10.3390/ educsci13010003 s 4-19.
- Hakkari, F. (2018). Meslek yüksekokulu öğrencilerinin uzaktan eğitim derslerine yönelik görüşleri. Journal of Social and Humanities Sciences Research, vol:5 issue:23, p: 1140-1151.
- Kang, B. (2021). The future of service post-covid-19 pandemic. Seoul: Springer.