Agenda for Tuesday

Today’s students and parents are demanding facilities that engage them, enhance their learning experience, and serve their needs. Delayed maturation of young people is resulting in new learning and working styles, yet existing learning environments and practices often do not keep up with today’s student and are inflexible and costly to change. Learn how your campus can attract, retain, and engage this new generation of students through transformative and interactive learning environments.

Learning Outcomes:

1. Identify the key components of a new set of influencers that students bring with them to their higher education experience, and how those influences affect the planning of the built environment.
2. Review the ways that spaces can foster, support, and enhance connections – a key to learning – among students, faculty, and employers, whether in mediated interaction (e. g., web-based learning/ interaction, telepresence) or face-to-face.
3. Discuss how institutions are planning and deploying physical spaces to work in tandem with “virtual” learning environments, spaces that readily respond to changing teaching and learning styles in free-style, cost-effective ways. Recognize that the spaces between formal learning spaces are just as important and must be designed to “work” just as hard.
4. Describe the life phase termed, "Emerging Adulthood" and understand how universities can recruit and retain this new generation of students who have both different expectations for their learning experience, and a different maturity level than students of the past.

In the midst of the economic downturn, Saskatchewan has developed a unique position as a leader in natural resource extraction, research, and development. University of Saskatchewan programs have expanded in response to this, with significant graduate student growth, including attracting international researchers. Today’s diverse grad student population demands choice and a community to ensure their academic success. ‘Diversity and choice in the context of the collective’ underpins the design and business case of the new multi-faceted University of Saskatchewan Grad Student Residence.

Learning Outcomes:

1. Develop an understanding of today’s graduate students and the challenges involved in creating a graduate student community.
2. Examine how a dynamic business case is able to respond to design constraints and opportunities.
3. Create distinct communities within a building through its site response, unit type, and common amenity locations.
4. Evaluate the importance of variety and choice to a diverse student population.

Metropolitan Community College (MCC) is realigning its physical assets across seven campuses to efficiently deliver quality educational experiences to the 1.2 million residents in its greater Omaha service area. Recently completed plans focus on the reduction of curricular and facility redundancy through strategic migration of programs amongst dwindling funding sources. This session will examine the integrated master planning process employed at MCC, including utilization of GIS as an informed planning tool, integration of student and community participation, and consensus-based collaboration.

Learning Outcomes:

1. Utilize geospatial analysis, environmental scanning, and demographic analysis tools to shape a framework plan at a complex urban and multi-campus community college.
2. Match institutional mission with physical vision through a consensus based process that integrates multi-disciplinary team members with several student, community, college and administrative user groups.
3. Explore student experience issues of access, gathering, and space creation that are specific to community colleges through surveys and user group meetings.
4. Discuss the student-centered and college-wide benefits of community involvement in the master planning process.

When enrollment is up and facility needs are numerous, how does a university embed its mission and values in the planning process? This session will focus on how North Park University stayed true to developing a campus that "provides for and fosters teaching and learning, student growth and development, and neighborhood collaboration and collegiality." Throughout the planning process, and coming to fruition in the new Science and Community Life Building, the student experience remained at the forefront. Several core principles will be explored, including: student participation in the process; creating a sense of ownership; connecting students to the university's history, place and brand; creating connections between various student groups and majors; and fostering community among students, faculty, administration, various colleges, and the North Park area.

Learning Outcomes:

1. Review techniques for increasing participation and buy-in through the planning process.
2. Discuss how the student experience vision was translated from initial planning to building design.
3. Examine the effects a clear vision and goals had on the master plan and building design.
4. Investigate how a focus on student experience led to the pairing of unlikely functions in a single building.

This program describes the 15 year old, highly successful, Iowa State Learning Community program. We will share the history of collaboration between student affairs and academic affairs that led to very positive retention and graduate rates. Qualitative and quantitative assessment data will be provided along with examples of successful individual programs and lessons learned. Ample time will be provided for discussion and sharing by participants.

Learning Outcomes:

1. Identify effective collaborative methods.
2. Assess the importance of communication in cross disciplinary planning.
3. Explain the need for appropriate assessment when developing programs.
4. Review an innovative program that supports the overall student experience through a partnership between student and academic affairs.

Several forces are driving change in higher education’s shared facilities. First, institutions are looking for more ways to encourage collaboration and share resources across disciplines. Second, corporate partners are playing a bigger role in academia and in research. In some cases, multiple universities are working together to provide enhanced programs. Creating facilities that foster collaboration without creating departmental silos is a challenge, and a must, in today’s evolving higher education environments.

Learning Outcomes:

1. Explore the benefits and challenges associated with providing shared facilities for multiple departments.
2. Describe best practices in creating a successful multi-use building.
3. Discuss steps in the space planning, programming, and design process that support shared facilities.
4. Review the application of these planning and design principles to the Purdue University Health and Human Sciences Building.

Current best practice supports increased use of active, inquiry-based teaching methods in higher education.  Creating more of these learning opportunities for students requires both appropriate facilities and  skilled faculty motivated to use them.  The University of Iowa coordinated planning for new active-learning classrooms with faculty development programs in active learning methods. It opened three new technology-rich classrooms, branded as TILE rooms – Transform, Interact, Learn, Engage - and has more in development. At the same time, it has carefully developed a growing cohort of faculty prepared and excited to use these rooms, and committed to mentoring more faculty. We will describe the cross-institutional efforts to make this happen.

Learning Outcomes:

1. Identify the characteristics of learning spaces and faculty skills that support active, inquiry-based teaching methods.
2. Coordinate faculty training with the planning and development of active-learning classrooms.
3. Foster a culture to support the adoption of new teaching methods and the creation of accompanying learning environments.
4. Identify potential outcome measures to evaluate the success of active learning initiatives.

Iowa State University has a number of faculty working with students to design and implement improvements to the physical environment of the campus.  These hands-on learning experiences have increasingly become an integral component to the learning environment at ISU.  Students and faculty will share four projects as part of this session.

Learning Outcomes:

1. Architecture presentation on design/build for campground cabins and student presentation spaces in the College of Design.  
2. Landscape Architecture presentation on problem identification and design/build for stream bank erosion and protection.  
3. Multi-disciplinary projects for design/construction/research of the Interlock House for the 2009 US DOE Solar Decathlon. 
4. Multi-disciplinary faculty/student led post-occupancy research and analysis of five buildings to identify strategies to reduce energy impacts of research and science education.

Is your campus ready for the unguided tour? Whether guided or unguided, the family visit to campus makes a lasting impression that often solidifies the decision about whether to apply. Incorporating 'voice of the customer' tools in your analysis can help the planning committee see campus development from a new perspective. This session explores methods to: 1) capture the voice of the customer; and 2) synthesize this research into campus plans that reflect the needs of a wide audience.

Learning Outcomes:

1. Define 'voice of the customer' analysis and its importance to planning; including a list of tools and techniques for data gathering.
2. Identify best practices for synthesizing data to inform planning options and recommendations.
3. Evaluate potential cautions and pitfalls of incorporating voice of the customer analysis into your planning.
4. Participate in a group discussion of issues and best practices.

Over the past few years, Northwestern University has created new student gathering places in several of its existing buildings, including the Norris Student Center, Willard Residential College, Mudd Library, and the Frances Searle Building. The design of these spaces has been inspired by the students themselves, who have provided key input to the university’s facilities management group and its partner, FGM Architects. This session will showcase four renovation projects that have successfully put students at the center of student-centered environments.

Learning Outcomes:

1. Incorporate student participation in the design process.
2. Prioritize needs and manage expectations with project stakeholders.
3. Provide choice and flexibility in the design and furnishing of student gathering spaces.
4. Assess the lessons learned from the process and the product in student-centered environments.

Iowa State University switched to a responsibility centered management budget model in 2009. The underlying principles of the Resource Management Model (RMM) align revenues with expenses in providing services. The RMM also requires a more integrated planning process. For example, college revenue budgets are based on enrollment and credits taught. This tuition distribution mechanism required a new method of enrollment projections. This process has evolved into a more integrated planning process for financial, curricular, and student services planning.

Learning Outcomes:

1. Describe the key differences between incremental budget and responsibility-centered management budget models.
2. Recognize how a decentralized financial resource allocation model can help support a university’s integrated planning process.
3. Relate an incentive-based resource allocation model to student recruitment and retention efforts.
4. Explore how student enrollment projections can be used to help in financial, curricular, and student services planning processes.

This case study will analyze the Des Moines Area Community College’s experience and results with developing an integrated educational environment for their allied health and nursing programs. We will discuss the initial goals and objectives for the programs; how those concepts were executed in the design of the project; the results after two years of practice; and, based on their experiences with the space and program, what they would change to improve the students’ experience.

Learning Outcomes:

1. Prepare faculty to work in an integrated environment.
2. Evaluate methods for incorporating "real world" learning into traditional higher education environments.
3. Identify ways that current educational environments can be adapted to create a more integrated learning environment.
4. Apply an integrated design process that encourages integrated teaching and learning.

Columbia College Chicago is an 11,500 student Arts and Media College located in Chicago’s South Loop. The non-traditional master plan emphasized the development of a unique student experience where the city and the campus were seamlessly intertwined – each supporting the other. Policies took the place of hard lined plans. An open inclusive process using the latest user research technologies, stakeholder interviews, and brainstorming achieved consensus within the college community, with the neighborhood, and the governing authorities.

Learning Outcomes:

1. Recognize methods for understanding current and desired student experience designed to fit the campus culture.
2. Develop strategies for achieving stakeholder participation and buy-in using methods fit to the audience and regular reporting/feedback to the full stakeholder audience at each step of the process.
3. Assess growth differences in programs and calibrate to existing campus facilities, and proposals for meeting future space needs.
4. Develop planning initiatives that engage and sustain the student experience and that embrace the unique identity of the institution.

This presentation will provide an overview of the rationale, design, and application of integrated water-based “green infrastructure” practices that are appropriate within the context of educational campuses including green roof technologies, porous pavements, bio-retention systems, rainwater harvesting and reuse, and the integration of native and drought tolerant ornamental landscape systems. Case studies will illustrate how to apply these practices through integrated design that creates opportunities for research and expanded or new curriculum offerings for students and faculty.

Learning Outcomes:

1. Explain the rationale and applications for the integration of emerging green infrastructure technologies into campus plans.
2. Communicate the liabilities associated with the design and construction of many conventional infrastructure practices.
3. Recognize the importance of the development of new sustainability doctrines and design and engineering paradigms that change values and attitudes.
4. Illustrate a framework for sustainability research, new curriculum development, and educational outreach.

This session will explore how to successfully plan sustainable, market-driven community colleges and satellite campuses. A case study, centered around the new Cuyahoga Community College Westshore campus, will show the process from the perspectives of the college and its design team. There are two challenges frequently encountered with the community college model. The first is how to appropriately balance needs for full campus support services, while still providing an educational program focus that can be successfully marketed in a single building. The second is how to maintain sustainability in an inherently auto-based suburban model.

Learning Outcomes:

1. Evaluate the importance of flexibility in planning and programming for a campus.
2. Create steps for maintaining sustainability objectives from start to finish.
3. Describe hurdles, and methods for overcoming them, during project planning and development.
4. Balance sustainability goals and academic objectives.

Cultural evolution is nurtured by a constant process of knowledge generation and dissemination. Universities are the mechanisms society has developed to house this process—a true knowledge infrastructure. Current social, economic, and technological trends create a dramatically different context from that which led to the existing infrastructure, and it is evident that a more pervasive process—an Anyhow, Anywhere, Anytime, Anybody knowledge creation and dissemination process—truly reflects the nature of modern culture.

Learning Outcomes:

1. Review trends in demography and the use of technology.
2. Consider the ways in which ubiquitous access to information changes the knowledge creation and dissemination processes.
3. Identify the effects of changes in information access that affect campus infrastructure needs.
4. Explore opportunities and challenges in the traditional higher education functions of knowledge preservation, creation, application, and dissemination.

Reiman Gardens, owned by Iowa State University, will host the Monday evening reception. One of the largest public gardens in Iowa, this award-winning facility features indoor and outdoor gardens, an indoor conservatory, a 2,500-square-foot indoor butterfly wing, five greenhouses, and a newly-planted rose garden that incorporates both sustainable designs, plants, and gardening practices.

Join your colleagues Tuesday evening for beautiful scenery, hors d'oeuvres, and a cash bar.