Students’ Perception on the Role of Practitioner-Tutors in the Design Studio
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21512/humaniora.v10i1.5369Keywords:
students’ perception, practitioner tutors, design studioAbstract
This research explored the perception of the students on the role of practitioner-tutors in the learning process of the Design Studio courses. Practitioner-tutors were commonly employed in the learning process at university and generally provided a collaborative contribution for the teaching team of lecturers or persons in charge of the design studios. The research utilized the quantitative method with surveys and was analyzed using the descriptive statistics method. The objects of the research were twenty practitioner-tutors in four design studios, and the respondents were a hundred students from various years of study. The research variables of the roles of practitioner-tutors included learning goal orientation, feedback seeking, help-seeking, and behavior learning engagement. In conclusion, the research shows that students perceive the role of the practitioner-tutors in the four dimensions as quite good, with the highest merits being, in consecutive order, learning goal orientation and feedback seeking. Meanwhile, help-seeking and behavior learning engagement variables both are placed last with the same value. The benefit of this research is applied to the design studio course manager, and tutors for the better process of tutoring in a design studio course and giving the foundation for further similar research.
Plum Analytics
References
Al-Hagla, K. S. (2012). The role of the design studio in shaping an architectural education for sustainable development: The case of Beirut Arab University. Archnet-IJAR, 6(1), 23–41. https://doi.org/10.26687/ARCHNET-IJAR.V6I1.75.
Christina, W., Purwoko, H., & Kusumowidagdo, A. (2015). The role of entrepreneur in residence towards the students’ entrepreneurial performance: A study of entrepreneurship learning process at Ciputra University, Indonesia. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 211, 972–976. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.129.
Cifuentes, L., Mercer, R., Alvarez, O., & Bettatti, R. (2009). A system for developing case-based learning environment. In M. Simonson (Ed.), The Annual Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (p. 76-83). Florida: Nova Southeastren University. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED511355.pdf.
Corker, K. S., & Donnellan, M. B. (2012). Setting lower limits high: The role of boundary goals in achievement motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(1), 138–149. https://doi.org/https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0026228.
Creswell, J. (2014). Research design, qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches. Kailash: California Publication.
Danaci, H. M. (2015). Creativity and knowledge in Architectural education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 1309–1312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.752.
Demirkan, H., & Afacan, Y. (2012). Assessing creativity in design education: Analysis of creativity factors in the first-year design studio. Design Studies, 33(3), 262–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2011.11.005.
Faroa, B. D. (2017). Considering the role of tutoring in student engagement: Reflection from a South African University. Journal of Student Affairs in Africa, 5(2), 1–15. doi: 10.24085/jsaa.v5i2.2699.
Francis, R., & Shannon, S. J. (2013). Engaging with blended learning to improve students’ learning outcomes. European Journal of Engineering Education, 38(4), 359–369. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2013.766679.
Garrett, C. (2011). Defining, detecting, and promoting student engagement in college learning environments. Transformative Dialogues: Teaching & Learning Journal, 5(2), 1–12.
Kadioglu, C., & Uzuntiryaki Kondakci, E. (2014). Relationship between learning strategies and goal orientations: A multilevel analysis. Egitim Arastirmalari - Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 14(56), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2014.56.4.
Kleingeld, A., Van Mierlo, H., & Arends, L. (2011). The effect of goal setting on group performance: A metaanalysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(6), 1289–1304.
Kyoungjin, A., & Davies, J. (2014). A teacher’s perspective on student centred learning: Toward the development of best practice in an undergraduate tourism course. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport, & Tourism Education, 14, 6–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhlste.2013.12.001.
McCarthy, J. (2012). International design collaboration and mentoring for tertiary students through Facebook. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(5), 755–775. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1383.
Obeidat, A., & Al-Share, R. (2012). Quality learning environments: Design-studio classroom. Asian Culture and History, 4(2), 165–174. https://doi.org/10.5539/ach.v4n2p165.
Ryan, M. (2012). Changes in help seeking from peers during early adolescents: Associations with changes in achievement and perception of teacher. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(4), 1122–1134. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0027696.
Sidawi, B. (2012). The impact of social interaction and communications on innovation in the architectural design studio. Buildings, 2(4), 203–217. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings2030203
Wang, T. (2010). A new paradigm for design and technology education? International Journal of Art & Design Education, 29(2), 173–183. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1476-8070.2010.01647.x.
Widowati, W., Sawitri, S., & Krisnawati, M. (2015). Efektivitas model pembelajaran berbasis proyek dalam peningkatan hasil berajar mahasiswa pada mata kuliah Pengembangan Desain. Teknobuga, 2(2), 45–60.
Williams, A., Ostwald, M., & Haugen, A. H. (2010). Assessing creativity in the context of architectural design education. Retrieved from http://www.drs2010.umontreal.ca/data/PDF/129.pdf.
Zairul, M. (2018). Introducing studio oriented learning environment (sole) in Upm Serdang: Accessing student-centered learning (Scl) in the architectural studio. International Journal of Architectural Research: ArchNet-IJAR, 12(1), 241-250. https://doi.org/10.26687/archnet-ijar.v12i1.1275.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
a. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License - Share Alike that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
USER RIGHTS
All articles published Open Access will be immediately and permanently free for everyone to read and download. We are continuously working with our author communities to select the best choice of license options, currently being defined for this journal as follows: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC BY-SA)
