Investigating Attitudes of Design Students Toward Parametric Design: Parametric Design Attitude Scale (PDAS)

Hasan Tastan; İhsan Erdem Er

doi:10.29130/dubited.1740484

EN TR

Investigating Attitudes of Design Students Toward Parametric Design: Parametric Design Attitude Scale (PDAS)

Abstract

This study aims to develop a valid and reliable measurement tool to evaluate architecture students’ attitudes toward parametric design. Adapting items from three established instruments on design technologies and programming, a four-phase methodology was employed. In the first phase, relevant attitude scales from the literature were examined and adapted to parametric design. The second phase involved administering the adapted scale to architecture students and conducting exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis, resulting in a four-dimensional structure: perceived usefulness; interest and preferences; functionality and application areas; and practicality and challenges. In the third phase, the finalized scale was applied to twenty-three students after a parametric design course alongside four affective measures. In the final phase all five survey results and students course performances are analyzed for correlations. The results showed that while PDAS shows strong relationships with self-confidence and design thinking variables, moderate correlation with task performance and other variables. This indicates that parametric design education requires balanced and sustainable pedagogical approaches.

Keywords

Parametric design, Attitude scale, Computational design, Architectural education

Supporting Institution

This research received no external funding.

Ethical Statement

This research was carried out with the permission of the Yıldız Technical University Rectorate Social and Humanities Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Board dated June, 01, 2023 and numbered 2023-06.

Thanks

The authors do not wish to acknowledge any individual or institution.

Tasarım Öğrencilerinin Parametrik Tasarıma Karşı Tutumlarının İncelenmesi: Parametrik Tasarım Tutum Ölçeği (PDAS)

Abstract

Bu çalışma, mimarlık öğrencilerinin parametrik tasarıma yönelik tutumlarını değerlendirmek üzere geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçme aracı geliştirmek amacıyla yapılmıştır. Tasarım teknolojileri ve programlama alanlarında kabul görmüş üç araçtan maddeler uyarlanarak dört aşamalı bir metodoloji uygulanmıştır. İlk aşamada, literatürdeki ilgili tutum ölçekleri incelenmiş ve parametrik tasarıma uyarlanmıştır. İkinci aşamada, uyarlanan ölçek mimarlık öğrencilerine uygulanmış ve keşifsel faktör analizi ile doğrulayıcı faktör analizi gerçekleştirilmiştir; bu analizler sonucunda algılanan yarar, ilgi ve tercihler, işlevsellik ve uygulama alanları ile pratiklik ve zorluklar olmak üzere dört boyutlu bir yapı ortaya çıkmıştır. Üçüncü aşamada, parametrik tasarım dersinin ardından nihai hale getirilen ölçek, dört duygusal ölçüm aracıyla birlikte yirmi üç öğrenciye uygulanmıştır. Son aşamada, beş anketin sonuçları ile öğrencilerin ders performansları arasında korelasyon analizi yapılmıştır. Sonuçlar, PDAS’ın özgüven ve tasarım odaklı düşünme değişkenleriyle güçlü ilişkiler gösterirken, görev performansı ve diğer değişkenlerle orta düzeyde bir korelasyon gösterdiğini ortaya koymuştur. Bu durum, parametrik tasarım eğitiminin dengeli ve sürdürülebilir pedagojik yaklaşımlar gerektirdiğini göstermektedir.

Keywords

Parametrik tasarım, Tutum ölçeği, Hesaplamalı tasarım, Mimarlık eğitimi

References

Abdalla, M. R., & Kandil, B. M. E. L.-S. (2017). Parametric and its roles in the design process. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science, 64(5), 345–363.
Alalouch, C. (2018). A pedagogical approach to integrate parametric thinking in early design studios. Archnet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural Research, 12(2), 162–181. https://doi.org/10.26687/archnet-ijar.v12i2.1584
Amabile, T. M. (1982). Social psychology of creativity: A consensual assessment technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(5), 997–1013. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.43.5.997
Anastasiadou, S. D. (2011). Reliability and validity testing of a new scale for measuring attitudes toward learning statistics with technology. Acta Didactica Napocensia, 4(1), 1–10. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1054957.pdf
Bandura, A. (1997). Self efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman and Company.
Başer, M. (2013). Developing attitude scale toward computer programming. International Journal of Social Science, 6(6), 199–215. http://dx.doi.org/10.9761/JASSS1702
Baysen, F., & Akçay, A. Ö. (2017). Architecture students attitudes toward information search process. Information World, 18(1), 125–142. https://doi.org/10.15612/BD.2017.596
Brenner, W., & Uebernickel, F. (Eds.). (2016). Design thinking for innovation: Research and practice. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26100-3
Cho, J. Y., & Suh, J. (2019). Understanding spatial ability in interior design education: 2D‐to‐3D visualization proficiency as a predictor of design performance. Journal of Interior Design, 44(3), 141–159. https://doi.org/10.1111/joid.12143
Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 10(1), Article 7. https://doi.org/10.7275/jyj1-4868

Dissaux, T., & Jancart, S. (2022). Architecture students’ search behavior in parametric design. In Co-creating the Future: Inclusion in and Through Design: Proceedings of the 40th Conference on Education and Research in Computer Aided Architectural Design in Europe (eCAADe 2022) (Vol. 1, pp. 171–181). https://doi.org/10.52842/conf.ecaade.2022.1.171
Er, I. E., Arabacıoğlu, F. P., & Tastan, H. (2025). Cognitive processes in parametric design: A systematic literature review of methods, models, and future directions. Megaron, 20(1), 37–51. https://doi.org/10.14744/megaron.2025.52893
Fennema, E., & Sherman, J. A. (1976). Fennema-Sherman mathematics attitudes scales: Instruments designed to measure attitudes toward the learning of mathematics by females and males. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 7(5), 324–326. https://doi.org/10.2307/748467
Garrett, J., & Walker, T. (2008). Student attitudes towards the use of graphical programming languages. In Proceedings of the 2008 Annual Conference & Exposition (pp. 13.1105.1–13.1105.11). https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--3239
Godbole, S. (2014). Impact of a visual programming experience on the attitude toward programming of introductory undergraduate students [Master's thesis, Purdue University]. Purdue e-Pubs. https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/open_access_theses/327/
Gürel, A., & Şenyapılı Ozcan, B. (2023). Cognitive Comparison of design methods in the conceptual phase. International Journal of Architectural Computing, 21(4), 581–601. https://doi.org/10.1177/14780771231188474
Hair, J. F. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. Prentice Hall.
Henderson, P. B., Cortina, T. J., Wing, J. M., & Hazzan, O. (2007). Computational thinking. In Proceedings of the 38th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 195–196). https://doi.org/10.1145/1227310.1227378
Holzer, D. (2015). BIM and parametric design in academia and practice: the changing context of knowledge acquisition and application in the digital age. International Journal of Architectural Computing, 13(1), 65–82. https://doi.org/10.1260/1478-0771.13.1.65
Hongwarittorrn, N., & Krairit, D. (2010). Effects of program visualization (jeliot3) on students’ performance and attitudes towards java programming. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computing, Communication and Control Technologies (CCCT 2010). https://www.iiis.org/CDs2010/CD2010IMC/CCCT_2010/PapersPdf/TA750PM.pdf
Hutchinson, A., Moskal, B., Cooper, S., & Dann, W. (2008). The impact of the Alice curriculum on community college students’ attitudes and learning with respect to computer science. In Proceedings of the 2008 Annual Conference & Exposition (pp. 13.1238.1–13.1238.14). https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--3306
Joklová, V., & Pifko, H. (2015). Innovation in architectural education-OIKONET experience. Global Journal of Engineering Education, 17(3), 124–131. https://www.wiete.com.au/journals/GJEE/Publish/vol17no3/04-Joklova-Pifko.pdf
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1
Korkmaz, Ö., & Bai, X. (2019). Adapting computational thinking scale (CTS) for Chinese high school students and their thinking scale skills level. Participatory Educational Research, 6(1), 10–26. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.19.2.6.1
Köller, O., Baumert, J., & Schnabel, K. (2001). Does interest matter? The relationship between academic interest and achievement in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32(5), 448–470. https://doi.org/10.2307/749801
Kukul, V., & Karatas, S. (2019). Computational thinking self-efficacy scale: Development, validity and reliability. Informatics in Education, 18(1), 151–164. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2019.07
Lee, J. H., & Ostwald, M. J. (2019). Measuring cognitive complexity in parametric design. International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation, 7(3), 158–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/21650349.2018.1555492
Li, Q., Liu, Z.-x, Wang, P., Wang, J.-j, & Luo, T. (2023). The influence of art programming courses on design thinking and computational thinking in college art and design students. Education and Information Technologies, 28(9), 10885–10902. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11618-7
Lun, S., Ho, H. N. J., Shih, M., Perng, Y. H., Tsaih, L., & Liang, J. C. (2025). Exploring learning approaches and self-efficacy among design students in Taiwan. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 35(4), 1717–1740. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-025-10004-3
Monteiro, V., Januário, P., & Veloso, M. (2020). Design collaboration towards constructibility in parametric design process: A design experiment with architecture students. In Anthropologic: Architecture and Fabrication in the Cognitive Age: Proceedings of the 38th Conference on Education and Research in Computer Aided Architectural Design in Europe (eCAADe 2020) (Vol. 1, pp. 305–314). https://doi.org/10.52842/conf.ecaade.2020.1.305
Nauzeer, S., & Jaunky, V. C. (2021). A meta-analysis of the combined effects of motivation, learning and personality traits on academic performance. Pedagogical Research, 6(3), Article em0097. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/10963
Nolan, M. M., Beran, T., & Hecker, K. G. (2012). Surveys assessing students’ attitudes toward statistics: A systematic review of validity and reliability. Statistics Education Research Journal, 11(2), 103–123. https://doi.org/10.52041/serj.v11i2.333 Oxman, R. (2008). Performance-based design: Current practices and research issues. International Journal of Architectural Computing, 6(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1260/147807708784640090
Öztürk Kösenciĝ, K., & Özbayraktar, M. (2025). Unveiling interactions among architectural sketching, parametric design, and digital fabrication using linkography. International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation, 13(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/21650349.2024.2426646
Razzouk, R., & Shute, V. (2012). What is design thinking and why is it important? Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 330–348. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312457429
Rees, C., Sheard, C., & Davies, S. (2002). The development of a scale to measure medical students’ attitudes towards communication skills learning: The Communication Skills Attitude Scale (CSAS). Medical Education, 36(2), 141–147. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2923.2002.01072.x
Riggio, M., & Cheng, N. Y.-w. (2021). Computation and learning partnerships: Lessons from wood architecture, engineering, and construction integration. Education Sciences, 11(3), Article 124. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11030124
Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01405730
Shaghaghian, Z., Burte, H., Song, D., & Yan, W. (2022). Learning geometric transformations for parametric design: an augmented reality (AR)-powered approach. In D. Gerber, E. Pantazis, B. Bogosian, A. Nahmad, & C. Miltiadis (Eds.), Computer-Aided Architectural Design: Design Imperatives: The Future Is Now (Communications in Computer and Information Science, Vol. 1465, pp. 515–527). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-1280-1_31
Shaghaghian, Z., Yan, W., & Song, D. (2021). Towards learning geometric transformations through Play: An AR-powered approach. In Proceedings of the 2021 5th International Conference on Virtual and Augmented Reality Simulations (ICVARS '21) (pp. 1–6). https://doi.org/10.1145/3463914.3463915
Suh, J., & Cho, J. Y. (2020). Linking spatial ability, spatial strategies, and spatial creativity: A step to clarify the fuzzy relationship between spatial ability and creativity. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 35, Article 100628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100628
Sunarya, W., Seputra, J. A. P., & Zakariya, A. F. (2023). Parametric modeling practice for the first-year architecture students learning. ARTEKS: Jurnal Teknik Arsitektur, 8(2), 293–304. https://doi.org/10.30822/arteks.v8i2.2189
Tarakçı Eren, E., & Düzenli, T. (2021). Determination of the difference between environmental attitudes of 1st and 4th year students of landscape architecture. A|Z ITU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 18(3), 551–565. https://doi.org/10.5505/itujfa.2021.23855
Tarakçı Eren, E., Düzenli, T., & Akyol, D. (2018). Attitudes of landscape architecture students towards biomorphic and parametric design approaches in environmental design. Sanat ve Tasarım Dergisi, 8(1), 126–143. https://doi.org/10.20488/sanattasarim.510285
Tarakçı Eren, E., & Yılmaz, S. (2022). The student attitudes towards digital and conventional drawing methods in environmental design studios and the impact of these techniques on academic achievement in the course. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 32(1), 617–644. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-020-09605-x
Tasli Pektaş, Ş., & Erkip, F. (2006). Attitudes of design students toward computer usage in design. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 16, 79–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-005-3175-0
Tastan, H., Tuker, C., & Tong, T. (2022). Using handheld user interface and direct manipulation for architectural modeling in immersive virtual reality: An exploratory study. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 30(2), 415–434. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22463
Tsai, M.-J., & Wang, C.-Y. (2021). Assessing young students’ design thinking disposition and its relationship with computer programming self-efficacy. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(3), 410–428. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120967326
Turan, B. O., Şahin, K., & Işıkdağ, Ü. (2017). An investigation on the attitudes towards adopting the design by coding paradigm. A|Z ITU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, 14(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.5505/itujfa.2017.18209
Uzun, N., & Sağlam, N. (2006). Development and validation of an environmental attitudes scale for high school students. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 30(30), 240–250. https://izlik.org/JA45DW48NF
Wiebe, E., Williams, L. A., Yang, K., & Miller, C. S. (2003). Computer science attitude survey. North Carolina State University, Department of Computer Science. https://repository.lib.ncsu.edu/items/f79abb75-cca8-4e39-85b0-4142bfec772e
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215
Yiwei, R., & Xia, R. (2010). Interpretation of parametric design. In 2010 IEEE 11th International Conference on Computer-Aided Industrial Design & Conceptual Design (Vol. 1, pp. 1458–1461). https://doi.org/10.1109/CAIDCD.2010.5681935
Yokoyama, S. (2018). Academic self-efficacy and academic performance in online learning: A mini review. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 2794. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02794

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Architectural Computing and Visualisation Methods, Architectural Design, Architecture (Other)

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Hasan Tastan ^*
0000-0001-6231-4388
Türkiye

İhsan Erdem Er This is me
0000-0002-9107-4923
Türkiye

Publication Date

July 24, 2026

Submission Date

July 11, 2025

Acceptance Date

April 13, 2026

Published in Issue

Year 2026 Volume: 14 Number: 3

DOI

https://doi.org/10.29130/dubited.1740484

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA83WE45WP

APA

Tastan, H., & Er, İ. E. (2026). Investigating Attitudes of Design Students Toward Parametric Design: Parametric Design Attitude Scale (PDAS). Duzce University Journal of Science and Technology, 14(3), 666-679. https://doi.org/10.29130/dubited.1740484

AMA

1.Tastan H, Er İE. Investigating Attitudes of Design Students Toward Parametric Design: Parametric Design Attitude Scale (PDAS). DUBİTED. 2026;14(3):666-679. doi:10.29130/dubited.1740484

Chicago

Tastan, Hasan, and İhsan Erdem Er. 2026. “Investigating Attitudes of Design Students Toward Parametric Design: Parametric Design Attitude Scale (PDAS)”. Duzce University Journal of Science and Technology 14 (3): 666-79. https://doi.org/10.29130/dubited.1740484.

EndNote

Tastan H, Er İE (July 1, 2026) Investigating Attitudes of Design Students Toward Parametric Design: Parametric Design Attitude Scale (PDAS). Duzce University Journal of Science and Technology 14 3 666–679.

IEEE

[1]H. Tastan and İ. E. Er, “Investigating Attitudes of Design Students Toward Parametric Design: Parametric Design Attitude Scale (PDAS)”, DUBİTED, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 666–679, July 2026, doi: 10.29130/dubited.1740484.

ISNAD

Tastan, Hasan - Er, İhsan Erdem. “Investigating Attitudes of Design Students Toward Parametric Design: Parametric Design Attitude Scale (PDAS)”. Duzce University Journal of Science and Technology 14/3 (July 1, 2026): 666-679. https://doi.org/10.29130/dubited.1740484.

JAMA

1.Tastan H, Er İE. Investigating Attitudes of Design Students Toward Parametric Design: Parametric Design Attitude Scale (PDAS). DUBİTED. 2026;14:666–679.

MLA

Tastan, Hasan, and İhsan Erdem Er. “Investigating Attitudes of Design Students Toward Parametric Design: Parametric Design Attitude Scale (PDAS)”. Duzce University Journal of Science and Technology, vol. 14, no. 3, July 2026, pp. 666-79, doi:10.29130/dubited.1740484.

Vancouver

1.Hasan Tastan, İhsan Erdem Er. Investigating Attitudes of Design Students Toward Parametric Design: Parametric Design Attitude Scale (PDAS). DUBİTED. 2026 Jul. 1;14(3):666-79. doi:10.29130/dubited.1740484

Investigating Attitudes of Design Students Toward Parametric Design: Parametric Design Attitude Scale (PDAS)

Abstract

Keywords

Supporting Institution

Ethical Statement

Thanks

Tasarım Öğrencilerinin Parametrik Tasarıma Karşı Tutumlarının İncelenmesi: Parametrik Tasarım Tutum Ölçeği (PDAS)

Abstract

Keywords

References

Details

Primary Language

Subjects

Journal Section

Authors

Publication Date

Submission Date

Acceptance Date

Published in Issue

DOI

IZ

Cite