Educational environments are recognized as fundamental pillars that exert a profound influence on the enhancement of academic learning processes and the robust cultivation of creative thinking among students. Within the scope of this research, architectural educational settings are conceptualized as the primary study context. Environmental factors are interpreted as a comprehensive constellation of physical-spatial and perceptual components capable of exerting a tangible impact on the creative cognitive faculties of students. Rigorous examination of the influence exerted by these educational settings, alongside a systematic analysis of their physical and spatial variances, can significantly contribute to the enhancement of the quality of architectural pedagogy. Design studios, which constitute the pedagogical nucleus of architecture curricula, are directly mediated by this environment; thus, the blossoming and maturation of students’ latent talents are inextricably linked to both their hands-on practical experiences and the adequacy of their spatial surroundings.
Although the concept of ‘learning’ is frequently positioned as a central process within general educational studies, this research intentionally adopts a different stance: learning is treated here as the foundational context and the essential background process, rather than the primary dependent variable under scrutiny. The core focus of this research centers on the creative thinking of architecture students, which serves as the primary dependent variable. This variable has been assessed independently through the application of the standardized Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (TTCT). Consequently, the environmental components of architectural educational spaces are analyzed as independent variables within the overarching framework of the learning environment, with the specific intent of elucidating their precise role and quantifying their impact on the promotion of student creative thinking.
Introduction
This research is driven by the overarching objective of investigating the specific influence that individual environmental components exert on the enhancement of creative thinking within educational contexts. The study endeavors to provide a comprehensive response to the central research inquiry: Which specific environmental components are most effective in promoting the creative thinking of students, and which of these components demonstrate the most substantial factor loading in the genesis of such creativity? The statistical population for this study comprises the student body of the Faculty of Architecture at Bu-Ali Sina University in Hamedan, with a total population size of 127 students, from which a representative sample size of 95 individuals was derived.
While a substantial body of existing academic research has examined the general impact of space on occupants, this study distinguishes itself by operationalizing specific and granular architectural factors (e.g., staircases, primary and secondary entrances, visual perspectives, and spatial configurations) as independent variables. It effectively bridges the gap between the physical aspects of architecture and the cognitive processes—specifically creative thinking—which are frequently investigated in isolation in contemporary literature. In this framework, the factors derived from qualitative analysis are systematically integrated into a model designed to assess their influence on creative thinking. The overarching aim is to identify, analyze, and quantify the impact of these environmental components on student creative thinking, utilizing a mixed-methods (qualitative-quantitative) research design with a significant emphasis on the analytical rigor of the quantitative phase.
During the qualitative phase, content analysis was employed. Through semi-structured interviews and a thorough synthesis of existing academic literature and research history, the environmental components were categorized. The gathered textual data were imported into the NVIVO software environment, where subsequent steps included rigorous coding, categorization, and frequency analysis. This process culminated in the generation of network conceptual diagrams, which served as the structural foundation for the subsequent phase: the development of a structured questionnaire. This involved selecting the final determining factors from the established codes and operationalizing each factor into specific items utilizing a Likert-type scale. This instrument was then administered to the 95 students, selected based on the Morgan sampling table. The resulting quantitative data were processed using ORIGINPRO 2022 software, where they underwent rigorous statistical analysis, including descriptive statistics, correlation, regression, and Path Analysis (PN).
The empirical findings indicated that components related to multi-functionality and environmental legibility held the highest factor loading (1.000), while natural environmental elements exhibited the lowest factor loading at 0.256. These results provide a robust quantitative foundation—rooted deeply in qualitative observation—suggesting that prioritizing the design of environments that actively integrate these identified components (such as meaningful interior ornamentation, adaptable multi-functional spaces, and high environmental legibility) can lead to a demonstrable and significant enhancement in the creative thinking capacities of students, thereby preparing a new generation of highly innovative architects.
Conclusion
The current research was conducted in two distinct yet interrelated phases—qualitative and quantitative—with the explicit aim of elucidating the function of physical components in promoting creative student thinking. In the qualitative phase, based on the thematic analysis of interview transcripts, a total of 22 final components were extracted from an initial set of 95 primary codes. These components were primarily objective and physical in nature. The participants emphasized that the physical structure of a space must transcend its basic utility; it must act as a carrier of aesthetic qualities and meaning-making processes. They argued that beauty, spatial order, and environmental perception must work in a synergistic manner to foster creative growth. Simultaneously, the qualitative data revealed that purely spatial components, when compared to creativity-oriented pedagogical elements, exert indirect and moderating influences.
In the quantitative phase, the correlation and regression analyses identified the multi-functionality of space as the most critical predictor of creative thinking. This component not only displayed a high correlation coefficient (r > 0.80) but also exhibited the highest standardized factor loading among all variables. Furthermore, the Path Analysis (PN) provided evidence of factorial overlap among the physical components, reflecting a conceptual ‘adhesiveness’ and demonstrating that their combined effects are additive in the enhancement of learning and creative processes. Consequently, criteria such as ornamentation, color usage, lighting, proportion and composition, inclusion of natural elements, and functional flexibility were identified as the primary clusters influencing the quality of spatial perception.
Educational environments are recognized as fundamental pillars that exert a profound influence on the enhancement of academic learning processes and the robust cultivation of creative thinking among students. Within the scope of this research, architectural educational settings are conceptualized as the primary study context. Environmental factors are interpreted as a comprehensive constellation of physical-spatial and perceptual components capable of exerting a tangible impact on the creative cognitive faculties of students. Rigorous examination of the influence exerted by these educational settings, alongside a systematic analysis of their physical and spatial variances, can significantly contribute to the enhancement of the quality of architectural pedagogy. Design studios, which constitute the pedagogical nucleus of architecture curricula, are directly mediated by this environment; thus, the blossoming and maturation of students’ latent talents are inextricably linked to both their hands-on practical experiences and the adequacy of their spatial surroundings.
Although the concept of ‘learning’ is frequently positioned as a central process within general educational studies, this research intentionally adopts a different stance: learning is treated here as the foundational context and the essential background process, rather than the primary dependent variable under scrutiny. The core focus of this research centers on the creative thinking of architecture students, which serves as the primary dependent variable. This variable has been assessed independently through the application of the standardized Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (TTCT). Consequently, the environmental components of architectural educational spaces are analyzed as independent variables within the overarching framework of the learning environment, with the specific intent of elucidating their precise role and quantifying their impact on the promotion of student creative thinking.
Introduction
This research is driven by the overarching objective of investigating the specific influence that individual environmental components exert on the enhancement of creative thinking within educational contexts. The study endeavors to provide a comprehensive response to the central research inquiry: Which specific environmental components are most effective in promoting the creative thinking of students, and which of these components demonstrate the most substantial factor loading in the genesis of such creativity? The statistical population for this study comprises the student body of the Faculty of Architecture at Bu-Ali Sina University in Hamedan, with a total population size of 127 students, from which a representative sample size of 95 individuals was derived.
While a substantial body of existing academic research has examined the general impact of space on occupants, this study distinguishes itself by operationalizing specific and granular architectural factors (e.g., staircases, primary and secondary entrances, visual perspectives, and spatial configurations) as independent variables. It effectively bridges the gap between the physical aspects of architecture and the cognitive processes—specifically creative thinking—which are frequently investigated in isolation in contemporary literature. In this framework, the factors derived from qualitative analysis are systematically integrated into a model designed to assess their influence on creative thinking. The overarching aim is to identify, analyze, and quantify the impact of these environmental components on student creative thinking, utilizing a mixed-methods (qualitative-quantitative) research design with a significant emphasis on the analytical rigor of the quantitative phase.
During the qualitative phase, content analysis was employed. Through semi-structured interviews and a thorough synthesis of existing academic literature and research history, the environmental components were categorized. The gathered textual data were imported into the NVIVO software environment, where subsequent steps included rigorous coding, categorization, and frequency analysis. This process culminated in the generation of network conceptual diagrams, which served as the structural foundation for the subsequent phase: the development of a structured questionnaire. This involved selecting the final determining factors from the established codes and operationalizing each factor into specific items utilizing a Likert-type scale. This instrument was then administered to the 95 students, selected based on the Morgan sampling table. The resulting quantitative data were processed using ORIGINPRO 2022 software, where they underwent rigorous statistical analysis, including descriptive statistics, correlation, regression, and Path Analysis (PN).
The empirical findings indicated that components related to multi-functionality and environmental legibility held the highest factor loading (1.000), while natural environmental elements exhibited the lowest factor loading at 0.256. These results provide a robust quantitative foundation—rooted deeply in qualitative observation—suggesting that prioritizing the design of environments that actively integrate these identified components (such as meaningful interior ornamentation, adaptable multi-functional spaces, and high environmental legibility) can lead to a demonstrable and significant enhancement in the creative thinking capacities of students, thereby preparing a new generation of highly innovative architects.
Conclusion
The current research was conducted in two distinct yet interrelated phases—qualitative and quantitative—with the explicit aim of elucidating the function of physical components in promoting creative student thinking. In the qualitative phase, based on the thematic analysis of interview transcripts, a total of 22 final components were extracted from an initial set of 95 primary codes. These components were primarily objective and physical in nature. The participants emphasized that the physical structure of a space must transcend its basic utility; it must act as a carrier of aesthetic qualities and meaning-making processes. They argued that beauty, spatial order, and environmental perception must work in a synergistic manner to foster creative growth. Simultaneously, the qualitative data revealed that purely spatial components, when compared to creativity-oriented pedagogical elements, exert indirect and moderating influences.
In the quantitative phase, the correlation and regression analyses identified the multi-functionality of space as the most critical predictor of creative thinking. This component not only displayed a high correlation coefficient (r > 0.80) but also exhibited the highest standardized factor loading among all variables. Furthermore, the Path Analysis (PN) provided evidence of factorial overlap among the physical components, reflecting a conceptual ‘adhesiveness’ and demonstrating that their combined effects are additive in the enhancement of learning and creative processes. Consequently, criteria such as ornamentation, color usage, lighting, proportion and composition, inclusion of natural elements, and functional flexibility were identified as the primary clusters influencing the quality of spatial perception.
The definitive results underscore that an educational environment functions as a ‘pedagogical agent’ that, when designed with a focus on multi-functionality and legibility, can significantly enhance student creativity. It is critical to note that none of the identified components exist in negative opposition to one another; rather, the presence of one acts as a complementary and reinforcing catalyst for the others. Therefore, it is strongly recommended that in the revitalization, renovation, or new design of educational facilities, architects and planners must give simultaneous and deliberate attention to physical and perceptual elements. Factors such as natural light penetration, visual openness, levels of spatial enclosure, flexible territorial boundaries, and pedagogical color schemes should serve as the foundational pillars for the planning and designing of future creativity-oriented educational spaces. By implementing these evidence-based design strategies, academic institutions can create environments that are not merely containers for learning, but active participants in the evolution of innovative architectural thinking..