Cumincad : CUMINCAD Papers : Search Results

CumInCAD is a Cumulative Index about publications in Computer Aided Architectural Design
supported by the sibling associations ACADIA, CAADRIA, eCAADe, SIGraDi, ASCAAD and CAAD futures

PDF papers
References

Hits 1 to 9 of 9

Reformat results as: short short into frame detailed detailed into frame

_id	7e15
authors	Kvan, Thomas
year	1997
title	Chips, chunks and sauces
source	International Journal of Design Computing, 1, 1997 (Editorial)
summary	I am sure there is an art in balancing the chunks to use with your chips. Then there is the sauce that envelops them both. I like my chips chunky and not too saucy. Not that I am obsessed with food but I don't think you can consider design computing without chunks. It's the sauce I'm not sure about.The chunks of which I write are not of course those in your salsa picante but those postulated by Chase and Simon (1973) reflecting on good chess players; the chunks of knowledge with which an expert tackles a problem in their domain of expertise. The more knowledge an expert has of complex and large configurations of typical problem situations (configurations of chess pieces), the greater range of solutions the expert can bring a wider to a particular problem. Those with more chunks have more options and arrive at better solutions. In other words, good designs come from having plenty of big chunks available. There has been a wealth of research in the field of computer-supported collaborative work in the contexts of writing, office management, software design and policy bodies. It is typically divided between systems which support decision making (GDSS: group decision support systems) and those which facilitate joint work (CSCW: computer-based systems for co-operative work) (see Dennis et al. (1988) for a discussion of the distinctions and their likely convergence). Most implementations in the world of design have been on CSCW systems, few have looked at trying to make a group design decision support system (GDDSS?). Most of the work in CSCD has been grounded in the heritage of situated cognition - the assumption that collaborative design is an act that is intrinsically grounded in the context within which it is carried out, that is, the sauce in which we find ourselves swimming daily. By sauce, therefore, I am referring to anything that is not knowledge in the domain of expertise, such as modes of interaction, gestures, social behaviours.
series	journal paper
email
last changed	2003/05/15 10:29

_id	2e3b
authors	Kvan, Thomas and Kvan, Erik
year	1997
title	Is Design Really Social
source	Creative Collaboration in Virtual Communities 1997, ed. A. Cicognani. VC'97. Sydney: Key Centre of Design Computing, Department of Architectural and Design Science, University of Sydney, 8 p.
summary	There are many who will readily agree with Mitchell’s assertion that “the most interesting new directions (for computer-aided design) are suggested by the growing convergence of computation and telecommunication. This allows us to treat designing not just as a technical process... but also as a social process.” [Mitchell 1995]. The assumption is that design was a social process until users of computer-aided design systems were distracted into treating it as a merely technical process. Most readers will assume that this convergence must and will lead to increased communication between design participants; that better social interaction leads to be better design. The unspoken assumption appears to be that putting the participants into an environment with maximal communication channels will result in design collaboration. The tools provided; therefore; must permit the best communication and the best social interaction. We think it essential to examine the foundations and assumptions on which software and environments are designed to support collaborative design communication. Of particular interest to us in this paper is the assumption about the “social” nature of design. Early research in computer-assisted design collaborations has jumped immediately into conclusions about communicative models which lead to high-bandwidth video connections as the preferred channel of collaboration. The unstated assumption is that computer-supported design environments are not adequate until they replicate in full the sensation of being physically present in the same space as the other participants (you are not there until you are really there). It is assumed that the real social process of design must include all the signals used to establish and facilitate face-to-face communication; including gestures; body language and all outputs of drawing (e.g. Tang [1991]). In our specification of systems for virtual design communities; are we about to fall into the same traps as drafting systems did?
keywords	CSCW; Virtual Community; Architectural Design; Computer-Aided Design
series	other
email
last changed	2002/11/15 18:29

_id	ce1b
authors	Kvan, Th., Lee, A. and Ho, L.
year	2000
title	Anthony Ng Architects Limited: Building Towards a Paperless Future
source	Case Study and Teaching Notes number 99/65, 10 pages, distributed by HKU Centre for Asian Business Cases, Harvard Business School Publishing (HBSP) and The European Case Clearing House (ECCH), June 2000
summary	In early 1997; Mr. Anthony Ng; managing director of Anthony Ng Architects Ltd.; was keenly looking forward to a high-tech; paperless new office; which would free his designers from paperwork and greatly improve internal and external communication – a vision that he had had for a couple of years. In 1996; he brought on board a friend and expert in Internet technology to help him realise his vision. In July 1997; his company was to move into its new office in Wan Chai. Their plan was to have in place an Intranet and a web-based document management system when they moved into the new office. But he had to be mindful of resulting changes in communication patterns; culture and expectations. Resistance from within his company was also threatening to ruin the grand plan. Several senior executives were fiercely opposed to the proposal and refused to read a document off a computer screen. But Ng knew it was an important initiative to move his practice forward. Once the decision was made there would be no chance to reconsider; given the workload demands of the new HK$12 billion project. And this decision would mark a watershed in the company’s evolution. This case study examines the challenges and implications of employing IT to support an architectural office.
keywords	IT In Practice; Professional Practice; Archives
series	other
email
last changed	2002/11/15 18:29

_id	d347
authors	Kvan, Th., Vera, A. and West, R.L.
year	1997
title	Expert and Situated Actions in Collaborative Design
source	Proceedings of Second International Workshop on CSCW in Design, ed. P. Siriruchatapong, Z. Lin & J.-P. Barthes. Second International Workshop on CSCW in Design, Beijing: International Academic Publishers, November, pp. 400-405
summary	This paper considers one of the fundamental questions behind research and implementation into collaborative design systems for architectural design: To what extent is design situated and to what extent is it expert behaviour? Extending from this question arises implementation questions for CSCW systems for architectural design. The authors propose a cognitive model of design and tested the model experimentally. From the results of the experiments; a discussion is presented of the expert and situated facets of the design process which have been manifested.
keywords	Collaboration; CSCW; Group Work; Design
series	other
email
last changed	2003/01/28 12:06

_id	789d
authors	Kvan, Th., West, R. and Vera, A.
year	1997
title	Tools for a Virtual Design Community
source	Preprints Formal Aspects of Collaborative CAD, ed. M. L. Maher, J. S. Gero & F. Sudweeks, Sydney: Key Centre of Design Computing, Department of Architectural and Design Science, University of Sydney, pp. 109-123
summary	This paper proposes a methodology to evaluate the effects of computer-mediated communication on collaboratively solving design problems. When setting up a virtual design community; choices must be made between a variety of tools; choices dictated by budget; bandwidth; ability and availability. How do you choose between the tools; which is useful and how will each affect the outcome of the design exchanges you plan? A commonly used method is to analyze the work done and to identify tools which support this type of work. In general; research on the effects of computer-mediation on collaborative work has concentrated mainly on social-psychological factors such as deindividuation and attitude polarization; and used qualitative methods. In contrast; we propose to examine the process of collaboration itself; focusing on separating those component processes which primarily involve individual work from those that involve genuine interaction. Extending the cognitive metaphor of the brain as a computer; we view collaboration in terms of a network process; and examine issues of control; coordination; and delegation to separate sub-processors. Through this methodology we attempt to separate the individual problem-solving component from the larger process of collaboration.
keywords	CSCW; Group Work; Design; Expertise; Collaboration; Novice
series	other
email
last changed	2002/11/15 18:29

_id	0f97
authors	Kvan, Th., West, R. and Vera, A.
year	1997
title	Choosing Tools for a Virtual Community
source	Creative Collaboration in Virtual Communities 1997, ed. A. Cicognani. VC'97. Sydney: Key Centre of Design Computing, Department of Architectural and Design Science, University of Sydney, 20 p.
summary	This paper reports on the results of experiments carried out to identify the effects of computer-mediated communication between participants involved in a design problem. When setting up a virtual design community, choices must be made between a variety of tools, choices dictated by budget, bandwidth, ability, availability. How do you choose between the tools, which is useful and how will each affect the outcome of the design exchanges you plan? Cognitive modelling methodologies such as GOMS have been used by interface designers to capture the mechanisms of action and interaction involved in routine expert behavior. Using this technique, which breaks down an individual's behaviors into Goals, Operators, Methods, and Selection rules, it is possible to evaluate the impact of different aspects of an interface in task-specific ways. In the present study, the GOMS methodology was used to characterize the interactive behavior of knowledgeable participants as they worked on a design task under different communication-support conditions. Pairs of participants were set a design problem and asked to solve it in face-to-face settings. The same problem was then tackled by participants in settings using two different modes of computer-supported communication: email and an electronic whiteboard. Protocols were collected and analyzed in terms of the constraints of each tool relative to the task and to each other. The GOMS methodology was used as a way to represent the collaborative design process in a way that yields information on both the productivity and performance of participants in each of the three experimental conditions. It also yielded information on the component elements of the design process, the basic cognitive building-blocks of design, thereby suggesting fundamentally new tools that might be created for interaction in virtual environments. A further goal of the study was to explore the nature of task differences in relation to alternative platforms for communication. It was hypothesized that design processes involving significant negotiation would be less aided by computer support than straight forward design problems. The latter involve cooperative knowledge application by both participants and are therefore facilitated by information-rich forms of computer support. The former, on the other hand, requires conflict resolution and is inhibited by non face-to-face interaction. The results of this study point to the fact that the success of collaboration in virtual space is not just dependent on the nature of the tools but also on the specific nature of the collaborative task.
keywords	Cognitive Models, Task-analysis, GOMS
series	other
email
last changed	2003/05/15 20:50

_id	01e7
authors	Kvan, Thomas
year	1997
title	Studio Teaching Without Meeting: Pedagogical Aspects of a Virtual Design Studio
source	CAADRIA ‘97 [Proceedings of the Second Conference on Computer Aided Architectural Design Research in Asia / ISBN 957-575-057-8] Taiwan 17-19 April 1997, pp. 163-177
doi	https://doi.org/10.52842/conf.caadria.1997.163
summary	Virtual Design Studios are proliferating. Schools of architecture are eagerly experimenting with the technology of the Internet. Discussions about Virtual Design Studios typically focus on technological issues – which hardware, what software – or environments – MOOs, ftp. Recently, some papers have been written on the perceptual issues and the social aspects of remote design collaborations, thus contributing to some of the contextual issues within which virtual studios are conducted. This paper contributes another perspective, presenting a review of the pedagogical issues raised in a VDS. It examines the difficulties and opportunities which present themselves in teaching a Virtual Design Studio. Based on reviews of problem-based learning and examinations of architectural studio learning, including several experiences in conducting virtual studios, the author considers the particularities of conducting a studio in the virtual world, the motivations for these studios, the experiences of students and the results obtained. From this background, the author identifies benefits and drawbacks of teaching in this manner, leading then to guidelines for framing and conducting effective and successful Virtual Design Studios and raises issues for further discussion.
series	CAADRIA
email
last changed	2022/06/07 07:52

_id	210b
authors	Kvan, Thomas
year	1997
title	But is it Collaboration?
source	Challenges of the Future [15th eCAADe Conference Proceedings / ISBN 0-9523687-3-0] Vienna (Austria) 17-20 September 1997
doi	https://doi.org/10.52842/conf.ecaade.1997.x.a6r
summary	Collaborative activities are an important application of computer technology now that telecommunications infrastructure has been established to support it. There are many students in schools of architecture who are undertaking collaborative projects using the Internet and many practices who work together exchanging files and interacting on shared digital models. Software vendors are developing tools to support such collaboration. But what are we doing? What is the nature of collaboration and what are the implications for tools that support this work?
keywords	Collaboration
series	eCAADe
email
more	http://info.tuwien.ac.at/ecaade/proc/kvan/kvan.htm
last changed	2022/06/07 07:50

_id	avocaad_2001_09
id	avocaad_2001_09
authors	Yu-Tung Liu, Yung-Ching Yeh, Sheng-Cheng Shih
year	2001
title	Digital Architecture in CAD studio and Internet-based competition
source	AVOCAAD - ADDED VALUE OF COMPUTER AIDED ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN, Nys Koenraad, Provoost Tom, Verbeke Johan, Verleye Johan (Eds.), (2001) Hogeschool voor Wetenschap en Kunst - Departement Architectuur Sint-Lucas, Campus Brussel, ISBN 80-76101-05-1
summary	Architectural design has been changing because of the vast and creative use of computer in different ways. From the viewpoint of designing itself, computer has been used as drawing tools in the latter phase of design (Mitchell 1977; Coyne et al. 1990), presentation and simulation tools in the middle phase (Liu and Bai 2000), and even critical media which triggers creative thinking in the very early phase (Maher et al. 2000; Liu 1999; Won 1999). All the various roles that computer can play have been adopted in a number of professional design corporations and so-called computer-aided design (CAD) studio in schools worldwide (Kvan 1997, 2000; Cheng 1998). The processes and outcomes of design have been continuously developing to capture the movement of the computer age. However, from the viewpoint of social-cultural theories of architecture, the evolvement of design cannot be achieved solely by designers or design processes. Any new idea of design can be accepted socially, culturally and historically only under one condition: The design outcomes could be reviewed and appreciated by critics in the field at the time of its production (Csikszentmihalyi 1986, 1988; Schon and Wiggins 1992; Liu 2000). In other words, aspects of design production (by designers in different design processes) are as critical as those of design appreciation (by critics in different review processes) in the observation of the future trends of architecture.Nevertheless, in the field of architectural design with computer and Internet, that is, so-called computer-aided design computer-mediated design, or internet-based design, most existing studies pay more attentions to producing design in design processes as mentioned above. Relatively few studies focus on how critics act and how they interact with designers in the review processes. Therefore, this study intends to investigate some evolving phenomena of the interaction between design production and appreciation in the environment of computer and Internet.This paper takes a CAD studio and an Internet-based competition as examples. The CAD studio includes 7 master's students and 2 critics, all from the same countries. The Internet-based competition, held in year 2000, includes 206 designers from 43 counties and 26 critics from 11 countries. 3 students and the 2 critics in the CAD studio are the competition participating designers and critics respectively. The methodological steps are as follows: 1. A qualitative analysis: observation and interview of the 3 participants and 2 reviewers who join both the CAD studio and the competition. The 4 analytical criteria are the kinds of presenting media, the kinds of supportive media (such as verbal and gesture/facial data), stages of the review processes, and interaction between the designer and critics. The behavioral data are acquired by recording the design presentation and dialogue within 3 months. 2. A quantitative analysis: statistical analysis of the detailed reviewing data in the CAD studio and the competition. The four 4 analytical factors are the reviewing time, the number of reviewing of the same project, the comparison between different projects, and grades/comments. 3. Both the qualitative and quantitative data are cross analyzed and discussed, based on the theories of design thinking, design production/appreciation, and the appreciative system (Goodman 1978, 1984).The result of this study indicates that the interaction between design production and appreciation during the review processes could differ significantly. The review processes could be either linear or cyclic due to the influences from the kinds of media, the environmental discrepancies between studio and Internet, as well as cognitive thinking/memory capacity. The design production and appreciation seem to be more linear in CAD studio whereas more cyclic in the Internet environment. This distinction coincides with the complementary observations of designing as a linear process (Jones 1970; Simon 1981) or a cyclic movement (Schon and Wiggins 1992). Some phenomena during the two processes are also illustrated in detail in this paper.This study is merely a starting point of the research in design production and appreciation in the computer and network age. The future direction of investigation is to establish a theoretical model for the interaction between design production and appreciation based on current findings. The model is expected to conduct using revised protocol analysis and interviews. The other future research is to explore how design computing creativity emerge from the process of producing and appreciating.
series	AVOCAAD
email
last changed	2005/09/09 10:48

No more hits.