Learning Resources

Abstract: There is increased demand to provide facilities that encourage student success. But how do you know if a space "works"? We will focus on how you can link your facilities planning to measurable student success. After reviewing broader national trends, we'll discuss metrics for student success and how space contributes to student success. Finally, we'll focus on tools and solutions that your institution can incorporate into its facilities planning process to ensure your learning spaces contribute to student success.

Abstract: Literature points out that big data and analytics (BDA) still fails to positively influence institutional planning—even though it's promoted as a novel approach to improving efficiency and effectiveness. What limits the usefulness of BDA? Researchers point to a lack of conceptual models that translate information into meaningful signals. Nonsense! We're using a metrics-based planning framework that's producing remarkable outcomes. We'll share our framework and how you can apply this concept at your institution.

Abstract: FLEXSpace—The Flexible Learning Environments eXchange—and the Learning Space Rating System (LSRS) are tools that can help you plan, design, assess, and improve learning spaces on your campus. In this session, you will learn about the newly released FLEXspace 2.0 along with the LSRS. We'll cover the features and benefits of both tools and how they can be incorporated into the planning process. Come learn how to use these tools to inform designs and support end users from planning through post occupancy.

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: This article describes execution of the balanced scorecard (BSC) strategic framework in a School of Nursing (SoN). The SoN strategy map was the outcome of the development phase. The two-year implementation phase incorporated balanced scorecards that linked outcome measures to the priority strategies. Thirty-two percent of the defined outcome measures were met. Factors in adopting the BSC framework included development of a strategic plan that supports the college mission and vision, improved communication within the SoN, a united effort to institute strategies to sustain the SoN’s future, and establishment of performance indicators to measure success in achieving those strategies.

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.

Abstract: In 1998, a Carnegie Foundation Commission Report criticized America’s 123 research universities for failing our educational system by ignoring undergraduate education. Notably absent from the Commission's list of recommendations was mentoring research university faculty as a strategy to improve their teaching. This article discusses strategic collaboration, a mentoring model that can contribute significantly to achieving this objective. Such a network can also create an environment conducive to interdisciplinary research that, because of its increased value and rewards at such universities, can provide an added incentive for faculty participation.

Abstract: Suggests that planning efforts begin not with mission statements but with key performance indicators, or KPIs, which are substantive, measurable, and specific directions that a strategic plan must address. Some of these KPIs are outside mandates, while others are internal management objectives or goals articulated by divisions or departments. The three types of KPIs form the "givens," or the foundation of the strategic plan. They take account of the various pulls on the institution, and outline more specific ways to address multiple needs and goals. Finally, they provide benchmarks against which institutions can measure the success of their planning efforts.