Revisiting a CAD course in the midst of the global pandemic with an activity-centered framework

Reflections from design students



Emneord (Nøkkelord):

CAD pedagogy, online design education, the ACAD Framework, activity-centered CAD learning, reflective writing


Inevitably, the global pandemic that occurred in 2020 had a significant impact on the practices of design education, and apparently, design teachers were not fully prepared and equipped. In this ambivalent and emergent era, they struggled to adapt their current teaching methods to online education. Since then, various teaching methods have been developed and applied to incorporate online delivery. As we see an invitation to advance learner-centered and process-based teaching approaches regarding Computer-Aided Design (CAD) education in the literature; in this article, we address how a constructively aligned CAD course has been adapted to online learning and how it affected design students’ learning ex­per­iences. Hence, we discuss the online CAD learning experience through students’ reflections based on the Activity-Centered Analysis and Design (ACAD) Framework. To get insights into their online learning experience on CAD, we asked students to write their thoughts based on a structured qualitative course evaluation template. Broadly, online learning practices in CAD not only resulted in challenges in design learning but also created opportunities as mentioned in students’ writings. Based on qualitative content analysis, students’ reflections on a CAD class implemented under the context of online learning can include both advantages and disadvantages of the online learning platform, peer learning, peer tutoring, active involvement in the class, communication, etc. As a result, students’ reflections on the CAD course made us think that the dimensions of the ACAD Framework are interwoven and interactive.


Antonietti, A., & Giorgetti, M. (2006). Teachers’ beliefs about learning from multimedia. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(2), 267–282.

Aras, L. (2021). Liberating design education after Corona Days. Academia Letters, 2.

Başa, İ., & Şenyapılı, B. (2005). The (in)secure position of the design jury towards computer generated presentations. Design Studies, 26(3), 257–270. d.2004.09.006

Bender, D. M., Wood, B. J., & Vredevoogd, J. D. (2004). Teaching time: Distance education versus classroom instruction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 18(2), 103-114.

Bhavnani, S. K., Reif, F., & John, B. E. (2001). Beyond command knowledge: Identifying and teaching strategic knowledge for using complex computer applications. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 229–236).

Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32(3), 347–364. https :// 38871

Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for quality learning at university. What the student does (4th ed.). Maidenhead.

Boud, D. (2013). Introduction: Making the move to peer learning. In D. Boud, R. Cohen, & J. Sampson (Eds.), Peer learning in higher education learning from & with other (pp. 1–20). Routledge.

Bülow, M.W. (2022). Designing synchronous hybrid learning spaces: Challenges and opportunities. In E. Gil, Y. Mor, Y. Dimitriadis, & C. Köppe. (eds) Hybrid Learning Spaces. Understanding Teaching-Learning Practice (pp. 135-163). Springer, Cham.

Carvalho, L., Martinez-Maldonado, R., Tsai, Y. S., Markauskaite, L., & De Laat, M. (2022). How can we design for learning in an AI world?. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3, 100053.

Chester, I. (2007). Teaching for CAD expertise. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 17(1), 23–35.

Chester, I. (2008). 3D-CAD: Modern technology–outdated pedagogy? Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 12(1), 7–9.

Çil, E., & Pakdil, O. (2007). Design instructor’s perspective on the role of computers in architectural education: A case study. METU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 24(2), 123–136.

Daalhuizen, J., & Schoormans, J. (2018). Pioneering online design teaching in a MOOC format: tools for facilitating experiential learning. International Journal of Design, 12(2), 1-14.

Davies, W., & Cormican, K. (2013). An analysis of the use of multimedia technology in computer aided design training: Towards effective design goals. Procedia Technology, 9, 200-208.

Demirci, A. (2011). Bilgisayar destekli eğitimin grafik tasarım dersinde kullanımına ilişkin öğrenci görüşleri [Student views on the use of computer aided graphic design courses]. e-Journal of New World Sciences Academy, 6(4), 472–484.

Dosen, A. S., Sher, W., Gajendran, T., & Gu, N. (2012). Teaching CAD: The challenges of online delivery to distance learning students. In Proceedings 37th AUBEA International Conference (pp. 48–56).

Dreamson, N. (2020). Online design education: Meta-connective pedagogy. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 39(3), 483-497.

Fawns, T., Markauskaite, L., Carvalho, L., & Goodyear, P. (2022). H2m pedagogy: Designing for hybrid learning in medical education. In E. Gil, Y. Mor, Y. Dimitriadis & C. Köppe. (eds). Hybrid Learning Spaces. Understanding Teaching-Learning Practice (pp. 61-76). Springer, Cham.

Fleischmann, K. (2019). From studio practice to online design education: Can we teach design online? Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology / La Revue Canadienne de L’apprentissage et de la Technologie, 45(1).

Fleischmann, K. (2020). Online design education: searching for a middle ground. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education. 19(1), 36-57.

Gelmez, K. (2020). In quest of a successful design studio course: A course evaluation template. In R. Almendra & J. Ferreira (Eds.), Proceedings of 1st International Conference on Research and Education in Design (REDES 2019) (pp. 110–118). Paper presented at Lisbon, 14 November 2019. CRC Press.

Gelmez, K., & Arkan, S. (2022). Aligning a CAD course constructively: telling-to-peer and writing-to-peer activities for efficient use of CAD in design curricula. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 32, 1813–1835.

Gelmez, K., & Bağlı, H. (2018). Tracing design students’ affective journeys through reflective writing. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28(4), 1061–1081.

Gelmez, K., Efilti, P., & Yilmaz, O. (2022). “Well, a tough question. Congratulations:” How and in what aspects do design students evaluate a design studio course? International Journal of Technology and Design Education.

Goodyear, P., Carvalho, L., & Yeoman, P. (2021). Activity-Centred Analysis and Design (ACAD): Core purposes, distinctive qualities and current developments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 1-20.

Green, B. (2004). Personal construct psychology and content analysis. Personal Construct Theory & Practice, 1(3), 82-91.

Green, J. K., Burrow, M. S., & Carvalho, L. (2020). Designing for transition: supporting teachers and students cope with emergency remote education. Postdigital Science and Education, 2(3), 906-922.

Hanna, R., & Barber, T. (2001). An inquiry into computers in design: Attitudes before-attitudes after. Design Studies, 22(3), 255–281.

Himaki, S. E. (2021). How to sketch things with words: Exploring the relation between verbal and visual expressions of novice design students [Master thesis], Graduate School of Istanbul Technical University.

Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative health research, 15(9), 1277-1288.

Ioannou, O. (2018). Opening up design studio education using blended and networked formats. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15(47).

Kember, D., Leung, D. Y. P., & Kwan, K. P. (2002). Does the use of student feedback questionnaires improve the overall quality of teaching? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(5), 411–425.

Lattuca, L. R., & Domagal-Goldman, J. M. (2007). Using qualitative methods to assess teaching effectiveness. New Directions for Institutional Research, 136, 81-93.

Marshalsey, L., & Sclater, M. (2020). Together but apart: Creating and supporting online learning communities in an era of distributed studio education. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 39(4), 826-840.

Milovanovic, A., Kostic, M., Zoric, A., Dordevic, A., Pesic, M., Bugarski, J., Todorovic, D., Sokolovic, N., & Josifovski, A. (2020). Transferring COVID-19 challenges into learning potentials: Online workshops in architectural education. Sustainability, 12(17), 1-21.

Newman, G., George, B., Li, D., Tao, Z., Yu, S., & Lee, R. J. (2018). Online learning in landscape architecture: Assessing issues, preferences, and student needs in design-related online education. Landscape Journal, 37(2), 41-63.

Onofrei, G., & Ferry, P. (2020). Reusable learning objects: a blended learning tool in teaching computer-aided design to engineering undergraduates. International Journal of Educational Management, 34(10), 1559-1575.

Pekrun, R. (2006). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: Assumptions, corollaries, and implications for educational research and practice. Educational Psychology Review, 18(4), 315–341. doi:10.1007/s10648-006-9029-9.

Platt, M. (1993). What student evaluations teach, Perspectives on Political Science, 22(1), 29–40.

Rajagopal, K., & Mateusen, L. (2021). Designing virtual mobility as a transformative learning experience. Edutec. Revista Electrónica De Tecnología Educativa, (75), 9-30.

Seinauskas, R. (1997). A distance laboratory for computer-aided design. In Proceedings of International Conference on Microelectronic Systems Education (pp. 107-108). IEEE.

Spooren, P., Brockx, B., & Mortelmans, D. (2013). On the validity of student evaluation of teaching: The state of the art, Review of Educational Research, 83(4).

Taşlı-Pektaş, Ş., & Erkip, F. (2006). Attitudes of design students toward computer usage in design. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 16(1), 79–95. 8-005-3175-0

Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative research: Analysis types and software tools. Falmer.

Topping, K. J. (2005). Trends in peer learning. Educational Psychology, 25(6), 631-645.

Tregloan, K., Soccio, P., & Thompson, J. (2020). BEL+T designs a DIAgram … a relational framework for teaching online. Distance Design Education [Online].

Tüfek, T. E. (2022). An unexpected shift to an online design studio course: Student insights on design critiques. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 41(1), 158-170.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Wood, J. (2003). Open minds and a sense of adventure: How teachers of art and design approach technology. International Journal of Art and Design Education, 13(1), 179–191.

Wragg, N. (2020). Online communication design education: The importance of the social environment. Studies in Higher Education, 45(11), 2287-2297.

Yixian, D., Qihua, T., Xuan, D., & Kongde, H. (2014). CAD/CAM courses integration of theoretical teaching and practical training. In Procedia—Social and behavioral sciences, 5th World Conference on Educational Sciences—CES 2013, 116, (pp. 4297–4300). 014.01.935

Yorgancıoğlu, D. (2020). Critical reflections on the surface, pedagogical and epistemological features of the design studio under the “new normal” conditions. Journal of Design Studio, 2(1), 25-36.

Gökhan Türer. EUT 241E Computer Aided Design, Final Project, Fall 2021




Hvordan referere

Gelmez, K., & Arkan, S. (2022). Revisiting a CAD course in the midst of the global pandemic with an activity-centered framework : Reflections from design students. FormAkademisk, 15(1).




Cited by