Multidisciplinary Collaborative Experiences: A
Case Study in Sustainable Construction and Design
Paul W. Holley
and Christian Dagg
Auburn University
Auburn, Alabama
In the construction and design industries,
survival for many construction and design firms is arguably predicated on their
ability to work together with other organizations. The demands of time and
budget placed upon these industries by building owners challenge traditional
project delivery methods such as design-bid-build, to which industry is
responding. Conversely, many academic institutions continue to neglect the
opportunity to collaborate between the design and construction aspects of
building by ignoring shared responsibilities and the shifts in industry. This
paper presents a case study in undergraduate education that fostered
collaboration between architecture and construction management students, which
would ultimately become the basis for a collaborative experience for every
construction student in the department. This is significant because pedagogical
models for teaching within the two curriculums have historically been discipline
specific, contributing to the continued lack of interaction between design and
building education.
In their collaborative work
with graduate students, O’Brien et al note that “…there is a need to gradually
reshape the curricula of Architecture, Engineering and Construction programs to
encourage collaboration and exchange of ideas among students” (2004). Septelka
concurs in that “…universities need to review their current academic model and
look for ways to increase the interaction between design and construction
programs.”(2002)
This paper presents a
pedagogical model recently implemented at “University X” through which
architecture students and construction students, too often separated by course
content and philosophical differences, were brought together in a collaborative
effort focusing on sustainability and the LEED green building rating system.
Interdisciplinary education is not new as an academic concept. (Davis et al.,
1996, Wyrick et al., 1996, Robson et al., 1997, Septelka, 2000). However, many
efforts to promote collaboration at the university level are limited to either a
short term experience such a design-build charrette (Septelka 2002) or a program
for a select group of students in a single class (Sulbaran 2003). The model
presented in this paper differentiates itself from these efforts in that it is a
semester-long experience and is the foundation of a commitment to provide a
collaborative experience for all undergraduate construction management
students in a reputable construction program.
In order for there to be
successful collaboration, there must be a shared goal between the participants
that is not exclusively in the domain of either discipline. For the initiative
in this case study, sustainable design provided this focus. While the
concept of sustainability has existed in academia for some time, it has not been
a part of traditional course content at many universities. Its implementation
on a large scale is relatively new within the professions of both design and
construction. Additionally, there have been pedagogical disagreements over the
proper strategy to address both environmentally sustaining design as well as the
need to work together in a manner other than traditional bid-build delivery. In
the fall of 2003, the first iteration of a new undergraduate classroom and
studio strategy attempted to foster the collaborative process while focusing the
students on the common goal of sustainable building practices. As the
construction and architecture programs at University X are located in the same
college, this offered an appropriate opportunity for collaboration between the
disciplines.
Collaboration
The growing demands of
schedule and budget placed upon design and construction professionals by
building owners often make traditional project delivery methods inappropriate.
Industry is responding to these demands with increased collaboration and other
creative solutions such as pre-construction and construction management (CM)
services, all of which present opportunities for academia to prepare students
for contemporary project delivery.
The dictionary defines
collaboration as both “working with others in an intellectual endeavor,” as well
as “to cooperate with an enemy” (Merriam Webster, 2004). Based on the authors’
perceptions, the second of these could be an appropriate description for both
architecture students and construction management students within the college at
University X. While both departments existed in the same building, students
rode the elevator quietly together, representative of a culture that needed to
change. Architecture school ultimately prioritizes the creative talent of the
individual, resulting in a fear of diluting one’s own work creating a powerful
incentive to avoid collaboration. Reciprocally, construction management
coursework is often more pragmatic, finite, and disciplined. These traits are
not always conducive to collaboration between the disciplines.
Sustainability
“What we need is a paradigm
shift in the way we view energy consumption in this country. It's architecture-
residential, commercial and industrial buildings and their construction
materials- that account for half of all energy used in this country each year.”
(Mazria, 2003).
Architects and constructors now find
themselves surrounded by significant environmental issues. Many professionals
in both industries have realized that early and constant collaboration is
essential to providing answers to this dilemma. In this case study, it was
necessary to find some starting point, whereby the Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design Rating System (LEED) developed by the United States
Green Building Council (USGBC) offered a fundamental structure to students in
both architecture and construction management curriculums. Additionally, alumni
and local professionals strongly indicate that LEED is steadily becoming a part
of their practices, hence an important professional skill to learn as well.
“The LEED Green
Building Rating System is a voluntary, consensus-based national standard for
developing high-performance, sustainable buildings. LEED provides a complete
framework for assessing building performance and meeting sustainability goals.
Based on well-founded scientific standards, LEED emphasizes state of the art
strategies for sustainable site development, water savings, energy efficiency,
materials selection and indoor environmental quality. LEED recognizes
achievements and promotes expertise in green building through a comprehensive
system offering project certification, professional accreditation, training and
practical resources.” (U.S.
Green Building Council, 2005) It takes
five aspects of any contemporary building project and suggests that green
buildings should improve the health of its occupants, utilize local and
renewable materials, create as little waste as possible both in its operation
and construction, and even contribute to the improved environment of its
neighbors. All of the green building credits can be achieved through changing
existing practices.
Case Study
The case study presented in
this paper will chronologically follow the evolution of the collaborative
initiative at University X, beginning in fall semester of 2003. The conception
of the project was based on creating an academic experience addressing the need
for a change in the culture within the college, a perceived divide between
construction and design students.
Original
Academic Model
The original academic model for collaboration
was fashioned to encourage social relationships before the beginning of the
technical process. Although collaboration is often considered and discussed in
each year of both construction management and architecture curricula, it was
agreed that advanced level students would be the most appropriate for this type
of intense working relationship. Beginning students would not be equipped with
developed skill sets or appropriate knowledge to complete some of the assigned
tasks, particularly tasks that would result in LEED credits.
The project model was based
on three phases during a regular semester, and included 30 construction students
and 20 architecture students each in their last year of respective curricula.
The first phase was structured as “leveling through labor,” in that both
architecture and construction students realized through observation that there
was a common capacity in their physical construction skills. All 50 students
joined in physical labor via a local community service construction project for
an entire Saturday. The ulterior intent was for stereotypes to be broken down
between the disciplines as each observed the others’ abilities and shortcomings,
and to promote social interaction outside of a classroom setting through service
learning.
The second phase included
an off-campus tour of a recently completed 1.1 million square foot LEED
certified facility, after which students participated in a roundtable discussion
with representatives from the design team, the construction joint venture, and
the owner’s facilities director. The trip yielded not only an in-depth exposure
to LEED, but also afforded more opportunities for the students to interact
across academic disciplines. Perhaps most importantly, students observed
industry members across all disciplines in a collaboration of their own in
presenting the results of bringing the LEED certified project to fruition.
Finally, the students spent
the latter half of the semester in a two month process of project collaboration
in delivering an in-depth sustainable design and construction solution for a
mixed use student housing proposal in a dense urban site. The design studio
that facilitated this process proposed 250 units of student housing on the
downtown campus of a proximal urban university, 130 miles away from their own
University. Each inter-disciplinary team of students delivered a design
solution for a specified project, as well as a pre-construction estimate, a
complete overall project schedule, and a sustainability cost premium recap, all
of which were presented through a “green” building lens. This collaboration
allowed not only for the design students to engage sustainable design and the
appropriate technical information, but also allowed construction management
students to be exposed to the same issues through the architectural studios and
simultaneously the design process itself. Participation in the final phase was
in groups of five, including two design students and three construction
management students.
Deliverables were assigned
in the form of a Request for Proposal from a Mixed Use Urban Development
Manager, as follows:
“Minimum Requirements:
A schematic design for all appropriate mixed use
components on the site, including site and building plans, three dimensional
models, LEED certification information, and other items as appropriate or
discussed with the owner’s design representatives. Construction information
including a conceptual estimate for the entire project, a proposed overall
schedule using Primavera software, a recap of “premium” costs for proposed LEED
design, construction, and operational elements, a jobsite overhead proposal
including single and reoccurring costs, and a comprehensive site utilization
plan with all necessary phasing, traffic control, etc.”
After 6 weeks of collaboration, the student
projects were presented in context as a team, with all deliverables presented to
a jury of both construction and design professionals from firms and practices
nationwide.
Second Semester Refinements
The next iteration in the process utilized a
one-to-one strategy with construction students being assigned to architecture
students with independent design thesis projects, demonstrating the flexibility
of the model. The scale of the projects ranged significantly, with project
results indicating a spread of construction costs between $2 million and $89
million. The deliverables assigned were similar to that of the original model;
however an extra component was added to give students latitude in how to promote
their concept to the industry jury. There were no objective criteria for the
added component other than it had to be germane to the project and demonstrative
of significant work in their collaborative efforts. Student work for this
component ranged from in-depth material analysis including life cycle impact and
sustainability related performance, to complete business pro formas enumerating
a proposed funding and delivery plan complete with ten year cash flows. While
the flexibility and deliverables of that semester’s undertaking were
interesting, the authors concluded that the one-to-one pairing to independent
design theses often presented challenging obstacles during the collaboration
process as well as a certain lack of consistency which precipitated grading
challenges. The most notable problems were encountered in those design projects
that were largely theoretical and lacked tangible building elements that could
be quantified and analyzed. The one on one pairing was appealing, however, as
students were forced to produce their own work in lieu of hiding within a group.
Third Semester Results
For fall semester of 2004, the model returned to
the group effort used in the original project, this time using the development
of 800,000 square feet of student housing on University X’s campus as the
project scope. The model was revisited in three ways. First, flexibility was
further explored by using different faculty coordinating the construction
students to demonstrate that the process was “reproducible.” Second,
significant precedent research was conducted by both design and construction
students to help in developing a master plan and initial budget for the
project. Students researched campus housing through their respective
disciplines to prepare themselves for providing both an appealing design and a
realistic budget. In this term, interim presentations were conducted in October
complete with industry juries to provide feedback for teams to consider refining
the final deliverables to be presented in December. The last of the iterations
for this term had perhaps the most impact on the project. In November, students
were given “correspondence” from the project owner indicating that there was an
absolute budget constraint of $44,000 per bed. This prompted response from
almost all of the student groups. Those who were in excess of the budget were
forced to consider project design and scope changes and reductions; those who
were not could reconsider design elements and features that might enhance their
project’s appeal of the owner. This model was very successful in that it most
accurately captured a true collaborative effort by both construction and design
students, primarily in forcing them to be dependent on their teammates to
succeed.
Future Collaboration
Based on the success of the project, the authors
now have a commitment from the Dean of the College to support every
undergraduate construction student having this or some similar experience. This
is significant primarily in that the construction program at University X
graduates some 90 students per year. This will require multiple faculty members
to be involved in both the construction and design departments, and is currently
prompting efforts to regroup other coursework so that the “project” can become
its own required 2-hour credit course. By fall semester of 2005, it is hoped
that this college-wide plan is in place.
Authors’ Conclusions
While the project deliverables included
technical requirements that challenged the abilities of students, they were
necessary in order to facilitate the collaboration and to advance the
understanding of sustainable design and construction techniques. For the
construction students, the project requirements represented additional work
beyond the normal coursework of the class through which the collaboration took
place. This precipitated a notable amount of after-hours work with their design
counterparts, which appeared to contribute positively to promoting teamwork and
mutual empathy. Should the project become its own credit course, it is expected
to be equally challenging for construction students by including in-depth
coverage of pre-construction services, conceptual estimating and scheduling,
business and real estate principals, and other pertinent topics to enhance the
collaborative experience.
The most noteworthy result of this process was
that students discovered the extent to which design and construction disciplines
had to rely on each other in order to deliver a complete sustainable solution,
and second, that the perceived disconnect between the two disciplines had
diminished significantly for students involved in this model. Evidence of these
results was seen anecdotally in the final jury feedback. The industry jurors
were not afraid to critique across disciplines, questioning both the “why” and
“how” of every project through an unsolicited collaboration of their own.
Students defended their strategies, demonstrating a cross-disciplinary
understanding of their proposals.
Further, University X has demonstrated a
commitment to sustainability by pursuing a silver LEED rating for a new facility
within the college to be constructed in 2005, which will be among the first
group of LEED accredited institutional buildings in the state.
Ultimately, the intent of the project over time
will be to facilitate the reliance of students upon each other to bring complex
proposals to fruition by the exchange of ideas and critique. It is this type of
team effort that they will likely experience in industry, for which this type of
significant collaborative effort will prepare them.
References
Davis, M. L. and Matsen, S.
J. (1996) "Design Competitions: Does "Multidisciplinary" Contribute to the
Team Building
Experience." Proceedings of the 1996 Frontiers in Education Conference,
276-279.
Mazria, E. (2003) "It's the Architecture,
Stupid!" Solar Today, May/June,
pp. 48-51.
Merriam Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary:
Tenth Edition. (2004) Springfield, Ma, Merriam-Webster Inc., Merriam
Webster Online Available from the World Wide Web: (http:// www.m-w.com)
O’Brien, W., Soibelman, L., and Elvin, G.
(2003). “Collaborative Design Processes: An Active- and Reflective-Learning
Course in Multidisciplinary Collaboration” Journal of Construction
Education, ASC, Vol. 8, pp. 78-93
Robson, K. F., Caldwell, M., and Reynolds, J.
(1997). “Enhancing Communications in the Design and Construction Industry
through Multi-Disciplinary Education” Journal of Construction Education,
ASC, Vol.1, pp. 41-48
Septelka, D. M., (2000).
"Interdisciplinary
Team Building as Part of the Construction Education Process." Proceeding of
the Construction Congress VI, ASCE.
Septelka, D. (2002). “The Design-Build
Charrette – An Educational Model for Teaching Multidiscipline Team
Collaboration” ASC Proceedings of the 38th Annual Conference,
pp. 85-96
Sulbaran, T. (2003) “An Experience of a
Multidisciplinary Project Involving Architectural Design, Quantity Takeoff and
Virtual Reality Framed Within TAC-ABET Accreditation Criteria” ASC
Proceedings of the 39th Annual Conference, pp. 185-192
Wyrick, C., Pinkus, C., and
Caenapeel, C, (1996) "Team
Building and Project Planning Catalyst for Engineering Interdisciplinary Clinic"
Proceedings of the 1996 Frontiers in Education Conference, 1463-66.