Learning Resources

Abstract: Human education is an experience that has a spatial dimension. To optimize the design/architectural component as a factor of excellence, historically, the coordination of two attitudes at universities has been a vital heritage: utopia and planning. Utopia is the energy used by universities to conceive and evolve their physical establishments. By the process of planning, campuses have undergone a long-term evolution of their built heritage, focusing on those where the hallmark is their human scale. This article illustrates briefly the application of these concepts in five cases, which have been culturally recognized as UNESCO World Heritage sites. However, it explores in depth one of those: The University of Virginia.

Abstract: Effectively integrating growth is an ongoing challenge that needs vision and attention. To preserve its best qualities, the University of Oregon seeks to grow via innovative ways, building upon its open space system and the creation of a campus physical framework vision, informed by a discourse with the campus community, leadership, and thought leaders. We will provide examples of multiple ways to structure campus growth, receive input from leadership, and effectively engage the campus community.

Abstract: Biophilic design is a fascinating design approach that incorporates nature into the built environment to enhance creativity and clarity of thought, reduce stress, and improve feelings of wellbeing. We will discuss how biophilic design was incorporated into Colorado State University's (CSU) new Biology Building, the impact the building has had on students, staff, and faculty, and opportunities for biophilic design on your campus.

Abstract: We will discuss how the implementation of our master plan galvanized collaboration and amplified partnerships among two co-located institutions, public agencies, and the Bothell community to creatively address capital funding and implement needed growth. The plan maps internal/external partnership opportunities, including shared academic buildings, public-private student housing, and a regional transit center. The transition from planning to project implementation succeeded because we emphasized communication and collaboration, strengthening relationships between institutions, agencies, and the broader community.

Abstract: As millennials move into leadership roles in academia, it's time to rethink the faculty workspace. Who truly needs private offices in the information age? With research as king and space at a premium, how can institutions design offices and workspaces that attract and retain the highest caliber faculty? This review of faculty workspace innovations across our region's institutions will challenge conventional thinking about how faculty space should be allocated within departments.

Abstract: A state mandate to increase undergraduate enrollment, the aspiration to achieve an Association of American Universities institution profile, and a desire to become carbon neutral—we'll discuss how the University of California (UC) Riverside negotiated these competing challenges while developing its master plan. Innovation is key while achieving access improvements, research aspirations, and environmental stewardship objectives. We'll share how community college districts, private colleges, and other institutions are implementing practical solutions to the new century's challenges while maintaining the institution’s sense of place and heritage.

Abstract: Design standards define what makes a campus unique without limiting creativity. This session highlights the trials and tribulations of defining what should and should not be in the campus standards. We'll discuss how to rethink the processes for creating and implementing campus standards, focusing on the “why” of campus standards while balancing life-cycle costs and ease of operation. We'll also look at how to better implement and communicate the standards, increasing the likelihood that they are incorporated into projects.

Abstract: We are all invited to take the stage in some form in our lives, whether that be in an interview for work, a speech at a wedding, or simply asking a question in a business meeting or classroom setting. We all have ideas, questions or explorations which we hold back from sharing because our brains are hardwired to prioritize acceptance by our peers and avoid rejection and ridicule. Sometimes, this keeps us safe—but more often than not—it keeps us from truly stepping into a life of opportunity. The first major theme of the presentation is the psychology of fear. What makes so many of our hands shake, our body’s fidget and our minds forget our words once so perfectly rehearsed? It is an evolutionary response, developed eons ago, designed to protect us. Public speaking asks us to do the one thing we are hard-wired not to do – step outside of the tribe and ask to be invited back in. As relatively weak and slow planetary beings, we survived only in community. Public speaking is the most vulnerable and scary thing that we can do. We will explore the role of this response and how it “shows up” for us in our modern-day world and body and four scientifically-proven ways to shift out of fear and into action using both science and story to address the “hack”. The second major presentation theme is the role of nonverbal communication. Research shows that over 93% of communication is nonverbal, demonstrating that our brains are wired to prioritize nonverbal over verbal communication. But as presenters, we focus on what we say – rather than how we say it. We engage in fun-partner work to learn how our brains are specifically attuned to body language – and the signals that we are unintentionally demonstrating while speaking from a place of fear or anxiety. The presentation is concluded with a challenge: to invite each audience member to make one commitment to themselves to lean in towards one area of fear in their life, whether that’s practicing a strategy at home or stepping onto the stage to share their message with the world.

Abstract: Many institutions are trying to figure out what to do with buildings from the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, many of which could be considered “background buildings”. With failing systems and extensive upgrade costs, what are the pros and cons of renew versus replace? Can “old” be made new again while maintaining architectural diversity for students on campus? See how other campuses are dealing with this issue as it relates to policy and capital projects. We'll include case studies of both rehabilitation and tear-down.