Reinforcing Social Aspects of Architecture Education: An Examination of the Iranian B-Arch Curriculum in Terms of the Science, Technology, Society (STS) Programme

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Associate Professor, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Iran University of Art, Tehran, Iran

2 PhD Candidate, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Iran University of Art, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Background and objectives: Architecture is closely linked to society, and architectural education plays a crucial role in raising awareness and understanding of social issues among architects. The ‘Science/Technology/Society’ (STS) programme is gaining popularity in many leading universities worldwide as a complementary educational programme. Its objective is to educate professionals in various fields about the socio-technological aspects of their knowledge. Studies in this field highlight how a deeper understanding of various sciences and society is essential for teaching students in the technological age. Next-generation students here are expected to examine information, understand the connection between sciences in their daily lives, and recognise that scientific endeavours are actually guided by social values. This study aims, therefore, to examine STS mechanisms whilst also investigating how social aspects are taught in Iran’s architectural undergraduate programme and identify the available opportunities in STS.
 
Materials and Methods: Stanford University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) were chosen for this study by virtue of their more comprehensive programmes and the availability of their detailed course descriptions. The STS at Stanford adopts a social-oriented approach, whilst MIT’s follows a socio-historical one. Reviewing these two programmes, efforts are made here to analyse the STS mechanisms and contemplate on how the social is taught in Iran’s undergraduate architectural education, whilst opportunities available in Stanford and MIT programmes are also identified.
Results and Conclusion: The findings of this research demonstrate that of the three categories identifiable in these universities’ programmes, namely knowledge, environmental perception, and application, STS places greater emphasis on the first two, and that this can be utilised to strengthen social concepts in Iran’s architectural education by focusing on the third. In response, the aim here is to enhance the knowledge and perception stages based on STS concepts, and thereby offering the knowledge-perception-application process a more precise definition in the Iranian context. Based on concepts derived from the STS programme, more socially-oriented objectives and topics have been suggested for a series of courses in the Iranian curriculum, including Humans, Nature and Architecture, World Architecture, Islamic Architecture II, Design Studio II, III and V, as well as Final Design Studio.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

 
Aikenhead, Glen S., and Alan G. Ryan. “The Development of a New Instrument: ‘Views on Science / Technology / Society’ (VOSTS)”. Science Education, 76(5) (1992): 477-491.
Akcay, Hakan, and Robert E. Yager. “The Impact of a Science / Technology / Society Teaching Approach on Student Learning in Five Domains”. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19 (2010): 602-611.
Akcay, Behiye, and Hakan Akcay. “Effectiveness of Science / Technology / Society (STS) Instruction on Student Understanding of the Nature of Science and Attitudes toward Science”. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 3(1) (2015): 37-45.
Aikenhead, G. “STS Education: A Rose by any other Name”. In R. Cross (Ed.), A Vision for Science Education: Responding to the Work of Peter J. Fensham, London, Routledge, 2003.
Aikenhead, Glen S. “Research into STS Science Eeducation”. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências, vol. 9, no. 1 (2009): 1-12.
Azad, A. and V. Ahmadi. “Revision of Undergraduate Courses in Architectural Engineering Using the Business of Three Prominent European Universities”. Art of Green Management, vol. 2, no. 1 (2023): 7-20. (In Persian)
Bhattacharya, Sujit. “Science and Innovation in the 21st Century: New Paradigms and Challenges for Policy Design”. Current Science, vol. 118, no. 3 (2020): 348-349.
Carayannis, Elias G., Klitos Christodoulou, Panayiotis Christodoulou, Savvas A. Chatzichristofis, and Zinon Zinonos. “Known Unknowns in an Era of Technological and Viral Disruptions—implications for Theory, Policy, and Practice”. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, (2021): 1-24.
Cutcliffe, Stephen H. “The Historical Emergence of STS as an Academicfteld in the United States”. Argumentos de Razón Técnica, 5 (2002): 281-292.
Decuypere, Mathias. “STS in/as Education: Where Do We Stand and What Is There (still) to Gain? Some Outlines for a Future Research Agenda”. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, vol. 40, no. 1 (2019): 136-145.
De Solla Price, Derek J. Little Science, Big Science. Columbia University Press, 1963.
Douglas, Deborah G. The Social Construction of Technological Systems. anniversary edition: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology, MIT press, 2012.
Gharibpour, A. “Assessing the Possibility of Paying Attention to the Cultural Component in the Basic Architectural Design Course”. Hoviat Shahr, vol. 13, no. 38 (2019): 5-20. (In Persian)
Humanities, Stanford School. STS Concentrations. Stanford University, 2023.
Kazemzadeh Raef, MA., M. Masoudinejad, and B. Vasigh. “Curriculum Strategies with Regard to the Creativity Process in Architecture Education (Case Study of Tehran, Shahid Beheshti and Science and Technology Universities)”. Islamic Art Studies, vol. 19, no. 49 (2023): 650-669. (In Persian)
Kuhn, Thomas. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, University of Chicago Press, 1962.
Lawson, Bryan. How Designers Think, The Design Process Demystified. Architectural Press, 2015.
Lumpe, Andrew T., Jodi J. Haney, and Charlene M. Czerniak. “Science Teacher Beliefs and Intentions to Implement Science / Technology / Society (STS) in the Classroom”. Journal of Science Teacher Education, vol. 9, no. 1 (1998): 1-24.
Mansour, Nasser. “Science / Technology / Society (STS) a New Paradigm in Science Education”. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, vol. 29, no. 4 (2009): 287-297.
Mitcham, Carl. “Why Science, Technology, and Society Studies?”. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 19(2) (1999): 128-134.
MIT. Science, Technology, and Society. http://catalog.mit.edu/schools/humanities-arts-social-sciences/science-technology-society/.
Moosavi, SM. and KS. Tabibzadeh. “Investigating the Possibility of Revising the Curriculum of Bachelor of Architecture Courses with a Local Perspective Case Study: Universities of Mazandaran”. Journal of Architecture and Urban Planning, vol. 15, no. 39 (2023): 123-143. (In Persian)
Pfotenhauer, Sebastian, and Sheila Jasanoff. “Panacea or Diagnosis? Imaginaries of Innovation and the ‘MIT model’in Three Political Cultures”. Social Studies of Science, vol. 47, no. 6 (2017): 783-810.
Prasad, Amit. “Anti-science Misinformation and Conspiracies: COVID–19, Post-truth, and Science & Technology Studies (STS)”. Science, Technology and Society, vol. 27, no. 1 (2022): 88-112.
Sclove, Richard E., Madeleine L. Scammell, and Breena Holland. Community-based research in the United States. Amherst, MA: The Loka Institute, 1998.
Seabrook, Bryn Elizabeth, Kathryn A. Neeley, Kari Zacharias, and Brandiff Robert Caron. “Teaching Sts to Engineers: A Comparative Study of Embedded Sts Programs”. Paper presented at the 2020 ASEE virtual annual conference content access, 2020.
Stanforduniversity. Major Requirements and Policies. https://sts.stanford.edu/academics/major-requirements, 2023.
Stuckey, Marc, et al. “The Meaning of ‘Relevance’in Science Education and Its Implications for the Science Curriculum”. Studies in Science Education, 49(1) (2013): 1-34.
Supreme Council for Educational Planning. Curriculum for the Bachelor of Architecture Degree. Ministry of Science, Research and Technology, 2016. (In Persian)
‘STS topics’. https://sts.stanford.edu/academics/concentrations.(May,2023)
‘What is the Study of STS’. https://sts.stanford.edu/about/what-study-sts.(April, 2023)
Yazdani, Majid, A. Rezvani, M. Vafamehr, and MH. Khademzade. “Assessing the Effect of Pragmatic Pedagogy Components on the Promotion of the Bachelor of Architecture Curriculum in Iran”. Journal of Architecture and Urban Planning, vol. 16, no. 40 (2023): 65-89. (In Persian)
https://sts.stanford.edu/about/about-our-sts-program.
https://sts-program.mit.edu/.(May 2023).

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 25 August 2023
  • Revise Date: 08 August 2024
  • Accept Date: 12 September 2025

Share

How to cite

Statistics