the impact of computer aided design and manufacture (cad ... · the impact of computer aided design...

Loughborough UniversityInstitutional Repository

The impact of ComputerAided Design and

Manufacture (CAD/CAM)on school-based design work

This item was submitted to Loughborough University's Institutional Repositoryby the/an author.

Additional Information:

• This is a conference paper.

Metadata Record: https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/2134/2833

Publisher: c© DATA

Please cite the published version.

https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/2134/2833

The impact of Computer Aided Design andManufacture (CAD/CAM) on school-based design workTony Hodgson, Loughborough University, EnglandAlister Fraser, Loughborough University, England

AbstractThis paper reports the findings of a nationalsurvey distributed to Heads of Design andTechnology departments, with the aim ofidentifying the level of CAD capability thatcurrently exists, and the nature of itsimplementation, within UK schools. It draws onteacher perceptions and conclusions from thestudy to identify further research that might beundertaken to help clarify the impact CAD/CAMhas had on the activity of ‘designing’ within aneducational context.

The role and impact that CAD may have on otheraspects of Design and Technology education isdescribed and provides for a more informeddiscussion on the students’ learning experience,particularly where this might be promoted by CAD.

Keywords: CAD, CAM, design, education, model,process

BackgroundThe CAD/CAM in Schools programme, introducedin 1999, has enjoyed increasing success with thenumber of registered teachers exceeding over8000 in the last year. The British EducationalCommunications and Technology Agency (BECTA)identified Design and Technology as thecurriculum area with the highest level ofsubstantial use of Information and CommunicationTechnology (ICT) second only to the subject of ICTitself (BECTA, 2004). It is likely that CAD/CAMmay be a contributing factor to that increase inprovision and in turn had some impact on theactivity of ‘designing’ in a school-based context.

The process of ‘designing’ in Computer AidedDesign (CAD) has been the subject of continuedscrutiny, often leading to comparisons betweendesign work undertaken using CAD and thatcompleted without it. In this respect, Kimbell et al(2002) described an inability to achieve the levelof effective development on CAD associated withthe traditional pencil and paper folio. However,until now, the extent to which CAD has beeneffectively implemented in school based design isa research question as yet to be objectivelymeasured (Hodgson & Allsop, 2003).

In order to assess the impact CAD/CAM has hadon school-based design work it is important todiscuss what is meant by the term design and thenature of the activity of ‘designing’.

Describing design processThe ability to document and prescribe the processof design activity is desirable as the technologicaladvances conceived within the act of ‘designing’shape both our culture and our future (Norman,2005). Subsequently, a great many attempts havebeen made to isolate the essence of designing anddocument it in the form of a generic method thatcould be applied in all situations. As a result, earlymodels of the design process were described,predominantly, in terms of a linear process often,as a series of ordered and prescribed elements(see Figure 1). However, there is an increasingawareness that designing may not be so easilydefined.

Design is often described as problem centredactivity, and that the problems inherent are illdefined and often irresolvable by logical orscientific means. Design problems by their illdefinition therefore consist in a state of affairs inwhich we feel some unease, discrepancy orincompatibility (Norman & Roberts, 1999). It islikely that there are as many ways of solving a‘design problem’ as there are designers and it is,therefore, unlikely that a generic process can beformulated or easily described. (Jones, 1970)

As a result, later models often incorporated a highlevel of generality in an attempt to formulate ageneric process. How these models wereprescribed or documented is generally a definingcharacteristic of individual authors and theactivity they attempted to reflect. However, thesemodels evolved to form representations of theprocess that where typically cyclic andencouraged the interaction between aspects ofthe design problem often derived from earlierlinear models.

95

DATA InternationalResearch Conference 2005

95

The recent retreat (in research terms) from thesystematic and procedural models of designingprescribed in the early 70’s literature on designprocess theory, to a position of greater uncertainty(models which incorporate a high level of generalityand iteration) in an attempt to understand howdesigners come to ‘know what they know’, hasresulted in widespread confusion (Baynes, 1990).Any such confusion may not be desirable if we wishto easily define the activity or process of design.

Irrespective of this confusion, the activity of‘designing’ prescribed in design process modelstypically express a common thread; from that ofan inception of an idea, through stages ofreflection, to eventual evaluation of a particularoutcome (Johnsey 1995, Mawson 2004).

It has been noted that the ability of design toshape both our culture and future means thatstakeholders within that culture will seek to gaincontrol. It is, therefore, unsurprising that the twoprimary areas from which models of designinghave emerged are design management and designeducation (Norman, 2005).

Subsequently, it could be considered that theprincipal motive for the development of models ofthe design process was to make possible theteaching and assessing of technology educationby imposing order on what is essentially aconfused iterative process (Mawson, 2004). Itmay not be of any great concern, therefore, thatdesigning is not represented too closely withinthese models, but, that the models represent aguideline or framework by which design activitymay be more easily identified.

It is important to acknowledge the fundamentaldifferences between the two contexts identified(design management and education). Therefore,consideration of design activity in education andhow this may be described or modelled is usefulto this research.

‘Designing’ in Education; a description of designas an educational activityIn order to better understand an educationalperspective it is useful to provide a description ofwhat the activity of designing in an educationalcontext involves.

There are clear differences between the role ofdesign in industry and its role in education. It isapparent that despite ‘design activity’ (withinindustrial or ‘real’ scenarios) being concerned withthe attainment of a result, ‘design educationalactivity’ is additionally concerned with thedevelopment of pupils’ knowledge andunderstanding. This is not to say that theattainment of a particular outcome is necessaryto constitute ‘designerly’ activity but more thatwhat is learnt through design is of greaterimportance than learning about design.

While it is accepted that a universal method ofdesign is not widely accepted or applied, Cooke etal (1984) suggest that a suitably constructedframework allows the participant to connectknowledge and skills in a logical way and shouldbe used to guide teacher and pupil endeavour.This may explain why models of design that areadopted by educationalists are not a truereflection of design activity or process that wouldbe typically identified by a practitioner.

96


96

Identityproblem

Research Generateideas

Selectand detail

Makesolution

Evaluate

making

planning themaking

detailing aproblem

refining ideas

exploringpossibilities

research

more information may beneeded before refinementis possible

evolution usually

leads to refining

of ideas

ideas

may

have

to be

deta

iled b

efore

they

can b

e reje

cted

mak

ing

proc

ess m

ayha

ve to

be

rese

arch

ed

evaluation

detailing asolution

observinga context

Representation of the process prescribed by SchoolsCouncil ‘Design and Craft Education Project’ (1972)Kimbell et al (1996)

Figure 1: Evolution Of Design Process Models

The GCSE cycle of ‘Designing’ Kimbell (1986)

It is clear that the manufacture of objects orartefacts can be seen to encourage relevant‘designerly’ activity and to promote the relevantcapabilities that meets the aims of design andtechnology education in the National Curriculum.

For example, throughout the attainment targetsset out by the National Curriculum for England(DfEE, 1999) there is a suggested underlyingframework which notes the importance of themanufacture of products. It is also suggested thatthe associated practical tasks actively encouragethe advancement of knowledge and understandingidentified as central to capability in design andtechnology education (DfEE, 1999).

Such curriculum frameworks need not followthose of industrial design too closely, but canusefully reflect how design activity is used as a‘vehicle for learning’ in design and technologyeducation.

It should be noted that the presence of all ormany objects or artefacts does not necessarilymean an act of ‘designing’ was necessarilyundertaken (Roberts, 1992). Also, an identical taskmay result in quite different levels of capabilitybeing demonstrated (Kimbell et al, 1990). Thepresence of an outcome does not, in itself,suggest that learning took place or capability wasdeveloped. For similar reasons, we must betterunderstand the contribution that CAD makes tothe design process and be careful that itsimplementation does genuinely bring aboutchange in the awareness and capabilities of theparticipants that may be regarded as central tocapability in design.

The adoption of CAD therefore, to purely reflectindustrial practices within an educational context,can be seen as a somewhat naïve application ofthe technology. It is necessary, instead, to gain abetter understanding of CAD in education and thenature of its use and implementation. A survey ofCAD use was developed to better understand thelearning experience that CAD promotes and inturn its ability to promote or detract from theintrinsic values of ‘design and technology’education as a whole.

Developing a National SurveyA pilot survey of approximately 800 accreditedtrainers for the CAD/CAM in Schools programmeidentified a range of design, and other activities,that might be developed through the use of CAD,with 3D CAD modelling being identified as thegreatest single significant activity. Subsequently,

these findings were used as a basis on which toconstruct a national survey with the aim ofidentifying the level of CAD capability that existsand the nature of its implementation. This wasthen distributed, on behalf of the authors, by theDesign and Technology Association (DATA) toheads of Design and Technology departments.

Participants were asked a range of questionsdirectly relating to their current use of CAD andto identify the use of CAD within a typical ‘designprocess’ in their schools. They were also asked tooffer their perceptions of CAD implementation,identifying the manner in which they felt thetechnology is best applied and the mainadvantages of its use. It should be noted that,following the pilot, this survey focussed primarilyon the use of 3D CAD modelling tools and doesnot reflect the use of CAD/CAM that does notexploit such CAD modelling software.

A copy of the questionnaire can be found at; www.cad-cam-in-schools-online-survey.retrocanvas.co.uk

Amongst other techniques the participants wereasked to express their opinion by ratingagreement or disagreement with a set of attitudestatements. Each degree of agreement was givena numerical value on a five point Likert scale.Thus, a total numerical value can be calculatedfrom all the responses and opinions representedquantitatively.

97


97

Initial Survey Results;Teacher perceptions of 3D CAD modellingactivity occurring within UK schools

It was apparent that opportunity exists for theuse of CAD at all stages of a typical designprocess (See Figure 2) and that 3D CAD modelling

software was the most significant contributingfactor to the use of CAD within education (seeFigure 3). It is possible to assume the CAD/CAM inSchools programme is the single mostcontributing factor to this use as a result of thepredominant uptake of Pro/DESKTOP software(see Figure 3).

98


98

Figure 2: Stages of a typical design process within which CAD is utilised

Figure 3: 3D modelling software currently used within UK schools

Student CAD capabilityAs many as 89% of respondents noted thatstudents were able to alter their design ideas inCAD. Likewise, 75% noted that students feltcompetent enough to use CAD as a developmenttool through which modifications could occur. Thisindirectly supported the belief that some designdevelopment activity could occur within a virtualenvironment (see Figure 4). It was also felt (by75% of respondents) that the CAD models produced as a result of this modelling activityaccurately reflected the students original designideas or intent. It is possible to assume, therefore,that teachers perceive students to have thenecessary skills to model their design ideaseffectively in CAD. However, the extent to whichthe activity of ‘designing’ occurs within, or byusing CAD to encourage this activity received amore confused response.

Figure 4: Teachers’ perceptions of students’capability to use CAD as a design tool

Figure 5: Teachers’ perceptions of students’ability to completely design their ideaprior to any involvement in CAD

For example, whilst over 78% of teachersidentified their students’ ability to make a changeto a design within a virtual environment, a lessobvious distinction could be made respondents(42%) indicated that the design was completebefore it was modelled in CAD (see Figure 5). Theability to modify designs and create iterationsusing CAD is one of its great strengths and,although acknowledged, it must be of someconcern if it is not well exploited.

The issues this raises will need to be examined inmore detail before any final conclusions about therole of CAD in designing can be drawn.

The Impact of CAD on workshop activityIn order to identify if CAD is shifting the emphasisof activity within ‘design and make tasks’,participants were asked to observe if they felt theuse of CAD had lessened the need for associatedworkshop activity. Participants were asked toidentify if experiences that typically occurred inthe workshop, such as simulating mechanisms,perceiving the form of design ideas and checkingif component parts fit together, had occurredpreviously as a result of CAD.

Just over half of the respondents agreed, orstrongly agreed, that evaluation of the studentsdesigns within a context, had occurred as a resultof CAD prior to workshop activity.

As many as 62% noted that CAD was used tosimulate elements of the design idea and 64%noted CAD aided perception of size form and fitprior to the start of workshop activity.

99


99

Whilst there was some consensus (see Figures 6,7, 8, and 9) that activity previously believed to beundertaken in workshops was taking place in CAD,a far less obvious distinction can be made whenthe question is asked more directly. Over 33% ofrespondents noted that they felt CAD had failed todirectly reduce the time required for workshopactivity (see Figure 10).

Likewise, 46% of the participants recognised thatphysical models still formed the basis ofsubmissions, although interestingly, nearly 36%used CAD models for submission (see Figure 11)suggesting a change in traditional assessmentprocedures within Design and Technologyeducation. Although large support wasdemonstrated for the submission of CAD modelsrather than physical models, no distinction wasmade (within the survey) concerning the extent towhich these models reflected design developmentas opposed to a single final prototype/design. Thisis clearly another area for further investigation.

100


100

Figure 6

Figure 9

Figure 10

Figure 11

Figure 7

Figure 8

Also, when asked their opinions about whichmedium they felt best reflected students’ designideas, only 8% felt that students design ideaswere best represented in workshop models. About24% identified CAD with the most (33%)identifying sketches as the best ways ofrepresenting designs (see Figure 12).

It is clear that the potential for CAD to impactworkshop activity has been noted by participantresponses showing a clear support for activities(often associated with design realisation)occurring in CAD prior to the commencement ofworkshop activity. It is interesting that, despitethis extensive activity, the use of CAD failed toreduce the time required within the workshop. Forexample, it would be expected that an increasedamount of realisation activity prior to thecommencement of workshop activity (in thisinstance within CAD) would have lessened thetime required within the workshop, as arguablystudents’ design intent should be better realised.There is a need to question the extent to whichthese CAD activities effectively support designingand the development of design ideas. Is this as aresult of an inappropriate use of CAD or, is CADidentifying possibilities for development thatwould not normally have been considered? This isto be the subject of further on-going investigationat Loughborough University.

The role of CAD in designThe use of CAD as a means of generating variousoutputs is predominant. For example, whenteachers were asked what they felt thepredominant use of CAD was within the classroomthere was clear emphasis on outputs such asrendering/presentation and aid to manufacture inthe form of CNC generated models.

This poses further questions about the extent towhich CAD is being effectively utilised across thedesign process. As identified earlier the presenceof artefacts or objects (in this instance the use ofCAD as an output) does not necessarily denotethat a ‘designerly’ act has been undertaken withinan educational context. There is evidence of clearpotential for the use of CAD within design, andalso to present design but it may be of someconcern that emphasis is placed on the latter.

This view is also supported by identifying that73% of students were willing to annotate aroundCAD images within folios, but only 29% werewilling to sketch over these print outs within adesigning activity.

This preservation of ‘precious’ images serves tosupport the notion that CAD is utilised significantlyas a means to an end in its own right but notdirectly to, say, modify design ideas and in turn toencourage the advancement of knowledge andunderstanding that should be developed throughthe activity of ‘designing’.

101


Figure 12

Figure 13

Figure 14

101

Summary These initial findings from the survey haveidentified some awareness of the great potentialfor CAD to be a part of design development inaddition to being a means of providing designoutput. Teachers believed that many of theactivities associated with project-based designcould be, and were, undertaken using CADtechnology. There is also evidence to suggest thesuccessful adoption of CAD for post processesand outputs but the evidence to suggest that theactivity of ‘designing’ is currently occurring withinCAD is, as yet, inconclusive. The respondents tothe survey may be seen as ‘CAD enthusiasts’, yetmany responses imply a naïve application of thetechnology. Subsequently, the impact of CAD ondesigning and the associated learning experiencemay, at this stage, be relatively underacknowledged.

It is clear that a better understanding of thelearning experience that CAD particularlypromotes and the activities which allow for itsinvolvement in the act of designing should beencouraged, in order to promote the learningexperiences identified within the nationalcurriculum.

The data recorded needs to be further scrutinisedto allow for a more informed discussion aboutissues raised within this paper and the researchobjective as a whole. The survey has raised anumber of issues to be pursued more directly withteachers in schools. These include:

• the extent to which CAD is replacing or reducingthe emphasis on other workshop activity, andthe extent to which CAD models are beingsubmitted for assessment;

• the extent to which genuine design activityoccurs in CAD and its direct impact on physicalmodelling undertaken in workshop activity;

• identifying a clearer distinction of the impact ofCAD by considering if an ability to design in CADis considered to be an alternative, or moreeffective, means of promoting the same learningexperience as that which is normally associatedwith more ‘traditional’ workshop activity.

It is also considered important to further supportthe data collected with relevant involvement ofschools who make less frequent use of CAD intheir design work.

Despite any limitations imposed by the survey thisinitial analysis should form the basis of moreinformed further research and the development ofa clearer understanding of the role of CAD withinDesign and Technology education.

ReferencesBaynes, K. (1990), ‘Defining a Design Dimension ofthe Curriculum’. In: D. Thistlewood, ed, Issues inDesign Education. UK: Longman, 51-63

BECTA. (2004), ‘The Impact of Information andCommunication Technologies on Pupil Learningand Attainment’ Available at:www.becta.org.uk/research/impact22004]

Cooke, P., Corbett, J., Pugh, S. and Weightman, D.(1984), A Guide to Design for Production. London:Institute of Production Engineers

Department for Education and Employment(DFEE). (1999), Design and Technology: TheNational Curriculum for England. London:Department for Education and Employment (DfEE)and the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority(QCA)

Hodgson, T. and Allsop, C. (2003), ‘BeyondPro/DESKTOP Computer Aided Design (CAD): thetransfer of CAD-based design modelling skillsform schools to Higher Education’, In: Norman, E.and Spendlove, D. Design Matters; Proceedings ofthe DATA International Research Conference2003, 45-49

Johnsey, R. (1995), ‘The Design Process - Does itexist?’ in The International Journal of Technologyand Design Education, 5, 199-217

Jones, J.C. (1970), Design Methods - Seeds ofHuman Futures. Bath: The Pitman Press

102


102

Figure 15

Kimbell, R. (1986), GCSE Craft and Design andTechnology; A guide for Teachers, Milton Keynes,Secondary Examinations Council and OpenUniversity

Kimbell, R., Lawler, T., Stables, K. and Balchin, T.(2002), ‘Pro/DESKTOP in Schools: A pilotresearch study’. The Journal of Design andTechnology, 7(1), pp. 29-33.

Kimbell, R., Stables, K. and Green, R. (1996),Understanding Practice in Design and Technology,Buckingham, Open University Press

Kimbell, R., Stables, K., Wheeler, T., Wosniak, A.and Kelly, V. (1991), The Assessment ofPerformance in Design and Technology; The finalreport of the APU design and technology project1985-1991, London: Schools Examinations andAssessment Council

Mawson, B. (2004), ‘Beyond 'The Design Process':An Alternative Pedagogy for TechnologyEducation’, International Journal of Technologyand Design Education, 13, 117-128

Norman, E. and Roberts, P. (1999), ‘Models ofDesign and Technology and their Significance forResearch and Curriculum Development’, Journalof Design and Technology Education, 4, 2, 124-131

Roberts, P. (1992), ‘Of models, modelling anddesign: an applied philosophical enquiry’. TheLanguage of Designing: Occasional Paper No. 1.UK: Loughborough University of Technology, 33-43

103


103

104


104

Appendix i)

Survey data collected but not directly referenced in this paper

List of Figures

Figure No. Description

16 Teachers’ perceptions of the best method by which to teach CAD

17 CAD use in other curriculum areas

18 Total timetable Design and Technology lessons devoted to CAD tuition

19 Teachers’ perceptions of students’ ability to re-design as a result of CNC/RPmanufacture

20 Teachers’ perceptions of students’ ability to produce working drawings toaid manufacture

21 Teachers’ perceptions of students’ ability to produce moulds using CNCequipment from which to make other parts

22 Teachers’ perceptions of students’ ability to use a CAD model to test orevaluate design ideas

23 Teachers’ perceptions of students’ increased quality of work as a result ofusing CAD

24 Teachers’ perceptions of students who produce one CAD model afterpreliminary drawings or sketches

25 Teachers’ perceptions of students’ ability to model a range of componentsand assemble them in 3D CAD

26 Teachers’ perceptions of students’ ability to produce foam CNC models orsimilar to visualise early designs.

27 Teachers’ perceptions of students’ ability to alter 3D CAD images ingraphics packages

28 Teachers’ perceptions of students’ ability to use a combination of CADimages and sketches to develop ideas

105


105

106


106

the impact of computer aided design and manufacture (cad ... · the impact of computer aided design...

Documents