Learning Resources

Abstract: On-campus living has been linked to student success and is a key factor in admissions decisions. As campuses look to expand and improve their housing inventories in a challenging fiscal environment, there are more options than ever available. One institution will share its recent experiences with several of these options. The University of Massachusetts (UMass) Lowell has more than doubled its on-campus housing inventory in the past five years using a combination of P3, real estate acquisitions, and conventional construction. This session will compare the relative benefits and particular challenges in utilizing these types of housing delivery methods. Come learn from campus facilities planning and student affairs officials, who will address the pros and cons of different delivery methods (P3, purchase/renovation, and conventional construction) from the perspective of up-front costs, operating and maintenance factors, student experience, and functionality.

Abstract: Challenging times continue for higher education: calls for more accountability, assessment of outcomes, evidence of institutional performance, relevance for life and careers, and student success. Integrated strategic planning and decision making in this ever-changing environment is critical for campus leadership. To maximize accountability, assessment, analytics, and accreditation, it is imperative for campus leaders to develop an integrated approach that begins with standard metrics, aligns with performance-based goals, and connects with accreditation requirements. Analytics, learning analytics, and learning management systems provide the crucial link to learning standards that support the reporting, monitoring, and improvement of student learning.

Abstract: In 2009 the Arizona University System (supporting over 130,000 enrollments) through its Board of Regents directed its board president and the presidents of Arizona State University, University of Arizona, and Northern Arizona University to create an operational plan that reflected the board’s vision, goals, and strategic directions. A primary objective was to transform the system (or enterprise) vision into concrete goals and outcomes that would directly connect to financial decision making at the system and university level. The backdrop for higher education planning and budgeting expectations included the continuation of severe reductions in state funding, rapidly increasing student tuition and fees, and a call for greater accountability. The planning processes were characterized by the integration of board and presidential discussions, inclusion of constituent debate, identification of strategic choices, and approval of outcomes focused on measuring performance. The integration ran across and within three organizations or levels that included the Arizona Board of Regents, its system administration, and the three universities.