Search

Book Description:\ud Universal design has traditionally focused on learning spaces—that is, the physical buildings and areas that support teaching and learning. This book takes a broad interpretation of this concept to include a specific focus on teaching and learning practice in higher education. It draws from the expertise of a range of professionals working in higher education across three countries (the UK, China and Malaysia), thus giving voice to rarely explored debates around teaching and learning, but also drawing from different cultural perspectives. The volume also explores challenges that arise when delivering higher education courses in the 21st century and possible solutions that attempt to address such challenges. As such, it has a practical focus that will appeal to HE practitioners who are keen to enhance their own practice and, as a consequence, student outcomes.\ud \ud Chapter Abstract:\ud From computer-aided drafting, modelling and visualization to computational design and fabrication, the use of digital technologies are normal practices in architectural education nowadays. While the advance digital tools allow new possibilities in creative design, how these tools are used and its effectiveness to student learning are questionable, and the issue of when and where to introduce digital tools in the curriculum is a topic of frequent discussion. One particular argument is that whether digital tools are suitable for foundation-level architecture students to enhance learning and creativity in design. Although the inevitability of digital literacy to prepare for professional practice is commonly acknowledged, yet there are two opposing views on the use of digital tools in architectural education. The proponents of technology suggest that digital learning is realistic to acquire professional skills and it motivates students to develop creative work, therefore it should be implemented from the very beginning of architectural education (Huang and Jiang, 2013), as the study of architecture is after all vocational. Conventionally students learn design from expert architects in the studio with a teaching model following the actual design process, which is a pragmatic view that considers the continuity between education and professional practice. It also shows the attitude on advance design tools as they are able to replace traditional tools and offer better solutions. This seems to be the mainstream thoughts in practice. On the other hand, there are critical views on the use of digital tools in relation to the development of essential understanding in architectural design. It argues that digital design mediated by a computer screen deviates from the comprehension of the tactile quality of architectural spaces, therefore it is ineffective to cultivate the sense of structural resolution and scale, as well as spatial experience for beginning design students. These are fundamental qualities in architectural thinking that is recommended to first learnt through conventional hand drawing and physical modeling. (Kara, 2015) Situated within the opposing views regarding the use of digital tools in architectural education, this chapter provides an alternative account that deals with the issue of non-learning with digital design tools by novice architecture students at the case study university. Through an experimental teaching project, the author argues that the incorporation of deliberate low-tech (manual) design methods can supplement and reinforce architectural learning, to inform students the criteria of architectural design and to enhance critical decision making in the process.

We developed a text-data based learning tool that integrates image processing and displaying by Excel. Knowledge required for programing this tool is limited to using absolute, relative, and composite cell references and learning approximately 20 mathematical functions available in Excel. The new tool is capable of resolution translation, geometric transformation, spatial-filter processing, Radon transform, Fourier transform, convolutions, correlations, deconvolutions, wavelet transform, mutual information, and simulation of proton density-, T1-, and T2-weighted MR images. The processed images of 128×128 pixels or 256×256 pixels are observed directly within Excel worksheets without using any particular image display software. The results of image processing using this tool were compared with those using C language and the new tool was judged to have sufficient accuracy to be practically useful. The images displayed on Excel worksheets were compared with images using binary-data display software. This comparison indicated that the image quality of the Excel worksheets was nearly equal to the latter in visual impressions. Since image processingis performed by using text-data, the process is visible and facilitates making contrasts by using mathematical equations within the program. We concluded that the newly developed tool is adequate as a computer-assisted learning tool for use in medical image processing.