Harinarain, N and Haupt, T C (2016) Mission: Studio based learning in construction. The University of KwaZulu-Natal case study. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 14(1), pp. 160-181.
Abstract
Purpose – This paper aims to present the responses of students to various aspects of a cluster of discrete modules delivered using a studio-based learning pedagogy. Design/methodology/approach – A variation of a case study approach was used that included observations and a survey of student opinions on six constructs or themes after a period of eight weeks into the semester about their experience of studio-based learning in a three-module cluster. This paper only reports on the findings of the analysis of the self-administered survey of the views of students. Findings – The student responses were analysed using SPSS (version 22). It is evident that the distinguishing features of the studio-based learning form of instructional delivery were reflected in their views despite the instructional space being far from ideal. However, given that this was their first experience they were apprehensive about the benefits of the approach to them personally especially in terms of whether their acquired knowledge base was broad enough for them to be confident about their future careers. The mapping of the learning outcomes of the modules against the project phases demonstrated that only the mode of transmission had in fact changed. Students were reticent about taking responsibility for their own learning possibly because they perceived that as being too risky. Research limitations/implications – The research is limited because the findings are based on a single case and a sample of students who had experienced eight weeks of studio-based learning of a cluster of three discrete modules in a revitalised construction program. Originality/value – The findings of this study have implications for the way construction programs are delivered at institutions of higher education.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | reflection; learning outcomes; critique; mode of instruction; studio based learning |
| Index terms: | methodology, module, survey, case study, knowledge base, studio, critique, variation, reflection, program, mode of instruction, higher education, career, pedagogy, mapping, learning outcome |
| Subjects: | research methods, construction type, student development, software systems, architectural elements, contractual condition, information systems, spatial and geospatial analysis, professional development, data collection methods, educational institutions, evaluation and assessment methods, teaching methods |
| Topics: | Information Management, Education, Contract Administration, Digital Applications, Design Practice, Research Practice, Construction Technology |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here