Learning Resources

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: 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.

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: Higher education institutions are under pressure to make transformative changes aimed at improving key areas of performance: access, affordability, price, and productivity to name a few. Institutions have responded with budget cuts and efficiency gains with incremental success. Yet paradoxically the very success they have achieved has also impeded the transformative change their stakeholders seek.

Many theories exist to support adaptive change in higher education. A single foundational theory of organizational change in industrial enterprises explains the paradox and illustrates how incremental success slows transformative change. Structural contingency theory, introduced by Alfred Chandler in 1962, encapsulates a number of higher education change theories, further grounding practitioners as they assist institutions in adapting to changing conditions and informing their planning efforts.

To achieve transformative change requires a model of integrated planning to synthesize unit improvements into institutional change greater than the sum of its parts. This article presents structural contingency theory to explicate the change process and introduces institutional portfolio management as an operational model of integrated planning. It speaks to an audience of practitioners seeking pragmatic solutions to very real and present problems.

Abstract: Integrated planning is a key concept for higher education planners. But it is difficult to define and even harder to express through individual competencies. Questions remain: what are the key constructs of integrated planning, what skill sets compose integrated planning, and how can it be measured? We suggest that integrated planning cannot be fully examined at the level of the individual planner, but rather that integrated planning is an institutional manifestation—understood only through organizational observation. This article explores this concept and makes a case for integrated planning as an organizational competency. We explain why orienting from this perspective is critical to success.