Howieson, J (2011) Adr for a built environment interdiscipline: Curriculum and practical applications. International Journal of Law in the Built Environment, 3(1), pp. 11-23. ISSN 1756-1450
Abstract
Purpose – This paper's central purpose is to demonstrate that facilitative alternative dispute resolution (ADR) processes can assist in the development of a built environment interdiscipline, and that a built environment interdiscipline should include an ADR course in its curriculum. Design/methodology/approach – The paper presents a brief summary of two empirical studies conducted at the University of Western Australia Law School which investigated the relationship between the teaching of ADR and student engagement. Findings – The research findings show that teaching ADR in an interactive and experiential manner can increase the students' sense of belonging to the school in which it is taught, and simultaneously can contribute to the students acquiring constructive conflict resolution skills. Research limitations/implications – The quantitative data derives from only one school in a university and subsequently, there was a lack of a control group. Yet, the sample size was sufficient for a reasonable analysis of the data and provides a base from which further studies in this field can occur. Practical implications – The paper provides ideas on how to structure an ADR course within a built environment curriculum and to present ADR material in a manner that enhances student learning and engagement. In addition, the paper provides evidence of how ADR processes offer a mechanism for facilitating engagement with a common axiomatic for the built environment field and also provide a link to that axiomatic. Originality/value – The paper provides an original analysis of the role of ADR in the built environment curriculum and strengthens the analysis by providing original research on the links between ADR education and student engagement.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | alternative dispute resolution; Australia; curriculum development |
| Index terms: | evidence, methodology, curriculum development, alternative dispute resolution, student engagement, built environment, empirical study, facilitative, Australia, sample size, conflict resolution |
| Subjects: | evaluation and assessment methods, research design and methodology, curriculum development, Geography, contract management, management, research methods, infrastructure and transport systems, student development, conflict resolution |
| Topics: | Stakeholder Management, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Business Strategy, Education, Contract Administration, Urban Studies |
| 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