The Behavioral Patterns of the Student in the Position of Peer-Jury in Landscape Design Studio

Keywords: Behavioral Patterns, Peer-Jury, Learning Outcomes, peer-learning, Likert Test, Facto Analysis, Landscape Design Studio

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to address the behavioral patterns of the students in peer-jury exercise and the learning outcomes in the landscape design studio. Despite the design studios run based on the relation of the master of the studio with the students, changing this relationship to the peer-learners experiments through this research. A Likert questionnaire was applied to ask the opinion of the students at the end of the semester, the data analyzed through a factor analysis test in SPSS. The findings of the analysis identified that the students addressed effective aspects of the exercise in five clusters including communication, interaction, presentation, innovation, and interpretation. The students learn through peer-jury to communicate with classmates through comments, critics, and recommendations, which is improved presentations. The comments of the peer-jury as an idea of design result in innovation in the design conceptualization. In conclusion, the students design their own style of communication in the position of peer-jury through an interpretation of the design projects. The results of the exercise shift the learning process from the instructor toward the peer-students and the peer-learners. 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Almquist, Y. B., Ashir, S., & Brännström, L. (2014). A guide to quantitative methods. Stockholm: Stockholm University, Sweden. Retrieved from www.chess.su.se/methods

Anas, N., Mohd Isa, N., Omar, N., Mohd Fatzel, F. H., & Ghazali, Z. M. (2021). The Relationship Between Students’ Learning Styles and Academic Performance: Final Year Accounting Students. EDUCATUM – Journal of Social Science (EJOSS), 7(1), 1-9. doi:10.37134/ejoss.vol7.1.1.2021

Armstrong, C. D. (2016). French Architectural Thought and the Idea of Greece, Eighteenth‐ and Nineteenth‐Century French Views on Greek Architecture. In M. M. Miles, A Companion to Greek Architecture, (pp. 487-508). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Brace, N., Kemp, R., & Snelgar, R. (2006). SPSS for Psychologists. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Chinn, C. A. (2011). Educational Psychology: Understanding Students’ Thinking. Rutgers University: New Jersey.

Ciravoğlu, A. (2014). Notes on architectural education: An experimental approach to design studio. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 152 ( 2014 ) 7 – 12, 152, 7-12. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.09.146

Collins, W. A., & Steinberg, L. (2006). Adolescent development in interpersonal context. In W. Damon , R. Lerner , & N. Eisenberg , Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (pp. 1003–1067)). New York, NY: Wiley.

D’Souza, N. (2007). Design Intelligences: A Case for Multiple Intelligences in Architectural Design. International Journal of Architectural Research, 1(2), 15-43.

Double, K. S., McGrane, J. A., & Hopfenbeck, T. N. (2020). The Impact of Peer Assessment on Academic Performance: A Meta-analysis of Control Group Studies. Educational Psychology Review, 32, 481–509. doi:10.1007/s10648-019-09510-3

Doyle, S. (2016). Bringing Bauhaus Back: Digital Architecture + Contemporary Craft. Architecture/Practice: Pre-Modern Training For a Postmodern Practice (pp. 1-7). Iowa: the Architecture at Iowa State University Digital Repository.

Drexler, A. (1975). THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE ECOLE DES BEAUX-ARTS. New York: The Museum of Modern Art.

Frankfort-Nachmias, C., Nachmias, D., & DeWaard, J. (2014). Research Methods in the Social Sciences (8 ed.). New York: SAGE Publisher Ink.

Frayling, C. (1993). Research in Art and Design. Royal College of Art Research Paper, 1(1), 1-5.

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.

Graumann, C. F. (2002). The Phenomenological Approach to People-Environment Studies. In R. B. BECHTEL, & A. CHURCHMAN , HANDBOOK OF ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY (pp. 95-113). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

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.

Groat, L., & Wang, D. (2002). Architectural Research Methods. New York: John Wiley & Sons INC.

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. K., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis. New York: Pearson,.

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. doi:10.1186/s41239-016-0017-y

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.

Krippendorff, K. H. (2003). Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology (2 ed.). New York: Sage Publications.

Lang, j. (1987). Creating Architectural Theory: The Role of the Behavioral Sciences in Environmental Design . New Your: Van Nostrand Reinhold.

Laseau, P. (2000). Graphic Thinking for Architects and Designers (3th ed.). New York: Wiley.

Lawson, B. (2005). How Designers Think: The Design Process Demystified (4 ed.). Oxford: Oxford Press.

Lee, S. W. (2005). Encyclopedia of school psychology. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

McClean, D., & Hourigan, N. (2013). Critical Dialogue in Architecture Studio: Peer Interaction and Feedback. Journal for Education in the Built Environment, 8(1), 35-57. doi:10.11120/jebe.2013.00004

Meeks, M. D., Knotts, T. L., James, K. D., Williams, F., Vassar, J. A., & Wren, A. O. (2013). The Impact of Seating Location and Seating Type on Student Performance. Education Science, 3, 375-386.

Meyers, L. S., Gamst, G., & Guarino, A. J. (2012). Applied Multivariate Research: Design and Interpretation . New York: SAGE.

Moore , C., & Teather, S. (2013). Engaging students in peer review: Feedback as learning. Issues in Educational Research,, 23(2), 196-211. Retrieved from https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ecuworks2013/9

Moreno, R. (2010). Educational Psychology. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Mugerauer, R. (1995). Interpreting Environments: Tradition, Deconstruction, Hermeneutics. Texas: University of Texas.

Mulder, R. A., Pearce, J. M., & Baik, C. (2014). Peer review in higher education: Student perceptions before and after participation. Active Learning in Higher Education, 15(2), 157-171. doi:10.1177/1469787414527391

Neuman, L. W. (2006). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. New York: Pearson Education.

Niezabitowska, E. D. (2018). Research Methods and Techniques in Architecture. New York: Routledge.

Noah, J. B., & Abdul Aziz, A. B. (2020). A Systematic review on soft skills development among university graduates. EDUCATUM – Journal of Social Science (EJOSS), 6(1), 43-58. Retrieved from https://ejournal.upsi.edu.my/index.php/EJOSS/article/view/3485

Orîndaru, A. (2015). Changing Perspectives on Students in Higher Education. In P. E. Finance (Ed.), 22nd International Economic Conference – IECS 2015 “Economic Prospects in the Context of Growing Global and Regional Interdependencies”, IECS 2015. 27, pp. 682 – 691. Elsevier.

Philippou, S. (2001). On a Paradox in Design Studio Teaching or the Centrality of the Periphery. Architectural Education Exchange Architectural Educators: Responding to Change (pp. 2-13). Cardiff : Cardiff University, LTSN Center for Education in the Built Environment,.

Ročāne, M. (2015). The Significance of Teacher`S Beliefs in the Learning Process. Society, Integration, Education, 2, 165-177. doi:10.17770

Seifert , K., & Sutton, R. (2009). Educational Psychology. Zurich, Switzerland: Global Text .

Tafahomi, R. (2020). Educational Outcome of Students’ Group-Table Arrangement for Collaboration in Architectural Thesis Studio. LWATI: A Journal of Contemporary Research, 17(2), 22-46.

Tafahomi, R., & Nadi, R. (2016). Modelling of thought in creation designing concept in urban design studio training. Prime Research on Education (PRE), 5(2), 821-828.

Uluoğlu, B. (2000). Design knowledge communicated in studio critiques. Design Studies, 2, 33–58.

Williams, M., & Robert, L. B. (1997). Psychology for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Woolfolk, A. (2016). Educational Psychology. Boston: Pearson.

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.

Published
2021-07-26
How to Cite
Tafahomi, R. (2021). The Behavioral Patterns of the Student in the Position of Peer-Jury in Landscape Design Studio. EDUCATUM Journal of Social Sciences, 7(2), 57-65. https://doi.org/10.37134/ejoss.vol7.2.6.2021