The Role of Computer-Aided Design in Architectural Education

imran GUMUS BATTAL

doi:10.38027/smart.v2n1-9

Authors

imran GUMUS BATTAL Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture and Design, Bursa Technical University, Turkey Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1837-281X

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.38027/smart.v2n1-9

Keywords:

architectural design, Architectural education, Computer-aided design (CAD), Design process

Abstract

Computer-Aided Design (CAD) tools have fundamentally transformed architectural education by offering greater precision, efficiency, and flexibility compared to traditional hand-drawing techniques. This study investigates the impact of CAD _programs on architectural training, focusing on their influence on students’ technical knowledge, spatial perception, and creativity. A mixed-method approach was employed, combining literature review and an empirical survey. The survey was administered to 40 first-year architecture students at Bursa Technical University following the completion of their introductory CAD course. Quantitative results revealed that 95% of the students reported an improvement in their technical knowledge, 90% stated enhanced drawing abilities, and 73% observed better spatial perception. However, only 65% felt that CAD improved their creativity, with qualitative feedback indicating mixed experiences regarding creative freedom. While many students valued CAD’s capacity for precise, iterative design, others felt constrained by software limitations. The majority (85%) favored a hybrid approach, combining CAD with hand-drawing techniques. The originality of this study lies in its integration of quantitative and qualitative data to assess both the benefits and perceived limitations of CAD in early design education. The findings underscore the importance of pedagogical strategies that blend digital tools with traditional methods, supporting both efficiency and creative exploration. This study contributes to the architectural education literature by offering empirical insights into students’ evolving design practices and by proposing a framework for balanced digital-traditional integration in design pedagogy.

References

Antonietti, A., & Giorgetti, M. (2006). Teachers’ beliefs about learning from multimedia. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(2), 267–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2004.06.002

Basa, İ., & Şenyapılı, B. (2005). The (In)secure position of the design jury towards computer-generated presentations. Design Studies, 26(3), 257–270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2004.09.006

Bektas Ekici, B., Akyildiz, N. A., Karabatak, S., et al. (2024). Architecture students’ attitudes toward emergency distance education and elements affecting their success in design studios: A sample from Turkey. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 34, 853–873. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-023-09842-w

Chaudhuri, N. B., & Dhar, D. (2024). Digitizing creativity evaluation in design education: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 34, 1211–1242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-023-09846-6

Çil, E., & Pakdil, O. (2007). Design instructors’ perspectives on the role of computers in architectural education: A case study. METU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 24(2), 123–136.

Dambrot, F. H., Watkins-Malek, M. A., Silling, S. M., Marshall, R. S., & Garver, J. A. (1985). Correlates of sex differences in attitudes toward and involvement with computers. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 27(1), 71–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(85)90053-3

Ebenezer, J., Sitthiworachart, J., & Na, K. S. (2022). Architecture students’ conceptions, experiences, perceptions, and feelings of learning technology use: Phenomenography as an assessment tool. Education and Information Technologies, 27, 1133–1157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10654-5

Hettithanthri, U., & Hansen, P. (2022). Design studio practice in the context of architectural education: A narrative literature review. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 32, 2343–2364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-021-09694-2

Kamel, M. A. E., & Khalil, M. W. I. (2023). The impact of using computer-aided design (CAD) on the creativity of architecture students. Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers, 14(4), 245–256. https://doi.org/10.47750/jett.2023.14.04.021

Lousberg, L., van Rooij, R., Jansen, S., et al. (2020). Reflection in design education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 30, 885–897. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-019-09532-6

Mıhlayanlar, E., & Tachir, G. (2019). Mimarlık eğitiminde bilgisayar destekli tasarımdan bina enformasyonuna. Artium, 17(2), 167–179.

Özdemir Işık, B. (2017). Contribution of computer-aided design programs to architectural education. The Journal of International Social Research, 10(51), 777–783. http://dx.doi.org/10.17719/jisr.2017.1814

Özgen, D. S., Afacan, Y., & Sürer, E. (2021). Usability of virtual reality for basic design education: A comparative study with paper-based design. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 31, 357–377. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-019-09554-0

Pektaş, Ş. T., & Erkip, F. (2006). Attitudes of design students toward computer usage in design. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 16(1), 79–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-005-3175-0

Robertson, B. F., Walther, J., & Radcliffe, D. F. (2007). Creativity and the use of CAD tools: Lessons for engineering design education from industry. Journal of Mechanical Design, 129(7), 753–760. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2722329

Robertson, S. I., Calder, J., Fung, P., Jones, A., & O’Shea, T. (1995). Computer attitudes in an English secondary school. Computers & Education, 24(2), 73–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/0360-1315(94)00072-H

Sanders, K. (1996). The Digital Architect: A Common Sense Approach to Computer-Aided Design. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Shashaani, L. (1997). Gender differences in computer attitudes and use among college students. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 16(1), 37–51. https://doi.org/10.2190/Y8U7-AMMA-WQUT-R512

Stam, L., Ostuzzi, F., & Heylighen, A. (2022). Open design: An actual topic in architectural education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 32, 667–693. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-020-09607-9

Sinnamon, C., & Miller, E. (2022). Architectural concept design process impacted by body and movement. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 32(2), 1079–1102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-020-09636-4

Svenningsson, J. (2020). The Mitcham score: Quantifying students’ descriptions of technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 30, 995–1014. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-019-09530-8

Şenyapılı, B., & Başa, İ. (2006). The shifting tides of academe: Oscillation between hand and computer in architectural education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 16(3), 273–283. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-005-5052-2

Utterback, J. M., Ekman, S., Sanderson, S. W., Vedin, B.-A., Verganti, R., Tether, B., & Alvarez, E. (2006). Design-Inspired Innovation. Singapore: World Scientific. https://doi.org/10.1142/6052

Veliz Reyes, A. (2024). A multimodal study of augmented reality in the architectural design studio. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-024-09895-5

Yalınay Çinici, Ş. (2007). Gelassenheit: Dilemma of computational thinking in architecture. In Proceedings of the 25th eCAADe Conference (pp. 275–282). Frankfurt, Germany: eCAADe. https://doi.org/10.52842/conf.ecaade.2007.275

Yıldırım, T. Ö., Yavuz, A., & İnan, N. (2010). Comparison of Traditional and Digital Visualization Technologies in Architectural Design Education. Journal of Information Technologies, 3(3), 17–26.

Yıldızoglu, N. (2024). Sketching versus digital design tools in architectural design. JCoDe: Journal of Computational Design, 5(2), 301–316. https://doi.org/10.53710/jcode.1504947

Zelef, H., Bursa, N., & Çakıcı, Z. F. (2011). An essay on representation methods in architectural education: Houses. Mimarlık (Architecture) Journal, 3(7), 100–108.