Understanding the goals and constraints of other disciplines are key to working well in cross-disciplinary Problem-, Project-, Product-, Process-, People-Based Learning TM (P 5 BL) teams. Education programs rarely offer learners opportunities to participate in authentic cross-disciplinary P 5 BL experiences in a global teamwork e-Learning environment. This paper reports on models of mentoring in cross-disciplinary learning in Stanford University's P 5 BL program. It addresses Architecture/Engineering/Construction (A/E/C) industry's needs to broaden the competence of engineering students to exercise the acquired theoretical knowledge and understand the role of the discipline-specific knowledge in a multi-disciplinary P 5 BL environment. In P 5 BL undergraduate and graduate students play the roles of apprentice and journeyman, and faculty and industry practitioners play the role of "master builders" and mentors. An analysis of mentoring opportunities is presented within a situated perspective on learning, exploring theoretical constructs and practical implications of the development of communities of practice that reach beyond the university walls. The study presents an analysis of mentoring techniques in scaffolding students' cross disciplinary design process, as well as a description of students' rolls in scaffolding mentors understanding of cutting edge collaboration technologies in A/E/C. The paper discusses implications for the design of P 5 BL environments, processes and implications for university and industry relationships. P 5 BL -the People-Problem-Process -Product -Project-based Learning approach in the Stanford School of Engineering addresses this problem by offering graduate students the unique opportunity to exercise their specialized skills as engineers, architects, construction managers in an cross-disciplinary, collaborative, geographically distributed Page 6.715.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lewis et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: