The document compares two distance learning courses: the A/E/C Global Teamwork Course and the ITC Euromaster, highlighting their structures, tools used, and student experiences. Both courses received positive feedback for delivering promised content, though technical issues were noted, particularly regarding communication technologies. Students reported the usefulness of instant messaging and audio communication for quick decision-making and collaboration, while also emphasizing the valuable lessons learned from interacting with diverse mindsets.

1. Comparison of distance learning courses: A/E/C Computer Integrated Global Teamwork Course & ITC Euromaster Robert Klinc [ [email_address] ]

2. Motivation A/E/C Global Teamwork Course ITC Euromaster Comparison Technical comparison Questionnaire Conclusions Questions ? O v e rview

3. Motivation Find similarities & differences Get students’ impression on the courses: What they think was good. Which tools did they find useful. Is there something they would change?

4. A/E/C Global Teamwork Course Stanford University Started in 1993 Project: 4-5 teams 6-8 team members Team: architect + structural engineers + construction managers + investor Each team = personalized project: start  finish

5. ITC Euromaster European Master in Construction IT Consortium of nine universities Started in 2004 Lectures on: technological aspects theoretical aspects models (including their functionality) processes (including their simulation)

6. Comparison ITC Euromaster A/E/C Global T. IM system Application sharing, whiteboard Video + Audio

7. Comparison ITC Euromaster A/E/C Global T. --- Recall TM Asynchronous lectures / sessions + Think Tank TM + Asynchronous communication Think Tank TM “ LMS”

8. ITC Euromaster

9. ITC Euromaster

10. A/E/C Global Teamwork Course

11. A/E/C Global Teamwork + Recall

12. Survey Why? impressions of communication technologies used experiences and impressions of the course impact of the course on the students  Webswey ( www.scix.net ) Survey population: Invited: 18 Responded: 15 (83%) 8 – A/E/C Global Teamwork 7 – ITC Euromaster

13. Average age

14. Gender of the participants

15. Question Please, evaluate from 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent) your knowledge of communication technologies prior to taking this course?

16. Result

17. Question Which tool was least known to you prior to taking the course?

18. Results

19. Question Which tool did you find most useful taking the course?

20. Results

21. Why? ITC Euromaster student #6 “ Because it was the most convenient method to communicate with others.” (audio communication) A/E/C Global Teamwork student #6 “ Helps in making quick decisions. Avoids lag time of e-mail.” (instant messaging) A/E/C Global Teamwork student #7 “ It was the easiest and fastest way to convey a message. It also took the least amount of time to set up.” (instant messaging)

22. Question Which tool did you mostly use during the course?

23. Results

24. Question Did you experience any (technical) problems during the course?

25. Results

26. What kind of problems? A/E/C Global Teamwork: Connection problems. Could not host sessions. Computers not able to handle multiple software. Low bandwidth. Stability. ITC Euromaster: Problems with ClickToMeet. Problems with C2M. Problems with video in ClicktoMeet. … C2M… Reliabiliy, bandwidth, video.

27. Question What did you, in your opinion, gain from this experience?

28. Answers: “ N ew approach to BC business .” “ Since our office has spread to two locations we are introducing more IT tools in the office .” “ I learned what the different types of internet communication are most useful for. ” “ Valuable lessons in working with people with completely different mindsets .” “ I now know all of the options available for worldwide communication. ”

29. Conclusions Both courses deliver ed what was promised. Technology can still be an issue. IM & audio most preferable technologies. Lack of modular, centrali s ed system for collaboration.

30. Thank you! Questions?