Torres, A (2023) Using large peer-teaching groups to learn construction management software packages. International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 19(4), pp. 426-442. ISSN 1557-8771
Abstract
Two large peer-teaching groups were developed in a construction management course in order to self-learn and then subsequently teach two separate construction management software packages. One half of the class was asked to learn and teach Microsoft Project and the other was asked to learn and teach Primavera P6, which are very similar scheduling packages. Milestone deliverables were due throughout the semester, with a final presentation near the end of the 16-week semester. This intervention took place a total of five times and one addition control semester in which the instructor taught both packages in a traditional manner for comparison. Within each peer-teaching group, the teams were asked to nominate a leader and co-leader, who would be responsible for assigning responsibilities to the team and to facilitate learning. This methodology allowed for two layers of peer-teaching; one within the peer-teaching group, and the other from the peer-teaching group to the remaining students. The intervention was validated through in-course questionnaires, and homework, quiz, and exam grade comparisons from the student-led lecture versus the instructor-led lecture. The surveys indicated a preference to the peer-teaching and student-led learning, over instructor-led learning. The grade comparison demonstrated an average 13.2 percentage point improvement.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | active learning; assessment; construction scheduling; peer-teaching |
| Index terms: | package, construction scheduling, active learning, construction management software, questionnaire, methodology, preference, scheduling, instructor, survey |
| Subjects: | learning methods, data collection methods, information systems, project controls, practitioner, contractual arrangements, operations research, decision-making and reasoning, research methods |
| Topics: | Procurement, Education, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Digital Applications, Time Control |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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