معیارهای گزینش دستیاران تدریس و مدرسان مدعو معماری؛ نمونه ی موردی: دانشگاه حکیم سبزواری (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
با افزایش پذیرش دانشجو در رشته ی معماری نسبت به گذشته، استادان معماری برای پیش برد کارگاه طراحی نیازمند کمک دستیارانی هستند که غالباً از میان مدرسان مدعو انتخاب می شوند. ظاهراً برای انتخاب این دستیاران محدودیت ها و معیارهای روشنی وجود ندارد و استادان صرفاً با نظر شخصی و تجربی و با شناخت قبلی خود دستیار انتخاب می کنند. از سوی دیگر، برخی دانش آموختگان جدید معماری نیز به دلیل کمبود کار در بازار حرفه ای، بدون میل و استعداد شخصی، متقاضی دستیاری هستند. گاهی بی توجهی یا اشتباه استادان در انتخاب یک دستیار مناسب، موجب نارضایتی دانشجویان کارشناسی معماری می شود. از این رو، سعی شده به معیار های گزینش دستیار تدریس و مدرسان مدعو در دانشکده ی معماری دانشگاه حکیم سبزواری پرداخته شود. روش تحقیق این مقاله ترکیبی است و در دو بخش مطالعات کتابخانه ای و زمینه ای، از طریق مصاحبه و پرسشنامه انجام شده است. از طریق مصاحبه با استادان و پرسش از دانشجویان دوره ی کارشناسی، و در ادامه، با مقایسه، تحلیل و تطبیق نظرها، چند معیار روشن بدست آمد و اولویت بندی شد. هدف از تحقیق حاضر آن است که از طریق استخراج معیارهای برجسته ی مورد قبول استادان و دانشجویان معماری، تعریفی عملیاتی برای گزینش دستیاران استاد ارائه دهد تا استادان علاقه مند بتوانند انتخاب های شخصی و تجربی خود را با نتایج حاصل از این پژوهش ارزیابی نمایند و خطای کمتری داشته باشند.The Criteria for Selecting Architecture Teaching Assistants and Visiting Instructors; Case Study: Hakim Sabzevari University
Extended Abstract Background and Objectives: In most architecture schools in the country, having teaching assistants alongside qualified professors is essential due to various reasons, including the sudden increase of architecture students in the last decade and the lack of experienced professors, and the need to train architecture instructors for the bright educational future of this field. In addition, the universities that do not use such assistants for any reason will face the sudden aging and retirement of their professors in the future. For this reason, it is important to hire teaching assistants to solve the shortage of professors regarding the increase of architecture students and train teachers for their educational future. However, on the other hand, the professors of architecture or architecture schools do not apply any criteria for selecting assistants. The vagueness of the appropriate criteria for selecting teaching assistants and visiting instructors has sometimes led to the selection of people who do not have the necessary qualifications and interest in educating architecture students. On the other hand, people who are good at being teaching assistants have a lower chance of being selected for the position due to the high volume of applicants. This might also lead them to give up their application. Therefore, the article’s authors aim to find the criteria for better selection of teaching assistants and ask, “What are the appropriate criteria for selecting teaching assistants and visiting instructors with inadequate experience to help the main professors in teaching architectural design workshops?” The research results can be useful and generalizable for other architecture schools by changing the research parameters. Methods: The research uses the “contextual” research method, and it was conducted through interviews and questionnaires. Bibliographic studies have also contributed to conducting the research. Two groups were allocated for data collection. The first group was comprised of professors, and the second group was comprised of students. This research was carried out by interviewing the faculty members of Hakim Sabzevari University, Khayyam University of Mashhad, and Hakim Nizami University of Qochan (choosing multiple universities in Khorasan was necessary to increase the internal validity of the research. In addition, several universities were requested to cooperate. These two universities agreed to cooperate with the researchers) and a questionnaire was compiled for architecture students at these universities. In fact, this research was concerned with the selection criteria of assistants from the perspective of these two groups, that is, the main professors (and the assistants above) and the architecture students (and the assistants below). By examining and comparing the interview data and the questionnaire output, we achieved the criteria for selecting visiting instructors and teaching assistants and finally prioritized these criteria. Findings: The features deduced from the interview and questionnaire show that qualifications such as “proper communication with students”, “proper transfer of content”, “being available for students”, “updated information” , “study in the field of teaching” , “appropriate social behavior” , “learning from the professor” , “ mastery of the relevant subject” , “ coordination with the professor” , “ regular attendance” and “ motivation and interest in teaching” were addressed by both professors and students. On the other hand, “professional work” , “ helping the professor” , “class management skills” , “ appropriate age difference with the student” , and “ having been graduated” were only expressed by professors. Other qualifications such as “presentation of tasks” , “perseverance” , “satisfaction with the teaching method” , and “ encouraging students” were only mentioned in student statements. The shared opinions of the two groups in choosing the criteria and prioritizing them came from the same concern in both groups. The difference in opinions seems to be caused by two different perspectives of professors and students. Conclusion: The students’ concern and dissatisfaction with some teaching assistants in the architectural design workshop, as well as the lack of clear criteria for selecting these assistants or instructors, prompted the authors to find and prioritize the selection criteria in this research. The data of this research was collected in the form of “interviews” with architecture professors and faculty members of three architectural schools in Khorasan, and the completion of a “questionnaire” by the students of these schools. After coding and analyzing the data, the following criteria were extracted and prioritized based on the opinions of professors and students: “regular attendance”, “updated information”,” coordination with the teacher”, “mastery of the relevant subject”, “proper communication with students”, “knowledge of teaching”, “being available for students”, “professional work alongside teaching”, “appropriate social behavior”, “learning from the professor”, “proper transfer of content”, “motivation and interest in teaching”, “encouraging students, “helping the teacher”,” class management skills”, “presentation of tasks”, “satisfaction with the teaching method”, “perseverance in carrying out responsibility”, “being graduated”,” appropriate age difference with the student”.
تبلیغات
