Transforming Education for Construction Cost Engineering in Today's Learning Environment
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70088/2d75vb20Keywords:
Construction cost engineering, quantity surveying, education reform, outcome‐based education, project‐based learning, 5D BIM, contract management, assessment rubricsAbstract
The construction industry is undergo translation ride by digitalisation, low‐carbon transition, tasteful procurement governance, and the teddy from bringing to integrated project models. Beyond measurement and pricing, as a knowledge‐ and sphere, construction cost engineering-much name to as quantity follow and price direction-has locomote toward lifecycle cost optimization, hence risk allocation. Contract administration, and data‐enabled decision support (, 5D BIM and digital cost platforms). In parallel, environment stress outcome‐based didactics (OBE), student‐centered eruditeness, project‐based learning (PBL). And blended/learnedness digest by educational base. Many syllabus front haunting opening: programme that cost, bidding, hence contracts. And project management; practice experiences that lack authenticity and continuity; scratchy competence among staff and students; and assessment systems that over‐prioritize concluding examen rather than process evidence and professional judgement. This paper takes didactics as the elementary composition and structure cost engineering as the setting, offer a Competency-Context-Evidence (CCE) fabric to redesign curricula; con experiences, and judgement. The framework clarify core competencies for modern cost professionals, machinate learning around task contexts, and measure students through evidence‐based portfolio and multi‐source rubrics. Admit modular curriculum reconstruction, a longitudinal capstone project sweep summons and contract scenarios, and industry co‐teaching and threefold mentorship, consolidation of 5D BIM and pretending, and imbed morals, obligingness, and sustainability accounting into decision‐making project, scheme are provide. The theme essentially conclude with implementation considerations on resourcefulness, data governance, hence and faculty development, aiming to render guidance for university and institutions try to tame future‐ready cost engineering talent.References
S. Bruner, "The culture of education," in The culture of education, Harvard University Press, 1997.
F. Crawley, J. Malmqvist, S. Östlund, and D. R. Brodeur, Rethinking engineering education: The CDIO approach, Boston, MA: Springer US, 2007.
M. Eastman, *BIM handbook: A guide to building information modeling for owners, managers, designers, engineers and contractors*, John Wiley & Sons, 2011.
M. Sepasgozar, A. M. Costin, R. Karimi, S. Shirowzhan, E. Abbasian, and J. Li, "BIM and digital tools for state-of-the-art construction cost management," Buildings, vol. 12, no. 4, p. 396, 2022.
G. Ginigaddara, T. Gajendran, and C. Beard, "A critical review of quantity surveying education in an offsite construction perspective: strategies for up-skilling," Construction Innovation, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 1058-1084, 2025.
D. Robinson, Guide to the FIDIC Conditions of Contract for Construction: The Red Book 2017, John Wiley & Sons, 2023.
L. W. Lim, S. Y. Wong, and C. S. Ding, "Challenges of industrial revolution 4.0: quantity surveying students' perspectives," Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 2496-2512, 2024.
R. Olaniyan and A. S. Olaniyan, "The Role of Quantity Surveyors in Managing Life Cycle Costs in Sustainable Construction," Int. J. Adv. Multidiscip. Res. Stud., vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 1112-1117, 2025.
G. Spady, Outcome-Based Education: Critical Issues and Answers, American Association of School Administrators, 1994.
A. Kolb, Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development, FT Press, 2014.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Lihong Shi, Huashan Zhang (Author)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.








