Killip, G (2020) A reform agenda for UK construction education and practice. Buildings & Cities, 1(1), pp. 525-537. ISSN 2632-6655
Abstract
Achieving zero carbon requires major changes in buildings and construction practices, but both remain very hard to achieve. The UK construction sector operates in a low-skills equilibrium, whereby poor quality assurance and significant design–performance gaps accompany low educational attainment and low wages. Skills debates often focus too narrowly on the supply of skill, but consideration also needs to be given to skill demand and use in the workplace. An evaluation framework for zero-carbon construction is proposed in which types, orders, and domains of learning are explained and differentiated. Competence is presented as a bundle of learning attributes including theoretical knowledge, practical skill and integrity of character. Each type of learning operates in hierarchical orders and can apply in different domains: from the narrowest focus on individual tasks to broader domains of occupation and industry. This evaluation framework is used to analyse previous research with low-carbon pioneers, showing how higher orders of learning need to be applied on projects, in firms, networks and business models. If the construction industry is to achieve these levels of learning, and apply them regularly in mainstream practice, then fundamental changes are necessary to the structure of employment as well as educational reforms. Policy relevance The UK construction sector currently operates in a low-skills equilibrium which negatively impacts the capabilities to produce low-energy buildings. Research with low-carbon pioneers shows how higher orders of learning need to be applied to projects, in firms, networks and business models. Higher levels of occupational competence should be the goal, combining theoretical knowledge, practical skill and quality of character (acting responsibly and with integrity). The achievement of higher level competences in mainstream practice will require significant changes to the structure of employment involving labour market reforms and higher levels of accreditation and professionalisation of construction vocations. Meaningful educational and training reform requires industry reform at the same time to create the appropriate demand pull. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction industry; industry reform; labour; low carbon; UK; vocational education and training; zero carbon |
| Index terms: | construction industry, construction sector, vocational education and training, commons, performance gap, construction education, competence, business model, vocation, labour market, employment, occupation, integrity, quality assurance, low carbon, industry reform, wages, evaluation, professionalization, low-energy building |
| Subjects: | personnel development, economic concepts, health safety and environment, economics, performance management, management, sustainability assessment, energy efficiency, student development, quality assurance, industry analysis, professional education, sociology, business economics, specialized education, business, property law, data analysis and analytics |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Governance, Sustainability, Legal Issues, Design Practice, Supply Chain Management, Human Resources, Quality Management, Education |
| 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