The use of building information modelling (BIM) has increased in the global architecture, engineering, construction and owner-operated (AECO) industries. This increased use has contributed to a recognition by project stakeholders of its importance across the building life cycle, leading higher education institutions to rethink their AECO provisions. There has been much debate about how BIM should be employed in undergraduate curricula: should it be included as a stand-alone subject in a programme or as an underlying theme across the programme? Research has also been conducted into theories of practice with regard to BIM education. This article builds on previous research in the codeBIM project and describes students’ perceptions of current practice in the United States and the United Kingdom. The article begins with a literature review of current theories of BIM teaching in AECO and a summary of good practice. The use of focus groups is described and the findings from focus group sessions held in the United Kingdom and the United States are discussed. The authors identify six key areas required for BIM to be inclusive in higher education: collaborative curricula, space, teamwork, relevance to the industry, technical/technological skills and the role of the professor or lecturer. Each of these areas is discussed in light of the findings from the focus groups.

The construction industry worldwide is moving towards more collaborative working practices, such as integrated project delivery (IPD). The era of the Master Builder has passed; modern construction projects are too complex for one person to understand all aspects. New specialist disciplines are emerging, with experts engaged at earlier stages of the design process. However, this collaborative approach is not reflected in the current education of architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) professionals. Students of the separate disciplines are generally educated in isolation from the others. On graduation, they are then expected to be able to work in integrated teams without prior training in multidisciplinary teamwork. This contributes to the poor levels of trust and inadequate information sharing that plague the industry and prevents it from fully embracing the productivity savings that BIM (building information modelling) and IPD promise. Academics of the AEC disciplines also work in isolation, and the same courses are developed from scratch every time a new academic arrives at an institution. This paper proposes an integrated approach to the teaching of AEC subjects, including a framework to assist academics in adapting their existing curricula, and reports on some initial trials carried out in three Australian Universities.

-Several factors have contributed to the growth of BIM usage in the global construction industry, including availability of appropriate software and hardware tools, the opportunity to minimize errors, waste & cost and increasingly competitive markets [1][2]. An emerging approach in the construction industry is the use of 5D-BIM, by combining the traditional three dimensions of a BIM with the schedule as the fourth dimension and cost estimate as the fifth dimension [3]. This approach allows the contractors to better predict the cost of the project, the time-line of the project when these expenses are anticipated to occur, while simultaneously allowing the schedule to be optimized by considering the quantities of materials derived from the model and the productivity rate of construction crews. On the one hand 5D-BIM methods provide an excellent opportunity to connect processes in design, cost and construction methods; on the other hand they call for a significant shift in the way construction companies operate. It is unrealistic to commit extensive resources for a large construction company, towards a re-alignment of their internal processes, while continuing to be competitive and profitable. This paper considers how one construction company in the United States adopted the 5D-BIM methods, the challenges faced in implementing it within the company and the lessons learned in the process. A case-study method was used in an effort to understand the paradigm shift within the company in adopting 5D-BIM. Interviews with key personnel within the company were conducted and content analysis of the data was performed to describe the results. The results from this study show the intricacies of implementing a technology driven paradigm shift to a population of construction experts with a not-so erstwhile philosophy of success within the construction industry. The captains within the company communicated a great appreciation for the 5D-BIM concepts but were unwilling to delve into it whole-heartedly. Several reasons contributed to this attitude, including a reluctance to change by some, motivation to demonstrate immediate profitability and the lack of demand for such endeavours from the owner/designer community. However there were also personnel within the company that quickly adapted to the 5D way of thinking about construction and were keen to proceed with using the methodology on future projects. The advantages of using 5D-BIM and the problems encountered in implementing it are analysed in the results section of the paper.

No abstract

Prior to commencing at the University in 1996, she worked for fifteen years as a structural engineer in private industry on industrial, commercial and residential projects. She has a BE (Hons) from Adelaide University and a PhD from Curtin University in the area of structural engineering education. Her primary research interests are in cold-formed steel structures, engineering education and women in engineering. Julie co-authored a book on Gender Inclusive Engineering Education published by Routledge in 2010. She is currently leading a nationally funded project on Collaborative Building Design Education utilising BIM. In 2009 Julie was awarded the Australasian Association for Engineering Education National Teaching Excellence Award.