Case Study | Building Information Modeling Education

Case Study
Building Information Modeling Education for Construction
Engineering and Management.II: Procedures and
Implementation Case Study
E. Pikas1; R. Sacks2; and O.Hazzan3
Abstract: The construction industry needs graduate engineers with knowledge and skills in building information modelin
tailed set of 39 topics required for BIM competence in construction management, together with specific targets for comp
was recently compiled on the basis of research into the needs of industry. However, only a handful of universities have i
into their curricula for construction engineering and management (CEM) students. A set of guidelines for the integration
CEM curricula has been developed and tested at the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology. The BIM education interven
seven courses were planned, implemented, and evaluated over three semesters. The experiments showed that BIM sho
only as a topic in its own right, but more importantly, also as a tool for performing the engineering tasks taught within d
managementcourses.Further,knowledge of the softskills of information sharing and knowledge management,professionalroles,com-
mercial context, etc. are as important as the technology aspects. The work contributes a set of procedures that educato
their local requirements and build comprehensive BIM education into their CEM degree programs. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)C
.0000765.© 2013 American Society ofCivil Engineers.
CE Database subject headings: Building information models;Construction management;Engineering education;Information
technology (IT);Three-dimensionalmodels;Case studies.
Author keywords: Building information models;Construction engineering and management;Engineering education;Information
technology;Three-dimensionalmodels;Information technologies.
Introduction
The use ofbuilding information modeling (BIM)hasbecome
common worldwide (Eastman etal. 2011)and is continuing to
grow. Many governmental, public, and private construction clients
have established formalrequirements for its use in their projects
(Khemlani2012).A recentindustry reportcites the proportion
of heavy users among construction-industry design and manage-
ment professionals (defined as those using BIM on 60% or more
of their projects) to be 44% in Western Europe and 39% in North
America (Lee et al. 2012). As a result, there is a growing demand
for construction professionals with BIM knowledge and skills.
However,withoutprofessionaleducation and ongoing training,
neither the continuous improvementnor the knowledge manage-
mentnecessary for realizing the value propositions ofBIM can
be achieved (Sacks et al.2010).
Several universities are developing BIM-integrated curriculu
for students of construction engineering and management (CE
butthey representonly a handfulof the large numberof such
programsavailable worldwide(Barison and Santos2010a,b;
Becerik-Gerber etal. 2012),and in addition,there is significant
diversityin their content.A BIM education frameworkfor
CEM programs is needed to aid educators in establishing cohe
and comprehensive curricula,both within existing courses and
by introducing new courses.
Using the tables ofthe construction industry’s requirements
for BIM education forgraduate engineers specializing in CEM
established in earlierwork (Sacks and Pikas 2013),the authors
have proposed, tested, and revised such a framework.The frame-
work includes a setof 39 topics in three areas ofexpertise for
BIM-competentconstruction managers,a set of learning goals
for each topic at two levels of education (Bachelor’s degree le
or Master’s degree orequivalentlevelof continuing education),
and a setof courses and course module examples.The learning
goals are intended to be used as a benchmark against which p
posed curricula can be evaluated. The detailed courses were t
and evaluated at Technion over the course of this research. Th
of procedures developed can serve as a guide for educators to
tegrate the framework topics within the specific contexts of th
own programs.
Although the scope of this research was limited to CEM pro-
grams,many of the topics are relevant to other disciplines with
the architecture/engineering/construction professions.The setof
topics and learning goals may serve as starting points for deve
ment of BIM curricula for a range of degree courses in architec
and civilengineering.
1Graduate Research Assistant, Virtual Construction Laboratory, Faculty
of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Technion-Israel Institute of Tech-
nology,Haifa 32000,Israel.E-mail [e-mail]
2Associate Professor, Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa 32000, Israel (corresponding
author).E-mail:[e-mail]
3Associate Professor,Dept.of Education in Science and Technology,
Technion-IsraelInstituteof Technology,Haifa 32000,Israel.E-mail
[e-mail]
Note. This manuscript was submitted on November 27, 2012; approved
on June 20, 2013; published online on August 1, 2013. Discussion period
open until January 1, 2014; separate discussions must be submitted for in-
dividual papers.This paper is part of the Journal of Construction Engi-
neering and Management,© ASCE, ISSN 0733-9364/05013002(13)/
$25.00.
© ASCE 05013002-1 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Nebraska-Lincoln on 08/17/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

BIM Education in CEM Programs
Sacks and Pikas (2013) provide a thorough review of the literature
covering the state-of-the-art in university-level BIM education for
the broad architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) sector,
against the backdrop of university-level civil engineering education
and the Civil Engineering Body of Knowledge (Russell 2013). The
main findings were that (1) BIM was being adopted gradually, but
that most schools were still struggling to understand what and how
to teach, and (2) the majority of existing courses implement BIM on
a basic levelby teaching a specific tool(Barison and Santos
2010b). However, BIM can help students understand the complex-
ity of construction projects from both the product and process per-
spectives (Boon and Prigg 2011). In the following text, the authors
sharpen the focus on CEM. The BIM tool has been used as a ve-
hicle to teach the means and methods ofbuilding construction
(Deutsch 2011;Kymmell2008).Nawarietal. (2011) found that
using BIM can also deepen students’ understading of structures.
Lu et al. (2013) concluded that using BIM for construction prepa-
ration, to virtually build the facility, affords better understanding of
constructions tasks. Furthermore, using BIM can enhance students’
spatialperception (Glick etal. 2011).Another similar study that
focused on BIM-based estimation concluded that linking building
elements with databases reduces mistakes and time for compiling
estimates.Given thatuniversity students lack experience in con-
struction, teaching BIM methods for quantifying and costing major
systems can yield better understanding among students (Sylvester
and Dietrich 2010).
Lee and Hollar(2013)conducted a briefsurvey ofindustry
requirements and exisiting CEM programs.They rated five areas
of competence,mostof which concern BIM functionality [clash
detection, four-dimensional (4D) modeling, etc.]. They concluded
thatBIM education mustbe adopted broadly acrossmultiple
courses,to satisfy the growing need for BIM-educated engineers.
To realize the promise of BIM education, construction engineers
must be equipped not only with the skills of using technology, but
also with skills to collaborate in multidiciplinary integrated project-
delivery systems.These aspects should be taughtin the capstone
courses (Solnosky et al.2013).
Molavi and Shapoorian (2012) proposed a framework for devel-
oping a BIM education that will bridge the gap between industry
needs and university education. They emphasized that curricula de-
velopment should also consider innovations such as green building
and integrated projectdelivery.
In a previous case study (Hyatt2011),three differenttrends
were integrated into a scheduling course, namely, lean construction,
sustainability,and BIM.The LastPlanner system (Ballard 2000)
was used as a generaloutline forthe course,which proved to
be highly successful in engaging students in these important topics.
Goedert et al. (2011) used BIM and other innovative technolo-
gies to develop a concept for educating CEM students/practitioners
in a virtual environment, which simulated the decision-making pro-
cess for optimizing the resourcing of projects. However, this appli-
cation cannot be considered BIM education per se, but rather use of
BIM as a supporting technology to develop an educational tool.
Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011) mapped the current status of BIM,
sustainability,collaboration,and virtual-learningapplications
within AEC education.They surveyed deans,departmentchairs,
and program directors of488 U.S.programs accredited by the
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology, the National
Architecture Accrediting Board,American Councilfor Construc-
tion Education,and the American Schools of Construction.They
received 101 responses, of which 26% were construction manage-
ment programs. The first part of the survey focused on the level of
BIM integration for programs thatalready offered BIM courses.
The results mustbe read with caution due to the smallnumber
of construction managementprogramsresponding and due to
the factthatit is likely thatthose who had already developed
BIM content were more likely to respond than those who had n
The findingsshow that60% of construction management
programshavesomeBIM component.Although thenumber
seems high,mostof these include a BIM topic in only one or
two courses, and most courses with BIM components in constr
tion management programs are elective. Construction manage
programs are the latest adopters, but have a rapid deploymen
The teaching methods in construction management programs
the approximate proportion of programs including each metho
include introduction to BIM concepts (40%);BIM assignments
merged into the projectwork in classes (67%);stand-alone BIM
courses (67%);BIM immersed into existing courses and design
projects (60%);and BIM merged into research projects (28%).
The major reasons cited by those who have not yet incorpor
BIM in their programs are that there is no one to teach BIM. Ot
significant constraints were insufficient resources,no room in the
curriculum, and no accreditation requirement for BIM. As show
Fig. 1, of approximately 27 construction managementprograms,
approximately 65% teach BIM for constructability, 4D scheduli
and model-based estimating, followed by design (55%), visual
tion (50%),sustainability (40%),and costcontrol (35%).
Case Study Procedure
In preparation forthe case study,the educationalapproach and
the curricula for CEM BIM courses were developed through the
following steps:
• Analysis of the existing curricula of CEM track courses at Te
nion against the set of requirements established for industr
determine which courses were suitable for experimentation
whatBIM educational contentshould be added.This analysis
was performed based on the results of gap analysis carried
other courses from major universities (Stanford,University of
Southern California,Georgia Tech)and reported previously
(Sacks and Pikas 2013).
• Selection of potential courses for BIM integration by carefull
examining the existing CEM curricula. The logical sequence
courses was keptin mind to enable students’ knowledge and
skills to mature through the years of their studies.
• Running an introductory seminar to educate the educators i
terms of the potentialuse of BIM in the selected courses.
• Developmentand preparation ofBIM course contentfor the
set of courses selected for experimentation, based on the c
syllabi, and abiding by the principle that the original course
tent should not be degraded. The expected level of outcom
each course was first established subjectively by authors ba
on the existing course content, and then discussed with the
fessors who taught each course to identify and correct any
understandings.Implementation ofthe proposed courses and
contents during three consecutive semesters and assessme
students’ learning.The results of students’ achievements were
monitored through test scores and interviews with educator
students.Students’ skills,knowledge,and confidence were as-
sessed before and after each course using a questionnaire t
included tables with the framework topicsand achievement
levels for each. Some students were also interviewed after
pleting the courses.
• Evaluation of the results and refinementof the procedures to
develop BIM-integrated curriculums.
© ASCE 05013002-2 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Nebraska-Lincoln on 08/17/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

The cognitive domain ofBloom’s taxonomy ofeducational
outcomes (Bloom et al. 1956), applied to each of the 39 topics de-
fined for BIM competence for construction managers (Sacks and
Pikas 2013), formed the basis for planning and assessing students’
levels of achievement. Six levels are defined as follows: 1, Know;
2, Understand; 3, Apply; 4, Analyze; 5, Synthesize; and 6, Evalu-
ate. For full details of the BIM competence levels, readers are re-
ferred to Tables 1, 3, 4 and 5 in the companion paper (Sacks and
Pikas 2013).
Selection and Evaluation of Courses for
Experimentation
The CEM degree track atTechnion is similarto thatof most
universities thatofferCEM as a specialization within civiland
environmental engineering. Students are required to complete 156
course credits.These include 40 credits offoundation subjects
(mathematics, sciences, etc.), 46.5 credits of mandatory civil engi-
neering subjects, 54 credits in the CEM track, two senior-year cap-
stone projects (one in CEM and the other in a different branch of
civil engineering),and 10 credits of elective courses (humanities
and others).The seven courses detailed in Table 1 were selected
from this program for experimentation.Their selection was based
on the following two guidelines: (1) the courses should represent
both design and management disciplines; and (2) they should cover
the full range of courses from basic freshman year, through th
of the bachelor’s degree and extending to graduate studies.
Of the seven courses selected (those listed in Table 1) only
(014008, 014617, and 018625) had any BIM content at the ou
(019627—Advanced BIM—was a new course whose curriculum
had not yet been determined). The depth and breadth of their
tentwere evaluated according to the defined topics and achiev
mentlevels.The evaluation aimed to determine the collective
gap that should be fulfilled either through additions to these c
or through a new course (019627—Advanced BIM).
Table 2 provides the detailed analysis of the courses’ BIM co
tent.GraphicalEngineering Information (014008) is a freshman
course that introduces engineering graphics, but whose main
tentis BIM. It was introduced in this form in 2005 (Sacks and
Barak 2010).Although the analysis showed thatit is achieving
more than planned,for 17 of 21 topics it achieves only either the
know or understand level.This indicates thatstudents are intro-
duced to many topics on a basic level but not to any of the fol
topics in depth. The table also reflects the focus on learning to
for modeling and producing drawings.
Planning and Controlof Construction Projects (014617) is an
advanced course in which students are required to prepare qu
takeoffs, detailed cost estimates, location-based schedules, sit
outs, and cash-flow analyses. At the time of assessment, only
tity takeoff was performed using BIM tools.
Fig. 1. BIM topics taughtby construction managementprograms (data from Becerik-Gerber etal.2011)
Table 1.Technion Courses Selected for Experimentation
Code Course Credits Status Semester
014008 GraphicalEngineering Information 3.0 Foundation: Compulsory 1 (4)
014123 Concrete Structures 1 3.5 Mandatory civil engineering 4
014617 Planning and Controlof Construction Projects 3.0 Construction engineering and managementtrack 5 (6)
014609 Construction Mechanization 2.5 Construction engineering and managementtrack 7
014601 Senior-Year Projectin Construction Management 2.5 Capstone project 8
019627 Advanced Building Information Modeling 3.0 Graduate elective Graduate
018625 InternationalCollaboration in Construction Management2.0 Graduate elective Graduate
© ASCE 05013002-3 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Nebraska-Lincoln on 08/17/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

The InternationalCollaboration in Construction Management
course (018625) is a project-based course in which teams com-
posed ofstudentsfrom multiple universitiesdispersed around
the world prepare schedules,costestimates,and risk analyses
(Soibelman et al. 2011). The specifications for the buildings used
for the term projects are provided as sets of building information
models(architectural,structural,and mechanical,electricaland
plumbing models). Students use a variety of BIM tools to collabo-
rate on their projects. The models were used for preparing product
breakdown structures,work breakdown structures,development
and proposal of design changes, selection of construction methods,
quantity takeoff, cost estimation, scheduling, and risk assessment. In
general,most of the expected BIM objectives for this course were
achieved, although for some, the level of achievement differed from
the planned baseline. For example, the assessed level of achievement
for interoperability (Topic 2.6) was understand instead of apply as
was expected. The same applies to rapid generation of multiple de-
sign alternatives (Topic 3.2) and 4D visualization ofconstruction
schedules (Topic 3.15). This shows that the learning and consequent
use of BIM for collaborative working was insufficient.Thus,the
potential for introducing additional BIM topics, such as BIM stand-
ardization (Topic 1.15),cloud computing,networking,big-room
equipment (Topic 2.8), selection of BIM technologies/processes/tools
(Topic 2.9),and clash detection (Topic 3.8),was recognized.
As can be seen in Table 2,the levels of achievement required
were only met for a small number of the topics (1.1, 1.3, 2.1, 2.2,
3.5, and 3.9), all of which represent basic BIM skills. Review of the
content over the three areas (work processes, BIM technology, and
BIM functionality) revealed that the area of BIM work processes is
covered less wellthan the others.
The gap between whatindustry expects and what engineering
students were being taught was clear. Overall, this result matched
with the findings of the gap analysis of the state-of-the-art of BIM
education internationally (Sacks and Pikas 2013). A small number
of universities offer BIM content in just one to three courses, and
mostinclude only a limited number of topics.In lightof the re-
quirements for BIM skills expressed by the construction industry,
this is clearly insufficient.
BIM Education Interventions
In the nextstep of the research,interventions in specific courses
were planned,prepared,implemented,and evaluated to test ways
in which the BIM requirements defined by industry could be in
grated into the curriculum asa whole.Of the seven possible
courses,fourwere selected forexperimentation.Targetachieve-
mentlevels were setfor each,as outlined in Table 3.
The firstchallenge was to involve and educate the professors
and teaching assistants (TAs)who had little orno background
in BIM. A series of workshops were held in which the concepts
were taught and tools were introduced. However, the primary
was to define appropriate ways to introduce new teaching me
that would enhance the teaching of the core subjects. Some p
sors expressed concern that introducing BIM might consume t
thatshould be spentteaching the underlying engineering topics.
This was a particular concern for a course such as Concrete St
tures, the core purpose of which is to teach the basics of reinfo
concrete design, and not information modeling. Direct involve
of the course faculty was perceived to be essential to achievin
appropriate balance, and this was one of the key issues monit
and evaluated through the experiments.
Depending on the course content and needs, BIM-related st
materials, tutorials, and lectures were developed. These were
duced to courses at different times and using different approa
as was agreed with the professor of each course.In some cases,
educators were trained to teach BIM content, whereas in other
uations the authors participated in the lectures or tutorials to t
specific topics.
Validation: Experiments,Case Studies, and
Discussion
This section summarizes the experiments conducted in the co
thatwere selected forinvestigation.It includesdetailsof the
contents planned,theirimplementation,monitoring ofstudents’
progress and evaluation of the results.
Table 2.Evaluation of the BIM Contentof the Selected Courses before ExperimentalIntervention
Requirement
Number Knowledge area covered
Required achievement
level
Assessed achievement
level in courses
First-degree
Graduate
courses 014008 014617 018625
1.1 Overall construction design,managementand contracting procedures 3 4 2 3 3
1.3 Advantages and disadvantages of BIM for design and construction processes3 4 2 3 2
1.7 Information integrity 2 3 1 1 2
1.10 Management of information flows 3 5 — 1 2
2.1 Basic BIM operating skills 3 4 3 3 2
2.2 Modeling with standard catalog elements 3 3 3 — —
2.4 Massing/solid modeling 3 4 2 — —
2.6 Interoperability (file formats,standards,and structure for data sharing) 2 3 1 1 3
2.7 Communication tools,media,channels,and feedback 3 5 2 — 3
2.9 Choose rightBIM technologies/processes/tools for specific purposes 3 5 2 1 3
3.3 Energy analysis 2 2 1 — —
3.4 Structuralanalysis 2 2 1 — —
3.5 Automated quantity takeoff and costestimation 3 4 3 3 3
3.6 Check code compliance 2 — 1 — —
3.8 Clash detection 3 4 2 2 —
3.9 Automated generation of drawings and documents 2 3 3 — —
3.13 Discrete event simulation 1 2 — 1 —
3.14 4D visualization of construction schedules 3 5 1 3 2
3.16 Exportdata for computer-controlled fabrication 2 3 1 — —
Note: Numerical achievement level codes are defined in Table 1 of Sacks and Pikas (2013); requirements that are not addressed are
© ASCE 05013002-4 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Nebraska-Lincoln on 08/17/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Concrete Structures
This is a typical design course, and as such BIM tools were intro-
duced through severaltutorials and individualconsultation as an
alternative way for students to prepare their final project drawings.
Participation in the experiment was voluntary as the course policy
was not to restrict students’ choice of tools, whether hand drafting
or two-dimensionalcomputer-aided design (2D CAD),or now,
BIM. A competition with prizes was instituted as a motivating fac-
tor for developing BIM. The competition called for students to de-
velop their project design, model the project, and produce drawings
in Tekla Structures software. They were required to fill out an ini-
tial survey,to submita progress-monitoring reportonce every
week,and to deliver the projectand publish the modelto Tekla
BIMSight.Four 2-h training sessions on the use of the software
were provided and students were given the opportunity to consult
when needed.
The intervention in this course was tried over a single seme
using Tekla Structures. At the end of the semester, each of the
dents was interviewed. None of them had any prior experience
2D CAD. They found that while the thinking behind the BIM too
was simple to understand, some aspects of using the tool for m
eling were more complicated than they expected.They feltthat
these obstacles, related to ease of use of the tool, could have
mitigated if there were better self-learning materials, more ha
on experience on sample projects through tutorials,better align-
mentof course objectives,and if the teaching staffwere more
experienced with the tool and able to demonstrate more real-w
examples.
The students all stated that there was a relatively steep lea
curve,and therefore,greatcommitmentwas required to study
the tool.A significantbenefitthatthey cited was thatusing a
BIM application helped them understand the structure,and more
Table 3.Achievement-Level Targets Set for Courses Included in the Experimentation Trials
Requirement
number Knowledge area
Targetachievementlevels (assessed levels)
014123
Concrete
structures
014617
Planning
and control
014601
Capstone
project
019627
Advanced
BIM
1.1 Overallconstruction design,management,and contracting procedures 2 3 (3) 4 5
1.2 Facility maintenance and management — — — 2
1.3 Advantages and disadvantages of BIM for design and construction processes1 2 (3) 3 4
1.4 Model progression specification and level of detail concepts 2 2 3 4
1.5 Change managementprocedures — 2 — 4
1.6 Data security — 1 — 3
1.7 Information integrity — 2 (1) 2 3
1.8 Design coordination — 2 2 4
1.9 Constructability review and analysis — 2 3 4
1.10 Management of information flows — 2 (1) 2 4
1.11 Contractualand legalaspects of BIM implementation — — — 3
1.12 BIM standardization (in organizations and projects) — — — 3
2.1 Basic BIM operating skills 3 3 (3) 3 4
2.2 Modeling with standard catalog elements 3 2 3 4
2.3 Creating and modeling with custom elements — — 3 4
2.4 Massing/solid modeling — — — 2
2.5 Centraldatabases/information repositories — 2 2 2
2.6 Interoperability (file formats,standards,and structure for data sharing) — 1 (1) 3 4
2.7 Communication tools,media,channels,and feedback 3 2 3 4
2.8 Ways to store and share information (cloud computing,networking,big-room
equipment,etc.)
— 2 — 3
2.9 Choose rightBIM technologies/processes/tools for specific purposes 2 2 (1) 3 5
2.10 Laser scanning — — — 3
3.1 Create renderings and representations for aesthetic evaluation — — 2 3
3.2 Rapid generation of multiple design alternatives — — 2 4
3.3 Energy analysis — — — 2
3.4 Structuralanalysis 1 — — 5
3.5 Automated quantity takeoff and cost estimation — 3 (3) 4 5
3.6 Check code compliance — — — 2
3.7 Evaluation of conformance to program/clientvalues — — — 3
3.8 Clash detection — 2 (2) — 5
3.9 Automated generation of drawings and documents 3 — — 3
3.10 Multiuser editing of a single discipline model; multiuser viewing of merged or
separate multidiscipline models
— — — 3
3.11 Rapid generation and evaluation of construction-plan alternatives — 2 4 5
3.12 Automated generation of construction tasks — — — 3
3.13 Discrete-event simulation — 1 (1) — —
3.14 4D visualization of construction schedules — 3 (2) 4 5
3.15 Process status monitoring and visualization — 2 — 4
3.16 Exportdata for computer-controlled fabrication — — — 5
3.17 Integration with projectpartner (supply chain) databases — — — 3
Note: Numerical achievement level codes are defined in Table 1 of Sacks and Pikas (2013); data provided in brackets are the existing
wherever relevant.
© ASCE 05013002-5 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Nebraska-Lincoln on 08/17/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

particularly,how reinforcementshould be placed in concrete ele-
ments. Despite the difficulties, all three students received very
grades relative to their classmates who used 2D CAD or manu
drafting.High grades are given in the course notfor the quality
of engineering drawings but for ability in reinforced concrete e
gineering.Thatability was presumably enhanced by the deeper
understanding of the three-dimensional (3D) structure that the
ported gaining from the authors of this study. They rated their
of achievement for use of tools as 3 (apply), meaning that the
confidentthatthey could use BIM in the future forreinforced
concrete modeling.
Tables 4–6 summarize students’achievements in relation to
what was planned with respect to all of the four courses. With
spect to the Concrete Structures course, for three items in par
whose targetswere notmet(1.1,2.9, and 3.4),an evaluation
showed that the targets set were unrealistic. For example, the
structuralanalysis (3.4) was notachieved,because there was no
room in the course content for discussion of the possibilities o
tegrating structural analysis tools. Integrating analysis tools sh
be an objective of a subsequentcourse on concrete structures.
Planning and Control of Construction Projects
This is the penultimate course in the CEM track, preparing stud
for their capstone project. All aspects of management and me
are integrated and applied for solving problems and making d
sionsfor delivering construction projects.As explained in the
aforementioned analysis, BIM was already used within the cou
but only for quantity takeoff. Intervention in this course consis
of introducing use of a comprehensive BIM-based software pac
age for quantity takeoff, estimating, location-based scheduling
layout, cash-flow analysis, work breakdown and cost analysis,
for process visualization (4D CAD) and construction control.
This intervention was trialed over two consecutive semeste
with both localand internationalstudents.With the exception of
two introductory homework stilldone using critical-path method
software,all homework and the term projectwere now to be
delivered using the BIM software.The experiments were imple-
mented by training TAs to use the software, adapting the tuto
homework,and projectassignmentdefinitions to reflectthe new
ways ofworking,and supporting the professorand TAs during
the course with advice on training and procedure. The course
were introduced to the software in three sessions,whose content
was as follows:
• Introduction,user interface,modelmanagement,model-based
takeoffitemsand takeoffquantities,node concept,formula
editor,and costestimation with assemblies.
• Locationbreakdownstructure,locationsystems,creation
of projecttask list,and mapping tasks to resources in cost
estimation.
• Scheduling environment,Ganttand flow-line schedules,pro-
gram networking (schedule logic),types of task dependencies
(location,organizational,and technological),assignmentof
resources to tasks,cash-flow analysis,and risk analysis.
During the first trial, the TAs encountered technical difficult
associated with incompatible versions of BIM files,in which the
BIM-authoring software wasupgraded butthe CEM package
did notyethave the appropriate importroutine available.This is
typicalof interoperability problems encountered in industry from
time to time.The resultwas thatthe finalhomework reverted to
use of the non-BIM software used previously. In the second tria
software was updated and students were able to finish their p
as planned,despite challengesimposed by aging hardware in
computer classes.
Table 4.BIM Contentin Selected Courses in the Category of Processes and General Knowledge Area
Number
BIM-related knowledge/skill:
processes/generalknowledge area
First-degree courses Graduate courses
Required
014008 014123 014617 014609 014601 Required 019627 018625
AssessedPlanned Actual Planned Actual AssessedPlanned Actual Planned Actual Assessed
1.1 Overallconstruction design,management,and contracting
procedures
3 2 2 1 3 3 2 4 4 4 5 4 2
1.2 Facility maintenance and management 1 — — — — — — — — 2 2 1 —
1.3 Advantages and disadvantages of BIM for design and
construction processes
3 2 1 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 4 4 —
1.4 Model progression specification and levelof detailconcepts 3 — 2 2 2 2 1 3 2 4 4 3 —
1.5 Change managementprocedures 3 — — — 3 2 — — 2 3 4 2 —
1.6 Data security 2 — — — 1 — — — — 3 3 — —
1.7 Information integrity 2 2 — — 2 — — 2 2 3 3 3 —
1.8 Design coordination 2 1 — — 2 — — 2 2 4 4 4 —
1.9 Constructability review and analysis 3 — — — 2 — 2 3 3 4 4 4 —
1.10 Managementof information flows 3 — — — 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 2
1.11 Contractualand legal aspects of BIM implementation 2 — — — — — — — — 3 3 1 —
1.12 BIM standardization (in organizations and projects) 2 — — — — — — — 2 3 3 1 —
Note:Numerical achievement level codes are defined in Table 1 of Sacks and Pikas (2013); the table data provide planned versus achieved for experimental courses,assessed for existing courses;industry
requirements are summarized in Tables 3–5 of Sacks and Pikas (2013).
© ASCE 05013002-6 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Nebraska-Lincoln on 08/17/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

At the end of each semester,teaching staff and students were
interviewed. The TAs of the first trial were frustrated by the ne
to divert their students’ attention to technical issues, but they
theless highlighted the potential advantages of the software in
senting the differentpracticalCEM actions in a holistic manner,
ratherthan as disparate parts.An importantdifference between
the two semester groups thatcame to lightwas thatthe students
in the second trial,those of the internationalengineering school,
found the learning curve foroperation ofthe BIM tools to be
significantly less steep than the students ofthe firsttrial.The
international students had studied the Graphic Engineering Inf
mation course just one semester before studying the Construc
Planning course, whereas the students of the first trial had a g
three semesters between the courses.This notonly indicates the
value of the first course in preparing students,but also highlights
the factthatit may be offered too early in their degree program.
Senior-Year CEM Project
The senior-year project is a compulsory capstone project for C
students. Students are expected to integrate all their knowled
perform management functions including cost estimation, bud
ing,proposing and choosing between technologicalalternatives,
planning production and site layout,choosing proper machinery
for construction, organizing work, choosing, and assigning nec
sary resources,etc.
The intervention planned for this course was to offer studen
the possibility to deliver their project using BIM tools as an alte
native to traditionalmethods.It was tried overtwo consecutive
semesters.Students who selected BIM were given additionalre-
quirements,such as location-based scheduling using the model
and preparation of 4D visualizations, and therefore, they were
fered additional training in the use of the tools. Approximately
third of the students elected the BIM option. Their motivation w
clarified in a shortsurvey distributed to the students in this and
other courses. The 39 respondents rated the requirements of i
try and potential advantage when seeking employment as the
significant motivating factors for studying BIM tools, with aver
scores of 4.23 and 4.17 on a scale of 1–5,respectively;the least
motivating factors were an interestin technology (3.69) and the
software supports learning in the coursework (3.46).
One ofthe projectmentors from industry and the volunteer
studentswere given two refreshercoursesin Autodesk Revit,
and three training sessions in Vico Office,structured in the same
way as those described previously for the Planning and Contro
course.The students were also coached by a TA who specialized
in the BIM-delivery track.
Fig. 2 presents examples of the differentCEM tasks thatstu-
dents completed. The initial modeling stage took a relatively l
time (half of the semester), but students found that modeling
them improve their understanding of the projects as they were
tually virtually building them. This gave them a good basis for
forming managementfunctions subsequently,which underscores
the value of requiring students to model their own projects, ra
than providing them with preprepared design models.
Some of the benefits students highlighted in their postcours
interviews are extraction ofaccurate quantities,visualization of
alternativesfor equipmentselection and sitelayout,location-
based production planning,cash-flow analysis,and risk analysis
(Monte-Carlo simulation),all based on the same database.Fig. 3
compares the workflow taughtbefore the intervention with that
implemented in the experiment, showing both iterations and a
tionalsteps thatthe latterprocess facilitated.Once the building
modelwas compiled and the construction process was planned
Table 5.BIM Contentin Selected Courses in the Category of BIM and Related Technology
Number BIM-related knowledge/skill:BIM and related technology
First-degree courses Graduate Courses
Required
014008 014123 014617 014609 014601 Required 019627 018625
AssessedPlannedActual PlannedActual AssessedPlannedActual PlannedActual Assessed
2.1 Basic BIM operating skills 3 3 3 3 3 3 — 3 3 3 4 4 3
2.2 Modeling with standard catalog elements 3 3 3 3 2 3 — 3 3 3 4 4 —
2.3 Creating and modeling with custom elements 3 1 — — — — — 3 3 3 4 5 —
2.4 Massing/solid modeling 3 2 — — — — — — — 3 2 3 —
2.5 Centraldatabases/information repositories 2 — — — 2 3 2 2 2 4 2 1 —
2.6 Interoperability (file formats,standards,and structure for data sharing)3 1 — — — 2 — 3 2 5 4 4 2
2.7 Communication tools,media,channels,and feedback 4 1 3 3 3 2 — 3 2 5 4 4 3
2.8 ways to store and share information (cloud computing,networking,
big-room equipment,etc.)
2 — — — 2 3 — — — 3 3 3 —
2.9 Choose rightBIM technologies/processes/tools for specific purposes3 2 2 1 2 — 1 3 2 5 5 4 —
2.10 Laser scanning 2 1 — — — — 1 — — 3 3 2 —
Note:Numericalachievement level codes are defined in Table 1 of Sacks and Pikas (2013); the table data provide planned versus achieved for experimentalcourses,assessed for existing courses.
© ASCE 05013002-7 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Nebraska-Lincoln on 08/17/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Table 6. BIM Contentin Selected Courses in the Category of BIM Applications/Functionalities
Number
BIM-related knowledge/skill:
BIM and related technology
First-degree courses Graduate courses
Required
(App.I)
014008 014123 014617 014609 014601
Required
(App.I) 019627 018625
Assessed Planned Actual Planned Actual Assessed Planned Actual Planned Actual Assessed
3.1 Create renderings and representations for aesthetic
evaluation
2 1 — — — — — 2 — 3 3 3 —
3.2 Rapid generation of multiple design alternatives 2 — — — — — — 2 2 3 4 4 1
3.3 Energy analysis 2 1 — — — — — — — 3 2 2 —
3.4 Structuralanalysis 2 1 1 — — — — — — 3 5 3 —
3.5 Automated quantity takeoff and cost estimation 3 3 — — 3 3 2 4 4 5 5 5 3
3.6 Check code compliance 2 1 — — — — — — — — 2 2 —
3.7 Evaluation of conformance to program/clientvalues 2 — — — — — — — — — 3 3 —
3.8 Clash detection 3 2 — — — — 2 — — 5 5 2 —
3.9 Automated generation of drawings and documents 3 3 3 3 — — — — — — 3 — —
3.10 Multiuser editing of a single discipline model;multiuser
viewing of merged or separate multidiscipline models
3 — — — — — — — — — 3 — —
3.11 Rapid generation and evaluation of construction plan
alternatives
3 — — — 2 3 — 4 — 5 5 3 —
3.12 Automated generation of construction tasks — — — — — — — — — — 3 4 —
3.13 Discrete-event simulation 1 — — — 1 1 — — — 2 — — —
3.14 4D visualization of construction schedules 3 1 — — 3 3 2 4 — 5 5 4 2
3.15 Process status monitoring and visualization 3 — — — 2 2 2 — — 5 4 3 —
3.16 Exportdata for computer-controlled fabrication 2 1 — — — — — — — 3 5 5 —
3.17 Integration with projectpartner (supply chain) databases2 — — — — — — — — 3 3 — —
Note:Numericalachievementlevelcodes are defined in Table 1 of Sacks and Pikas (2013); the table data provide planned versus achieved for experimentalcourses,assessed for existing courses.
© ASCE 05013002-8 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Nebraska-Lincoln on 08/17/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

students were able to perform the additional tasks (cash-flow analy-
sis, risk analysis, and 4D visualization) with minimal effort. One of
the most significant successes of the intervention was the judgment
of the teaching staffs, as reflected in the final grades in both semes-
ters,that the quality of the projects produced in the BIM process
was, from a professional standpoint, significantly superior to that of
the other students’ projects.
One of the students’ review comments had particular insight:
“These tools help you give a better understanding of the big picture
but still make detailed information available. I think the more ex-
perienced people are in construction management,the more they
can benefitfrom the BIM process as they have more real-life
knowledgeto apply within themodels.” Many indicated that
BIM would increase the importance of preplanning,as now the
building can be builtfirstvirtually,before being builtin reality,
enabling a more holistic view of project delivery and identification
of potential risks and action where necessary. One of the students
added thatBIM would change interpersonalcommunication:“I
mean how the communication willtake place between different
parties involved.The new tools facilitate the processes with the
platform; they provide a common language between all the parties.”
The evaluation ofthe difference between the contentof the
course as planned and the actuallevel of achievement is detailed
in Tables 4–6. In general, the BIM education objectives were m
with some exceptions,which are as follows:
• Change management(1.7) was notinitially planned,butwas
introduced in the tutorials to explain the impact of model ch
to managementaspects.
• BIM standard workflows (1.15) had to be introduced becaus
the dependence of the BIM application for CEM on appropria
modeling (in the model-authoring tool) of objects in a way s
table for costand task classifications.
• Issues of interoperability (2.6) were notdealtwith because a
custom direct one-way translator that used the application p
gramming interface of the authoring tool was used to expor
models to the CEM application.
• Select BIM tools and processes (2.9) were not learned becau
students were given only one alternative process. Expectati
that they could exercise judgment in this regard were prem
BIM Graduate Course
Advanced Building Information Modeling was an entirely new
course thatwas developed and prototyped during this research
(to date, it has been offered two times). The objective was to t
students to apply theoretical knowledge of BIM in the develop
of a building project from conceptual design, through engineer
Fig. 2. Examples of students’ final project work, including (clockwise from top left to center): cash-flow analysis, floor plan, res
quantity takeoff,location breakdown,site layout,location-based scheduling,and 4D process visualization
© ASCE 05013002-9 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Nebraska-Lincoln on 08/17/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

and construction-engineering analysis,to detailed design and
fabrication of models using rapid prototyping technologies. It uses
formallectures,tutorials,and a hands-on multidisciplinary group
project.The course is a jointoffering ofthe Faculties ofCivil
and Environmental Engineering (Structural Engineering and Con-
struction Management Unit) and the Faculty of Architecture. In ad-
dition to advanced BIM concepts and technologies, the course also
aims to provide understanding of how various but interdependent
disciplines work and think,and how they can collaborate.
The weekly content includes a 2-h lecture, 2 h of hands-on tuto-
rial, and group and individual homework. The modules covered are
the following:
• Introduction to BIM
• BIM in architecturaldesign and manufacturing
• BIM in structuralengineering
• BIM in CEM
• Parametric design and modeling
• Collaboration and interoperability
• BIM-supported design simulations and analysis
• BIM-supportedconstructionengineeringsimulationsand
analysis
• BIM contractprovisions
• Detailing and manufacturing
• Production of3D prototypes and use ofcomputernumerical
controlmachines
The primary deliverable,and thevehiclefor collaboration
among studentteams,is the course project.The projectrequires
students to design, analyze, and detail a small structure, and to fab-
ricate a scale model of it. The project brief called for a ticket sales
kiosk at the entrance to a nature reserve. In addition to defining the
buildings’ function and intent, specific process requirements were
set,including,design the building parametrically,with nonrepeti-
tive parts;coordinate the design among the differentdisciplines;
present the whole building solution to the faculty using immersive
virtual reality in the cave automatic virtual environment (CAVE);
produce a small-scale model of the building using 3D printing.
As a prototype, the course was limited to one group of grad
consisting ofthree CEM students (who each focused on differ-
entaspects),one structuralengineering student,one architecture
student,and one digitalprototyping and manufacturing student.
Studentshad individuallearning assignmentsas well as the
group project.After some introduction to BIM applications,tuto-
rials were dedicated to the developmentof the term project.The
team membersdeveloped a schematic design fortheirproject
through a number of iterations.
In the designdevelopmentphase,structuralanalysiswas
performed using Atir STRAP software.The architecturalmodel
was exported from McNeelRhinoceros (Rhino) to STRAP using
DXF file format.The projectteam then prepared the modelfor
final reporting,including design ofthe interior(performed in
Revit, exchanged through DWG), shell detailing for manufactu
(Grasshopper within Rhino), model coordination (Autodesk Nav
works), visualization in the CAVE (Autodesk 3DS Max and EON
Studio),costestimating and scheduling (Vico Office),and digital
prototyping/3D printing (in AlphaCAM and ZCorp software). Fig
illustrates the sequence of use of the software tools and the d
exchanges made between them.
In the staff members’ and students’ evaluations of the cour
they highlighted the following lessons learned:
• Various disciplines think and work in differentways;
• The variety ofBIM tools available forcomplex projectsis
limited;
• Traditional BIM tools are inefficient for producing complex a
free-form designs;
• Interoperability and information-exchange management is a
aspect of BIM projects;and
• Model coordination for developing and sharing the right con
at the righttime is a majormanagementchallenge forBIM
projects.
The content of the course lectures appeared to be timely an
developed.However,students pointed outthatsome BIM topics
they considered relevantwere omitted,such asnationalBIM
Fig. 3. Alternative workflows for the capstone project,with and without comprehensive BIM tools
© ASCE 05013002-10 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Nebraska-Lincoln on 08/17/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

standards, model coordination management, and BIM standardiza-
tion within organizations and projects. The biggest challenge during
the course was the complexity of the term project. Whether because
of the problem posed or poor choice of potential solution, the team
spent relatively more time on designing the facility than on anything
else,leaving less time to dealwith other BIM aspects.From the
perspective of collaboration between disciplines it was instructive,
but from the perspective of using advanced BIM technologies for
delivering projects, it was less successful. The recommendation was
to assign a simplerproject-design task to balance collaborative
design and use of BIM technologies.
Results
In general, the use of BIM enhanced students’ learning of engineer-
ing topics.This was declared by students in the Concrete Struc-
tures,the ProjectControl,and the capstone projectcourses,who
commented on the learning benefits afforded by clear visualization
of productand process information using BIM.
Tables 4–6 provide an overview of the state of BIM content
across the seven courses selected at the end of the research period.
For the courses in which experiments were conducted, it shows the
planned versus the achieved levels. The values for the other courses
reflectthe assessments of their status atthe same pointin time.
Although it appears that a significant portion of what was planned
was achieved,some topics require more attention.
In the area of BIM processes,teaching of the following topics
must be improved: change management (1.7),data security (1.8),
contractualand legalaspects of BIM implementation (1.14),and
BIM standardization (1.15). The last three topics refer to the man-
agement of BIM models. They could be improved in the Advanced
BIM course by introducing studentsto legalimplicationsand
standardsof BIM adoption,and by requiring studentsto plan
and monitor their project BIM process.
In the area of BIM technologies, most of the expected compe-
tencies were achieved. This reflects the focus on technology in the
existing courses.
In the area of BIM applications and functionalities, planned lev-
els were notachieved for structuralanalysis (3.4),process status
monitoring and visualization (3.16), clash detection (3.8), and rapid
generation and evaluation ofplan alternatives (3.12).These are
topics thatshould be integrated into bachelor’s degree courses,
and mustbe taken into consideration forfuture improvement.
Multiuser editing of a single discipline model (3.10) and multiuser
viewing of merged or separate multidiscipline models (3.11) w
not given enough attention,and should be incorporated in the
Advanced BIM course.
Refined Proposal of Procedures to Develop
BIM-Integrated Curricula
The overall approach for developing a BIM-integrated curriculu
followed the plan–do–check–adjust(PDCA) cycle (Azharet al.
2010;Calado etal. 2009).As laid outin the “Case Study Pro-
cedure” section, the overall process for integrating BIM was as
lows: analysisof existing coursesand curricula,selection of
courses for BIM integration,involvementof educators,develop-
ment of BIM content for selected courses and defining the exp
levels of achievement, implementation and monitoring, and fin
improvements.This methodology was applied through three con-
secutive semesters of studies,with three PDCA cycles.
The refined procedure can therefore be stated as follows:
• Review the industry requirements laid out in Tables 1, 3, 4,
of the companion paper (Sacks and Pikas 2013) and adjust
local context if necessary.
• Define the objectives of your school in relation to the indust
requirements—determine for each item what level your sch
aims to achieve.
• Assess existing curricula to identify the currentstate of BIM
content and the gap between your goals and the existing co
Itemize the gap using a table such as Table 2.
• In consultation with all the course educators, identify and se
existing courses,and define new courses as required to fulfill
the goals.
• Compile curricula and implementcourses.
• Monitor and measure achievements in each course impleme
using Tables 4–6.
• Review the courses and determine any changes that are ne
in the curricula and/or the requirements.
• Repeatthe process for continuous improvement.
Note that the first two steps should result in a set of require
that is specific to the educational goals of each schoolor depart-
ment. This will commonly require adjustment of levels of achie
ment, but it may also prove necessary to extend the range of
The procedure,and the requirements framework itself,by their
nature cannot be considered prescriptive. They do not absolve
ucators of their responsibility to determine the goals and cont
for BIM education according to the capabilities and needs of th
students and the localindustry conditions.
Conclusion
In this section, several lessons learned from the analysis of the
studies described in this paper are suggested.The authors do not
argue for any generalization,but do propose that the appropriate-
ness of these guidelines should be examined when the introdu
of BIM into a study program is considered:
• BIM education should be continuous:This is reflected by the
factthatthose students who took partin the senior-year cap-
stone projectcourse had to investa considerable amountof
time to catch up with the tools and applications thatthey stu-
died during theirfreshman year.The internationalstudents,
who had only one semester gap between Engineering Graph
and Planning and Control of Construction Projects, did not e
perience the same difficulties.Students delivering senior-year
capstone projects mustfocus on engineering ratherthan on
studying new orremembering old applications.They must
Fig. 4. Digital project environment for delivering the multidisciplinary
term project
© ASCE 05013002-11 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Nebraska-Lincoln on 08/17/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

acquire the knowledge ofpropertoolsand concepts before
entering the finalproject.
• BIM can enhance students’learning ofengineering topics:
While there is a certain overhead for students to apply BIM tools
within engineering courses if they have not previously learned
the specific application required,this appears to be more than
offset by the advantages gained in terms of their improved abil-
ity to grasp the engineering concepts themselves that modeling
affords.The benefits appear to flow from the parametric mod-
eling,intelligentobjectbehavior,and clear visualizations pro-
vided by BIM tools.
• TAs must have hands-on experience with BIM: Students stated
thatthey could have benefited more ifthe instructorsand
TAs had been more experienced with the applications. It is re-
commended,therefore,to give the teaching staffthe needed
technical assistance or alternatively, to employ experienced pro-
fessionals in the field to teach the said courses.
• Integrate real project examples in the courses: Students said that
more realistic examples from realprojects could have helped
them improve theirunderstanding ofthe benefitsof using
BIM applications. Here too it is recommended to employ a pro-
fessional with experience in the construction industry to be in-
volved in the design and teaching of courses where appropriate.
Such examples may increase students’ motivation when they
feelthattheir learning is meaningful.
• Obsoletehardwareand impropersoftwaresetup can harm
students’ motivation: The entire study environment needs to sup-
port students’ learning commitment and experience. The support
from faculty, teaching staff, working software, and hardware all
must support the creation of a healthy study environment.
• Encourage students to make use ofthe opportunity to self-
learn operation ofBIM software:BIM education includes
principle and theoreticalaspects,and these mustbe conveyed
by the professor and the TAs. However, there are also technical
and/or operational topics that students can study by themselves,
especially because mostof the software vendors have well-
developed step-by-step tutorialsfor learning theirsoftware.
The process of self-learning willprepare them also for future
employment situations in which they will have to become famil-
iar with new tools.
In addition,teaching BIM may elevate students’learning of
teamwork and othersoftskills.Therefore,the teaching ofBIM
should not be limited to technology, but should also cover the ways
in which technology should be aligned with processes and people
in organizations and projects.In courses thatinvite project-based
learning, it is recommended to take advantage of the BIM tools as
a vehicle forintegrating otherhuman aspects ofCEM into the
courses.
In practice,two generalscenarios for future improvements in
BIM contentfor Technion’s CEM programs are proposed.First,
integrate more BIM topics within a variety of courses to emphasize
collaboration between interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary proc-
esses and integration. Second, add an elective course between the
introductoryBIM course (GraphicalEngineeringInformation
at Technion)and the junioror senioradvanced CEM courses
(Planning and Controlof Construction Projects and Senior-Year
Construction Managementcapstoneat Technion).This course
should deliver the message thatBIM is a common language be-
tween projectparties and emphasize how project/facility-related
information is created,compiled,and shared to supportdecision
making through complex construction-projectprocesses.Such a
coursewill reducethe timeinvested in thecapstoneproject
course on learning the software and enable students to focus on the
actualconstruction-engineering analysis and use the toolas an
environmentthatreinforces theirlearning and understanding of
CEM processes.
This research differs from other similar studies in that it focu
on the entire construction-engineering and management curri
rather than just on isolated courses. Most previous studies stu
the use of BIM in the context of a single course.This work con-
tributestried and tested guidelinesfor universitiesto develop
BIM-integrated curriculum by considering all the years of civil
gineering studies.The main limitation of this study was the time
and effortrequired to conductexperiments and aggregate results.
The research was conducted overtwo academic years.To gain
betterunderstanding ofthe appropriateness ofthe procedures,a
longerstudy—ideally following students’progressthrough an
entire degree program and on into industry—is recommended
Acknowledgments
The authors are indebted to the professors,TAs, and students of
the Faculty of Civil Engineering at Technion who took part in th
experiments.
References
Azhar,S., Ahmad,I., and Sein,M. K. (2010).“Action research as a pro-
active research method for construction engineering and managem
J. Constr.Eng.Manag.,136(1),87–98.
Ballard, G. (2000). “The Last Planner system of production control.” P
dissertation,Univ.of Birmingham,Birmingham,UK.
Barison,M. B., and Santos,E. T. (2010a).“BIM teaching strategies:An
overview of the current approaches.” Proc., of the Int. Conf. Comp
in Civil and Building Engineering, W. Tizani, ed., Nottingham Unive
sity Press,Nottingham,UK, 577–584.
Barison, M. B., and Santos, E. T. (2010b). “Review and analysis of cur
strategies for planning a BIM curriculum.” Proc., of the Int. Counci
Building W78 2010:27th Int.Conf.Applications in IT in the AEC
Industry,Virginia Tech.,Blacksburg,VA, 1–10.
Becerik-Gerber,A. M. A. B., Ku, K., and Jazizadeh,F. (2012).“BIM-
enabled virtual and collaborative construction engineering and ma
ment.” J.Prof.Issues Eng.Educ.Pract.,138(3),234–245.
Becerik-Gerber,B., Gerber,D. J., and Ku, K. (2011).“The pace of
technological innovation in architecture, engineering, and constru
education: Integrating recent trends into the curricula.” J. Inf. Tech
Constr.,16(3),411–432.
Bloom,B. S.,Engelhart,M. D., Furst,E. J., Hill, W. H.,and Krathwohl,
D. R. (1956).Taxonomy ofeducationalobjectives,David McKay,
New York.
Boon, J., and Prigg, C. (2011). “Releasing the potential of BIM in cons
tion education.” Managementand Innovation for Sustainable Build
Environment,CIB Int.Conf.,CIB, Amsterdam,Netherlands,9.
Calado, R., Fellows, R. F., and Liu, A. M. M. (2009). Research method
construction,Wiley,West Sussex,UK.
Deutsch, R. (2011). BIM and integrated design: Strategies for archite
practice,Wiley,Hoboken,NJ.
Eastman,C. M., Teicholz,P., Sacks,R., and Liston,K. (2011).BIM
handbook:A guide to building information modeling ofowners,
managers, designers, engineers and contractors, John Wiley and S
Hoboken,NJ.
Glick, S., Clevenger, C., and Porter, D. (2011). “Integrating 3D model
construction management education: Masonry interactive homew
Proc., 47th ASC Annual Int. Conf, The Associated Schools of Constr
tion,Windsor,CO.
Goedert,J., Cho,Y., Subramaniam,M., Guo,H., and Xiao,L. (2011).
“A framework for virtualinteractive construction education (VICE).”
Autom.Constr.,20(1),76–87.
Hyatt,B. A. (2011).“A case study in integrating lean,green,BIM
into an undergraduate construction managementscheduling course.”
© ASCE 05013002-12 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Nebraska-Lincoln on 08/17/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Proc.,2011 AnnualConf.of the ASEE,The Associated Schools of
Construction,Windsor,CO.
Khemlani,L. (2012).“Around the world with BIM.” AECbytes feature,
〈http://www.aecbytes.com/feature/2012/Global-BIM.html〉 (May 9, 2012).
Kymmell,W. (2008).Building information modeling:Planning and
managingconstructionprojectswith 4D CAD and simulations,
McGraw-Hill.
Lee,G., Lee,J., and Jones,S. (2012).“The business value ofBIM in
South Korea.” SmartMarket Rep., McGraw-Hill Construction, Bedford,
MA, 60.
Lee, N., and Hollar, D. A. (2013). “Probing BIM education in construction
engineering and managementprograms using industry perceptions.”
49th ASC Annual Int. Conf. Proc., California Polytechnic State Univ.,
San Luis Obispo,CA.
Lu, W., Peng,Y., Shen,Q., and Li, H. (2013).“Generic modelfor
measuring benefits of BIM as a learning toolin construction tasks.”
J. Constr.Eng.Manag.,139(2),195–203.
Molavi, J., and Shapoorian,B. (2012).“Implementing an interactive
program ofBIM applicationsfor graduating students.”Int. Conf.
on Sustainable Design,Engineering,and Construction 2012,ASCE,
Reston,VA, 1009–1016.
Nawari,N., Itani,L., and Gonzalez,E. (2011).“Understanding building
structuresusing BIM tools.” Int.workshop on computing in civil
engineering 2011,ASCE, Reston,VA, 478–485.
Russell,J. S. (2013).“Shaping the future of the civil engineering profes-
sion.” J.Constr.Eng.Manag.,139(6),654–664.
Sacks, R., and Barak, R. (2010). “Teaching building information mode
as an integral part of freshman year civil engineering education.”
Issues Eng.Educ.Pract.,136(1),30–38.
Sacks, R., Koskela, L., Dave, B. A., and Owen, R. (2010). “Interaction
lean and building information modeling in construction.” J.Constr.
Eng.Manag.,136(9),968–980.
Sacks, R., and Pikas, E. (2013). “Building information modeling educa
for construction engineering and management. I: Industry requirem
state of the art,and gap analysis.” J.Constr.Eng.Manage,10.1061/
(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000759, 04013016.
Soibelman,L., Sacks,R., Akinci,B., Dikmen,I., Birgonul,M. T., and
Eybpoosh,M. (2011).“Preparing civilengineersfor international
collaboration in construction management.” J. Prof. Issues Eng. Ed
Pract.,137(3),141–150.
Solnosky,R., Parfitt,M., and Holland,R. (2013).“An IPD and BIM
focused capstone course based on AEC industry needs and involve
ment.” J.Prof.Issues Eng.Educ.Pract.,in press.
Sylvester, K. E., and Dietrich, C. (2010). “Evaluation of building inform
tion modeling (BIM) estimating methods in construction education
Proc., 46th ASC Annual Int. Conf, The Associated Schools of Constr
tion,Windsor,CO.
© ASCE 05013002-13 J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
J. Constr. Eng. Manage.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Nebraska-Lincoln on 08/17/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.