, collaboration, and the other disciplines changedbecause of the competition. Seventy-eight fourth-year students took part in the competition: 26architecture students, 19 construction students, 14 graphic design students, and 19 interior designstudents. Seventy students completed the initial survey, for a response rate of 95%, and 63students completed the final survey, for a response rate of 81%. The discipline-specific genderdistribution for the 34 males and 44 females taking part in the competition is shown in Figure 1,below. 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 Female 4 2
Engineering and Managementfaculty members and graduates students was created to facilitate collaboration among the threeparties involved. The partnering model shown in figure 1 can be beneficial to all parties involved.Having graduate CEM students working in real university projects benefits the university bylowering the costs that they would ordinarily incur by either having their architecture/engineeringteam and General Service’s staff or outside consultants working in the pre-construction phase of aproject. It benefits CEM faculty who supervise the graduate students because it provides themrelevant and current experience working on projects and an opportunity to interact with campusadministrators and personnel outside their department. Finally and
difficulties for a program offering distance learning revolve around one basic theme, getting students into the courses. 1) Conveying the program quality to the public: Distance learning has carried a stigma of poor educational value from the days of correspondence courses to today’s diploma mills. While the allure of a watered down program to get a quick buck is tempting for even traditionally strong academic institutions, especially in more trying economic times, it is becoming evident that a tradition of quality and value will stand the test of time. Students may complain about the amount, and rigor of work required to obtain a quality degree but they clearly value its significance. Programs these days need to beable to convey to the
InformationModels for the development of additional learning modules. The presented work illustrates howthe influence of instructional theories and design can support the generation of a new learningplatform for construction engineering and management.1. Introduction One of the main objectives of engineering education is to shape students that possess awide variety of knowledge, skills, and attitudes obtained as a result of education, experience, andachievement.[1] This holds true for construction engineering students, who are challenged withreal world problems during their education and after graduation. This educational objectiverequires educators to prepare their learners to solve real world problems, with which theArchitecture, Engineering and
methods. This can be useful in the education of history and engineering to a generalaudience, as well as research in the same fields. This project will be recreating the constructionof one of the most famous ancient monuments: the Colosseum of Rome. Page 26.546.2 II. HISTORICAL ACCOUNTS The erection of the Colosseum (Fig. 1) was begun by Vespasian in AD 727,3, but he died inAD 79 prior to its completion. When his son Titus dedicated the Colosseum in 80, a year beforehe himself died, the top story was still incomplete11; however, Lanciani4 believed that by thistime, the structure had reached the fifth and topmost floor. In AD 81 Titus’ brother Domitianbecame the next
of equipment and materials installed in mechanical, electrical, and plumbing building systems. • Comprehend the design intent and constructability issues in mechanical, electrical, and plumbing building systems. • Synthesizing the knowledge gained through class readings and exercises by participating in construction site visits. Page 26.455.4Learning Objectives:The learning objectives of the exercise are: 1. To give the student a first-hand chance to observe the management factors that affect job productivity 2. To be able to articulate and apply recognized techniques that improve labor productivity. 3