Toward a learning-styles profile of construction students: Results from New Zealand

Harfield, T; Panko, M; Davies, K and Kenley, R (2007) Toward a learning-styles profile of construction students: Results from New Zealand. International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 3(3), pp. 143-158. ISSN 1557-8771

Abstract

The purpose of this research was to identify a group learning-styles profile for construction students. The identification of a discipline-specific student learning-styles profile has important implications for college instructors. Such a profile aids educators in designing classroom teaching strategies. Individual learning-styles profiles were obtained from 153 construction students in New Zealand using the Productivity Environmental Productivity Survey (PEPS). These data were aggregated, and six PEPS factors were considered significant as the basis for a construction student learning-styles profile. The identified preferred learning-styles of construction students in New Zealand based on these six factors appear to have strong similarities to preferences of construction students in the United States and Hong Kong. The proposed group profile for construction students supports earlier calls for activity-based classroom teaching strategies using peer learning with a high degree of instructor monitoring. Construction students also appear to want highly structured course content and assignments that are presented graphically with little text.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: construction students learning profile; learning-styles; New Zealand
Index terms: monitoring, Hong Kong, New Zealand, productivity, classroom, preference, instructor, United States, strategy, survey
Subjects: management, data collection methods, control systems, decision-making and reasoning, Geography, construction type, practitioner
Topics: Research Practice, Business Strategy, Construction Technology, Roles and Professions, Site Management, Geographical Context
Descriptive scope: 3 PCE

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