Boyd, David (2006) Developing a knowledge centric approach to construction education. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 2(1-2), pp. 149-159. ISSN 1745-2007
Abstract
Knowledge management has been an in-vogue management initiative for a number of years but the obvious link to education has not been made, except for the use of Web-delivered information. This paper establishes a knowledge centric approach to construction education and reports on the application of this to a master's conversion course. The knowledge centric approach develops a capability to work with incomplete knowledge. Incomplete knowledge is a growing problem in the industry as projects and technology become more complex; for conversion graduates it is the critical factor. The knowledge centric idea was based on research into the knowledge of competent practitioners. This highlighted the growing tension between the need for a deeper understanding of construction activity as solution composition, as against the application of technical knowledge. The approach requires abilities to appreciate self-knowledge, to access different knowledge (technical, organizational and human relational) in situations, to understand the social operation of knowledge, to negotiate action under competing knowledge and to develop new knowledge. The challenge of the knowledge centric approach is to create practitioners who can act effectively with incomplete knowledge.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | conversion education; incomplete knowledge; knowledge management |
| Index terms: | critical factor, construction activity, conversion, knowledge management, construction education, practitioner |
| Subjects: | professional education, professional development, construction operations, manufacturing engineering, risk assessment, practitioner |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Engineering Principles, Education, Information Management, Risk Management, Site 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