Learning Resources

Abstract: During his year of ACE fellowship, Robert Schultz, department chair for teacher education at the University of Toledo, had a front row seat as Ohio State University adjusted to COVID-19, seeing firsthand the remarkable pivot a large institution can make when its leadership has spent significant time and effort on teamwork development. He discusses the need for collaborative governance and transitioning to the planning and change leadership that is necessary for schools to effectively strategize for what’s next.

Abstract: by Ricardo Azziz, Guilbert C. Hentschke, Lloyd A. Jacobs, and Bonita C. Jacobs
Johns Hopkins University Press
Baltimore, MD 2019
288 Pages
ISBN 9781421432601

Abstract: Until recently, the campus and the institution were the same organisms, as shell and snail. The campus was an analog reflection of the institution's mission and scale. Mission was linked to place and size of place linked to scale. The institution required physical places for all its students, faculty, and staff. This link began to fray in the last decade of the 20th century, as the placeless, non-physical potential of a digital world became more obvious and increasingly functional. What are the physical consequences of these fraying relationships? How must campuses adapt? What remains after the environmental forces of a digital world?

Abstract: Higher education disruption takes many forms and its origins can range from local to international. Integrated planning is something all institutions need to confront disruption, but few institutions understand or practice. This session will discuss sources of disruption and how integrated planning can help institutions prepare for all different types as well as acculturate change conversation on campus. We will work through several exercises that will show you how to develop two to three competencies to address common challenges, allowing you to apply, tailor, and communicate a robust integrated planning value proposition 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: This article evaluates administrative bloat, the ballooning growth of administrative functions and personnel, in American higher education. This evaluation was undertaken through a review of the available literature describing administrative bloat. Though unintentional, increased spending and government requirements for accountability may have contributed to overall growth and cost in higher education. Similarly, the changing composition of faculty—in terms of tenure-track faculty, annual contracts, and adjunct faculty—may have also played a role in the increased influence that administration has over campus policy and curricular decisions. Strategies to mitigate the cost of administrative bloat and to balance campus decisions between faculty and administration are suggested.

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: “A look at what the future looked like in 1995, and what happened in higher education as we moved through seventeen years to 2013? Then, a look ahead . . . Remember: Just because we are changing a great deal does not mean we are transforming.”

Another SCUP title, Transforming Higher Education—A Vision for Learning in the 21st Century, was once a higher education bestseller. In this monograph, co-author and SCUP Distinguished Service Award recipient Donald M. Norris and his team review what the Academy was doing and thinking in 1995, and what has happened since. They take stock of the present and look back at it from the perspective of 2020. Pragmatically, they suggest dual paths forward. Which will your institution take? Path A, reposition the core? Path B, leap into the future? Or perhaps, as the authors suggest, both?