Learning Resources

Abstract: This report was produced by the research team awarded the M. Perry Chapman Prize for 2015–2016.

What will be the impact of rapidly developing online learning modalities on the campus face-to-face experience over the next decade? What might campus planners need to look out for over the next 10 years as they strive to align their institution’s virtual and physical infrastructure with its mission?

This study reviews the scholarly literature and the expert views of practitioners in campus planning (both virtual and physical) to forecast how campuses might evolve between now and 2030. It views the university as a “complex adaptive assemblage” made up of many component parts working not within a systematic framework but as separate assemblages coexisting on campus affected by uncontrollable outside forces. These separate assemblages and their interrelationships can be better understood in a campus context by using experts in the fields of learning sciences, teacher professional development, educational technologies, learning environment/campus design, and others to form a cohesive idea of how the separate parts might come together to inform the future of higher education.

Abstract: Wellness—including mental health counseling, medical care, fitness and recreation, and other services—is now recognized as a crucial service for higher education institutions to provide to their students. This article discusses current trends in wellness centers at U.S. colleges and universities and challenges the reader to consider questions such as how campuses will meet increasing demands for mental health counseling. We describe how institutions are establishing best practices and building state-of-the-art facilities to serve the needs of the person as a whole. In preparation for renovation or new construction, we recommend that higher education professionals and architects implement a data-driven process to determine how best to serve the student population.

Abstract: Do you have facility needs, like the need for more/improved space for instruction or infrastructure upgrades? Is it time to address deferred maintenance issues? Do you have reservations about venturing into unfamiliar territory? You’ll have to wrestle with some vexing matters—plan alternatives, big budgets, illusive funding sources, and an uninformed public.
Your concerns are valid. With a rich background as architectural firm principal and later as a community college project manager, the author has been through the drill. This article’s thoughtful advice details a project’s first phases—from initial concepts to developed projects with funding. It will head you toward success by helping to avoid the pitfalls.

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: With North Dakota experiencing a significant shortage in all health care-related fields, the University of North Dakota School of Medicine and Health Sciences replaced its aging facility with a new school in order to (1) increase enrollment by 25 percent, (2) attract and retain top-tier faculty and staff, (3) encourage inter-professional collaboration, (4) colocate all eight medical, health sciences, and basic sciences in one building, and (5) retain more in-state graduates. The facility is now a shared collaborative learning environment, the result of the university “rethinking everything” about how it delivered health sciences education.

Abstract: Public-private partnerships—in which public and private sector entities partner to deliver a service or facility for the use of the general public—are spreading in the United States and elsewhere as cash-strapped public entities seek investment funds from private sources. However, it is important not to let immediate challenges and opportunities cause one to lose sight of long-term obligations. In this article, we underscore the importance of taking the long view and share lessons learned regarding finance, planning, and negotiation at institutions that have employed the P3 process. We also offer additional best practices regarding campus master planning to ensure a successful P3 process while maintaining the long-term integrity of the campus.

Abstract: The imperative for higher education institutions to dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions is driven by the energy required to sustain their campus facilities and by rapid, irreversible changes to the climate that threaten global infrastructures. This article provides a framework that comprehensively addresses campus facilities’ energy consumption reduction and conversion to renewable resources while helping building users become more aware of how their actions impact greenhouse gas emissions. Case studies illustrate how two different institutions developed campus energy master plans and set incremental goals toward carbon neutrality and net-zero fossil fuel energy consumption.

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.