Learning Resources

Abstract: In April of 2017 the University System of Georgia (USG) launched a system wide initiative, known as the Comprehensive Administrative Review (CAR). The charge was to identify and implement administrative service improvement, efficiencies, and administrative cost savings that can be redirected to student success efforts and core academic programs. As Chair of the CAR Steering Committee, Dr. Marrero will outline the objectives of the CAR, the process, implementation and reporting structures, and the results to date. Furthermore, as a President of two USG comprehensive universities during the process of and initial implementation of CAR (University of West Georgia and Georgia Southern University), Dr. Marrero will provide an institutional perspective and insight into building a culture of high performance with a focus on evidence-based leadership, accountability, and continuous improvement. The session will highlight why investing in and engaging your people is critical in building a culture of continuous improvement.

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: Institutions usually spend more on providing courses for some academic programs than others. Stakeholders need to decide where and how to allocate resources to support instruction. This session introduces recent best practices using the Delaware Cost Study data to facilitate 1) the identification of under-resourced academic programs and 2) decision making in faculty budgeting and staffing. You will leave this session ready to re-evaluate the metrics you use to support instructional budgeting decisions so you can identify under-resourced programs and accurately understand faculty hiring needs.

Abstract: All learners are different. These differences—also known as neurodiversity—impact learning. Fortunately, the design of learning spaces does not have to be one-size-fits-all. We will discuss how learning spaces can be flexible and easily adapted to students' needs across the spectrum of neurodiversity, whether or not they are on the autism spectrum, manage learning disabilities, or have a mental health condition. Come learn how flexible learning space design can improve the experience of all learners.

Abstract: Middle skills education, personalized curriculum, and student-directed training are playing an increasingly integral role in higher education. A new generation of students is already likely to hold different educational expectations and desires than their predecessors. Accommodating those trends means planners, architects, and higher education administrators will need to think differently about how they train skilled workers for the most needed professions.

Abstract: Educators in teacher preparation programs use a range of pedagogies to assist teacher candidates in developing the knowledge, skills, and attitudes to become reflective instructors. Participating in co-curricular service-learning (CSL) provides an opportunity for candidates to show initiative and step out of their comfort zones, developing cultural understanding by working directly with community members and their children (Bates 2009; Coffey & Lavery 2015; Harrison 2013). In this article, the authors explore the impact of a CSL initiative on the teacher candidates from Nipissing University and the Indigenous community they service. Using a case study design, data, in the form of anticipatory and post-CSL reflections and individual semi-structured interviews, were collected over three years.

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.