Paper ID #33163Responding to the COVID Pandemic: Results and Reflections on Round-TableDiscussions at ASEE 2020Dr. John Tingerthal P.E., Northern Arizona University John Tingerthal joined the Construction Management faculty at Northern Arizona University in 2007 and was appointed as a Distinguished Teaching Fellow in 2015. His engineering career spans a variety of design and forensic engineering experiences. He spent the first eight years of his career performing structural consulting engineering in Chicago. He earned his Doctorate in Education and is currently the Associate Chair of the Civil Engineering, Construction
Paper ID #21485Fostering Civic Identity in Architectural Technology Students through theEvaluation of Critical Reflection in Service Learning CourseworkBeth Huffman, Indiana University Purdue University, Indianapolis Beth Huffman is a lecturer at Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) in the interior design department. She is a licensed architect with specialties in sustainability and construction. Beth’s classroom pedagogy is focused on the practices of design/ build. She often encourages students to build a portion of their projects at full scale, in order to understand construction connections and
activities: design, build, and test; which employ the following pedagogicaltechniques: inductive, experiential, and reflective learning respectively (Figure 1). Theseactivities each achieve one or more of the learning objectives: The design activity servesLearning Objectives 2 and 4 by splitting students’ time between two sets of design sketching andfeedback sessions. The build activity facilitates Learning Objective 3. The test activity servesLearning Objectives 4 and 5 through its presentation, load testing, and instructor feedbackcomponents. All activities engage Learning Objective 1 because this is a group work project, andrequires efficient teamwork in order to complete in the modest two-day timeframe. [Figure 1] Three
• New typical wall sections • New building cross section. • Building code analysisLater on this paper we will see some examples of student reflection as they talk about how theassignments may have helped them be effective in their deliverables, or in some cases where they would like to see improvements in this course to better assist them in future assignments.Community partners can play a vital role in high impact practice courses that utilize servicelearning, and during the pre-course development I conducted several meetings to clarify, wants& needs of the partner. These meetings also help to set the groundwork for expectations
emphasizes students understanding the world in a holistic way byintegrating disciplinary knowledge into a more comprehensive view while willing to collaborateand learn across the barriers between disciplines [1]. This course prepares students to addresscontemporary environmental policies demanding pursuit of the most effective solutions. Theprofessional context for students taking the course reflects emerging professional ethics andbusiness models emphasizing sustainable and resilient community development. To meet theseprofessional and environmental challenges, students need to be prepared to lead in the design andmanagement of high-performance buildings and districts.1.1 The need for an Inter-Disciplinary course on Sustainable Technology
includedmodeling and doing orthographic drawings. Moreover, Demirbas¸et al. [4] concluded thatvarious types of learning were effective on the performance scores of students in different stagesof a design problem through the studio process and that there is a shift from the learning thattakes place by experiencing and learning by doing, to learning by reflecting and learning bythinking. Therefore, in producing these two major design projects in the Architectural Designcourse, specifically the students’ own individual designs, the students would have to draw fromtheir learning experiences from their construction and design related courses where applicable.The aforementioned process would necessarily be valid as Oxman [5] notes that ArchitecturalDesign
research has documented the relationship between the efficacy of internships in constructionor engineering (Laxman et al. 2005 and Moore and Plugge 2008). However, little research has focusedon the relationship between the availability of paid internships and the economy. There is plenty ofresearch available on job rates and the economy in general (BLS 2020), however there is no researchpublished that reflects the relationship between internships and the economy. In the past recession, jobloss has caused some employed to return to university as non-traditional students (Barr and Turner2013). It is not yet known if that same non-traditional population will return to university while courseshave shifted to an online format. Perceptions of student
. A greater reliance upon online instruction requires a commensurateincrease in collaborative interaction. Palloff and Pratt recognize that an effective online model,“includes deliberate attempts to build community as a means of promoting collaborativelearning” [16]. Collaborative learning promotes a social presence and promotes independentlearning. “The instructor in an online class is responsible for facilitating and making room for thepersonal and social aspects of an online community so social presence can emerge and make theclass a successful learning experience” [16].Teachers can apply several techniques to build community. The online activities are moreeffective when treated as collaborative information seeking behaviors and reflective
, supports course completionthat reflects an indirect gauge to retention and facilitates understanding complex engineeringconcepts through technological simulations.Introduction and MotivationThe President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology encourages developinginnovative teaching practices, to improve student retention and enhance their learningexperiences [1]. Research reveals that STEM and building sciences are taught in astraightforward way based on fragmented concepts rather than embracing technology andcreative problem solving skills [2]. Although problems related to innovative pedagogies thattrain STEM students have been enhanced through for example vertically integrating courses thatsupport students learning and trainings [3
traditional design studio consists of ateacher telling students what to do and student doing what they are told, other formats have student takingthe lead with the critique being the main feedback mechanism for what to further explore (Hassanpour etal. 2010). Part of this reflection comes from classical training of architects and the experience imparted tostudents by their design instructors. Rarely are these instructors are experts on educational theories. Theexperience of the faculty may or may not align with the projects and thus, a disconnect exists (Goldschmidtet al. 2010). Hence, a need has been recognized for moving beyond a trial-and-error approach to design byadapting to more systematic iterations (Wang 2010). There have been educational
individual to carry out taskscomfortably in terms of their photo sensory perception of their environment (Centre for Windowand Cladding Technology, 2017). These metrics are dependent on various factors including lightintensity, direction of light source, reflection of surfaces, contrast of surfaces, the nature of thetask being undertaken, and the photo sensory capabilities of the users’ eyes. Among studies focused on daylight performance, Sharaidin (2012) designed anexperiment focused on optimization of the daylight performance through various motionsapplied to responsive facade systems using integrated software. In another study, Wagdy, Fathyand Altomonte (2016) proposed optimum visual comfort metrics such as hourly spatial daylightautonomy
crucial at the start of theprogram, and do not come as naturally when online. The event drew a large crowd, withnearly 100% of the 124 students participating and dozens of volunteers coming from variousgroups (students, faculty, and industry), and was shown to be well-received by the results ofsurveys. The paper concludes with a reflection of the perceived successes and challenges ofthe event. Also, recommendations are discussed in the context of the virtual event platform,which can be extended to general AE online learning.1.0 IntroductionIn 2018, a design-build activity was held during the first two days of fall semester for the firstcohort of a newly-established Architectural Engineering (AE) program at the University ofWaterloo (UW). The
observations of the instructor in class and the reflection reportswritten by the students that the Arch E students were working in teams more effectively than thestudents in the other programs. As reported in their reflection reports, the Arch E already knewhow to work well together and resolve conflicts, as they have been doing this since Day 1 withtheir studio course and the Arch E Design Days event they all undertake in the first week of class(Mui et al., 2019). Teamwork being one of the twelve outcomes that need to be addressed foraccreditation of an engineering program according to the Canadian engineering accreditationboard (CEAB, 2018), it is important to identify that this outcome is being addressed in theprogram. As the first years of all
]ducation must be conceived as a continuing reconstruction of experience… the process andgoal of education are one and the same thing” [10] . Kolb states that learning is best supportedwhen students are engaged in a process that draws their beliefs and ideas about a topic so thatthey can be examined, tested, and integrated with new and more refined ideas [11]. Kolbdescribes learning as a four-stage process: concrete experience, reflective observation, abstractconceptualization and active experimentation. He contents that immediate experience is the basisfor observation and reflection, which is assimilated to abstract concepts, where new ideas andactions can be generated [12].The Skope applications leverage affordances of AR and VR technologies to
learning, and collaborative learning [3]. The skills gained by incorporatingthese approaches are critical for students looking to pursue a career in the construction industry.Felder et al. reinforced the notion that active learning is more effective than lecturing as studentscan gain a deeper understanding of the material [4]. They also stressed the importance of practiceand reflection in the learning process. Freeman et al. compared studies focused on undergraduatestudents in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) that used active learningtechniques and those that used traditional approaches [5]. Average examination scores increasedby 6% in the active learning sections, thus highlighting the importance of active learning inSTEM
primary difference was beams were previously unreinforced.Additionally, students previously constructed their own forms as opposed to using the lab-provided molds. The shift to this new exercise was made in order to put more focus on theinteraction between concrete and steel reinforcement. In addition, the lab report component wasadded to prompt students to reflect and understand what went on during fabrication and testing.Process – beam fabrication, testing, and report The entire “lab” consisted of three parts, utilizing two class days. Students had two“Beam Days”; one was fabrication and the other was testing. The final part was a report, thatwas generated by each student group. Students were divided into groups of three. Prior to
, educators can do more to encourage reflection, exploration, and self-directed learning among students. This is a work in progress, and the first phase has been a pilot study. This paper reports results of the pilot as well as the context, rationale, and design of the overall study. The pilot was the first step in a study seeking to provide new understandings: (1) spanning multiple professions; (2) identifying the various concepts that architecture and engineering students hold about the generation of new designs; and (3) describing how these conceptualizations compare within and between fields. The second phase will use phenomenographic methodologies to identify qualitatively different ways engineering and
understanding seismicload combinations. 3.29 4.00Rate your confidence in calculating stress within ashear wall. 3.71 3.50Rate your confidence in calculating forces withinmembers of a braced frame. 4.29 4.50Rate your confidence in modeling structuralsystems in RISA. 3.86 4.00* Ratings are on a 5-point scale, with 5 being the highest**Survey results have been parsed to reflect third-year student data separately, as the intent goingforward is to position this class as a third year course
Means Online, MS Project, Synchro, Bluebeam, and Recap.The hands-on portion of the course is currently divided into four modules: (1) model-based costestimating, (2) scheduling and 4D simulation, (3) design coordination, and (4) as-built modeling.Each module takes four classes to complete, which include: an introductory lecture on that topic,two hands-on lab classes, and a reflection class where two (out of eight) student teams presenttheir work for that specific module. The longest hands-on module of the course is designcoordination as it includes an industry-led, mock-design coordination session as well asdiscussions on BIM Project Execution Planning. In addition to the hands-on portion of thecourse, the students are also exposed to industry
reflect and are associated by theinfluence of the VR training on the students’ professional growth. The future stage of thisstudy will conduct social media activities that will further engage and nurture these students’presentation skills.CONCLUSIONTo become competent engineers and construction managers, STEM students must invest indeveloping their professional skills, such as communication and presentation skills. Based onthe benchmark survey, it is found that female, first generation and undergraduate students areless likely to possess proficient communication skills and thus require targeted trainingactivities to embrace underrepresented student’s growth. Additionally, through peer-evaluations, results indicate that the main weaknesses that CM
virtual visit.Additionally, students answer if they felt that they interact more with their classmates throughhearing their doubts in the visit. A majority of 61.98% (n=75) score this interaction with thehighest score, we obtain that results tend to the lower half of the scale more than any otherquestion before, but we can still observe that the results are overall positive. Fig. 8. Scale of motivation gained in learning new topics from students’ perspectiveIn the questionnaire, the participants were able to reflect the level of satisfaction provided by thevirtual activity. The students were asked the question “Considering the pandemic period, do youfind the virtual site visit to be an equivalent and effective alternative to maintain
System, they do not think their faculty helped use it. A similar divide was identifiedin the students' perceptions of online classes. Respondents stated they did not enjoy the onlinecourses but felt like the online teaching was successful. In response to the perception of adaptation,respondents identified that they and their faculty adapted, with faculty to a lesser extent. Thus,students' perceptions reflect they are comfortable in an online learning environment but do notprefer it. The responses also indicate that students perceive that they may be better in the onlineenvironment and adapting to it than their faculty. This might be an expected outcome as facultyare older and perceived as slightly less capable of technology and adaptability
loads. However, the methodology was applied in 6 different modules thatcovered trusses and frames, continuous beams, buckling in columns, in-plan, and out-of-plane wallbehaviors, long-span systems, and shells. The exercises were introduced over 2 weeks. Data collectedwere used to reflect on the introduction of educational tools into an otherwise conventionalmathematical class. The tools introduced can be divided into two categories: 1) simulation software forreal-time simulation and 2) small-scale models for physical demonstrators. The first category was usedto help students to comprehend dissimilarities between didactical problems and real-world applicationsby visualizing and experiencing structural behaviors in a virtual environment. The
thought through.After specifying every material used in each BIM model with every unique material condition, Tally wasready for the second round of assumed variables. For the sake of time, these variables were largely left attheir generic values, but they were no less critical to accurate results of a real-life scenario. Tally’s abilityto accurately assess “cradle to grave” carbon impact becomes quite evident in this set of global variablesthat apply to each project. If desired, the travel distance of each material can be clarified to reflect a true-to-life analysis of transportation on carbon required for construction, and inputs for building lifedemonstrate the environmental impacts upon demolition of the structure. All these variables were
arguments suggesting schools are not providing sufficienteducation regarding building science and code compliance while Shealy et al. (2015) reflects that manyprograms that attempt teach codes hold little importance in the mind of many faculty. When code istaught, these lecturing methods more often than not take a hands-off static teaching approach with littleappeal, particularly to the more visual learns in these programs (Moon 2010). Building code educationdeficiencies include (Solnosky et al. 2017): Courses do not provide adequate detail Material is isolated from other course and/or curriculum content Code knowledge is not reinforced in assignments There is limited available time to cover code material in existing
overhangs to prevent the direct sunlight, shade the windows, andsupport diffusing the daylight inside the space. Another supporting action ca be using a designedceiling geometry configuration that can help to diffuse daylight instead of the conventional flatceilings.The mixed overhang/light shelf became as one horizontal surface, as shown in Fig.11. Oneachievable method to tackle this issue is to take advantage of a white reflective coating on thetop layer of the light shelf finish material. By implementing this strategy, 50% of the floor areaachieved adequate daylighting, which means an additional 30% of the spaces have sufficientdaylighting. In addition, high efficiency LED lights, are added for the rest of the spaces to evenlydistribute light
-test toassess the effect of the classroom intervention on students.For qualitative analysis, student reflection data, prompted with open-ended questions, will becollected to provide insight to improve the intervention strategies. Thematic coding will be usedto analyze the open-ended questions.ConclusionThe Engineering Education Pilot program described in this paper aims to produce data that willinform one another to understand how this intervention is able to provide supports for students’career pathways. In this paper, we outline the theoretical bases for this work, SCCT, and IBM.Together, these frameworks inform the types of interventions to be implemented with 8 th-gradestudents in low-income areas. The results of this work should provide
Milano,Dept. Architecture, Built Environment and Construction Engineering (ABC), Via Bonardi 9,20133, Milan. ilaria.oberti@polimi.it, francesca.plantamura@polimi.it[19] Jade Woodard (2017), “Investigating Properties of High-Performance Printing Concrete”,Master of Science at North Carolina A&T State University, 85 pages.[20] Brandy Diggs (2017), “Clustering Analysis: Envelope Energy Performance, MoistureControl and Thermal Bridge of Military B-Huts”, Master of Science at North Carolina A&TState University, 91 pages.[21] Sissy S. Wong, Jonah B. Firestone, Lionnel G. Ronduen, EunJin Bang, “Middle SchoolScience and Mathematics Teachers’ Conceptions of the Nature of Science: A One-Year Study onthe Effects of Explicit and Reflective Online
, configuring and designing structural elements and systems for abuilding from beginning to end of the design. Figures 4 - 8 provide one example of the design,review, and resubmittal process that occurred between the faculty and student team duringARCE 226. The submittals reflect the conceptual development of a building design and itsstructural solution refined over advancing stages of a project. Figure 4: Submittal 1a – 3D drawing of original building formFigure 5: Submittal 1a – Representative Framing plans for 3D structure shown aboveFigure 6: Submittal 3a – Refined Framing plans Figure 7: Final Submittal – 3D Framing Figure 8: Final Submittal – Representative Framing PlansThe noted advantages of using Bluebeam for the