Journal of Iranian Architecture & Urbanism(JIAU)

Abstract Extended Abstract Background and Objectives: Criticism and correction sessions form the basis of evaluating architectural design projects. A valid and targeted assessment, in addition to measuring fundamental knowledge, also measures its practical application in practice. Integrating knowledge and skills stands as a primary objective within architectural studios. Therefore, evaluation plays a very important role in the process of architectural education that shapes the professionals in the future. The most important issue is to achieve different methods of criticism according to different conditions. Additionally, evaluation should extend beyond merely appraising final projects, encompassing the critique process throughout an educational period (such as an academic semester) for formative assessment. The application of the successful experiences of foreign researchers in the workshop critique process and its comparative comparison with the workshop critique process in Iran can determine our position in this field. The aforementioned comparative comparison has generally identified the similarities and differences of successful international experiences compared to domestic experiences, and by examining and discovering the reason for the existence of these similarities and differences, it is possible to (1) solve the problem, which is to identify the degree of conformity of the structure of criticism and correction sessions. Through this comparative analysis, two key objectives are addressed: aligning the structure of critique sessions with active research findings and identifying optimal criticism methods within educational contexts. Ultimately, this process leads to localization and enhancement of architectural education practices. In this study, Shahid Beheshti University views the architectural studio as a research workshop, adopting a novel approach to architectural education. Guided by fundamental principles outlined by faculty, this workshop aims to enhance the quality of architecture education, positioning itself as a successful domestic model compared to international counterparts. The primary objective of this paper is to evaluate the alignment of Shahid Beheshti University research studio critique and correction session structure with the recommendations of leading researchers in the field. Specifically, the authors seek to answer the question: to what extent does the structure of critique and correction sessions at Shahid Beheshti University research studio adhere to the standards proposed by active researchers? It is hypothesized that the level of conformity to these standards is within the average range, although empirical evidence will be necessary to confirm this assertion.
Methods: In this comparative study, researchers employed a hypothesis testing approach using a comparative strategy. The study utilized data from two sources: (a) the opinions of leading researchers in architectural education, particularly concerning the structure of criticism and correction sessions, and (b) the innovative approach of Shahid Beheshti University research studio. Ten key concepts, defining the theoretical framework of criticism and correction sessions in architectural studios, were identified through a systematic review of relevant literature from both communities. These concepts, derived from a scientific process, also align with historical perspectives on the subject. The research method employed in this study is a documentary-survey approach utilizing content analysis techniques. The process begins with the selection of keywords and concepts. In the initial step, information is gathered by extracting data from two sources: (1) scientific research articles authored by selected researchers on the broader topic of ‘criticism and correction sessions in architectural studios,’ and (2) published articles specifically related to this topic, focusing on Shahid Beheshti University. The second step involves qualitative and quantitative text analysis, including categorization and extraction of information from the selected sources. This analysis determines the frequency of topics within the categories based on textual elements. Subsequently, in the third step, the results from the second step are interpreted. Statistical analysis of quantitative data was conducted using SPSS software.
Findings: The rThe research findings indicate the identification of ten main concepts or criteria in the structure of critique and correction sessions in the research studio of Shahid Beheshti University. These concepts are: constructive studio environment, participation-oriented approach, involvement of professors and professional activists in studio sessions, criterion-based teaching and assessment method, simultaneous presence of several professors in a single studio for training and evaluation purposes, receiving critical opinions from different professors, integration of different student groups (peer and non-peer) in studio sessions, application of educational technologies in the studio, teacher-centered/ student-centered approach, assessment of judgment and final decisions.
Conclusion: The results reveal a direct and statistically significant relationship between the structure of critique and correction sessions in Shahid Beheshti University research studio and the proposed structure by active researchers in this field, as indicated by the ten identified concepts. This suggests that the critique and correction sessions within the university research studio adhere to a systematic and convergent framework similar to successful global models. Consequently, it is recommended as an exemplary model with the potential for broader applicability. While the research hypothesis initially suggested a moderate level of compliance, the observed correlation coefficient of 0.674 surpasses this expectation, indicating a stronger alignment than anticipated.

Abstract The dualism of creativity and innovation versus impressionable, linkage and kinship among works have always been debated in art and architecture, especially after modernity. This research attempts to express the process of intertextuality and describes that architecture is not only created by relying on the ingenuity and dominance of the originality of the idea of the architect and not created suddenly, but it is created by instinctive fascination with the experience, method, effect and other tools of the artists. The architecture of adaptation and reading is broad; it is heterogeneous and never-ending in the works of others, and always in dialogue with another. In the process of intertextuality, our effort is to search for similarities and analogies of architectural works which should be attributed to the human desire to finding ancestry and origin, genealogy, and the term "kinship myth". Research is based on the defense of the hypothesis that architecture is a kind of discourse that speaks of the interconnectedness and kinship between works as opposed to the hegemony of singularity and uniqueness of the work. It is in the criticism of traditional critique that, in the body of their criticism, they attribute the value of the work to the originality of the idea and the product of its creator creative mind, and some works are downgraded to the level of a copy of the other works. But in the intertextual approach, no other text is merely unique, and it is certainly formed in the dialogue between the layers of the artist's mind and one or more previous texts. Research is applied in nature and relies on analytical-interpretive method. The extracted data were analyzed based on logical reasoning, the results of which are presented in graphs. The nature of research is an applied research and relies on the analytical-interpretive method. The extracted data were analyzed based on logical reasoning, the results of which are presented in graphs. Using the intertextual interpretive approach, the analysis of authentic opinions is focused on the concept of intertextual reading, and finally, several works of Iranian architecture are presented in order to recognize the reading and creating of intertextual architecture.