Educators frequently ask whether hand drawing in architectural education adds to the curriculum. It is an interesting question since this topic centers on the technology used to create a rendering rather than the fact that architecture itself is frequently characterized as both an art and a science.
With this in mind, it helps to look at what an architectural drawing offers. Whether created by hand or with a CAD editor, the goal of a rendering is to represent on a flat plan, or in 2-dimensions, something that is actually 3-dimensional. A successful drawing will convincingly capture the depth of the physical world.
Both computer driven and hands-on practices can achieve good results. What a teacher wants to do in the classroom, however, is help a student internalize what it takes to accurately translate the geometry of a physical space accurately. Internalizing the rules of projection and linear perspective, some argue, is more likely when the student wrestles directly with how to represent what is seen.
Indeed, those who argue for a technologically driven classroom cite time saved as a recommendation. By contrast, the other view is that a software program necessitates learning a set of rules that may not even have the capacity to produce the desired results in every case.
When drawing with a pencil, one can also focus on the work itself. There are no printing problems to distract the architectural student. Since there is also no software to learn, the knowledge will not become outdated when an update is issued to the program.
Course that teach hand drawing in architectural education have a long history. Recent debates have challenged this part of the curriculum and predicted it will die out. Yet, because some still cherish the kind of advance planning and complex thinking of the older methods, the debates continue.