CONSTRUCTION EDUCATION GRADUATES--1948-1987

INTRODUCTION

Construction education at Texas A&M came into existence in 1944. From its inception the program experienced a steady growth, reaching a maximum enrollment of 568 undergraduate students in 1985. Since 1985, enrollment figures have slowly decreased and stabilized near the 450 mark. This growth and stabilization can be attributed to both the success of the graduates and to the Department's continual effort to be responsive to the needs of the construction industry. An integral part of this effort has been follow-up studies of Departmental Graduates. Throughout the period from 1944 until now, a conscious effort has been made to assess the strengths and weaknesses of the curriculum by surveying departmental graduates in the construction industry. Data gathered is not limited to salary and position information, but also includes ratings of curriculum offerings, questions regarding continuing education, participation in professional associations, etc.

Construction education at Texas A&M was formally established in 1944 under the School of Architecture and the College of Engineering. It was, at that time, a five year, 178 credit hour option. The degree awarded was a Bachelor of Science in Architectural Construction.

The Department of Building Construction came into existence in 1969. At that time, the School of Architecture was granted college status with Building Construction being one of five undergraduate departments within the newly formed college. With this reorganization, the curriculum was changed to a four year, 137 credit hour program which awarded a Bachelor of Science Degree in Building Construction. In 1980, the Department of Building Construction made extensive curriculum revisions in response to the needs of the construction industry for more "management oriented" graduates.

In the academic year 1984-1985 the program changed its name to the current "Department of Construction Science". The program currently enrolls 425 students in the undergraduate program and continues to award a Bachelor of Science in Building Construction.

THE SURVEY

During the Fall Semester of 1982 and again in 1987, a survey was conducted of the Building Construction/Construction Science students who had graduated since 1948. In the 1987 survey, approximately 1500 graduates received surveys. Of the number mailed, 493 were returned which had usable data (response rate of 32.8%). Because of the wide range of graduation dates and shifts in program emphasis, data was analyzed in three groups:

These groupings are arranged to coincide with the changing status of the department and curriculum. In 1970, there were extensive modifications made to the program which had existed as Architectural Construction; in 1980, a somewhat major curriculum change was made based on the needs of a changing industry. Group 1 is comprised of graduates from the 1948­1969 program; Group 2 graduates are from the 1970-1979 program; and Group 3 from the period 1980-1987. The survey was designed to provide a view of the graduates and their positions within the construction industry.

The same questionnaire was used for all groups with each group's data receiving the same statistical (descriptive) treatment. Information was analyzed in areas of: 1) salary and job experience; 2) employment information; 3) curriculum content; and 4) professional development. Data treatment consisted of descriptive statistics and is available for graphic comparisons both within groups and between groups.

DATA ANALYSIS

Part 1 Salary and Job Experience

Average Salaries Reported salaries were averaged for each of the groups as described prior. Figure 1 (see page 2) shows the means for graduates from (1) before 1970; (2) 1970-1979; and (3) 1980-1987. To present a better overall view of the salaries of the groups a salary range table is in Figure 1. The maximum, minimum, and average salaries are listed for each group. In addition the average entry level salary from the 1982-1987 graduates is shown in the bar chart.

Salary Distribution Figure 2 (see page 2) shows the distribution of reported salaries for all graduates. It is noteworthy that only 2.7% listed salaries under $20,000; 78.4% earn from $20,000 to $50,000; and 97.3% of all graduates are earning more than $20,000. Further information regarding salaries is shown in the frequency distribution chart at the bottom of Figure 2.

Job Experience

Information gathered included questions relating to on-the-job experience. Basically, this was broken into three categories:

Figure 3 shows items (a) and (b) for each of the graduate groupings. It is interesting to note that all groups, including the most recent graduates, showed a tendency toward job mobility. Table 1 reveals the tendency of job mobility more clearly.

Salary and Job Experience Summary

The graduates from before 1970 have an average of 27 years and 7 months of on-the job experience; an average of 13 years and 11 months of experience with their current firm and have been employed by an average of 4.16 firms. Their average salary is $80,222.

From the period 1970 to 1979, the graduates have an average of 13 years and 3 months experience with 6 years and 4 months spent with their present firm. This group of graduates has worked for an average of 2.83 employers. Average salary for these graduates if $55,875.

The most current group of graduates has an average of 4 years and 2 months of experience, 2 years and 4 months of which have been spent with their current employer. They have been employed by an average of 1.74 firms, and earn an average of $33,156.

Taking all graduates into consideration, the average on the job experience is 11 years and 9 months with 7 years and 9 months spent with their current employer. They have been employed by an average of 2.57 firms, and receive an average annual salary of $49,592.

DATA ANALYSIS

Part 2 Employment Information

Employment Breakdown Each respondent's employment position was placed into one of the following categories:  

Figures 4, 5, and 6 show the percentage breakdown for each category.

From this data, one interesting observation is the very high concentration of graduates employed in the general contracting sector. Using the categories of commercial, industrial, residential and heavy/highway as the general contracting sector, employment ranges from 77% for the most recent graduates to 62% for the 1970-1979 group of graduates. For the combined group of graduates, the total employed by the general contractors still exceeds 70%. With this high concentration of graduates in the general contracting sector, only a small percentage (6%) of all graduates are employed by subcontractors.

Employment Positions  Positions held by graduates of the Building Construction/Construction Science programs are shown in Figure 7. These positions were listed as the respondent's primary job responsibility. All percentages are presented in Figure 7 for each group of graduates; however, attention should be brought to the very high percentages of graduates who are employed as project managers and estimators. The percentages reflect very high concentrations of graduates in these positions. Collectively, project management, project engineering and estimating show concentrations of 44.9% and 37.4% for the 1980-1987 and 1970-1979 graduates respectively. For all graduates, this figure remains high at approximately 40%.

Employment Information Summary

Combining this data from the employment breakdown with this information leads to the following observations: Considering all graduates, the data reveals that over 70% of the graduates work in the general contracting sector. These graduates are concentrated in the areas of project management, estimating and project engineering. As job experience increases, there is a gravitation away from the areas of estimating and project engineering in favor of middle/upper management and private ownership.

The tendency toward private ownership is shown to increase with time since graduation. Just over five percent (5.14%) of the most recent group of graduates are owners or part owners of firms. This increases to 20.4% for the graduates from the 1970­1979 group, and peaks at 38.1% for graduates before 1970.

DATA ANALYSIS

Part 3 Curriculum Content

Curriculum Content For the purpose of having graduates rate the curriculum offered by the Department of Building Construction/Construction Science, nine areas or clusters of courses were identified as follows:

Each respondent was asked to rate each of the curriculum areas from I to 5. Values assigned to these ratings are:

Figures 8 through 10 show how each group rated these content areas. Figure 11 shows the comparison of the content ratings for all groups. The average ratings for each content area are all relatively close between groups and a consistent pattern can be seen. Using average ratings as the criteria for ranking course content, rankings are shown in Table 2.

Curriculum Content-Summary

Of all curriculum areas rated, the areas of (a) Professional/ Managerial, (b) Estimating/Scheduling, and (c) Materials/ Methods, continually appear at the top of the rankings (See Table 2). Graduates who have been on the job for longer periods of time rate most of the general studies content higher than do the more recent graduates. Even though these areas are rated lower as a whole, only a very small percentage of the total graduates indicated a need for less emphasis of the general studies. It appears while curriculum areas which deal directly with the construction industry are immediately perceived as more important, the importance of the general studies content evolves over an extended period of time.

Respondents were asked which curriculum areas needed to be emphasized less. Response to this question was minimal and in insignificant numbers. Each curriculum area took its share of the few responses indicating a need for "less emphasis".

Graduates were then asked which curriculum areas needed to be emphasized more. Unlike the previous question regarding "less emphasis", this question drew substantial response (842). Percentages for each of the nine curriculum areas plus those areas added by the graduates are listed in Table 3.

DATA ANALYSIS

Part 4 Professional Development

Each respondent was asked about their continuing education. Table 4 reflects the responses to these questions.

CONCLUSION

The conduct of this study included surveying in excess of 1500 graduates. The information sought was general in nature and encompassed a broad spectrum of concepts. Usable responses totaled approximately 33%, thus providing a representative sample from Departmental graduates since 1948.

Analysis consists of descriptive statistics for each group of graduates. Several observations are available to the reader, many more than are specifically mentioned in the text. The graphic presentation of the data allows a variety of comparisons and contrasts to be made visually. Certainly the survey does not answer all questions regarding construction education graduates; hopefully it generates questions, provokes contemplation, and provides information relevant to construction education's future scope and purpose. Information gathered in this survey, together with future data is an integral part of the effort to provide undergraduate construction students with the best possible academic program.