Elgamal, S; Ayer, S and Parrish, K (2025) A review of VR in undergraduate construction education and training: Unveiling the opportunities to address content areas from ACCE's student learning outcomes (SLOs). International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 21(3), pp. 408-432. ISSN 1557-8771
Abstract
Research documents the use of Virtual Reality (VR) for construction engineering and management (CEM) education; it does not explicitly consider how VR supports undergraduate CEM program accreditation. Through literature review, this paper elucidates how VR supports accreditation by documenting how VR is used to address the content areas associated with the American Council for Construction Education's 2013 Student Learning Outcomes (ACCE's SLOs), used for accreditation from 2014 through August 2023. The authors reviewed 59 articles and found that VR has been used to address the content areas associated with ACCE SLOs 1–3, 5–11, 13, 15–16, 18–20 (note that SLOs 7, 9, and 13 have since been deleted). This study documents that VR activities provide benefits including virtual on-site immersion, manipulation of time, and cost efficiency. Results also indicate that VR does not yet address content areas associated with ACCE SLOs involving human interaction, quantitative calculations, construction management tools, delivery method, nor stakeholder and risk management. This paper contributes to the construction education body of knowledge by documenting (1) those content areas associated with ACCE SLOs where VR training has been implemented, (2) the benefits of VR applications in undergraduate CEM classrooms, and (3) unexplored content areas associated with ACCE SLOs.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction education and training; student learning outcomes; virtual reality |
| Index terms: | delivery method, construction engineering, undergraduate, virtual reality, risk management, interaction, learning outcome, literature review, program, classroom, construction education, documents, body of knowledge, cost efficiency |
| Subjects: | professional education, behavioral psychology, construction type, knowledge management, curriculum development, economics, engineering methods, software systems, professional development, delivery method, student development, risk assessment, virtual reality, data analysis and analytics |
| Topics: | Construction Technology, Cost Management, Information Management, Research Practice, Digital Applications, Risk Management, Procurement, Engineering Principles, Education |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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