The need for professional certification in the construction industry has been identified in recent years for several different reasons. Perhaps the reason that draws the most attention is the need for an improved public image of the construction industry. Numerous surveys at a variety of levels have been conducted that indicate that the public has a very poor perception of both the skill required at the craft level and the technical, financial and organizational expertise necessary to successfully manage construction projects in today's world.

Mulligan and Knutson (1999) ask incoming freshman at Arizona State University a question pertaining to their perception of construction, contractor or constructor. The results indicate, "…we still have a long way to go to achieve the accepted status of a professional on par with architects, engineers, etc. It appears that in the eyes of the general public, hard hats, detour signs, and construction delays represent the constructor." Construction Management (CM) students new to the program at Central Washington University (CWU) are introduced to the variety of industry organizations such as Associated General Contractors (AGC), National Association of Home Builders (NAHB), etc. but still have a hard time distinguishing between companies that actually build projects (contractors) and individuals involved as professionals (constructors). In fact the authors have found that at this level the word "constructor" is difficult for the new students to include in their vocabulary. In the eyes of the public, there appears to be little or no recognition of the distinction between companies involved in construction and individuals as professionals in the industry. In the summer of 1999 both authors participated in a weeklong program sponsored by the AGC of Washington Education Foundation. This program was actually designed to place teachers from the public schools in the Seattle area on construction sites to learn more about the complexities of the industry and to bring improved perceptions back to their students in the classrooms. The teachers, most of whom had little or no construction knowledge prior to the experience, gained new respect for the industry. Prior to the experience one individual did not realize that contractors actually had offices, believing that the workers simply showed up on the jobsite and built the project without company direction or management. Others were surprised to learn that tradespeople have to use math and that construction companies actually use computers. Although progress was made in this case there is obviously a very large need to improve the public image of the construction industry.

The second reason for certification is the need within the industry to recognize accomplishment and professionalism. Architects, engineers, doctors, lawyers and accountants "…have achieved their professional status through education and examinations. In addition to the degrees these professionals need, they also go on to become in some way 'certified' or 'registered'. In most cases this process requires some type of rigorous examination and generally is administered in two phases. The first, early in the career, following a formal education and the second, after gaining several years of experience in the chosen field." (Mulligan and Knutson, 1999). This type of certification or registration carries a lot of weight within the particular profession, beyond the perception of the general public. For example, obtaining a professional engineer's license and having the "P.E" designation means something to most engineers and other design professionals. Most employers, including public agencies, recognize this extra level of professionalism in some manner, including, in some cases, additional compensation or job status. The same is not true within the construction industry at this point, although progress is being made. For example, on March 21, 2000 the AGC of America announced an official endorsement of the American Institute of Constructors (AIC) Constructor Certification Program (CPC).

It is the authors' experience that the industry is not at the point where it truly recognizes or understands the certification process. Last spring several graduating seniors in the CM program at CWU, all of who sat for the Constructor Qualification Examination (CQE) Level I, mentioned certification to employers during interviews. Very few of the employers were even aware of the certification process and no employer, to the authors' knowledge, differentiated between graduates who passed the exam and those who did not. This may be attributed to the relative infancy of the process or perhaps to the robust economy at that time, however if certification is to be meaningful it first must be recognized within the industry.

The AIC was established in 1971 as a professional society for construction educators and professional practitioners. The Institute was created with two goals in mind; provide standards for schools of construction in higher education and promote professionalism and ethics in the construction industry. The second goal led to the decision to establish voluntary national certification and in 1994 the AIC Constructor Certification Commission was created with a goal of including a written examination in the certification process. (AIC, 2001b).

The CPC program involves a two-step certification process. The first step leads to the title of Associate Constructor and requires qualifying for the CQE Level I, Construction Fundamentals, through education, experience or a combination of both, and successfully completing the exam. The second step requires seven years of additional professional experience and successful completion of the CQE Level II Exam. In addition, the Certified Professional Constructor must agree to abide by the AIC Code of Ethics and must comply with the continuing professional development requirements established by AIC. (AIC, 2001a).

The exams were created over a two-year time period as practitioners and construction educators participated in writing and reviewing pilot examinations, leading to the administration of the first national semi-annual exams beginning in 1996. Currently there are 69 schools that serve as test sites for the exams and to date approximately 2900 candidates have applied for the exams. (AIC, 2001b) and (Harris, 2001).

Compared to other professional certifications the CPC program is relatively young and although there are certainly intangible benefits to becoming certified the construction industry is just now starting to make a hard line distinction between certified and uncertified practitioners. Just last year, in March of 2000, the Associate Constructor designation was accepted by the Montana Department of Transportation as equivalent to the Engineer-In-Training (EIT) designation for non-design professional positions. Other government agencies, such as the State of Idaho and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers are also investigating similar policies. (AIC, 2001b). In addition the State of Oklahoma recognizes the CPC as one of the credentials to practice construction management in the state and the Central Indiana Business Roundtable has endorsed the CPC process and will be investigating ways for owners to encourage companies to increase the number of CPCs on their staff. (Harris, 2001).

It is the authors' belief that the certification process is important enough to give the students in the CM program at CWU a head start. This is accomplished by requiring a review course of all seniors during winter quarter, followed by the requirement that each student register and sit for the CQE Level I exam in April. The exam has been offered on campus only for the April time since 1997. During this five-year span 126 students from CWU have completed the exam and 69 have passed. Results and feedback from this examination also provide the CM program at CWU an assessment tool that is used to make future improvements to the program.

Students generally perceive the requirement to take a review class and an examination as a burden instead of an opportunity to obtain a marketable credential sought by a future employer or client. Student evaluations of instruction for this class, although satisfactory, are somewhat lower than other required core classes in the major. Student attendance and assignments, although not graded, are required to ensure the entire class is present. The class is only offered on a satisfactory or unsatisfactory grading system. Motivating the students to take the course seriously is a challenge. The Lowman (1985) "two-dimensional model" of good teaching is employed to make the class intellectually exciting and to include interpersonal rapport. Some methods of intellectually exciting the students are: providing organized and clear material, the professor is energetic and enthusiastic, the students are engaged in class discussion and two-person learning. Interpersonal rapport is provided by the fact that the professor knows each student as an individual and all construction management professors offer extensive office hours for questions, discussions, and guidance.

The class has two main objectives: 1) help students prepare for the CQE Level I examination and 2) provide a mechanism to require exam participation.

Classes at CWU are based on the quarter system of instruction. There are nominally 12 weeks in a quarter and this class meets for one hour each week. This provides for 12 class sessions that includes an introduction and a class instructional period during the final examination week. The topic for each lesson is shown in Table 1.

The format for the class is based on knowledge areas that are expected to appear on the CQE Level 1 examination (AIC, 2001a). Because most of the topics are a review of the material studied over the course of a student's program of instruction, a different approach to teaching is presented. The format is a very short quiz presented to the students at the beginning of class, which is immediately self reviewed. A short lecture is then presented on the topic of the day. This lecture is interactive and essentially involves reviewing notes and asking the students questions. Finally, as an assignment for each class period, each student is required to develop a multiple-choice question from the last class subject. These questions are exchanged between students and two-person teaching-learning occurs.

The class outline is drawn from and follows the knowledge area list provided in the AIC Candidate Handbook (AIC, 2001a). Several of the knowledge areas apply to the subject areas and courses students are required to take to earn their Bachelor of Science in Construction Management. For ease of delivery and to fit the knowledge areas into a weekly class, the topics shown in Table 1 are defined in the following sections.

Introduction and Communications. This introduces the students to the class format, lesson objectives, and requirements. Written and oral communication skills are reviewed and examples of good writing techniques are discussed and critiqued.

Surveying and Related Engineering. This subject covers using surveying instruments, establishing elevations from known points and project layout. Terminology from the soils and foundations class is also reviewed.

Statics, Strength of Materials, Math and Science. This session reviews the basic laws of mechanics and properties of construction materials. Mathematical operations typically associated with construction are reviewed.

Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing. Although not a specific knowledge area identified in the AIC handbook, special attention is given to these topics with respect to blueprint reading, terminology, estimating and managing.

Construction Estimating. This class reviews the fundamentals of material take off and applies production data as found in a typical database such as Means Cost Data (R.S. Means, 2001).

Construction Safety. This topic covers construction safety as published in the Washington State Safety Standards for Construction Work. (Washington State Department of Labor and Industries, 2001)

Methods and Materials. The terminology and application of the sixteen divisions of the Construction Specifications Institute (CSI) are reviewed in this class.

Budgeting and Cost Control. This class touches on how a project work breakdown structure, budget, cost control curves and forecasting methods are developed.

Management and Test Taking Skills. The management topics of ethics, team building and leadership are reviewed in the session. A short review of good test taking practices is presented. A recent alum from the program that successfully passed the exam is invited as a guest speaker to offer suggestions on how to properly prepare for and take the exam.

Construction Scheduling. This class reviews the procedures to develop a network schedule showing the logical sequence of events in a construction project.

Project Administration. This session is concerned with the various project delivery methods and stresses field project management activities.

Contract Law. This class provides an overview of the duties, rights and responsibilities of the individuals involved in the Construction industry. The American Institute of Architects (AIA) A201 general conditions document is reviewed.

The preparation class has three main blocks of learning techniques: 1) a short quiz for self-assessment 2) an interactive lecture to develop a feel for the depth of topics, and 3) a two person teaching-learning session.

The self-graded introduction quiz takes about 10 minutes. The three to five questions are multiple-choice and pertain to the day’s topic. The objective of the quiz is to expose the students to a simple problem or construction term that may be representative of an exam question. It is felt that by practicing typical questions students may identify areas of weakness and practice answering multiple-choice questions. The following is an example question:

An interactive lecture follows the short quiz. The students are given an outline of the lecture. Because most of the material is a review, the lecture is mostly asking students questions or working through an example problem with student involvement. A portion of an outline for the estimating topic is provided below:

For example, in subject one in the above example a student may be asked, "Who in the construction industry would use a square foot estimate". If the answer needs qualification, the student would be asked why and when a particular entity would use this type of estimate.

The final portion of the class, about 15 minutes, is spent performing two-person teaching-learning. The idea behind two-person teaching-learning is that an individual must understand the material if they are to teach it to someone else (Covey 1989). Each student is asked to bring a multiple-choice question based on the topic from the last week’s lecture. Students trade questions with each other and then answer the question they have received. Once both students complete the question, discussion is encouraged among the individuals that have traded questions. Ideally each student will discuss the answer and how it pertains to the learning objective for that particular question.

Two-person teaching-learning provides a mechanism for a students to perform some learning outside the classroom and share this knowledge with a peer. Generally the students like this format because it provides a classic trade of effort and rewards. It provides a simple method for the dedicated student to concentrate on a perceived area of weakness. Alternatively it provides a less dedicated student a means to create a simple question and answer without much effort.

Table 2 presents the results for the 126 students from CWU who have taken the exam over the past five years and compares these results to the national averages.

Results, measured in terms of percentage of students passing the exam at CWU, have improved over this five-year period, from a low of 46% in 1997, to approximately 60% in more recent years. The table uses a limited data set and only should be used to review CWU’s ability to affect results. It is the authors' assessment that this is partially the result of the students taking the exam more seriously, but more importantly an improved examination preparation course is being offered. In the early years many students did not take the preparation or the exam seriously, some completing it so quickly that they could not have had time to adequately read the questions. While this attitude still exists among some students it certainly is not as prevalent as in prior years. The preparation course has been substantially improved over the past five years to better help the students prepare for the exam.

Recent results indicate that the percentage of CWU students passing the exam is slightly higher than the national average. A better metric would be to compare the results from CWU to other schools that require the examination. It is felt that the above comparison of results may be somewhat skewed because if students are not required to take the exam, only those students with a higher propensity to pass the examination would likely attempt it. Thus the authors anticipate CWU’s results would compare even more favorably to the schools that require the examination because of the effects of our preparation class.

The construction industry has recognized a need for professional certification of its workforce. A means and method is available for new graduates to voluntarily become certified. This certification effort is relatively young and has yet to become a major distinguisher of professional construction talent. Both authors strongly advocate that undergraduate CM programs require graduating seniors sit for the CPC CQE Level I examination. This requirement bolsters certification efforts by establishing a future critical mass of certified construction professionals and provides one more tool to assess a program's strengths and weaknesses.

Our method of maintaining participation in the certification process is to require a mandatory class that has two main objectives: 1) provide a mechanism to require student participation in the exam and 2) provide a refresher or preparation class to enhance student performance on the examination. Construction educators must make the course intellectually exciting and provide interpersonal rapport for the students to take the class, examination, and certification seriously. Recent results suggest that CWU students who take this exam have a passing rate that is slightly above the national average.

American Institute of Constructors. (2001a). Certified Professional Constructor Candidate Handbook. St. Petersburg, Fl

American Institute of Constructors. (2001b). Professional Constructor Certification Background Information. St. Petersburg, Fl

Covey, Steven. (1989). The Seven Habits of Highly Successful People. New York, NY. Simon and Schuster.,

Harris Cheryl. (2001). E-mail dated October15 2001, From Cheryl Harris to David Carns. Cheryl Harris, Executive Director, American Institute of Constructors. St. Petersburg, Fl.

Lowman, Joseph. (1995). Mastering the Techniques of Teaching 2^nd Edition. San Francisco, CA. Jossey-Bass.

Mulligan D.E. and Knutson K. (1999). Professionalism Through Certification. Associated Schools of Construction Proceeding of the 35^th Annual Conference (pp 233-230).

R. S. Means (2001). Building Construction Cost Data 59^th Annual Edition, , Kingston, MA. R.S. Means.

Washington State Department of Labor and Industries. (2001). Safety Standards for Construction Work. Olympia, WA. Department of Labor and Industries.