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