Evaluation of Graduate Outcomes in Architecture Accreditation Requirements from a Student Perspective
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2024.296Keywords:
Architectural education, Accreditation, Analytical hierarchy process, Student perspective, MIAK-MAKAbstract
Architectural education encompasses a variety of methods, with the primary goal of maintaining and improving education quality. In this context, the concept of accreditation has emerged as a system that ensures the preservation of certain standards and keeping these standards up to date in higher education. In Türkiye, the Association for Accreditation of Architectural Education (MIAK-MAK) has established certain accreditation requirements for Architectural Bachelor's Programs in 2021. According to these requirements, the targeted graduate profile is defined under the title of "Education and Learning Characteristics" of the program. The subheading "Knowledge, Skills, and Competencies that Graduates Should Acquire" summarizes the knowledge and skill areas that students need to acquire through the courses included in the program's curriculum, which are categorized into five titles. This study aimed to statistically evaluate the importance of the areas created for the knowledge, skills, and competencies that the graduate should gain from the perspective of the active student. The study focuses on the students of the Department of Architecture at KTO Karatay University Faculty of Fine Arts and Design. In this context, a face-to-face survey was conducted with the students, and the survey results were evaluated using the Analytic Hierarchy Process method. By comparing each subheading with the others, a ranking system was created, and their importance levels were determined. The results of student evaluations indicated that especially issues related to life safety, structural systems, sustainability, and global architecture stood out prominently. Studies evaluating accreditation criteria from the student perspective are very limited in the literature. For this reason, as an important approach, this study points out the gap in the field for researchers working on accreditation. This research, which aims to provide a perspective from students, is expected to offer an alternative approach and provide a participatory view in educational research.
Metrics
References
Akadiri, P. O., Olomolaiye, P. O., Chinyio, E. A. (2013). Automation in construction multi-criteria evaluation model for the selection of sustainable materials for building projects. Automation in Construction, 30, 113–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2012.10.004
Akış, T. (2019). 100. Yılında Bauhaus’tan kalan niyet. Mimarlık Dergisi, 56 (410), 11-15.
Aktan, C.C., Gencel, U. (2010). Yüksek Öğretimde akreditasyon. Organizasyon ve Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 2:2, 137–155.
Attia, A. S. (2019). International accreditation of architecture programs promoting competitiveness in professional practice. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 58(3), 877-883.
Ayyıldız Potur, A. (2007). The Relationship Between the Level of Interest-Ability-Creativity When Entering Architectural Education And Design Performance. Doctoral Thesis, Yıldız Technical University, Institute of Science, İstanbul.
Basar, H. B. (2011). Multi-Criteria Evaluation of Power Plants. Master's Thesis, Gazi University, Institute of Science, Ankara.
Božić, S., Vujičić, M. Dj. K., Besermenji, S., Solarević, M. (2018). Sun, Sea and Shrines: Application of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to assess the attractiveness of six cultural heritage sites in Phuket (Thailand). Geographica Pannonica, 22(2), 121–138.
Bulat, S. (2014). Bauhause Tasarım Okulu Bauhause Design School. Atatürk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 18 (1): 105-120.
CHEA Institute, and Study of Accreditation, and Quality Assurance. (2003). Statement Of Mutual Responsibilities for Student Learning Outcomes: Accreditation, Institutions, and Programs. Council for Higher Education Accreditation Board of Directors.
Chong, M., Qingqin, W., Baizhan, L. I., Chunmei, G. U. O., Naini, Z. (2019). Development and Application of Evaluation Index System And Model For Existing Building Green-Retrofitting. Journal of Thermal Science, 28(6), 1252–1261.
Dalbudak, E., Rençber. Ö. F. (2022). Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemleri Üzerine Literatür Incelemesi. GAUNIIBFD, 4(1), s. 1-16, 1.
Deljavan, N. (2020). Adapting The Quality Function Deployment Method to Design Appropriate Building Facades. Doctoral Thesis, ODTÜ, FBE, Ankara.
Dikmen, Ç. B. (2011). Mimarlık Eğitiminde Stüdyo Çalışmalarını Önemi: Temel Eğitim Stüdyoları. E-Journal of New World Sciences Academy, 6(4), 1509–1520.
Doğaner, S., Hoşkara, Ş. (2020). Mimarlık Eğitimi Müfredatlarının Akreditasyonlar Işığında Yönetilmesi: Değişen NAAB Akreditasyon Koşulları. XXI. https://xxi.com.tr/i/mimarlik-egitimi-mufredatlari.
Esin, N. 2014. Mimarlık Eğitiminde Akreditasyon Tartışmalı Konular Üzerinde Yeniden Düşünelim. Mimarlık Dergisi, 376.
Gombrich, E. (1986). Sanatın Öyküsü. İstanbul: Remzi Kitapevi.
Harputlugil, T. (2012). Analytic Hierarchy Process Based Approach for Evaluation and Improvement of Architectural Design Quality in Building Process İmplemented With Case Studies. Doctoral Thesis, Gazi University, Institute of Science, Ankara.
Harputlugil, T. (2018). Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) As an Assessment Approach for Architectural Design: Case Study of Architectural Design Studio. ICONARP International Journal of Architecture & Planning, 6(2), 217–245. https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2018.53
Hatipoğlu Şahin, B. (2021). Examining The Applicability of The Quality Function Deployment Model to Quality of Life in Mass Housing Projects. Doctoral Thesis, KTO Karatay University, LEE, Konya.
Kara, B. (2017). Comparative analysis of design studio education in architecture schools in Türkiye. Master's Thesis, Yıldız Technical University, Institute of Science, İstanbul.
Kuban, D. (1998). Mimarlık Sözlüğü. YEM Yayını, İstanbul.
Kumar, P., Shukla, B., Passey, D. 2020. Impact of Accreditation on Quality and Excellence of Higher Education Institutions. Investigación Operacional, 41(2), 151-167.
Kuran, A. (1969). Mimarlık Eğitimi Üzerine. Mimarlık Dergisi, 71, 19–20.
Kuruüzüm, A. (2001). Analitik Hiyerarşi Yöntemi ve Işletmecilik Alanındaki Uygulamaları. Akdeniz Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, i (1), 83-105.
Lin, R., Lin, J. S. J., Chang, J., Tang, D., Chao, H., Julian, P. C. (2008). Note On Group Consistency in Analytic Hierarchy Process. European Journal of Operational Research, 190(3), 672-678.
Lizondo-Sevilla, L., Bosch-Roig, L., Ferrer-Ribera, C., Alapont-Ramón, J. L. (2019). Teaching Architectural Design Through Creative Practices. Metu Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 36(2), 41–60. https://doi.org/10.4305/METU.JFA.2019.1.8
Minez, B. (2013). Investigation Of the Transformation of The Perception of Individuals Throughout Architectural Education On The Basis of Visual Environment Evaluation Techniques. Doctoral Thesis, Trakya University, Institute of Science, Edirne.
Nalçakan, H., Polatoğlu, Ç. (2008). Türkiye’deki ve Dünyadaki Mimarlık Eğitiminin Karşılaştırmalı Analizi İle Küreselleşmenin Mimarlık Eğitimine Etkisinin İrdelenmesi. Megaron, 3(1), 79–103.
Pham, H. T. 2018. Impacts of Higher Education Quality Accreditation: A Case Study in Vietnam. Quality in Higher Education, 24(2), 168–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2018.1491787.
Prins, M., Topçu, Y. İ. (2014). Architectural Design Quality Assessment Based on Analytic Hierarchy Process: A case study. METU, JFA(1). 139–161. https://doi.org/10.4305/METU.JFA.2014.2.8
Rasimgil, M. (2019). İTÜ’de Bauhaus Etkileri: Ercüment Kalmik ve Temel Tasarım Eğitimi. Mimarist Dergisi, 65, 69-73.
Rondinel-Oviedo, Alejandra Acevedo-De-los-Ríos, Daniel R. 2022. Impact, Added Value and Relevance of an Accreditation Process on Quality Assurance in Architectural Higher Education. Quality in Higher Education, 28:2, 186–204, DOI: 10.1080/13538322.2021.1977482.
Rosen, M. A., Kishawy, H. A. (2012). Sustainable Manufacturing and Design: Concepts, Practices and Needs. Sustainability 4(2), s. 154-174.
Sunar, Ş. (1975). Mimarlıkta Bilgilenme Gereği. Arkitekt Dergisi, 359, 130–132.
Şentürer, A. (2020). Bir Mimari Tasarım Stüdyosu Ekolü: İTÜ. XXI, 1. https://xxi.com.tr/i/bir-mimari-tasarim-studyosu-ekolu-itu
Şimsek, S. (2019). An Evaluation of Three Solar Architecture Housing Projects. Eurasian Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture, 3(1), 56–69.
Uludağ, A. S. (2016). Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemlerinin Karşılaştırılmasına Odaklı Bir Hizmet Kalitesi Uygulaması. Çankırı Karatekin Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 6 (2), 17–48.
Volkwein, J. F., Lattuca, L. R., Harper, B. J., Domingo, R. J. 2007. Measuring the Impact of Professional Accreditation on Student Experiences and Learning Outcomes. Research In Higher Education, 48, 251-282.
Yıldız Kuyrukçu, E., Alkan, A. (2019). AHP Metoduyla Yer’e Özgü Mimari Tasarım Kriterlerinin Öncelik Sırasının Belirlenmesi. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 23, 169–180. https://doi.org/10.19113/sdufenbed.531807
Ziyagil, E. H. (2021). Türk Müziği Dinleme Kültürünün, Günümüz Z Kuşağı Nesline Aktarılmasına Dair Bir Öneri. Uluslararası Toplumsal Bilimler Dergisi. 5 (2), s. 114-133.
URL 1: https://denklik.yok.gov.tr/akreditasyon-tanima-denklik-nedir
URL 2: https://sozluk.gov.tr/
URL 3: https://www.turkak.org.tr/akreditasyon/akreditasyon-nedir.html
URL 4: https://www.naab.org/accreditation
URL 5: https://www.uia-architectes.org/en/about/about-the-uia/
URL 6: https://www.ncarb.org/sites/
URL 7: https://www.eaae.be/about/about-eaae/
URL 9: http://www.MIAK-MAK.org
URL 10: https://tusside.tubitak.gov.tr/tr/yontemlerimiz/Cok-Kriterli-Karar-Verme-Teknikleri
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 ICONARP International Journal of Architecture and Planning
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
COPYRIGHT POLICY
1. The International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) open access articles are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDeriatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). This license lets the author to share (copy and redistribute) his/her article in any medium or format.
2. ICONARP cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms. Under the following terms:
The author must give appropriate credit, provide a link to ICONARP, and indicate if changes were made on the article. The author may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the ICONARP endorses the author or his/her use.
The author may not use the article for commercial purposes.
If the author remix, transform, or build upon the article, s/he may not distribute the modified material.
The author may share print or electronic copies of the Article with colleagues.
The author may use the Article within his/her employer’s institution or company for educational or research purposes, including use in course packs.
3. The author authorizes the International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) to exclusively publish online his/her Article, and to post his/her biography at the end of the article, and to use the articles.
4. The author agrees to the International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) using any images from the Article on the cover of the Journal, and in any marketing material.
5. As the author, copyright in the Article remains in his/her name.
6. All papers should be submitted electronically. All submitted manuscripts must be original work that is not under submission at another journal or under consideration for publication in another form, such as a monograph or chapter of a book. Authors of submitted papers are obligated not to submit their paper for publication elsewhere until an editorial decision is rendered on their submission. Further, authors of accepted papers are prohibited from publishing the results in other publications that appear before the paper is published in the Journal.
ICONARP International Journal of Architecture and Planning is an OAJ supported by 