In recent years, technological advances had an impact on the field of education, and computer technologies were started to be used mainly in visual arts, architecture and planning departments in colleges. However, applications such as the use of conventional drawing tools and graphical techniques, sketching, drawing plans, sections, and elevations on paper and production of models are still prevalent in landscape architecture, architecture, interior design or planning departments. Digital technologies are also utilized as supplementary tools. The current article scrutinized student attitudes towards digital and conventional drawing methods in landscape architecture department environmental design studios and the impact of these techniques on the academic success in the course. The study was conducted with KTU Landscape Architecture Department students. Initially, an analysis of variance was conducted to determine whether there was a difference between student attitudes towards conventional and digital drawing techniques in environmental design studio. It was determined that there was a difference between the attitudes of the students between the items 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 12, 14, 15, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23 in the scale that contained statements (23 items) to measure student attitudes (p < .05), and no difference was observed between the student attitudes in remaining items (p > .05). The highest difference was found (F = 168.200) in item 23, followed by items 18 (F = 106,290), 10 (F = 104,533), and 14 (F = 103.292). In the second stage, to determine the effects of using digital or conventional drawing techniques in landscape design studio on the student achievement in the course, a quasi-experimental study was conducted with a pre-test post-test model with control group. It was determined that the pretest findings had a significant effect on both groups (p < .05). Digital and conventional drawing techniques that students learned in environmental design studio were correlated with their academic achievements and the difference between the groups was significant.

近年来，技术进步对教育领域产生了影响，计算机技术开始主要应用于大学的视觉艺术、建筑和规划部门。然而，诸如使用传统绘图工具和图形技术、在纸上绘制草图、绘制平面图、剖面图和立面图以及模型制作等应用在景观建筑、建筑、室内设计或规划部门仍然很普遍。数字技术也被用作补充工具。当前的文章仔细研究了景观建筑系环境设计工作室中学生对数字和传统绘图方法的态度，以及这些技术对课程学术成功的影响。这项研究是与 KTU 景观建筑系的学生一起进行的。最初，进行方差分析以确定环境设计工作室中学生对传统和数字绘图技术的态度是否存在差异。在包含陈述的量表中，确定了学生的态度在第 3、4、5、7、8、10、12、14、15、18、20、21、22、23 项之间存在差异（23 项）来衡量学生的态度（p  < .05)，其余项目的学生态度之间没有观察到差异 ( p  > .05)。在项目 23 中发现最大差异 (F = 168.200)，其次是项目 18 (F = 106,290)、10 (F = 104,533) 和 14 (F = 103.292)。在第二阶段，为了确定在景观设计工作室中使用数字或传统绘图技术对学生在课程中成绩的影响，我们使用一个前测后测模型与对照组进行了一项准实验研究。确定前测结果对两组都有显着影响（p < .05)。学生在环境设计工作室学习的数字和传统绘图技术与其学业成绩相关，组间差异显着。