CAD education

Let’s examine a current practice in architectural education, for example the practice in CAD teaching (two-dimensional Computer-Aided Architectural Design) at a school of architecture and the application of evidence-based research on this practice. 

Most schools of architecture began to incorporate a limited number of CAD courses in the mid-1990s, but the rapid development of digital technology forced most of them to increase the teaching hours and credits. However, the specific educational practice isn’t yet evidence-based or informed. The majority of the instructors follow the typical teaching method, which is based on the detailed presentation of the commands and tools. The expected outcomes for the students are: The success in the final examinations and the ability to complete a simple architectural drawing using specific CAD software.

Although there isn’t much research and literature on the subject, there are however few experimental studies with interesting and useful findings. For example, Ivan Chester (2007) conducted a study, with the method of Randomized Control Trials, in order to find effective CAD teaching methods which are able to provide the students with procedural/strategic Knowledge rather than simple command knowledge. Moreover, several practitioners have raised serious questions and concerns around CAD education (Xiuzi et al, 2004), (Yuxiang Kuang, 2008) that would be worth exploring from the researchers.

The stakeholders of architectural schools (professors, staff members, instructors, students) are encouraged to discuss, cooperate, or even conduct small-scale experimental researches and conclude to some common guide lines for issues such as:

— The curriculum and whether it should be given more or less emphasis to the new technologies in relation to other traditional courses (hand drawing, sketches etc).

— The matter of what should be included in a CAD course. For example Yuxiang Kuang (2008) sets the problem of the continuous technological development and the necessity of a dynamic and constantly updated curriculum.

— The adequate educational method (or blended method) for a teaching that combines theoretical knowledge and technological skills (engineering, technical drawing, computer skills).

— The use of the most effective educational means (video-tutorials, printed material etc).

            On the other hand, there are aspects on CAD education that should be strictly based on evidences, even if such evidences would take the form of restrictive and authoritarian rules. These aspects have to do with technical issues such as:

—  The maximum number of students that an instructor can effectively attend.

— The maximum working time that a student can pass in front of his computer without suffering from fatigue.

—  The minimum equipment requirements (software-hardware)

But although an evidence-based/informed practice seems promising we should keep in mind than in higher technical education (Polytechnic Schools, Technical Institutions) the personality and the professional skills of the instructor are sometimes more appreciated than his teaching capacities.

References

Chester, I. (2007) ‘Teaching for CAD expertise’, International Journal of Technology & Design Education, 17, (1), pp 23-35.

Xiuzi Ye., Wei Peng., Zhiyang Chen, Yi-Yu Cai. (2004) ‘Today’s students, tomorrow’s engineers: an industrial perspective on CAD education’, Computer-Aided Design, 36, (14), pp1451-1460.

Yuxiang Kuang. (2008), ‘Problems and solutions on the teaching of Computer-aided industrial design’ , in Proceeding of the 9^th International Conference- Computer- Aided Industrial Design and Conceptual Design, Kunming Nov 22-25 2008, CAID/CD, pp. 998-1001.