Flora Fakourian, Mehdi Khakzand, Esra Kurul, Mehdi Hamzenejad
pp. 299 – 326, download
(https://doi.org/10.55612/s-5002-068-010)
Abstract
The integration of technological mediums in architectural pedagogy has transitioned from a supplementary aid to a foundational necessity in response to the increasing complexity of design practices. This study conducts a systematic literature review to examine how these mediums interact with architectural pedagogy to enhance educational effectiveness. Analyzing a corpus of 175 peer-reviewed studies, the research identifies critical success factors and synthesizes them into an original conceptual model. The findings reveal that technological value in architectural education is generated through five interrelated dimensions: Configuration, Visualization, Construction Management, Knowledge Management, and Integrated Analysis. While immersive visualization remains the most dominant dimension, its impact is frequently limited to perceptual engagement rather than deep cognitive reflection. The study further identifies that successful integration is heavily moderated by institutional infrastructure, instructor expertise, and pedagogical scaffolding. By bridging fragmented empirical evidence into an integrative framework, this research shifts the discourse from technology-centered adoption toward a value-driven pedagogical strategy. These insights offer a transferable roadmap for curriculum designers and policy-makers to align technological affordances with high-order architectural learning outcomes, making a significant contribution to the current discourse. .
Keywords: architectural pedagogy, technological mediums, technology-enhanced learning, design education, systematic literature review, pedagogical value..
References
1. Ahlqvist, O., & Khodke, N. (2018). Computers , Environment and Urban Systems GeoGame analytics – A cyber-enabled petri dish for geographic modeling and simulation. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 67, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2017.08.013
2. Andriamasinoro, F., Hohmann, A., Douguet, J. M., & Angel, J. M. (2020). Serious games as a social learning tool in formalizing the artisanal and small-scale mining sector in African territories. Extractive Industries and Society, 7(3), 1108–1120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2020.07.017
3. Blitz, A. (2019). Stepping stones: Virtual restoration and 3D visualisation of the tessellated 4th century Byzantine synagogue floor at Apamea on Orontes, Syria. In Digital Applications in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage (Vol. 15). Elsevier Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.daach.2019.e00108
4. Bogosian, B., Bobadilla, L., Alonso, M., Elias, A., Perez, G., Alhaffar, H., & Vassigh, S. (2020). Work in Progress: Towards an Immersive Robotics Training for the Future of Architecture, Engineering, and Construction Workforce. EDUNINE 2020 – 4th IEEE World Engineering Education Conference: The Challenges of Education in Engineering, Computing and Technology without Exclusions: Innovation in the Era of the Industrial Revolution 4.0, Proceedings, 18–21. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUNINE48860.2020.9149493
5. Bozzelli, G., Raia, A., Ricciardi, S., Nino, M. De, Barile, N., Perrella, M., Tramontano, M., Pagano, A., & Palombini, A. (2019). An Integrated VR / MR Framework for User-Centric Interactive Experience of Cultural Heritage : the ArkaeVision. Digital Applications in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage, e00124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.daach.2019.e00124
6. Bradley, S. R., Hayter, C. S., & Link, A. N. (2013). Models and methods of university technology transfer. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 9(6), 571–650. https://doi.org/10.1561/0300000048
7. Bt, N., Yusof, M., & Darus, B. (2012). Evaluation of An Open Source Learning Management System : Claroline. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 67(November 2011), 416–426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.11.346
8. Burt, J. A., Killilea, M. E., & Ciprut, S. (2019). Coastal urbanization and environmental change : Opportunities for collaborative education across a global network university. Regional Studies in Marine Science, 26, 100501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsma.2019.100501
9. Camaj, J., Kendra, M., & Lalinská, J. (2015). Using of Simulation in Technical Subjects Education Process. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 176, 659–666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.524
10. Carter, G. V, & Arroyo, S. J. (2020). Tubing the Future : Participatory Pedagogy and YouTube U in 2020. Computers and Composition, 28(4), 292–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2011.10.001
11. Chang, C., Chang, C. K., & Shih, J. L. (2016). Motivational strategies in a mobile inquiry-based language learning setting. System, 59, 100–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.04.013
12. Darwish, M., Kamel, S., & Assem, A. (2023). Extended reality for enhancing spatial ability in architecture design education. Ain Shams Engineering Journal, 14(6), 102104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2022.102104
13. Dihan, S., Akash, A. I., Tasneem, Z., Das, P., Das, S. K., & Islam, R. (2024). Digital Twin : Data Exploration , Architecture , Implementation and Future. Heliyon, e26503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e26503
14. Elkington, S., & Bligh, B. (2019). Pedagogy Future Learning Spaces. Book, February.
Georgescu, M., & Popescul, D. (2015). The Impact of New Information and Communication Technologies on the Creation and Dissemination of Knowledge Inheritance. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 188, 122–129
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.03.347
15. Fakourian, F., Khakzand, M., Kurul, E., & Hamzenejad, M. (2025a). Exploring the impact of mixed reality on architectural basic design education: A systematic review. Journal of Umm Al-Qura University for Engineering and Architecture. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43995-025-00261-7
16. Fakourian, F., Khakzand, M., Kurul, E., & Hamzenejad, M. (2025b). The influence of educational virtual reality on the visual perception skills of architecture students. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTEL.2025.10074560
17. Geropanta, V., Papamanolis, A., Studi, D., Marconi, G., & Papamanolis, A. (2017). E-Learning & Digital Design in Architectural Pedagogy Observations and Questions based on the On-line Msc of Design Coastal Regeneration Strategies View project AR architetti Roma View project E-Learning & Digital Design in Architectural Pedagogy Observat. October. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325205871
18. Graham, E., & Warren-myers, G. (2019). Investigating the ef fi cacy of a professional education program in promoting sustainable residential construction practices in Australia. Journal of Cleaner Production, 210, 1238–1248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.354
19. Hamilton, D., McKechnie, J., Edgerton, E., & Wilson, C. (2021). Immersive virtual reality as a pedagogical tool in education: a systematic literature review of quantitative learning outcomes and experimental design. In Journal of Computers in Education (Vol. 8, Issue 1). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-020-00169-2
20. Harwood, A. R., Lovett, A. A., & Turner, J. A. (2015). Customising virtual globe tours to enhance community awareness of local landscape benefits. Landscape and Urban Planning, 142, 106–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.08.008
21. Hismanoǧlu, S. (2010). Attitudes of L2 teachers towards Internet-based foreign language teaching. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 3, 106–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.07.019
22. Holotescu, C., Cre, V., & Grosseck, G. (2014). Microblogging Architecture and Scenarios for Learning in Mobile Groups. 143, 1158–1163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.07.571
23. Huang, T. C., & Lin, C. Y. (2017). From 3D modeling to 3D printing: Development of a differentiated spatial ability teaching model. Telematics and Informatics, 34(2), 604–613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2016.10.005
24. Jaalama, K., Fagerholm, N., Julin, A., Virtanen, J. P., Maksimainen, M., & Hyyppä, H. (2021). Sense of presence and sense of place in perceiving a 3D geovisualization for communication in urban planning – Differences introduced by prior familiarity with the place. Landscape and Urban Planning, 207(December 2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.103996
25. Kang, I., Bonk, C. J., & Kim, M. C. (2011). A case study of blog-based learning in Korea: Technology becomes pedagogy. Internet and Higher Education, 14(4), 227–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.05.002
26. Kang, L. (2021). Street architecture landscape design based on Wireless Internet of Things and GIS system. Microprocessors and Microsystems, 80(October), 103362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micpro.2020.103362
27. Kent, L., Snider, C., Gopsill, J., & Hicks, B. (2021). Mixed reality in design prototyping: A systematic review. Design Studies, 77(September). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2021.101046
28. Kim, D.-Y., Choe, Y., & Kim, S.-A. (2015). Implementing a Digital Model for Smart Space Design: Practical and Pedagogic Issues. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 3306–3313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.998
29. Kim, J., & Irizarry, J. (2021). Evaluating the Use of Augmented Reality Technology to Improve Construction Management Student’s Spatial Skills. International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 17(2), 99–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/15578771.2020.1717680
30. Knoth, A., Kiy, A., Müller, I., & Klein, M. (2020). Competences in Context: Students’ Expectations and Reflections as Guided by the Mobile Application Reflect.UP. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 25(4), 707–731. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-019-09407-8
31. Kümmel, E., Moskaliuk, J., & Cress, U. (2020). education sciences Digital Learning Environments in Higher Education : A Literature Review of the Role of Individual vs . Social Settings for Measuring Learning Outcomes.
32. Lee, C., Yeung, A. S., & Cheung, K. W. (2019). Learner perceptions versus technology usage: A study of adolescent English learners in Hong Kong secondary schools. Computers and Education, 133(August 2017), 13–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.01.005
33. Lin, S., & Gerber, D. J. (2014). Evolutionary energy performance feedback for design : Multidisciplinary design optimization and performance boundaries for design decision support. Energy & Buildings, 84, 426–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.08.034
34. Martin, F., Dennen, V. P., & Bonk, C. J. (2020). A synthesis of systematic review research on emerging learning environments and technologies. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(4), 1613–1633. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09812-2
35. Milovanović, A., Kostić, M., Zorić, A., Dordević, A., Pešić, M., Bugarski, J., Todorović, D., Sokolović, N., & Josifovski, A. (2020). Transferring COVID-19 challenges into learning potentials: Online workshops in architectural education. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(17), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12177024
36. Milovanovic, J., Moreau, G., Siret, D., & Miguet, F. (2017). Virtual and Augmented Reality in Architectural Design and Education: An Immersive Multimodal Platform to Support Architectural Pedagogy. 17th International Conference, CAAD Futures 2017, Istanbul, Turkey, July 2017, 513–532.
37. Mohd, N., Izham, M., & Yunus, M. (2010). The Mobile Learning Environment for the In-Service School Administrators. 7(C), 671–679. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.10.091
38. Moty, V., Henková, S., & Kantová, R. (2014). Brno University Of Technology ’ s Faculty Of Civil Engineering Considers The Opinions Of Construction Companies When Planning Study Programme Content. 143, 423–427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.07.507
39. Niazi, M., & Hussain, A. (2011). Agent-based computing from multi-agent systems to agent-based models: A visual survey. Scientometrics, 89(2), 479–499. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0468-9
40. Papamanolis, A., & Geropanta, V. (2018). Information Technologies in Architectural Pedagogy: from “Tool” to a “Comprehensive Educational Strategy.” Emerging Trends in Education, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.19136/etie.a1n1.2788
41. Peng, L., Du, Y., & Zhang, Z. (2021). The Application of Virtual Reality Technology in Architectural Design. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, 1283, 231–236. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62746-1_34
42. Philippe, S., Souchet, A. D., Lameras, P., Petridis, P., Caporal, J., Coldeboeuf, G., & Duzan, H. (2020). Multimodal teaching, learning and training in virtual reality: a review and case study. Virtual Reality & Intelligent Hardware, 2(5), 421–442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vrih.2020.07.008
43. Ping, C., & Libing, W. (2017). Blended Learning fo Quality Higher Education.
44. Portman, M. E., & Natapov, A. (2015). Computers , Environment and Urban Systems To go where no man has gone before : Virtual reality in architecture , landscape architecture and environmental planning. COMPUTERS, ENVIRONMENT AND URBAN SYSTEMS, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2015.05.001
45. Punithavathi, P., & Geetha, S. (2020). ScienceDirect Disruptive smart mobile pedagogies for engineering education. Procedia Computer Science, 172(2019), 784–790. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2020.05.112
46. Raou, K., Park, K., Hasan, T., Haapala, K. R., Psenka, C. E., Jackson, K. L., Okudan, G. E., & Kim, K. (2019). A cyberlearning platform for enhancing undergraduate engineering education in sustainable product design. 211, 730–741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.11.085
47. Roupé, M., Bosch-sijtsema, P., & Johansson, M. (2014). Computers , Environment and Urban Systems Interactive navigation interface for Virtual Reality using the human body. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 43, 42–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2013.10.003
48. Rybnicek, R., & Königsgruber, R. (2019). What makes industry–university collaboration succeed? A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Business Economics, 89(2), 221–250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-018-0916-6
49. Serban, C., & Todericiuaa, I. A. (2020). Alexa, What classes do I have today? The use of artificial intelligence via smart speakers in education. Procedia Computer Science, 176, 2849–2857. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2020.09.269
50. Serban, C., & Vescan, A. (2019). Advances in designing a student-centered learning process using cutting-edge methods, tools, and artificial intelligence: An e-learning platform. EASEAI 2019 – Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGSOFT International Workshop on Education through Advanced Software Engineering and Artificial Intelligence, Co-Located with ESEC/FSE 2019, 39–45. https://doi.org/10.1145/3340435.3342716
51. Tagg, C., & Seargeant, P. (2021). Context design and critical language/media awareness: Implications for a social digital literacies education. Linguistics and Education, 62, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2019.100776
52. Tai, N. C. (2023). Applications of augmented reality and virtual reality on computer-assisted teaching for analytical sketching of architectural scene and construction. Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1080/13467581.2022.2097241
53. Taleb, Z., Ahmadi, A., & Musavi, M. (2015). The Effect of M-learning on Mathematics Learning. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 171, 83–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.092
54. Tsolis, D., Stamou, S., Christia, P., Kampana, S., Rapakoulia, T., Skouta, M., & Tsakalidis, A. (2010). An adaptive and personalized open source e-learning platform. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, 38–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.112
55. Turk, Z. (2016). Ten questions concerning building information modelling. 107, 274–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.08.001
56. Tyler-Wood, T. L., Cockerham, D., & Johnson, K. R. (2018). Implementing new technologies in a middle school curriculum: a rural perspective. Smart Learning Environments, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-018-0073-y
57. Vassigh, S., Davis, D., Behzadan, A. H., Mostafavi, A., Rashid, K., Alhaffar, H., Elias, A., & Gallardo, G. (2020). Teaching Building Sciences in Immersive Environments: A Prototype Design, Implementation, and Assessment. International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 16(3), 180–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/15578771.2018.1525445
58. Vinu, P. V., Sherimon, P. C., & Krishnan, R. (2011). Towards pervasive mobile learning – The vision of 21 st century. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 3067–3073. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.247
59. Voinea, G. D., Boboc, R. G., & Antonya, C. (2022). Mixed Reality Tools for Education in the Metaverse. 249–251. https://doi.org/10.36315/2022v2end056
60. Vučić, M., & Tepavčević, B. (2021). Web-Based Collaborative Method for the Design and Fabrication of Gridshells. Proceedings of the International Conference on Education and Research in Computer Aided Architectural Design in Europe, 1, 225–234. https://doi.org/10.52842/conf.ecaade.2021.1.225
61. Wagdi, O., Abouzeid, W., & Fathy Mohamed, H. E. D. (2021). Restructuring and Transformation of Arab Educational Institutions into Fourth-Generation Universities. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 12(14), 5763–5781.
62. Wang, M., Wang, C. C., Sepasgozar, S., & Zlatanova, S. (2020). A systematic review of digital technology adoption in off-site construction: Current status and future direction towards industry 4.0. Buildings, 10(11), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings10110204
63. Wang, P., Wu, P., Wang, J., Chi, H. L., & Wang, X. (2018). A critical review of the use of virtual reality in construction engineering education and training. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(6). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15061204
64. Woolcott, G., Seton, C., Mason, R., Chen, O., Lake, W., Markopoulos, C., & Boyd, W. (2019). Developing a New Generation MOOC (ngMOOC): A Design-Based Implementation Research Project with Cognitive Architecture and Student Feedback in Mind. In European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning (Vol. 22, Issue 1, pp. 14–35). https://doi.org/10.2478/eurodl-2019-0002
65. Xu, Y., Guo, Y., Khan, A., & Khatib, S. F. A. (2021). Application of ecological ideas in indoor environmental art design based on hybrid conformal prediction algorithm framework. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 86(October 2020), 106494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106494
66. Yousif, S., Aljanabi, M., & Reddy, T. (2024). International Journal of Cognitive Computing in Engineering Navigating the Nexus : A systematic review of the symbiotic relationship between the metaverse and gaming. International Journal of Cognitive Computing in Engineering, 5(November 2023), 88–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcce.2024.02.001
67. Yu, R., Gu, N., Lee, G., & Khan, A. (2022). A Systematic Review of Architectural Design Collaboration in Immersive Virtual Environments. Designs, 6(5)
https://doi.org/10.3390/designs6050093
68. Zaballos, A., Briones, A., Massa, A., Centelles, P., & Caballero, V. (2020). A smart campus’ digital twin for sustainable comfort monitoring. Sustainability (Switzerland), 12(21), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12219196
69. Zhang, Z., & Xue, Y. (2015). An Investigation of How Chinese University Students Use Social Software for Learning Purposes. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 186, 70–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.084