Paper ID #18320

Unique Approach to Teaching Heavy Civil Estimating

Dr. Okere O. George, Washington State University
George is an assistant professor in the construction management program in the School of Design and
Construction at Washington State University (WSU). Before joining WSU he worked for Kiewit Corpo-
ration on various heavy civil projects. He received his PhD in Technology Management from Indiana
State University with specialization in Construction Management. His research focus is in the area of
contract administration on state DOT projects.
Dr. W. Max Kirk, Washington State University
Max is currently an Associate Professor in Construction Management in the School of Design and Con-
struction at Washington State University. Max received a B.S., Washington State University, 1977; B.A.,
Eastern Washington University, June 1985; M.S. Arizona State University, May 1990; Ph.D., University
of Nebraska-Lincoln, May 2000.
After stepping down from administrative duties as Interim Director School of Design and Construction
in 2014, Assistant Director School of Design and Construction (2006-2013) and coordinator of Construc-
tion Management (2001-2013), Max is now focusing on his teaching and research duties and also been
appointed as the University Ombudsman in July 2015.
This past spring of 2014 working as a Co-PI a team of researchers received a research grant to study
Climate Change Impacts on Indoor Air Quality. Grant Funded $996,588.00 Max also holds a patent No.
6,213,117 (2000) for a Motorized, Insulated Damper Assembly for Indoor Air Quality.

American
c Society for Engineering Education, 2017
 Unique Approach to Teaching Heavy Civil Cost Estimating

This paper is an evidence-based practice paper and it is about a unique approach to teaching
heavy civil cost estimating.
Abstract
Construction performance and efforts have always been measured in terms of time and budget,
and a good understanding of the basis for generating time and cost estimate is required of
construction management (CM) students and construction engineering (ConE) students. This is
important because they need such knowledge in order to conceptualize, design, and construct
projects. The need to create time and cost estimate at some point in a project’s lifecycle is a
certainty. Students must be taught how to create an accurate cost estimate, which in part depends
on the quality of knowledge transferred to the students. How can educators evaluate the quality
of the knowledge transferred to students in the area of cost estimating, if they do not have a real
world method to test out the quality of knowledge transferred? The purpose of this paper is to
present a unique approach to teaching heavy civil cost estimating, one that allows students to
prepare bids on state or local transportation projects. This method also provides the basis for
students and educators to assess the quality of the teaching technique in the area of heavy civil
cost estimating.
With this in mind, the authors have developed a unique instructional method for teaching heavy
civil cost estimating. The course is taught in such a way that students bid projects alongside
licensed contractors or bid on recently bid projects. This method provides students with an in-
depth knowledge of cost estimating and all the steps that are akin to the real world cost
estimating practice. The data collected within the last two years from projects that the students
have bid on, show how close students’ bids are to those submitted by licensed contractors. While
the approach of bidding alongside other contractors in a real world scenario has its challenges,
the option of bidding recently bid projects is the recommended method, because it allows for a
wide range of projects to select from, and there is no need try to align with whatever project is
bidding at that time. The significance of these methods is three-fold. First, it offers students the
kinds of exposures that are typically open to professionals in the construction industry, and as
such, the students become practice-ready graduates. Secondly, this method provides a strong
basis for students to evaluate the quality of education that they are receiving. Thirdly, educators
can assess how well they are performing by looking at how closely the students’ bids fall within
those of experienced contractors.
Introduction
Dysert [1] defined an estimate as “a prediction of the probable costs of a project, of a given and
documented scope, to be completed at a defined location and point of time in the future.”
Estimating is the process of determining the quantity of work and cost of all resources (labor,
materials, equipment, and subcontracts) and incidentals required to construct projects.
Projects to be built in the future are estimated in the present, and the estimates are developed to
show how much the projects will cost at some point when they are finally constructed. Such
projection is based on what is known now and how well the future conditions can be predicted.
Therefore, there is no way one can be 100% accurate in predicting and estimating all future
conditions of a project. According to Park and Chapin [2], a cost estimate is not useful if it fails
to make an accurate projection of the cost of doing the work. Dysert [1] agrees that an estimate
could never be 100% accurate. However, the author states that the accuracy of each phase of a
project estimate (based on the scope detail) should reliably predict the costs to deliver the
project. As such, cost estimates should provide sufficient accuracy to support decision making.
Students in the CM and ConE programs are taught to prepare cost estimates for items of work
and in some cases a whole project cost estimate, with sufficient accuracy to support decision
making. But how can educators evaluate the quality of the knowledge transferred to students in
the area of cost estimating, if they do not test it out in the real world?
While it is know that a 100% accurate estimate is not possible, the expectation is that the
estimates prepared by students are accurate enough and within an acceptable range. This paper
presents a unique approach to teaching cost estimation which allows students and educators to
see if the estimates prepared by the students are within a reasonable range of those prepared by
licensed contractors. For the students, this method tests the quality of knowledge gained in the
area of cost estimating, and for the educators, it provides a path to evaluate the course contents,
the student learning outcomes and the areas that need improvements. For contractors, it shows
the level of job readiness.
What follows is a review of how cost estimating is practiced in the real world by practitioners,
how educators organize their course contents to educate students in the area of cost estimating,
and the method that was used by one educator to bring real world cost estimating experience to
his students. In addition, the paper describes how the method has been advanced, and provides
reports that show the range of students’ cost estimates as compared to those of licensed
contractors.
Cost Estimating in the Real World – Standard of Practice
Over the years several professionals have developed fundamental principles that have guided the
way practitioners estimate the cost of projects. Principles are fundamental truths that explain
relationships between two or more sets of variables and define actions or steps required to attain
some desired objectives. In the construction environment, those desired objectives involve
meeting time, budget, scope, and quality.
Carr [3] provided seven fundamental principles that should guide good estimating practices: 1)
the need to produce realistic estimates; 2) the use of the appropriate level of detail for each stage
of project development; 3) making sure to provide a complete estimate of all work items,
incidentals, and their costs; 4) documentation of the project scope, estimate basis, project
conditions, methods of construction, assumptions, and calculations; 5) inclusion of all direct and
indirect costs; 6) including all fixed, and variable costs; 7) accounting for uncertainty with the
appropriate level of contingency.
The American Society of Professional Estimators (ASPE) technical papers retrieved from
http://www.aspenational.org/page/TechnicalPapers on “how to estimate the cost of..” provide a
standard framework of how professional estimators go about preparing the price of an item of
work, or for a whole project. After reviewing over 30 of these technical papers, a theme emerges:
scope definition, scope breakdown using MasterFormat divisions and subdivisions as a guide,
definition of unit of measurements, consideration of various known factors and cost drivers,
consideration of risk factors, quantity takeoff, resources (labor, material, equipment, subcontract)
needs, and pricing out all associated resources and efforts needed to complete the work. In
addition, the format includes a section for ratios and analysis, which is used for testing out the
accuracy of the bid against known benchmarks.

The Association for Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE) is comprised of construction

professionals, and the association’s journals are practice-based and practical. The total cost
management (TCM) framework published by AACE [4] details the fundamental principles and
framework that inform how practitioners should practice cost estimating and include the
following:
1. Plan for cost estimating
2. Quantify scope content
3. Cost scope content
4. Price the cost estimate
5. Simulate and optimize costs
6. Budget costs
7. Analyze cash flow
8. Bidding the cost estimate
9. Review and document estimate
10. Develop and maintain methods and tools

On state DOT projects, the estimates developed by the agencies are based on several standard
practices. They start with a clear definition of the scope of work, as defined in the plans and
specifications. Then the associated bid items are scoped, and the corresponding quantities are
taken off. Typically the estimates are developed at the unit price/bid item level by collecting and
analyzing past bids on similar work items and averaging-out the numbers to arrive at the new
price. The other option is the cost-method which requires a deep-dive on major cost drivers such
as earthwork and structural work and to estimate the work at the element/component level based
on applicable tasks and their production rates. Schexnayder et al. [5], looked at various state
DOTs and found that they typically use three estimating methods which include historical bid
price estimating, detailed estimating, and a combination of both methods.
Irrespective of the directions an estimator might take to prepare an estimate, the fundamental
principles and steps are the same, and figure 1 below encapsulates the key activities that show
the process of cost estimating and bidding.
 Obtain Bid Documents

Pre-Bid Activities
Review the Plans/Specs and Contract

Conduct Job Site Visit

Attend Bid Opening

Decide on Bid/No Bid

Setup Document Control and Store Bid Documents

Develop Estimate Schedule and Assign Estimate Team and Resources

Preparatory Bidding Activities

Develop WBS and Breakdown Bid Items and Tasks

Decide on Subcontract Scope

Assign Different Scope of Work to Different Estimators

Conduct Plan Flip and Specifications Review

Develop Estimate checklist Review and Conduct Bidder's Inquiry

Conduct Quantity Takeoffs on Bid Items and Tasks

Compare Quantities if second estimate is Used

Order and Receive Bid Bond Brainstorm on Construction Methods

Review and Prepare Bid Documents

Request Sub Quotes from Subcontractors

Bidding Activities

Request Material Quotes for Unique Materials Evaluate and Estimate Project Related Risks

Select Applicable Past Cost and Production Rates Determine Direct Cost

Generate Material Price List Prepare Project Schedule

Generate Equipment Price List Determine Job Level Overhead

Generate Appropriate Labor Rates Determine Home Office Indirect Cost (G&A)

Bid Reviews and Checks

Receive and Review Last Minute Sub Quotes

Adjust Bid to Reflect New Information Received

Bid Day Activities

Evaluate and Decide on Bid Strategy

Add and Distribute Job Level Overhead

Compute Total Bid Price

Add and Distribute Markup (G&A and Profit)

Submit Bid

Review bid result

Post Bid Activities

Capture Lessons Learned

Update Bid Strategy

Closeout Bid Hand Off to Construction Team

Figure 1. The Process of Cost Estimating and Bidding

ACCE and ABET Requirements and Cost Estimating Curriculum in CM and ConE
Programs – Educating the Students
In construction management and construction engineering education, the two accreditation
bodies include ACCE and ABET and the student learning outcome (SLO) are well defined by
these accreditation bodies. According to ACCE accreditation document 103 retrieved from
http://www.acce-hq.org/images/uploads/Doc_103_Updated_081116_final3.pdf, students
graduating with a 4-year degree shall be able to create construction project cost estimates as well
as have knowledge on related areas which include 1) ability to analyze professional decision
based on ethical principles; 2) analyze construction documents; 3) analyze methods, materials,
and equipment used to construct projects; 4) understand construction risks; 5) understand the
legal implications of contracts; 6) understand construction project control process; 7) create
construction project schedules; 8) create written communications appropriate the construction
discipline; 10) create oral presentations appropriate to the construction discipline; 11) apply
electronic based technology to manage the construction process; 12) understand different
methods of project delivery and the role and responsibilities of all constituencies involved in the
design and construction process. The SLO from ABET for construction engineering retrieved
from http://www.abet.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/E001-15-16-EAC-Criteria-03-10-15.pdf
states that students must be able to analyze and design construction processes and systems,
applying knowledge of methods, materials, equipment, planning, scheduling, safety, and cost
analysis; to understand basic legal and ethical concepts and the importance of professional
licensure in the construction industry; to apply basic concepts of management topics such as
economics, business, accounting, communications, leadership, decision and optimization
methods, engineering economics, engineering management, and cost control.
A review of several CM and ConE syllabi on cost estimating indicate the following common
topical areas:
• Use of estimate and types
• Plans and specifications reading
• Materials and methods used in construction
• Quantity takeoffs
• Resources and crew production rates
• Pricing
• Ethics related to cost estimating and bidding
• Direct and indirect costs
• Bid preparation and submission
• Computer applications
The conventional method of teaching cost estimating would include any of the following
methods:
1. How to read plans and specs, how to conduct quantity takeoff; how to prepare cost for
labor, material, equipment, crew; how to obtain and evaluate quotes from subcontractors;
and after which, students are assigned related exercises to complete
2. How to read plans and specs, how to conduct quantity takeoff; how to prepare cost for
labor, material, equipment, crew; how to obtain and evaluate quotes from subcontractors;
and after which, students are assigned individual items of work to estimate
Prior Work on Unique Methods for Teaching Cost Estimating – The Gap
Research is about learning from others and improving on the work of others, and several
educators have paved the way for unique methods of teaching cost estimating. The most
impressive methods for teaching cost estimating are those that bring into the classroom real
world applications that are evidence-based. From over 20 cost estimating course syllabi
reviewed, only a handful provided the students with actual assignment that involve real world
project bidding. However, the fact that they are not explicitly written down in the syllabi does
not mean that such opportunities are not given to students. Kirk [6], published a well-received
work detailing how to teach cost estimating by allowing students to bid on projects alongside
professional contractors. Kirk recommended that a cost estimating curriculum should include
quantity survey, pricing of activities, bidding strategies, and simulated bid exercises, in which
the students would actually undertake and bid projects. The author has successfully implemented
and coordinated live bid in his classroom, where students bid on state and local transportation
agency projects alongside registered contractors. This method involves coordination with the
contracting agency to accommodate the student’ made-up companies and dummy bids, working
with the state attorney general’s office on legalities, and coordination with the state to register
the student companies as viable contractors. Additional coordination requires contacting the local
contractor associations informing them that for academic exercise, students will be submitting
dummy bids, and notifying the subcontractors and suppliers of the intent in obtaining dummy
quotes from them. The author explained that this method has worked without major challenges.
However, he was quick to point out that, in some cases, some contractors, subcontractors, and
suppliers might view it as disruptive, and may not be willing to work with the students.
Advancing and Improving on Instructional Methods for Teaching Cost Estimating –
Building upon the Work of Others
Course Content and Design – Reflecting Real World Application
For a contractor putting together a detailed estimate, the real world process generally involves:
project selection (go/no go); setting up resources for estimating; familiarizing with the scope,
detailing associated tasks and conducting quantity takeoff; selecting applicable crew production
rates, material and equipment rates, and labor rates needed to come up with associated cost;
reviewing and evaluating subcontractor’s quotes; accounting for indirect cost; adding markup;
and making sure that all bid/proposal documents are completed properly and provided.
To align with the real world cost estimating practice, the method described in this paper teaches
students the fundamentals of preparing cost estimates for heavy civil projects which include:
roads, bridges, tunnels, railroad, waterfront structures, retaining structures, water/waste water
treatment plants, airports, dams, etc. Students are taught how to conduct work breakdown,
scoping, takeoff, costing, pricing, and bidding. The main focus of the course is that students are
required to prepare a complete bid package for a project that is being bid by licensed contractors,
or a for a project that was recently bid by licensed contractors.
The course content is designed to provide the fundamental principles and practices of cost
estimating, and it includes the typical areas, along with a few unique areas. The typical areas
include types of estimate, reading plans and specifications, quantity takeoff, production rates,
material rates, equipment rates, analysis of subcontractor quotes, and pricing individual items of
work.
The unique aspects of the course content include: helping students to understand the systems,
elements, and components of each type of heavy civil project; teaching students about work
breakdown structure (WBS) and how to breakdown a project; construction methodology;
working out crews and production rates; introducing databases of tasks and resources for
students to use as references; learning about the bidding process and putting together a complete
bid package; and project schedule development. The focus of the course is the bid project, and
this aspect of the course is 50% of the course grade.
Description of the Method for Bidding Recently Bid Project
The bidding method described here does not require coordination with state and local agencies,
contractors, subcontractors and vendors for participation in live bid simulations. However, it
does require coordination with the county engineer to serve as the person to help open and read
the bids out aloud.
Bidding the project is reserved for the last four weeks of the semester, at which point the students
have acquired the basis of estimating and have completed the course section on “how to estimate
the cost of” several items of work that include, but are not limited to: clearing and grubbing,
roadway excavation, structural excavation, bases, hot mix asphalt paving, structural concrete
bridge, backfill, RCP culvert, etc. At this point the students know how to read plans and
specifications, how to breakdown bid items to tasks, how to align each bid item tasks to
applicable crew and production rates, how to conduct quantity takeoffs, how to develop crews
assemblies and production rates, how to use reference tasks database and resource files,
knowledge of the different cost elements, and how to create cost extensions. In addition, the
students are taught the elements of bid preparation and submission.
The selection of projects to bid is usually very simple because there is no shortage of projects to
bid. Some state and local transportation agencies have current and recently bid projects posted
online, and they provide the entire bid package as well as the bid result tabulation. The only
challenge is in finding a project that has a limited number of bid items and can be estimated by
student teams within four weeks. The goal is to pick a project that is within a range of $0.5M to
$3M with a scope of work that captures various aspects of a heavy civil project such as roadway,
bridge, drainage, retaining wall.
Planning for a bid requires putting teams together and making sure there are enough people to
work on the estimate together. The student teams are usually groups of four, and no more than
six, and each team takes on the name of a company. Depending on the number of students in the
class, there are usually four to five to seven teams each semester.
The bid package is uploaded to Blackboard for students to access, and, the bid list sheet is
enhanced to enable students to complete what is called “bid item mapping.” Bid item mapping
requires each team to show knowledge of specification sections and drawing sheets that detail,
and specify the requirements for each bid item. The bid list sheet is also enhanced to capture job
direct cost, job indirect cost, markup, and final unit price. In addition to the bid package
provided, a database of tasks is provided, and resource files for material rates, labor rates,
equipment rates are provided. It is worth noting that the reference cost estimating database of
tasks and resource files used in the class, including the estimating software are from the chief
estimator software - http://www.infrastructurecost.com/Estimating_Software and are provided at
no cost to all the students in the class. As soon as bidding is started, subcontractor quotes are sent
to the teams for evaluation of subcontracted items of work, and all bid inquiries are handled
quickly to make it easier for students to complete their bids. A bid guideline and checklist is
provided to help the teams navigate the bidding process, as well as understand how their bids
will be evaluated. Finally, on the bid day, each team selects a bid runner to deliver the bid to the
county engineer and wait for the opening of the bids.
Students’ Bid Compared to those of Licensed Contractors
In the spring of 2015, there were 26 students in the class grouped into four teams. The project
that the student teams bid on was a bridge replacement project with an engineer’s estimate of
$554,686.50.
The project involved the replacement of an existing bridge on a county road in Grant County,
Washington State, and included removal of the existing bridge, providing a temporary bridge,
roadway excavation, embankment compaction, crushed surfacing base course, top course,
concrete class 4000 for abutment footings and walls, superstructure for Bridge #399, beam
guardrail, and other work all in accordance with the contract plans, contract provisions and
standard specifications.
The chart below shows the range of student team bid prices as compared to the engineer’s
estimate and those of licensed contractors that bid on the project.

Range of Student Team Bids

$1,000,000.00 $886,068.00
$900,000.00 $843,333.00
$760,236.50
$800,000.00
$700,000.00 $645,772.00
$565,000.00
$600,000.00 $554,686.50 $549,207.06
$504,009.50 $488,372.47 $533,724.00
$500,000.00
$400,000.00
$300,000.00
$200,000.00
$100,000.00
$-
Engineer's Contractor Contractor Contractor Contractor Contractor Student Student Student Student
Estimate 1 2 3 4 5 Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4

Bid Price and Bid Range

Figure 2 – Range of student bids on Project No. 1 as compared to those of licensed contractors
For select bid items, the table below shows the range of bid prices from contractors as compared
to those from the student teams
Table 1 – Range of students bids on select bid items for Project No. 1 as compared to those of
licensed contractors

BID ITEM Contractors’ Price Student Teams’ Price

Low to High Low to High
Removal of existing timber bridge
(Engineer’s estimate $50,000) $12,000 to $65,000 $21,761 to $85,397
Roadway excavation
(Engineer’s estimate $1,337) $1,719 to $6,685 $1,693 to $4,772
Commercial HMA class 1/2" incl. PG64-28 paving
asphalt (Engineer’s estimate $7,875) $5,425 to $8,750 $1,406 to $6,318
Structural excavation class "A" incl. haul
(Engineer’s estimate $5,760) $2,880 to $9,600 $877 to $3,990
Concrete class 4000 for abutment footing and walls
(Engineer’s estimate $35,700) $33,150 to $89,250 $28,424 to $54,550
Precast girder superstructure – bridge #399, W-NW
(Engineer’s estimate $164,000) $180,000 to $391,500 $123,342 to $160,703

In the spring of 2016, there were 32 students in the class grouped into five teams. The project
that the student teams bid on was a gravity wall project with an engineer’s estimate of
$1, 259,814.52.
The project involved the construction of gravity wall with moment slab concrete barrier,
guardrail, asphalt concrete pavement, drain pipe installation, pavement markings, traffic control,
and other work all in accordance with the contract plans, contract provisions, and standard
specifications.
Because of the size of this project, and the short amount of time left for students to prepare the
bid, some of the bid items were plugged. This means that on a few bit items, the item unit price
were preloaded for the students, allowing them to focus on the major bid items.
The chart below shows the range of student team bid prices as compared to the engineer’s
estimate and those of licensed contractors that bid on the project.
 Range of Student Team Bids
$2,000,000.00 $1,778,650.00
$1,760,554.50 $1,697,087.33
$1,800,000.00
$1,463,632.00 $1,564,744.91
$1,600,000.00 $1,442,428.00
$1,417,774.00 $1,330,909.51
$1,400,000.00 $1,259,814.52
$1,200,000.00 $1,243,285.00
$1,000,000.00
$800,000.00
$600,000.00
$400,000.00
$200,000.00
$-
Engineer's Contractor Contractor Contractor Contractor Student Student Student Student Student
Estimate 1 2 3 4 Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Team 5

Bid Price and Bid Range

Figure 3 – Range of student bid on Project No. 2 as compared to those of licensed contractors
For select bid items, the table below shows the range of bid prices from contractors as compared
to those from the student teams
Table 2 – Range of student bids for select bid items on Project No. 2 as compared to those of
licensed contractors

BID ITEM Contractors’ Price Student Teams’ Price

Low to High Low to High
Structural Excavation class A incl. haul
(Engineer’s estimate $72,200) $50,540 to $162,450 $28,011 to $97,141
Moment slab traffic barrier
(Engineer’s estimate $207,200) $207,200 to $414,400 $129,370 to $388,842
Crushed surfacing base course
(Engineer’s estimate $55,500) $46,250 to $83,250 $29,204 to $51,946
HMA CL. 1/2 in. PG 64-22
(Engineer’s estimate $56,000) $33,040 to $37,800 $3,652 to $287,328
Gravel backfill for foundation class A
(Engineer’s estimate $7,560) $12,448 to $24,118 $5,932 to $11,440
Gravity block wall
(Engineer’s estimate $111,000 ) $118,400 to $140,600 $84,244 to $182,162
Discussions
Teaching cost estimating with job readiness in mind. Estimating is a subject which cannot be
taught entirely through a textbook, especially if the goal is to prepare students to be job ready.
There are actually three parts to an estimate, with the first being the quantity takeoff. This aspect
of estimating can be presented through a good textbook, but to truly prepare students in the other
two parts -- cost and bidding – only those who have had real world experience in the rigors of
cost estimating can help students to understand the systems, elements, and components so that
students can be job ready. Therefore, the quality of cost estimating knowledge transferred to
students must be tested in real world scenarios to bridge the gap between the classroom and the
real world.
Student team bids compared to those of practicing contractors. Students like to know how
they compare to practicing contractors on individual bid items as well as an overall bid. This can
be accomplished through live bids where their numbers are read aloud along with the
contractors’, or through simulated bids where their numbers can be reviewed, compared and
scrutinized after the actual bid. It is a process of transferring knowledge through practice.
Comparison becomes a valuable process in ascertaining bid preparation and submission, and
where students can gain confidence in learning the art and science of cost estimating.
Effectiveness of teaching techniques. Though the authors state that experience in estimating is
paramount for teaching students to be job ready, one doesn’t need to be a highly successful
estimator or have many years as an estimator. What is important is teaching an awareness of all
the elements and resources that form an estimate. There are no exact or right answers when
evaluating student work such as can be found in other subjects taught within the curriculum.
Cost items and the overall bid are created by being aware of all the elements in creating an
estimate: the scope of the project, material, equipment and labor rates, evaluating subcontractor’s
quotes, indirect cost, markup, etc. Over the years that the authors have taught the methods
described in this paper, and have discovered that it is the process of creating a course that
emulates an actual estimate that forms the motivation to learning through a discovery of
knowledge – the process of acquiring and understanding knowledge through experiences and real
world application.
Challenges encountered. Challenges are encountered in teaching any course, and teaching cost
estimating is no exception. The greatest challenge in this course is finding projects that best
encompass the elements of estimating while at the same time not overwhelming the students. If
the scope of the project and the cost resources are beyond a student’s comprehension, then the
motivation to learn through the experience will be lacking. And, the opposite is just as true -- if
the project scope is too uncomplicated or simple, the course will lose its motivation and focus.
Improvements implemented. Reviewing the range of student pricing for some bid items, there
are indications of their lack of experience and use of checks. Hence the need to evaluate their
bids not only at the overall project level but also at an item-by-item level. The bid guidelines
and checklists need to be reviewed and updated to include an acceptable range for each bid item.
Bid items that fall outside the range will be regarded as non-responsive, and the entire bid will be
rejected. To help student teams address this requirement, students need to be taught the use of
“ratios and analysis”, “rule of thumb” and how to use historical past cost data as a guide to check
the accuracy of the unit price computed.
Conclusion
Cost estimating is an integral part of any construction process. Teaching cost estimating is best
served by education through realism. This is important because students must be taught how to
create an accurate cost estimate, and it all depends on the quality of knowledge transferred in
their coursework. This paper described a unique approach to teaching heavy civil cost
estimating, using a real world method that allows students to prepare bids on actual, recently bid
state or local transportation projects. In utilizing actual projects, students are exposed to real
world scenarios, and are able to compare their bid results with those of experienced contractors.
This method is unique in that it provides the basis for students and educators to assess the quality
of cost estimating knowledge delivered. Most significantly, this realistic exposure allows
students to become practice-ready graduates.
References:
1. Dysert, L. (2006). Is “Estimate Accuracy” and oxymoron? AACE International Transactions.
EST.01. 1-4
2. Park, W., & Chapin, W. (1992). Construction bidding: Strategic pricing for profit. New
York: Wiley
3. Carr, R. (1989). Cost estimating principles. Journal of Construction Engineering and
Management 115, (4), p 545-551.
4. John K. Hollman, Editor, (2006) TCM Framework: An Integrated Approach to Portfolio,
Program and Project Management, AACE.
5. Schexanayder, J. C., Weber, L. S., Fiori, C. (2003). Project cost estimating: A synthesis of
highway practice. AASHTO
6. Kirk, M. (1999). Teaching application-based estimating: Integrating the workplace and the
classroom. Journal of Construction Education. 4 (1), p 6-16