Learning Resources

Supporting Neurodiversity in Higher Education

When Every Space Counts

By: Kathleen Kelly, MBA, AIA, LEED A+P

By integrating several unique campus voices, we can realize that unassignable space is highly valuable to the neurodivergent campus occupant.

From Volume 51 Number 4 | July–September 2023

Abstract: While universities have long been bastions of intellectual diversity, they are now embracing a broader understanding of diversity that extends beyond race, gender, and socioeconomic background. Neurodiversity, a concept celebrating the natural variations in human neurological functioning, is gaining prominence as an essential aspect of fostering a truly inclusive educational environment.

Institutions Mentioned: University of Cincinnati-Main Campus, University of Southern Denmark, Syracuse University, University of California-Berkeley, University of Washington-Seattle Campus, University of Toronto-Downtown Toronto (St. George), Rutgers University-New Brunswick
Planning Types: Campus Planning
Tags: Accessibility, Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI), Facilities Design, Facilities Planning, Health and Wellness, Informal Learning Environments, Space Assessment

Member Price:
Free | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

Webinar Recordings

Published
September 17, 2020

Out of the Fire and Into the Future

Insights on Essential Planning Strategies Post COVID

By: Pete Zuraw, Vice President, Market Strategy and Development, Gordian (Moderator) | Michael McCormick, Associate Vice President Asset Management and University Architect, University of Washington | Mina Amundsen, Assistant Vice President, Facilities and Capital Planning, Colby College

The integrative process of short-term planning during the pandemic effectively brought together academic, financial, and physical planning, and presents a unique opportunity to continue work across traditional planning silos. Explore new planning modes being used during this crisis and their long-term application.

Abstract: Higher education has been responding in crisis mode since spring and racing toward an entirely new kind of academic year this fall. How can we turn this experience into productive new strategies for planning and leadership?

Existing siloed decision making would not have allowed for a successful response to the rapidly changing conditions brought on by the pandemic. The integrative process of short-term planning effectively brought together academic, financial, and physical planning, and presents a unique opportunity to continue work across traditional planning silos and modes of learning and living.

Institutions Mentioned: University of Washington-Seattle Campus, Colby College
Planning Types: Campus Planning
Tags: COVID-19, Response Planning

Member Price:
Free

Non-Member Price:
Free

Conference Recordings

Published
August 28, 2020

2020 Pacific Regional Conference | August–October 2020

Curriculum Redesign

Evolving Practices for Virtual and Physical Learning

By: Jeffrey Ashley, Thomas Jefferson University, 2018–19 SCUP Fellow | Scott Montemerlo, Teknion | Peter Hendrickson, University of California-Los Angeles | Royce Smith, Montana State University-Bozeman | Leesa Beck, University of California-Santa Barbara | Jennifer Milliron (Moderator), LMN Architects

This session will explore how institutions can move away from “crisis teaching” and towards a mindfully-redesigned and thoughtfully-delivered curriculum spanning a range of models, from virtual to hybrid to in-person learning.

Abstract: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, institutions have been making pedagogical changes that will impact the long-term future of higher education. This session will explore how institutions can move away from “crisis teaching” and towards a mindfully-redesigned and thoughtfully-delivered curriculum spanning a range of models, from virtual to hybrid to in-person learning. Institutions must quickly adapt their curricula in order to provide quality education in a post-COVID era. Come learn how you can prepare your institution to meet current needs and future challenges in learning through sharing ideas and experiences with your peers.

Institutions Mentioned: Thomas Jefferson University, University of California-Los Angeles, Montana State University – Bozeman, University of California-Santa Barbara
Planning Types: Academic Planning, Campus Planning, Information Technology Planning
Tags: COVID-19, Learning Environments, Online Learning, Response Planning, SCUP 2020 Pacific Regional Conference, Teaching and Learning

Member Price:
$65 | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

Webinar Recordings

Published
June 8, 2020

Campuses Learning From Each Other

By: Co-Host and Moderator: Rena Cheskis-Gold, Principal and Founder, Demographic Perspectives | Co-Host and Panelist: Laura Pirie, Principal and Founder, Pirie Associates | Panelists: Michael Perez, Associate Vice Chancellor, Vanderbilt University; Jennifer Stone, Partner, Robert A.M. Stern Architects; Pam Schreiber, Assistant Vice President for Student Life and Executive Director, Housing & Food Services, University of Washington

COVID-19 has left universities overwhelmed and struggling to rapidly shift to new ways of operating Focusing on the interactions between people, policy, facilities, and technology is more important than ever on campuses. Colleagues from Demographic Perspectives and Pirie Associates, in affiliation with SCUP, discussed the challenges, priorities, solutions, and opportunities to change the way campuses operate for the future.

Abstract: COVID-19 has left universities overwhelmed and struggling to rapidly shift to new ways of operating effectively. Focusing on the interactions between people, policy, facilities, and technology is more important than ever on higher education campuses. The short-term solutions colleges are now implementing need to be embraced as lessons for the long-term. What can we learn from others working in and with higher education? What are the challenges, priorities, and solutions and, where are the opportunities to change the way campuses operate for the future?

Institutions Mentioned: Vanderbilt University, University of Washington-Seattle Campus
Planning Types: Campus Planning
Tags: COVID-19, Response Planning

Member Price:
Free

Non-Member Price:
Free

Conference Presentations

Published
July 14, 2019

2019 Annual Conference | July 2019

Risk Management and Campus Resilience

By: Bonny Bentzin, Ariane Laxo, Lisa Matthiessen

With climate change bringing dramatic demographic, economic, and weather changes, universities and colleges must be prepared for risks to the campus's buildings, landscapes, and infrastructure that could disrupt operations. This session explores the intertwined concepts of risk management and resilience planning.

Abstract: With climate change bringing dramatic demographic, economic, and weather changes, universities and colleges must be prepared for risks to the campus's buildings, landscapes, and infrastructure that could disrupt operations. This session explores the intertwined concepts of risk management and resilience planning. You will learn about best practices in campus resilience planning, and try a simple resilience assessment tool for identifying, prioritizing, and planning for potential risks. You can take this useful Excel-based tool back to your institution to identify the top risks that should be prioritized in campus planning efforts.

Institutions Mentioned: University of California-Los Angeles
Planning Types: Continuity Planning
Tags: Continuity Planning, Crisis and Disaster Management, Facilities Planning, Resiliency, Risk Management, SCUP 2019 Annual Conference, Sustainability (Environmental)

Member Price:
Free

Non-Member Price:
Free

Creating a Sense of Community on Urban College and University Campuses

Implications for Planning and Design

By: Peter A. Bacevice, Bennet Dunkley

Urban campuses have unique planning and design challenges when it comes to creating a sense of place that reflects both their global ambitions and local commitments to a variety of stakeholders.

From Volume 47 Number 1 | October–December 2018

Institutions Mentioned: Fordham University, CUNY Brooklyn College, Loyola University Chicago, New York University, Case Western Reserve University, University of Washington-Seattle Campus
Planning Types: Campus Planning
Tags: Urban Campus

Member Price:
Free | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

Using Positive Turbulence for Planning and Change

By: Robert Brodnick, Stan Gryskiewicz

As higher education leaders, we must take charge of our destinies and shape our industry by harnessing the forces of positive change using innovative, intentional approaches.

From Volume 46 Number 4 | July–September 2018

Abstract: Today we find our institutions barraged by the forces of change, and dutifully we respond. Over time, however, we end up molding our institutions to these forces to our own peril, and now U.S. higher education is on the ropes, so to speak. We believe education leaders should take hold of our destinies and shape our industry not by the forces of lackluster government policy, self-serving press and media, and for-profit mega corporations, but to serve true learning and personal growth. There are many tools we can use to lead change. This article introduces the concept of Positive Turbulence, an intentional, disruptive approach for positive change, to the education industry.

Institutions Mentioned: University of California-Los Angeles, Capital University, The State University of New York at Albany, Resurrection University
Planning Types: Strategic Planning
Tags: Organizational Change, Theory

Member Price:
Free | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

P3 Performance for Higher Education

By: Nic de Salaberry, Ryerson University

This is a SCUP Fellow Research Project Final Report for the 2016–2017 program. The researcher’s intention was to better understand P3 models and learn how they have performed, possibly generating some useful lessons for how P3 models can be applied with desired outcomes.

Abstract: Public-Private Partnership (“P3”) procurement models for built infrastructure serving higher learning institutions started to gain attention in North America in the late 1990s—mostly as an alternative approach to adding student housing at select universities and colleges. More recently, P3 models have been applied to a diverse range of higher learning projects, with some serving core academic and research functions.

Although many institutions are considering P3 approaches among their options to address emerging pressures to expand or update their facilities, their implementation is not yet common. The researcher’s intention was to better understand P3 models and learn how they have performed, possibly generating some useful lessons for how P3 models can be applied with desired outcomes.

Institutions Mentioned: Sheridan College Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning, University of Toronto-Scarborough, Drexel University, Ohio State University-Main Campus, York University-Keele Campus, University of Washington-Seattle Campus, University of California-Merced, Emily Carr University of Art and Design
Planning Types: Campus Planning
Tags: Original Research, Public-Private Partnerships (P3)

Member Price:
Free

Non-Member Price:
Free

Increasing Access to College: Extending Possibilities for all Students

By: Laura Saunders

From Volume 34 Number 1 | September–November 2005

Institutions Mentioned: University of California-Los Angeles
Planning Types: Student Affairs Planning

Member Price:
Free | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

Research Space: Who Needs It, Who Gets It, Who Pays for It?

By: Ira Fink

An overview of research space management in the United States, based on interviews with senior administrators, Internet documents, and the authors’ vast experience, identifies important trends that need attention.

From Volume 33 Number 1 | September–November 2004

Abstract: Today, the amount of space devoted to research at research universities exceeds that of classrooms and class laboratories. This research space portfolio presents important policy and management challenges. As stewards of this portfolio, universities must address issues of funding the construction of research facilities, equipping and maintaining them, allocating and accounting for space used for research, and managing, in broadest terms, the physical and administrative infrastructure in which research is conducted. As this article illustrates, managing the balance between the growing demand for and the supply of research space is complicated. To address the issues of research space, universities have developed a variety of space management methods to fit their unique research missions, priorities, and operational culture. This article provides important insights into this little studied aspect of higher education space planning. The article is an overview of research space management across the U. S. on general campuses and in health science centers. It is based on interviews with senior administrators in selected research universities conducted specifically for this study, information about research space management available on university documents on the Internet, and on the work of Ira Fink and Associates, Inc. in programming research facilities on a multitude of campuses nationwide.

Institutions Mentioned: University of Arizona, University of California-Los Angeles, University of Pittsburgh-Pittsburgh Campus, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Duke University, Carnegie Mellon University, University of California-Berkeley, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, University of Washington-Seattle Campus, University of California-San Diego, University of Iowa, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Member Price:
Free | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

Planning Types

Challenges