Learning Resources

Abstract: In difficult times, planning and the successful implementation of that planning require the buy-in and support of a whole range of stakeholders–but particularly the faculty, since they carry out the institution’s teaching and research missions.

Faculty can make or break successful planning.

An institution must be very circumspect in their choice of representative faculty for planning groups, how they are engaged in the planning process, and how they interact with other campus constituencies for maximum buy-in. This endeavor is particularly difficult when the new planning process follows previous attempts that have failed because of faculty resistance or lack of meaningful involvement. This session details successful planning initiatives at two regional universities, one in the Midwest and one in the southern Northeast, where earlier planning efforts failed because of “the faculty factor.”

Join us to explore the successes and failures involved in these two planning initiatives that required broad-based faculty support in order to reverse issues with programmatic quality, student success, and institutional accreditation.

Abstract: Having been on both the inside of regional accreditation and outside looking back on it, Lynn Priddy knows that accreditation has long tried to revolutionize itself, while at the same time increasingly becoming subject to federal regulatory burdens and expectations from the Department of Education. That has backed it into becoming a bureaucracy at the very time it needed to break out to focus on innovation, learning, and student success.

Abstract: As the start of the 2020–21 academic year approaches, America faces a series of unprecedented challenges: the worst public health crisis since 1919, the worst economic environment since 1933, and the worst civil unrest since 1968. Public policy-makers have so far struggled to respond to this rapidly changing environment. How will the federal government's actions affect colleges and universities? What other governmental policies might ameliorate these challenges on campuses? This session will explore the policy and political climate in Washington DC, discuss current and potential policy changes, and encourage you to consider how these will impact your institution.

Abstract: The consolidation of administrative services into a centralized shared services model is increasingly common. Unfortunately, this move can be a rocky one, often encountering resistance and skepticism. Our session will focus on the implementation and optimization of a shared services model for academic services from both sides of the change—a person on the team leading the change and a key stakeholder undergoing the change. This session will provide you with information, skills, and approaches to ensure a pain-free implementation of a shared services model.

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: 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: For most institutions of higher learning to thrive amid the shifting demographics, financial outlooks, and value propositions of the 21st century, they must design and implement change that is comprehensive rather than compartmental. Since such change comes hard to institutions steeped in century-old traditions, there are few colleges or universities that have undertaken it. Hiram College (OH) is an exception. Given the dearth of lessons from the field, the Hiram College president offers this constructive and realistic example of systemic change and the five possible steps that academic leaders and trustees elsewhere might consider before triggering it.

Abstract: This article applies the three stages of change (mobilization, implementation, and institutionalization) to the academic curricular process change that occurred during the 2014–2015 academic year at the Indiana University of Pennsylvania. Reflecting on the manner in which this major initiative was conceptualized and executed has revealed an inadvertent yet seamless application of Curry’s (1992) organizational change model. Throughout each stage of this organizational change, some inherent principles were maintained while balancing the required condensed timeline for completion. These principles included consistent and transparent consultation with many branches of the university community and revision of proposed processes based on feedback from community members. The goal of the authors in sharing the change process at IUP is to provide potential insights for others on recognizing a need for organizational process revision. The authors highlight the actions taken at IUP, offer recommendations, and identify potential hazards to institutions contemplating organizational change.