دیدگاه دانشجویان فنی دانشگاه تهران نسبت به وضعیت تدریس همه ‏شمول و نقش هوش مصنوعی

بیگ پوریان, بهزاد; حبیبی, علی

doi:10.22047/ijee.2026.583176.2250

دیدگاه دانشجویان فنی دانشگاه تهران نسبت به وضعیت تدریس همه ‏شمول و نقش هوش مصنوعی

نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی - پژوهشی

نویسندگان

بهزاد بیگ پوریان ¹

علی حبیبی ²

¹ گروه آموزش مهندسی، دانشکده مهندسی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران

² دانشگاه تهران، گروه آموزش مهندسی

10.22047/ijee.2026.583176.2250

چکیده

آموزش مهندسی برای پاسخ به نیاز‏های فردی دانشجویان باید از روش‏های تدریس شخصی‏ سازی ‏شده استفاده کند که در عصر هوش مصنوعی این فنّاوری نوین می ‏تواند کمک شایانی به تحقق این امر کند. چارچوب یادگیری فراگیر و تأثیر کاربرد هوش مصنوعی، یک مدل مناسب برای افزایش کیفیت تدریس همه‏ شمول در آموزش مهندسی است که به‏ دلیل نبود یک پژوهش جامع در این حوزه در مطالعات آموزش مهندسی ایران، این مقاله سعی در جبران این خلاء پژوهشی دارد. در این پژوهش با جمع ‏آوری اطلاعات به‏ صورت کمّی از 405 دانشجوی دانشکدگان فنی تهران، نخست دیدگاه آنها نسبت به فرایند یاددهی و یادگیری همه‏ شمول در ابعاد مختلف به‏ صورت آمار توصیفی بیان شده است. سپس منطبق با نتایج در مرحلۀ توصیفی و با تشکیل گروه ‏های مخالف، موافق و ممتنع در هر بعد، به‏ صورت تحلیلی نگرش دانشجویان نسبت به محدودیت‏ های هوش مصنوعی در آموزش و همچنین تمایل ایشان به استفاده از هوش مصنوعی در آینده مقایسه شده است. نتایج این پژوهش در هر دو بعد به ما کمک می‏ کند که با نقاط قوت و ضعف موجود در روش ‏‏های تدریس همه ‏شمول آشنا شده و باتوجه ‏به تنوع دیدگاه در گروه‏ های مختلف، برای ترغیب دانشجویان به استفاده مناسب از هوش مصنوعی، راهکارهای مناسب در تدریس ارائه دهیم.

کلیدواژه‌ها

هوش مصنوعی

محیط یادگیری همه‏ شمول

یادگیری شخصی ‏سازی‏ شده

آموزش مهندسی

20.1001.1.16072316.1405.28.110.2.9

موضوعات

روش‌ های نوین یاددهی و یادگیری در آموزش مهندسی

عنوان مقاله English

THE PERSPECTIVES OF ENGINEERING STUDENTS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF TEHRAN ON THE STATUS OF INCLUSIVE TEACHING AND THE ROLE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

نویسندگان English

Behzad Beigpourian ¹

Ali Habibi ²

¹ Engineering Education Department, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

² ِDeprtment of Engineering Education, University of Tehran

چکیده English

Engineering education, in order to address the individual needs of students, must utilize personalized teaching methods. In the age of artificial intelligence, this new technology can significantly contribute to realizing this goal. The inclusive learning framework and the impact of AI applications represent a suitable model for enhancing the quality of inclusive teaching in engineering education. Due to the lack of comprehensive research within Iranian engineering education studies, this paper attempts to fill this research gap. In this study, by quantitatively collecting data from 405 students at the college of engineering at the University of Tehran, their perspectives on the inclusive teaching and learning process in various dimensions were first presented using descriptive statistics. Then, in accordance with the descriptive results and by forming opposing, agreeing, and abstaining groups in each dimension, the students’ attitudes toward the limitations of AI in education, as well as their willingness to use AI in the future, were compared analytically. The results of this research in both dimensions help us become familiar with the strengths and weaknesses in inclusive teaching methods and, given the diversity of perspectives among different groups, provide appropriate teaching strategies to encourage students to make appropriate use of artificial intelligence.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Artificial intelligence

inclusive learning environment

personalized learning

engineering education

Afini Normadhi, N. B., Shuib, L., Md Nasir, H. N., Bimba, A., Idris, N., & Balakrishnan, V. (2019). Identification of personal traits in adaptive learning environment: Systematic literature review. Computers & Education, 130, 168-190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.11.005.
Almeqdad, Q. I., Alodat, A. M., Alquraan, M. F., Mohaidat, M. A., & Al-Makhzoomy, A. K. (2023). The effectiveness of universal design for learning: A systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis. Cogent Education, 10(1), 2218191. https://doi.org/10.2331186٫1080X.2023.2218191.
Bahçeci, F., & Gürol, M. (2016). The effect of individualized instruction system on the academic achievement scores of students. Education Research International, 2016, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.2016٫1155/7392125.
Bergdahl, N., & Sjöberg, J. (2025). Attitudes, perceptions and AI self-efficacy in K-12 education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, 100358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100358.
Çakıroğlu, Ü. (2014). Analyzing the effect of learning styles and study habits of distance learners on learning performances: A case of an introductory programming course. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(4). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v15i4.1840.
Chan, C. K. Y., & Hu, W. (2023). Students’ voices on generative AI: perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00411-8.
Chen, L., Chen, P., & Lin, Z. (2020). Artificial intelligence in education: A review. IEEE Access, 8, 75264-75278. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2988510.
Das, D. K. (2023). Exploring the impact of feedback on student performance in undergraduate civil engineering. European Journal of Engineering Education, 48(6), 1148-1164. https://doi.org/10.03043797٫1080.2023.2238188.
Direito, I., Chance, S., Clemmensen, L., Craps, S., Economides, S., Isaac, S., Jolly, A.-M., Truscott, F., & Wint, N. (2021). Diversity, equity, and inclusion in engineering education: An exploration of european higher education institutions’ strategic frameworks, resources, and initiatives.
Farrell, S., Riley, D., & Godwin, A. (2021). A sociocultural learning framework for inclusive pedagogy in engineering. Chemical Engineering Education, 55(4). https://doi.org/10.2٫18260-1-370.660-128660.
Gómez, S., Zervas, P., Sampson, D. G., & Fabregat, R. (2014). Context-aware adaptive and personalized mobile learning delivery supported by UoLmP. Journal of King Saud University - Computer and Information Sciences, 26(1), 47-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksuci.2013.10.008.
Hazari, S. (2024). Justification and roadmap for artificial intelligence (AI) literacy courses in higher education. Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.5590/JERAP.2024.14.1.07.
Jacobs, M., Kane, D., Yahne, R., & Goodridge, W. (2025). Challenges and opportunities: A systematic review of AI tools in engineering education. 2025 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings, 56075. https://doi.org/10.1٫18260-2--56075.
Klašnja-Milićević, A., Vesin, B., Ivanović, M., & Budimac, Z. (2011). E-Learning personalization based on hybrid recommendation strategy and learning style identification. Computers & Education, 56(3), 885-899. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.11.001.
Koohang, A., Sargent, C. S., & Svanadze, S. (2024). Students’ perceptions of benefits and opportunities of artificial intelligence (AI). Issues In Information Systems. https://doi.org/10.2٫48009_iis_2024_134.
Liao, E. (2024). Research on teaching reform for Python programming curriculum based on AIGC-CDIO-OBE model. 2024 6th International Conference on Computer Science and Technologies in Education (CSTE), 106-109. https://doi.org/10.1109/CSTE62025.2024.00026.
Makokha, J. (2021). Artificial intelligence paradigms and the future of learning: What a partial review of half a century of AI conceptualization suggests. 2021 ASEE Virtual Annual Conference Content Access Proceedings, 36700. https://doi.org/10.1٫18260-2--36700.
Marquez, R., Barrios, N., Vera, R. E., Mendez, M. E., Tolosa, L., Zambrano, F., & Li, Y. (2023). A perspective on the synergistic potential of artificial intelligence and product-based learning strategies in biobased materials education. Education for Chemical Engineers, 44, 164-180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ece.2023.05.005.
Merino-Campos, C. (2025). The impact of artificial intelligence on personalized learning in higher education: A systematic review. Trends in Higher Education, 4(2), 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/higheredu4020017.
Ouyang, F., Wu, M., Zheng, L., Zhang, L., & Jiao, P. (2023). Integration of artificial intelligence performance prediction and learning analytics to improve student learning in online engineering course. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00372-4.
Palid, O., Cashdollar, S., Deangelo, S., Chu, C., & Bates, M. (2023). Inclusion in practice: A systematic review of diversity-focused STEM programming in the United States. International Journal of STEM Education, 10(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-022-00387-3.
Pontual Falcão, T., Mendes De Andrade E Peres, F., Sales De Morais, D. C., & Da Silva Oliveira, G. (2018). Participatory methodologies to promote student engagement in the development of educational digital games. Computers & Education, 116, 161-175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.09.006.
Qureshi, B. (2023). Exploring the use of ChatGPT as a tool for learning and assessment in undergraduate computer science curriculum: Opportunities and challenges. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2304.11214.
Rodríguez-Simmonds, H. E., Godwin, A., Langus, T., Pearson, N., & Kirn, A. (2023). Building inclusion in engineering teaming practices. Studies in Engineering Education, 3(2), 31-59. https://doi.org/10.21061/see.84.
Schelly, C., Davies, P., & Spooner, C. (2011). Student perceptions of faculty implementation of Universal Design for Learning. . Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 24(1), 17-30.
Shemshack, A., & Spector, J. M. (2020). A systematic literature review of personalized learning terms. Smart Learning Environments, 7(1), 33. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-020-00140-9.
Song, Y., Weisberg, L. R., Zhang, S., Tian, X., Boyer, K. E., & Israel, M. (2024). A framework for inclusive AI learning design for diverse learners. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6, 100212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100212.
Swiecki, Z., Khosravi, H., Chen, G., Martinez-Maldonado, R., Lodge, J. M., Milligan, S., Selwyn, N., & Gašević, D. (2022). Assessment in the age of artificial intelligence. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, 100075. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100075.
Tang, P. C. (1938). The power function of the analysis of variance tests, with tables and illustrations of their use. Statistical Research Memoirs, 2, 126-149.
Wiese, L., Will Pinto, H. E., & Magana, A. J. (2024). Undergraduate and graduate students’ conceptual understanding of model classification outcomes under the lens of scientific argumentation. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 32(4), e22734. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22734.
Winkens, A.-K., Engelhardt, F., Lemke, C., Stöhr, C., & Leicht-Scholten, C. (2025). Enhanc(e)ing engineering education in Europe - cross-national perspectives on challenges and opportunities for university teaching practices. European Journal of Engineering Education, 1-30. https://doi.org/10.03043797٫1080.2025.2573884.
Winstone, N. E., & Pitt, E. (2025). Approaches to feedback on examination performance: Research, policy, and practice. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 50(6), 876-896. https://doi.org/10.02602938٫1080.2025.2476622
Zhai, X., Chu, X., Chai, C. S., Jong, M. S. Y., Istenic, A., Spector, M., Liu, J.-B., Yuan, J., & Li, Y. (2021). A review of artificial intelligence (AI) in education from 2010 to 2020. Complexity, 2021(1), 8812542. https://doi.org/10.2021٫1155/8812542.