View
236
Download
2
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Tracing Ideas with Digital SketchingNancy Yen-wen Cheng, University of Oregon Architecture
“I want to see therefore I draw.” -- Carlo Scarpa
M.C. Escher
Project Goals• Reveal hidden aspects of design drawing• Create dialogue on alternative methods• Understand what’s difficult for students• Develop lessons for live / remote access
“I want to see therefore I draw.” -- Carlo Scarpa
M.C. Escher
PhasesEXPERIMENTAL• Collect examples of standard tasks• Try teaching with examples
ANALYTICAL• Compare student performance after seeing different examples• Analyze student performance to understand difficulties
CREATIVE• Make alternative lesson formats• Looking at expressive possibilities
Logitech Io Pen • Draw with a special pen and paper• Download drawings to a computer• Review animation in Logitech
IoReader software
Anoto Digital Pen on Paper System
Lesson Scenario
1. Try drawing task BEFORE studying examples
2. Study examples & own drawings
3. Try similar task AFTER studying examples
4. Analyze & discuss results
PRE-TEST
POST-TEST
INTERVENTION
Example FormatsINTERACTIVE:IoReader
Example Formats• Q & A:Image slideshow
Developed by Ri Len Lukens
Example Formats http://sketching.uoregon.eduAUTOPLAY: Scaleable Vector Graphics
shows thinking pauses
Developed w/ Stephen Lamb, Will Henderson & Brian Lockyear
Example FormatsINTERPRETED:Narrated Video
Developed with Nargas Oskui
Example FormatsACTIVITY:• Video with Exercises
Developed with Nargas Oskui
Example Formats
? Problems very basic
+ engagingACTIVITYVideo with Exercises
> Needs variety of voices
+ explains graphics+ audio or text option
INTERPRETEDNarrated video
- no active drawing
+ involves student with questions
Q & AImage slideshow
- static> requires interpretation
+ clarifies important steps
PRINTOUTImage storyboard
- could use interpretation
+ Reveals actual timing
AUTOPLAY Scaleable Vector Graphics
- Final results always showing
+ Self-guided pace + Engaging
INTERACTIVE IoReader
Analysis Process: Comparison
PRE-TEST
POST-TEST
INTERVENTION A
PRE-TEST
POST-TEST
INTERVENTION B
Learning from Animations vs. StoryboardsHypothesis• Interactive animated sketches are better
teaching tools than a still storyboard.
Can students viewing an animated sketch copy its process better than students viewing a storyboard of the same sketch?
Animation Paper Storyboard
OR
How to measure learning?To compare understanding of animation & storyboards, we looked
at abilities to:
1. COPY the order of drawing operations: animation slightly better
2. DESIGN to fulfil the problem requirements
How to measure learning? RESULTSTo compare understanding of animation & storyboards, we looked at abilities
to:
1. COPY the order of drawing operations: animation slightly better
2. DESIGN to fulfil the problem requirements: animation slightly better
Analysis 1: Ability to copy stepsA. Categorizing design stepsB. Use color coding in parsing steps in original and copies
Developed with Andrew McKelvey
Analysis 2: Ability to design RESULTS• Jury says groups are
equal, criteria shows Animation group better
INTERPRETATION• Students could follow
compelling animation more closely
Findings: Design ChallengesRESULTS• Difficult tasks revealed:
widest skill variation
INTERPRETATION• Beginners may see but
lack skills to copy
Findings: Drawing efficiencyRESULTS• Beginner, Intermediate
and Advanced students used approximately the same number of strokes
INTERPRETATION• Experts use strokes
efficiently; setting up context to explore new aspects
Space Planning Scoring - Mar 9, 2007Uses plan conventions:
1. Labels more than 50% of rooms2. Labels all rooms3. Draws symbols (doors, windows, stairs, north arrow, sun4. Draws wall thickness through double lines or poche 5. Adds furniture (shelves, desks, chair indications, floor pa6. Creates explanatory diagrams
3D visualization: 1. Includes a mezzanine (draws both first floor and mezzan2. Floor plan and mezzanine plan show spatial consistently 3. Floor plan and mezzanine plan show that stairs align4. Draws a different 2D view: section or elevation5. Draws a 3D view: perspective or axon
Site context interpretation 1. Draws rectangular footprint
Analysis: Construct MappingFrom Kathleen Scalise, UO Education and Mark Wilson of UC Berkeley, • A construct: the cognitive characteristic to be measured • Define developmental performance criteria from beliefs about how students represent knowledge
PRE-TEST
PRE-TEST
PRE-TEST
PRE-TEST
PRE-TEST
PRE-TEST
PRE-TEST
Analysis: Construct MappingFrom Kathleen Scalise, UO Education and Mark Wilson of UC Berkeley, • Assessment distinguishes expert vs. beginner performance;
shapes an accurate description of the developmental process• Provokes re-definition of developmental constructs
Most rarely achieved: 1) Drawing all areas to size within 15%
2) Drawing in 3D
4XX
3 XX X
XX XXX X D5 3D Perspective
2 X XXXX B7 Areas sized correctly XXX
XXXXXX XXXXXXXXX A10 Context 2+ ways X B8 Transforms XXXX
1 XXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXX XXXXXXX C6 Explanatory Diagrams
XXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX B4 Zones/Mods, B5 Thum XXXXXXXXXX C5 Furniture D3 Stairs align
0 XXXXXX A1 Rectangle XXXXXXXXXXX B2 Bubble diagram XXXXXX D4 another 2D viewXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX B3 Program Areas, B6 Al XXXXXXX D2 consistent floor plans
XXXX A6 Struct/Meas Grid XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXX B10 Circulation Efficient XXXXXXXXXX XXXXX XXXXX
- 1 XXX A9 Context 2 ways XXX XXX C2 Labels all roomsXX X XXX D1 Includes a mezzanine
XXX X XXX X X
- 2 X A7 Columns well spaced X B9 Room Proportion okay XXX XXX XXX
XX- 3 X A2 Columns XX C3 Symbols
X A3 Columns on Centerline, A4 # ColumnsXX A5 Footprint proportion XX A8 Context 1 way C1 labels 1/2+ rooms
- 4X B1 Some Program Areas
Context Programming & Planning Graphics: 2D & 3D
Analysis: Construct MappingCORRELATIONS show developmental path i.e. Those who sized areas correctly:- Document the site accurately- Use a grid- Create consistent space without alternate views- Draw diagrams less frequently
PROG
RAMM
ING
/ PLA
NNIN
G
7.Dr
aws c
orre
ct siz
es o
f pro
gram
with
in 10
-15%
4.Dr
aws o
rgan
izing
zone
s or m
odul
es
5.D
raw
s thu
mbn
ail d
iagra
m
6.Sh
ows a
ll pr
ogra
m ar
eas
SITE
CON
TEXT
10.
Show
s bui
ldin
g co
ntex
t mor
e tha
n tw
o wa
ys
6.Dr
aws s
tructu
ral g
rid o
r mea
sure
men
t grid
9.Sh
ows b
uild
ing
cont
ext t
wo w
ays
PLAN
GRA
PHIC
S
6.Cr
eates
expl
anato
ry d
iagra
ms
4.Dr
aws w
all th
ickne
ss
2.La
bels
all ro
oms
3D V
ISUA
LIZA
TION
5.Dr
aws a
3D vi
ew
3.Fl
oor p
lan an
d m
ezza
nine
plan
alig
n sta
irs
2.Fl
oor p
lan an
d m
ezza
nine
plan
hav
e con
sisten
1.In
clude
s a m
ezza
nine
# strong planners 10 2 2 8 2 8 8 2 3 9 1 9 10 10
% strong planners 100% 20% 20% 80% 20% 80% 80% 20% 30% 90% 10% 90% 100% 100%
#others 0 27.5 33 41 18 38 40 23 30 50 10 25 30 47
%others 0% 39% 46% 58% 25% 54% 56% 32% 42% 70% 14% 35% 42% 66%
%difference 100% -19% -26% 22% -5% 26% 24% -12% -12% 20% -4% 55% 58% 34%
Creative examples
Creative examples
Creative examples
Next StepINTEGRATE paused color drawing with
commentary
INTEGRATE paused color
Developed with Brian Lockyear
Conclusion• Opening eyes, creating dialog through technology
CREATE ANALYZE
REFLECT
Cyclical Development Process
Nancy Yen-wen Cheng sketching.uoregon.edu nywc@uoregon.eduThanks to:Assistants Nargas Oskui, Brian Lockyear, Ri Len Lukens, Stephen LambProf. Kathleen Scalise, UO School of EducationUO Educational Technology fundingNorthwest Academic Computing ConsortiumLogitech Corporation
Recommended