10.57647/j.ccd.2025.0802.07

Analyzing the role of computer systems in improving the quality of architectural designs by third-degree undergraduate students

PDF
  • Babak Fadavi Akhavan1,
  • Shabnam Akbari Namdar*1,
  • Mir Saeed Moosavi1,
  1. Department of Architecture, Ta.C., Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran.

Received: 2023-04-14

Revised: 2023-05-23

Accepted: 2023-08-19

Published in Issue 2025-06-01

Copyright (c) 2025 Babak Fadavi Akhavan, Shabnam Akbari Namdar, Mir Saeed Moosavi (Author)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Fadavi Akhavan, B., Akbari Namdar, S., & Moosavi, M. S. (2025). Analyzing the role of computer systems in improving the quality of architectural designs by third-degree undergraduate students. Creative City Design, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.57647/j.ccd.2025.0802.07
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

PDF views: 134

Abstract

Aims: Architecture, as one of the specialized academic disciplines, requires learning the necessary equipment, computer systems, and software. Most of the activities of students in this field during their studies take place in software environments, so the role of software in promoting architectural designs and projects should be considered. This study aimed to investigate the role of computers in improving the quality of architectural designs.

Methodology: The research was descriptive-analytical and inferential in terms of applied purpose and its nature. The statistical population of this study consisted of 86 undergraduate students who were studied in total. Data analysis using a factor analysis test led to a reduction of 25 variables to 12 variables, which could explain 88.82% of variance changes.

Findings: The results of the Pearson correlation test regarding these 12 variables showed that there was a significant relationship between the 12 variables studied and the quality improvement of Scheme 3 at the level of 0.000. Finally, to predict the changes between the independent variables (7 anthropological variables and 5 design environment variables) by improving the design quality (dependent variable), a stepwise linear regression test was used, which showed that the anthropological variables could explain 87.9% of variance changes and design environment variables could explain 79.6% changes, and in total, two groups of variables could explain 84.6% changes.

Conclusion: According to the findings, it can be said that the quality improvement of architectural designs is influenced by software and hardware, but this influence depends on many anthropological factors and the design environment.

Keywords

  • Architectural engineering,
  • Education,
  • Architectural designs,
  • Quality improvement,
  • Software
PDF

References

  1. M. Yazdani, A. Rezvani, M. vafamehr, and M. H. khademzade. “Evaluation of Architectural Engineering Curriculum to Promote Vocational Education Based on Klein Model.”. Creative City Design, (1):45–61, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30495ccd.2022.689602.
  2. H. S. Salman, R. Laing, and A. Conniff. “The impact of computer aided architectural design programs on conceptual design in an educational context.”. Design Studies, 35(4):412–439, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2014.02.002.
  3. E. Brimondi and Y. Mohammadi Far. “The quality of services received from Razi University and its effect on the level of students’ satisfaction.”. Iranian Higher Education Quarterly, 11(3):101–126, 2018. URL http://ihej.ir/article-1-1273-fa.html.
  4. B. Eilouti. “Concept evolution in architectural design: an octonary framework.”. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 7(2): 180–196, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2018.01.003.
  5. A. J. Fletcher. “Applying critical realism in qualitative research: methodology meets method.”. International journal of social research methodology, 20(2):181–194, 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2016.1144401.
  6. I. Navarro, O. de Reina, A. Rodiera, and D. Fonseca. “Indoor positioning systems: 3D virtual model visualization and design process of their assessment using mixed methods: Case study: World heritatge buildings and spatial skills for architecture students.”. 11th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI), IEEE, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/CISTI.2016.7521532.
  7. A. Gharibpour. “Analytical comparison of hand and computer drawing in architectural design process.”. Fine Arts Quarterly, 19(1):14–5, 2013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22059/jfaup.2014.55370.
  8. N. Klini Mamqani and S. Azimi. “The effect of freehand drawing (sketch) in the design process.”. Fine Arts Journal, 3(46):75–85,2018. DOI: https://doi.org/20.1001.1.22286039.1390.3.46.8.7.
  9. R. Naboni and I. Paoletti. “Advanced customization in architectural design and construction.”. Spriger, 2015.
  10. S. Soliman, D. Taha, and Z. El Sayad. “Architectural education in the digital age: Computer applications: Between academia and practice.”. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 58(2):809–818, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04423-1.
  11. M. Mahdavinejad. “Creativity and the process of creative education in architectural design.”. Fine Arts Journal, 28(1):57–66, 2005.URL https://journals.ut.ac.ir/article 10726.html.
  12. V. Jamiri, J. Hatami, A. Fathi-Azer, and M. Pakdel Fard. “Examining the degree of adaptation of the architectural engineering bachelor’s curriculum to the needs of the labor market in Iran.”. Higher Education Curriculum Studies, 1(2):111–133, 2018.
  13. H. Naser Khaki. “The role of computer in architectural design process; A comparative comparison of two generations of contemporary Iranian architects.”. PhD dissertation, University of Tehran, 2018.
  14. K. de Gaulmyn, C. nad Dupre. “Teaching sustainable design in architecture education: Critical review of Easy Approach for Sustainable and Environmental Design (EASED).”. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 8(2):238–260, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2019.03.001.
  15. W. Mitchell. “Computer-aided architectural design.”. Cambridge, Mass, The MIT Press, 2017.
  16. J. Torkzadeh, M. Shabani Far, J. Muammarhor, and A. Sinaii. “Pathology of educational system in technical and professional university centers.”. Iranian Higher Education Quarterly, 9(4): 57–77, 2016. URL http://ihej.ir/article-1-1189-fa.html.
  17. N. Gislason. “Architectural design and the learning environment: A framework for school design research.”. Learning Environments Research, 13(2):127–145, 2010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-010-9071-x.
  18. C. Argyris. “A life of learning.”. Journal of Organization Studies, 24(7):1178–1192, 2003.
  19. D. Newton. “Generative deep learning in architectural design.”. Technology— Architecture + Design, 3(2):176–189, 2019. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/24751448.2019.1640536.
  20. M. Asefi and A. Imani. “An analytical study of the effect of using digital software on the promotion of creativity in architectural design education.”. Hovit Shahr Quarterly, 11(4):79–92, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/20.1001.1.17359562.1396.11.4.7.5.
  21. C. de Gaulmyn and K. Dupre. “Teaching sustainable design in architecture education: Critical review of Easy Approach for Sustainable and Environmental Design (EASED).”. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 8(2):238–260, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2019.03.001.
  22. C. F. Albrecht and L. D. Iulo. “Healthful, Sustainable Design in Community-Engaged Architecture Education.”. Educating the Sustainability Leaders of the Future, pages 431–451, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-22856-8 24.
  23. S. Arslan Selcuk and G. Mutlu Avinc. “Natural language approach for bio-informed architectural education: a biomimetic shell design.”. International Journal of Technology and Design Education,32(4):2297–2317, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-021-09689-z.
  24. L. M. Khodeir and A. A. Nessim. “Changing skills for architecture students employability: Analysis of job market versus architecture education in Egypt.”. Ain Shams Engineering Journal, 11(3): 811–821, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2019.11.006.
  25. T. Abel. “Design education: out of the studio and into the research lab.”. Journal of Art and Design, 1(1):10–16, 2013. URL https://www.ajindex.com/dosyalar/makale/acarindex-1423910424.pdf.
  26. E. M. A. Benzenberg. “Exploring Design Process Evolution in Architecture and Interior Design Firms.”. the Ohio State University,2011. URL http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc num=osu1313341550.
  27. R. S. Priya, P. Shabitha, and S. Radhakrishnan. “Collaborative and participatory design approach in architectural design studios.”.Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 2(1):100033, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2020.100033.
  28. F. Muzaffar and A. Ekhlasi. “A new approach to teaching architectural design, providing an educational model based on CAAD-PBL.”. International Journal of Industrial Engineering and Production Management, 2017.