Learning Resources

Abstract: First generation and marginalized students often have difficulty accessing campus services. Holistically supporting students through integrated services so that they feel valued, respected, and included is critical to graduation and retention rates. The University of Arizona (UA) radically transformed access to student services, bringing together previously disparate services into the co-located Student Success District that renews existing campus assets into accessible, flexible, human-centric spaces. This session will share a model for bridging strategic and facilities planning with universal principles and qualitative and quantitative metrics for leveraging existing programs and building resources to improve student outcomes.

Abstract: Community colleges provide equitable access to higher education and pathways to sustainable careers. This session will show how Laurel Ridge Community College (LRCC) secured its role in the regional economy by aligning programs with community priorities and mapping students’ career pathways to inform facilities planning. Collaboration with industry and the community enabled LRCC to plan for expansion, relevant programs, and advanced facilities for science, technology, engineering, math, and health sciences (STEM-H). Join us to find out how an engaging, user-focused academic building can leverage both flexibility and specialization to support student success and attract partners.

Abstract: “Will innovative environments like a smart building expand STEM education and reach more underrepresented groups? If technology can support remote work, then why haven’t the previous proofs of concept become fully adopted?” The author pursued these questions through her SCUP Fellows research, exploring the hypothesis that user-centered design would better address STEM student needs and could increase the likelihood of a broader adoption of remote labs. Although the COVID-19 pandemic required a hard pivot in her research plan, she was able to leverage the world's new focus on remote activities and work with students to design a prototype mobile application for a digital, interactive twin of a STEM building on campus.

Abstract: by Julie R. Posselt
Stanford University Press: Palo Alto 2020
240 Pages
ISBN: 978-1-5036-1271-6

Abstract: The services required to support the strategic work of universities often exist in silos, and this disconnection can impede the advancement of new initiatives. To prepare for a complex new program, a number of analytical processes need to occur—background research, environmental scans, and benchmarking. To develop the initiative, strong facilitation and project management skills are also required. To ensure the initiative’s success, careful space planning and financial planning must exist along with the development of evaluative measures to monitor progress. This article describes how one university combined these services into a single department to more effectively support the strategic work of schools, divisions, and campus-wide programs.

Abstract: While universities recognize the need for change, establishing an environment conducive to change requires time and movement through stages. In this article, I examine different tools and processes that can pave the way for innovation or change. These processes became evident in my research on the emergence of an interdisciplinary policy school jointly established on two campuses where previous models did not exist. The change came about because there was a confluence of forces that promoted it; these factors were strong enough to negate the barriers. There were key actions undertaken by the universities that promoted the change, including systematic program review, university-wide integrated planning, the appointment of an executive sponsor who had social and political capital, and the establishment of a “grassroots” working committee comprising faculty who were passionate about the initiative. However, there were equally important practices and policies that hindered the movement forward; these included institutional procedures that required multiple levels of approval in a lock-step process and the many facets of resistance to change. For universities contemplating a change agenda, the implementation of some of these processes and tools could potentially be beneficial in moving forward.

Abstract: Over the course of two years, The New School, a New York City university established in 1919 by philosopher John Dewey and other prominent Progressive Era scholars, partnered with the Stevens Institute of Technology, a private research university in Hoboken, New Jersey, founded in 1870. The partnering universities entered—and were selected as one of 20 finalists of—a biannual, international competition among higher education institutions to design and build an energy-efficient house. Typically, the competition draws significant public attention because of its focus on showcasing innovative technologies to advance energy savings. (All 20 finalist houses—this time, including the New School–Stevens “Empowerhouse”—are displayed on the National Mall in Washington, DC.) As well, the competition spurs innovation among students and provides an extraordinary “real-world” educational experience. Five of us who worked on this project discuss the challenges and benefits of an inter-institutional approach that also centered on collaboration with multiple community partners including Habitat for Humanity of Washington, DC, several DC government agencies, and community-based organizations in the DC neighborhood of Deanwood, where the competition house would ultimately be relocated and reconstructed as a two-family Habitat for Humanity residence. The project involved more than 200 students over a multiyear period working on and employing their academic preparation in areas including community engagement, advocacy, mechanical engineering, civil engineering, environmental policy, sustainability management, fashion design, lighting design, organizational change management, urban policy, environmental studies, architecture, and product design.

Abstract: The role of central administration in program development varies from institution to institution. Applications of shared governance, differences in state regulations, and evolving institutional procedures result in dissimilar administrative structures. This article reports on the role of central administration in new program development, as discussed by 13 senior academic officers at 12 public universities in the Carnegie Research Universities/Very High classification. The themes of fostering institutional communication and partnerships emerged in the interviews. In addition, the perceptions of the assistant provosts, associate provosts, and vice provosts responsible for the process are included.