Learning Resources

Conference Recordings

Published
July 15, 2021

2021 Annual Conference | July 2021

Go Outside! Learnscapes and Optimizing the Spaces In Between

By: Heidi Creighton, BuroHappold Engineering | Julie Hendricks, University of California-Santa Barbara | Alice Kimm, JFAK Architects | Mia Lehrer, Studio-MLA

In this session, we'll discuss how to connect structure, landscape, and sustainability to counter VUCA and establish stable and productive learning environments that enhance performance, creativity, and wellness through connections to nature and newly-expanded views and perspectives.

Abstract: Pandemics aren't going away, which is why institutions must invest in permanent outdoor learnscapes to optimize educational outcomes. In this session, we'll discuss how to connect structure, landscape, and sustainability to counter VUCA and establish stable and productive learning environments that enhance performance, creativity, and wellness through connections to nature and newly-expanded views and perspectives. Come discover new ways to transform your outdoor campus spaces with wellness-oriented designs to offset enrollment decline, maintain stable learning conditions, and stabilize class sizes.

Institutions Mentioned: University of California-Santa Barbara
Planning Types: Campus Planning
Tags: Facilities Design, Facilities Planning, Landscape / Open Space, Learning Environments, SCUP 2021 Annual Conference

Member Price:
$35 | Login

Non-Member Price:
$50

Conference Recordings

Published
April 30, 2021

2021 Pacific Regional Conference | April–June 2021

Mindful Redesign for New and Effective Learning Environments

By: Alice Kimm, John Friedman Alice Kimm Architects (JFAK) | Collette Creppell, Chapman University | Heidi Creighton, BuroHappold Engineering | Mia Lehrer, Studio-MLA | Julie Hendricks, University of California-Santa Barbara | Jennifer Milliron, LMN Architects | Helen Chu, Stanford University | Leesa Beck, University of California-Santa Barbara | David Gier, University of Michigan | Royce Smith, Montana State University – Bozeman | Timothy Waters, Sextant Group / NV5 Engineering & Technology

Join us to discuss what our campuses are planning for the immediate and distant future of teaching and learning.

Abstract: This session will focus on how changes in academic planning—accelerated in large part due to COVID-19—are resulting in new physical and virtual frameworks for learning. These range from enhanced online platforms to flexible hybrid environments, including the reappropriation and redesign of ‘found spaces,’ such as valuable and underutilized exterior zones on our existing campuses. Join us to discuss what our campuses are planning for the immediate and distant future of teaching and learning.

Institutions Mentioned: Chapman University, Montana State University – Bozeman, Stanford University, University of California-Santa Barbara, University of Michigan-Ann Arbor
Planning Types: Academic Planning, Campus Planning
Tags: Facilities Design, Facilities Planning, Flexible Learning Spaces, Learning Environments, Online Learning, SCUP 2021 Pacific Regional Conference, Teaching and Learning

Member Price:
$65 | Login

Non-Member Price:
$119

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

Campus Chapels Make A Comeback: Planning for the Adaptive Reuse of Campus Chapels

Campus heritage, a growing interest in spirituality among multidenominational students, the need for multiple use of student spaces are fueling a closer look at campus chapels. This article takes a look at those factors and issues to be addressed in the renovation and reuse of such buildings.

From Volume 33 Number 3 | March–May 2005

Abstract: Campus chapels once bespoke a school’s curriculum, defined the student body, contributed to ambiance, and served as a recruitment tool for parents looking to religion to influence their children’s character. As schools strayed from their religious roots, encountered pressing program needs, and faced funding concerns, many of these rarely used buildings fell into disrepair. In the last few years, efforts to preserve an institution’s heritage, maximize space, and address spirituality have led schools to consider restoring and reusing campus chapels. This article focuses on keeping the chapel’s original design intent while capitalizing on its strengths to upgrade the building and supplement its usage.

Institutions Mentioned: College of William and Mary, Tufts University, University of Mount Union, Wellesley College, Babson College, Bowdoin College, Harvard University, Yale University, University of Vermont, University of Pennsylvania
Planning Types: Campus Planning

Member Price:
Free | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

Solving Campus Parking Shortages: New Solutions for an Old Problem

By: Adam Millard-Ball, Patrick Siegman, Jeffrey Tumlin

Recent major enrollment and construction trends on campus mean that, once again, the demand for parking is increasing at the same time as supply is being eroded. Universities and colleges, however, are able to achieve more integrated parking and transportation policies than are other large institutions.

From Volume 33 Number 1 | September–November 2004

Abstract: Universities and colleges across the country are faced with growth in the campus population and the loss of surface parking lots for new buildings. The response of many institutions is to build new garages with the assumption that parking demand ratios will remain the same. Such an approach, however, can be extremely expensive—upwards of $2,000 per net new space annually. In many cases, a mix of parking and demand reduction programs—such as shuttles, bicycle and pedestrian improvements, and financial incentives not to drive—can accommodate growth at a lower cost per trip. A balanced approach will also tend to support other goals, from improving town-gown relations to maintaining debt capacity. Demand management strategies have been employed by institutions for many years. However, it is less common for a cost-benefit analysis to be undertaken comparing them with new parking construction. Using examples from universities in California and Colorado, this article demonstrates a methodology to inform basic decisions on the amount of parking required to cater to campus growth, which can be incorporated into campus master planning.

Member Price:
Free | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

The Road Less Traveled: Sustainable Transportation for Campuses

By: Will Toor

The high costs of parking expansion have propelled many institutions toward a transportation demand management strategy to shift many trips from single occupant automobiles to other modes of travel.

From Volume 31 Number 3 | March–May 2003

Abstract: This article provides a survey of innovative approaches to campus transportation in the United States. The high costs of parking expansion have propelled many institutions toward a transportation demand management strategy, using parking pricing, transit passes for students and employees, and investment in bicycle infrastructure to shift many trips from single-occupant automobiles to other modes of travel. These institutions have experienced multiple benefits, including lower transportation costs, lower environmental impacts, and improved community relations.

Institutions Mentioned: University of Colorado Boulder, University of Maryland-College Park, Stanford University, University of California-Davis, University of California-Santa Barbara, The University of Montana, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, University of Vermont, Cornell University, University of Washington-Seattle Campus, University of California-San Diego

Member Price:
Free | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

Successful Strategies for Planning a Green Building

By: William Browning

Green buildings offer many advantages over their conventional counterparts, but their development requires a set of clear environmental performance goals as well as involvement from a wide range of participants.

From Volume 31 Number 3 | March–May 2003

Abstract: Green buildings offer many compelling advantages over their conventional counterparts—increased educational performance, lower energy costs, and lower environmental impact, to name a few—so green buildings should be easier to develop. Unfortunately, that isn’t always the case. Several strategies are important to avoid a protracted process. Develop a set of clear environmental performance goals (buildings as pedagogical tools, climate-neutral operations, maximized human performance), use Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED™) as a gauge of performance, and use the project to reform the campus building process. All of these steps need to involve a range of participants—students, faculty, administration, and facilities staff—to achieve the best results.

Institutions Mentioned: Oberlin College, De Montfort University, Goshen College, Emory University, University of California-Santa Barbara, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Northland College, Pima Community College

Member Price:
Free | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

Environmental Management Systems: A Framework for Planning Green Campuses

By: Julian Keniry

Employing environmental management systems can help institutions address campus environmental impacts by providing a structure for assessing and improving the sustainability of all facets of campus operations.

From Volume 31 Number 3 | March–May 2003

Abstract: Drawing on recent survey data from the National Wildlife Federation and other publications, this article explains what an environmental management system is and identifies its components; examines how environmental management systems have been applied and adapted to higher education settings; reports on trends in implementation; and illustrates how the environmental management system can help in planning green campuses. It addresses such issues as environmental policy, training, compliance, performance evaluation, staffing, and assessment within the higher education context.

Institutions Mentioned: University of Colorado Boulder, University of Massachusetts-Amherst, University of New England, Wentworth Institute of Technology, University of Massachusetts-Lowell, Brown University, University of Vermont, University of Waterloo

Member Price:
Free | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

Campus Housing: The Turnkey Route

By: James J. Morisseau

From Volume 1 Number 1 | August 1972

Abstract: Building cost escalation has forced up the price of new campus housing to the point that, under conventional planning and construction methods, dormitory space can cost as much as $10,000 or more per bed. Given such costs, many institutions find it difficult if not impossible to finance new housing without raising student rental charges to prohibitive levels. In response, a number of institutions have sought ways to provide housing at substantially lower cost. One solution is the so-called "turnkey" approach, in which a developer plans, designs, and builds new housing to meet the institution's specifications at a predetermined, fixed cost. This article describes the successful application of the turnkey technique at three institutions--the Universities of Rhode Island, Vermont, and Delaware.

Institutions Mentioned: University of Rhode Island, University of Vermont, University of Delaware
Planning Types: Campus Planning

Member Price:
Free | Login

Member-only Resource

Join now to have access

Planning Types

Challenges