معماری و شهرسازی ایران(JIAU)

تحلیلی بر آموزش معماری از جنبه‌ی کاربست مدل‌های نوین با تأکید بر مدل BIM‌؛ بررسی تطبیقی دانشگاه فنی استانبول و دانشگاه هنر اسلامی تبریز

نوع مقاله : برگرفته از رساله دکتری

نویسندگان

جاهد جعفری‌مند 1
شهریار شقاقی 2
حسن ابراهیمی اصل 3
نسیم نجفقلی پور کلانتری 4

1 دانشجوی دکترای معماری، گروه معماری، واحد شبستر، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، شبستر، ایران.

2 استادیار، گروه معماری، واحد شبستر، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، شبستر، ایران.

3 استادیار، گروه معماری، واحد بین‌المللی جلفا، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، جلفا، ایران.

4 استادیار، گروه معماری، واحد تبریز، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تبریز، ایران.

https://doi.org/10.30475/isau.2024.392431.2033
چکیده
امروزه ادغام فناوری‌های نوین در آموزش معماری، موجبات ارتقاء یادگیری، بهبود مهارت‌های دانش‌آموز، افزایش مشارکت، خلاقیت بیشتر، نگرش بهتر نسبت به دوره‌ها و مشاغل، و علاقه و مشارکت بیشتر مربیان در کلاس‌ها خواهد گردید. با توجه به اهمیت کاربست فناوری‌های نوین در آموزش معماری، هدف از تحقیق حاضر ارزیابی ظرفیت‌های پذیرش فناوری‌های نوین در آموزش معماری با تأکید بر مدل‌سازی اطلاعات ساختمان (BIM) در دانشگاه فنی استانبول و دانشگاه هنر اسلامی تبریز می‌باشد. از این‌رو، روش تحقیق آمیخته (ترکیبی از روش‌های کمی-کیفی) با هدف کاربردی و ماهیت توصیفی-تحلیلی می‌باشد که در راستای تجزیه و تحلیل اطلاعات از مدل‌سازی معادلات ساختاری در نرم‌افزار Amos و تحلیل عاملی کیو (Q) در نرم‌افزار SPSS استفاده شده است. جامعه‌ی آماری تحقیق شامل دانشجویان و اساتید معماری دانشگاه فنی استانبول و دانشگاه هنر اسلامی تبریز می‌باشد که با استفاده از روش کوکران، حجم نمونه‌ی دانشجویان برای هرکدام از دانشگاه‌ها 384 نفر و با استفاده از روش دلفی هدفمند، حجم نمونه‌ی اساتید برای هرکدام از دانشگاه‌ها 8 نفر تعیین گردیده است. یافته‌های تحقیق نشان می‌دهد در راستای بهره‌گیری از فناوری‌‎های نوین (BIM) در آموزش معماری، مقدار بحرانی هر سه متغیر محتوای آموزشی، فرایند آموزشی، ظرفیت نهادی و اساتید برای دانشگاه فنی استانبول بالای 1/96 محاسبه شده و در سطح اطمینان 95 درصد دارای وضعیت مطلوبی می‌باشند. در دانشگاه هنر اسلامی تبریز تنها ظرفیت نهادی و اساتید دارای مقدار بحرانی بالای 1/96 بوده و محتوا و فرایند آموزشی در شرایط نامطلوبی قرار دارند. همچنین نتایج حاکی از آن است که سه عامل اصلی تحقق فناوری‌های نوین در آموزش معماری عبارتند از سازمان آموزشی، محتوای آموزشی و اساتید حرفه‌ای که بر مبنای مدل تحلیل عاملی کیو 79/581 درصد از تحقق فناوری‌های نوین در آموزش معماری را تبیین می‌کنند.

چکیده تصویری

تحلیلی بر آموزش معماری از جنبه‌ی کاربست مدل‌های نوین با تأکید بر مدل BIM‌؛ بررسی تطبیقی دانشگاه فنی استانبول و دانشگاه هنر اسلامی تبریز

تازه های تحقیق

- آموزش معماری در سطوح مختلف وجهی از آموزش عالی است که به دلیل نقش و جایگاه حرفه‌ای آن، نظامی خاص یافته و برخلاف بسیاری از رشته‌های تحصیلی، از روش و فرآیند خاصی برخوردار است.
- با توجه به اهمیت ادغام فناوری‌های نوین در آموزش معماری در راستای ارتقاء مهارت‌های دانش‌آموزان و سهولت ورود به بازار کار حرفه‌ای، می‌توان عنوان کرد که آموزش معماری بر مبنای مدل کاربردی BIM ضرورتی اجتناب‌ناپذیر برای تربیت معماران حرفه‌ای می‌باشد. 

کلیدواژه‌ها

آموزش معماری
مدل‌سازی اطلاعات ساختمان (BIM)
دانشگاه فنی استانبول
دانشگاه هنر اسلامی تبریز

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله English

Evaluating the capacity to adopt new technologies in architectural education with an emphasis on the BIM model: A comparative study of Istanbul Technical University and Tabriz Islamic Art University

نویسندگان English

Jahed Jafarimand 1
Shahriar Shagagi 2
Hassan Ebrahimi Asl 3
Nasim Najafgholipour Kalantari 4
1 Ph.D. Candidate in Architecture, Department of Architecture, Shabestar Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shabestar, Iran.
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Architecture, Shabestar Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shabestar, Iran.
3 Assistant Professor, Department of Architecture, Jolfa international Branch, Islamic Azad University, Jolfa, Iran.
4 Assistant Professor, Department of Architecture, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran.
چکیده English

Extended Abstract
Background and Objectives: Today, the integration of new technologies in architectural education will lead to improved learning, improved student skills, increased participation, greater creativity, more positive attitudes toward courses and future careers, and greater interest and participation of instructors in classes. In the current era, one of the most significant emerging technologies in architectural education and the training of professional architects is Building Information Modeling (BIM). BIM represents a major advancement in the fields of architecture and construction, marking a shift from traditional two-dimensional drawings to intelligent three-dimensional models that are goal-oriented and data-driven. Unlike conventional design environments that rely on geometric shapes such as lines, squares, and circles, BIM utilizes architectural components like walls, doors, and windows, offering a more integrated and realistic design process. Considering the growing importance of applying such technologies in architectural education, the aim of this study is to evaluate the capacity for adopting new technologies, with a particular emphasis on BIM, in architectural education at Istanbul Technical University and Tabriz Islamic Art University.
Methods: This study employs a mixed-method approach, combining both quantitative and qualitative methods, with an applied purpose and a descriptive-analytical nature. For data analysis, Structural Equation Modeling using AMOS software and Q factor analysis using SPSS software were utilized. The statistical population includes architecture students and professors from Istanbul Technical University and Tabriz Islamic Art University. Based on the Cochran formula, the student sample size for each university was determined to be 384 individuals. For professors, using a purposive Delphi method, the sample size was set at 8 for each university. In the first phase of the study, the components influencing architectural education, specifically in relation to the BIM model, were identified. Following this, architecture students were surveyed to assess the quality of each of these components, and the results were evaluated through structural equation modeling using AMOS software. The identified components include educational content (EC), educational process (EP), and institutional capacity and professors (ICP). Additionally, to explore the factors affecting the acceptance of new technologies such as BIM in architectural education, interviews were conducted with professors from the universities under study, and the findings were analyzed using Q factor analysis in SPSS.
Findings: The research findings show that, in the context of integrating new technologies such as BIM into architectural education, the critical values for all three variables of educational content, educational process, and institutional capacity and professors at Istanbul Technical University were above 1.96, indicating a statistically favorable condition at the 95% confidence level. In contrast, at Tabriz Islamic Art University, only the variable related to institutional capacity and professors exceeded the critical value of 1.96, while both educational content and educational process were found to be in an unfavorable state.
In addition to the quantitative assessment of architectural education at Istanbul Technical University and Tabriz Islamic Art University—focusing on the teaching of specialized new technologies such as BIM—interviews were also conducted with students to gather qualitative insights.
Conclusion: Studies conducted at Istanbul Technical University and Tabriz Islamic Art University indicate that BIM technology has not yet been incorporated into the architectural educational content at either university. However, given the existing capacity at Istanbul Technical University, the integration of this technology is feasible. Considering the necessity of adopting new technologies in architecture and the importance of training professional architects, it is essential to enhance the educational content, educational processes, and the capacities of universities and their faculty to improve students’ competencies in architectural principles and their ability to engage with various models and methodologies.
While Istanbul Technical University possesses the full capacity to support this process, Tabriz Islamic Art University faces fundamental shortcomings, particularly in its educational content and teaching processes.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Architectural Education
Building Information Modeling (BIM)
Istanbul Technical University
Tabriz Islamic Art University

این مقاله برگرفته از رساله دکتری نویسنده نخست با عنوان «واکاوی و مقایسه تطبیقی آموزش معماری از جنبه فضا و نحوه آموزش به دانشجویان در دانشگاه‌های ایران و ترکیه» می‌باشد که به راهنمایی نویسنده دوم و مشاوره نویسنده سوم و چهارم در دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد شبستر انجام گرفته است.

This article is derived from the first author`s doctoral thesis entitled “Analyzing and comparative comparison of architectural education from the aspect of space and teaching methods to students in Iran and Türkiye universities”, supervised by the second and advised by the third and fourth authors, at Islamic Azad University, Shabestar Branch.

  1. Agirbas, A. (2020). Teaching construction sciences with the integration of BIM to undergraduate architecture students. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 9, 940-950.
  2. Al-Bayari, O., & Shatnawi, N. (2022). Geomatics techniques and building information model for historical buildings conservation and restoration. The Egyptian Journal of Remote Sensing and Space Sciences, 25, 563–568.
  3. Anderson, T., Howe, C., Soden, R., Halliday, J., & Low, J. (2001). Peer interaction and the learning of critical thinking skills in further education students. Instructional Science, 29(1), 1-32.
  4. Azhar, S. (2011). Building information modeling (BIM): trends, benefits, risks, and challenges for the AEC industry. Leadership and Management in Engineering, 11(3), 241-252.
  5. Azhar, S., Nadeem, A., Mok, J.Y.N., & Leung, B.H.Y. (2008). Building information modeling (BIM): a new paradigm for visual interactive modeling and simulation for construction projects. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Construction in Developing Countries. Karachi, Pakistan, pp. 435-446.
  6. Becerik-Gerber, B., Gerber, D.J., & Ku, K. (2011). The pace of technological innovation in architecture, engineering, and construction education: integrating recent trends into the curricula. Journal of Information Technology in Construction, 16, 411-432.
  7. Berwald, S. (2008). From CAD to BIM: the experience of architectural education with Building Information Modeling. Proceedings of Architectural Engineering Conference (AEI). Denver, Colorado.
  8. Boeykens, S., De Somer, P., Klein, R., & Saey, R. (2013). Experiencing BIM collaboration in education. Computation and Performance e Proceedings of the 31st Education and Research in Computer Aided Architectural Design in Europe Conference (eCAADe). Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands, pp. 505-513.
  9. Bouzas, O., Cabaleiro, M., Conde, B., Cruz, Y., & Riveiro, B. (2022). Structural health control of historical steel structures using HBIM. Automation in Construction, 140, 1-14.
  10. Chen, Y., Yin, Y., Browne, G., & Li, D. (2019). Adoption of building information modeling in Chinese construction industry. Engineering Construction & Architectural Management, 26(9), 1878-1898.
  11. Chu, S.K.W., Reynolds, R.B., Tavares, N.J., Notari, M., & Lee, C.W.Y. (2017). 21st century skills development through inquiry-based learning: from theory to practice. Singapore: Springer Science+Business Media.
  12. Deamer, P., & Bernstein, P.G. (2011). BIM in Academia. Yale School of Architecture, CT.
  13. Demirbas, A. (2017). Tomorrow’s biofuels: Goals and hopes. Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental Effects, 39(7), 673-679.
  14. Ding, Z., Zuo, J., Wu, J., & Wang, J. (2015). Key factors for the BIM adoption by architects: a China study. Engineering Construction & Architectural Management, 22(6), 732-748.
  15. Domjan, M. (2010). Principles of learning and behaviour. 6e. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Cengage.
  16. Eastman, C., Teicholz, P., Sacks, R., & Liston, K. (2008). BIM Handbook A Guide to Building Information Modeling for Owners, Managers, Designers, Engineers and Contractors. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ.
  17. Ergenoglu, A.S. (2015). Universal design teaching in architectural education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 1397–1403.
  18. Farshihaghi, Zohreh; Mahmoudi-Nejad, Hadi; Naseri, Gholamhossein and Dadashi, Mehdi. (1400). Evaluation of the application of biomimicry knowledge in architectural design education using the method of analogy from nature. Sustainable Architecture and Urban Planning, 9(2), 112-97. [In Persian]
  19. Ford, S., & Minshall, T. (2019). Invited review article: where and how 3D printing is used in teaching and education. Additive Manufacturing, 25, 131–150.
  20. Garcia-Gago, J., S´anchez-Aparicio, L.J., Soilan, M. & Gonz´alez-Aguilera, D. (2022). HBIM for supporting the diagnosis of historical buildings: case study of the Master Gate of San Francisco in Portugal. Automation in Construction, 141, 1-19.
  21. Gharibpour, Afra & Totunchi Moghadam, Maral. (2016). Evaluation of undergraduate architecture education programs in Iran from the perspective of paying attention to cultural components. Iranian Architectural Studies, 5(10), 141-160. [In Persian]
  22. Guidera, S.G. (2006). BIM applications in design Studio: an integrative approach developing student skills with computer modelling. Synthetic Landscapes - Proceedings of the 25th Annual Conference of the Association for Computer-Aided Design in Architecture (ACADIA). University of Kentucky, Lexington, Louisville, Kentucky, 231-227.
  23. Haghshenas, M., Hadianpour, M., Matzarakis, A., Mahdavinejad, M., & Ansari M. (2021). Improving the suitability of selected thermal indices for predicting outdoor thermal sensation in Tehran. Sustainable Cities and Society, 27, 1-13.
  24. Hardin, B. (2009). BIM and Construction Management. Wiley, Indianapolis.
  25. Haskel. R.E. (2002). Transfer of Learning, Cognition, Instruction, and Reasoning. American Psychological Association (APA).
  26. Jarvis, P. (2005). Adult Learning in the Social Context. London: Routledge.
  27. Khodeir, L.M. (2018). Blended learning methods as an approach to teaching project management to architecture students. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 57, 3899–3905.
  28. Kocaturk, T., & Kiviniemi, A. (2013). Challenges of integrating BIM in architectural education. Computation and Performance - Proceedings of the 31st Education and Research in Computer Aided Architectural Design in Europe Conference (eCAADe). Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands, pp. 465-473.
  29. Kvan, T., & Yunyan, J. (2005). Students’ Learning Styles and Their Correlation with Performance in Architectural Design Studio. Design Studies, 26 (1), 19-34.
  30. Kymmell, W. (2008). Building Information Modeling: Planning and Managing Construction Projects with 4D CAD and simulations. McGraw e Hill Construction Series, New York.
  31. Luchman, S.J. (1997). Learning is a Process: Toward an Improved Definition of Learning. The Journal of Psychology, 131(5), 477-480.
  32. Macdonald, J.A., & Mills, J.E. (2011). The potential of BIM to facilitate collaborative AEC education. Proceedings of the 118th American Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference (ASEE). Vancouver, Canada, pp. 1-7.
  33. Mandhar, M., & Mandhar, M. (2013). BIMing the architectural curricula: integrating Building Information Modelling (BIM) in architectural education. International Jounal of Architecture, 1(1), 1-20.
  34. Matheou, M., Couvelas, A., & Phocas, M.C. (2020). Transformable building envelope design in architectural education. Procedia Manufacturing, 44, 116–123.
  35. Nazidizaji, S., Tome, A., Regateiro, F., & Ghalati, A.K. (2015). Narrative ways of architecture education: A case study. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 197, 1640-1646.
  36. Nikolov, R., Shoikova, E., & Kovatcheva, E. (2016). Competence based framework for curriculum development. PICTET: EQF-based professional ICT training for Russia and Kazakhstan (pp. 309-323).
  37. Oluwatayo, A., Opoko, A., Ezema, I., & Irohma, O. (2016). How do students perceive their employability readiness: the case of architecture students. In: 3rd International Conference on African Development Issues (CUICADI). Covenant University Press; 2016. p. 193–195.
  38. Ongardwanich, N., Kanjanawasee, S., & Tuipae, C. (2015). Development of 21st century skill scales as perceived by students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191, 737-741.
  39. Rahbar, M., Mahdavinejad, M., Bemanian, M., Davaie Markazi, A.H., & Hovestadt L. (2019). Generating Synthetic Space Allocation Probability Layouts Based on Trained Conditional-GANs. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 33(8), 689-705.
  40. Rahimzadeh, Mohammad Reza; Gharibpour, Afra and Shahpari, Anahita. (2019). A comparative study of the educational programs of the non-continuous master's degree course in architecture. Letter of Architecture and Urban Planning, 13(29), 73-95. [In Persian]
  41. Rogers, J., Chong, H., & Preece, C. (2015). Adoption of building information modelling technology (BIM). Engineering Construction & Architectural Management, 22(4), 424-445.
  42. Russell, D., Cho, Y., & Cylwik, E. (2014). Learning opportunities and career implications of experience with BIM/VDC. Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Construct. 19, 111-121.
  43. Sabongi, F. (2009). The integration of BIM in the undergraduate curriculum: an analysis of undergraduate courses. Proceedings of the 45th Annual Conference by Associated Schools of Construction. Gainesville, FL.
  44. Santos, R., Costa, A.A., Silvestre, J.D., & Pyl, L. (2019). Informetric analysis and review of literature on the role of BIM in sustainable construction. Automation in Constructionm, 103, 221–234.
  45. Sedaghati, Abbas and Hojjat, Isa. (2019). Comparing the success rate of architectural education courses after the Cultural Revolution. Architectural Thought, 4(7), 44-57. [In Persian]
  46. Simeone, D., Cursi, S., & Acierno, M. (2019). BIM semantic-enrichment for built heritage representation. Automation in Construction, 97, 122–137.
  47. Talebi, Zeinab; Habib, Farah and Etesam, Iraj. (2016). The necessity of workshop training in empowering urban planning students in applying knowledge from the perspective of constructivist learning models. Urban Management, 45: 57-72. [In Persian]
  48. Techel, F., & Nassar, K. (2007). Teaching building information modeling (BIM) from a sustainability design perspective. Embodying Virtual Architecture - Proceedings of 3rd International Conference of the Arab Society for Computer Aided Architectural Design (ASCAAD). Alexandria, Egypt, pp. 635-650.
  49. Vinsova, I., Achten, H., & Matejovska, D. (2015). Integrating BIM in education: lessons learned. Real Time - Proceedings of the 33rd Education and Research in Computer Aided Architectural Design in Europe Conference. Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria, pp. 127-131.
  50. Woo, J.H. (2006). BIM (building information modeling) and pedagogicalchallenges. The 43rd Annual Conference by Associated Schools of Construction. Northern Arizona
  51. Wu, W., & Issa, R.R.A. (2014). BIM education and recruiting: surveybased comparative analysis of issues, perceptions, and collaboration opportunities. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 140(2), 1-13.
  52. Yan, W. (2010). Teaching building information modeling at undergraduate and graduate levels. Future Cities - Proceedings of the 28th Education and Research in Computer Aided Architectural Design in Europe Conference (eCAADe). ETH Zurich, Switzerland, pp. 97-106.
  53. Yin, X., Liu, H., Chen, Y., & Al-Hussein, M. (2019). Building information modelling for off-site construction: review and future directions. Automation in Construction, 101, 72–91.

  • تاریخ دریافت 20 فروردین 1402
  • تاریخ بازنگری 12 شهریور 1402
  • تاریخ پذیرش 23 آبان 1402

صفحه اصلی

راهنمای نویسندگان

ارسال مقاله

داوران

تماس با ما