Wu, W; Sandoval, A; Gunji, V; Ayer, S K; London, J; Perry, L; Patil, K and Smith, K (2020) Comparing traditional and mixed reality-facilitated apprenticeship learning in a wood-frame construction lab. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 146(12): 04020139, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Mixed reality (MR) has the potential to accelerate construction workforce training and enhance college education. However, there is a lack of empirical evidence in the research literature on how effective MR may be in facilitating student apprenticeship learning in field construction activities compared to the traditional paper-based approach. This research designed an outdoor wood-frame construction lab with two parallel sessions involving paper drawings (the control) and MR mockups (the experiment) for conveying design information. The research team used video recordings and questionnaires to collect behavioral and perception data for comparative analysis. The results indicated that student teams in the two sessions exhibited comparable construction productivity. However, they demonstrated different behavioral patterns and time allocation for technology use and reported different apprenticeship learning gains. This research also identified and discussed potential contributing factors that limited the success of MR. The contribution of this work resides in presenting empirical evidence of the impact of using MR on student apprenticeship learning through outdoor construction activities. It also provides peer educational researchers with valuable insights on how to study pedagogical use of MR with consideration of potential challenges that are present in realistic construction environments.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Index terms: | questionnaire, evidence, apprenticeship, comparative analysis, experiment, drawing, construction productivity, wood, construction activity |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods, technical documentation, operations management, construction operations, data analysis and analytics, traditional and composite building materials, professional education |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Project Management, Construction Materials, Education, Site Management, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PEA |
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