Learning Resources

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: Many institutions are trying to figure out what to do with buildings from the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, many of which could be considered “background buildings”. With failing systems and extensive upgrade costs, what are the pros and cons of renew versus replace? Can “old” be made new again while maintaining architectural diversity for students on campus? See how other campuses are dealing with this issue as it relates to policy and capital projects. We'll include case studies of both rehabilitation and tear-down.

Abstract: While nontraditional students now make up the majority of most student bodies, we continue to use physical planning outreach and engagement tools designed for traditional students. This session shares how we developed new practices and tools to deliver better campus experiences for students from nontraditional backgrounds, yielding social equity in campus planning and building design. You will learn about new physical planning engagement and assessment tools that reveal and remedy the disparities nontraditional students encounter in their lives on campus.

Abstract: Institutional data trends over time is important to show progress or areas of concern. It can be equally important to compare oneself to like institutions. Have you ever thought about how a peer group gets determined? If you have a peer group, have you ever wanted to evaluate the group using data? You will learn an approach for developing a data-informed peer group and how benchmarking with a peer group can inform your institution's governing board and be linked to mission.

Abstract: Biophilic design is a fascinating design approach that incorporates nature into the built environment to enhance creativity and clarity of thought, reduce stress, and improve feelings of wellbeing. We will discuss how biophilic design was incorporated into Colorado State University's (CSU) new Biology Building, the impact the building has had on students, staff, and faculty, and opportunities for biophilic design on your campus.

Abstract: Measuring environmental comfort and user preferences gives insights into qualities of space that enhance health and educational performance. Taking post-occupancy evaluation (POE) to the next level, tools have been developed to reveal the measurable factors defined by users’ actions: frequency, duration, and usage of a desk, room, building, and campus. Unveiling the data and recognizing the trends provides actionable outcomes for operations and maintenance as well as the design of future projects.

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: 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.