COMPUTER-AIDED DESIGN OR MANUAL DRAFTING: DETERMINING THE

PREFERRED DRAFTING METHOD OF 3RD YEAR ARCHITECTURE STUDENTS IN

AKLAN STATE UNIVERSITY – KALIBO CAMPUS

A Research Proposal Presented to:

AR. RAMON DUEÑA JR.

Instructor

In Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements in the Subject

ARM - Research Methods for Architecture

by:

KAREN ABEGAIL HONRADO

MARK LORENZ VICTORIANO

BSA 4-A

May 2023
Computer-Aided Design or Manual Drafting: Determining the Preferred Drafting Method

of 3rd Year Architecture Students in Aklan State University – Kalibo Campus

Chapter 1

Introduction to the Study

Chapter 1 is made up of five parts, namely; (1) Background and Conceptual Framework of

the Study, (2) Statement of the Problem and the Hypothesis, (3) Significance of the Study, (4)

Definitions of Terms, and (5) Delimitation of the Study.

Background of the Study and Conceptual Framework

The present study focuses on comparing Computer-Aided Design (CAD) and Manual

Drafting in the context of architectural design.

Computer-Aided Design (CAD) is a manufacturing technique that enables designers and

engineers to digitally develop 2D drawings or 3D models using computer software. CAD software

offers improved project accuracy, reliable documentation, and the ability to simulate stress testing

and material interactions (Chai, 2020). The history of CAD dates back to the 1940s and 1950s,

with significant advancements in software and the introduction of tools like Sketchpad in 1963,

which paved the way for modern CAD software (3dsourced, 2021). AutoCAD, one of the earliest

primary CAD tools, has become popular due to its ease of use and integration with traditional

drafting environments (Rouse, 2021). CAD software, specifically designed for architects known
as Computer-Aided Architectural Design (CAAD), allows for geometric construction,

modifications, and facilitates the coordination and control of the design process (Hannula, 2022).

CAD has also had a significant impact on architecture education, fostering creativity, enabling the

generation of multiple design alternatives, and facilitating interactive design processes (Yashar,

n.d.).

On the other hand, manual drafting, also known as hand drafting, involves drawing by hand

using pencils or ink on paper or film, utilizing drafting devices (Khillar, 2020). Manual drafting

has a long history, dating back to ancient times, and has been an important skill for professionals

in architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) fields (Dela Cruz, 2019). Manual sketching,

as a multifaceted design tool, serves as a thinking tool, medium of communication, interpretation

and analysis tool, and a means of expressing innovation (Putra et al., 2022). Manual sketches are

valued in architectural design for their ability to quickly explore design ideas, study site conditions,

plan spaces, investigate building details, and add a creative touch to projects (Martinez, 2023).

Manual drafting is considered authentic and high-quality, allowing architects and designers to

incorporate their individual style and personality into their work (Minnella, n.d.).

The integration of CAD into architecture education has transformed the teaching and

learning process, fostering creativity, enabling the exploration of design alternatives, and utilizing

interactive media (Yashar, n.d.). However, manual drawing remains an important skill for

architects, offering advantages in the early stages of design education, promoting good drawing

habits, and complementing the use of CAD software (Lewis, 2022). Studies suggest that a solid

understanding of manual drawing is crucial for effectively utilizing CAD software and becoming

a competent designer (Bairaktarova, 2017). Furthermore, architecture students who master manual
drawing tend to exhibit better design quality and intuition compared to those relying solely on

CAD (Putra et al., 2022).

It is in the light that the purpose of this study is to determine the prevailing drafting method,

whether computer-aided design (CAD) or manual drafting, among 3rd year architecture students

at Aklan State University - Kalibo Campus, which will provide valuable information for

curriculum development, instructional strategies, and potential improvements in the architectural

education program at the university.

Figure 1 below illustrates the conceptual framework of the research. The paradigm presents

the variables that are considered in the research.

Independent Variable Dependent Variable

Third Year Architecture Students Drafting Method

of Aklan State University – 1. CAD Drafting

Kalibo Campus 2. Manual Drafting

Figure 1. A schematic diagram showing the relationship that exists 3rd Year Architecture Students

of Aklan State University – Kalibo Campus and the drafting methods: CAD (Computer-Aided

Design) and Manual.

 Statement of the Problem and the Hypotheses

The primary purpose of the study was to determine the preferred drafting method, whether

computer-aided design (CAD) or manual drafting, among 3rd year architecture students at Aklan

State University - Kalibo Campus.

Specifically, this study sought to answer the following question:

1. What is the preferred drafting method between manual drafting and Computer-Aided

Design (CAD) of 3rd year architecture students at Aklan State University - Kalibo

Campus?

Based on the statement of the problem, the following hypotheses was tested:

1. Computer-Aided Design (CAD) is the preferred drafting method of 3rd year architecture

students at Aklan State University - Kalibo Campus.

2. Manual drafting is the preferred drafting method of 3rd year architecture students at

Aklan State University - Kalibo Campus.

3. Mix of both manual and Computer-Aided Design (CAD) is the preferred drafting

method of 3rd year architecture students at Aklan State University - Kalibo Campus.
 Significance of the Study

The results of the study provided insights on the prevailing drafting method of 3 rd year

architecture students at Aklan State University - Kalibo Campus. Specifically, this study will

beneficial to the following:

Architecture Students. The study benefits architecture students by providing them with

insights into the preferred drafting method among their peers. This information allows them to

make more informed decisions about their own drafting practices, leading to increased efficiency

and effectiveness in their work. They can align their skills and knowledge with the preferred

method, enhancing their learning experience and better preparing themselves for future

professional practice.

Professors/Instructors. The study provides valuable information for professors and

instructors in the architecture program. It allows them to tailor their teaching methodologies and

resources to meet the needs of the students. Professors can design coursework and assignments

that align with the preferred drafting method, ensuring students receive the necessary training and

support. This knowledge can enhance the effectiveness of instruction and contribute to improved

student outcomes.

Architecture Program/Curriculum. The study findings can inform the architecture program

and curriculum at Aklan State University - Kalibo Campus. The program can adapt its curriculum

to align with the preferred drafting method, ensuring that students receive relevant and up-to-date

training in their field. It enables program administrators to make informed decisions about resource
allocation, including drafting tools and software, to meet the needs of the students and provide

them with a comprehensive educational experience.

Aklan State University. The study contributes to the reputation and standing of Aklan State

University - Kalibo Campus by showcasing its commitment to evidence-based decision-making

and educational excellence. The research findings can highlight the university's responsiveness to

the needs and preferences of its architecture students. The university can use the study results to

enhance its programs, attract prospective students, and foster a supportive and conducive learning

environment.

Architecture Profession. The study has implications for the architecture profession as a

whole. By identifying the preferred drafting method among architecture students, the research

provides insights into the prevailing practices and trends within the industry's future workforce.

This information can help practicing architects and firms understand the preferences and skills of

emerging professionals, facilitating collaboration and the integration of new graduates into the

profession.

Future Researchers. The study contributes to the body of knowledge in architectural

education and drafting methods, providing a foundation for future research. Researchers can build

upon the study's findings to delve deeper into related topics or explore other aspects of drafting

methodologies. The study serves as a reference for future researchers interested in investigating

the impact of drafting methods on architectural education, practice, and technological

advancements.
 Definition of Terms

Drafting – also known as technical drawings, is the technique of making accurate

representations of objects for architectural and engineering applications (Northern Architecture,

2023). Specifically, architectural drafting entails creating scaled drawings with accurate

measurements and detailed information for constructing buildings, interiors, and other structures.

These drawings serve as visual communication tools for construction projects, encompassing floor

plans, elevations, sections, details, and mechanical information like electrical and plumbing plans

(Minnella, n.d.)

As used in the study, "drafting" operationally refers to the process of creating architectural

drawings or designs using manual or computer-aided methods. It involves the use of drafting tools,

software, and techniques to produce visual representations of architectural concepts, including

plans, elevations, sections, and models.

CAD (Computer-Aided Design) – is a manufacturing process that enables the digital

creation of 2D drawings or 3D models for future products, and provides designers and engineers

with a visualization of the product's construction before it is actually fabricated. As the name

suggests, CAD relies on computer technology to develop, modify, and optimize designs (Goodwin

University, 2022).

As used in the study, “CAD” operationally refers to the utilization of software tools such

as AutoCAD, SketchUp, and Lumion for the creation of 2D and 3D architectural drawings and

models to produce detailed and realistic visual representations for both drafting purposes and

project presentations.
 Manual Drafting –often known as hand drafting, is the technique of drawing by hand using
a pencil or ink on a medium such as paper or polyester film, utilizing drafting devices and
equipment (Khillar, 2020).

As used in the study, “manual drafting” operationally refers to the traditional approach of

creating architectural drawings and designs by hand, without the assistance of computer-aided

software. It involves utilizing manual drafting tools such as pencils, pens, rulers, T-squares, and

templates to produce drawings on paper or drafting sheets, either in a freehand or precise manner.

Manual drafting may also involve the application of coloring materials like markers, colored

pencils, watercolors, or other artistic mediums to enhance architectural presentations with color,

texture, and visual elements.

Architecture – refers to the art and study of designing buildings (Oxford Advanced
Learner's Dictionary, n.d.).

In the context of this study, "architecture" operationally refers to the academic program

offered at Aklan State University - Kalibo Campus. It specifically pertains to the curriculum,

courses, and educational activities provided by the Architecture Program at the university. The

study focuses on the experiences, preferences, and perceptions of 3rd year architecture students

within this program, considering their engagement with drafting methods, such as computer-aided

design (CAD) or manual drafting.

 Delimitation of the Study

The study is delimited to Aklan State University - Kalibo Campus during the school year

2022 to 2023 in Kalibo, Aklan. The sample was limited to 3rd year architecture students from the

university, and data was collected using a researcher-made questionnaire administered through

Google Forms. The questionnaire consists of 16 items, with two questions for each criterion related

to preferred drafting methods. The findings provided insights specific to the given university and

academic year, and generalizability to other contexts or populations was limited.

 Chapter 2

Review of Related Literature

This chapter discusses the literatures and the results of other related researches to which

the present study bears relation or similarity. This chapter is divided into three parts: 1) Computer-

Aided Design (CAD), 2) Manual Drafting, and 3) related studies comparing the two concepts.

Computer-Aided Design

The manufacturing technique known as computer-aided design (CAD) enables designers

and engineers to digitally develop 2D drawings or 3D models of prospective items, wherein

computers are used to produce, modify, and optimize these designs. It enables improved project

correctness and offers trustworthy documentation that is stored throughout the entire process.

Modern CAD software can simulate stress testing on 3D models and show designers how different

materials interact with one another. The majority of CAD software available today is cloud-based,

making the designs accessible from anywhere, including the manufacturing facility and the

development site (Chai, 2020).

CAD was created as a more precise, less expensive method for designers, engineers, and

manufacturers to construct, visualize, and test models while reducing the possibility of errors.

Fewer revisions and a more effective workflow are the results of CAD software's consideration of

the interactions between the various materials used in a project. There are numerous varieties of

CAD software available, all of which are based on geometry and use raster or vector-based visuals

(3dsourced, 2021).
Computer-Aided Design in History

The early years of computer-aided design (CAD) can be dated to the 1940s and 1950s,

when a number of software advancements expanded the capabilities of early computers in the area

of design. Douglas T. Ross, an MIT researcher, first used the phrase "computer-aided design" in

1959 (3dsourced, 2021).

The first computer graphic application, Sketchpad, was created by computer scientist Ivan

Sutherland in 1963, marking a significant turning point. This tool served as the precursor to CAD

software as we know it today by enabling users to communicate graphically with computers by

sketching directly into a CRT monitor with a light pen. Large automotive and aerospace firms

started creating their own software in the 1970s, which is when CAD started to be utilized in

industry rather than just for research. A significant turning point occurred when John Walker

launched Autodesk in 1982, following the development of the CAD application CATIA in 1977.

The use of CAD software increased throughout the 1980s and 1990s, but it generally remained

limited to larger businesses during this time. As personal computers quickly gained popularity in

the late 1990s and early 2000s, CAD became more widely available as a result of the creation of

free, open-source CAD software (3dsourced, 2021).

AutoCAD is one of the earliest primary tools in computer aided design has evolved over

the past few decades. Since its release in 1982, AutoCAD has become extremely popular in all

sorts of drafting, engineering and design. One of the biggest utilities of AutoCAD has been its ease

of use. In many cases, AutoCAD is easy to integrate in traditional bare-metal environments.

Instructors and students have often referred to AutoCAD as being easy to learn, and it's been a

great and valuable skill for people in various types of industrial jobs and roles (Rouse, 2021).
Computer-Aided Design in Architectural Design Process

Computer-Aided Architectural Design (CAAD), is a special category of CAD software

created specifically for use by architects and planners. A database of geometric and other object

features is used by all CAAD systems, and these objects can be constructed and modified using a

graphical user interface (Hannula, 2022).

Although numerous computer programs are used by architects at various phases of the

design process, this is not the only factor that is taken into consideration. Because the early stages

of the design process are not dependent on CAD accuracy and functionality, many architects

continue to use paper and pen or scale models. However, utilizing accurate software early in the

design process could hinder originality and promote subpar work. They are, nevertheless,

frequently utilized to speed up subsequent stages of the design process (Nejadriahi & Arab, 2017).

Some architects use computer-aided design (CAD) to speed up the transition from less

precise design phases to ones that require greater accuracy since computers are faster and more

reliable at calculating. As designers can now produce conceptually sophisticated 2-D and 3-D

drawings, alter the form, and take on more challenging design challenges faster, CAD has had a

significant impact on the education, learning, and practice of design. Additionally, CAD is a highly

interactive and sophisticated piece of software with a number of simulations to help create better

visual concepts for designs (Nejadriahi & Arab, 2017).

Furthermore, with better accuracy, CAD helps architects synthesize, analyze, and

document their designs, which lowers the likelihood of design flaws in the final product. Through

CAD, the designer has the ability to swiftly and easily switch between two-dimensional (2D) and
three-dimensional (3D) views, zoom in and out, rotate images to see them from various angles,

adjust the scale, and manipulate shapes, giving the designers have the ability to coordinate and

control the final result, model the building's performance, and make necessary changes

instantaneously (Nejadriahi & Arab, 2017).

Also, by enabling files produced by various systems to be read into the same model and

used to incorporate modifications into the design process, CAD facilitates communication between

the architect, contractor, and client. Additionally, CAD can provide high-quality drawings with

fewer drafting errors and improved legibility, assisting in better design documentation. It is also

simple to preserve and utilize for future reference all the information and drawings used for

designing (Nejadriahi & Arab, 2017).

Computer-Aided Design in Architecture Education

Since the middle of the 1980s, computer-aided design, or CAD, has transformed

architectural design. CAD software applications were created with the introduction of personal

computers and have since evolved into crucial tools in the practice of architecture. The widespread

use of digital technology in architectural education gives students a competitive edge by fostering

their creativity through helping them to come up with new alternatives and utilize interactive media

(Yashar, n.d.).

It has become vital to architectural education to include CAD courses in curricula at design

schools all around the world. With the use of digital technologies, students may generate more

design solutions, which results in innovative designs. The benefits of CAD are its dimensional

accuracy, adaptability, and ease of modification, allowing designers to capture and regulate
complexity while delivering sensitive and accurate alterations rapidly. As the foundation of the

design process and an integral component of the growth of design studios, the capacity to produce

a greater number of design alternatives fosters student creativity and offers chances to use

interactive media. Additionally, the usage of CAD in design studios offers a dynamic and

interactive design process. It is simple to convert 2D designs into 3D representations, making it

easier to comprehend spatial relationships and design components. The ability to modify the design

process promotes experimentation and encourages investigation of different design solutions

(Yashar, n.d.).

In conclusion, the introduction of CAD into architecture education has raised the standard

of teaching and created multimedia, interactive studios. CAD has evolved into a crucial instrument

for the growth of design studios, forming the framework of the design process and evolving into

an integral component of architectural education. A significant tool for architectural design

education, CAD offers opportunity for students to develop their creativity through an increasing

level of re-productivity, the capacity to create new alternatives, and the usage of interactive media.

Undoubtedly, further developments in CAD technology and its use in design studios will impact

architecture education in the future (Yashar, n.d.).

 Manual Drafting

Manual drafting, often known as hand drafting, is the technique of drawing by hand using

a pencil or ink on a medium such as paper or polyester film, utilizing drafting devices and

equipment (Khillar, 2020). Manual or freehand drafting is still a crucial talent for professionals in

the fields of architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC), as well as product design and

creation, despite the development of computer-aided drafting (CAD) technologies. Using visual

representations, technical drawing and drafting can be used to communicate ideas. Additionally,

by assuring accuracy in scales and measures, these visual figures offer guidance for assessing the

feasibility and setting a product, machine, or structure into production, which requires experts to

use high-quality equipment and instruments (Dela Cruz, 2019).

Manual Drafting in History

The earliest historical documentation of drafting goes back to 2000 BC, as proven by a

found petrified blueprint depicting an aerial perspective of a Babylonian citadel. This type of

documentation emphasizes the use of drawings to guide the development of structures, even in the

early ages. Leonardo da Vinci was a prominent individual in the Renaissance period who used the

art and science of drafting. His mechanical construction designs garnered acclaim from specialists

in a variety of sectors, including civil and mechanical engineering (Dela Cruz, 2019).

Prior to the 1960s, drafting was confined to hand-drawing on paper or the use of the

drafting machine, which Charles Little created in 1901. Computerized technologies were

established in the modern age and progressively became available to a large community of drafters.

Over time, CAD technology evolved into the CAD applications we use today, with many
businesses relying on them. Nonetheless, hand drawing has remained an important skill among

drafting experts (Dela Cruz, 2019).

Manual Sketches as a Multifaceted Design Tool

Manual sketching is a vital technique for designers since it allows them to think, form

mental impressions, and critically explore complicated spatial concepts. The manual drawing

method consists of six essential elements. Initially, it is a thinking tool that allows you to generate

and test ideas. Secondly, it serves as a medium for communication, promoting the sharing of ideas

among designers, stakeholders, and coworkers. Thirdly, it is an interpretation, analysis, and

comparison tool that enables designers to make sense of complicated design challenges and assess

viable solutions. Lastly, it is a way of expressing innovation, allowing designers to articulate their

ideas while also providing a means of improvement (Putra, et al., 2022).

Drawing is an important tool for designers as it contributes significantly to perception and

the creative process that represents society, public areas, and urban settings. Perception is shaped

by early experiences and is unique to each person. It involves gathering, evaluating, and comparing

information with past knowledge and experiences in order to build particular responses. However,

psychologists suggest that people might make mistakes when they rely their view only on what

they observe. Manually sketching, on the other hand, allows designers to go deep into their

creativity and use their senses to explore and develop design ideas. This method of drawing is a

crucial tool for designers, since it allows them to develop, communicate, understand, analyze,

express, explore, and document complex spatial concepts. Designers may improve their

perception-building abilities and construct a creative approach that represents their unique

experiences and expertise through manual sketching (Putra, et al., 2022).

Manual Drafting in Architectural Design

Drawing, in all of its forms, is an essential part of the architectural design process.

Architects create a variety of drawings, ranging from diagrammatical ones at the beginning of a

project to more technical ones at the end. Design concepts are examined, researched, and shared

during this process, needing information contact at various levels. Despite the availability of

equivalent technical tools, manual sketching remains a vital skill in architecture. It adds a distinct

value to every project by allowing architects to explore design options and share their ideas quickly

and efficiently. As a result, it is critical for architects to learn and use throughout the design process

(Martinez, 2023).

Hand sketches are essential in the architectural design process as they provide a rapid and

effective technique for solving problems. They can investigate a wide range of design ideas,

including the creation of a parti, the research of site conditions, the layout of areas, and the

investigation of building details. For instance, developing a parti - the concept of an architectural

design - entails studying form, space, orientation, context, and other factors using loose diagrams

that initiate a complicated design with an abstract idea. Sketches are also used to describe site

conditions and to investigate various factors such as wind directions, solar pathways, terrain,

vegetation, and landscape, as well as to provide a buildable area and orientation for building

location. Bubble sketches are used in programmatic diagrams and space planning exercises to

depict spatial connections and hierarchies, exit and circulation patterns, and vertical stacking.

Sketches of building elevations and sections aid in the exploration of proportions, materials, and

palettes for a proposed project. Furthermore, architectural details are easily addressed by

comparing and identifying the most suitable solution through several sketches (Martinez, 2023).
 In the professional field, manual drafting is generally seen as authentic and high-quality

due to the amount of technical ability and competence required, which is often possessed by

professionals in the industry. Furthermore, one of the primary benefits of manual drafting is the

opportunity to add a creative style and emotion to designs. Because manual drawing is more hands-

on and tactile, architects and designers may include their individual style and personality into their

projects (Minnella, n.d.). With this, manual drafts, according to CWG Architects (2019), have a

great creative character. Historically, the skill to draw by hand has been essential to the

architectural profession, both in making exact technical drawings and emotive sketches. Architects

who learn to write with just ink and graphite create drawings that are absolutely distinctive.

Manual Drafting in Architecture Education

In architectural studies, drafting is a crucial skill. In design thinking, the drafting method

matters. According to experts, beginning with hand sketching can be advantageous during the

initial stages of drafting education. Hand sketching provides hands-on experience with scales and

units of measurement, which can be more effective than computer drafting. By mastering these

fundamentals through manual drafting, students can develop good drawing habits that will serve

them well throughout the design process (Lewis, 2022).

According to the case studies performed by Bairaktarova (2017) for her research paper

entitled "Coordinating Mind and Hand: The Importance of Manual Drawing and Descriptive

Geometry Instruction in a CAD-Oriented Engineering Design Graphics Class," it was stated that

a solid understanding of manual drawing is important to effectively utilize and comprehend the

limitations of a CAD software. According to the study, relying solely on CAD training does not

adequately prepare students to become competent designers. Instead, an effective CAD curriculum
should go beyond just learning computer software and should include a focus on freehand drawing

techniques and instruction on the basics of orthographic systems through manual drawing.

According to a recent study by Putra et al. (2022), architecture students who rely on manual

drawing tend to exhibit better design quality and intuition compared to those who rely solely on

computer-aided design. Manual drawing can also serve as a medium for understanding and

appreciating the environment. The study suggests that mastering manual sketching is a crucial step

in architectural education before transitioning to digital technology. To enhance the design

process, a combination of traditional manual drawing and digital techniques can be used, reflecting

a hybrid approach.

Students of architecture who become proficient in manual design methods and learn digital

software will be able to utilize both manual and digital methods with proficiency. Architecture and

sketching are interconnected activities with both abstract and concrete processes and outcomes,

and drawing is an important aspect of the architectural process. Architectural sketches are a visual

impression of form and space that portray space in an abstract manner. Manual drawings are the

blueprint of an idea while the design process requires remembering stored visual information in

the mind. As a result, sketching is an important part of the design process, acting as a critical stage

in bringing ideas to life (Putra, et al., 2022).

 Related Studies Comparing Manual Drafting and Computer-Aided Design

The use of computer-aided design (CAD) in architectural education and practice is

examined in a study by Obafemi & Oluwaseun (2015) entitled Effects of the Use of Computer

Aided Design (CAD) On Architecture: A Quantitative Approach. New educational paradigms in

architecture have been made possible by the use of digital technology and design in architecture.

However, the introduction of CAD into architectural education has prevailed over conventional

drafting techniques, stripping them of their value in the advancement of design ethics. Although

there is no denying that using CAD in architecture has many advantages, including increased

productivity, higher-quality designs, reduced costs, and quicker delivery times, it has come under

criticism for having a detrimental effect on how visually sensitive young architects become. As a

result, the study suggests balancing the usage of CAD and conventional drawing in the

architectural design process. It is crucial to establish a balance between the two in architectural

education and practice since an effective integration of conventional design principles and modern

use of CAD will result in excellent design solutions.

The impact of Computer-Aided Architectural Design (CAAD) tools on architectural design

education at the Department of Architecture, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and

Technology (KNUST), Kumasi, Ghana, is the subject of research done by Botchway, Abanyie,

and Afram (2015). Compared to other internationally renowned departments of architecture, the

study found that CAAD's level of integration in architectural design education is poor. Students

are not given enough direction in transitioning their knowledge of traditional design approaches to

the more complex method of design instruction using computers and other CAAD tools.

Additionally, the study demonstrated that typical design education techniques can be applied to
CAAD, and students who are able to do so use CAAD efficiently throughout the entire design

process. To become proficient in the CAAD tools, the majority of students combine private

coaching and/or self-teaching with the departmental CAAD courses. Due to the weak connection

between the traditional and modern approaches to architectural design education, the research

urges a full restructuring of the department's present CAAD courses.

According to a research entitled "CAD in Architectural Education: The Role of Computer

Aided Design (CAD) in Architectural Education," integrating digital media to capture and manage

complexity leads to dimensional precision. It has been noted that scale sensitivity and quality of

drawings and models created using digital media are superior to those created using traditional

methods, which introduce errors in hand drawing, cutting and pasting into models. Additionally,

in CAD, flexibility enables system-wide modifications without compromising performance during

the sketching and modeling phases. On the other hand, traditional approaches demand that the

design be completely redone after even a little alteration, such as in the case of two-dimensional

drawings or three-dimensional perspective and models (Yashar, n.d.).

In a study entitled, "The Effect of Manual Sketching on Architectural Design Process in

Digital Era," it was discovered that computer-aided architectural design has advantages such easy

storage and sharing, the capacity to swiftly produce design modifications, and 3D visualization.

However, it was also pointed out that computer-aided design might impair students' capacity for

creative expression and design, restrict their engagement with advisors, result in poor design, and

develop technology addiction. According to the study, hand drafting can improve visual memory

and should be taught in an engaging manner in design education. Drawing by hand helps to develop
visual memory, which is important for designing. The research points out the necessity of manual

drafting instruction in design education, especially in the digital age (Putra, et al., 2022).

Another study conducted by Fakhry, et al. (2021), concludes that the use of CAD in

architecture education for working drawings coursework has become the preferred method for the

majority of educators and students due to its accuracy, neatness, and overall quality. Students find

CAD to be faster and more cost-efficient than traditional hand drafting methods. However, it is

important to note that the use of copy commands for previous projects in CAD can have a negative

impact on understanding. Despite this, respondents still preferred hand drafting for note-taking

during site visits. To improve working drawings courses, the paper suggests adding CAD

application assignments, dedicating time to developing CAD skills, improving students'

understanding of how to extract knowledge from previous projects, requiring hand drafting

assignments for note-taking, and integrating BIM education with working drawings education.

Additionally, the paper suggests reducing the size of assignments and exams when using hand

drafting compared to CAD. Overall, while CAD has many benefits, it is important to incorporate

traditional hand drafting methods for certain tasks and ensure that students understand the

underlying principles of working drawings.

 Chapter 3

Research Design and Methodology

Chapter 3 consists of three parts: 1) Research Design, 2) Methods and 3) Data Analysis.

Research Design

The method that was used for the study is the descriptive-survey research design.

Descriptive research design refers to the scientific process of describing and researching the

behavior of specific subjects in their normal contexts. Also, it is used to obtain the general

characteristics of the subjects under the study (Shuttleworth, 2008).

On the other hand, survey research design is a systematic method of collecting information

from a sample of entities with the aim of constructing quantitative descriptors for the larger

population they represent. Surveys are utilized to gather data on attitudes, behaviors, opinions, and

beliefs of a population that cannot be directly observed (Avedian, 2014).

The independent variable in this study is the 3 rd Year Architecture Students of Aklan State

University – Kalibo Campus, while the dependent variable is the prevailing drafting methods,

CAD (Computer-Aided Design) and manual drafting. The data was analyzed through Narrative

Thematic Analysis.
 Methods

Participants

This study involved 25 participants who were students of Aklan State University - Kalibo

Campus, specifically enrolled in the Architecture program as 3rd-year students during the

academic year 2022 to 2023. Their inclusion in the study is crucial as they possess valuable insights

and experiences regarding their preferred drafting methods. By engaging these participants, the

study aims to understand their attitudes, perspectives, and preferences in terms of computer-aided

design (CAD) and manual drafting. The data provided by the participants will contribute to

generating a comprehensive understanding of the preferred drafting method among 3rd year

architecture students in the specified university context.

Data Gathering Instrument

In order to identify the predominant drafting method used by 3rd year Architecture students

at Aklan State University - Kalibo Campus, the researcher conducted a questionnaire survey

consisting of eight criteria. The criteria are as follows:

Output Preferences. This was used to assess the respondents' preferred drafting methods,

based on their perception of which drafting method yields better architectural drawings.

Creativity and Thinking Process. This pertain to the cognitive and imaginative aspects

involved in the drafting methods chosen by architecture students. It encompasses the ability to

generate innovative ideas, think critically, problem-solve, and employ design thinking principles

during the drafting process.

 Flexibility. This refers to the degree to which a drafting method allows for adaptability,

modifications, or adjustments during the design process. It relates to the ease with which changes

can be made to the drawings or designs based on evolving requirements or client feedback.

Limitations. This refer to the inherent constraints or drawbacks associated with a specific

drafting method. These constraints may include factors such as time-consuming processes, limited

software capabilities, restrictions in design complexity, or difficulties in reproducing physical

drawings accurately.

Conceptualization. This refers to the ability of architecture students to develop and

visualize ideas or design concepts during the drafting process. It involves translating abstract

concepts into tangible representations that convey the intended architectural vision.

Presentation. This refers to the respondents’ choice of drafting method for creating

presentation materials, such as renderings, visualizations, or graphic representations of their

architectural projects. The respondents' consideration of these criteria is aimed at producing

presentation materials that effectively convey their architectural ideas, engage viewers, and

enhance their ability to communicate their designs visually.

Usage and Satisfaction: Usage and satisfaction refer to the level of comfort, convenience,

and overall satisfaction experienced by architecture students when utilizing a particular drafting

method. It includes aspects such as ease of use, familiarity, technical proficiency, and overall

satisfaction with the chosen method.

Overall Preference. This was used to determine the respondents' overall preference for a

drafting method when considering all aspects of architectural drafting.

 Each criterion in the questionnaire included two questions. The first question asked the

respondents to indicate their choice of drafting method (CAD, manual drafting, a mix of both, or

neither) for the corresponding criterion. The second question focused on identifying the factors

that influenced their decision in selecting a particular drafting method.

Data Gathering Procedure

The researcher created a survey questionnaire that encompassed the following criteria:

Output Preferences, Creativity and Thinking Process, Flexibility, Limitations, Conceptualization,

Presentation, Usage and Satisfaction, and Overall Preference. These questions were then

incorporated into a Google Forms survey and distributed online to 3rd year Architecture students.

Google Forms automatically generated a summarized result for the survey.

Data Analysis

The data that were obtained from the survey questionnaire were analyzed using the

following statistical tool:

Narrative Thematic Analysis. Refers to a method for analyzing raw data from surveys,

interviews, transcripts, and other primary sources while establishing special emphasis on the

information's context in order to draw a definite conclusion (Butina, 2015). This was used to

analyze and understand the information gathered from the survey questionnaire to determine the

prevalent drafting method used by 3rd year Architecture students at Aklan State University - Kalibo

Campus.

All gathered data were analyzed inductively in order to reach a firm conclusion.
 Chapter 4

Results and Discussions

Chapter 4 presents the findings of the investigation. The data for this descriptive method

of research were obtained through survey questionnaires. Below is the presentation of the

descriptive data gathered in the study.

Preferred Drafting Method in terms of Output Preference

Preferred Drafting Method in terms of

No. of Respondents Percentage
Output Preference

CAD Drafting 15 60%

Manual and CAD Drafting 9 36%
Uncertain 1 4%
Total 25 100%

Table 1. The table shows the survey findings regarding the favored drafting method based on the

respondents' output preferences for producing better architectural drawings. It presents the

number of respondents and the corresponding percentages for each category.

Among the 25 respondents, 15 individuals (60%) preferred CAD drafting as their chosen

method. This high preference for CAD drafting suggests that these respondents recognize the

advantages and benefits of using digital tools in their architectural work. On the other hand, nine

respondents (36%) indicated a preference for both CAD and manual drafting. This suggests that

these individuals value the strengths of both methods and prefer to leverage them in their design
process. Combining the precision and efficiency of CAD with the artistic qualities of manual

drafting allows for a more versatile approach. However, only one respondent (4%) expressed

uncertainty between the two methods. This indicates a clear preference among the majority of

respondents and reflects a certain level of confidence in their chosen drafting method.

No. of Respondents Percentage

Reasons for Preferred Drafting Method
(out of 25) (out of 100%)

Attention to detail and precision 18 72%

Clarity and legibility 20 80%
Realism and visualization 18 72%
Flexibility for revisions 17 68%

Table 2. The table illustrates the data on the reasons behind the respondents' choices regarding

their preferred drafting method in terms of specific qualities or attributes contributing to the

quality of architectural drawings.

Regarding the reasons behind their choices, the survey results revealed that a significant

number of respondents placed high importance on attention to detail and precision, with 18

individuals (72%) voting for this attribute. This suggests that architectural students recognize the

need for accuracy and meticulousness in their drawings to ensure the quality of their work. Also,

clarity and legibility were also deemed crucial, with 20 individuals (80%) selecting this as a key

factor. This indicates that respondents value the ability of their chosen drafting method to produce

drawings that are clear, easily understandable, and effectively communicate their design intent.
 Furthermore, 18 respondents (72%) emphasized the importance of realism and

visualization, which indicates a desire to create drawings that accurately depict the intended

design, allowing stakeholders to visualize and comprehend the architectural concepts effectively.

In addition, flexibility for revisions was highlighted by 17 individuals (68%), which suggests that

respondents value the ability of their chosen drafting method to accommodate changes and

modifications throughout the design process, enabling them to refine and improve their work as

needed.

Preferred Drafting Method in terms of Creativity and Thinking Process

Preferred Drafting Method in terms of

No. of Respondents Percentage
Creativity and Thinking Process

CAD Drafting 6 24%

Manual Drafting 6 24%
Manual and CAD Drafting 13 52%
Total 25 100%

Table 3. The table shows the survey results regarding the preferred drafting method in terms of

how it enhances the respondents' creativity and thinking process. It presents the number of

respondents and the corresponding percentages for each category.

Based on the survey results, it is evident that the preference for drafting methods among

the respondents is fairly evenly split. Six individuals (24%) expressed a preference for CAD

drafting, while an equal number of six respondents (24%) favored manual drafting. This suggests
that there is a balanced distribution of students who prefer digital tools and those who prefer

traditional drafting techniques.

Remarkably, the majority of the respondents, comprising 13 individuals (52%), indicated

that they believe both CAD and manual drafting methods enhance their creativity and thinking

process in planning. This finding highlights the recognition among these students that both

methods offer unique advantages and can be complementary to each other in stimulating their

design ideas and thought processes.

No. of Respondents Percentage

Reasons for Preferred Drafting Method
(out of 25) (out of 100%)

Freedom for artistic expression 16 64%

Hands-on engagement 12 48%
Ability to explore various design options 21 84%
Flexibility for spontaneous changes 15 60%

Table 4. The table illustrates the data on the reasons behind the respondents' choices regarding

their preferred drafting method in terms of how it contributes to their creative thinking.

The survey results shed light on how the chosen drafting method contributes to the creative

thinking process of the respondents. The majority of individuals, specifically 16 (64%), expressed

a preference for a drafting method that provided them with the freedom for artistic expression.

This indicates that the ability to unleash their creativity and bring their unique artistic vision to life

is a crucial factor in their choice of drafting method. Furthermore, 12 individuals (48%)

highlighted the importance of hands-on engagement in their creative thinking process. This
suggests that they value the tactile experience and direct involvement that manual drafting offers,

which allows them to connect more intimately with their designs.

An overwhelming majority of 21 respondents (84%) recognized the significance of the

chosen drafting method in exploring various design options. This finding implies that the ability

to experiment, iterate, and explore different design possibilities is a crucial aspect of their creative

thinking process. Lastly, 15 individuals (60%) emphasized the importance of flexibility in their

preferred drafting method. The ability to make spontaneous changes and adapt designs on the go

is seen as a valuable attribute that enhances their creative thinking process.

Preferred Drafting Method in terms of Flexibility

Preferred Drafting Method in terms of

No. of Respondents Percentage
Flexibility

CAD Drafting 22 88%

Manual and CAD Drafting 3 12%
Total 25 100%

Table 5. The table shows the preferred drafting method in terms of flexibility for making

alterations or revisions to designs, based on the survey results. It presents the number of

respondents and the corresponding percentages for each category.

The survey results indicate a clear preference among the respondents for CAD drafting in

terms of flexibility. A significant majority of 22 individuals (88%) selected CAD drafting as their

preferred method, highlighting its perceived advantages in terms of flexibility in architectural

design. This finding suggests that CAD drafting offers a higher degree of flexibility compared to
manual drafting, as CAD software provides a range of tools and features that allow for easier

modifications, revisions, and adaptability in the design process.

On the other hand, a small minority of three individuals (12%) expressed an opinion that

both CAD and manual drafting methods are equally good in terms of flexibility. This indicates that

there is a recognition among a few respondents that both methods have their merits and can offer

flexibility in different ways.

No. of Respondents Percentage

Reasons for Preferred Drafting Method
(out of 25) (out of 100%)

Flexibility in modifying designs 16 64%

Quick and seamless updates 12 48%
Ease of experimentation with design elements 15 60%

Table 6. The table displays data on the reasons behind respondents' preferred drafting method

choices, based on specific features or capabilities that facilitate easier alterations.

The survey results indicate that a majority of the architecture students, specifically 16

individuals (64%), prioritize flexibility in modifying designs when choosing a specific drafting

method. This finding suggests that students value the ability to make changes and adjustments to

their designs easily, allowing them to adapt to evolving project requirements and explore different

design possibilities. Furthermore, 12 students (48%) identified quick and seamless updates as an

important factor in their choice of drafting method. This indicates that students value efficiency in

their design process, seeking methods that enable them to make updates swiftly and smoothly.

This efficiency is crucial in meeting project deadlines and managing their time effectively.
 Additionally, 15 respondents (60%) emphasized the significance of ease of

experimentation with design elements. This finding suggests that students value the freedom to

explore various design options and concepts without limitations. The ability to experiment with

different design elements allows students to unleash their creativity and expand their design

horizons.

Preferred Drafting Method in terms of Limitations

Preferred Drafting Method in terms of

No. of Respondents Percentage
Limitations

Manual Drafting 13 52%

CAD Drafting 4 16%

Both methods have similar limitations. 8 32%
Total 25 100%

Table 7. The table shows the preferred drafting method in terms of limitations when it comes to

complex or intricate designs, based on the survey results. It presents the number of respondents

and the corresponding percentages for each category.

The survey results indicate that among the 25 architecture students who participated, a

majority of 13 individuals (52%) perceive manual drafting to have more limitations when dealing

with complex or intricate designs. This suggests that these students believe manual drafting may

be less effective or efficient in achieving the desired level of complexity and intricacy in their

architectural projects. In contrast, a smaller proportion of respondents, specifically four individuals

(16%), expressed the view that CAD drafting has more limitations in handling complex or intricate

designs. This suggests that these students may find certain aspects of computer-aided design
software to be challenging or less suitable for achieving the desired level of detail and intricacy in

their designs.

Furthermore, eight individuals (32%) indicated that both manual and CAD drafting

methods have similar limitations when it comes to complex or intricate designs. This perspective

suggests that these students recognize that both methods may have their own set of constraints and

challenges when dealing with complex design requirements.

No. of Respondents Percentage

Reasons for Preferred Drafting Method
(out of 25) (out of 100%)

Difficulty in achieving intricate details. 13 52%

Time-consuming for complex designs. 12 48%
Limited precision or accuracy. 13 52%
Constraints in realizing complex geometries. 13 52%

Table 8. The table displays data on the reasons behind respondents' preferred drafting method

choices, based on specific limitations or challenges that they face with the chosen method when

working on complex designs.

The survey results revealed that among the 25 architecture students who participated, a

majority of 13 individuals (52%) mentioned that their choice of drafting method is influenced by

the challenges they face in achieving intricate details. This suggests that these students perceive

certain drafting methods to be more suitable or effective in capturing the desired level of intricacy

in their architectural designs. Similarly, an equal number of individuals also expressed concerns

about limited precision or accuracy and constraints in realizing complex geometries when
choosing a drafting method. This indicates that these students recognize the potential limitations

of certain drafting methods in accurately representing intricate details and complex forms in their

designs. In contrast, 12 respondents (48%) highlighted that the time-consuming nature of

designing complex structures influenced their decision in selecting a drafting method, which

suggests that these students prioritize efficiency and productivity when choosing a method for

handling complex architectural projects.

Preferred Drafting Method in terms of Conceptualization

Preferred Drafting Method in terms of

No. of Respondents Percentage
Conceptualization

Manual Drafting 12 48%

CAD Drafting 7 28%

Both methods. 6 24%
Total 25 100%

Table 9. The table shows the survey results of the preferred drafting method in terms of

conceptualization of initial design concept in architectural projects. It presents the number of

respondents and the corresponding percentages for each category.

Based on the survey results gathered from the 25 architecture students, it was evident that

the majority of 12 individuals (48%) favored manual drafting as their preferred method for

conceptualizing initial design concepts in architectural projects. These students likely appreciate

the hands-on approach and tactile experience that manual drafting offers, allowing them to express

their creativity and explore ideas through sketching and drawing by hand.
 In contrast, seven individuals (28%) expressed a preference for CAD drafting as their

chosen method for conceptualization. This indicates that these students value the digital tools and

capabilities provided by CAD software, which enable them to create and manipulate designs in a

virtual environment. Meanwhile, six respondents (24%) acknowledged the strengths of both

manual drafting and CAD drafting for conceptualization, suggesting that they believe each method

has its own merits and can be utilized depending on the specific project requirements or personal

preferences.

No. of Respondents Percentage

Reasons for Preferred Drafting Method
(out of 25) (out of 100%)

Ability to quickly sketch and visualize initial

24 96%
design ideas.
Flexibility in exploring various design concepts. 18 72%
Ease of expressing and communicating design
15 60%
intent.

Table 10. The table displays data on the reasons behind respondents' preferred drafting method

choices based on its specific advantages or benefits in conceptualizing design.

Based on the survey results, it is evident that the majority of architecture students,

specifically 24 individuals (96%), prefer their chosen drafting method because it enables them to

quickly sketch and visualize design ideas. This indicates that these students value the efficiency

and immediacy offered by their preferred method in capturing and exploring their creative

concepts. Furthermore, a significant number of students, 18 individuals (72%), highlighted the

importance of flexibility in their chosen drafting method. This suggests that these students

appreciate the freedom to explore and iterate on various design concepts, allowing them to refine
their ideas and find innovative solutions. Additionally, 15 students (60%) emphasized the ease of

expressing and communicating design intent as a significant factor in their choice of drafting

method. This indicates that these students value a method that enables them to effectively convey

their design vision and communicate their ideas to others.

Preferred Drafting Method in terms of Presentation

Preferred Drafting Method in terms of

No. of Respondents Percentage
Presentation

CAD Drafting 18 72%

Mix of CAD and Manual Drafting 7 28%
Total 25 100%

Table 11. The table shows the survey results of the respondents’ preferred drafting method in terms

of creating presentation materials of architectural projects. It presents the number of respondents

and the corresponding percentages for each category.

According to the survey results, it is evident that a significant majority of architecture

students, specifically 18 respondents (72%), believe that CAD drafting is the preferred method for

creating presentations for their architectural projects. This indicates that these students perceive

CAD as a valuable tool for generating visualizations, renderings, and graphic representations that

effectively showcase their design concepts. In contrast, seven individuals (28%) expressed a

preference for using a combination of CAD and manual drafting in their presentation materials.

This suggests that these students value the unique qualities and characteristics offered by both
methods, leveraging the advantages of CAD for digital visualization and the tactile nature of

manual drafting for certain aspects of their presentations.

No. of Respondents Percentage

Reasons for Preferred Drafting Method
(out of 25) (out of 100%)

High-quality visualizations and realistic

22 88%
representations.
Ease of incorporating changes and adjustments. 18 72%
Familiarity and comfort with the method. 16 64%

Table 12. The table displays data on the reasons behind respondents' preferred drafting method

choices in creating their presentation materials.

Based on the data presented in Table 12, it is clear that a significant majority of architecture
students, specifically 22 individuals (88%), have a preference for their chosen drafting method due
to its ability to create high-quality visualizations and realistic representations. This suggests that
these students prioritize the visual impact and realism of their architectural drawings in their design
process. Furthermore, 18 respondents (72%) identified the ease of incorporating changes and
adjustments as an important factor in their preference for a particular drafting method. This
indicates that these students value the flexibility and efficiency that their chosen method offers
when it comes to making modifications to their designs.

Additionally, 16 individuals (64%) mentioned familiarity and comfort as contributing

factors to their choice of drafting method. This suggests that these students feel more confident
and at ease when working with a drafting method they are familiar with, which may enhance their
overall productivity and creativity.
Preferred Drafting Method in terms of Usage and Satisfaction

Preferred Drafting Method in terms of

No. of Respondents Percentage
Usage

CAD Drafting 18 72%

Manual Drafting 2 18%
Both methods equally. 5 20%
Total 25 100%

Table 13. The table illustrates the survey results regarding the respondents' most frequently used

drafting method for their architectural projects. It presents the number of respondents and the

corresponding percentages for each category.

Based on the results, it is clear that the majority of architecture students, specifically 18

individuals (72%), have frequently utilized CAD drafting for their architectural projects. This

indicates a strong inclination towards using computer-aided design tools among the surveyed

students. In contrast, a smaller proportion of two individuals (8%) have favored manual drafting

as their preferred method. This suggests that while traditional manual drafting still holds some

appeal for a few students, it is not as commonly used as CAD.

Moreover, five individuals (20%) have expressed an equal preference for both CAD and

manual drafting methods. This indicates that there is a subset of students who value the unique

advantages and characteristics offered by each method and choose to utilize both in their

architectural projects.
 Reasons for Preferred Drafting Method No. of Respondents Percentage

Very Satisfied. 7 28%

Satisfied. 11 44%
Neutral. 7 28%
Total 25 100%

Table 14. The table presents data on the satisfaction level of the respondents with their frequently

used drafting method.

Based on the results, it is clear that a majority of architecture students, specifically 11

individuals (44%), expressed satisfaction with their frequently used drafting method. This

indicates a positive sentiment among the surveyed students regarding the drafting method they

employ in their architectural work. Furthermore, 7 individuals (28%) voted for being very satisfied

with their chosen drafting method, demonstrating a higher level of contentment and appreciation

for the method they use. This suggests that these students find their drafting method to be highly

effective and suitable for their architectural projects. In contrast, an equal number of respondents

expressed a neutral level of satisfaction with their drafting method. This indicates that some

students may have mixed feelings or a more balanced perspective regarding the effectiveness and

performance of their chosen method.

Drafting Method for Overall Preference

Preferred Drafting Method in terms of

No. of Respondents Percentage
Usage

CAD Drafting 15 60%

Manual Drafting 1 4%
Mix of both methods. 9 36%
Total 25 100%

Table 15. The table illustrates the survey results regarding the overall preference of the

respondents based on all aspects of architectural drafting. It presents the number of respondents

and the corresponding percentages for each category.

The data presented in Table 15 provides insights into the overall preference of architecture

students regarding their chosen drafting method. It is evident that a significant majority of 15

individuals (60%) have expressed a preference for CAD drafting. This indicates a strong

inclination towards the use of computer-aided design software among the surveyed students. On

the other hand, only one individual (4%) selected manual drafting as their preferred method. This

suggests a relatively lower preference for traditional manual drafting techniques among the

surveyed students. Moreover, nine individuals (36%) indicated a preference for a combination of

both CAD and manual drafting methods. This suggests that these students recognize the benefits

and value of utilizing both approaches in their architectural work, potentially leveraging the

strengths of each method for different aspects of their projects.

 Chapter 5

Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations

Chapter 5 consists of three parts, namely: 1) Summary of the Problems and Findings; 2)

Conclusions; and 3) Recommendations.

Summary of the Problems and Findings

The primary purpose of the study was to determine the preferred drafting method, whether

computer-aided design (CAD) or manual drafting, among 3rd year architecture students at Aklan

State University - Kalibo Campus.

Specifically, this study sought to answer the following question:

1. What is the preferred drafting method between manual drafting and Computer-Aided

Design (CAD) of 3rd year architecture students at Aklan State University - Kalibo

Campus?

Based on the following statements of the problem, a hypothesis was tested:

1. Computer-Aided Design (CAD) is the preferred drafting method of 3rd year architecture

students at Aklan State University - Kalibo Campus.

2. Manual drafting is the preferred drafting method of 3rd year architecture students at

Aklan State University - Kalibo Campus.

3. Mix of both manual and Computer-Aided Design (CAD) is the preferred drafting

method of 3rd year architecture students at Aklan State University - Kalibo Campus.
 Based on the survey data findings, the following general summaries can be derived for

each of the criteria:

1. Output Preferences: The majority of architecture students preferred CAD drafting due

to its advantages in creating high-quality visualizations and realistic representations.

Some students also expressed a preference for a combination of CAD and manual

drafting for unique qualities offered by both methods.

2. Creativity and Thinking Process: Students valued drafting methods that allowed them

to unleash their creativity and express their artistic vision. They appreciated hands-on

engagement and the freedom for artistic expression in their chosen drafting method.

3. Flexibility: Architecture students emphasized the importance of flexibility in their

drafting method. They valued the ability to make changes and adjustments easily,

adapt designs on the go, and explore different design possibilities.

4. Limitations: Some students perceived manual drafting as having limitations in dealing

with complex or intricate designs, while others expressed concerns about certain

limitations of CAD drafting. Some recognized that both methods have their own set

of constraints when it comes to complex design requirements.

5. Conceptualization: Students showed a preference for either manual drafting or CAD

drafting for conceptualizing initial design concepts. Some appreciated the hands-on

approach and tactile experience of manual drafting, while others valued the digital

tools and capabilities provided by CAD software.

6. Presentation: The majority of students believed that CAD drafting was the preferred

method for creating presentations, as it allowed for generating visualizations,

renderings, and graphic representations effectively. Some students preferred a

combination of CAD and manual drafting for specific aspects of their presentations.

7. Usage and Satisfaction: Students frequently utilized CAD drafting for their

architectural projects and expressed satisfaction with their chosen drafting method.

They found their method effective, suitable, and capable of meeting their project

requirements. Some students had a neutral satisfaction level, indicating mixed feelings

or a balanced perspective.

8. Overall Preference: The majority of architecture students preferred CAD drafting,

indicating a strong inclination towards using digital tools in their work. However, a

smaller proportion favored manual drafting, and some recognized the value of

utilizing a combination of both methods depending on project requirements or

personal preferences.
 Conclusions

In conclusion, the study on architecture students' preferences of drafting methods reveals

a clear inclination for CAD drafting among the surveyed students. They recognize the advantages

of using digital tools in their architectural work, such as visual quality, ease of modification, and

realistic representations. While CAD drafting is favored by the majority, a significant number of

students also value the unique strengths of manual drafting and believe that both methods can

complement each other in the design process. Attention to detail, clarity, flexibility, and the ability

to enhance creativity and the thinking process were identified as important factors in selecting a

drafting method. Students expressed overall satisfaction with their chosen method and highlighted

efficiency, ease of experimentation, and the ability to visualize and communicate design ideas as

key considerations. The findings emphasize the importance of adapting to evolving project

requirements, exploring design possibilities, and effectively conveying design intent. Ultimately,

the study demonstrates that architecture students value the advantages and versatility of CAD

drafting while recognizing the continued relevance of manual drafting techniques in their

architectural practice.
 Recommendations

Based on the findings and conclusions presented, the following recommendations are

suggested:

1. Increase the sample size by including a broader and more varied group of

architecture students. This will result in more trustworthy and generalizable

conclusions by providing a greater representation of ideas and preferences.

2. To maintain consistency in data gathering and analysis, create and use

standardized questionnaires. This will make it easy to compare data across

research and promote meta-analyses.

3. Conduct follow-up interviews with a group of participants to acquire additional

in-depth insights into their preferences and experiences with various drafting

methods. This qualitative data might offer a more complete picture of the

factors influencing their decisions.

4. Include a control group in the research design to compare architecture students'

preferences and views to those of experts currently working in the field. This

comparison can give useful information on how drafting method preferences

vary over time and with experience.

5. Conduct usability testing on CAD software and manual drawing tools to

determine their ease of use, efficiency, and user satisfaction. This can provide

significant insights into the strengths and drawbacks of various tools and drive

ideas for development.

 6. Encourage replication of the study by other researchers to confirm the findings

and guarantee the generalizability of the results. This will improve the

research's robustness and boost trust in the obtained outcomes.

Implementing these recommendations will contribute to the improvement of future

research studies, leading to a more comprehensive understanding of architecture students' drafting

method preferences and better informing educational practices and industry standards.
 Bibliography

3dsourced. (2021). What is CAD? Definition, Advantages and Uses Explained. Retrieved from

https://www.3dsourced.com/guides/what-is-cad-guide-modeling/

Avedian, A. (2014). Survey Design. Harvard Law School. Retrieved from

https://hnmcp.law.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Arevik-Avedian-Survey-

Design-PowerPoint.pdf

Bairaktarova, D. (2017). Coordinating Mind and Hand: The Importance of Manual Drawing and

Descriptive Geometry Instruction in a CAD-Oriented Engineering Design Graphics Class.

Engineering Design Graphics Journal (EDGJ). Vol. 81, No. 3, 2017. Retrieved from

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/229786962.pdf

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.

ResearchGate. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282424714_The_Impact_of_Computer_Aided_

Architectural_Design_Tools_on_Architectural_Design_Education_The_Case_of_KNUS

Butina, M. (2015). A Narrative Approach to Qualitative Inquiry. Retrieved from

http://clsjournal.ascls.org/content/ascls/28/3/190.full.pdf

Chai, W. (2020). CAD (computer-aided design). TechTarget. Retrieved from

https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/definition/CAD-computer-aided-design
CWG Architects. (2019). The Evolution of Drafting: Hand vs. Computer Aided Design. Retrieved

from https://cwg-architects.com/2019/03/02/the-evolution-of-drafting-hand-vs-computer-

aided-drawings/

Dela Cruz, R. (2019). Drafting: Everything You Need to Know. Engineer Warehouse. Retrieved

from https://engineerwarehouse.com/blogs/everything-you-need-to-know/drafting-

everything-you-need-to-know

Fakhry, M., et al. (2021). CAD using preference compared to hand drafting in architectural

working drawings course-work. Ain Shams Engineering Journal. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349525969_CAD_using_preference_compared

_to_hand_drafting_in_architectural_working_drawings_coursework

Goodwin University. (2022). What is Computer-Aided Design (CAD)?. WordPress. Retrieved

from https://www.goodwin.edu/enews/computer-aided-design-definition/

Hannula, L. (2022). CAAD - Computer-aided Architectural Design. Digital Design. Retrieved

from https://digitaldesign.aalto.fi/digital-design-workflows/caad/

Khillar, S. (2020). Difference Between CAD and Drafting. Difference Between Similar Terms and

Objects. Retrieved from http://www.differencebetween.net/technology/difference-

between-cad-and-drafting/.

Lewis, M. (2022). Why Choose Hand Drafting Over Computer-Aided Design?. Graphics Output.

Retrieved from https://gographicsoutput.com/blog/manual-vs-hand-drafting/

Martinez, W. W. (2023). Design Process: The Power of Drawing in Architecture. Dekker Perich

Sabatini Design. Retrieved from https://www.dpsdesign.org/insights/design-process-the-

power-of-drawing-in-architecture/

Minnella, F. (n.d.). Technical Manual Drafting. Retrieved from

https://www.frankminnella.com/technical-manual-drafting.html

Nejadriahi, H. & Arab, K. (2017). A Study on the Impacts of Computer Aided Design on the

Architectural Design Process. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology.

International Journal of Architectural and Environmental Engineering. (Vol. 11, No. 8).

Retrieved from https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/144729804.pdf

Northern Architecture. (2023). Technical Drawing. Retrieved from

https://www.northernarchitecture.us/building-codes/technical-drawing.html

Obafemi O. A. P. & Oluwaseun K. M. (2015). Effects of the Use of Computer Aided Design (CAD)

On Architecture: A Quantitative Approach. International Journal of Educational Research

and Information Science. Vol. 2, No. 4, 2015, pp. 67-76. Retrieved from

https://www.academia.edu/16356953/Effects_of_the_Use_of_Computer_Aided_Design_

CAD_on_Architecture_A_Quantitative_Approach

Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary. (n.d.). architecture. Retrieved from

https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/architecture
Putra, A. M., et al. (2022). The Effect of Manual Sketching on Architectural Design Process in

Digital Era. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology. Vol. 100, No 2,

2022. Retrieved from http://www.jatit.org/volumes/Vol100No2/10Vol100No2.pdf

Rouse, M. (2021). Computer-Aided Design. Techopedia. Retrieved from

https://www.techopedia.com/definition/2063/computer-aided-design-cad

Shuttleworth, M. (2008). Descriptive Research Design. Explorable.com. Retrieved from

https://explorable.com/descriptive-research-design

Yashar, Z. E. (n. d.). CAD in Architectural Education: The Role of Computer Aided Design (CAD)

in Architectural Education. Academia. Retrieved from

https://www.academia.edu/36244448/CAD_in_Architectural_Education_The_Role_of_C

omputer_Aided_Design_CAD_in_Architectural_Education