Vol.:(0123456789)
Discover Education (2024) 3:248
|
https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00350-0
Discover Education
Research
Assessing theawareness ofemerging digital technologies
amongstudents inarchitectural education inGhana
ElomAyeke
1
· EmmanuelAppiahAcheampong
2
· IshmaelBekoe
3
· JeannetteAttipoe
1
Received: 17 April 2024 / Accepted: 13 November 2024
© The Author(s) 2024 OPEN
Abstract
The twenty-rst century has become synonymous with two primary architectural concepts: sustainability and digital
technologies. While the former seeks less carbon footprint within the built environment, the latter drives a novel approach
towards ecient and eective productivity. However, previous ndings show inadequate study on Emerging Digital
Technologies (EDTs) and their Awareness in Higher Educational Institutions (HEIs), especially in the Global South. In light
of this, the study primarily aims to evaluate the perceived Awareness of students of EDTs within architectural educational
institutions in Ghana. The study used a quantitative approach, obtaining data from 243 respondents using a question-
naire. Findings revealed students were aware of most EDTs, indicating an interest specically in Computer-Aided Design
and Building Information Modelling software. However, the students perceived little Awareness and interest in robotics
and nanotechnology. Furthermore, the students perceived that inadequate tools and equipment are vital inuences that
limit their Awareness of EDTs. The authors recommend that HEIs review curricula to incorporate EDTs and collaborate
with digital agencies to create an eective environment for students to increase their interest and prociency in EDTs in
architecture. There should also be continuous capacity building for the architectural HEI sta to ensure the transfer of
relevant skills in contemporary EDTs in the industry. Moreover, further studies must be conducted into a standardized
framework for introducing EDTs in architectural education.
Keywords Architectural curricula· Architectural education in Ghana· Emerging digital technology· Students’
perspective
1 Introduction
Technologies are increasingly playing a role in education due to the advent of the fourth industrial revolution [1]. Even
though Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) are considered the least digitized sectors, there is an increased
interest in conceptualizing and integrating emerging digital technologies in practice and academia [2]. Thus, built envi-
ronment professionals of the twenty-rst century are exposed to new horizons of design and manufacturing possibilities,
impacting form, structure, and material use [3, 4]. Consequently, technological advancements signicantly impact the
architectural profession since it is closely linked to society and its changing customs [5]. This change stems from Emerging
Digital Technologies (EDTs) that aect how modern architecture is designed and built compared to previous centuries.
* Elom Ayeke, elayke68@gmail.com; Emmanuel Appiah Acheampong, Acheampongemmanuel11@gmail.com; Ishmael Bekoe,
bekoeishmael7@gmail.com; Jeannette Attipoe, jattipoe@htu.edu.gh |
1
Department ofArchitecture andReal Estate Management,
Ho Technical University, Ho, Ghana.
2
Department ofArchitecture, Kwame Nkrumah University ofScience andTechnology, Kumasi,
Ghana.
3
Department ofBuilding Technology, Koforidua Technical University, Koforidua, Ghana.
Vol:.(1234567890)
Research Discover Education (2024) 3:248
|
https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00350-0
EDT is not a standardized term. From its root terms, ‘emerging’ and ‘digital technologies,’ the online Oxford dictionary
denes ‘emerging’ as ‘starting to exist, grow or become known.’ Whereas ‘digital technologies’ are virtual systems/tools
that enable the creation, handling, and storage of information as well as various forms of communication in digital, binary
computer language between humans and electronic systems [6, 7]. Thus, EDTs can be considered as using virtual tools
that are primarily unrealized and can potentially change the status quo within a particular eld [8, 9]. EDTs cover a wide
range of uses; as such, they can be categorized as digital learning tools like online hosting platforms like Zoom and MS
Teams [5] and specic/intrinsic uses in particular industries such as the AEC industry [5, 7, 10]. This study’s scope is limited
to digital applications intrinsic to the architectural discipline and can potentially change the current work standards.
Given the subject, such EDTs include Computer Aided/Drafting and Design (CADD), Building Information Modelling
(BIM), 3D/digital fabrication, Geographic Information Systems (GIS), programming, coding and scripting, and robotics
[10–14]. These technologies are recognized as ‘emerging’ as their full potential is yet to be fully exploited in practice and
academia. Additionally, it has the potential to fundamentally alter design and construction practices within the built
environment, as well as the vocabulary and identity of twenty-rst-century architecture [11].
In light of the signicance of EDTs, it is considered a vital skill within the twenty-rst century. As such, this places a
charge, especially on higher education institutions (HEIs), in adapting to changing digital trends. Subsequently, as digital
technologies advance, architecture schools are tasked with teaching them. This presents a chance to design contem-
porary learning modules and guarantee student access to these digital skills [5, 12]. However, architectural educational
institutions face the challenge of keeping up with constant changes and understanding how to educate on digital tech-
nologies [13, 14]. Contrastingly, there seems to be a detachment between the discussion of training on digital technolo-
gies and a lack of real-world project experience, thus resulting in architectural education disconnecting with modern
design and global professional practice [15]. Consequently, given the fast-paced technological changes, students receive
knowledge that may not be relevant to the job market [16, 17]. Hence, the emergence of digital technologies in architec-
ture education prepares students to cope eciently with the constantly changing architecture profession and moderately
lls the gap without real-world practical sessions [16]. To facilitate the adoption of EDTs, Awareness is considered one of
the signicant precursors to the successful adoption of EDTs as Awareness forms part of the cognitive process of learning
for students [18, 19]. Furthermore, Kashada etal. [20] state that users who are not adequately informed or aware of new
technology or system being adopted will generally not favorably see the adoption and utilization process. As a result,
they are not likely to embrace the new approach that prepares students to cope eciently with the constantly changing
architecture profession and vice versa.
Given this, most architectural schools and departments, particularly in developed countries, have reviewed their edu-
cational modules by integrating additional digital-related courses [10, 17]. Architectural courses in several international
institutions, such as the University of Colombia, Cornell University, Milano University, University of Melbourne, U.C.L.,
Harvard School of Architecture, Princeton University, University of Pennsylvania, as well as ETH Zurich- Swiss Federal,
have integrated more digital-related courses such as 3d fabrication, simulation and programming in the curriculum, with
a higher integration intensity happening in the preparatory Year (s) of their undergraduate studies [10]. On the other
hand, architectural institutions in the global south are lagging behind these rapid advancements [17, 21, 22]. Hence, to
educate future generations of architects to utilize these technologies to alter our environment, schools of architecture in
developing countries should understand these EDTs and adapt them accordingly. The adoption of EDT allows architec-
ture students in developing countries like Ghana to compete favorably in the global market by acquiring new skills and
practical experience, improving creativity, and lending eorts to achieve sustainability in the built environment. From
this context, this paper seeks to answer the following questions concerning EDTs in architecture from the perspective
of student architects in Ghana:
i. What is the level of architecture students’ awareness of emerging digital technologies?
ii. What perceived factors inuence the level of awareness of EDT among architectural students?
iii. What information channel do architecture students perceive is necessary to improve their awareness of emerging
digital technologies?
The study is signicant for advancing architectural education, promoting quality education, and fostering sustain-
able and resilient communities. Additionally, it is helpful to lecturers and HEIs in Ghana who are planning to incorporate
digital technologies into education.
Vol.:(0123456789)
Discover Education (2024) 3:248
|
https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00350-0
Research
2 Literature review
This section reviews architectural education and Emerging Digital Technologies (EDTs) used within architectural
education.
2.1 Architectural education
Technology is used extensively in architecture; thus, it signicantly impacts architectural design, education, and practice
[10]. As such, the use of EDTs within design studio curricula in architectural education has increased [17, 21]. This has
allowed previous design complexities, detail, and materiality to be possible in architecture [21]. In light of this, the archi-
tectural studio has evolved into a place to investigate the ability of EDTs in architectural design. As a result, the growing
Awareness and prociency in various EDTs allow the involvement of diverse design media in their creative processes [22].
This is signicant because students begin employing these tools during the conceptual stage of their design investiga-
tion, allowing them to be conversant with EDTs used in practice. Consequently, EDTs have provided both professionals
and students with exibility in design and construction [10]. Furthermore, these technologies ensure greater eciency
and design intelligence; thus, they are increasingly considered essential to the AEC industry [6, 23]. However, critiques
of EDTs have cited addiction to its use in design projects as a disadvantage. Therefore, many educators and practitioners
recommend combining traditional and digital design methods instead of one approach [15, 24]. Understanding EDTs’
eect begins with how awareness can guide future study, advance design and building methods, and enhance profes-
sional training [10, 21].
2.2 Architectural education insub‑Saharan Africa (SSA)
In sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), formal architectural education began in the 1900s. This move sparked discussions about
the shape of architectural education in Africa [25, 26]. The architect’s education was intended to be a complementary
position to existing colonial socio-political structures [26]. Due to the wind of independence, Ghanaian-trained architects
were schooled to incorporate context climate and culminate an identity for the independent nation [27, 28]. However,
the origins of architectural education imposed by the British throughout SSA have had a lasting inuence on African
architectural education [26, 29]. Consequently, the Bauhaus tradition has characterized architecture education in Ghana
and many parts of Africa through experimentation and the Beaux Art training model using symmetry. Over time, the
Bauhaus model has resonated well with contemporary schools as it has the exibility of adaptation to meet the ever-
changing demands of modern practice and client interest [30–32]. This is signicant as it allowed for the continual
emphasis on experimentation and exploitation of materials, patterns, and design within the architectural studio. An
extension of this model employs the Problem-Based Learning (PBL) approach, where students actively solve signicant
challenges through practice and reection, develop self-directed learning habits, and build mental models for learning
[33]. Here, it is constructive. It views students as active learners and co-creators who, with past knowledge, arrange newly
relevant experiences into individual mental models [34]. According to Olweny [35, 36], there is a move in Kenya to use
PBL and research in teaching while emphasizing solving emerging issues on shelter, water, and energy. On the other
hand, Uganda is inculcating design technologies as an integral part of its future architectural practitioners. Whereas
Ghana’s contemporary model of architectural education is evolving toward developing critical professional competen-
cies and sustainable design practices [37] [38]. This resonates with the global emphasis on the relationship between
architecture and society and adopting cultural integration, sustainability, and community engagements. In Ghana, the
educational model is regulated using a 5-year cyclical review by the Ghana Tertiary Education Commission (GTEC). The
review is signicant as it provides opportunities to keep the curriculum abreast with contemporary trends while making
students’ learning experiences more relevant to the current demands of society and industry [39]. As part of structuring
students’ academic progression, architectural education institutions of higher learning in Ghana use the Royal Institute
of British Architects (RIBA) or the American academic architecture practice. The RIBA school practice comprises four years
of undergraduate plus two years of postgraduate. In contrast, the American system typically includes a straight ve-year
undergraduate system with two or more years of postgraduate.
Vol:.(1234567890)
Research Discover Education (2024) 3:248
|
https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00350-0
2.3 Digital technologies inarchitectural education
The potential of digital technologies in the AEC industry allows complicated buildings to be created more sustainably,
using less material and without conventional formwork, thus changing both industry and academic environments [21,
40, 41]. These digital technologies express modern architectural concepts in parametric design, intelligent buildings,
performative architecture, and resilient and sustainable buildings. The use of EDTs also plays a role in reducing carbon
footprint through the use of less paper, less waste on construction sites, and the encouragement of modularity in design
and construction. These include Computer-Aided Design (CAD), 3D/Digital fabrication, Virtual environments, Building
Information Modelling (BIM), computer programming, Articial Intelligence (AI), Nano Technology, Geographic Informa-
tion Systems (GIS), and robotics [3, 10, 42–45].
2.3.1 Computer‑aided design (CAD) andbuilding information modelling (BIM)
Computer-aided design (CAD) was popularized in the 1980s when commercial PCs became accessible. As a result, CAD
software products increased in line with technological advancements; thus, software programs were readily available
[42, 43]. However, early versions of CAD were two-dimensional (2D). CAD has been integrated into the Building Infor-
mation Modelling (BIM) process to increase the potential of CAD products. BIM is considered a process for integrating
technology and building information to produce a digital representation of a project. It incorporates information from
numerous sources and develops jointly with the actual project throughout its timeline, including design, construction,
and operational data [44, 45]. This has allowed the possibility of producing 3D models and rendering virtual design,
animation, and analysis. This has given architecture presentations new dimensions and tectonic and spatial geometries.
The use of CAD and BIM helps students’ creativity by allowing them to create design solutions, employ interactive media,
reduce production time, and facilitate work between groups of students [46]. Examples of CAD and BIM software include
Autodesk Revit Architecture, Autodesk AutoCAD, Rhinoceros, Grasshopper, and Sketchup.
2.3.2 3D/digital fabrication
Despite being around since the late 1970s, 3D/Digital printing has only recently gained popularity in this decade of the
twenty-rst century. 3D printing has recently sparked a lot of “future” activity due to a mix of media interest and the
expanding accessibility of consumer-level technology [3]. Digital fabrication makes 3-dimensional (3D) objects using
related information from digital models [4]. This uses an additive process where successive layers of material are laid
until the object is created. The process is termed stereolithography, which uses a laser to solidify small layers of liquid
polymer sensitive to ultraviolet (UV) radiation [3, 4]. The three-dimensional printer is one of the most signicant tools
for manufacturing rapid prototyping [47]. To print, a mechanical device known as a “3D printer” uses materials such as
plastic or metal or various materials to create a 3D model. A specialist program transforms a digital model into a 3D ste-
reogram to execute a printing command to produce an object [48]. 3D printing allows easy project conceptualization
for the client and designer [11, 49].
2.3.3 Virtual environment‑VE (virtual reality, augmented reality, mixed reality, 360 degrees)
Despite architecture’s long history and experience in using 2D plans for building design, modern designs have a higher
complexity of design and increased social participation. Thus, using the Virtual Environment (VE) lls the gap in digital
technology for a better representational medium. The technology involves 3D simulations, enabling the designer and
client to immerse, explore, and control the 3D simulation environment [50–52]. This is performed using either a VR
headset, holographic lenses, paranormal photos or videos, and controllers, which may have sensors so that users can
interact with the virtual environment [53]. Using VE allows the determination of comprehensive specications for build-
ing design before construction. The virtual environment increases students’ spatial ability and appreciation during the
design conceptual stage [54].
Vol.:(0123456789)
Discover Education (2024) 3:248
|
https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00350-0
Research
2.3.4 Geographic information system (GIS)
GIS in architecture began as a regional and urban development tool and later expanded to include urban planning and
management. This gave architects more information than just site plans and base maps. It incorporates solid tools for
analyzing, designing, creating, and managing architectural data to assist well-informed decisions, covering a range of
scales of subjects and space [55]. It provides a dynamic method for displaying previously unnoticed patterns of socio-
cultural, socioeconomic, behavioral, or demographic data and contextual relationships throughout a geographical area
[56]; for architecture students using CAD, GIS in the educational setting oers technological assistance for creating
contextual architecture, including the place-making process in their designs, query, and analysis of geographical data,
as well as present spatial data [57].
2.3.5 Programming andartificial intelligence (AI)
Architectsincreasingly adopt digital computational techniques to produce parametric design, ecient energy modeling,
lighting calculations, and environmental analysis [14]. This is possible by using articial intelligence (AI), which focuses on
developing algorithms that let computers learn from data and make judgments, and traditional programming focuses
entirely on writing a set of predetermined instructions for a computer to follow to fulll the user/client’s need [41, 58,
59]. The necessity for architecture students to become familiar with fast-evolving tools such as parametric computational
modeling tools, performative computation, or algorithmic programming has thus become a forefront agenda, noted by
educators and researchers [10]. Despite the importance of completing challenging tasks, such as modeling complicated
geometries or simulating performance, some issues may be beyond the scope of the software. Modifying the built-in
features of various digital instruments, coding, and scripting can be extremely helpful in overcoming these diculties
by enabling users to carry out challenging tasks that were previously impossible [14, 60]. Programming and AI can also
automate monotonous jobs, reducing the time needed to complete these extensive, time-consuming processes [59].
Additionally, scripting can address design issues and analyze and visualize large datasets, such as those needed for
energy modeling [61].
2.3.6 Robotics
Robotics is essential in all phases of architectural design, from early conceptual work to construction. Robots can be
thought of as a computer-controlled extension of hand tools. These tools include Computer Numerical Control (CNC)
milling machines, drones, and multi-axis robotic arms, amongst many others [62]. Due to the complex nature of today’s
world, it is inevitable for one discipline to intersect, and this presents opportunities for professionals in the built environ-
ment to collaborate to advance human needs and aspirations and protect the environment. In the coming decades, the
increasing integration of robotics into the built environment will have a signicant social inuence as these technologies
support and, in some circumstances, enhance routine work, educational, and recreational activities [63, 64]. Robotics ena-
bles students to explore complex geometries and forms. It enhances precision and allows rapid prototyping and testing
of design concepts. Consequently, students can quickly evaluate and rene ideas before creating full-scale models [65].
2.3.7 Nanotechnology
Nano-scale objects exist in sizes near the atomic level; thus, nanotechnology is the study of controlling materials at an
atomic or molecular scale. The use of nanotechnology will signicantly alter how we live. Its benets include a reduc-
tion in the volume or weight of materials, more eective use of resources and preservation, reduced requirement for
operational maintenance (easier to clean and longer cleaning intervals), reductions in energy and raw material use as
well as CO
2
emissions [66]. Developments are already underway for recently discovered usage. Nanotechnology will
signicantly impact the qualities of construction materials and the eld of architecture [67, 68]. An example of such
developing technology is the carbon nanotubes, which are estimated to be 100 times stronger than steel [69]. Other
materials include a polymer nanotruss, self-cleaning coating, nanotechnology to control elastic waves to redirect external
disturbances such as tsunamis or earthquakes, and cellulose nanocrystals to improve the strength of traditional building
materials such as concrete and timber [68]. At the conceptual stage of designing, students are motivated to reconsider
the use of conventional materials due to the potential of new materials with improved strength, lightweight design, and
superior acoustic and thermal insulation. Developing more environmentally friendly building materials allows students
Vol:.(1234567890)
Research Discover Education (2024) 3:248
|
https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00350-0
to investigate ideas related to materials that lessen waste and their impact on the environment or surfaces that clean
themselves when putting together their design projects [70]. This is pivotal as the consideration of nanotechnology dur-
ing the conceptual stage enables students to consider materials for indoor air quality, user comfort, aesthetic potential,
and enhanced durability, promotes interdisciplinary conversations among students as well and fosters forward-thinking
mindsets to address future challenges in design and construction [71].
2.4 Benefits ofemerging technologies
The foundation for using emerging technologies is laid by fundamental tools like Computer-Aided Design (CAD) software
and Building Information Modeling (BIM) software which expedite design processes [72]. As such, EDTs provide numer-
ous advantages. EDTs possess sophisticated simulation tools that speed up and improve design eciency. It makes it
simpler for engineers, architects, and other collaborators to work together, which enhances project processes. EDTs also
guarantee that designs are accurate and compliant with all specications [1]. Architects may experiment and push the
boundaries of what may be feasible in building design and construction with robots and nanotechnology. This advances
the frontiers of architectural design and construction, combining robots and nanotechnology that oers promise for
the future. Alternatively, EDTs promote the design of a minimal carbon footprint of the built environment and maximize
energy eciency [73].
Furthermore, EDTs are revolutionizing architectural education and practice, especially in places where their integra-
tion is still developing [74], such as the global south. In light of this, students are ready to adopt new trends and stay
ahead of the curve due to immersive learning environments [48, 75]. By adopting EDTs, the upcoming generation of
architects is prepared and has the skills to t into a contemporary and sustainable technological architectural future.
However, collaboration between academic institutions and industry stakeholders is crucial to closing the knowledge
and skill gap in EDTs.
2.5 EDTs inGhana
Since the popularization of CAD in the 1980s, West African schools formally introduced them in curricula in the 2000s [42,
76]. In Ghana, Computer Aided Design (CAD) was incorporated into the curriculum of architectural education in the early
2000’s [76]. Despite that, the usage of CAD design tools from 1st (rst semester) to 4th (eighth semester) undergraduate
studio is constrained. Although CAD has been used for over ten years, its full potential has not yet been achieved [77].
Subsequently, the discoveries of alternative technologies have not found their way into the current curriculum, although
there are continuous cyclical reviews. As such, there is an observed mismatch in the schedule for knowledge impartation
against contemporary needs [76]. Architectural institutions in Ghana employ a combination of drafting techniques using
mechanical drawing tools and basic digital alternatives. This approach makes up the contemporary idea of architecture
design education [77]. This hinders hands-on learning through virtual environments to visualize and experiment during
the conceptual stages. Also, it limits interdisciplinary peer learning among students. Though limited, students tend not
to limit themselves to using AutoCAD but primarily through self-learning to acquire competencies in other architecture-
related EDTs [76–79]. However, due to their limitation, less complex geometry is explored by undergraduate students,
although master students showed improved competencies [78]. This condition can be attributed to a wide range of issues,
including insucient infrastructure for digital teaching and practice, a lack of digital technology training specialists, dif-
culties with the user interface of digital tools, inadequate research and development team, limited and expensive cost
of digital technologies subscriptions [11, 77, 80, 81]. Thus, there is a need to promote research into EDTs to strengthen
architectural education and promote contemporary innovations.
2.6 Context ofstudy
With a population of 31 million, Ghana, at the time of data collection had only two accredited architectural educational
institutions of higher learning in Ghana. The academic models described in the paper include “School A,” a 4-year under-
graduate session plus a 2-year postgraduate study, and ‘School B,’ which adopts the straight 5-year BArch program. Both
institutions teach digital technologies as individual courses, knowledge of which must then be employed in studio
design tasks.
Vol.:(0123456789)
Discover Education (2024) 3:248
|
https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00350-0
Research
2.6.1 School A
School A oers a full-time architectural education in Ghana. Currently, there are twelve design studios. The use of digital
technologies for studio work typically commences in the fth semester of studio.
2.6.2 School B
School B oers a full-time architectural program in Ghana. Their programs entail ten design studios. Digital tools in CAD
and graphic software are taught in the fourth-semester studio. They commence using the software in their design dur-
ing the fth-semester studio.
3 Research methodology
A quantitative approach was used because when evaluating students’ awareness, a quantitative research approach works
well since it makes it possible to gather quantiable data from a comprehensive sample, allowing statistical analysis to
pinpoint general levels of Awareness and trends and patterns. Additionally, it guarantees the ndings’ objectivity and
reproducibility [82, 83]. Empirical data was obtained from School A and School B architecture students using a survey
tool. This study primarily assesses students’ awareness of undergraduate research in two accredited institutions, thus
using a cross-sectional approach. Additionally, we do not have the liberty to use a longitudinal approach to the study;
thus, a cross-sectional study is satisfactory for measuring our awareness objective. Table2 shows the population from
both institutions and the sample size.
3.1 Target group
The target group included students who met the following criteria: students enrolled in a public or private institution
and enrolled in an architecture program. However, it excluded rst-year students who we consider to have not been
introduced to EDTs formally. Having an overall population of 656, a hyper-geometric distribution formula generated a
sample size of 243 respondents, as shown in Table1
A pilot study was run with 77 respondents involving computer science students. This group was considered for a pilot
study because the cohort is also aected by the exposure and inuence of related EDTs and are expected to gain com-
petency in taught EDTs. Additionally, there were logistical challenges in recruiting architectural students thus computer
science students, who were easily accessible and ready to participate were recruited to evaluate the survey instrument.
The reliability and validity of the research instrument were ascertained using Cronbach’s alpha. The result shown in
Table2 suggested that the research instrument was reliable and consistent for use.
Table 1 Population and
sample of architecture
students in selected
institutions
Institution Population
School A (without rst years) 515
School B (without rst years) 141
Overall total 656
Estimated sample size 243
Responses obtained 243
Table 2 Test items for reliability
Test Item Coecient alpha Sub value
Awareness of emerging digital technologies (EDT) in architecture 0.918 8
Interest in EDTs 0.845 8
Factors inuencing awareness of EDT in architecture 0.924 11
Channels of information to improve your Awareness of EDTs in architecture 0.925 7
Vol:.(1234567890)
Research Discover Education (2024) 3:248
|
https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00350-0
The questionnaire was divided into ve sections with close-ended answers using a ve-pointer Likert. The rst section
comprises socio-demographic data such as gender, age, level of study, and institution. The subsequent section com-
prises awareness of emerging digital technologies (1 = Not aware, 2 = slightly aware, 3 = moderate aware, 4 = very aware,
5 = highly aware), Interest in EDTs (1 = No interest, 2 = low interest, 3 = moderate interest, 4 = high Interest, 5 = extreme
interest), perceived factors inuencing Awareness (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = slightly agree, 4 = agree,
5 = strongly agree) and channels of information to improve Awareness in EDTs (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree,
3 = slightly agree, 4 = agree, 5 = strongly agree). The variables were measured based on related literature [3, 10, 15, 17].
3.2 Data analysis
Three hundred survey questionnaires were distributed in the institutions. Questionnaires were printed and circulated
among students using Google Forms. After four months, 243 responses were received, indicating a representative sam-
ple for analysis. Data was collected and analyzed using descriptive statistics, which was computed using the statistical
package for social science (SPSS v.27). The data was analyzed using primarily the Relative Importance Index (RII), RII = ΣW/
(A*N). Where A is the most signicant weight (ve in this case), W is the weighting that respondents assigned to each
component (which ranges from one to ve), and N is the total number of respondents. More signicance corresponds
with a higher RII value, meaning more students are aware or procient or agree with a particular variable [84], as shown
in Table3.
4 Findings anddiscussions
4.1 Respondents’ socio‑demographic characteristics
Regarding the socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents, 60.5% are males, and 39.5% are females. This
may support the perception that architecture is considered a male-dominated eld, though anecdotal evidence sug-
gests an increase in the enrolment of female students. The predominant age group in the survey was 20–24years, with
64.6%. It was followed by 15–19years with 21.8%. Cumulatively, it results in 86.4%, which signies a youthful range of
architecture students who are within their developmental stage and have higher adaptability to and interest in digital
technologies. The predominance of a younger student cohort also suggests that most students are likely to be open
and familiar with emerging digital technologies, consequently inuencing their receptivity and willingness to engage
with them. As illustrated in Fig.1 below, the highest number of respondents were from the fth-year class (9th and 10th
semester), representing 30.0% of the respondents. This was followed by the second-year class, which had 27.2% (3rd
and 4th semester). Representations from the fourth-year class accounted for 16.5 (7th and 8th semester), 14.4% for the
sixth (11th and 12th semester), and 11.9% for third years (5th and 6th semester).
4.2 Awareness ofstudents onemerging digital technologies (EDTs)
Respondents were asked to rate their Awareness of EDTs in architecture. The results of their awareness were analyzed
based on a ve-point Likert scale, as shown in Table4. The indicators were based on the following EDTs: 3D/Digital fabri-
cation, Building Information Modelling (BIM), Virtual Environment (Virtual Reality, Augmented reality, Mixed reality, and
360 degrees), Computer-Aided Design and Visualization, Nano Technology, Robotics, Geographic Information System
(GIS) and Programming and Articial Intelligence.
The study hypothesizes that H
o
= Awareness of emerging digital technologies is low.
Table 3 Classication of RII
Scale Importance RII
1 Very low-median 0.0 ≤ RII ≤ 0.2
2 Low-median 0.2 ≤ RII ≤ 0.4
3 Average 0.4 ≤ RII ≤ 0.6
4 High-median 0.6 ≤ RII ≤ 0.8
5 Very high-median 0.8 ≤ RII ≤ 1.0
Vol.:(0123456789)
Discover Education (2024) 3:248
|
https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00350-0
Research
H
1
= Awareness of emerging digital technologies is not low.
The study adopts the mean critical region to be 3; thus, it fails to reject the null hypothesis if the mean response is less
than three and rejects it if it is greater than 3.
Based on the computed mean response, the results demonstrate that students are most aware of computer-aided
design and visualization. Out of 8 EDTs, students were aware of 6 technologies. This results from the mean responses
above the critical region value of 3; thus, the null hypothesis is rejected. This is unsurprising, as CAD was introduced into
Ghanaian architectural education in the early 2000s. This action compelled students to learn CAD on their own or under
the guidance of an instructor [76]. Students indicated a high Awareness of Building Information Modelling, coming in
2nd place, followed by Digital fabrication, Virtual environments, Programming and Articial Intelligence, and Robotics.
However, empirical data suggests that architecture students are least aware of geographical information systems and
nanotechnology. The results of the low awareness of GIS are interesting because aside from CAD, BIM, and VE, GIS stands
as the most relatable concept contemporary architects should be up-to-date with since it deals with spatial parameters.
The general outlook of results, however, contradicts earlier ndings, which indicate that awareness in the global south
may be low [17, 85]. In addition, it is often anticipated that the students in the worldwide south may not have easy expo-
sure and access to these EDTs. To corroborate, practices of EDTs are low within the professional practice in the sub-region
such as Nigeria [3]. However, this study suggests that Ghana’s case may dier from that of other countries within the
Global South. This may be associated with the recent strides by Ghanaian universities to promote sustainable education
within the country, and the increasing access to ICT may also be an underlying factor.
4.3 Interest inEDTs
This section examines students’ interest in EDTs, as shown in Table5. The data reveal that students show a higher level
of interest in CAD and visualization, BIM, and Virtual Environments, which closely aligns with their levels of awareness.
This is consistent with the correlation between awareness and interest [86]. A correlation analysis was conducted to
Fig. 1 Number of respond-
ents against year of study of
respondents
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
L600 L500 L400 L300 L200
Number of respondents
level of study
Architecture students
Table 4 Awareness of
emerging digital technologies
in architecture
Emerging digital technologies 5 4 3 2 1 MR RII RNK
Computer-aided design and visualization 128 62 25 10 18 4.15 0.83 1st
Building information modelling 106 52 36 25 24 3.79 0.76 2nd
3D/digital fabrication 96 51 44 26 26 3.68 0.74 3rd
Virtual environment 68 63 48 23 41 3.33 0.67 4th
Programming and articial intelligence 64 56 40 49 34 3.24 0.65 5th
Robotics 51 59 44 49 40 3.07 0.61 6th
Geographic information system (GIS.) 42 55 40 47 59 2.76 0.55 7th
Nano technology 28 31 50 50 84 2.22 0.44 8th
Vol:.(1234567890)
Research Discover Education (2024) 3:248
|
https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00350-0
verify this relationship, conrming a signicant relationship between Awareness and interest (p < 0.05), as presented in
Table6. However, the results indicate a moderate positive relationship for Digital Fabrication (r = 0.377), BIM (r = 0.478),
and Virtual Environment (r = 0.479). These ndings suggest that while Awareness is a signicant factor, the complexities
of other factors also inuence students’ interest in EDTs [87].
The ndings further suggest that although nanotechnology, robotics, and programming are not core competencies
in the current curriculum, students may view these areas as extensions of their knowledge in CAD and BIM, with their
motivation to learn driven by perceived relevance rather than inherent interest.
4.4 Perceived factors influencing awareness
This section oers further insight into what students perceive as aecting their Awareness of EDTs in architecture, as
shown in Table7. Understanding this would enable stakeholders to make inroads to solving the limitations students
face in embracing EDTs. Students ‘ responses were obtained based on inuential factors aecting awareness [11, 38, 80,
81, 88]. The student viewpoint elicits the most signicant inuencing factor as ‘Inadequate provision of tools and equip-
ment’ and the least being ‘It is not relevant in the current practice of architecture in Ghana.’ This response highlights the
importance of the participation of students in internship programs as part of a seamless transition into architectural
practice. Students’ exposure to work culture forms their understanding of the work environment and the tools it entails
[89]. As such, inadequate exposure to contemporary work environments and, by extension, EDTs inclined practice at
the workplace leads to poor awareness among students. It is followed by students perceiving ‘Lecturers/technicians are
not aware of EDT’ and ‘Lecturers/technicians are not well trained to teach EDT.’ These observations are quite signicant
and require concerted eorts for immediate redress. HEIs must be adequately equipped, while sta capacity must be
continuously built to further expose students to these emerging technologies and their associative applicability in the
learning environment and the real world.
4.5 Channels ofinformation toimprove awareness inEDTs
Respondents were asked to determine which information acquisition channel eectively inuences Awareness in EDTs.
Online tutorials and the use of social media were considered the most viable, as shown in Table8. This could result
from accessibility, convenience, and the opportunity to save for later reference. These are also engaging via live chats
on phones, so far as data availability is comparable to traditional media (ranked 6th on the list), which would require
scheduling. Additionally, the respondents perceived that apprenticeship was inuential in their training for EDTs. This
underscores the importance of the apprenticeship model as an integral practice of the architectural profession. Even
though critics assert that the apprenticeship model of educating architects may have died out, respondents arm
that they learn eectively through this training. Another interesting observation is the low peer-to-peer interface in
learning on EDTs. Perhaps the participants perceive their peers as not having advanced knowledge after obtaining the
basic knowledge. Thus, they actively explore other alternatives for advanced knowledge. In light of this, students are
proactive in developing self-learning approaches to improve their awareness of emerging digital technologies. These
approaches include video tutorials from online or recorded tutors, in-person training from their senior colleagues, and
personal learning [90].
Table 5 Interest in emerging
digital interest
Emerging digital technologies 5 4 3 2 1 MR RII RNK
Computer-aided design and visualization 153 50 26 8 6 4.39 0.88 1st
Building information modelling 117 68 35 14 9 4.11 0.82 2nd
Virtual environment 111 58 40 16 18 3.94 0.79 3rd
3D/digital fabrication 103 49 59 21 11 3.87 0.77 4th
Programming, coding, articial intelligence
and scripting
94 56 50 21 22 3.74 0.75 5th
Robotics 69 49 62 35 28 3.40 0.68 6th
Geographic information system (GIS) 67 45 61 34 36 3.30 0.66 7th
Nano technology 67 43 46 46 41 3.20 0.64 8th
Vol.:(0123456789)
Discover Education (2024) 3:248
|
https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00350-0
Research
Table 6 Correlation between awareness and interest of students in EDTS
Interest in digital
fabrication
BIM Virtual Envi-
ronment
CAD and
Visualiza-tion
Nanotechnology Robotics G.I.S Program-ming
Awareness of digital fabrication Pearson Correlation 0.377
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000
Awareness in BIM Pearson Correlation 0.478
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000
Awareness in the Virtual Environment Pearson Correlation 0.479
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000
Awareness of CAD and visualization Pearson Correlation 0.285
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000
Awareness in nanotechnology Pearson Correlation 0.387
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000
Awareness in Robotics Pearson Correlation 0.267
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000
Awareness in
G.I.S
Pearson Correlation 0.436
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000
Awareness in programming
Pearson Correlation 0.311
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000
Vol:.(1234567890)
Research Discover Education (2024) 3:248
|
https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00350-0
Table 7 Variables aecting awareness of architecture students in EDTs
Variables inuencing awareness 5 4 3 2 1 MR RII RNK
Inadequate provision of tools and equipment 98 83 33 9 20 3.95 0.79 1st
Financial constraints of school/department 99 66 47 13 18 3.88 0.78 2nd
The school/department is not pushing for strategic partnership with Digitally inclined institutions which can benet
students
80 57 59 29 18 3.63 0.73 3rd
Inadequate presence in course allocation/curriculum 71 65 50 32 25 3.51 0.70 4th
Inadequate presence in studio requirement 54 64 69 34 22 3.39 0.68 5th
Limited forms of expression in studio works 50 72 62 34 25 3.36 0.67 6th
Regulatory bodies of Arch are not encouraging EDT adequately in schools 48 66 74 32 23 3.35 0.67 7th
The professional body of Arch are not extending their Continuing Professional Development (CPD’s) for students 44 56 91 30 22 3.29 0.66 8th
Lecturers/technicians are not well-trained to teach EDT 47 52 58 39 47 3.05 0.61 9th
Lecturers/technicians are unaware of EDT 20 42 82 36 63 2.67 0.53 10th
It is not relevant in current professional architecture practice in Ghana 16 25 41 36 125 2.06 0.41 11th
Vol.:(0123456789)
Discover Education (2024) 3:248
|
https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00350-0
Research
4.6 Perceived educational experience
This question sought to elicit students’ views on how well their architectural education has prepared them to use EDTs,
as illustrated in Fig.2. The results suggest that most participants, 60.0%, perceived they were on track with their current
knowledge of EDTs. This would require further investigation to ascertain their reasons. 32.0% are uncertain, signifying
indecision where they need more experience to form a clear judgment. The remaining 8.0% perceive inadequacy in their
education experience. This nding suggests that students perceive the current architectural educational experience as
adequate; however, it requires increased exposure to EDTs for participants who express uncertainty.
5 Conclusion
The study sought to investigate the awareness of architecture students in Ghana of emerging digital technologies
(EDTs). Findings from the study validated the alternative hypothesis of a high level of awareness on EDTs against the null
hypothesis of low awareness. Out of eight EDTs, students were found to have high awareness in six EDTs. While a higher
awareness may suggest prociency, students may still lack the requisite skill in the applicability of these EDTs in real-
world scenarios and, in some cases, within the classroom environment. The study, therefore, underscored the need for
increased sensitization and emphasis on EDTs. As indicated by previous studies, it highlights the need for architectural
Table 8 Channels of
information
Channel of information 5 4 3 2 1 MR RII RNK
Online tutorials 120 74 34 8 7 4.2 0.84 1st
Apprenticeship 121 67 27 15 13 4.10 0.82 2nd
Social media (i.e., X (formerly Twitter), Instagram,
LinkedIn, Facebook)
113 72 34 16 8 4.09 0.82 3rd
Seminar and workshops 113 69 40 11 10 4.09 0.82 4th
Peers 90 87 49 12 5 4.01 0.80 5th
Formal training/Lectures 95 77 47 14 10 3.96 0.79 6th
Traditional (mass) media, e.g., TV, radio, newspaper 49 75 62 45 12 3.43 0.69 7th
Fig. 2 Perceived EDT pre-
paredness by architectural
students
Vol:.(1234567890)
Research Discover Education (2024) 3:248
|
https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00350-0
educational institutions to proactively provide an environment that educates its students by continuously building sta
capacity. Given this, the study can also be used as a supporting tool to inuence professional and regulatory bodies to
promote EDTs among practitioners since they were trained with ‘low EDT’ curricula. This call would usher an era of growth
within architecture practice into an age that allows graduates to be globally competitive with their counterparts in other
jurisdictions. Another perspective would be to review the curriculum to reect the changing trends within the global
built environment industry. Partnerships with other digitally inclined interest groups/ agencies are crucial to fullling
this mandate of promoting digital technologies, which, to a large extent, could contribute to building sustainable and
resilient communities. Although EDTs are a relatively new development within the built environment industry and aca-
demia, stakeholders should promote these new programs and apply for grants to build capacity for their widespread use.
Further study may have to be conducted to ascertain the level of Awareness, prociency, and application of EDTs in
related built environment programs at both academic and professional levels in Ghana. While awareness of EDTs has
a signicant relationship with students’ interest in EDTs, it is not the only factor that inuences their interest, as there
are multiple other factors, such as classroom environment, student background, access to the technology, etc., that
contribute to the complexities of their interest. Therefore, further studies must be conducted into the complexities of
factors that inuence digital awareness. Additionally, relationships between variables such as level of study, institutions
studied in, barriers, skills, and channels can be examined to ascertain inuences that could aect student learning of
EDTs. Moreover, further studies need to be conducted into the call for a standardized framework for introducing EDTs
in architectural education.
Acknowledgements Special thanks to Owuraku Agyei Dsane who helped the research team gather data.
Author contributions E.A: conceptualisation; literature review and investigation; methodology and editing of the original manuscript, writ-
ing—original draft preparation; and reviewing and editing of the revised manuscript. E.A.A: literature review, methodology and editing of
original and revised manuscript. I.B: conceptualisation, methodology, reviewing and editing of the original and revised manuscript. J.A:
reviewing and editing the original and revised manuscript.
Funding Not applicable.
Data availability The corresponding author can provide the datasets used and/or analyzed in the current work upon reasonable request.
Declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate An ethical clearance was sought and approved by the HTU. Directorate of Research and Innovation
with reference HTU/DRI/EC2023-030 on 20th December 2023. The clearance is for six months. An informed and implied consent was requested
from participants who answered the questionnaire. The present study was conducted per the HTU—Research Ethics Policy.
Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adapta-
tion, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source,
provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article
are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in
the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will
need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
References
1. Goldin T, Rauch E, Pacher C, Woschank M. Reference architecture for an integrated and synergetic use of digital tools in education 40.
Proc Comput Sci. 2022;200:407–17. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. procs. 2022. 01. 239.
2. Brozovsky J, Labonnote N, Vigren O. Digital technologies in architecture, engineering, and construction. Automat Construct.
2024;158:105212. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. autcon. 2023. 105212.
3. Oke AE, Atofarati JO, Bello SF. Awareness of 3D printing for sustainable construction in an emerging economy. Construct Econ Build.
2022;22(2):55–68.
4. Beyhan F, Selçuk SA. 3D printing in architecture: one step closer to a sustainable built environment. In: Proceedings of 3rd international
sustainable buildings symposium (ISBS 2017). Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2017. p. 253–68.
Vol.:(0123456789)
Discover Education (2024) 3:248
|
https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00350-0
Research
5. Ceylan S, Şahin P, Seçmen S, Somer M, Süher H. The contribution of digital tools to architectural design studio: A case study. Ain Shams
Eng J. 2024;15(7):102795. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. asej. 2024. 102795.
6. Aghimien D, Ngcobo N, Aigbavboa C, Dixit S, Vatin N, Kampani S, Khera G. Barriers to digital technology deployment in value man-
agement practice. Buildings. 2022;12:731. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ build ings1 20607 31.
7. Ibem E, Laryea S. Survey of digital technologies in procurement of construction projects. Autom Construct. 2014;46:11–21. https://
doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. autcon. 2014. 07. 003.
8. Sharma P, Ueno A, Dennis C, Turan C. Emerging digital technologies and consumer decision-making in retail sector: towards an
integrative conceptual framework. Comput Hum Behav. 2023;148:107913. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. chb. 2023.
9. Tommaso C, Martin K, Silvia M, Lucia P. Digital technologies, innovation, and skills: Emerging trajectories and challenges. Res Policy.
2021;50:104289. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. respol. 2021. 104289.
10. Soliman S, Taha D, Sayad ZE. Architectural education in the digital age. Computer applications: Between academia and practice.
Alexandria Eng J. 2019;58:809–18. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. aej. 2019. 05. 016.
11. Kadhim N. New technologies and their impact on the development of Architectural education. In: 3rd International scientific confer-
ence of engineering sciences. IEEE; 2018.
12. Eloy S, Dias M, Pedro Faria Lopes P, Vilar E. Digital technologies in architecture and engineering exploring an engaged interaction
within curriculum. Lisbon: ISCTE Instituto Universitário de Lisboa; 2016.
13. Saleh M, Abdelkader M, Hosny S, Abdelkader M, Hosney S. Architectural education challenges and opportunities in a post pandemic
digital age. Ain Shams Eng J. 2023;14(8):102027. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. asej. 2022. 102027.
14. Doyle S, Senske N. Between design and digital: bridging the gaps in architectural education. Charrette. 2017;4(1):101–16.
15. Zhao S, Angelis ED, Ma D. Reflecting on the architecture curriculum through a survey on career switching. Des Technol Educ.
2017;23(1):1–14.
16. Xiang X, Yang X, Chen J, Tang R, Hu LA. Comprehensive model of teaching digital design in architecture that incorporates sustain-
ability. Sustainability. 2020;12:8368. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ su122 08368.
17. Kara L. A critical look at the digital technologies in architectural education: when, where, and how? Proc Soc Behav Sci.
2015;176:526–30.
18. Bekmurzayeva S, Yuqi F, Begimbetova G, Hebebci M, Karibayeva L, Khang L. Improving students’ cognitive processes to enhance the
quality of education. In: Materials of international practical internet conference “challenges of science”, Issue VI, Kazakhstan; 2023.
19. Stanton J, Sebesta A, Dunlosky J. Fostering metacognition to support student learning and performance. CBE Life Sci Educ. 2023;20(2):2023.
https:// doi. org/ 10. 1187/ cbe. 20- 12- 0289. (PMID: 33797282; PMCID: PMC8734377).
20. Kashada A, Li H, Koshadah O. Analysis approach to identify factors inuencing digital learning technology adoption and utilization in
developing countries. Int J Emerg Technol Learn (iJET). 2018;30(2):48–59.
21. Žujović M, Obradović R, Rakonjac I, Milošević J. 3D printing technologies in architectural design and construction: a systematic literature
review. Buildings. 2022;12(9):1319.
22. Fitriawijaya A, Jeng T. Integrating multimodal generative AI and blockchain for enhancing generative design in the early phase of archi-
tectural design process. Buildings. 2024;14(8):2533. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ build ings1 40825 33.
23. Abdelhai N. Integration BIM and emerging technologies in architectural academic programs. UK: InTech Open; 2022.
24. Kalay YE. The impact of information technology on architectural education in the 21st century. In: 1st International conference on critical
digital: what matter(s)? Cambridge, MA; 2008.
25. Olweny M. Architectural education in sub-Saharan Africa: an investigation into pedagogical positions and knowledge frameworks. J
Architect. 2020;25(6):717–35. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 13602 365. 2020. 18007 94.
26. Olweny M. The Foreign and the local in architectural education in late colonial and post-independence East Africa. ABE J. 2023. https://
doi. org/ 10. 4000/ abe. 15314.
27. Stanek L. Post-colonial education in Kumasi. The Architectural Review. 20 09 2022 [Online]. https:// www. archi tectu ral- review. com/ essays/
post- colon ial- educa tion- in- kumasi. Accessed 22 February 2024.
28. Stanek Ł. Architecture in Global Socialism: Eastern Europe, West Africa and the Middle East in the cold war. New Jersey: Princeton University
Press; 2020.
29. Okoye I. Architecture, history, and the debate on identity in Ethiopia, Ghana, Nigeria, and South Africa. J Soc Architect Historians.
2002;61(3):381–96. https:// doi. org/ 10. 2307/ 991791.
30. Daichendt GJ. The Bauhaus artist-teacher: Walter gropius’s philosophy of art education. Teach Artist J. 2010;8(3):157–64. https:// doi. org/
10. 1080/ 15411 796. 2010. 486748.
31. Yu B. A study on the developing tendency of industrial design education with national characteristics based on the theory of Bauhaus.
In: 10th International conference on computer aided industrial design and conceptual design, Wenzhou; 2009.
32. Cross A. The educational background to the Bauhaus. Des Stud. 1983;4(1):43–52. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/ 0142- 694X(83) 90007-8.
33. Yew EJ, Goh K. Problem-based learning: an overview of its process and impact on learning. Health Professions Educ. 2016;2(2):75–9.
https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. hpe. 2016. 01. 004.
34. Gorghiu G, Drăghicescu L, Cristea S, Petrescu A, Gorghiu L. Problem-based learning—an ecient learning strategy in the science lessons
context. Proc Soc Behav Sci. 2015;191:1865–70. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. sbspro. 2015. 04. 570.
35. Olweny MO. Introducing sustainability into an architectural curriculum in East Africa. Sustain Higher Educ. 2018;19(6):1131–52. https://
doi. org/ 10. 1108/ IJSHE- 02- 2018- 0039.
36. Olweny MO. Technology and architecture education in Uganda. In: 40th Annual conference of the Architectural Science Association,
ANZAScA, Adelaide; 2017.
37. Kwoe T, Amos-Abanyie S, Botchway E. Critical professional competencies of architects in the Ghanaian construction industry. Int J
Architect Eng Construct. 2016. https:// doi. org/ 10. 7492/ IJAEC. 2016. 010.
38. Department of Architecture-KNUST. Information submitted to the CAA/ARC/GIA validation board. KNUST Department of Architecture,
Kumasi; 2014.
39. Ghana Tertiary Education Commission (GTEC), Publications, GTEC; 2022 [Online]. https:// gtec. edu. gh/. Accessed 24 March 2024.
Vol:.(1234567890)
Research Discover Education (2024) 3:248
|
https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00350-0
40. Jaafar M, Salman A, Ghazali F, Zain M, Kilau N. The awareness and adoption level of emerging technologies in fourth industrial revolution
(4IR) by contractors in Malaysia. Ain Shams Eng J. 2024;15(5):102710.
41. Hassanain MA, Juaim M. Modeling knowledge for architectural programming. J Architect Eng. 2013;19:101–11. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1061/
(ASCE) AE. 1943- 5568. 00000 99.
42. Elhamy KMA, Khalil MWI. The impact of using computer aided design (CAD) on the creativity of architecture students. J Educ Teachers
Trainers. 2023;14(4):245–56.
43. Rockey SD. Entry-level computer aided design and drafting skills. Iowa: University of Northern Iowa; 1983.
44. Kjartansdóttir IBEA. Construction managers’ library managers. ERASMUS+ ; 2017.
45. Mandhar M, Mandhar M. BIMing the architectural curricula: integrating building information modelling (BIM) in architectural education.
Int J Architect. 2013;1(1):1–20.
46. Ode D, Bala Muhammad I. The impact of educational technology tools in architectural education in Nigeria. In: International engineering
conference, Lagos; 2017.
47. Johnson L, Becker S, Estrada V, Freeman A. NMC horizon report. The New Media Consortium; 2014.
48. Özeren Ö, Özeren E, Top S, Qurraie B. Learning-by-doing using 3D printers: digital fabrication studio experience in architectural education.
J Eng Res. 2023;11(3):1–6.
49. Shahrubudin N, Lee T, Ramlan R. An overview on 3D printing technology: technological, materials, and applications. Proc Manuf.
2019;35:1286–96. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. promfg. 2019. 06. 089.
50. Kharvari F, Ewald Kaiser L. Impact of extended reality on architectural education and the design process. Automat Construct.
2022;141:104393. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. autcon. 2022. 104393.
51. Sitzmann W. How do people explore virtual environments? California. arXiv: 1612. 04335 v2 [cs.CV]. 2017.
52. Mandal S. Brief introduction of virtual reality & its challenges. Int J Sci Eng Res. 2013;4(4):304–9.
53. Rice M. The role of virtual environment and virtual reality for knowledge. Iowa: University of Northern Iowa; 2018.
54. Darwish M, Kamel S, Assem A. Extended reality for enhancing spatial ability in architecture design education. Ain Shams Eng J.
2023;14(6):102104. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. asej. 2022. 102104.
55. Santos B, Gonçalves J, Martins A, Pérez-Cano M, Mosquera-Adell E, Dimelli D, Lagarias A, Almeida P. GIS in architectural teaching and
research: planning and heritage. Educ Sci. 2021;11:307. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ educs ci110 60307.
56. Muntazar M, Islam MZ. GIS for architects: exploring the potentials of incorporating gis in architecture curriculum. beyond architecture:
new intersections & connections. In: Re-disciplining: the rise, fall and reformation of the disciplines. History, theory, historiography, and
future studies. Hawaii: ARCC/EAAE; 2014.
57. MIT Libraries. GIS for architects. MIT; 2022. Available https:// libra ries. mit. edu/ les/ gis/ gis4a rchit ects_ oct20 11_ post. pdf. Accessed 27
November 2023.
58. Adetiba E, Adeyemi-Kayode T, Akinrinmade A, Moninuola F, Akintade O, Badejo J, Obiyemi O, Thakur S, Abayomi T. Evolution of articial
intelligence programming languages—a systematic literature review. J Comput Sci. 2021;17:1157–71. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3844/ jcssp . 2021.
1157. 1171.
59. Alomari H, Al-Sheikh S, Younis G. Architecture programming approaches in practical research of fth-year thesis—specialists of local
architecture department. Proc Soc Behav Sci. 2013;102:368–85. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. sbspro. 2013. 10. 752.
60. Agirbas A. The use of simulation for creating folding structures: a teaching model. In: Proceedings of the 35th eCAADe (education and
research in computer aided architectural design in Europe). Rome, Italy: Sapienza University of Rome; 2018.
61. Labib R. Is computer programming benecial to architects and architecture students for complex modelling and informed performative
design decisions? In: Proceedings of the 12th conference of advanced building skins. Bern, Switzerland; 2017.
62. Radziszewski K, Cudzik J. Parametric design in architectural education. World Trans Eng Technol Educ. 2019;17(4):448–53.
63. Kapadia A, Walker I, Green K, Manganelli J, Houayek H, James A, Kanuri V, Mokhtar T, Siles I, Yanik P. Rethinking the machines in which we
live: a multidisciplinary course in architectural robotics. Robot Automat Mag. 2014;21:143–50. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1109/ MRA. 2013. 22874
56.
64. Kapadia A, Walker I, Green K, Manganelli J, Houayek H, James A, Kanuri V, Mokhtar T, Siles I, Yanik P. Architectural robotics: an interdiscipli-
nary course rethinking the machines we live in. In: Proceedings—IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, Anchorage,
USA; 2010.
65. Cudzik J, Radziszewski K. Robotics in architectural education. World Trans Eng Technol Educ. 2019;17(4):459–64.
66. Madkour M, Lobna A. Nanotechnology sustainable construction towards green heritage. In: Archcairo8At: four seasons hotel, Cairo, Egypt;
2019.
67. Mobasser S, Firoozi AA. Review of nanotechnology applications in science and engineering. J Civil Eng Urban. 2016;6:84–93.
68. Hu M. The signicance of nanotechnology in architectural design. In: ARCC. Future of architectural research. pp. 90–96; 2015.
69. Niroumanda H, Zainb M, Jamil M. The role of nanotechnology in rammed earth walls and earth buildings. Proc Soc Behav Sci.
2013;89:243–7.
70. Cheirchanteri G. Nanotechnology: The Challenge in Innovative Architectural Design Using Nanomaterials. In: Cheirchanteri G, Barros
JAO, Kaklauskas G, Zavadskas EK, editors. Modern building materials, structures and techniques. MBMST 2023. Lecture notes in Ci. Cham:
Springer; 2024. p. 2024.
71. Verma AYP. Application of nanomaterials in architecture—an overview. Mater Today Proc. 2021;43:2921–5. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j.
matpr. 2021. 01. 268.
72. Correia da Silveira Batista HM, Meirelles Drumond G, Dias AC, da Cunha Reis A, Picinini Méxas M. The inuence of technology in logistics:
an exploratory study. Perspect Contemp. 2019;14(3):108–26.
73. Faryadi Q. Eective teaching and eective learning: instructional design perspective. Int J Eng Res Appl. 2012;2(1):222–8.
74. Cockburn T. Reections on emerging digital technologies’ impact on leadership models and decision-making. SSRN. 2021. https:// doi.
org/ 10. 2139/ ssrn. 38894 64.
75. Özacar K, Ortakcı Y, Küçükkara M. VRArchEducation: redesigning building survey process in architectural education using collaborative
virtual reality. Comput Graph. 2023;113:1–9. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. cag. 2023. 04. 008.
Vol.:(0123456789)
Discover Education (2024) 3:248
|
https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00350-0
Research
76. Botchway E, Abanyie S, Afram S. The impact of computer-aided architectural design tools on architectural design education; the Case of
KNUST. J Architect Eng Technol. 2015. https:// doi. org/ 10. 4172/ 2168- 9717. 10001 45.
77. Botchway E. Software application employed in architectural design education: the case of KNUST. Rev Eur Stud. 2016;8(2):30.
78. Maina J. Barriers to eective use of CAD and BIM in architecture education in Nigeria. Int J Built Environ Sustain. 2018. https:// doi. org/ 10.
11113/ ijbes. v5. n3. 275.
79. Maina J. CAD and BIM in architecture education: awareness, prociency and advantages from the student perspective. J Sci B Art Human
Des Plan. 2018;6(4):167–78.
80. Oke AE, Aliu J, Onajite SA. Barriers to the adoption of digital technologies for sustainable construction in a developing economy. Architect
Eng Des Manage. 2023;20(3):431–47.
81. Algassim H, Sepasgozar S, Ostwald M, Davis SA. Qualitative study on factors inuencing technology adoption in the architecture industry.
Buildings. 2023. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ build ings1 30411 00.
82. Siripipatthanakul S, Asrifan MMA, Kaewpuang SSP, Sriboonruang P, Limna P, Jaipong P, Sitthipon T. Quantitative research in education.
In: Asrifan A, Isumarni N, editors. Interdisciplinary research. India: Island Publishers; 2023. p. 30–53.
83. Creswell J. Research design. Qualitative, quantitative and mixed approaches. Los Angeles: Sage; 2018.
84. Adebayo F, Mustafe O. A study on the eects of construction project delays in Somaliland construction industry. J Manage Econ Ind
Organ. 2020;4:89–102. https:// doi. org/ 10. 31039/ jomei no. 2020.4. 3.6.
85. Prashanth P. Information technologies applications for construction. Belgaum, Karnataka: Visvesvaraya; 2018.
86. Moghadam FA, Azad SA, Sahebalzamani M, Farahani H, Mojgantabatabaee J. An investigation on the level of awareness, attitude, and
interest among medicine, dentistry, and pharmacy students toward their majors on entering university: the case of Islamic Azad University,
Tehran medical sciences branch. J Family Med Prim Care. 2017;6(4):784–90. https:// doi. org/ 10. 4103/ jfmpc. jfmpc_ 224_ 17.
87. Bosch-Sijtsema P, Claeson-Jonsson C, Johansson M, Roupe M. The hype factor of digital technologies in AEC. Construct Innov.
2021;21(4):899–916. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1108/ ci- 01- 2020- 0002.
88. Commonwealth Association of Architects (CAA). 2022–2024 CAA council end of term report. CAA, 16 07 2024 [Online]. https:// issuu. c om/
comar chite ct. org/ docs/ 2022- 2024_ caa_ end_ of_ term_ report. Accessed 24 August 2024.
89. Gundes S, Atakul N. An empirical study of internship practices in architectural education: Student perspectives. Megaron. 2017;12:355–64.
https:// doi. org/ 10. 5505/ megar on. 2017. 86094.
90. Cho ME, Lee JH, Kim MJ. Identifying online learning experience of architecture students for a smart education environment. J Asian
Architect Build Eng. 2022;22(4):1903–14. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 13467 581. 2022.
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional aliations.
