Content uploaded by Robert Eadie
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Robert Eadie on Jun 11, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
TEACHING BIM IN A MULTIDISCIPLINARY DEPARTMENT
Robert Eadie1, David Comiskey2 and Mark McKane1
1 School of the Built Environment, University of Ulster
2 Belfast School of Architecture, University of Ulster
email:r.eadie-r@ulster.ac.uk , da.comiskey@ulster.ac.uk , m.mckane@ulster.ac.uk
Abstract: Universities need courses to reflect what is happening in the macro environment. With Building Information
Modelling (BIM) being mandated for all UK Government projects from 2016, many within built environment industries
are already adopting BIM working methods. It is therefore essential that students are equipped with the skills and
understanding of BIM concepts to be relevant and achieve employment in a rapidly changing construction industry. In
order to achieve this BIM needs to be added to the curriculum. One of the reasons that the UK government wants to
introduce BIM is that it allows collaboration across the disciplines in construction. In literature there have been a
number of examples of the approach taken by Universities but these focus on the way it is taught rather than the mode
of delivery. This paper examines lecturer, employer and student perceptions of the optimum way to teach BIM in a
multidisciplinary department. It indicates that BIM teaching improves student employability. The mode of delivery
preferred overall for BIM teaching is via standalone modules and in collaboration with other built environment courses
dealing with both theory and software. The ranking of separate modules for theory and software was very low
indicating the preference for both to be taught in a single module.
Keywords: BIM, Teaching, BIM Pedagogical aspects, Student Employability.
.1 INTRODUCTION
Snook (2009) provides the official definition of Building Information Modeling (BIM) as a “digital
representation of physical and functional characteristics of a facility creating a shared knowledge resource
for information about it forming a reliable basis for decisions during its life cycle, from earliest conception
to demolition.” Kymmell (2008) shows that the idea behind an intelligent 3D BIM model is to use a virtual
environment to imitate a construction project using computer software. This simulation is not only geometric
but contains elements of the specification including design life, costing and purchase information which
allows management of the facility from concept to demolition (Bin and Yu, 2010). This produces many
benefits and has led to the UK government setting a target of 2016 for BIM adoption on all government
projects (Efficiency and Reform Group, 2011). The BIM Industry working group (2011) suggests BIM
adoption will increase productivity and ensure that the construction industry is more refined. However, the
implementation of BIM in the construction sector is being delayed by the absence of sufficiently trained BIM
personnel (Becerik-Gerber et al., 2011). Universities are seeking to address this issue, especially with
studies, such as that from Wu and Issa (2013), showing that BIM knowledge is inextricably linked to
employability. This paper examines this from the perspective of students, academics and employers.
To construct a project, input is required from a variety of specialisms including architects, architectural
technologists, engineers, and quantity surveyors. Baiden et al (2006) consider the typical construction project
to be a collaborative venture involving these specialisms coming together to form “the construction project
team”. BIM allows this collaboration to take place in a virtual environment. Arayici et al (2011) confirms
that BIM allows collaboration transcending organisational boundaries resulting in enhanced project
performance. This paper examines the appetite amongst employers, university staff and students for a cross
discipline approach to teaching BIM.
.1.1 Literature relating to BIM implementation by Universities
Kymmell (2008) identified barriers to imbedding BIM in the curriculum. Three categories were specified:-
1. Capability in the software aspects relating to learning and using BIM software;
2. Confusion as to the strategic and process issues and;
3. Changing the academic environment to accommodate implementation.
A lot of research has focussed on BIM software and the government construction strategy. However, little
has been published on the environment that BIM should be taught in. This research is set in the context of a
university which has adopted a modular system of teaching and the paper explores for the first time student,
staff and employer perceptions of the best mode of BIM teaching delivery.
.1.2 Literature relating to employment issues relating to BIM
Literature has provided evidence of BIM impacts across the full spectrum of built environment disciplines.
Poerschke et al. (2010) were able to demonstrate in literature a collaborative BIM course that brought
together students from six different disciplines from three academic departments to experiment with BIM.
Thomas et al (2013) developed a link with industry that allowed students from Architectural Technology and
other construction related programmes to work with real information from a live project. The remainder of
literature focused on individual modules in specific disciplines. Sacks and Barak (2010) changed an
engineering graphics module to implement 3D modelling in civil engineering. In structural engineering,
Barham et al (2011) used BIM in concrete design. Sustainability and environmental design have been
incorporated via BIM by Hyatt (2011). Peterson et al. (2011) linked BIM software to project management
tools in construction engineering project management courses. For the first time this paper seeks to show
with empirical data whether the single module model or integrated model across a number of courses is
preferred by students, staff and employers.
.2 RESEARCH METHOD
The study used Limesurvey™ to gather survey data via a managed PHP interface to a MYSQL database. The
study was conducted in three parts. The first collected data from 246 final year students in the School of the
Built Environment. In total 144 responses were received providing a response rate of 58.53%. Rubin and
Babbie (2009, pg 117) consider a response rate of over 50% to be ‘adequate’ for the purposes of analysis.
Responses from the various courses involved are provided in Table 1.
Table 1 Breakdown of student responses
Course Number of responses Percentage of Responses
Architectural Technology 31 21.53%
Quantity Surveying 42 29.17%
Civil Engineering 38 26.39%
Building Engineering & Materials 5 3.47%
Construction Engineering and Management 28 19.44%
The second section of the study collected data from lecturers from both the Belfast School of Architecture
and the School of the Built Environment. Of the 44 lecturers contacted, 24 responses were received. This
equates to a response rate of 54.54% again above the “acceptable” limit for validity and reliability purposes
in Rubin and Babbie (2009).
The third section of the study collected data from employers that employed placement students and graduates
of the University of Ulster. There were 85 organisations contacted. Three opted out commenting that they
did not have the expertise to complete the questionnaire. There were 34 completed responses received a
41.46 response rate. This is a limitation in relation to validity and reliability (Rubin and Babbie, 2009) but
the qualitative aspects are included and the basic statistics regarding the teaching options for comparative
purposes.
.3 FINDINGS
.3.1 Findings on the impact of teaching of BIM on students of construction courses
While the strategic aspects of BIM have been introduced to all the taught courses, practical elements have
not been introduced to all. Currently the responses show that 45 (31.25%) students had practical experience
of BIM through their course and 99 (68.75%) said they had no practical experience. Table 2 indicates the
respondent’s considerations on aspects of BIM. The findings indicate that students considered BIM software
easier to use than 2D CAD programmes. Another positive was that they considered it gave them a better
understanding of the construction / detailing process than the 2D option. The impact BIM adoption has on
other construction modules should not be minimised. Students agreed that the learning achieved through
BIM modules has proved useful for other construction modules. Furthermore, students acknowledge that
BIM exposure has enhanced their self-confidence in applying for a job.
Table 2 Impact of Teaching BIM on Courses
Question (Scale 5-Strongly Agree to 1 – Strongly Disagree Arithmetic Mean Standard Deviation
Is BIM software easier to use than 2D CAD programmes 2.96 1.04
BIM provides a better understanding of the construction/detailing process 3.18 1.11
BIM has proved useful for other construction modules 3.14 1.18
BIM knowledge has enhanced my self-confidence in applying for a job 3.24 1.13
.3.2 Findings on Lecturers perspectives on the teaching of BIM
Academics strongly support the perception that use of BIM will increase over the next five years. This is evidenced
through their ranking, providing an arithmetic mean of 4 and a standard deviation of 0.98. They support the
hypothesis that advanced BIM theory knowledge will be important to graduates over the next five years with an
arithmetic mean of 3.54 and a standard deviation of 0.88. This increases to an arithmetic mean of 4.13 and a
standard deviation of 0.9 for introductory BIM theory knowledge. They also support the hypothesis that
advanced BIM software knowledge will be important to graduates over the next five years with an arithmetic mean
of 3.46 and a standard deviation of 0.93. This increases to an arithmetic mean of 3.96 and a standard
deviation of 0.81 for introductory BIM software knowledge. They were further asked to identify how
important they considered having BIM as a core curriculum component would be for graduates getting
employment on graduation. This produced an arithmetic mean of 3.79 and a standard deviation of 1.02.
These figures emphasise the importance of BIM teaching to the employability of students. They also
emphasise the need to have a BIM component evident in each course to provide the knowledge required to
meet the needs of industry.
.3.3 Findings on Employers perspectives on the teaching of BIM
Employers recognise the impact BIM will have in the Architectural, Engineering & Construction (AEC)
industry within the UK and Ireland over the next 5 years as they ranked its importance with an arithmetic
mean of 4 on a Likert scale of 1-5, 1 being little importance and 5 of vital importance with a standard
deviation of 0.94. They also strongly support the perception that use of BIM will increase over the next five
years. This is ranked with an arithmetic mean of 4.14 and a standard deviation of 0.98. This is a higher rank
than the academics indicating that those at the “coal face” are more aware of the importance of BIM
adoption. They support the hypothesis that advanced BIM theory knowledge will be important to graduates
over the next five years with an arithmetic mean of 3.79 and a standard deviation of 0.95. This increases to
an arithmetic mean of 4.21 and a standard deviation of 0.84 for introductory BIM theory knowledge. They
also support the hypothesis that advanced BIM software knowledge will be important to graduates over the
next five years with an arithmetic mean of 3.76 and a standard deviation of 0.82. This increases to an
arithmetic mean of 4.24 and a standard deviation of 0.78 for introductory BIM software knowledge. They
were further asked to identify how important they considered the adoption of BIM technology in education
as a core curriculum component would be in their organisation offering placement/graduate positions to
students with BIM skills in the next 5years. This produced an arithmetic mean of 3.79 and a standard
deviation of 0.98. These figures are identical to those from an academic standpoint and only further
emphasise the importance of BIM teaching on each course to the employability of students.
3.4 Findings on opinions on teaching methods of BIM on courses
Table 3 indicates the rankings for the way in which students, lecturers and employers see the teaching of
introductory and advanced level teaching within a University context. It can be seen from the findings that
the overall (O/A) preferred mode of delivery for BIM modules for both introductory and advanced BIM
teaching is that they are Standalone modules and in collaboration with other built environment courses
dealing with both theory and software. The top three overall rankings are the same for both introductory and
advanced teaching. The collaborative and multidisciplinary aspects of BIM are therefore clearly identified.
The findings indicate that academics and employers especially realise the importance of this aspect of BIM.
Students also acknowledge this but wish to specialise in their own discipline which is the reason that they
chose to do the course they are on, therefore the ranking for a collaborative module across the disciplines
drops into second position. The rankings also indicate that theory and practice should be taught together.
There is very little support for either the theory or software aspects of BIM being segregated and taught
separately. Therefore a holistic approach to teaching BIM should be adopted on University courses. A
Standalone module within a specific Discipline Area dealing with both theory and software ranked second
overall for both introductory and advanced teaching of BIM. Of note is the difference in ranking from
academics. They ranked introductory and advanced BIM teaching differently in this model of delivery with
the introductory dropping into third place behind Not as a standalone module but integrated within other
modules within a specific discipline area. This indicates that they consider the material applies over a wide
variety of aspects of construction and therefore should be taught with the relevant other material. However,
when the advanced material needs to be taught they recognise that this is a specialist topic and should be
taught as a separate module.
Table 3 Findings on way of Teaching BIM on Courses
Module Type % for Introductory Level Teaching % for Advanced Level Teaching
Students
%/Rank
Lecturers
%/Rank
Employers
%/Rank
O/A
Rank
Students
%/Rank
Lecturers
%/Rank
Employers
%/Rank
O/A
Rank
Standalone
module within a
specific discipline
Area dealing
solely with
software
9.03% 4 0.00% 5 5.71% 5 5 11.81% 3 0.00% 5 2.86% 4 5
Standalone
module within a
specific
Discipline Area
dealing solely
with theory
0.69% 9 0.00% 5 2.86% 6 7 0.69% 8 0.00% 5 0.00% 5 9
Standalone
module within a
specific
Discipline Area
dealing with both
theory and
software
38.19% 1 25.00% 3 20.00% 2 2 37.50% 1 29.17% 2 8.57% 3 2
Not as a
standalone
module but
integrated within
other modules
within a specific
discipline area
13.89% 3 33.33% 2 17.14% 3 3 11.11% 4 25.00% 3 8.57% 3 3
Standalone
module and in
collaboration
with other built
environment
courses dealing
solely with
software
5.56% 6 0.00% 5 0.00% 7 6 4.17% 6 0.00% 5 2.86% 4 6
Standalone
module and in
collaboration
with other built
environment
courses dealing
solely with theory
2.08% 7 0.00% 5 0.00% 7 8 1.39% 7 0.00% 5 0.00% 5 8
Standalone
module and in
collaboration
with other built
environment
courses dealing
with both theory
and software
22.22% 2 37.50% 1 34.29% 1 1 23.61% 2 41.67% 1 57.14% 1 1
I do not have an
opinion
6.25% 5 4.17% 4 17.14% 4 4 8.33% 5 4.17% 4 17.14% 2 4
Other 1.39% 8 0.00% 5 0.00% 7 9 0.00% 9 0.00% 5 0.00% 5 10
No Answer 0.69% 9 0.00% 5 2.86% 6 7 1.39% 7 0.00% 5 2.86% 4 7
Two other options for teaching BIM were received from students were the provision of a core module to
teach basics while integrated through design modules and that it should be run in collaboration with CAD
classes as they need to be shown the software. Classes on the theory of BIM are of little practical use.
“Hands on” experience is essential. Both of these options were received from a single student and therefore
do not have much support.
.4 CONCLUSIONS
With the UK government targets of 2016 already set, the findings of the study indicate that BIM teaching
will become vital for students, academics and employers. There is a need for Universities to meet the needs
of industry and produce graduates with a good standard of BIM knowledge. Not only is it essential to meet
the requirements of industry but students considered BIM software easier to use than 2D CAD programmes
and it gave them a better understanding of the construction / detailing process than the 2D option. Its wider
impact on other construction modules should therefore not be minimised. Students, academics and employers
all agree that the teaching of BIM has a positive impact on student employability. The preferred mode of
delivery for BIM modules for both introductory and advanced BIM teaching is that they are Standalone
modules and in collaboration with other built environment courses dealing with both theory and software,
therefore acknowledging the collaborative aspects of BIM and making the teaching as close to the
“construction project team” in practice as possible. The students chose a course to specialise in their own
discipline therefore dropping the course specific aspect into second position. However, the views of
employers and academic staff should prevail as the collaboration aspect of BIM has already been shown to
be vitally important. Further work is required to determine the exact contents of the modules for teaching
BIM but what is important according to the findings is that the theory and software elements should be
taught together.
.5 REFERENCES
Arayici, Y., Coates, P., Koskela, L., Kagioglou, M., Usher,C.and O'Reilly K. (2011), Technology adoption in the BIM
implementation for lean architectural practice, Automation in Construction, Vol. 20 (2), March 2011, 189-195.
Baiden, B., Price, A., and Dainty, A. (2006), The extent of team integration within construction projects, International
Journal of Project Management, Vol. 24, Iss 1, Pp 13-23.
Barham, W., Meadati, P., and Irizarry, J. (2011), Enhancing student learning in structures courses with building
information modelling, International Workshop on Computing in Civil Engineering 2011, Miami, Florida, United
States, June 19-22, 2011, pp. 850-857
Becerik-Gerber, B., Gerber, D., and Ku, K. (2011), The pace of technological innovation in architecture, engineering,
and construction education: Integrating recent trends into the curricula.” In Journal of Information Technology in
Construction, Vol. 16, 411–432.
Bin, C., and Yu, W (2010), BIM's Content and Its Application in Contemporary Architectural Design, Proceedings of
2010 International Conference on Management and Service Science (MASS), August 24-26, 2010, Wuhan, China
1-4.
BIM Industry working Group 2011. A report for the Government Construction Client Group Building Information
Modelling (BIM) Working Party Strategy Paper, Available on line: http://www.bimtaskgroup.org/wp-
content/uploads/2012/03/BIS-BIM-strategy-Report.pdf (accessed January 2014).
Efficiency and Reform Group,( 2011), Government Construction Strategy, Cabinet Office, UK:London.
Hyatt, B. A. (2011), A case study in integrating lean, green, BIM into an undergraduate construction management
scheduling course, in Proceedings of the 47th Associated Schools of Construction Annual International Conference,
Omaha, NE, available online at http://ascpro0.ascweb.org/archives/cd/2011/paper/CEUE304002011.pdf (accessed
January 2014).
Kymmell, W., (2008). Building Information Modelling: Planning and Managing Construction Projects with 4D CAD
and Simulations. McGraw Hill New York, USA.
Poerschke, U., Holland, R. J., Messner, J. I., and Pihlak, M. (2010). BIM collaboration across six disciplines. In
Proceedings of the International Conference on Computing in Civil and Building Engineering, W. Tizani, ed., Univ.
of Nottingham, Nottingham, U.K., available online at
http://www.engineering.nottingham.ac.uk/icccbe/proceedings/pdf/af288.pdf (accessed January 2014).
Rubin A, and Babbie E.(2009), Essential Research Methods for Social Work, USA, Cengage Learning.
Sacks, R., and Barak, R. (2010). “Teaching building information modelling as an integral part of freshman year civil
engineering education.” Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, Vol. 136, Iss 1,pp.
30–38.
Snook, K., (2009) Drawing is Dead - Long Live Modelling, available at https://www.bsria.co.uk/download/asset/long-
live-modelling.pdf (accessed January 2014).
Thomas, K., Chisholm, G., Dempsey, B., Graham, B., and Stubbs, R. (2013). Collaborative BIM Learning via an
Academia-Industry partnership. In Proceedings of the CITA BIM Gathering Conference, 14-15 November 2013,
Dublin, Ireland.
Wu, W. and Issa, R. (2013). BIM Education and Recruiting: Survey-Based Comparative Analysis of Issues,
Perceptions, and Collaboration Opportunities. In Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education Practice,
available online at http://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/(ASCE)EI.1943-5541.0000186 (accessed January 2014).