Experiences from Norway on implementing BIM in existing bachelor engineering curriculum

This study explore experiences from ongoing implementation of BIM in existing bachelor engineering courses at Oslo Metropolitan University in Norway. This is done by a combination of semi-structured interview, net-based survey of management, lectures and students at the department. The findings are analysed by use of the multi-motive information systems continuance (MISC) model, which focus on hedonic, extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. This study do not confirm the traditional view that young students are positive and old teachers are negative to BIM, or that use of BIM will increase by itself when I become more mature. The most important aspects for increased implantation of BIM is to create a dynamic learning environment who support and combine all three types of motivation by having an intentional attitude to learning objectives, assessment criteria and context and relevance of competence. This approach can support implantation of BIM in all professional course in an engineering study as an integrated part of the learning outcome by focusing on “Use of BIM to learn Construction”. This is an original manuscript/preprint of a book chapter published by CRC Press in eWork and eBusiness in Architecture, Engineering and Construction on August 21, 2018, available online: https://www.crcpress.com/9781138584136 were the dominant type of publication in this type of studies. There are challenges regarding BIM in terms of establishing (1) a common understanding of what BIM really is and (2) how to determine whether, to what extent, and for what purpose BIM is introduced in HE. The first challenge has been experienced by other scholars; for instance, in a study about BIM teaching strategies by Barison and Santos (2010, p. 1), the authors stated: “it is still unclear how BIM should be taught as most experiences are very recent.”. The NATSPEC survey (Ronney, 2015), however, did suggest increased interest in and a focus on BIM in a number of countries. According to Rooney (2014, p. 1): “It would appear that the majority of BIM education available to date focuses on training in the use of particular BIM software packages, particularly seen as a lot of training for professionals appears to be provided by the software vendors. Training for both graduates and professionals in openBIM concepts, BIM management and working in collaborative BIM environments appears to be still in its infancy”. The Ph.D. thesis by Hjelseth (2015) introduce a dynamic understanding of BIM which combines the Model/Modelling / Managements do be applicable by focus on program / processes /person / as illustrated in figure 1. Figure 1. The trinity of BIM understanding (Hjelseth, 2015). The second challenge is based to the above referenced observations indicate that the dominant view of BIM is related to the use of software. HE is by nature theory focused, not on practical skills in the use of particular BIM software. Measuring the status of BIM in education must therefore include a better understanding of what BIM really is. Studies by Becker et al. (2011), Salman (2014), and Rooney (2014, 2016) demonstrate that many educational institutions across the globe investigates how to incorporate BIM in HE. Peterson (et al., 2011) give an example of how teaching construction project management with BIM support. This more integrated perspective is quite different from e.g. use of BIM software in project management to develop a 5-D schedule like Synchro based on import from authoring tool like Revit. A study in UK by Underwood and Ayoade (2015) illustrate the situation in HE by following quote: “Despite an overwhelming level of support for the importance of BIM related accreditation criteria of courses in academic institutions, the level of conviction for actual change is however debatable”.