Furber, A; Crapper, M; Gillie, M; Stratford, T; Bisby, L; Blackford, J and White, D (2014) Innovative learning at the University of Edinburgh. Proceedings of Institution of Civil Engineers: Management, Procurement and Law, 167(1), pp. 13-24. ISSN 17514304
Abstract
The activities available to civil engineering students during the University of Edinburgh's innovative learning week in 2012 were examined. The academic staff proposed a wide range of possible activities and student participation was optional. Popular activities were those with a 'hands-on' element: making or doing something. The practical activities offered included designing and building trebuchets, relaying railway permanent way on a heritage railway, practical workshops on engineering in international development and learning to juggle. These activities suggested that heuristic learning by trial and error was likely to enhance the visualisation skills that contribute to good engineering design. Further, the linking of achievement to purposeful practice rather than innate talent could inform teaching methods in the future. They also showed that in some cases safety culture messages were still not fully assimilated by students. ICE Publishing: All rights reserved.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | buildings; design methods and aids; education and training; structures and design |
| Index terms: | international development, visualization, safety culture, workshop, heuristic, design method, education and training, teaching method, engineering design |
| Subjects: | professional education, design process, health safety and environment, strategic management, construction type, design practice, teaching methods, risk assessment, design methods |
| Topics: | International Construction, Design Practice, Digital Applications, Construction Technology, Education, Health and Safety, Risk Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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