RETHINKING THE STRUCTURES CURRICULUM

INTRODUCTION

Students often struggle with the concepts of structures as traditionally presented, and fail to see its practical significance. Furthermore, discussions with graduates and advisory council members of construction programs reveal their perception that the structures they learned in school has been of little use to them in practice.

Two actions have been taken at Auburn to relieve student frustration in structures courses. The first has been to change course content to reflect the construction context. The second has been to supplement the lecture format with activities that stimulate and motivate students.

STRUCTURES REQUIREMENTS

The ACCE proposed for 1989 that 24 semester credits or 36 quarter credits be completed in the Construction Science area. There are five groups under this heading, which may be roughly categorized as follows: Materials, Mechanics, Structural Analysis, Temporary Facilities, and Project Development.

The structures sequence at Auburn University consists of four five-hour courses; Static, Strength of Materials, Reinforced Concrete, and Applied Structures. These courses are taken by both Architecture and Building Science students, with an average class size of thirty

students. In addition, Building Science students take a 3­hour course in temporary structures.

EVALUATION OF CURRENT PROGRAM

The sequence of structures courses required at Auburn University has been recently evaluated as to its effectiveness. Since a somewhat large proportion of the curriculum is occupied by these courses, the practicality of the material and the effectiveness of the teaching is very important.

This evaluation was very informal. Information was solicited from three separate groups; students currently enrolled in the sequence, former students, and Building Science faculty members.

To obtain comments from students currently taking these courses, the authors have passed out evaluations in every structures class over a two year period. These evaluations are not campus wide standard evaluations, but rather a list of specific questions regarding the effectiveness of the course. Whenever possible, former students were asked to respond to similar questions. Other faculty members not involved in teaching the structures courses were also asked for their input. In addition to these efforts, members of the industry advisory council expressed their opinions of the structures courses during a meeting held to discuss curriculum.

This information was gathered over a considerable period of time. No attempt was made to make a sophisticated analytical or statistical study, but an effort was made to get a general "feel" for the information. The following statements represent the two most prevalent criticisms directed toward the courses.

The first criticism deals directly with course content, and the second is related to teaching methodology. The remainder of this paper will address both issues.

WHAT MATERIAL SHOULD BE TAUGHT?

Before any reasonable discussion on course content can occur, a statement of purpose should be formulated. The fundamental objectives of the course (or sequence of courses in this instance) should be stated. The lack of such a statement was the cause of several inconsistencies in the manner in which material was previously presented in the structures courses at Auburn University. After some discussion, the following statements were agreed upon as representing the key objectives of the structures sequence in the Department of Building Science at Auburn University.

Both objectives are general in nature. They do, (and should) provide instructors the freedom to give different degrees of emphasis to the various topics that are covered. Although they are flexible, the objectives provide a benchmark for measuring the appropriateness of course material.

No formalized set of objectives was previously in existence at Auburn. The objectives listed above represent a definite change in attitude and direction for the structures faculty. They reflect goals that are targeted more toward construction and less toward engineering.

As an example, very rigorous mathematical coverage of rigid frames has been dropped, because a knowledge of this topic contributes very little to the satisfaction of either of the objectives. For much the same reason, a graphical method for finding forces in trusses has also been eliminated, making room for more emphasis on overall truss behavior.

The formulation of general objectives is an important aspect of curriculum evaluation and development. Each school may have a different set of objectives. Regardless of the wording, the primary function of the objectives should be to insure that the student is provided with information that is current and relevant to his or her job as a constructor.

HOW SHOULD MATERIAL BE PRESENTED?

Traditional Verses Experiential

In the past, structures courses have been taught to construction students by engineers, using textbooks and methods that evolved over many years within the engineering disciplines. These methods generally involve learning specific mathematical techniques to analyze isolated building components, resulting in what might be described as a microscopic view. Very little emphasis has been placed on the functioning of the various components within the larger structural system; the macroscopic view.

A more experiential approach, which focuses upon the behavior of structural systems, has been evolving over a period of several years at Auburn. Techniques were developed to generate more interest and understanding of basic structural principles. Students have responded positively to a more interactive environment that emphasizes visualization. A clear understanding of structural theory and behavior is possible only when critical links are established between common physical occurrences and the mathematical descriptions used to measure them. The tables below contrast the characteristics of each approach.

Learning Devices

Listed below are several classroom innovations that have been used to motivate structures students and support the Experiential approach, most with varying degrees of success. Listed below are activities that may be used in implementing the experiential approach.

Models - build a model and test

Group Construction Projects - build a structure

Slides - view structural components and systems

Guest Speakers - listen to successful practitioners

Field Trips - guided observation

Demonstrations - experimentation

Material testing - observe and measure

Shop Drawings - how do the pieces fit together?

The most successful of these activities at Auburn has been the small group construction project.

Group Construction Projects

Over the past two years, groups of students in structures courses at Auburn have been required to participate in a small building project. Lacking a lab facility at Auburn, the projects were originally designed to provide a hands-on construction component not available to many students. Coincidentally, a number of hidden benefits have emerged in the process, making the group projects one of the most valuable learning devices we have yet implemented.

Upper level structures courses now include a requirement for a small group construction project. Students are required to get involved in all aspects of a small building project, including client contact, structural design, cost estimate, and execution of all building phases. The final requirement is for group members to present their experiences in verbal, visual and written form to the class at large. Specific project requirements are shown in the Group Project Requirements of Appendix A.

Early in the quarter, the students assemble into groups. An effort is made to avoid the usual segregation of the Architecture and Building Science students. Each group consists of 4 to 7 people, depending on level of project difficulty. The students are given the option of finding their project or having one assigned by the instructor. The projects must always be approved by the instructor before construction. Students have been extremely resourceful in locating small building projects, usually in the greater Auburn area. Some examples of the projects completed for both the reinforced concrete and applied structures courses are listed in the Appendix B. A recently completed wood project is discussed in detail in the following paragraphs.

The Project The purpose of this project was to add a shed roof projection to an existing building. The roof was to provide protection for mechanical equipment that would be parked in this area when not in use. The work was done for the Facilities Division of the University. Besides the construction drawings, all building materials and necessary tools were supplied by the University.

The area was 12 feet wide and 25 feet long. No walls were required. The new roof matched the 2 on 12 slope of the existing structure. A 4 inch slab on grade was also required. The rafters were supported by a long girder that in turn was supported by four square wood columns.

The Construction Group The group was comprised of four Building Science and two Architecture students. Four of the six had some previous construction experience.

Pre-construction Before construction, the group did a detailed structural analysis on the joists, the girder, and the supporting columns. The analysis was a required portion of the project and was turned in with other documentation at completion. All structural members were well within code requirements.

Although University personnel did a material take-off, the students were also required to do one. This proved not to be a waste of time since some discrepancies and omissions were found. The students were also required to make a comprehensive list of all equipment that would be needed to complete the job.

Construction After extensive planning, the team began actual construction on a Friday afternoon at one o'clock. Each team member had previously been assigned very specific duties and responsibilities. The slab on grade, which had been poured by another group, was true and level.

The students began by constructing the primary girder along with its supporting columns on the ground and lifting them into place as a unit. The group leaders had decided that this technique would save them time, and it did prove to be effective. After the column and girder were set, the rafters were installed. After the rafters were in place the roof sheathing was installed.

Results The students estimated that construction would take 6 hours, and somewhat surprisingly came very close to finishing on time. Two of the students in this group had previous construction experience , which helped with the planning. University personnel were extremely pleased with the work that was done and expressed interest in participating in more projects with students in the department of Building Science.

Project benefits There are many benefits that have been demonstrated by the group projects. Building an actual structure provides the student with a practical context for learning structural principles. Student motivation level and degree of enthusiasm have noticeably improved.

Students are given the opportunity within a technical course to improve their written and verbal communication skills.

Perhaps the most important benefit, especially for a program lacking a laboratory facility, is the discovery of a "free laboratory" outside the classroom walls. Laboratory experimentation has an important place in construction education, yet building a full scale structure has many intangible advantages over controlled experimentation. The act of building allows students to experience many hidden principles of structures such as lateral stability "up close and personal." Each building is unique, thereby enabling students to exercise creativity and ingenuity in completing the construction. Students are required to exhibit leadership, cooperation, clear communication, and hard work to complete the project. More experienced students can share their skill and knowledge with less experienced ones.

Beneficial Side Effects A few hidden benefits extend far beyond the immediate structure being built. A sense of accomplishment often results from having created something useful to someone. Students go out of their way to return to the scene of the construction in order to admire their work. Students act as good will ambassadors to the university and town communities, donating a service to construct something that otherwise may not have been built. Students often work alongside experienced trades people, giving them the opportunity to pass along things they have learned through years of experience.

CONCLUSION

The evaluation of any course or sequence of courses should begin with a list of formal written objectives. Once these objectives are expressed, faculty should concentrate on realizing them. Generally, this involves deciding what topics should be covered, and how these topics can be most effectively presented to the students.

The topics that are covered in these courses can often be enhanced and reinforced by using teaching techniques that differ from a strictly lecture based format. The use of the group project as an effective teaching tool has been discussed extensively in this paper. It can be easily incorporated into most existing structures course formats. These projects have greatly enhanced students comprehension, knowledge, and enthusiasm for the subject matter. Student comments on course evaluations praise the group project as the most important learning component of the course.

APPENDIX A

AUBURN UNIVERSITY BUILDING SCIENCE DEPT.

BSC 315 - Group Project Requirements

WOOD STRUCTURE 

The purpose of the group project is for you to work as a team to design and build a small, safe structure of wood. You should execute all phases of the construction, including the following:

A. PRELIMINARY PROPOSAL

Each group must submit a 1 page description of its project by mid-quarter.

B. STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

C. REPORT:(8¹/2x11 format)

A typewritten report must be submitted at the time of the project presentation. The report should contain the following items:

D. PRESENTATIONS:

Projects will be evaluated on the quality of verbal and written communication as well as on design and construction execution. Presentations should be designed for 20-30 minutes. Videotaping is a good medium for condensing information. There should be evidence that all group members have participated in the project. A presentation date will be assigned to each group well in advance.

E. EXTRA CREDIT:

computer (spreadsheet) analysis computer (CAD) drawings working model

APPENDIX B

Example Student Projects:

WOOD PROJECTS

Children’s' Playset Wheelchair ramp Deck or Porch Walkway or Dock Footbridge Carport

Greenhouse Storage shed

CONCRETE PROJECTS

Sidewalk

Swimming Pool Apron Wheelchair ramp Retaining wall Picnic furniture Sculpture

Driveway slab Basketball court Airport hanger slab

APPENDIX C

The following recommendations are the result of two years of experimentation with group projects. They are suggestions to increase the likelihood for successful projects: