Learning Resources

Abstract: Institutions are adapting their strategic plans, layering the impacts of technology, and thinking towards the future during the COVID-19 pandemic. In order to provide students with a quality education, institutions must learn, test, and implement changes quickly. This session will explore the core issues, challenges, and opportunities that are shaping higher education and uncover the breadth of adaptation that institutions must undertake in this time of disruption. Come learn how to better prepare to meet your institution’s current needs and future challenges by sharing implementable ideas and insights with your peers.

Abstract: Leaders across higher education have had to confront the collision of three pandemics—health, economic, and racial. No institution has escaped worrying about the wellbeing of staff, students, faculty and alumni; no school has gone untouched by the economic fallout of going online or staying in place; all anticipate new costs whether instruction is online or hybrid. Most know they have an obligation to address racism and inequality. Where does diversity, equity, and inclusion fit in this world? Should it fit?

Abstract: If a facilities master plan cannot keep up with rapid change, it becomes just another big book on the shelf. The University of Michigan-Ann Arbor’s (UM) College of Engineering did away with a static master plan in favor of a one that is data-driven and reflects the latest trends in engineering education. In this session, you will learn how UM created this responsive master plan that acts more as an interactive set of tools than a static document.

Abstract: Designing libraries based on student experience rather than book storage provides the potential to cater to a wider variety of students and learning styles, transforming libraries from an afterthought for prospective students to an asset for recruitment. This session will use recent library projects to study the effect of major program shifts on student behavior and discourse. We will look at both larger capital improvement projects and “small wins” that can be readily executed.

Abstract: In 1966, Frederick W. Mayer joined the staff of the University Planner’s Office at the University of Michigan. In 1968 he was named “university planner”—a position he held until his retirement in 2003. In this position he was responsible for the preparation and updating of master plans for all of the university’s campuses.

The material included in this work is presented as a case study of one university’s successful program of campus planning and implementation over a period of 40 years. It is hoped that it will prove instructive and useful to other institutions and individuals engaged in the process of campus planning.

Abstract: This article evaluates administrative bloat, the ballooning growth of administrative functions and personnel, in American higher education. This evaluation was undertaken through a review of the available literature describing administrative bloat. Though unintentional, increased spending and government requirements for accountability may have contributed to overall growth and cost in higher education. Similarly, the changing composition of faculty—in terms of tenure-track faculty, annual contracts, and adjunct faculty—may have also played a role in the increased influence that administration has over campus policy and curricular decisions. Strategies to mitigate the cost of administrative bloat and to balance campus decisions between faculty and administration are suggested.

Abstract: Given the increase in student commuters, part-time students, and online learning, institutions of higher education are evolving to embrace a blended campus experience. The emerging importance of student connectivity and interaction can be seen in the new role of the student union as a center of student life and learning. This article explores how University of California, Berkeley, North Carolina Agricultural & Technical State University, and Portland Community College have leveraged new student union complexes—including associated open space—to address changing student needs and increase social interaction.

Abstract: This article explores a major opportunity that universities have to capitalize on their existing property portfolio to both earn additional revenue and enhance the quality of the student and staff experience: the creation of university-linked retirement communities. We examine this opportunity in the context of demographic and educational trends in the United States and United Kingdom and identify the factors that act as catalysts for universities to create these communities. We then describe a conceptual framework for university-linked retirement communities that categorizes communities in terms of the level of university involvement in the community and the level of care provided to the residents. We next place university-linked retirement communities in a broader context of social housing trends in Europe and suggest that it may also be possible to create more socially inclusive university-linked learning-centered communities that provide additional opportunities for universities to capitalize on their resources and expertise while contributing to the surrounding community.

Abstract: Universities and colleges across the country are faced with growth in the campus population and the loss of surface parking lots for new buildings. The response of many institutions is to build new garages with the assumption that parking demand ratios will remain the same. Such an approach, however, can be extremely expensive—upwards of $2,000 per net new space annually. In many cases, a mix of parking and demand reduction programs—such as shuttles, bicycle and pedestrian improvements, and financial incentives not to drive—can accommodate growth at a lower cost per trip. A balanced approach will also tend to support other goals, from improving town-gown relations to maintaining debt capacity. Demand management strategies have been employed by institutions for many years. However, it is less common for a cost-benefit analysis to be undertaken comparing them with new parking construction. Using examples from universities in California and Colorado, this article demonstrates a methodology to inform basic decisions on the amount of parking required to cater to campus growth, which can be incorporated into campus master planning.