Rojas, E M and Mukherjee, A (2005) General-purpose situational simulation environment for construction education. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 131(3), pp. 319-329. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The traditional construction education model based on precise well-defined problems and formal definitions is not satisfactorily fulfilling its mission of educating the decision makers of tomorrow. This realization has moved several researchers to explore alternatives where problem solving is carried out in conjunction with the environment, and concepts are embedded in the context promoting learning within the nexus of the activity. Several efforts have been undertaken to develop these environments resulting in a variety of special-purpose situational simulations. However, special-purpose situational simulations exhibit inherent limitations related to their application breadth, flexibility, and promotion of collaborations. These limitations cannot be resolved within the framework of special-purpose learning environments. A general-purpose environment is required to overcome these shortcomings and take full advantage of the situational learning paradigm. This paper describes the conceptual framework and pilot implementation of such an environment called the Virtual Coach.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | computer aided instruction; engineering education; simulation models |
| Index terms: | construction education, collaboration, problem solving, conceptual framework, paradigm, implementation, traditional construction, promotion, engineering education |
| Subjects: | professional education, heritage and conservation, management, education and knowledge transfer, theoretical framing, decision-making and reasoning, contractual arrangements |
| Topics: | Procurement, Research Practice, Education, Organizational Design, Human Resources, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
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