Learning Resources

Abstract: Planners are being asked to define programs earlier to facilitate the public-private partnership (P3) selection process for increasingly complex build types. This session will focus on how University of California Merced defined an academic and research science program for an unknown group of scientists to allow for a selection process, the resultant design dilemma faced by the architects, and how the team took on the challenge of modifying the generic laboratories.

Abstract: Through cross-disciplinary collaboration, Pennovation Works at the University of Pennsylvania has become a successful place for entrepreneurship in the 21st century. The Philadelphia campus unites research and private venture in a central innovation incubator and generates a diverse community, new economy, and enhanced visibility for its institution. We will reveal our methodology for how institutions can generate new economies, define an innovation campus identity, and utilize brownfields. Come learn how integrated design of collaborative space can inform a non-traditional innovation campus.

Abstract: The demand for graduates and technicians in the academic fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) is influencing the design of specialized educational facilities in community colleges. Community colleges are increasingly aligning their academic programs to the specific economic development priorities and projected demand for skilled labor in the geographic regions they serve. It is expected that partnerships with local industry will increasingly shape curriculum development and facilities design. This trend is rapidly developing in California, where community colleges are incorporating sophisticated simulation laboratories, makerspaces, and innovation centers outfitted with advanced infrastructure and equipment, along with spaces that support the full spectrum of competencies required for graduates to succeed in the STEM labor market.

Abstract: Over the last decade, many academic institutions, from elementary schools to universities, have added academic makerspaces to their campuses. This development has enabled students and faculty to come together and collaborate, design, fabricate, and learn in shared spaces. This article describes how the creation and incorporation of academic makerspaces in a university learning ecosystem can help achieve accreditation. Specific examples are drawn from ABET’s engineering accreditation criteria. The article also explores how academic makerspaces can enhance teaching objectives and student outcomes by providing a space for learning technological skills within social contexts in interdisciplinary communities of practice.

Abstract: Makerspaces designed for collaborative learning are appearing on campuses throughout the United States, including at Drexel University. These spaces succeed because they permit students to collaborate, observe, and learn from professors and peers. Unique to the Drexel project is the intermingling of engineering undergraduates, graduate students, post-docs, faculty, and commercial interests in one facility with laboratories, machine-shop equipment, and informal study areas. Facilities that give students great visibility into nearby research, contain areas where they can take breaks without leaving the building, and lend themselves to informal encounters with peers, faculty, and others result in better academic experiences for undergraduates.

Abstract: Industry and academia are partnering like never before as entrepreneurship and maker culture become more important to our economy and a regular fixture in higher education curricula. With the influx of allied industry partnerships, evolving pedagogies, entrepreneurship programs, and a maker culture comes a pressing need for new spaces, ranging from fabrication and prototyping studios to innovation districts devoted to new kinds of research partnerships. Schools like the University of Washington, Babson College, and Arizona State University are leading the way on new collaborations. In this article, Sasaki planners and urban designers examine how design disruption will guide the development of campuses that enable 21st-century teaching, learning, and research paradigms.

Abstract: As efforts to stimulate innovation spring up across campuses, institutions need a comprehensive planning framework for the integrated planning of initiatives that support innovation. The campus can be viewed as an Innovation Landscape, and settings for collaborative creative activity—both physical and virtual—can infuse the campus fabric and become part of the daily experience of users. The Innovation Landscape Framework is a tool to help coordinate physical planning with organizational initiatives, engage a wide range of stakeholders, and enable a more widespread culture of innovation.

Abstract: “Designing Innovative Campuses For Tomorrow’s Students” explores increasing investment by higher education institutions in new programs and facilities that boost on-campus innovation and entrepreneurship. This trend is a response, in part, to the changing expectations and demands of Millennial and Generation Z students and their future employers. The impact of this movement, though, goes far beyond those constituencies—changing everything from campus housing to the economic development role of higher education institutions. The examples of Clemson University’s Watt Family Innovation Center and the University of Florida’s Infinity Hall are provided to illustrate the scope of influence and success of these changes.

Abstract: This report was produced by the research team awarded the M. Perry Chapman Prize for 2013–2014.

As the recipients of the 2012–2013 Perry Chapman Prize show in their report, Research on Learning Design: Present State, Future Directions, the study of learning spaces in tertiary education is an emerging field in which the key issues are to “establish a body of knowledge that will guide the design, remodel, and use of new and existing learning spaces” and “evaluate these learning spaces by developing research to determine whether and how they fulfill their purposes.”

This report aims to produce complementary work by addressing the larger context of the university campus and students’ perceptions and experiences of their learning at the tertiary level more generally. Rather than starting from environmental psychology or behaviorist models, it explores the value of applying contemporary approaches from the social sciences to learning space design, an approach increasingly being developed. This, however, is not just a matter of applying a different research method; it also concerns the underlying problem of how we conceptualize relationships between material space and its occupation both generally and specifically in relationship to learning. In fact, over the last few years, theorists across many disciplines that deal with material space—such as geography, anthropology, and science and technology studies—have been critically examining precisely this issue of rethinking how to conceptualize the interrelationships between space, people, artifacts, and activities.