Learning Resources

Abstract: This is a revised version of the article originally published in Planning for Higher Education 43 (4), Summer 2015.
We are seeing an emergent campus type driven by a desire around the world for economically accessible, community-focused—and community-grown—learning and knowledge creation in a networked digital age. While questions about the future of the traditional campus have been a central focus of higher education discussions, off to the side there is a groundswell of learning activities that is all about the “there” there while also being everywhere. Grounded in physical communities, these activities strive to connect home, school, and work in a continuous lifelong learning path nourished by open digital resources. This is the Networked Community (College) for the growing legions of Citizen Learners. While seemingly peripheral to traditional higher education, this new model represents an approach that increasingly will be central to learning and knowledge creation in the 21st century not only beyond a traditional institution’s boundaries but also at its very core.

Abstract: The earliest American colleges were designed with health in mind. Today, however, the importance of the relationship between the campus environment and student health has waned in favor of individually based evaluations and behavioral interventions, an approach that fails to consider the contexts in which behaviors occur and overlooks the fundamental role of place—and those who design it—in shaping human health. In this article I argue that, in fact, the college campus matters to student health and thus must be designed and evaluated accordingly. Using an ecological model of health to explore two burgeoning student health concerns—mental health and sedentary behavior—I identify health needs not currently addressed by standard assessments of student health, define a new method for evaluating the environmental contexts in which health-related behaviors occur, and offer recommendations for planning and designing campuses as healthy places.

Abstract: Globally, changes in demographic and financial realities—and shifts in educational approach to meet these new challenges—require colleges and universities to reorient to support new educational models. In the process, institutions are recasting both what higher education is and how a physical environment can serve it. A look at the diverse approaches schools are taking to planning, design, and building around the world produces a revealing snapshot of a fast-changing future for campuses and the new experience students and young workers will come to know. Amidst all this change, the campus—in all its evolving forms—matters as much as ever.

Abstract: There are literally thousands of studies on retention efforts; however, the role of the built environment at the campus level is largely ignored. Using data from 103 universities in the United States with high research activities, we found strong positive associations between three campus qualities—(1) greenness, (2) urbanism, and (3) on-campus living—and student retention and graduation rates after controlling for student selectivity, class size, total undergraduate enrollment, and university type. Overall, this research provides new insight for university administrators, campus planners, and higher education researchers about the significance of the campus built environment in retention efforts.

Abstract: The forms and layouts of classrooms reflect the societies and economies that students will face when they graduate. As happened in the previous two industrial revolutions, classrooms today need to respond to an emerging “third industrial revolution,” with its demand for innovation and creativity and its provision of information on demand. Active learning classrooms represent a transition to a future in which most learning will no longer happen in what we call a “classroom” today. Instead, students and teachers will be able to move to a variety of spaces, on demand, in order to accommodate different kinds of intelligences and pedagogies.

Abstract: This article combats traditional notions of higher education planning by emphasizing a “planning as playmaking” approach that stresses authentic, active, integrative, and ongoing planning that drives change. The results of a recent survey reveal the value of integrated planning across higher education—building relationships across boundaries, aligning planning practices, creating a sustainable culture of change—but sputtering attempts at implementing these concepts durably. Five essential strategies help institutions fill the gap: balancing creativity and discipline, connecting choices to underlying values, developing planners across the institution, celebrating the “expert-generalist,” and bridging pragmatism and ambition to foster sound implementation.

Abstract: While college and university administrators tend to be conscious of the need to integrate financial and budgetary considerations into institutional plans, there are other equally important concerns to weave into planning. Real integrated plans proclaim not only what the organization will invest in and improve on but also what it will cease doing. Priority setting, done properly, includes decisions about shutting down non-priority activities, yet most institutional plans in higher education shy away from such considerations. Mindful of the hard choices that must be made in genuinely integrated plans, college and university leaders must be careful to compose planning teams with diverse sets of participants whose ownership of the plan lends overall legitimacy to the process and the plan itself.