Using Virtual Reality to Improve Visual Recognition Skills of First
Year Architecture Students: A Comparative Study
Salih Ceylan
Department of Architecture, Bahçeşehir University, Istanbul, Turkey
Keywords: Virtual Reality, Design Education, Visual Media in Architecture.
Abstract: The use of virtual reality (VR) technologies is getting widespread throughout the world in the last years.
Architecture as a prominent discipline in using digital technologies has a lot to promise about the use of VR
in different areas of the profession. It can be used as a design or a representation instrument, as well as a tool
in the construction processes. Accordingly, as architectural education needs to keep itself up-to-date about
new technologies, the implementation of VR technologies into the architecture curriculum is supposed to be
a subject to be studied by researchers working in the educational domain of architecture. This paper presents
a comparative study on the use of VR technologies in the first year of architectural education to improve the
visual and spatial recognition skills of students. The findings of the study indicate that VR technologies can
be beneficial in various aspects like the perception of certain physical characteristics of a model, and students’
enthusiasm to participate in the design studio courses.
The strong relationship between technology and
society is an undeniable truth nowadays. Technology
has become a major force that transforms and adds
new dimensions to people's lives (Dugger Jr., 1993).
century has been the era of digitalization where
the knowledge of humanity was transferred to digital
devices and the 21
century is being the era of digital
communication as every entity is connected to others
through a global web of networks. Digital technology
has entered most things in everyday life and it
increasingly determines the activity of people
(Rückriem, 2009). Computers, phones, other smart
devices, even household tools that are connected to
the internet transform society into a massive organism
that depends on technology for its improvement.
Children of the last decade who are born into such a
society are significantly talented in using those
technological devices, and in that way, they
contribute to the broader and further development of
digital technologies throughout the whole world.
However, the reflections of technological
improvements in society are not emphasized enough
in the fields of education and teaching. Technology
has had very little effect on our conceptions of
teaching and learning (Schank, 2007). The reasons for
this situation may be varying from the conservative
approach of the educators to the phlegmatic structure
of education policies, but its results are mostly seen
in struggling curricula that try to keep up with the
emerging needs of the society but are bound to
conventional approaches in education. Bates and
Poole (2003) argue that it does not make sense to use
technology unless it makes a difference in learning
and teaching.
In higher education, especially in disciplines
where the connection between the practice and
academy is strong, the mechanism for the
digitalization of educational content works slightly
faster. Emerging developments in technology briskly
become a part of vocational education through some
exercises and implementations. In architectural
education, emerging technologies like automation in
construction, building information modelling (BIM)
and artificial intelligence have already started to
become a part of the curriculum. Various researchers
and educators have begun to address the need to
integrate digital design in architectural design
education (Oxman, 2008). Among the different ways
to integrate digital technologies into architectural
education are computer augmented design studio,
Ceylan, S.
Using Virtual Reality to Improve Visual Recognition Skills of First Year Architecture Students: A Comparative Study.
DOI: 10.5220/0009346800540063
In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2020) - Volume 2, pages 54-63
ISBN: 978-989-758-417-6
2020 by SCITEPRESS Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
CAD-plus studio, virtual and web design studio,
cyberspace design studio, intelligent building studio,
and toys and tools studio (Do & Gross, 1999). Virtual
reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) are other
emerging technologies that are started to be employed
in architectural design and representation processes
and they already started to find a place in education
as well. However, they mostly serve as
representational tools rather than design instruments,
and they are utilized in the advanced phases of the
education instead of first years. This paper presents a
case study that questions the use of virtual reality
technologies in the first year of architectural
education as a supportive tool to improve students’
visual and spatial recognition skills.
1.1 Aim of the Study
This study aims to examine the benefits of the use of
VR technologies in the first year of architectural
education by comparing them with different
representational techniques in architecture such as
physical and digital models. It is assumed that VR
technologies’ use in education is beneficial from
various aspects such as visual recognition and student
motivation. The first year of architectural education
is the period when the spatial and visual recognition
skills of students start to develop. Any tool that can
be useful to support this development needs to be
integrated into the education process to get better
outcomes. VR as an emerging technology can easily
be adapted to the first year of architectural education
by forming several exercises for students.
Another aim of the study is to examine several
representational methods to find out the advantages
and disadvantages they provide for the students with
their spatial and visual recognition processes.
Physical scaled models, digital models and virtual
models have their unique characters and features,
enabling certain perception skills to be activated in
the human brain. The case study aims to reveal those
features to formulate a structure for future exercises
in the first years of architectural education.
1.2 Research Questions
Through this research, it can be determined if and
how the use of VR technologies contribute to primary
levels of architectural education. To find out in what
extents it contributes and how it performs compared
to other methods of representation, the following
research questions are asked:
RQ1: How are different representational methods in
architecture compared with each other in terms of
spatial and visual recognition of first-year students?
RQ2: To what extent and how does the use of VR
technologies contribute to the spatial recognition of
first-year architecture students?
RQ3: Is the use of computer-aided tools necessary
and beneficial for first architecture students?
1.3 Methodology
The methodology used in this study is based on an
exercise and a survey of first-year architecture
students. Following a literature review on
architectural education, VR technologies and their
use in architectural education; the exercise and survey
in the scope of the paper reveal the interrelationship
between different representational techniques from
certain aspects. The outcomes of the survey are
analysed and the results are interpreted according to
the needs of architecture education for first-year
students. The findings of the case study are used to
formulate statements in the concluding remarks and
how the outcomes of the paper can be used for further
Architecture is a practice that has strong connections
with other disciplines. Its vocational nature makes it
also strongly related to developments in society and
technology. Especially in the 21
century, technology
is influencing architecture more than ever. In this era,
the use of computers and other technologies in design
is inevitable (Özgen et al., 2019). Thanks to
technology, design became a prescriptive activity, in
which models and drawings are used to foresee
reality, and in which everything must be resolved
before the construction process (Celani, 2012). The
reflections of technology can be seen in various
phases of the architecture practice such as design,
representation, construction, and education.
Education is a powerful agent of social change for
it raises awareness of new developments and provides
training for professionals and researchers who will
develop the next generation of systems and devices
(Taleghani et al., 2011). Architectural education as
the foundation of the profession is responsible for
equipping young architects with proper tools to tackle
emerging problems of society. Therefore, it needs to
Using Virtual Reality to Improve Visual Recognition Skills of First Year Architecture Students: A Comparative Study
keep itself up-to-date and ready for upcoming
The architectural curriculum is composed of
fundamental courses that develop design knowledge;
courses that develop the scientific formation of
architecture; courses for strengthening architectural
representation; and design courses, a combination of
the others and constitute the most crucial part of
design education (Demirbaş & Demirkan, 2003).In
the first year of the curriculum, the foundation for all
the domains of knowledge is laid. In this phase, visual
perception and visual language are introduced as the
roots of design education (Wong, 1993). In that
period, digital technologies in architecture can be
potentially seen in the design and representation
domains of the curriculum. However, in the current
understanding of architectural education, the use of
digital technologies is either completely restricted or
very limited in the first year. The following chapters
are about the current and potential use of digital
technologies in two different domains of architectural
2.1 Design Domain
The design domain of first-year architectural
education mostly consists of basic design or similar
introductory courses. The roots of basic design course
reach out to Bauhaus school where elements of
design, fine arts, technology, and craftsmanship were
brought together. Basic design education aims to raise
awareness and provide visual sensitivity in
transferring an image onto the design field (Akbulut,
2010). Design education itself has not kept up with
the changes in technology and many cases do not
enhance students’ learning and knowledge-building
skills beyond predetermined, standardized
boundaries (Demirkan, 2016). Currently, in basic
design courses, the use of digital technologies is
mostly limited to the layout and poster presentation
tools. The use of computer-aided design tools in basic
design courses is only seen in a small portion of the
architectural institutions.
Emerging digital technologies make it possible
that digital tools can be used to support the design
process in first-year architectural education by
providing additional media for design activities.
Important issues of design like visual perception,
spatial recognition and problem-solving can be
strengthened with the use of digital technologies.
Current hardware and software provide solutions to
easily implement digital tools into the first phases of
architectural education.
2.2 Representation Domain
The representation domain of architectural education
goes hand in hand with the design domain all through
the course of the curriculum. Spatial information is
represented in many ways, ranging from traditional
methods, such as printed plans and physical models,
to modern methods, such as digitally printed plans
and tri-dimensional models, which allow a greater
level of detail and the ability to navigate and actualize
potential changes instantaneously (Fonseca et al.,
2014). In the first year of education, it is more about
forming a visual language to communicate with the
viewer graphically. For first-year students, exercises
on representation like parallel projection and different
types of perspectives are quite challenging as they
have no experience with the problem. Additionally,
transforming a three-dimensional entity into a two-
dimensional drawing on the paper is a novel form of
abstraction for novice designers. New media and its
forms of representation are challenging traditional
skills of communication and representation (Reffat,
In their first year of training, architecture students
search for concrete elements rather than abstract
things around themselves. Digital technologies can
aid students with the understanding of space and mass
by providing a clear dynamic and interactive medium
for recognition of the given subjects. While the forms
of representing architectural designs (i.e. plans and
sections) are remaining the same, the possible means
towards these ends are increasing (Ivarsson, 2010).
Computer-aided design and drafting technologies are
at a very advanced level so that they can be used for
alternative methods for training architecture students
about ways of understanding the space and objects
around them. 3D Modellers, 3D Scanners, immersive
Virtual Environment, and Rapid Prototyping are used
to assist both students and teachers to explore and
study architectural creativity in a new way that
enables a deeper involvement into design-issues
(Mark et al., 2001). Consequently, emerging digital
technologies in design hold great potential for the
contribution to the representation domain of
architectural education for first-year students.
Technological developments are equipping the world
with new and useful instruments. One of the most
recent instruments digital technologies provide for
CSEDU 2020 - 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Education
the use of humankind is the understanding of
alternative realities. Different types of alternative
realities such as Virtual Reality, Augmented Reality
or Mixed Reality are changing the way people
understand their environment. Portman et al. (2015)
define virtual reality as the component of
communication, which takes place in a computer-
generated synthetic space and embeds humans as an
integral part of the system. It is being used in
architecture among many other fields like
engineering, medicine, and gaming. The following
chapters summarize the history of VR technologies,
followed by their use in architecture and architectural
3.1 History of VR Technologies
Even though virtual reality is considered a recent
technology, its roots can be followed back to the first
half of the 20
century. Since the book Pygmalion’s
Spectacles by Stanley Weinbaum (1935), attempts to
bring virtual reality together with daily life and
different fields of studies continued. Virtual reality
technologies were tried to be implemented into the
daily life through devices like CAVEs (Cave
Automatic Virtual Environment) and HMDs (Head-
mounted Display) like the “Sword of Damocles”,
“Sensorama”, “Sega VR”, etc. (Maghool et al., 2018).
Nowadays, the most widespread use of virtual reality
is seen in the gaming and entertainment industries.
Nevertheless, the technology of VR is developing in
many domains, and architecture is one of those.
3.2 VR in Architecture
Thanks to the rapid growth of software and hardware
in the field, the use of VR in architecture is getting
more common every day. Its immersive technology
aids the user to experience the designed product in an
interactive virtual environment on 1:1 scale.
Information technology is developing powerful
capabilities for creating virtual contexts to be used in
the field of architecture (Dede, 2000). Accordingly,
numerous academic studies in the last decades
address virtual reality technologies and their
relationship with architecture (Witmer & Singer,
1998; Jackson & Fagan, 2000; Schnabel & Kwan,
2003; Seichter, 2007; Angulo, 2013; Häkkila et al.,
2018). These and other similar studies indicate the
strong influence of VR technologies on architecture.
The use of VR in architecture may vary between
different phases like drafting, representation or even
construction. Although it is most useful with
representational purposes nowadays, the future holds
great potential in terms of using VR technology in the
beginning phases of design. Setting the users free
from conventional architectural communication
techniques like plans, sections or physical scaled
models, VR technology’s area of use is getting wider
in architecture and connected professions, e.g. real
estate where the customer can experience a property
in a distant location in the VR environment before
making a decision. VR in architecture has many
benefits that are described as:
- The visualization of building model;
- Representation of multi-dimension design space
- Providing real-time interactions
- Providing multi-user real-time collaboration for
problem solutions (Ding et al.,2003).
These kinds of benefits potentially provide a great
contribution to architecture so that VR needs to be
successfully integrated into the professional, as well
as to the educational environment of the discipline.
Educational benefits of the use of VR can touch upon
many points in different phases of the curriculum.
3.3 VR in Architectural Education
The process of architectural education has always
been directly influenced by the technological
advancements in computer-aided drafting and design
tools, enabling young architects to easily control,
manage, study, visualize and evaluate their designs
(Hosny & Kader, 2004). Utilization of technological
tools like artificial intelligence, rapid prototyping,
additive manufacturing, automation in construction
and virtual reality are some of the most predominant
teaching approaches in the contemporary world of
Virtual reality provides a suitable medium for
architectural education with its immersive
environment. Kalisperis et al. (2002) argue that using
VR in design studios would boost architectural design
education for students because of its contribution to
spatial recognition and the 3-dimensional way of
thinking. This contribution is especially valuable for
students in their first year of architectural education
to develop their design and understanding skills. The
strong relationship between architectural education
and the use of VR technologies are indicated by
recent studies. Abu Alatta and Freewan (2017)
studied the effect of employing immersive virtual
environment on enhancing spatial perception within
design process. Lin and Hsu (2017) developed
strategies for integrating procedural modelling
process and immersive VR environment for
Using Virtual Reality to Improve Visual Recognition Skills of First Year Architecture Students: A Comparative Study
architectural design education. Other researchers also
worked on the connection between VR technologies
and architectural education (Camba et al., 2017; Tsou
et al., 2017; Valls et al., 2016). De Vasconselos et al.
(2018) state that the implications and applications of
the possibilities of VR use for architecture education
are obvious but still require quite an investigation.
Accordingly, educators and researchers in the field of
architecture must study the potentials of using VR
technologies in architectural education, especially in
its first year.
The use of VR technologies in architectural education
is getting widespread, but it is usually seen in
advanced phases of the curriculum. The use of digital
tools including VR technologies is generally
restricted in the first years. The reasons for that are
mostly based on the intention to develop students
hand-drawing skills and improve their imagination
without limits caused by any setback. It is a fact that
the relationship between the brain and the hand,
consequently the relationship between the
imaginative and physical world is very strong and
needs to be set free. However, it is also true that any
contribution from external resources that support the
development of students’ design skills is valuable.
According to Zelanski and Fisher (1996), recognition
of visual sophistication is the elementary aim of basic
design education. Therefore, a case study was
conducted to find out whether virtual reality as an
emerging technology and a potential supportive tool
for design education can contribute to the
improvement of visual and spatial recognition skills
of first-year architecture students.
4.1 The Design of the Case Study
The study aims to find out what kind of contribution
virtual reality technologies can make to the first year
of architectural education. For that purpose, a
comparative case study is prepared. 36 first-year
architecture students are split randomly into three
groups and they were expected to participate in an
exercise through different representational
A- Physical scaled model
B- Digital model
C- Virtual model
All three models have similar characters: Surfaces
and spaces consisting of square-based units with
different colours. The reason to select square as the
base unit derives from the fact that first-year students
are already familiar with the shape and they have
conducted some exercises with similar approaches at
the beginning of the semester.
Figure 1: Sample picture of the physical model that the
students worked with (source: author).
The first group of the students was given a 1/50 scaled
model to inspect and evaluate (see fig. 1), as the
second group was shown a digital model prepared in
a 3d modelling software (see fig. 2), and the third
group was invited to inspect another model in virtual
reality environment (see fig. 3). Since the first-year
students were not familiar with digital tools used in
design and representation processes, the second and
third groups of students were given short instructions
about the digital and virtual software used to prepare
the models before using them.
Figure 2: Rendering of the digital model that the students
worked with (source: author).
The survey was categorized into 4 parts:
1- The dimensions: Length, width, height, total used
2- Physical appearance: Solid or transparent
surfaces, light and dark areas, and colours of the
3- Open-ended questions: Describing the model
CSEDU 2020 - 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Education
4- Opinion question: The use of digital and virtual
technologies in first-year architectural education.
Figure 3: Screenshot from the virtual model that the
students worked with (source: author).
4 categories had a total of 9 questions and all students
answered them to provide input data for the study.
The following data came up as the answers of the
students who attended the survey.
4.2 Ethical Concerns
All students participating in the research were
informed about its contents before the process started.
They were asked to sign an information sheet that
explains the purposes of the study and explained
participants’ involvement, risks they take and
emergency procedures. Participants were also
informed that the process was confidential and their
names were not going to be revealed in the research
process. Additionally, they were told that they had the
right to quit participating in the research at any time.
4.3 Data Analysis
The assessment for the first and second categories of
the survey is based on the percentile proximity of the
students’ answers to the correct values for the given
questions. In the third category, a qualitative analysis
has been made according to the statements of the
students. Finally, the fourth category remarks
students’ preferences on the usefulness of various
representation techniques in the first year of
architectural education.
The first part of the survey was about the students’
perception of dimensions in the given models. In this
part, their prediction about the length, width, and
height of the models, as well as their total area was
requested. In the physical scaled model, students
percentile proximity rate for length was 84%, width
77% and height 78%. The proximity for the total area
of the model the result was 81%. For the digital
model, the results were; length 77%, width 69% and
height 74%. The result of the total area was 74%. For
the virtual model, the results were 71%, 66%, 70%
for dimensions and 75% for the total area (see fig. 4).
Figure 4: The results for the four questions in the first part
of the survey (source: author).
The second part of the survey was about the visual
and spatial recognition of the students. The first
question in this part was about the solid/void balance
of the given models. The result for the physical model
in this question was 68%, for the digital model it was
59% and for virtual model 78%. The second question
in this part was about the balance between the light
and dark volumes in the models where the result for
the physical model was 71%. The digital model result
for the question was 61% and the virtual model result
was 84%. The third question in this part was about the
colours used in the models and the results for
physical, digital and virtual models were as follows
in order of appearance: 86%, 73% and 81% (see fig.
Figure 5: The results for the three questions in the second
part of the survey (source: author).
The third part of the survey consisted of open-ended
questions and data was analysed according to the
detail level and type of written communication in the
answers of the students. The first question in this part
was to describe the given model and the students who
Using Virtual Reality to Improve Visual Recognition Skills of First Year Architecture Students: A Comparative Study
described the physical model used an average of 8.6
words for the answer, mostly using keywords instead
of complete sentences. The students who described
the digital model used 6.4 words on average and they
also used keywords to describe the model they have
seen. The results of the virtual model were 16.6 words
per student on average and most students, 8 out of 12,
preferred to use complete sentences instead of
The fourth part of the survey was an opinion
question regarding the priorities of the use of different
representational techniques in the first year of
architectural education. 17 students stated that the
most important technique was physical model, as 11
out of 17 saw virtual models as a secondary technique
to be useful. 10 students define virtual models as prior
technique and 9 out of those 10 place physical models
into the second position. 8 students see digital models
as the primary method to be used in the first year of
architectural education where 5 of them put virtual
models after the digital models in terms of usefulness
(see fig. 6).
Figure 6: The results for the opinion questions in the fourth
part of the survey (source: author).
4.4 Outcomes of the Study
Data gathered from the survey provides important
information about students’ perception of space and
how virtual and digital models contribute to their
visual recognition.
The first part of the survey revealed that the
dimensions in space are best perceived through a
physical scaled model. Digital and virtual models
appear to be less useful in terms of the perception of
dimensions of a space. The most evident reason for it
is that first-year students started to work with physical
models since the first day of their education as digital
and virtual models are something recent for them.
Results of the virtual model were the lowest in the
first part, as students observed the model only from
the human eye level and from within the space instead
of a higher level and distant view to perceive it as a
whole mass.
In the second part of the survey, results about the
virtual model came into prominence with the best
scores about the recognition of solid/void surfaces
and light/dark spaces. Being in the human eye level
and perceiving the space from within served the
purpose of sensing the space this time. The immersive
feeling of being in the space was probably another
reason for these high scores. In the physical model,
students received the second-best average, as in the
digital model the results were lowest in the second
part of the survey. In terms of colour recognition, the
results for all three representational techniques were
quite high so that it was not possible to form a
statement as a comparison between them. In response
to research question 2, it is possible to claim that VR
technologies contribute to the spatial visual
recognition of students in terms of the physical
appearance of the space.
Figure 7: A participating student working in the virtual
reality environment (source: author).
The most significant part of the survey was the third
part, the open-ended questions, where the students
were asked to write about their impressions about
what they see in the models. In physical and digital
models, students used fewer words for the description
and keywords rather than complete sentences,
exemplified by statements such as open/closed space,
no columns, colourful, and two-floor high. However,
the students who have experienced the virtual reality
environment used more words on average and
described their experience with more details about the
space and their perception about it. One student
CSEDU 2020 - 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Education
quoted: “When you enter the space, you become
curious about what you will see around the corner.
Another student mentioned her excitement about
being a part of the space in full scale, as one other said
You can easily understand the difference between
being in a closed or open space, having a plane or the
sky over your head.” This is a sign that shows the use
of new technologies can be used to increase the
interest level and enthusiasm of the students about a
given subject. The excitement of experiencing
something novel has potentially a positive effect on
the students’ attitude against the subject.
In the fourth part of the survey, the opinion
question, students remarked their preference about
the priority of the given representational techniques.
Most of them stuck to their habits and chose physical
models as the primary representation technique to be
used in education. However, virtual reality
technologies also had significant attention from many
students to reveal it as a beneficial medium for their
training. Digital technologies did receive the least
attention even though it is going to be the medium
they will consult most frequently in the following
years of their education.
Summarizing the outcomes of the case study, one
can assert that every different representational
method in architecture contributes to the training of
first-year students in terms of spatial and visual
recognition from different aspects (RQ1). VR
technologies contribute to spatial recognition,
especially in terms of physical appearance (RQ2).
Moreover, it can be stated that the use of computer-
aided tools is beneficial for first architecture students,
however, the primary instrument for the
representation of ideas is still the physical model for
first-year students because of its ease of use and
economic and practical feasibility (RQ3).
The primary purpose of this study was to determine
whether the use of virtual reality technologies in
visualizing models contribute to the visual
recognition of first-year architecture students. The
results are in line with the assumptions in the
beginning that they do contribute in various aspects,
but they also showed some weaknesses of VR
models, especially in terms of recognizing the model
as a whole object. The level of interaction between
the students and the model in the 1:1 scale provided
several advantages in spatial and visual recognition,
reflected on the perception of solid and void surfaces,
as well as light and dark spaces of the model.
Another positive aspect of using VR technologies
in the first year of architectural education is based on
the students’ motivation. Students embrace new
technologies like VR because they find it interesting,
fun, pleasing and engaging in comparison to
conventional methods. Enthusiasm and openness to
innovations are important factors in learning, and its
reflections are possible to be seen in the academic
success of the students. The relationship between the
academic successes of first-year students and the use
of virtual reality in architectural education is another
potential subject for further studies.
Digital technologies have been promoted as the
almost magical agent of change for nearly all
educational settings, including university schools for
professionals such as architects (Wang, 2009).
Accordingly, prospects provided by virtual reality
technologies are quite a lot. As an improving
technology, it can aid architects and architectural
students in many different ways in terms of design,
representation, and construction. However, an
important fact about the use of VR technologies in the
training of novice architects nowadays is that they
should be utilized as an alternative tool and one of the
different options rather than the only instrument. It is
evident that VR models have setbacks and physical
scaled models are still one of the most beneficial tools
in terms of representing ideas.
Design studios, especially in the first year of
architectural education require collaboration between
the students, as well as the interaction of the students
with their instructors. Regarding this, the most
prominent setback of the VR technologies today
appears to be the economic challenge. Although it is
obvious that VR tools, just like other digital
technologies are developing rapidly and are going to
be economically much more accessible in the future,
the current situation appears to be a challenge for
them to spread out throughout the world. Physical
scaled models are, and probably shortly will still be,
the main representational tool in architectural
Speaking of the use of VR technologies getting
widespread, it is also important to consider the
training of the trainers. Academic institutions are the
places where any innovation in technology finds its
field of utilization for further development. Members
of the academic institutions in architecture are
supposed to show interest in the field of VR
technologies to improve its use in terms of
technologic advancement and knowledge transfer to
young professionals who are going to be the future
users of these technologies.
Using Virtual Reality to Improve Visual Recognition Skills of First Year Architecture Students: A Comparative Study
Consequently, the use of VR technologies in first-
year architecture education proves itself beneficial.
They provide undeniable benefits in terms of visual
and spatial recognition, as well as student motivation
and enthusiasm. However, conventional methods like
sketching and physical scaled models should not be
abandoned as they are still the main medium of
representation in architecture. Further studies need to
be conducted to come up with strategies about the
implementation of VR technologies into different
phases of architectural education.
Abu Alatta, R., Freewan, A., 2017. Investigating the Effect
of Employing Immersive Virtual Environment on
Enhancing Spatial Perception Within Design Process.
Archnet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural
Research, 11(2): 219-238.
Akbulut, D., 2010. The effects of different student
backgrounds in basic design education. Procedia
Behavioral and Social Sciences, 2, 5331–5338.
Angulo, A., 2013. On the design of architectural spatial
experiences using immersive simulation. In
Envisioning Architecture: Design, Evaluation,
Communication - Proceedings of the 11th conference of
the European Architectural Envisioning Association,
Morello, E., Piga, B. (Eds), 151-158, Politecnico di
Milano: Italy.
Bates, A.W., Poole, G., 2003. Effective Teaching with
Technology in Higher Education: Foundations for
Success, Jossy Bass, San Francisco.
Camba, J.D., Soler, J.L., Contero, M., 2017. Immersive
Visualization Technologies to Facilitate
Multidisciplinary Design Education. Proceedings of
HCI International 2017, Learning and Collaboration
Technologies: Novel Learning Ecosystems, pp. 3-12.
Celani, G., 2012. Digital Fabrication Laboratories:
Pedagogy and Impacts on Architectural Education.
Nexus Network Journal, 14(3): 469–482.
Dede, C., 2000. Emerging influences of information
technology on school curriculum. Journal of
Curriculum Studies, 32(2): 281–303,
De Vasconcelos, G.N., Van Stralen, M.S., Menezes, A.,
Ramos, F.M.G., 2018. Perceive to learn to perceive: an
experience with virtual reality devices for architecture
design learning. 22nd Conference of the Iberoamerican
Society of Digital Graphics, Sao Carlos, Brasil.
Demirbaş, O. O., & Demirkan, H., 2003. Focus on
architectural design process through learning styles.
Design Studies, 24(5), 437-456.
Demirkan, H., 2016. An inquiry into the learning-style and
knowledge-building preferences of interior architecture
students. Design Studies, 44(2016): 28–51.
Do, E., Gross, M., 1999. Integrating Digital Media in
Design Studio: Six Paradigms, 144-148, ACSA
National Conference, Minneapolis, MN.
Dugger Jr., W.E., 1993. The relationship between
technology, science, engineering and mathematics.
American Vocational Association Conference,
Nashville, Tn.
Fonseca, D., Marti, N., Redondo, E., Navarro, I., Sanchez,
A., 2014. Relationship between student profile, tool
use, participation, and academic performance with the
use of Augmented Reality technology for visualized
architecture models. Computers in Human Behavior, 31
(2014): 434–445.
Häkkilä, J., Colley, A., Väyrynen, J., Yliharju, A., 2018.
Introducing virtual reality technologies to design
education, International Journal of Media, Technology
and Lifelong Learning, 14(1), 1–12.
Hosny, S.S., Kader, S.M.A., 2004. Integrating intelligent
mixed reality in architectural education: a theoretical
model. Al Azhar University Engineering Journal, 7(3):
Ivarsson, J., 2010. Developing the construction sight:
Architectural education and technological change.
Visual Communication 9(2): 171-191.
Jackson, R., Fagan, E., 2000. Collaboration and learning
within tele-immersive virtual environments, Ph.D.
Dissertation, College of Education, University of
Washington, Seattle, WA.
Kalisperis, L., Otto, G., Muramoto, K., Gundurum, J.,
Masters, R., & Orland, B. 2002. An Affordable
Immersive Environment in Beginning Design Studio
Education, Proceedings of the 2002 Annual Conference
of the Association for Computer Aided Design in
Architecture, 49–56.
Lin, C., Hsu, P., 2017. Integrating Procedural Modelling
Process and Immersive VR Environment for
Architectural Design Education, MATEC Web of
Conferences 104,
Maghool, S.A.H., Moeini, S.H., Arefazar, Y., 2018. An
educational application based on virtual reality
technology for learning architectural details:
Challenges and benefits. Archnet IJAR: International
Journal of Architectural Research, 12(3): 246–272.
Mark, E., Martens, B., Oxman, R.E., 2001. The Ideal
Computer Curriculum. Proceedings of eCAADe 19,
168-175, Helsinki, Finland.
Portman, M., Natapov, A., Fisher-Gewirtzman, D. 2015. To
go where no man has gone before: Virtual reality in
architecture, landscape architecture and environmental
planning. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems,
54, 376–384.
sys. 2015.05.001.
Rückriem, G., 2009. Digital technology and mediation: A
challenge to activity theory. In Learning and
CSEDU 2020 - 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Education
Expanding with Activity Theory, A. Sannino, H.
Daniels, K.D. Gutierrez (eds.), Cambridge University
Press: New York.
Oxman, R., 2008. Digital architecture as a challenge for
design pedagogy: theory, knowledge, models and
medium. Design Studies, 29(2): 99–120.
Özgen, D.S., Afacan, Y., Sürer, E., 2019. Usability of
virtual reality for basic design education: A
comparative study with paperbased design.
International Journal of Technology and Design
Education, 1–29 (published online first)
Reffat, R., 2007. Revitalizing architectural design studio
teaching using ICT: Reflections on practical
implementations. International Journal of Education
and Development using Information and
Communication Technology, 3(1): 39-53.
Schank, R., 2007. Teaching in the New Era. In Proceedings
of Society for Information Technology and Teacher
Education International Conference 2007, C.
Crawford, R. Carlsen, K. McFerrin, J. Price, & R.
Weber (Eds.), Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Schnabel, M.A., Kvan, T., 2003. Spatial understanding in
immersive virtual environments, International Journal
of Architectural Computation (1): 4, 435–448.
Seichter, H., 2007. Augmented reality and tangible
interfaces in collaborative urban design. Proceedings of
the 12th International Conference on Computer Aided
Architectural Design Futures, pp.3–16.
Taleghani, M., Ansari, H.R., Jennings, P., 2011.
Sustainability in architectural education: A comparison
of Iran and Australia. Renewable Energy, 36(2100):
2021–2025. https://doi:10.1016/j.renene.2010.11.024.
Tsou, C.H., et al., 2017. Immersive VR Environment for
Architectural Design Education. SA’17 SIGGRAPH
Asia 2017, Article 55, pp.1–2.
Valls, F., Redondo, E., Fonseca, D., Garcia-Almirall, P.,
Subiros, J., 2016. Videogame Technology in
Architecture Education. Human-Computer Interaction:
Novel User Experiences, Proceedings of 18th HCI
International Conference, pp. 436–447.
Weinbaum, S., 1935. Pygmalion’s Spectacles, Kessinger
Publishing: Exeter, UK.
Witmer, B.G., Singer, M.J., 1998. Measuring Presence in
Virtual Environments: A Presence Questionnaire.
Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments,
(7):3, 225-240.
Wang, T., 2009. Rethinking teaching with information and
communication technologies (ICTs) in architectural
education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(2009):
Wong, W., 1993. Principles of form and design. Van
Nostrand Reinhold: New York.
Zelanski, P., Fisher, M. P., 1996. Design Principles and
Problems. Van Nostrand Reinhold: New York
Using Virtual Reality to Improve Visual Recognition Skills of First Year Architecture Students: A Comparative Study