The document presents a case study on a large-scale integrated project designed for built environment undergraduate students, focusing on their learning experiences and outcomes. It details the research methods used, including student and staff interviews, assessment strategies, and challenges faced by both students and faculty. The findings highlight areas for improvement in teaching methodologies, student feedback, and future project implementation.

1. Large-scale integrated project for built
environment undergraduate students:
a case study
Steve Austin
Ursula Rutherford
John W Davies
Coventry University, UK
29/11/2011 Introduction 1

2. Introduction
• Aim:
– compare the intent with the experience
• Research methods:
– Observation by an independent researcher
– Interviews with students (n=22) and staff (n=8)
– Anonymous student feedback (full cohort)
29/11/2011 Introduction 2

3. Background
Activity led learning (ALL):
“Engaging students through challenges
requiring them to develop and apply their
technical and scientific knowledge, whilst
simultaneously developing their team
working, leadership, problem solving and
life-long learning skills.”
Wilson-Medhurst and Glendinning (2009)
29/11/2011 Introduction 3

4. Background
18 weekly
sessions 3 phases
Integrated Project (IP) for 210 final year students
Civil engineering
Structural engineering
Architectural technology
Building surveying
6 Multi-
Construction management
meeting disciplinary
rooms groups
29/11/2011 Introduction 4

5. Intent: Learning outcomes
Technical
• Diagnose client requirements
• Produce detailed design solution
• Undertake technical design
• Demonstrate project management strategies
• Monitor costs
• Produce tender documentation
29/11/2011 Intent 5

6. Intent: Learning outcomes
Personal and Professional
• Develop visual and verbal communication skills for
the professional arena
• Develop a critical approach to study skills through
team work and continuous personal improvement
• Demonstrate good professional practice as a
reflective and conscientious student
• Manage and control personal and professional
development
• Review personal and professional development for
future uses
29/11/2011 Intent 6

7. Intent: Teaching methods
• Synthesis of technical knowledge and skills
taught in other technical modules
• Project brief presents a major scenario-based
building design and construction project from
inception through to tender
• Real-world artefacts (site reports, plans, visit)
• Teamwork • 30% part-time students
(with full-time jobs in the industry)
• Industrial experience
• 17% overseas students (placement or a year out)
(English as a 2nd language) • Mature students with work experience
• <5% female students
29/11/2011 Intent 7

8. Intent: Assessment methods
3 phases, each comprising:
Presentations Peer and self
Technical • Audio-visual assessment
tasks • Exhibition • 10%  50%
29/11/2011 Intent 8

9. Experience
29/11/2011 Experience 9

10. Experience
Challenges Challenges
for students for staff
Student
Responses
feedback
29/11/2011 Experience 10

11. Experience: Challenges for students
• Lack of time
• Over-working
• Group marks •Non-contributing members
•Late work
• Description of tasks not clear •Lack of knowledge
•Poor English (written/spoken)
• Multi-disciplinary groups •Domineering leaders
•Insufficient collaboration
• Group management •Unequal workloads
•Misunderstandings
•Personality clashes
• Peer assessment ‘unfair’
29/11/2011 Experience

12. Experience: Challenges for staff
• Consistency of advice
• Rotating staff
• Over-reliance on module leaders
• Marking burden
• Timely feedback
29/11/2011 Experience 12

13. Experience: Student feedback
Statement Week 5 end
Staff teaching on this module are good at explaining things
68% 73%
clearly
Staff teaching on this module make the subject interesting 52% 69%
Staff teaching on this module are enthusiastic about what they
68% 78%
are teaching
The module is intellectually stimulating and engaging 60% 73%
The materials used by the staff have enhanced my learning 47% 67%
Staff teaching on this module are well prepared 65% 76%
The assessment requirements on this module are clear 64% 70%
Feedback on any returned work has been useful to develop my
69% 75%
understanding of the module content
Staff teaching on this module are available when they say they
69% 87%
will be
Overall the quality of this module is satisfactory 64% 80%
29/11/2011 Experience 13

14. Experience: Responses to feedback
• End rotation of teaching assistants
• Teaching assistants briefed earlier
• Staff available by appointment
• Staff available by email
• Pre-submission checks
29/11/2011 Experience 14

15. The future
• Smaller companies and more choice by students in their
allocation to companies
• An extended initial period for company formation
• Involvement of the TAs as (bookable) specialist consultants
to the companies
• Marking load of module leaders shared with TAs
• Review of the work load for students
• Variation of tasks for different companies according to the
spread of disciplines within them
• More individualisation of marks for students within the
companies
• Credit for technical tasks to be attributed to other modules
• More advice on team management
29/11/2011 Conclusions 15

16. Other papers
• Huichun Li and Lars Bo Henriksen How we implement PBL in a
university: two case studies
• Mike Young, Steve Austin and John Davies Peer support in practical
activity-led learning
• Diana Stentoft Bridging disciplines through problem based learning
• Prue Howard and Matt Eliot A strategic framework: assessing
individual student learning in team-based subjects
• Gordon Lindsay Alcock and Henrik Blyt Quantifying reflection –
developing reflective competencies by profiling student reflection
on their learning gains in the initial stages of collaborative PBL
learning
• David Trujillo Peer-assessment and group-composition in PBL: a
case study
29/11/2011 Conclusions 16

17. Large-scale integrated project for built environment
undergraduate students: a case study
Any questions?
Steve Austin
Ursula Rutherford
John W Davies
29/11/2011 Conclusions 17