Learning Resources

Abstract: Book review: Planning and Managing for Higher Education Facilities. Harvey H. Kaiser, editor. NEw Directions fro Institutional Reseacrh, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers, Number 61, Spring 1989.

Abstract: In this article, we discuss a method for developing and writing scenarios for a college or university. We begin by reviewing the general literature on scenarios; we then detail a scenario development project at Arizona State University. This project, conducted in 1988–89, was Arizona State University's first institution-wide, futures-based planning and scenario development effort. The focus of the project for Arizona State University was planning and programming for affirmative action. An outside consultant facilitated the group-process portion of the project and instructed university staff in scenario development. Staff in the university's Office of Institutional Analysis then developed and wrote a set of three scenarios to guide the university's affirmative action programming and planning during the decade of the nineties.

Abstract: This study identifies causes of failure in the design of campus performance facilities and summarizes planning and project management strategies that have resulted in successful projects. Failure consists mainly of cost overruns, functional nonperformance, and user disappointment. These instances of failure are most often attributed to programming rather than design. Common programming problems are placed in the following categories: (1) "Expectations too vague," (2) "Lack of architectural program detail," (3) "Unwillingness to understand compromises," (4) "Misunderstanding the economics of audience size," (5) "Understanding the impact of site on budget," (6) "Making the smaller facility less versatile," (7) "The expense of 'statement' lobbies," and (8) "Value engineering begins too late." Common design problems are also discussed and are placed in the following categories: (1) Internal zoning, (2) HVAC problems, (3) Poor analysis of site lines, (4) Inspection problems, and (5) Client noninvolvment in trade-offs. Within each of these categories, more specific examples are given and suggestions made. The article is based on the author's presentation at SCUP-24 in Denver, Colorado, on July 24, 1989.

Abstract: Book review: Successful Strategic Planning: Case Studies, by Douglas W. Steeples, editor. New Directions fro Higher Education, Number 64. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc., 1988.

Abstract: Skillful management of an institution's physical assets is crucial to the institution's financial well-being. This publication provides executive managers and trustees with guidelines for long-term financial planning for plant renewal and adaption. It provides these strategic decision makers with a better understanding of the financial planning requirements necessary to protect the value of their institution's plant assets in relation to evolving institutional missions by giving them a clearer way to think about those assets. Readers are furnished with guidelines, examples of campus plans that incorporate them, and analytic tools.

A joint project of Society for College and University Planning (SCUP), The National Association of College and University Business Officers (NACUBO), The Association of Physical Plant Administrators of Universities and Colleges (APPA), and Coopers and Lybrand.

Abstract: Book review: In Pursuit of Equality in Higher Education, by Anne S. Pruitt. New York: General Hall, Inc., 1987.