Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Digital design implications: a comparative study of architecture education curriculum and practices in leading architecture firms

  • Published:
International Journal of Technology and Design Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Leading architectural firms in professional practice are expanding their range of design possibilities using digital design strategies. A digital design strategy enables architects to make informed decisions and better handle the interdisciplinary nature of the discipline, while dealing with various complexities, uncertainties and an infinite number of the potential solutions. One of the main responsibilities of architectural education is to educate students on the breadth of professional opportunities and career paths. Therefore, it is highly important to examine the sufficiency of available digital design courses in the architectural education curriculum. To achieve this, the study examines the curriculum of two architectural programs in the Middle East and compares the findings with award-winning architectural firms in international professional practice from a digital design perspective. In the first step, various cutting-edge technology-driven firms were investigated, then three award-winning firms were subsequently selected and studied using a deliberate review. Secondly, the curriculum of each architecture school was reviewed and the responsible instructors were interviewed through a qualitative method of in-depth interviews; the perceptions and suggestions of eight academic staff members from both schools (four each) were recorded to facilitate an assessment of the status of the integrated digital design methodologies in the architecture education of the intended schools. The findings indicate that the current structures of architecture education curricula cannot match the innovative challenges and social demands of architecture in the digital age. The importance of curriculum review, as well as different incorporation alternatives of the digital design applications, are also suggested.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Reproduced from Gehry (2016)

Fig. 2

Reproduced from Hadid (2016)

Fig. 3

Reproduced from Ingels (2016)

Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abdullah, H. K., & Kamara, J. M. (2013). Parametric design procedures: A new approach to generative-form in the conceptual design phase. In Anumba, C. J. & Memari, A. M., (Eds.), Proceedings of the architectural engineering conference “building solutions for architectural engineering” (AEI 2013). Pennsylvania: American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) (pp. 333–342).

  • Agkathidis, A. (2015). Generative design: Form-finding techniques in architecture. London: Laurence King Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aish, R., & Hanna, S. (2017). Comparative evaluation of parametric design systems for teaching design computation. Design Studies, 52, 144–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aish, R., & Woodbury, R. (2005). Multi-level interaction in parametric design. In Butz, A., Fisher, B., Kruger, A. & Olivier, P., (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th international conference on smart graphics, volume number 3638 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science (pp. 151–162). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

  • AJ100. (2016). AJ100 and awards winners revealed. Architects’ Journal. Retrieved from https://aj100awards.architectsjournal.co.uk. Accessed 25 November 2016.

  • Andreassen, J., (2016). BIG BIM for the conceptual architect. GRAPHISOFT. Retrieved from http://www.graphisoft.com/users/bim-case-studies/BIG_BIM_for_the_concept_arch.html. Accessed 27 November 2016.

  • Barbero, B. R., Pedrosa, C. M., & Samperio, R. Z. (2016). Learning CAD at university through summaries of the rules of design intent. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 27(3), 481–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Botchway, E. A., Abanyie, S. A., & Afram, S. O. (2015). The impact of computer aided architectural design tools on architectural design education. The Case of KNUST. Architectural Engineering Technology, 4(2), 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, N., De Oliveira, J. I. F., Ochsendorf, J., & Mueller, C. (2016). Early-stage integration of architectural and structural performance in a parametric multi-objective design tool. In International conference on structures and architecture. July 27–29, 2016, Guimarães, Portugal.

  • Buckley, J., Seery, N., & Canty, D. (2017). Heuristics and CAD modelling: An examination of student behaviour during problem solving episodes within CAD modelling activities. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28(4), 939–956.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunchanan, P. (2012). What’s wrong with architectural education? Almost everything. The architectural review. Retrieved from https://www.architectural-review.com/today/1989-july-whats-wrong-with-architectural-education-almost-everything/8637977.article. Accessed 27 November 2016.

  • Burry, M., Grifoll, J. C., & Serrano, J. G. (2008). Sagrada Família s. XXI Gaudí Ara/Ahora/Now. Barcelona: Edicions UPC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ceccato, C. (2009). Zaha Hadid Architects develops visionary buildings with software from Dassault Systèmes Partner Gehry Technologies. Dassault Systèmes. Retrieved from http://www.3ds.com/press-releases/single/zaha-hadid-architects-develops-visionary-buildings-with-software-from-dassault-systemes-partner-geh/. Accessed 15 December 2016.

  • Chang, L. (2015). The software behind Frank Gehry’s geometrically complex architecture. Priceonomics. Retrieved from https://priceonomics.com/the-software-behind-frank-gehrys-geometrically/. Accessed 5 December 2016.

  • Chu, P. Y., Hung, H. Y., Wu, C. F., & Te Liu, Y. (2017). Effects of various sketching tools on visual thinking in idea development. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 27(2), 291–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Çolakoğlu, B., & Yazar, T. (2007). An innovative design education approach: Computational design teaching for architecture. METU JFA, 24(2), 159–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danhaive, R. A., & Mueller, C. (2015). Combining Parametric modelling and interactive optimisation for high-performance and creative structural design. In IASS—annual international symposium on future vision. Aug 17–20, 2015, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

  • Downey, G. L. (1992). Human agency in CAD/CAM technology. Anthropology Today, 8(5), 2–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Downey, G. L. (1993). Steering technology development through computer-aided design. In A. Rip, T. Misa, & J. Schot (Eds.), Managing technology in society: The approach of constructive technology assessment (pp. 83–110). London: Wellington House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Downey, G. L. (1998). The machine in me: An anthropologist sits among computer engineers. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Futures, R. B. (2011). Will architects exist in 2025? RIBA report. London: Royal Institute of British Architects.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gehry, F. (2016). Gehry partners, LLP. Retrieved from http://www.foga.com/. Accessed 18 December 2016.

  • Gehry Technologies. (2015). Digital Project. Retrieved from http://www.digitalproject3d.com/. Accessed 18 December 2016.

  • Gerber, D. J., & Lin, S. H. E. (2014). Designing in complexity: Simulation, integration, and multidisciplinary design optimization for architecture. Simulation, 90(8), 936–959.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, E. (2007). How Are architects using digital design tools. Cadalyst. Retrieved from http://www.cadalyst.com/aec/how-are-architects-using-digital-design-tools-aec-focus-column-3577. Accessed 10 January 2017.

  • Hadid, Z. (2016). Zaha Hadid architects. Retrieved from http://www.zaha-hadid.com/. Accessed 15 December 2016.

  • Hazzan, O., & Karni, E. (2006). Similarities and differences in the academic education of software engineering and architectural design professionals. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 16(3), 285–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holzer, D., Hough, R., & Burry, M. (2007). Parametric design and structural optimisation for early design exploration. International Journal of Architectural Computing, 5(4), 625–643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ibrahim, M., & Okeil, A. (2011). Building information modelling in architectural education: The case of the middle east. In 6th International conference on construction in 21st century “construction challenges in the new decade” (CITC-VI 2011). July 5–7, 2011, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

  • Ingels, B. (2016). Bjarke Ingels Group. Retrieved from http://www.big.dk/. Accessed 27 November 2016.

  • Ismail, A. F. H. (2001). Evolved representation and computational creativity. Acta Polytechnica, 41(3), 36–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jabi, W. (2013). Parametric design for architecture. London: Laurence King.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kara, L. (2015). A critical look at the digital technologies in architectural education: When, where, and how? Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 176, 526–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kondyli, V., Bhatt, M., & Hartmann, T. (2018). Precedent based design foundations for parametric design: The case of navigation and wayfinding. Advances in Computational Design, 3(4), 339–366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kowaltowski, D. C., Bianchi, G., & De Paiva, V. T. (2010). Methods that may stimulate creativity and their use in architectural design education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 20(4), 453–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leahy, K., Daly, S. R., Murray, J. K., McKilligan, S., & Seifert, C. M. (2018). Transforming early concepts with design heuristics. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 29(4), 759–779.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lockwood, J., & Mooney, A. (2017). Computational thinking in education: Where does it fit. A systematic literary review. Maynooth: National University of Ireland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maher, A., & Burry, M. (2003). The parametric bridge: Connecting digital design techniques in architecture and engineering. In Proceedings of the annual conference of the association for computer aided design in architecture, Oct. 23–26, 2003, Ball State University, Indianapolis, USA (pp. 39–47).

  • Makert, R., & Alves, G. (2016). Between designer and design: Parametric design and prototyping considerations on Gaudí’s Sagrada Familia. Periodica Polytechnica Architecture, 47(2), 89–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malkawi, A. (1994). Building energy design and optimization: Intelligent computer-aided thermal design. Ph. D. dissertation. Georgia Institute of Technology, USA.

  • Meagher, M. (2015). Designing for change: The poetic potential of responsive architecture. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 4(2), 159–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oxman, R. (2008a). Performance-based design: Current practices and research issues. International Journal of Architectural Computing, 6(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oxman, R. (2008b). Digital architecture as a challenge for design pedagogy: Theory, knowledge, models and medium. Design Studies, 29(2), 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oxman, R. (2009). Performative design: A performance-based model of digital architectural design. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 36(6), 1026–1037.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrina, S. (2003). Two cultures of technical courses and discourses: The case of computer aided design. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 13(1), 47–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piedmont-Palladino, S. (Ed.). (2007). Tools of the imagination: Drawing tools and technologies from the eighteenth century to the present (1st ed.). New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Platt, K. H. (2014). Interview: Patrik Schumacher. Arcspace. Retrieved from http://www.arcspace.com/articles/interview-patrik-schumacher/. Accessed 18 December 2016.

  • Rama Murthy, S., & Mani, M. (2012). Design for sustainability: The role of CAD. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 16(6), 4247–4256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schumacher, P. (2008). Parametricism as style—Parametricist manifesto. In 11th architecture biennale, Venice.

  • Şenyapili, B., & Basa, Ý. (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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turrin, M., Von Buelow, P., & Stouffs, R. (2011). Design explorations of performance driven geometry in architectural design using parametric modelling and genetic algorithms. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 25(4), 656–675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyrnauer, M. (2010). Architecture in the age of Ghery. Vanity Fair. Retrieved from http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2010/08/architecture-survey-201008. Accessed 25 January 2016.

  • Van Deursen, A., Aniche, M., Aué, J., Slag, R., De Jong, M., Nederlof, A., & Bouwers, E. (2017). A collaborative approach to teaching software architecture. In Proceedings of the technical symposium on computer science education (SIGCSE 2017), Mar. 8–11, 2017 (pp. 591–596). Washington: ACM.

  • Veale, T. (2013). A service-oriented architecture for computational creativity. Journal of Computing Science and Engineering, 7(3), 159–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodbury, R. (2010). Elements of parametric design. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xie, C., Schimpf, C., Chao, J., Nourian, S., & Massicotte, J. (2018). Learning and teaching engineering design through modelling and simulation on a CAD platform. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 26(4), 824–840.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, C. (2012). Fostering creative engineers: A key to face the complexity of engineering practice. European Journal of Engineering Education, 37(4), 343–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the participants from the architecture departments of Eastern Mediterranean University, Famagusta and Salahaddin University-Erbil, Erbil, who were academic staff in the 2016–2017 academic year, for their valuable time and responses to the interview questions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Eastern Mediterranean University, Via Mersin 10, 99628, Famagusta, North Cyprus, Turkey

    Hardi K. Abdullah & Badiossadat Hassanpour

  2. Department of Architecture, College of Engineering, Salahaddin University-Erbil, Erbil, Kurdistan, 44001, Iraq

    Hardi K. Abdullah

Authors
  1. Hardi K. Abdullah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Badiossadat Hassanpour
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hardi K. Abdullah.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Abdullah, H.K., Hassanpour, B. Digital design implications: a comparative study of architecture education curriculum and practices in leading architecture firms. Int J Technol Des Educ 31, 401–420 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-019-09560-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-019-09560-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation