İç Mekan Estetik Memnuniyetin Karşılaştırılması: İç Mimarlık Birinci Sınıf ve Üst Sınıf Öğrencileri Arasındaki Farklılıklar

Öz

İç mimarlık mesleği, hem estetik hem de işlevselliğin bütünleştiği bir alandır. Bu nedenle, bu kavramlar üniversite eğitim süreci boyunca derinlemesine işlenmektedir. Bu eğitimin ilk yılında, öğrencilerin tasarıma eleştirel bakabilme ve soyut düşünme becerilerini geliştirmeye başlamalarını amaçlayan temel tasarım stüdyosu dersleri yer almaktır. Öğrencilerin estetik değerlendirmelerini ne kadar geliştirebildiklerini ölçmek ve analiz etmek temel tasarım eğitimi literatürüne katkı sağlayacaktır. Bu nedenle çalışmayı, iç mimarlık eğitimine yeni başlayan öğrenciler ile birinci yılını tamamlamış öğrenciler arasında iç mekanlara yönelik estetik değerlendirmelerde bir fark olup olmadığını araştırmak amacıyla gerçekleştirdik. Sonuçlar, öğrencilerin iç mekanların tasarımını değerlendirirken estetik memnuniyet ve yenilik kategorilerinde önemli bir fark olduğunu göstermiştir. Birinci sınıfı bitiren öğrenciler, üniversite eğitimine yeni başlayan öğrencilere göre tasarımını değerlendirdikleri iç mekanları estetik memnuniyet ve yenilik bakımından daha az beğenmişlerdir. Temel tasarım eğitiminin sonunda bu durum normaldir çünkü eğitiminin en önemli amacı öğrencilere eleştirel düşünmeyi öğretmektir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• APID ölçeği
• Estetik Memnuniyet
• İç Mimarlık eğitimi
• Temel Tasarım dersi

A Comparison of Interior Aesthetic Pleasure: Differences Between Interior Architecture First-Year and Upper-Year Students

Abstract

The professions of interior architecture necessitate the integration of both aesthetics and functionality. Therefore, these concepts are deeply embedded in the university education process. The first step on this educational path is taking the basic design studio course which aims students to start developing critical and abstract thinking skills in the design process. It would contribute to the literature to examine how far students are able to develop their aesthetic evaluations in the first year of university education. Therefore, we conducted the study to investigate if there is a difference in aesthetic evaluations of interiors between students who have just started their interior architecture education and students who have completed their first year. Examining how students' aesthetic evaluations for interior design evolve over the course of their interior architecture education provides valuable insights into design education. The results illustrated that there is a significant difference between evaluations of aesthetic pleasure and novelty. The students who finished the first year have less aesthetic pleasure and novelty scores than the students who just started their university education. The first year of education may reduce aesthetic appreciation because basic design education aims to teach students to think critically.

Keywords

• Aesthetic pleasure
• Basic Design course
• Interior Architecture education
• the APID scale

Kaynakça

1. Akbay, S. (2022). Constructive Alignment of Basic Design Education: Students' Approaches to Learning and Perceived Learning Demands in Online Distance Education. Online Journal of Art & Design, 10(4).
2. Berghman, M., & Hekkert, P. (2017). Towards a unified model of aesthetic pleasure in design. New Ideas in Psychology, 47, 136-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.NEWIDEAPSYCH.2017.03.004 Blijlevens, J., Hekkert, P., Leder, H., Thurgood, C., Chen, L. L., & Whitfield, T. W. A. (2017).
3. The aesthetic pleasure in design scale: The development of a scale to measure aesthetic pleasure for designed artifacts. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 11(1), 86–98. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000098
4. Bloch, P., Brunel, F. F., & Arnold, T. J. (2003). Individual differences in the centrality of visual product aesthetics: concept and measurement. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(4), 551-565. https://doi.org/10.1086/346250
5. Büyüköztürk, S., Akgün, Ö. E., Özkahveci, Ö., & Demirel, F. (2004). The validity and reliability study of the Turkish version of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 4(2).
6. Chatterjee, A. and Vartanian, O. (2014). Neuroaesthetics. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(7), 370- 375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2014.03.003
7. Cheung, M. C., Law, D., & Yip, J. (2014). Evaluating aesthetic experience through personalappearance styles: a behavioral and electrophysiological study. PloS one, 9(12), e115112.
8. Demirbaş, Ö. O. (2001). The relation of learning styles and performance scores of the students in interior architecture education (Doctoral dissertation, Bilkent Universitesi (Turkey).

9. Demirbas, O. O., & Demirkan, H. (2007). Learning styles of design students and the relationship of academic performance and gender in design education. Learning and Instruction, 17(3), 345- 359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.02.007
10. Garrido-Possauner, L. M., & Maya, J. (2019). The Aesthetic Pleasure in Design Scale for Spanish Speaking Countries: A Method for the Cross-Cultural Implementation and Adaptation of Psychometric Scales. In Cross-Cultural Design. Methods, Tools and User Experience: 11th International Conference, CCD 2019, Held as Part of the 21st HCI International Conference, HCII 2019, Orlando, FL, USA, July 26–31, 2019, Proceedings, Part I 21 (pp. 487-505). Springer International Publishing., 11576 LNCS, 487–505. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030- 22577-3_35
11. Hekkert, P. (2006). Design aesthetics: principles of pleasure in design. Psychology science, 48(2), 157. Hung, W. K., & Chen, L. L. (2012). Effects of novelty and its dimensions on aesthetic preference in product design. International Journal of Design, 6(2), 81-90.
12. IFI (2011). IFI Interiors Declaration. Retrieved from https://ifiworld.org/programsevents/ interiorsdeclaration-adoptions/
13. Interior Design Magazine. (2024). Large Apartment Vanke Hushanyuanzhu. Retrieved January 16, 2024 from https://interiordesign.net/wp-content/uploads/awards/2021/largeapartment- Vanke-Hushanyuanzhu-Villa.jpg
14. Interior Design Magazine. (2024). Nautilus Pier Four. Retrieved January 16, 2024 from https://interiordesign.net/wp-content/uploads/awards/2021/casual-dining-Nautilus-Pier- Four.jpg
15. Lang, J. (1992). Symbolic aesthetics in architecture: toward a research agenda. Environmental Aesthetics: Theory, Research, and Applications, 11–26.
16. Leydecker, S. (Ed.). (2013). Designing interior architecture: concept, typology, material, construction. Walter de Gruyter.
17. Light, A., & Smith, J. (Eds.). (2005). The aesthetics of everyday life. Columbia University Press.
18. Martindale, C., Moore, K., & Borkum, J. (1990). Aesthetic Preference: Anomalous Findings for Berlyne’s Psychobiological Theory. The American Journal of Psychology, 103(1), 53. https://doi.org/10.2307/1423259
19. Matthee, M., & Turpin, M. (2019). Teaching critical thinking, problem solving, and design thinking: Preparing IS students for the future. Journal of Information Systems Education, 30(4), 242-252.
20. Myers, B. and Dyer, J. (2006). The influence of student learning style on critical thinking skill. Journal of Agricultural Education, 47(1), 43-52. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2006.01043
21. Omale, R. P. (2022). Evaluation of Aesthetic Perceptions of Public Buildings' Façades by Design Professionals. Edinburgh Architecture Research, 37, 70-89.
22. Paakki, M., Aaltojärvi, I., Sandell, M., & Hopia, A. (2019). The importance of the visual aesthetics of colours in food at a workday lunch. International Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science, 16, 100131. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJGFS.2018.12.001
23. Page, C., & Herr, P. M. (2002). An Investigation of the Processes by Which Product Design and Brand Strength Interact to Determine Initial Affect and Quality Judgments. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 12(2), 133–147. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327663JCP1202_06 Pearce, M. T., Zaidel, D. W., Vartanian, O., Skov, M., Leder, H., Chatterjee, A., & Nadal, M. (2016). Neuroaesthetics: The cognitive neuroscience of aesthetic experience. Perspectives on psychological science, 11(2), 265-279.
24. Rafaeli, A., & Vilnai-Yavetz, I. (2007). Instrumentality, aesthetics and symbolism of physical artifacts as triggers of emotion. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 5(1), 91–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/1463922031000086735
25. Skov, M. (2019). Aesthetic appreciation: The view from neuroimaging. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 37(2), 220-248.
26. Šuligoj, V., Žavbi, R., & Avsec, S. (2020). Interdisciplinary critical and design thinking. International journal of engineering education, 36(1), 84-95.
27. Turner, H. (2021). Effective critique through effective peer engagement. Journal of Interior Design, 46(3), 29-45. https://doi.org/10.1111/joid.12195
28. Türkmen, A. (2020). Concept representation and form production in basic design. IDA: International Design and Art Journal, 2(2), 228-247.
29. Uluçay, N. Ö. (2023). Introductory design course through art-based research in interior architecture education. Journal of Design for Resilience in Architecture and Planning, 4(1), 136-147.
30. Walker, P., & Finney, N. (1999). Skill development and critical thinking in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 4(4), 531-547.
31. Zenner, S. (2019). It costs a lot to look this cheap: Preference for low-quality graphic design. Visual Communication Quarterly, 26(1), 22–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/15551393.2019.1577076