Learning Resources

Abstract: This research aims to identify factors related to university closures. While other studies have examined internal factors, few have investigated the impact that external factors, such as demographics, have on school survival. First, this research identifies 96 private baccalaureate and higher-level colleges and universities that have closed since 2000. Next, the closed schools are compared to a sample of 1,793 schools that remained operational over the same time period. Geographic and statistical analysis was completed to identify significant factors that differentiate closed schools. Economic and demographic census data were used to analyze the area around each school, and financial data were used to evaluate the financial health of the school itself. Many articles point to a trend away from rural colleges as the main reason for closure, but this research shows no significant difference in population density in the areas around schools that closed and schools that remained open. Internal factors like enrollment and expenses proved more significant.

Abstract: “Designing Innovative Campuses For Tomorrow’s Students” explores increasing investment by higher education institutions in new programs and facilities that boost on-campus innovation and entrepreneurship. This trend is a response, in part, to the changing expectations and demands of Millennial and Generation Z students and their future employers. The impact of this movement, though, goes far beyond those constituencies—changing everything from campus housing to the economic development role of higher education institutions. The examples of Clemson University’s Watt Family Innovation Center and the University of Florida’s Infinity Hall are provided to illustrate the scope of influence and success of these changes.

Abstract: Just when higher education thought it had Millennials figured out, along comes Generation Z. . . .
There are six extant generations presently represented in the U.S. populace. Millennials, or those born between 1982 and 2004, are the most studied generation in history, helping increase awareness of generational cohort theory as a unifying construct. As students, Millennials fueled more interactive pedagogical approaches while also triggering an “amenities war” on campuses across the country. This construction boom, curbed by the 2008 recession, has morphed into a call for institutional accountability and relevance. The characteristics of trailing Millennials are now providing insights into how the expectations of their successor generation, Generation Z, will differ—and how higher education spaces must continue to adapt.

Abstract: Globalization and improved access to information has opened up opportunities for more personal mobility and worldwide interconnectedness. Annually, millions of students (both domestic and foreign) leave their homes in pursuit of a higher education, and among Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) member countries, student mobility has grown to over 50 percent in the last decade.
A greater influx of students into tertiary institutions suggests a need to provide housing for them, especially for those students coming from outside the region where the university is located, for example, from interstate or overseas. However, amid fluctuating economic conditions and budgetary constraints, universities direct their expenditures toward their core competence of teaching and research leaving the private sector, in the main, to cater to student housing needs. While current economic realities make it logical for universities to move away from providing students with accommodation, studies over the years show the benefits of university provided housing (UPH) both for students and the institution.
Against the backdrop of an increasing student population in Australia and reduced access to public funds by universities, this study assesses the current number of bed spaces provided in 30 Australian universities. Findings from the study show a low number of UPH bed spaces; the authors proffer solutions for universities to circumvent their economic realities while providing students with a suitable place to live.

Abstract: Traditional campuses are being challenged by the digital transformation of higher education. The unquestioned need for synchronous place and time is evaporating. Assumptions about academic calendars, faculty, and geography are now either obsolete or optional. A thicket of demographic and business issues reduces institutional options. Academic tradition limits innovation. Investments in the physical campus and those who plan them are being questioned as never before. To be justified—for campuses to matter—they must provide value that is not available by other means. Existing campuses need to be rethought and transformed as if their survival were at stake.

Abstract: The phenomenon of universities building luxury dormitories or commissioning headline-grabbing landmarks as a means of gaining an edge over other institutions has become one of the most conspicuous trends in modern campus design. However, this is no new practice. Roberts and Taylor consider how, since the Middle Ages, the physical environment of a university has been perceived as a decisive factor in attracting staff and students and acquiring the competitive advantage that leads to success.