Attitudes of Jordanian architecture students toward scientific research: A single-institution survey-based study

Abstract

Architecture is a profession in a perpetual state of change. Thus, it is essential for students to have a solid research foundation on which they can apply their knowledge and evidence-based solutions to architectural design, to enhance the quality of the built environment. Despite the fact that students’ views and engagement in research have been receiving great attention recently, no studies have yet been conducted to assess Jordanian students’ perspectives regarding scientific research. This paper examines the attitudes of a Jordanian university’s architecture students toward scientific research. The descriptive study sampled 184 students from the College of Architecture who were asked to fill out a self-administered questionnaire. The data were both descriptively and quantitively analyzed using correlation, a Mann-Whitney U Test, and a Kruskal-Wallis Variance Test. The findings revealed that female students’ outlook on research was more optimistic than that of male students. Moreover, fifth-year students had the least favorable opinions compared to third and fourth-year students. Furthermore, participants who followed architectural channels and broadcasts had more favorable sentiments toward research than those who did not. Finally, participants with previous experience in scientific research had fewer unfavorable opinions regarding research than those who were inexperienced. In conclusion, the majority of the students who participated in this study had positive attitudes toward scientific research. However, there is still a need to promote a culture of scientific research among undergraduate students, encouraging them to engage in scientific activities and providing them with opportunities to conduct research that will contribute to the architectural scene in Jordan.

Keywords:

• Attitude
• architecture students
• scientific research
• education

1. Introduction

Architecture is an ever-changing profession (Donovan et al., 2021; Duffy & Rabeneck, 2013) which has experienced a significantly drastic transition during the past couple of decades. In addition, twenty-first-century societies have been undergoing tremendous economic, environmental, social, and cultural transitions. Hence, the role of architects in the 21st century has gotten more demanding. Accordingly, architecture graduates are required to be highly skilled in order to meet the field’s increasing demands. In the same vein, contemporary discourses have emphasized the importance of finding innovative tools for knowledge generation and acquisition in architecture, like the incorporation of research into architectural pedagogy (Huber, 2017; Saghafi, 2020; Salama, 2016). In other words, the development of students’ research skills and critical thinking abilities in a way that can be successfully translated into built environments.

Architecture research necessitates an inclusive and holistic understanding of the role knowledge plays in designing responsive built environments. Namely, if students knew how to integrate different modes of knowledge production in the process of designing built environments, they will certainly be able to come up with rational and evidence-based design solutions (Groat & Wang, 2013; Pietrzyk, 2022; Van der Zwart, 2021). As long as the structure of contemporary societies continues to change, the demands for multiple types of knowledge acquisition will certainly increase. Therefore, architects must be interested in research while being inquisitive and responsive to learning in order to fulfill the global demand associated with the rapid and ongoing growth of the field (Huber, 2017; Wiley, 2017).

Many design professionals base their judgments on personal preferences, intuition, and past experiences rather than rigorous investigational strategies (Cross, 2012; Lawson, 2006). Even though personal experience is a significant element in the design process, judgments should be made according to an ever-evolving body of knowledge (Dickinson et al., 2012), and that is the role of scientific research as it improves knowledge formation, supports decision-making, and promotes the design processes (Collins, 2014; Fraser, 2013; Huber, 2016). As future architects, students should be backed up with a strong knowledge basis whose core is advanced research skills. In addition to providing conventional educational services, universities are supposed to be leaders in scientific research instilling scientific attitudes and behaviors in their students (Blazar & Kraft, 2017). Various studies have investigated the issue of integrating research and design in architectural pedagogy (Dickinson et al., 2012; Fraser, 2013; Hubka & Eder, 2012; Hurol, 2020; Roberts, 2007) focusing on the viewpoints of students regarding architectural research (Jansen et al., 2021; Yalçın & Ulusoy, 2015). Most of these studies asserted that architecture students should have opportunities to benefit from research evidence by applying it practically (Cranz et al., 2014; Khodeir & Nessim, 2020; Zimbardi & Myatt, 2014).

The state of research classes in undergraduate architecture programs in fifteen different schools across eight different Middle Eastern countries (Bahrain, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, and United Arab Emirates) was investigated by Salama (2006). The study revealed that ten out of fifteen programs provide students with the opportunity to take at least one research method-related class during their undergraduate study. Moreover, nine programs offered the research course as a core subject of their curriculum, while one program offered it as an elective course. Furthermore, the results demonstrated an increased understanding of the importance of integrating research methods classes in undergraduate architecture programs in the Middle East (Salama, 2006).

The research education offered in research courses or other theoretical courses may alter the quality of student learning or improve their knowledge acquisition and application abilities (Alsuhaibani et al., 2019; Huybrechts et al., 2012; Salama, 2012). Nevertheless, students’ perceptions of scientific research continue to pose a challenge. It is important to assess students’ perspectives regarding scientific research as these students will be key to the success of future research efforts (Alsuhaibani et al., 2019; Jansen et al., 2021). Architecture students who lack a positive outlook on scientific research are less likely to contribute to the progress of the profession and the design quality (Duffy & Hutton, 2004; Roberts, 2007; Wiley, 2017).

Studies have investigated undergraduate students’ perspectives regarding the status and reality of scientific research at Arab universities (e.g., Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Jordan; Ameen et al., 2011; Alsuhaibani et al., 2019; Dessouky, 2016; Halabi, 2016; Osman, 2016; Salama, 2006). The results of these studies have shown that universities encourage scientific research at the undergraduate level in a variety of disciplines, including architecture. In addition, university students are encouraged to engage in scientific research and scientific activities such as conferences and competitions. Finally, the investigated students have shown a genuine desire to engage in scientific research. However, there is a lack of studies that investigate the attitudes of Jordanian architecture students regarding architectural research. Thus, this study attempts to fill this gap by exploring the attitudes of undergraduate architecture students at a Jordanian university.

The Jordanian architectural scene is undoubtedly affected by the unpredictability of Jordan’s geopolitical atmosphere and its limited economic, natural, and human resources (Hoteit, 2016; Matarneh, 2017). Consequently, education of architecture in Jordan—and elsewhere in the area—emphasizes the role of social, spatial, and technological factors in the built environment (Matarneh, 2018). It seeks to equip students with the capabilities they need to assess design challenges, communicate design alternatives, promote design solutions, and critically study the design processes and results. This enables students to adapt to evolving design challenges.

Furthermore, the modern architectural research agenda lacks studies that are relevant and responsive to the shift in demands. In addition, the complex and dynamic influence of architecture as a discipline and profession necessitates the accumulation of a vast body of specialized knowledge (Matarneh, 2017). This is particularly important today, with Jordan’s institutions making efforts to raise the quality of architectural education and practice in the country.

This study elicited the perspectives of a Jordanian university’s architecture students regarding scientific research in their field. Since the bachelor’s degree program in architectural education in Jordan consists of five years, the emphasis of this research was the third, fourth, and fifth years. This choice was made because the students at that point in the program would have gained greater experience and knowledge. The study aimed at fulfilling the following objectives:

• to explore the trends in architecture students’ attitudes toward conducting and benefiting from architectural research

• to examine the differences between students’ attitudes toward architectural research in relation to selected characteristics (age, gender, academic level, research experience, etc.)

Jordanian universities promote scientific research as an essential tool for professional growth (El-Muwalla, 2022). The Jordanian Ministry of Higher Education emphasizes the need for college students to engage in research; it even provides incentives for this purpose (El-Muwalla, 2020). To foster a culture of research, several university committees host annual contests that require students to submit research projects. The findings of this study will be used to develop recommendations that might help in promoting students’ interest in research as early as possible in their college careers.

2. Methods

2.1. Sample

The study targeted 374 students of the Department of Architecture at a Jordanian university. The students come from diverse cultural, geographic, and socioeconomic backgrounds. The inclusion criteria included the following: (1) Being an architecture student. (2) Being an active student during the semester in which the data were collected. On the students’ Facebook page, a post was shared requesting participation in the survey. The post contained information regarding the goal of the study, the researcher’s contact information, and instructions for completing the electronic questionnaire. The final sample consisted of 184 students (48.4% of the total number of students enrolled).

The targeted architecture program is accredited by the Accreditation and Quality Assurance for Higher Education Institutions (AQACHEI). This five-year program consists of (169) credit hours (CH), including (25 CH) university requirements, (29 CH) college requirements, and (115 CH) department requirements. Figure 1 displays a breakdown of the faculty and department’s requirements, which accounts for 68% of the program’s credit hours. In the first year, students are exposed to the fundamentals of design and are instructed in architectural drafting and visual communication using various media, such as pencil and watercolor. In addition, students are exposed to the fundamentals of construction and building materials. In the second year, students are exposed to the fundamental concepts of architecture via exposure to core compositional, technical, and analytical skills, as well as the development of convincing verbal and visual responses to design challenges. Emphasis is placed on addressing experimental design through materials studies and 2D and 3D computer modeling. Additionally, students learn to integrate theory, practice, and communication skills into the conceptual design of an architectural proposal.

Figure 1. The breakdown of the department’s requirements. Prepared by Prof. Ahmed Attia.

In the third year, students are exposed to more complicated programmatic, technical, theoretical, and conceptual requirements that call for a coordinated integration of spatial organization, cultural contexts, and sustainable and structural tactics. In the fourth year, the focus shifts to more realistic, comprehensive, and professional curricula, such as urbanization and cultural and social elements, along with the skills required to execute medium- to large-scale projects.

In the fifth year, students learn to follow a customized approach toward defining design challenges through their graduation project and experience design as a means of investigation and discovery. Moreover, students explore topics related to professional practice. During the summer before their fifth year, students must complete a compulsory internship.

Despite the absence of a research course in the program’s plan, lecture-based courses often incorporate a research component in the form of library research assignments or field visits. Additionally, architectural design studios improve students’ information-gathering abilities throughout the design phases. During the last three years of the program, students are exposed to advanced courses in architecture, during which they improve their architectural abilities in design, analysis, critical thinking, and design presentation. They also learn how to solve design problems related to the built environment and establish connections between various architectural topics. Thus, this study focuses on the attitudes of students in the third, fourth, and fifth years.

2.2. Design

A descriptive approach was followed to obtain baseline data on students’ attitudes and to investigate the connection between the variables. The purpose of this research was to address the following research questions:

• What are the attitudes of architecture students toward research?

• What are the links between students’ perspectives regarding research and their characteristics (e.g., age, gender, academic level, etc.)?

2.3. Measures

The data were collected through a self‐report questionnaire. The questionnaire consisted of two major sections and took approximately 10 minutes to complete. The questionnaire was constructed based on the reviewed literature regarding attitudes toward scientific research, and a pilot test was conducted with a sample of 12 students to assess comprehension, clarity, and completion time. An English version of the self-report questionnaire was used.

The questionnaire was developed using the electronic platform Qualtrics. The sole identification associated with each completed questionnaire was an untraceable IP address. Upon receipt, each completed questionnaire was sequentially numbered by the survey program. These allocated numbers were then used to identify the completed surveys. The goal and significance of the research were described on the first page of the questionnaire, along with a statement assuring the anonymity and confidentiality of the participants.

• The first section consisted of seven questions about the students’ profiles. Three of these pertained to participants’ characteristics (age, gender, and academic year). The rest of the questions focused on knowledge or experience of scientific research (i.e., whether the students had previously taken part in research activities; had an experience of scientific research; or regularly consumed architectural publications or broadcasts and/or participated in meetings, conferences, seminars, or similar activities).

• The second section assessed students’ attitudes toward scientific research with questions based on relevant literature (Halabi, 2016; Ünver et al., 2018). The responses were scored on a 5-point Likert scale, with answers ranging from 1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree). Hence, lower scores indicated positive attitudes.

The research was authorized by the university’s scientific ethics committee. The participants were invited to read and browse the questionnaire before completing it, and it was made clear to them that they could withdraw at any time. The first page of the questionnaire highlighted that the collected information would only be used for scientific purposes.

2.4. Data analysis

The responses to the closed-ended questions were analyzed using the SPSS 19.0 program (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). The demographic information was analyzed using descriptive statistics in the form of mean, standard deviation, and percentages. A Shapiro-Wilk test was conducted to assess the normality of the items in the attitude scale, as the data were measured on an ordinal scale. The test results indicated that the scale’s items were not normally distributed (Shapiro-Wilk normality test, P < .001). Therefore, nonparametric descriptors and statistical tests (Spearman, Mann-Whitney U, and Kruskal-Wallis H tests) were used. The threshold of significance was established at a p-value of < 0.05. The reliability test for the original scale was a Cronbach’s alpha (α) of 0.74, and for the subscales, α = 0.64–0.76. The overall reliability of this research was 0.73, while the reliability of the subscales varied from 0.68 to 0.76. The outcome was satisfactory. Hence, the internal consistency of the attitude scale was confirmed for the current sample.

3. Results

3.1. Profile of architecture students

The sample consisted of both male and female students: 54.3% (n = 100) females and 45.7% (n = 84) males. The group included architecture students in their third, fourth, and fifth years of study, and they were between 20 to 23 years old, with a mean of 21.92 (0.98) years. Almost half (44.6%) of the participants stated that they had previously undertaken research-related activities: 43.5% had participated in scientific activities, meetings, congresses, symposia, and other similar activities; 21.7% had conducted research, including collecting and writing-up data; while 68.5% said that they regularly consume architecture-related broadcasts, including YouTube channels (Table 1).

Table 1. Informative features of the sample Students (N = 184)

Feature	M	SD
Age (M and SD)	21.92	0.98
Gender	n	%
Female	100	54.3
Male	84	45.7
Academic year	n	%
Third	47	25.5
Fourth	84	45.7
Fifth	53	28.8
Do you follow the continuous broadcast related to Architecture?	n	%
Yes	126	68.5
No	58	31.5
Did you take part in conducting research such as data collection, writing, etc.?	n	%
Yes	40	21.7
No	144	78.3
Do you participate in scientific activities, meetings, congresses, symposia, or other related activities?	n	%
Yes	80	43.5
No	104	56.5
Have you undertaken any research activity on any of the university courses you took?	n	%
Yes	82	44.6
No	102	55.4

Note. Participants’ age ranged from 20 to 23 years.

3.2. Overall attitudes of students toward research

The first study question enquired about the students’ views of research. Table 2 illustrates the mean, standard deviation, and top box score (percentage of respondents who selected the most positive response categories). The threshold was three, and all scores over three represented unfavorable views.

Table 2. Descriptive statistics of subscales of attitudes towards research among Jordanian architecture students

Code	Items	N	Mean	Std. Deviation	Top Box score	Rank
Q2.1	Reluctance to be Helpful to Researchers	184	4.22	1.013	1.10 %	1
Q2.2	Negative Attitude Toward Research	184	3.64	1.197	5.40 %	2
Q2.3	Positive Attitude Toward Research	184	2.01	0.917	32.60 %	4
Q2.4	Positive Attitude Toward Researchers	184	2.47	1.297	32.10 %	3
F1	The usefulness of research (α = 0.74)	184	2.098	0.6005		B
Q3.1	I feel research is important and useful	184	1.59	0.770	52.70 %	1
Q3.2	Architects must be taught to read and utilize research findings	184	3.05	1.026	5.40 %	5
Q3.3	Conduct architecture research is necessary for the development of the profession	184	2.00	1.003	37.40 %	3
Q3.4	Architects must be involved in research if architecture is to be respected as a profession	184	2.12	0.990	30.40 %	4
Q3.5	Research has the potential to improve designs	184	1.73	0.913	50.00 %	2
F2	Personal interest (α = 0.68)	184	2.587	0.565		D
Q4.1	I would like to participate in a research	184	1.79	0.850	44.00 %	1
Q4.2	I am keen to participate in scientific events and conferences.	184	2.11	0.948	28.80 %	2
Q4.3	Architecture faculty should promote research in their teaching	184	3.68	1.173	5.40 %	4
Q4.4	I am interested in conducting a research project	184	2.76	0.947	6.50 %	3
F3	Research abilities (α = 0.76)	184	2.002	0.708		A
Q5.1	I feel that I am familiar with research terminology	184	2.07	1.001	33.70 %	4
Q5.2	I feel confident in my ability to participate in a research study	184	1.77	0.852	45.10 %	2
Q5.3	I feel confident about my ability to design a research study	184	1.90	0.953	3.97 %	3
Q5.4	I feel confident in my ability to analyze data	184	1.66	0.879	53.80 %	1
Q5.5	I feel confident in my ability to interpret research findings	184	2.62	1.090	16.80 %	5
F4	Using research in Practice (α = 0.71)	184	2.541	0.375		C
Q6.1	Architecture research is often irrelevant to design practice	184	2.87	0.908	4.30 %	3
Q6.2	It is unnecessary for practicing architects to conduct research.	184	2.49	0.941	14.10 %	4
Q6.3	It is very difficult to conduct research in the practice area. Architecture research complicates the ordinary work of architecture.	184	2.12	1.033	31.50 %	6
Q6.4	It is unlikely that I will use the research after I graduate	184	1.87	0.900	39.70 %	7
Q6.5	Reading research reports is difficult	184	2.13	0.983	30.40 %	5
Q6.6	It is difficult to identify researchable architectural problems	184	1.63	0.819	55.40 %	8
Q6.7	Architecture design solutions should not be based on scientific results and reliable research experience.	184	4.19	0.936	1.10 %	1
Q6.8	Introducing changes and testing new ideas is not very important in the architecture profession.	184	3.03	1.203	9.80 %	2
	Overall attitude scale	184	2.307	0.441

Responses range from (1) Strongly Agree to (5) Strongly Disagree. A higher value indicates a more negative attitude. SD = Standard deviation

The findings (Table 2 and Figure 2) suggest a generally favorable attitude toward the main four scale items (Q2.1-Q2.4). This can be seen in the mean values of several questions, where higher mean values were found for unwillingness to assist researchers (m = 4.22), negative attitudes toward research (m = 3.64), and lower mean values for positive views of researchers (m = 2.01), and positive attitudes toward research (m = 2.47).

Figure 2. Mean values for attitudes toward research scale items.

Due to the excellent Cronbach’s alpha values (Table 2) for each of the four factors (F1-Usefulness of research, F2-Personal interest, F3-Research abilities, and F4-Using research in practice), the scores of the individual items comprising a factor’s total scale score could be averaged. Among those factors, the mean value for F3-research skills and abilities (m = 2.002, averaged across five items) is the lowest, suggesting that the majority of students agreed with the statements regarding their ability to conduct or engage in research. The responses revealed that the participants are confident about their skills in analyzing, conducting, and participating in research.

The mean score for F1-research usefulness (m = 2.09, averaged across five questions) indicates a favorable opinion regarding the use of architectural research. Participants suggested that architectural research is valuable, relevant, and capable of informing architectural design. The mean score for F4-utilizing research in practice (m = 2.54, averaged over eight items) is relatively high but indicates a positive attitude. As for the practical implementation of research, the most favorable opinions were related to the conviction that design solutions should be based on scientific findings and reliable research processes.

The mean score for F2-personal interest (m = 2.59, averaged across four questions) is the highest among the four factors, but the mean value is below 3. The participants showed relatively low levels of personal interest in research; however, the mean values suggest that they had favorable sentiments toward helping researchers in conducting research (Q4.1). In other words, students had a generally favorable view of architectural research and were eager to assist researchers. They recognized their own research abilities and the importance of architectural studies for their future careers. Nonetheless, they were not as enthusiastic about conducting research themselves.

3.3. Differences in students’ attitudes toward research

The second research question focused on the relationship between participants’ attitudes toward architectural research and their personal characteristics, including their gender, academic level, and prior experiences in research. The correlational analysis revealed that most of the relationships were weaker than r = 0.30, and p-values were more than 0.05, meaning that they were not statistically significant. On the other hand, the statistical analysis showed significant weak correlations between the participants’ academic level and factors (students’ unwillingness to assist researchers, their unfavorable perceptions of research, their positive views of researchers, and their positive views toward research (r = −0.174, −0.162, 0.156, and 0.145 respectively). Furthermore, significant weak correlations appeared between students’ follow-up of architectural broadcasts and several variables, including reluctance to be helpful to researchers, negative attitude toward research, the usefulness of research, personal interest, and research abilities (r = −0.210, −0.343, 0.152, 0.159, and 0.238). Indicating that following and learning from architectural channels was connected to students’ opinions regarding the significance of the research, their personal motivations for participating in research, and their assessments of their own research abilities.

A Mann-Whitney U test and Kruskal-Wallis H analysis of variance (Figure 3) were conducted to examine the discrepancies between participants’ answers to the attitude scale variables. Variance analysis revealed disparities between male and female students, with female students having more favorable attitudes than their male counterparts. It also revealed statistical differences between the responses of students at different academic levels, with those in the third and fourth years exhibiting a greater willingness to assist researchers than those at the fifth academic level. Compared to those at other levels, fifth-year students had more unfavorable attitudes toward research and less positive attitudes toward researchers.

Figure 3. Differences in students’ attitudes toward research.

The statistical analysis revealed differences between the responses of students who followed architectural broadcasts and those who did not, with students who did not watch architectural broadcasts having a greater desire to assist researchers and less negative attitudes toward research. However, individuals who said that they followed architectural media were certain about the usefulness of scientific research, personally motivated to engage in it, and more confident about their own research abilities. In addition, the statistical analysis revealed that students with prior experience in conducting research, such as data collection and writing, had less favorable views regarding research than those who did not possess that experience. According to the statistical data, students who attended conferences or scientific meetings had fewer unfavorable opinions regarding architectural research.

4. Discussion

The present study is one of the few studies which examined the attitudes of Jordanian architecture students (or Arab students in general) toward research. The findings indicated that students generally had favorable opinions toward research, a notion that is consistent with the literature (Jansen et al., 2021; Yalçın & Ulusoy, 2015).

Moreover, the study found a correlation between the attitude scale scores and the gender of the participants. For example, female students had slightly more favorable opinions regarding architectural research than male students. This goes in line with the findings of earlier studies on the attitudes of female students toward research in architecture and other fields (e.g., interior design, landscape architecture, and medical specializations; Björkström et al., 2003; Jansen et al., 2021; Weinburgh, 1995). This investigation also found a link between academic level and attitudes, with students at more advanced academic stages having less favorable views of research. This is inconsistent with earlier research indicating that the older the participants and the higher their academic level was, the more positive their attitudes toward research become (Björkström et al., 2003; Shaukat et al., 2014). Numerous reasons could account for our findings. For example, older students are more rational and have a better understanding of the scientific research requirements. Students in the third and fourth years, compared to their peers in the fifth year, have more freedom to think without being constrained by some advanced courses in the curriculum that frame students’ cognitive abilities through a more realistic context, such as quantities and specifications and professional practice courses. Another reason could be psychological in nature, related to students’ desire to learn more—students in lower academic levels are still halfway through the program and still open to learning new things. While fifth-year students believe they have had enough knowledge and are eager to graduate and find a job.

The findings suggest that following and watching architecture-related broadcasts contributes to favorable views of architecture research. A more comprehensive grasp of architecture-related themes may lead to favorable attitudes toward architectural research, greater comprehension of its significance, a willingness to participate, and a strengthening of one’s own research capacities. This supports earlier research, such as the study by Ünver et al. (2018), which emphasized the value of media for increasing students’ knowledge and favorable attitudes toward the profession and, thus, architectural research. Previous experience in research was also shown to increase favorable sentiments about researchers. Experience and engagement in all areas of research—such as data collection, writing, or filling out questionnaires—made people more aware of what researchers do and the effort they put into their work, thus increasing their respect and appreciation for them (Wishkoski et al., 2022).

The results indicate that students’ participation in conferences and scientific gatherings tends to reduce their negative attitudes toward research. Therefore, students should be encouraged to attend architectural meetings and sessions to reflect on the relationship between research and architectural design. In addition, students may be exposed to searchable problems through research groups and architectural conferences that present concerns, debates, and challenges in the field, thereby stimulating inquiry.

There were no statistically significant differences between the different participating groups’ attitudes toward the value of research for professional practice. However, the mean values reflected positive attitudes toward the role of research in enhancing architectural design and advancing the profession, with participants agreeing that the research findings could be used to their advantage when they became practicing architects. This result is congruent with the conclusions of Duffy and Hutton (2004), whose study indicated that scientific research was essential for professional growth. The participants highly agreed that it was difficult to identify researchable architecture problems. As a result, they often struggled to comprehend the research topics, what they should investigate in the context of their professional objectives, and the relevance of research topics to practice. This is a frequently occurring issue, according to the available evidence (Pietrzyk, 2022). Therefore, it is essential to integrate research into the study program—as early as possible and in every subject.

The university’s architecture curriculum is well-known for being physically and mentally demanding, and frequent design courses force students to prioritize crucial curricular requirements above research activities. These circumstances will limit interest in conducting research. Since students’ attitudes rely heavily on their comprehension of what research means, the recommended tactics are similar to those proposed by Wishkoski et al. (2022). They include the integration of research into courses, with students required to read research papers in particular fields, think critically, learn about problems and identify solutions using classroom research findings, and cite research papers in their own presentations. Additionally, since architecture students benefit from exposure to evidence-based practice and research initiatives that strengthen their abilities, the architecture curriculum must emphasize evidence-based practice and research skills.

Therefore, one of the recommendations to modify the architecture curriculum under study in order to enhance students’ research skills is to modify some course descriptions to emphasize scientific research components such as identifying the problem, data collection, and data analysis. The architectural design courses at different academic levels could be modified in a way to corporate more research tasks and specialized lectures and coupled them with the design process in a way that makes students recognize the role of research in making more responsive and rigorous design decisions. Moreover, the current program curriculum has six credits taken as special topics in architecture which provide a great opportunity to introduce students to the scientific research area. Also, one scientific research-oriented class that could be added to the group of elective classes in the curriculum

One of the limitations of this research is that it was based upon self-report questionnaires, and its data were collected through a convenience sample. Thus, the interpretation and generalization of the findings should be made with care. Moreover, the sample was recruited from a single institution which is one of the largest institutions in Jordan, and its students come from diverse cultural, social, economic, and demographic backgrounds. However, the findings would be more reliable if the study incorporated several universities. Furthermore, the measuring tool employed was a five-point Likert scale restricting respondents’ selections and generating forced selection variation.

5. Conclusion

This study sought to identify students’ attitudes toward research based on the following factors: the desire to help researchers, negative attitudes toward research, positive attitudes toward research, positive attitudes toward researchers, research capabilities, the usefulness of research, personal research interest, and the application of research in practice. Among those factors, the items related to “research abilities” received the highest scores, while items related to “personal interest” received the lowest.

To summarize, the findings demonstrate that Jordanian architecture students have a favorable view of research. Research of this kind is likely to have ramifications for students, practicing architects, and academic institutions. Architectural courses must highlight the importance of implementing research results. Architects should actively participate in international research and seek to benefit from it. Jordan is a significant supplier of the architecture-specialized workforce in the Arab world; preparing its architecture students is thus crucial for assuring the quality of architectural design, the status of architecture research, and the fulfillment of global requirements for research practice. As they are likely to engage in extensive contact with architects from other nations, students should—as early as possible during the course of their learning—be sharing their experiences via research projects. More focus should be granted to the globalization and internalization of research and its dissemination to architects across the globe.

Ultimately, this study recommends emphasizing research applications, teaching research principles at early stages, and incorporating the research-process components into all other courses of the architecture curriculum. Due to the paucity of information on this topic in Jordan, further studies should be conducted to evaluate students’ usage of architectural research and to validate the proposed techniques for the development of the field. Additionally, it is essential to investigate the obstacles architecture face in education and practice. Finally, students should be well-equipped with evidence-based knowledge and practices, which are essential products of architectural research.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank all the participants of the study for their time and effort. We would also like to thank Ms. Maria Shahatit for her assistance with data collection.

Disclosure statement

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper

Additional information

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.