Revisiting learning styles and autonomy in the design studio: an undergraduate assessment

IF 1.5 4区 经济学 0 ARCHITECTURE
Dua Al Maani
{"title":"Revisiting learning styles and autonomy in the design studio: an undergraduate assessment","authors":"Dua Al Maani","doi":"10.1108/ohi-02-2022-0058","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThis cross-sectional study investigated differences in the learning styles of 127 undergraduate architectural students (first year through to final year) to examine the relationship between learning styles and learning autonomy.Design/methodology/approachFor the investigation, the Felder and Solomon index of learning styles and the Macaskill and Taylor autonomous learning scale were used to identify how these variables relate to one another and how this relationship differs by gender and level of study.FindingsThe study provides evidence of a statistically significant impact of studio-based learning on both learning autonomy and style. Our findings, in conjunction with the absence of consistent findings from literature, provide suggestions for making learning in the studio more inclusive for all students. The authors also suggest that looking for learning style differences in the design studio is redundant. This is not intended to ignore the importance of learning styles, but when differences of learning preferences are apparent in one design studio, such finding would provide support for that specific learning setting, and only then conclusions can be drawn and suggestions can be introduced to help its learners, but not to be generalized to other studios.Originality/valueLearning styles in the design studio literature has revealed only a few fragmentary and sometimes contradicting evidence that cannot be generalized. Although previous studies have explored learning styles in architecture in some detail, much uncertainty still exists about the relation between learning styles and other learning concepts such as autonomy, especially within studio-based subjects. In this research, the authors interrogated and critically review learning styles as applied to different design settings from different countries.","PeriodicalId":44969,"journal":{"name":"Open House International","volume":"73 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open House International","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ohi-02-2022-0058","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHITECTURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

PurposeThis cross-sectional study investigated differences in the learning styles of 127 undergraduate architectural students (first year through to final year) to examine the relationship between learning styles and learning autonomy.Design/methodology/approachFor the investigation, the Felder and Solomon index of learning styles and the Macaskill and Taylor autonomous learning scale were used to identify how these variables relate to one another and how this relationship differs by gender and level of study.FindingsThe study provides evidence of a statistically significant impact of studio-based learning on both learning autonomy and style. Our findings, in conjunction with the absence of consistent findings from literature, provide suggestions for making learning in the studio more inclusive for all students. The authors also suggest that looking for learning style differences in the design studio is redundant. This is not intended to ignore the importance of learning styles, but when differences of learning preferences are apparent in one design studio, such finding would provide support for that specific learning setting, and only then conclusions can be drawn and suggestions can be introduced to help its learners, but not to be generalized to other studios.Originality/valueLearning styles in the design studio literature has revealed only a few fragmentary and sometimes contradicting evidence that cannot be generalized. Although previous studies have explored learning styles in architecture in some detail, much uncertainty still exists about the relation between learning styles and other learning concepts such as autonomy, especially within studio-based subjects. In this research, the authors interrogated and critically review learning styles as applied to different design settings from different countries.
重新审视学习风格和自主性在设计工作室:本科评估
目的本研究调查了127名建筑系本科生(大一至大四)学习风格的差异,以检验学习风格与学习自主性之间的关系。设计/方法/方法在调查中,使用Felder和Solomon学习风格指数和Macaskill和Taylor自主学习量表来确定这些变量如何相互关联,以及这种关系如何因性别和学习水平而不同。研究结果表明,基于工作室的学习对学习自主性和学习风格都有显著的影响。我们的研究结果,结合文献中缺乏一致的研究结果,为使工作室的学习对所有学生更具包容性提供了建议。作者还建议,在设计工作室寻找学习风格的差异是多余的。这并不是要忽视学习风格的重要性,但当一个设计工作室的学习偏好差异很明显时,这样的发现将为特定的学习环境提供支持,只有这样才能得出结论和建议,以帮助其学习者,但不能推广到其他工作室。在设计工作室的文献中,独创性/价值学习风格只揭示了一些零碎的,有时是相互矛盾的证据,这些证据不能概括。虽然以前的研究已经详细探讨了建筑中的学习风格,但学习风格与其他学习概念(如自主性)之间的关系仍然存在许多不确定性,特别是在工作室为基础的科目中。在这项研究中,作者询问并批判性地回顾了不同国家不同设计环境下的学习风格。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
18.20%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: The journal of an association of institues and individuals concerned with housing, design and development in the built environment. Theories, tools and pratice with special emphasis on the local scale.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信