LEAPFROGGING, TUNNELING THROUGH AND

0 downloads 0 Views 490KB Size Report
overcoming the multiplicity of construction education challenges in Nigeria. ... Pultar (1998) notes that building professions have been compartmentalized into groups such as ..... http://leapfrog.umn.edu/Documents/CaoSignificanceChina.pdf.
LEAPFROGGING, TUNNELING THROUGH AND OVERCOMING: MEETING THE NEEDS OF CONSTRUCTION EDUCATION IN NIGERIA Professor Natalia A. Anigbogu Department of Building, University of Jos, Jos, Nigeria natashaanigbogu @yahoo.com Abstract: This paper attempts to identify different strategies that are employed or might be employed in overcoming the multiplicity of construction education challenges in Nigeria. Nigerian higher education generally has been a topic of a continuous debate and a subject of many institutional reforms, most of which are characterized by a blanket top-down approach. There are, however bottom-up initiatives by academic staff and to some extent students that impact greatly on different aspects of higher education in Nigeria. This is especially pronounced in the training of the construction professionals. Processes of globalization, technological advancements, particularly digital media and multimedia technologies, revolutionized the learning and teaching environments and the very lives of students and academic staff and created new opportunities for teaching and learning. Keywords: Higher Education, Construction Education, Leapfrogging, Nigeria INTRODUCTION Both education and construction are recognized as the key factors of economic and socio-economic development. Education is a formal means of acquiring knowledge. It is the basic factor to develop human capital, the most influential form of capital, and a central factor of societal development (MacGregor, 2009). Universities are currently one of the main agents providing education within the education industry and stand at the centre of the knowledge-based economic development. Universities are important industries in the economy. Activities undertaken in Universities provide about 2 per cent of GDP (Borland, Dawkins, Johnson and Williams, 2000). As Olssen

and Peters (2005) remark, the role of higher

education for the economy is seen by governments as having greater importance to the extent that higher education has become the new star ship in the policy fleet for governments around the world.

The major trends in higher education are determined by demographic changes, international economic and political forces and unprecedented rate of technological breakthroughs (World declaration on

higher education for the twenty-first century, 1998; Boer de, 2002; Lundberg, Merino and Dahmani, 2008; Enders and Musselin, 2008; MacGregor, 2009). These trends in turn are responsible for enormous challenges facing global higher education (Figure 1).

CONSTRUCTION EDUCATION Some of the trends and challenges of University education are determined by discipline or profession it provides the education and/or training for. For construction education these are the reflection of the developments in the construction industry in addition to general developments with respect to higher education. Construction education is also referred to in literature as building education (Pultar, 1998), architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) education (Becerik-Gerber, Gerber and Ku, 2011) and construction engineering education (Jaselskis, Ruwanpura, Becker, Silva, Jewell, and Floyd, 2011). The construction industry faces several technical, social, financial, political, and cultural challenges. Developments such as the growing volume of activity, increasing number of active stakeholders, advancement in technology, more intense global competition, and demand for fast-track completion, have created many distinct challenges for construction professionals (Toor and Ofori, 2008). Consequently, there is a need to equip the professionals with hard (technical) as well as soft (management and leadership) skills. As Toor and Ofori (2008) point out, construction professionals invariably work in teams and often assume leadership roles as the design manager, construction manager, procurement manager, contracts manager, or project manager. They deal with various project stakeholders and often get involved in sensitive decision making and dispute resolution processes. There is a broad sentiment in the industry that today’s new graduates are not adequately trained to deal with the soft issues on complex construction project; in particular, academic programs do not prepare professionals with an appropriate blend of hard and soft skills (Toor and Ofori, 2008). The increasing global emphasis on sustainable approaches and the need to increase efficiency and improve cost over the lifecycle of projects, demand new approaches to construction education. Historically, the construction education system did not allow for adequate interplay between disciplines. Pultar (1998) notes that building professions have been compartmentalized into groups such as architects, various engineers, surveyors, contractors and realtors, each of which has formed its own terminology and modes of operation. The same attitude is also visible in many institutions of higher education dealing with construction. Potential differences between architectural and engineering students are recognized, magnified, and made more rigid by the difference in their education; different professional jargons and looking down upon the efforts of others as secondary, lead to many problems in communication and coordination among these professionals, which result in the many incompatibilities, inefficiencies and

human discontent that are observed daily (Pultar, 1998). Recent studies to determine the technical and personal abilities required of young professionals by today’s construction industry indicate some key concerns: today’s graduates need to have strong collaboration and teamwork skills; they need to have a broader perspective of the issues that concern their profession such as social, environmental and economic; and finally they need to know how to apply fundamental engineering science and computer skills in practice (Becerik-Gerber, Gerber and Ku, 2011). Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems (Education of Architects and Engineers, 1995) criticized the education of construction professionals by identifying the weaknesses in the curricular: 

Engineering education is being criticized for failing to teach design, the importance of which is being increasingly recognized in engineering programs.



Architectural students get considerable exposure to design, but overemphasize the art in architecture to the detriment of such matters as client needs, constructability, costs, designing to budget and technology. (The design teachers claim half the curriculum and about 80% of the students time; design teaching also absorbs the major proportion of resources and staff time, according to De Graaff and Cowdroy (1997)).



Both architects and engineers have expressed concern that schools are not adequately training students in technology, particularly integrating academic design with applied technology. Schools tend to separate design from the production process.



Architects are not being given sufficient training in such practical matters as construction materials and systems, construction methods and practices, the cost of construction, specifications writing, codes and standards, and the design and functioning of mechanical and electrical systems in buildings.



Both architectural and engineering education programs have been criticized for failing to give students experience working in teams to achieve common goals; teamwork is equated to cheating. In the spectrum between cooperation and competition only competition is reinforced. The greatest limitation is the horizontal structure of the curriculum.



Architectural students do not get experience in dealing with the various engineering and construction specialties that play key roles in the design process or with the nontechnical entities that can influence a project, for example, zoning boards and financial institutions. (It is estimated that up to 60% of inputs to the construction process come from organisations who operate outside of the construction sector (Jaselskis et al, 2011)).



Both architectural and engineering graduates have been criticized for lacking knowledge in business, economics, and management and the manner in which business considerations affect the design of facilities. They often lack the organizational and managerial skills to efficiently operate

a business so that it is profitable. It limits their job opportunities - partly because of the inherent limitations of their educations and partly because many employers perceive engineers and architects as narrowly focused technocrats. 

Young engineers and architects do not understand the problems, motivations, and concerns of their employers and clients, often causing them to propose designs that do not reflect sound business practices. The specific practice-related topics need to include marketing, proposal preparation, office management, and personnel matters.



Engineering programs have been increasingly faulted for failing to teach communication skills adequately. The importance of graphical, written, and oral communication skills to engineers has been emphasized. Engineering graduates often have poor graphics communication skills.



Graduates are prepared to do research but are not prepared to apply their knowledge to practical industry problems.



Although architecture and engineering graduates have had computer instruction, the potential of computers has not been fulfilled as effectively as it could be; most computer-aided engineering software, even computer-aided design software, is entirely oriented towards individual use and analysis rather than a team approach. Architecture students want to receive credit for their individual creativity, which might be sublimated in team projects.



The writing and speaking skills of recent engineering and architectural graduates fall short of desired level.

Complaints about faculty with respect to construction education focus on three perceptions: (1) many faculty members have become so research oriented that they have lost interest in teaching generally and teaching undergraduates in particular (2) many faculty members are unable to teach design and technology because they have little or no practical experience outside of the academic world and (3) many faculty are poor teachers because they have received no training in education (Education of Architects and Engineers, 1995). MEETING THE NEEDS OF CONSTRUCTION EDUCATION IN NIGERIA Leapfrogging The concept of leapfrogging was originally used in the context of economic growth theories and industrial-organization innovation studies with specific focus on competition among firms. The hypothesis proposes that companies holding monopolies based on incumbent technologies have less incentive to innovate than potential rivals, and therefore they eventually lose their technological leadership role when new radical technological innovations are adopted by new firms which are ready to

take the risks (Leapfrogging, u.d.). Leapfrogging means to jump over obstacles to achieve goals and to get ahead of the competition or the present state of the art through innovative, time-and-cost-saving means (About the Leapfrog Institutes, 2012). Recently the concept of leapfrogging is being used with respect of sustainable development for developing countries as a theory of development which may accelerate development by skipping inferior, less efficient, more expensive or more polluting technologies and industries and move directly to more advanced ones ( for example, the adoption of solar energy technologies instead of creating an energy infrastructure based on fossil fuels, or jump to wireless phones, saving the cost of deploying an expensive copper wire system). It is sometimes argued that latecomers are better placed to take advantage of the technological innovations, since they are not hindered by obsolete technology of more developed countries which they are reluctant to abandon; some argue that leapfrogging is inevitable (Davidson, Vogel, Harris and Jones, 2000). Leapfrog development in education also has many advocates, the concept being especially popular in China. Modern educational institutions of higher learning in developing countries have a relatively short history. Higher education in these countries is faced with great challenges related to financing and equitable accessibility of education, staff development, skills-based training, quality education in teaching and research, relevance of programs, outdated curricula, etc. Upgrading educational standard of an institution of higher learning in a developing country means to bring up the level of education of this institution to the level of international educational institutions (Janjua, 2011). In most developing countries traditional teaching based on ‘rote learning’ is common, with instructors doing little more in the classroom than copying their notes onto a blackboard’ (Janjua, 2011). Implementation of leapfrog education development strategies is of special significance to developing countries. Cao (2008) offers classification of leapfrog development in education as 1) Leapfrog development in macro education, which involves leapfrogging in space, time and quality; and 2) Leapfrog development in micro education, which involves leapfrogging in the area of curriculum, the starting point of teaching, and the growth level of individual students (Table 1).

Table 1 Types of leapfrog development in education Types of leapfrog Contents of leapfrogging education Leapfrog in time

Basic characteristics

Macro education

Cooperation within region, country, the world. Sharing of educational resources. Advanced educational content and pedagogy

Leapfrog in space Leapfrog in quality

Micro education

Leapfrog in the area of curriculum development Leapfrog in the starting point of teaching Leapfrog in the rate of growth on individual students

Using less time than incumbents.

Projecting future developments. Starting teaching at the level of potential development (zone of proximal development). Individual guidance, constant leapfrogging over actual level of development of individual students.

Source: Modified from Cao (2008). How can construction education in Nigeria benefit from leapfrogging strategies? By now we have all heard, read or said enough about the rapid pace of technological change. Katz (2008) remarks that it has even become a cliché. ICT supports the development strategy of “leapfrogging” (Fig.2).

Figure 2. Model for 21st century educator Source: Leveraging The “Networked” Teacher (2009).

Technology is moving higher education from the traditional campus of “brick and mortar” to the electronic classroom of “wire and chip.” Internet has revolutionized the design process by allowing architects and designers to research new products, download specifications, access code information, transfer drawings, and even synchronously collaborate with colleagues from around the world (Bender and Vredevoogd, 2006). There are many benefits of using online technologies, such as the accuracy and consistency of data; all students are guaranteed to receive the same presentation material and get the same view of the professor and material, unlike the front row advantage in the traditional classroom. Also, ondemand access of online classes allows students flexibility in viewing course information at their convenience and as many times as they wish (Bender and Vredevoogd, 2006). Improvements in construction engineering education result when innovative information technologies are incorporated into academic curricula (Jaselskis et al, 2011). These may include: 

Digitized notes and complementing them with past examination questions with solutions and marking schemes is one of many steps to get students comprehensively briefed about the grading system and how their continuous assessment scripts are assessed.



Digital and digitized classroom.



The use of internet-based communication technologies; no longer must students physically travel to a construction project site to observe and hear construction operations.



Real-time video and audio can be delivered from active construction projects to a remote classroom through the internet. ICT dilutes the “tyranny” of geography by providing new ways to escape national boundaries (Braga, Daly, Eskinazi, Fink, 2002).



Monitoring and analysis of construction projects by using imagery gathered by web-enabled, digital cameras of fixed location transmitting video through the internet.



Globally networked organization of engineering and construction education institutions each sharing the unique engineering and building techniques of their respective part of the globe with design and construction students located around the world.



Exchange of construction project observations among the institutions enabled by the internetbased applications of virtual project tours and virtual supervision systems.



Students in construction and engineering disciplines typically learn how to develop a building construction schedule by visualizing 2D design documents for a building project. This learning process is difficult since student first needs to associate components in the 2D documents with their related construction activities, and then mentally visualize the construction sequence. 4D modeling technologies, visually representing the construction schedule time along with the 3D

model components, has the potential to aid this learning process by providing a common visual language for students. 4D modeling technologies, visually representing the construction schedule time along with the 3D model components, can provide a common visual language for students when learning how to develop construction schedules for buildings. 

Different types of simulation software allow for effective problem based solutions, including optimization in design and new material development.



Virtual relationships are now possible and have become commonplace outside of educational settings. Networks of all sorts (Facbebook, Ning, Twitter, etc.) webcams, Skype, etc. have changed the very definition of presence. Technology has changed who is part of the team. Team members can now be virtual. Members no longer tied to geographic limitation can provide input, ideas, and collaborate in real-time for any location on the globe. The person is the portal to the network. The person is an autonomous communication and collaboration node. Each member can potentially leverage not only their network, but also the network of others who are in their network. This principle is known as Metcalfe’s Law (Leveraging The “Networked” Teacher, 2009).

Educational assessment tools are being developed that further tailor the information so it is delivered in the format most appropriate for the individual. For example, depending on whether the person learns visually, auditorially or kinesthetically—or some combination of the three—the program delivers the lesson plan that will be best understood and absorbed by the student. A related program uses voice and facial recognition technology to determine if the person is successfully processing and absorbing the information (Uldrich and Anderson, 2008). Also tools are designed to access peer-based learning tools as well as ensure the student is fully engaged by making the learning enjoyable and, if possible, slightly addictive - like a good video game, gamification of the teaching and learning. It is important to realize that many of the leading programmers in the industrialized world are self-taught, despite the creation of the university discipline of computer science and the awarding of degrees in this subject. However, for every person who proves capable of developing an understanding of ICTs in this way, dozens, and perhaps hundreds, achieve only a rudimentary “user level” understanding (Steinmuelle, 2001). A principal implication of the digital divide is that societies that prove able to offer more extensive access are likely to generate a larger supply of such highly capable, self-taught persons. When assessing the potential for leapfrogging, it is important to acknowledge that the basis for bypassing earlier stages of development is the ability to access (with a reasonable investment in skills and equipment) the essential features of a contemporary technology.

There have been essentially three kinds of e-learning initiatives in Nigerian Higher Education (HEI) – local initiatives, corporate initiatives, and international partnerships. First, local initiatives are conceived and developed using local resources. Corporate initiatives – such as Cisco and Microsoft programmes – are developed abroad and delivered in Nigeria extensively through academies which are hosted in HEIs. The third kind has been developed through international cooperation (Liverpool, Marut, Ndam, Oti, u.d.). According to Olotuah, Daisiowa, Adedeji1 and Odeyale (2012), only 29.65% of practicing architects in Nigeria learnt Computer-Aided Design (CAD) during their course of architectural study; ver half of them (57.58%) had their first contact with CAD after their course of architectural study, while 12.77% have not learnt to use CAD. Such studies are few, so one has to rely on anecdotal evidence and personal observations to assess the level of e-learning and ICT utilization in construction education in Nigeria. There is a huge discrepancy between student and faculty rates of adoption of ICT. Often the educators are playing a catch-up role. Students often develop information technologies skills from recreational use and not as a result of course requirements. There is noticeable gap in the use of design software use between different professional courses, with architecture programmes leading the way. Students and faculty often adopt the use of computer only when it is an absolute necessity. Curriculum for many construction education programmes is increasing becoming obsolete. Teaching of computer aided design (CAD) and other computer applications is often as a result of personal initiative by faculty. This is a reflection of rigid system of curriculum changes. Top down approach in curriculum development is not efficient and in adoption of ICT most of the time is not sustainable. The effective use of information and communication technologies demands that faculty be familiar with teaching in an online environment. While there are a number of academic staff, arguably the younger ones, who willing to be trained, there exist a group of staff who are unwilling to try out the technology. This situation poses a major challenge in the widespread use of ICT for teaching. Research on the use of ICTs in different educational settings over the years invariably identify as a barrier to success the inability of teachers to understand why they should use ICTs and how exactly they can use ICTs to help them teach better. Unfortunately, as Mugenda (2006) points out, most teacher professional development in ICTs are heavy on “teaching the tools” and light on “using the tools to teach”. There are other readily identifiable challenges to leapfrogging (Table 3).

Table 3 Barriers to leapfrogging technologies in developing countries Absorptive capacity

Inadequate ability to recognize, place value upon, internalize and apply new knowledge Attitudes and Acceptability, perceived needs based on a needs analysis, attitudes towards perception technology, concepts of development, and focus on the problems to be solved (i.e. being people driven and problem-oriented) Cultural and Language, cultural views towards technology, sharing of resources within the community issues community, appropriateness of a specific technology within a given culture or community, literacy requirements, gender issues and access issues Legal and ethical Privacy, confidentiality, security, malpractice potential, insurance, jurisdiction, issues copyright, patents for new technologies and treatments, other intellectual property issues Technical issues Access to electricity grid and alternative power supplies, power schedules and reliability, UPS back-ups, ongoing maintenance of computers. Inappropriate access devices and inappropriate Internet technologies including low bandwidth. Insufficient language and cultural adaptation of content and the digital divide. Environmental issues Effects of weather, temperature, humidity and dust on equipment. Security and accessibility of equipment. Isolation, transport issues Sustainability issues Ongoing upgrades of technology, ongoing costs, cost-effectiveness Practical international Corruption, borders and customs in equipment transport, nationally-imposed issues barriers to information access or dissemination or to information privacy, donorimposed barriers, time zones and communication issues of working in remote geographical areas Source: modified from McConnel, H. (u.d.)

Two other concepts point out to possibility of overcoming barriers that underdevelopment presents with respect to higher education. Tunneling through A closely related concept to leapfrogging is that of ‘tunneling through’. There is an inverted-U relationship (Kuznets curve) that establishes the relationship between economic development and inequality by relating output per capita to a measure of income inequality. A closely related concept is that of the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) (Leapfrogging, u. d.). The concept proposes that developing countries could learn from the experiences of industrialized nations, and restructure growth and development to address potentially irreversible environmental damages from an early stage and thereby ‘tunnel’ through any prospective EKC. Environmental quality thereby does not have to get worse before it gets better and crossing safe limits or environmental thresholds can be avoided (http://www.tumblr.com/tagged/sustainable-development). The evidence also supports the existence of a Kuznets curve of education: as the average level of education rises, education inequality first increases, and, after reaching a peak at 5.13 years of schooling, starts declining; given the close link between the level of human capital/education and the level of

income, some researchers tried to find a similar relationship between the level of human capital/education and inequality in its distribution (Fidalgo, Simões and Duarte, 2010). In experimental psychology, the “tunnel effect” is the perception as a single object moving beyond an occluding object and then reappearing after a suitable amount of time on the other side of it. The optimal amount of time for giving the impression of a single object is shorter than what is actually needed to cross the occlusion at that speed (Tunnel effect, 2012). Inequality in higher education capabilities for institutions and individuals tends to undermine investigation into global public goods. Global inequalities in higher education are taken for granted, it is important to name and question them (Unterhalter, 2012). Sub-Saharan Africa has the lowest participation rate for higher education in the world (6%) (Unterhalter, 2012). The popular movement to achieve world class ranking amongst Nigerian Universities suggests the need for “tunneling through” to overcome the world inequalities in global higher education by adopting best world practices in teaching and flexibility of curriculum content changes. To “tunnel through”, all major stakeholders in higher education should be involved. These include the governments, educational institutions, parents/guardians and the private sector that employs the output of these institutions. Others include the students and the society in general. The rate of return to educational investment can be private or social. Private rate of return are the gains that accrue to a single individual from attaining a particular level of education, whereas social returns refer to the gains or benefits that accrue or are available to the society as a whole. In the case of Nigeria, studies indicate that the social rate of return is highest for primary education, followed by higher education, and secondary education; on the other hand, the private rate of return is highest for higher education, followed by primary education and secondary education (Okuwa, 2004). There is a need for more effective management of stakeholders in higher education.

CONCLUSION An attempt has been made in this paper to highlight the main challenges before higher education in Nigeria generally and that of construction education in particular. These include inadequate teaching of design, especially for engineering students, poor communication skills and lack of teamwork experience amongst others. The faculty are challenged with respect to curricular, their pedagogical and ICT skills. The strategies to overcome these challenges and to meet the needs of construction education have been discussed, mainly in the light of theories popularly referred to as “leapfrogging” and “tunneling through”, which indicate that that higher education in Nigeria has the potential to produce graduates for construction industry that would meet international requirements and be equipped to face global construction competitiveness arena.

REFERENCES About the Leapfrog Institutes (2012). http://leapfrog.umn.edu/about.html Becerik-Gerber, B., Gerber, D. J., Ku, K. (2011). The pace of technological innovation in architecture, engineering, and construction education: integrating recent trends into the curricula. Journal of Information Technology in Construction. 16, 411-432. http://itcon.org/2011/24 Bender, D. M., & Vredevoogd, J. D. (2006). Using Online Education Technologies to Support Studio Instruction. Educational Technology & Society, 9 (4), 114-122. Boer de, H., Huisman, J., Klemperer, A., Meulen van der, B., Neave, G., Theisens, H. and Wende van der, M. (2002). Academia in the 21st century: an analysis of trends and perspectives in higher education and research. AWT-Achtergrondstudie 28 . Adviesraad voor het Wetenschaps- en Technologiebeleid, The Hague. http://doc.utwente.nl/44717/ Borland, J., Dawkins, P., Johnson, D. and Williams, R. (2000). Returns to Investment in Higher Education. The Melbourne Economics of Higher Education Research Program Report No. 1 Report to the Vice Chancellor, The University of Melbourne http://melbourneinstitute.com/downloads/reports/rihe.pdf Braga, C. A. P., Daly, J.A., Eskinazi, R., Fink, C. (2002). Globalization and Technology: You Can’t Put the Genie Back in the Bottle Again http://www.cepal.org/prensa/noticias/noticias/2/9272/Braga.pdf Cao, C. (2008).The Significance of Leapfrog Education Development in China. http://leapfrog.umn.edu/Documents/CaoSignificanceChina.pdf Davidson, R., Vogel, D., Harris, R. and Jones, N, (2000). Technology leapfrogging in developing countries – An inevitable luxury? The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in developing countries. 1,5, 1-10. http://www.ejisdc.org/ojs2/index.php/ejisdc/article/viewFile/5/5 De Graaff, E. and Cowdroy, R. (1997). Theory and practice of educational innovation through introduction of problem-based learning in architecture. International Journal of Engineering Education,13(3),166-174. Education of Architects and Engineers for Careers in Facility Design and Construction (1995). Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems (CETS) Enders, J. and Musselin, C. (2008). Back to the future? The academic professions in the 21st century Higher education to 2030 – volume 1: demography http://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/41939654.pdf Fidalgo, J.G., Simões, M. and Duarte, A. (2010). Mind the Gap: Education Inequality at the Regional Level in Portugal, 1986-2005. Faculdade de Economia, Universidade de Coimbra, 32, 2243. http://ideas.repec.org/a/gmf/journl/y2010i32p22-43.html Janjua, P.Z. (2011). Upgrading the standard of higher education in developing countries through international cooperation International Journal of Education Administration and Policy Studies. 3(7), 103-111.

Jaselskis, E., Ruwanpura, J., Becker, T., Silva, L., Jewell, P., and Floyd, E. (2011). Innovation in Construction Engineering Education Using Two Applications of Internet-Based Information Technology to Provide Real-Time Project Observations. Journal of Constnuctio. Engineering Management. 137, SPECIAL ISSUE: Construction Engineering: Opportunity and Vision for Education, Practice, and Research, http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000297 ). Katz, R.N. (2008). The tower and the cloud: higher education in the age of cloud computing. EDUCAUSE. http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/PUB7202.pdf Leapfrogging (u. d.). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leapfrogging Leveraging The “Networked” Teacher: The Professional Networked Learning Collaborative. (2009). http://educationinnovation.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/06/leveraging-the-networkedteacher-the-professional-networked-learning-collaborative.html Liverpool, L. S. O., Marut, M. J., Ndam, J. N., Oti, D. A. (u.d.). Towards a model for e-learning in Nigerian HEIs: lessons from the university of Jos ICT maths initiative. http://www.forum.org.ng/system/files/IFE+paper.pdf Lundberg, J., Merino, D.C. and Dahmani, M. (2008). Do Online Students Perform Better than Face-toface Students? Reflections and a Short Review of some Empirical Findings. Monograph "The Economics of E-learning" http://www.uoc.edu/rusc/5/1/dt/eng/lundberg_castillo_dahmani.html MacGregor,

K. (2009). GLOBAL: Higher http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php

education

in

the

future.

McConnell, H., Chathoth, P., Pardy, A., Boostrom, C., Boostrom, E., Louw, K., Cuervo, L.G. and Ogawa, S. (u.d.). Leapfrog technologies for health and development. Global forum update on research for health, 5, 130-135. hawk.ethz.ch/.../23_Update5_LeapfrogTech_McConnell.pdf Mugenda, O.M. (2006). University roles in meeting aspirations for ICT and economic development. Paper presented at “Frontiers of Knowledge: University Leaders’ Forum”, Cape Town, November 19 – 21, 2006. http://www.foundation partnership.or/pubs/leaders/assets/papers/ MugendaSession4Paper.pdf Okuwa, O.B. (2004). Private returns to higher education in Nigeria. AERC Research Paper 139 African Economic Research Consortium, Nairobi March. http://www.aercafrica.org/documents/rp139.pdf Olotuah, A.O., Daisiowa,O.M., Adedeji1 and Odeyale, T.O. (2012). Re-visiting Curriculum Design in Architectural Education in Nigeria: the information technology factor. Education Research Journal. 2(4): 127 – 131. http://resjournals.com/ERJ/Abstract/2012/April/Olotuah%20%20et%20al.htm Olotuah, A.O., Daisiowa,O.M., Adedeji1 and Odeyale, T.O. (2012). Re-visiting Curriculum Design in Architectural Education in Nigeria: the information technology factor. Education Research Journal, 2(4), 127- 131. http://www.resjournals.com/ERJ

Olssen, M. and Peters, M.A. (2005). Neoliberalism, higher education and the knowledge economy: from the free market to knowledge capitalism. Journal of Education Policy. 20 (3), 313-345. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/ Pultar, M. (1998). Pultar, Mustafa (1998) "Holistic Education in Building: Premises and Approach." Architectural Education for the Third Millenium. Ed. A. Şentürer. Famagusta, Northern Cyprus: Eastern Mediterranean University. 155-162. http://www.bilkent.edu.tr/~pultar/Papers/Emu/Emu.html Kvavik, R. and & J Caruso, J. (2005). ECAR study of students and information technology, 2005: Convenience, connection, control, and learning (Boulder,CO: Educause Center for Applied Research, 2005). Steinmueller, W.E. (2001). ICTs and the possibilities for leapfrogging by developing countries. International Labour Review. 140(2), 194-210. Toor, S. and Ofori, G. (2008). Developing Construction Professionals of the 21st Century: Renewed Vision for Leadership.” Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 134(3), 279–286. http://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs Tunnel effect (2012). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunnel_effect Uldrich, J. & Anderson, S. (2008). The Future of Higher Education: A Cloudy Forecast. http://www.futur1st.com/the-future-of-higher-education-a-cloudy-forecast/ Unterhalter, E. (2012). What is wrong with global inequality in higher education? Public good, reciprocity and associational justice. http://www.srhe.ac.uk/conference2011/abstracts/0187.pdf Wang, X. (u.d.). The Leapfrog Principle and Paradigm Shifts in Education. http://leapfrog.umn.edu/Documents/WangParadigmShifts.pdf World declaration on higher education for the twenty-first century: vision and action(1998). http://www.unesco.org/education/educprog/wche/declaration_eng.htm

.