It can be seen, therefore, from discussions in the preceding sections that contemporary learning literature is largely supportive of the use of simulation-based educational tools, for the various benefits and positive outcomes associated with simulated learning in the various fields. In their literature review study, DeshPande and Huang (2008) usefully summarise the reported advantages of simulation tools as follows:
They are a method of organized experiential learning that incorporates an element of fun in the learning process.
They help connecting theory and practice to foster student’s understanding of the subject.
74
They possess the ability to alter attitudinal positions when designed in accordance with theory.
They open up dynamic participation, which should lessen resistance to accept innovative ideas and concepts.
They can guide students in understanding concepts and provide students a holistic working knowledge of the subject.
They give immediate feedback to the student making the interaction with the tool a learning process rather than an evaluation process.
They provide students an opportunity to face the consequences of the results of the decisions taken or process applied and not just be an observer.
They have increasing range of difficulty to challenge the student to develop to a more advanced level of comprehension.
They show greater retention over time than traditional classroom instruction.
Despite the stated benefits of simulation tools in education and learning, there are challenges associated with their use, which need to be taken into account. Based on a literature review of work by adopters of business simulations, Clarke (2009) discusses such challenges extensively. She highlights six key challenges as follows:
1. Adapting flexibly to pedagogical change and professional development:
Clarke (2009) as well as Windschitl (200) assert that the limited adoption of simulations by educators often lies in the uncertainty over how to develop, use and integrate simulations successfully into existing curriculum. Clarke (2009) suggests that in order to effectively implement adoption of simulation tools, there is a need to ensure professional standards and requirements, and cultures of practice are in place, which recognise the technologies as a core tool in a modern education and skills system.
2. Developing and updating infrastructure:
The barrier here is the limited access to reliable, sustainable infrastructure/software, including technical support, which may be linked to lack of funds, planning and in-house ability, particularly in smaller institutions (Clarke, 2009). Another important issue of relevance here, pointed out by Pasin and Giroux (2011) and Ezz et al. (2012) is the relatively high cost of simulations, in terms of both money and time required in their development, testing and implementation. For example, in the case of computerised simulations, there must be sufficient computers available for all participants to use, and the simulations may have to be adapted whenever new software versions are introduced (Pasin and Giroux, 2011).
75
3. Sustaining continuity of learning:Clarke (2009) states that while simulation technologies may offer opportunities for continuity and flexibility in learning, this use is not widespread. This may partly be because the use of simulations may seem to consume an excessive amount of time compared to other conventional teaching methods (Pasin and Giroux, 2009).
4. Meeting learners’ expectations:
Clarke (2009) makes the point that because today’s learners have grown up in a “digital” or multimedia environment and are in constant interaction with it, they expect such technologies to be just as present in their formal learning environments. In fact, the learners commonly report that they enjoy learning with technologies, and increasingly they use a range of tools and approaches to support their learning (Clarke, 2009). However, the problem is that the modern technologies may not be recognised, provided or supported in formal educational settings (Clarke, 2009). In addition, Pasin and Giroux, 2011) write that when technological tools such as simulations are provided, but are perceived by the learners to be unrealistic or unhelpful, the learners may not take them seriously or may not be motivated to learn from them.
5. Negotiating the role of the instructor:
Earlier discussions revealed that when using simulation tools, the role of the instructor is altered from a teacher or transmitter of knowledge to that of facilitator or enabler of the learning process (DeshPande and Huang, 2008). Hence, ample opportunity must be afforded to the learner to interact with fellow learners and explore learning in greater depth under the guidance of the facilitator. The challenge here is that not all teachers or instructors are accustomed to this kind of change in instructional technique, and sometimes they are reluctant to adapt (DeshPande and Huang, 2008). DeshPande and Huang (2008) state three reasons for this as: (i) unawareness of the capabilities of simulation tools, (ii) difficulty in obtaining the required resources (i.e. computers and simulation software), and (iii) inability of the instructor to use the latest technologies. Nonetheless, Rainbow and Sadler-Smith (2003) stress the importance of addressing these issues, if the potential of simulation tools for learning is to be fully realised above and beyond the mere enhancements in the quantity and quality of information presentation.
6. Delivering appropriate learning spaces:
Clarke (2009) argues that the development of innovative curriculum coupled with the integration of innovative learning technologies, must also deliver next generation learning spaces that provide flexibility and ease in design and technology, to enable different teaching and learning modes to connect, collaborate, share, reflect and report. The challenge here is that educational institutions are often unprepared to do the latter, which again may be linked to lack of funds, planning and in-house ability. According to Clarke
76
(2009), delivering appropriate learning spaces requires institutions to clearly articulate their learning objectives and then placing a high priority on including curriculum redesign in the planning process for new learning spaces. In addition, Clarke (2009) stipulates that faculty who are engaged in pedagogy, along with others who are concerned with the teaching and learning aspects of the space should play a central role in the planning process.It is worth noting and perhaps unsurprising that the challenges discussed here are to a large extent similar to those directed at experiential learning theory in the Chapter Two (Section
2.3.2.3.4)
, given that simulations have mostly been characterised as a form of experiential learning. For example, the problem of instructors who are unprepared to adopt innovative learning approaches as well as educational systems and cultures that have held standard curricula and lessons for many years is a shared concern. In addition, Li et al.’s (2007) raised the challenge involved in providing learners with opportunities to go through the entire experiential learning cycle of experiencing, reflecting, thinking and acting, stating that this requires much time and effort from educators. Similarly, simulations were considered costly, in terms of both money and time required in their development, testing and implementation. As discussed previously, this is because simulations and the core principles of the experiential learning model, present a drastic departure from the traditional instruction, lecture-based approaches.Nonetheless, in view of the reported advantages of the use of simulation learning tools as well as calls in the literature for the need for non-traditional tools in construction education, this research adopted innovative simulations that were designed and developed at Loughborough University, to simulate the occupational illnesses that commonly affect construction workers and their consequential impacts on both working and home life, in an attempt to investigate the value and utility of the simulations as training tools. The following section provides further justification for the adoption of the simulations in this research.