Printer Friendly

Limitless learning: creating adaptable environments to support a changing campus: by delivering adaptability in space, technology, and furnishings, old-world buildings and traditions can successfully survive amid a continual influx of new.

SOME THINGS NEVER SEEM TO CHANGE on the college campus--at least on the outside. Except for the ever-present smart phone, today's university looks remarkably similar to that of a generation ago or even longer.

But a closer look finds that a transformation is well underway. A peek into the buildings reveals a very different picture from that of a decade or two ago. What is so different? And more specifically, how does this affect the planning function?

CONTRASTS, COLLISIONS, AND CLASHES ON CAMPUS

To enter higher education today is to walk into a world of collisions. Contrasting cultures converge both in the classroom and across campus. Learning and teaching styles can be worlds apart. Multitasking students who grew up in a digital world and have an inherent ability to share and collaborate contrast strongly with tenured professors on campuses where the time-honored approach of lectures and individual assignments prevails and technology is limited to PowerPoint slides. At the same time, some of the most traditional institutions, while still teaching many classes in a conventional lecture hall format, have embraced online learning with gusto, expanding their reach internationally and establishing new profit centers.

Generational clashes also arise among faculty members. Professors who are Baby Boomers or older often have a very different mindset about formality (scheduled office hours) and space requirements (private offices preferred) than younger faculty who are as "portable" as their mobile devices and as informal as their students.

Perhaps the cultural collisions are most evident in the physical structures on those campuses where stately Georgian or Beaux Arts buildings sit alongside newly constructed multipurpose facilities designed and built for 21st-century living and learning. In these new facilities, soaring ceilings and extensive glass create an airy atmosphere in which learning studios have replaced traditional classrooms and wide open spaces are quickly and easily reconfigured to create hubs for learning, quiet study, meeting, socializing, or snacking.

Ironically, on the same campuses where state-of-the-art research takes place, a slow-to-change culture often prevails. Yet somehow amidst these deep contrasts, coalescence frequently emerges to reshape higher education.

This article addresses three key areas relevant to the changing campus landscape. First, it takes a closer look at the goals of higher education today, the forces behind them, and how they ultimately play out on campus. Second, it identifies a singular objective emerging to shape higher education.

Finally, it looks at how design and planning can address the challenges of today's trends and the future needs of a changing population and landscape.

FACTORS DRIVING HIGHER EDUCATION

While the world of higher education is affected by a broad range of factors, three primary trends are the most significant drivers of change on campus:

1. THE NEED TO SERVE AN INCREASINGLY DIVERSE POPULATION

By and large, college campuses are populated with traditional students: 18-22 year-olds with a recently acquired high school diploma attending classes full time at a four-year institution. Yet beyond these conventional collegians is an increasingly diversified student body. The average age of today's student is 29. The number of commuting students, transfer students, part-time learners, returning students, minority students, enrichment learners, and foreign scholars continues to grow.

Many campuses are welcoming returning students, including laid-off workers and parents "on-ramping" back into the workforce by retooling their job skills or learning new ones. More than a quarter of all adults participated in a work-related educational course in 2005, and the number of adults on campus is double what it was a generation or two ago.

2. THE OVERRIDING INFLUENCE AND FAR-REACHING IMPACT OF TECHNOLOGY

Whether digital, mobile, or virtual, technology has profoundly affected how students learn and engage. It is easily the single factor with the widest range of influence in the educational setting. Indeed, nothing else has transformed learning, communicating, living, working, researching, or otherwise connecting on campus more than the overarching influence of technology.

Digital technology has revolutionized textbooks, which are now the fastest growing segment in the digital publishing industry. Professors create books customized exactly to their requirements, and students enjoy significant savings. But technology no longer simply transfers printed materials to digital format. It has redefined the classroom and community at large through highly specialized programs that support profound shifts in learning style.

Enabled by laptops and mobile devices powered by Wi-Fi, students are less tethered than ever, enjoying immense mobility with few physical constraints. Similarly, teachers need not be limited to cables, cords, or a front-of-the-room orientation, potentially inspiring more active learning and theater-in-the-round-style participation.

Technology in the hands of today's students is a given. At any moment, anyone can pull out a handheld device, type in a few words, and open a world of instant and in-depth information on a particular subject. At the same time, these "digital natives" increasingly rely on campus infrastructure to provide reliable, ubiquitous power and wireless connections for their devices. Access to technology is vital inside media-heavy classrooms, as well as outside, where it is essential to complete assignments and facilitate Generation Y's day-today communication and interaction.

3. THE FERVENT DESIRE TO FOSTER COMMUNITY AND COLLABORATION

Creating community and a sense of belonging on campus are imperative. Despite nearly constant virtual connection, students still crave meaningful face-to-face contact. Schools are responding by designing spaces for students and faculty that encourage engagement and collaboration and reinforce the social aspects of learning and working.

Modeling the teamwork conditions encountered in the post-graduation workplace, schools integrate group projects throughout the curricula and across disciplines, building students' comfort level with collaboration as they embrace varying backgrounds, personalities, and fields of study. Such cross-pollination not only often leads to improved learning, but, beyond the classroom, can also encourage greater interaction across departments, disciplines, and institutions. This can lead to many positive outcomes, from shared expertise to greater cultural understanding to improved leadership.

Fostering such cross-pollination is an important step in breaking down the silos on campus that isolate individuals and resources from one another. Instead, partnerships can form that collectively contribute more than any individual entity can contribute on its own. In the process, each party gains an understanding and appreciation of the other. For example, medical schools are joining forces with nursing schools to come up with a more empathetic approach to patient care. Similarly, engineering and business schools are converging to provide real-life experience and encourage thinking beyond specialty areas.

SECONDARY DRIVERS ADD CONSTRAINTS AND CHALLENGES

In addition to the major factors driving higher education, four other noteworthy trends have emerged in recent years that also influence and shape the planning effort on campus.

* COMPETITION AMONG LEADING INSTITUTIONS TO RECRUIT AND RETAIN TOP STUDENTS. Many students cite facilities as a major recruiting tool, noting campus age, features, and amenities as influences in their decision making when choosing an institution. In fact, 62 percent of high school seniors made their college choice at least partially on the basis of the appearance of the campus buildings and grounds.

* ACUTE SENSIBILITY TO RESPONSIBILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY. Growing oversight by fiscal watchdogs from the public and private sectors has resulted in intense scrutiny of campus expenditures. Meanwhile, low-cost alternatives such as online learning are gaining traction, tuitions are rising faster than the rate of inflation, and staggering student debt levels are estimated to be as high as $1 trillion, exceeding the nation's credit card debt. The value of a college degree is being questioned, and the call for accountability and transparency has never been louder.

* A STRONG CULTURAL COMPONENT THAT MAKES ACADEMIA SLOW TO CHANGE. Academia typically cultivates an older work force-thought leaders often work well into their 70s-and a highly entrenched culture. Consequently, significant changes on campus often take a generation or more to materialize.

* EXPECTATIONS OF SUSTAINABILITY THAT AFFECT PLANNING EFFORTS. While providing sustainable solutions is often a design requirement, they are also used by many schools to create a living laboratory for students and the community. Moreover, energy efficiency is predicted to return to the forefront as a key way to keep costs down in new and aging buildings.

THE GOAL: LIMITLESS LEARNING

As these trends shape higher education, they ultimately coalesce into a singular objective: limitless learning.

Driven by a diverse population, enabled by technology, and fueled by a desire to create community, schools are striving for environments free of obstacles-physical or otherwise-that restrict learning, communication, or interaction on campus.

Limitless learning is an ideal of an unrestricted environment in which learning can happen by anyone, anytime, anyhow, anywhere. It is readily available to a diverse population (anyone) without limitations of when it happens (anytime: during scheduled classes or on demand), how it is delivered (anyhow), or where it can take place (anywhere: in classrooms or elsewhere on campus).

ANYONE: TRADITIONAL, RETURNING, PART-TIME, YOUNGER, OLDER, WORKING, MINORITY

Within the increasingly diverse population that makes up today's higher education students is a wide range of learning abilities and life experiences.

By 2022, almost half of all public high school graduates will be members of minority groups. If those graduates attend college, many of them will be the first in their families to do so. In fact, the greatest growth in the college-bound population will come from previously underserved groups: minority students, veterans, adult students, and others. Many of these potential students will require particular support services and/or substantial need-based aid. This is also a segment that colleges have historically struggled to serve.

Students from these underserved segments--both traditional-age and adult--enter college with enormous variance in their level of preparation for the rigors of postsecondary education. For many, success is contingent on the support services they receive on campus. Limitless learning serves a diverse population by providing a learning environment and support system that can be adapted to suit individual students and their backgrounds, ensuring their success in higher education.

ANYTIME: SHOWING UP. TUNING IN. LOGGING IN

The choice is up to the student. The traditional lecture format is alive and well on many campuses, and attendance is required by many professors. But in-person lecturing is only the beginning of the learning experience today. Lectures are often rebroadcast or simulcast on podcasts, webcasts, and similar platforms, allowing students to skip those 8 a.m. lectures and instead listen in at their convenience. Students can also view or listen to rebroadcasts multiple times to digest complex subject matter or can repeatedly review classroom material or work through problem sets online until they have thoroughly mastered the content.

In some cases, lectures don't take place in person at all. For space or economic reasons, some universities offer some classes online only, solving classroom capacity issues and student scheduling conflicts. In 2012, some 3 in 10 college students reported taking at least one online course, up threefold from 2003.

ANYHOW: ACCOMMODATING DIFFERENT LEARNING STYLES AND LEVELS

By facilitating the customization of learning materials and methodologies, technology supports different learning styles and alternative pedagogies that more closely parallel how the brain works. The end result is often higher grades and better understanding.

Studies at Stanford University have demonstrated that greater learning takes place when students learn by doing rather than by listening, giving rise to modalities such as project-based and student-directed learning, individual exploration and discovery, experiential learning (using digitally created virtual environments), collaborative learning, and small group interaction. This is particularly good news for Generation Y students, who are acknowledged as natural collaborators and who prefer to learn by teaching each other in small groups.

Even in large-enrollment courses, media-heavy models establish a highly collaborative, hands-on, computer-rich, interactive learning environment. For example, SCALEUP (Student-Centered Active Learning Environment with Upside-down Pedagogies) dispenses with lectures and labs in favor of class-wide discussions and hands-on tasks completed by students grouped into teams.

Online courses are also increasingly being integrated into traditional on-campus teaching methodologies. Some professors have found it more effective to place basic or core lecture content online, reserving classroom time for handson or interactive exercises that can be customized to class and/or individual needs for clarification of more complicated concepts. Often called upside-down learning (or "flipped" or "inverted"), this model also accommodates students who learn in different ways and/or at a different pace.

Similarly, computer-based modules offer self-paced programs that students can complete on their own schedule, either remotely or on campus with onsite tutors available for extra help on demand. In many cases, these are remedial programs to bring students with lower levels of preparation up to where they need to be to succeed.

ANYWHERE: ANY SPACE CAN BE A LEARNING CENTER, ON OR OFF CAMPUS

Technology, Wi-Fi, and mobile devices have essentially removed physical boundaries to afford learning virtually anywhere: inside the four walls of meeting rooms, conference rooms, and classrooms, as well as spontaneously in hallways, dorm rooms, lounges, cafes, and other campus hubs, and even outside in courtyards and green spaces.

Learning anywhere is a significant departure from the days before technology reigned supreme on campus. Throughout most of the 20th century, campus spaces typically had singular, specialized uses and definitive configurations: classroom, library, dorm, or student union. Today, with the

revolution in access to individualized information, the need for highly articulated space has dissolved into the desire for a series of more flexible and generalized spaces that promote interaction. Some describe it as a return to the one-room schoolhouse, only on a grand scale.

DELIVERING ADAPTABILITY: CREATING ENVIRONMENTS THAT SUPPORT LIMITLESS LEARNING

As limitless learning occurs, new planning challenges arise. Schools must support the learning that happens inside the structure, as well as the information technology that streams information beyond the building.

COMBINING FUNCTIONS, SHARING RESOURCES

Often, learning is but one of several operations and functions in a building. For example, a single building might unite a student center, a research library, and a learning commons (where information technology and library services come together as an outgrowth of the evolution of less stack space in libraries). Conference spaces for small or large groups are often placed near faculty offices, academic classrooms, and informal meeting areas.

Because economic and real estate efficiency demands that every space counts, areas on campus must serve diverse functions for varied populations at different times of day.

For example, a classroom becomes group study space; a student lounge with a cafe by day becomes a profit center as a conference facility hosting catered receptions in the evening; and a conveniently located and well-designed residence hall dining space becomes a popular social hub for faculty and students.

A further outgrowth of both belt tightening and increasing collaboration and cross-pollination is the sharing of resources between institutions and with the community. For example, a university health clinic might provide medical,

dental, and psychological services to both students and the community; schools might share their athletic facilities with recreational players; and libraries might open up their collections. Institutions might also share classrooms, lab space, and instructors with a partner institution in a joint-degree program. A state university system might build one new science building to be used by students from three state universities within the region.

PLANNING ADAPTABILITY FOR THE SHORT AND LONG TERM

Adaptability is the key to planning campus facilities that provide boundary-free environments for both the short and long term. In the short term, adaptable spaces seamlessly support limitless learning. They allow students to affect their environment and make it work how they work. Adaptable spaces are quickly and easily reconfigured to allow the easy mobility of people in an economical and efficient manner.

The most successful adaptable spaces require few, if any, additional resources--human or otherwise--to reconfigure them.

In the long term, adaptability means planning for inevitable change. Areas of study, programs, research, faculty, curricula, and pedagogy all evolve and change, as do the ways people share and communicate, sometimes dramatically and other times imperceptibly. Spaces must be designed to be flexible and easy to change in the future; technology must be integrated for both current and future use. Planning for adaptability recognizes that not all elements evolve on the same schedule. Technology can be obsolete in as few as 18 months; furniture has an average life span of 10 or more years; buildings last decades.

NEW DISCIPLINES MEAN NEW PHYSICAL REQUIREMENTS

Adaptable environments accommodate the different physical requirements of new learning approaches. For example, the virtual environments used in experiential learning might require projection rooms, custom labs, or black-box theater space. Interactive and cross-disciplinary studies often involve testing, hands-on exploration, larger group meetings, and equipment, potentially requiring correspondingly larger spaces.

DELIVERING ADAPTABILITY IN SPACE

To support an adaptable environment, individual interior spaces should not be considered in isolation, but rather by primary function:

* LEARNING SPACES. Flexible learning studios--no longer merely classrooms--can adapt to multimodal teaching styles and learning experiences. Today's learning might happen using a combination of methods and locations, including lecture (auditorium), small group discussion (breakout room), demonstration (classroom), or interactive activity (media lab). An adaptable space accommodates the transition from one method to another by providing a flexible, agile setting that can be created and changed by students and teachers.

Moreover, since limitless learning allows learning to happen anywhere, all spaces on campus should support learning whether the individual is sitting, standing, or lounging; is inside or outside a classroom; or is indoors or outdoors. Such spaces are not necessarily technologically intensive (assuming students have laptops and access to Wi-Fi and power), but are often more about human contact, information sharing, and idea sharing.

* MEETING AND SOCIAL SPACES. Limitless learning supports meetings of all types, from formal group study sessions scheduled in private meeting areas to spontaneous meet-ups in the learning commons. Adaptable meeting spaces provide students with options they can implement with a minimum of effort as group sizes and functions vary throughout the day.

Similarly, social spaces such as cafes, lounge areas, and recreation centers must adapt to accommodate formal and informal groups and various types of functions.

The most successful social spaces provide access to comfortable seating, ample table and storage space, food and beverage service, as well as power and data.

* FACULTY AND ADMINISTRATIVE SPACES. Real estate consolidation and the economics of doing more with less have shrunk the office footprint on campus. Similarly, flat screen monitors, tablets, cloud computing, and/or "dumb" terminals have lessened the need for expansive desktop space. However, the culture prevalent on many campuses puts a high value on private office space, adding a layer of complexity.

As elsewhere on campus, faculty and administrative spaces often must serve a range of functions throughout the day-daily work, spontaneous meetings, quiet research, and private office hours. Agile furniture and well-planned spaces provide flexibility and options.

DELIVERING ADAPTABILITY IN TECHNOLOGY

Supporting short-term needs while preparing for the inevitable changes in the long term is one of the greatest planning challenges in delivering adaptability in technology. Providing reliable access to voice, power, and data is vital not only in the student-centered spaces of learning, meeting, and socializing, but is also paramount in the many work spaces on campus such as faculty/administrative offices.

To deliver "plug and play" capabilities most "anywhere," the adaptable environment must support a variety of connections: hardware, data, and power that are integrated and transparent as well as high speed, high capacity, reliable, flexible, and accessible. Just as furniture is designed for easy rearrangement as the space shifts from one use to another, technology must also be able to be easily reconfigured, changed, or updated throughout the life of the facility without disrupting ongoing operations.

While the broad availability of wireless and cloud computing has simplified data delivery, access to power is a continuing challenge for facilities, particularly in older structures with limited outlets and/or insufficient power. Mobility in technology means less need for computer labs or areas in classrooms, but greater need for charging areas throughout the building, especially as the number of mobile devices proliferates. Moreover, some spaces might have additional requirements, such as team work spaces that require multimedia technologies.

While future-proofing used to mean placing a lot of conduits in the walls, today it means providing outlets for battery recharging stations everywhere imaginable. School design can capitalize on this need by creating a "campfire" effect: gathering spaces with access to power that provide opportunities to plug in to recharge as well as engage.

DELIVERING ADAPTABILITY IN FURNISHINGS

Limitless learning environments require adaptability in furnishings to suit the spectrum of spaces in which students learn and socialize today. Furnishings must also be relevant to the varied populations who use them, from the 18-year-old residential student away from home for the first time to the retiree learning new computer skills.

Flexibility in furniture is achieved with lightweight, mobile furnishings that allow the quick, easy reconfiguration of learning spaces. Adjustability is of particular value in flexible classrooms where hybrid courses are taught with a blend of lecture and computer time. Providing tables, monitor arms, and/or work surfaces that are easily adjustable supports users as they shift the furnishings to suit alternate tasks or functions as the focus of the learning space shifts.

As previously noted, many environments on the college campus are used for multiple functions throughout the day and night by individuals and groups who need to shape their environment to the activity at hand. Adaptable work tools

should be easily adjustable by the user, regardless of who that might be at what stage of the day. Access to storage in chairs, tables, and room dividers can help keep clutter at bay in learning studios and meeting spaces. Expression is realized when furnishings are not only relevant to the users, but also facilitate communication and idea sharing.

CORRIDORS, PORCHES, AND LOUNGES EXTEND LEARNING AND CREATE ENGAGEMENT

Direct links from specialized classrooms to auxiliary spaces such as lounges, courtyards, group study rooms, and carrels provide opportunities to extend the learning experience and create engagement. Such areas facilitate interdisciplinary and project-based learning by fostering the spontaneity found in student team rooms, cafes, and niche spaces. For example, schools are building brightened and widened corridors with benches to create "learning streets" that facilitate relaxed gathering and discussion. Linking learning studios with vibrant concourses in lieu of static corridors enables both structured and impromptu learning and promotes social zones for students. Similarly, "front porches," widened areas with seating outside the classroom, allow discourse between students and/or the instructor to continue after class.

Exterior spaces can also become learning spaces. In some cases, a learning commons area extends outdoors via a patio or similar setup. In others, it might mean using a creatively designed, indoor-outdoor/multilevel space as a physics or engineering lab to conduct experiments that measure gravity and projection.

QUIET SPACES ALLOW FOCUSED INDIVIDUAL AND SMALL GROUP WORK

Allocating small, intimate spaces for quiet, focused work is particularly critical in environments where social and collaborative areas abound.

Research confirms that learning occurs more at the individual level, and providing an environment in which to think and digest information privately is as vital as providing shared space. Recent studies point to the classroom as a preferred collaboration area, reserving the library as the location for quiet, focused work.

Mobile boards, screens, low shelving, or temporary storage can function as movable walls to divide a large open space into smaller group meeting areas and/or create visual privacy.

In addition to quiet open areas, adaptable environments should include rooms that can be closed off to provide quiet study space for individuals or private meeting space for group work.

DELIVERING ADAPTABILITY: LEARNING SPACES

An adaptable environment accommodates a variety of learning methods, often in a single setting. In some cases, formal configurations are eliminated or reduced to encourage collaboration. In others, space must transition from one format (lecture) to another (group discussion) and back again within one class period. In all cases, an emphasis on comfort is appreciated, particularly in seating. Small scale task chairs are a good solution.

Declining costs make it possible to use technology broadly in learning spaces. Instead of radiating from a single point (a lectern in front of the instructional wall), learning can be supported on numerous walls and surfaces.

LARGE GROUP LECTURE SPACES

Lightweight, mobile chairs and tables allow users to reconfigure their own space quickly and easily. Lecture-style rows for large groups can transition into various shapes-Ushape, rectangle, trapezoid, circle-for smaller group activities.

* Design elements, such as carpet patterns that serve as "guidelines" for furniture placement, can ease the transition from one configuration to another.

* Compact storage can further aid mobility. Stacking chairs and tilt-top tables that nestle in a small footprint open up space for small group interactive activities.

LARGE GROUP INTERACTIVE LEARNING SPACES

* A learning theater with a flat floor and an elevated media wall accommodates lecture formats, projectbased work, and seminar functions all in one room.

* A media wall adds instructor mobility and opens up room orientation options by eliminating cords and cables. Display walls also create multiple zones for different groups to share solutions accomplished in class.

* Round tables and mobile chairs aid collaboration.

SMALL GROUP BREAKOUT SPACES

* Breakout rooms in enclosed settings typically

accommodate more task-oriented work. Task seating, markerboards, screens, and expansive surface areas support learning and collaboration in a functional, yet flexible, space.

* Seating should support a variety of nontraditional postures (not just seated forward-facing and upright) and provide flexibility to accommodate both individual and collaborative activities.

* Easily adjustable settings for monitor arms, chairs, and other furnishings accommodate both individuals and groups of different sizes who use the meeting rooms throughout the day and night.

DELIVERING ADAPTABILITY: SOCIAL AND MEETING SPACES

Since learning happens everywhere on campus, requirements for social and meeting spaces echo those for learning spaces. Flexible furnishings that allow for varied applications, lighting that allows for myriad situations, and technology that allows for easy and intuitive participation all deliver adaptability.

When spaces on campus segue from one use to another and user groups shift in size throughout the day, the environment must adjust accordingly. Adaptability supports the transformation of private spaces to open spaces and back easily and efficiently.

CAFE

* Not only can a cafe provide access to refreshments, but it can also function as a place for individuals and groups to socialize and study.

* Elements of a comfortable coffee shop environment can soften a traditionally sterile space (such as the campus library) and encourage students to use the space for informal meetings and gatherings as well as study and research.

LARGE GROUP MEETING SPACE

* A cluster of mobile furniture components provides flexibility to meet individual learning styles. Movable pieces can be arranged in multiple small or large group vignettes, collaboration areas, and reading nooks in either open or closed configurations.

* A variety of seating options accommodates different gatherings and functions. Lounge seating, ideally with space for a laptop, should provide access to power and data and can mix with an assortment of tables and other chairs.

* A low table surrounded by comfortable chairs provides a generous work surface on which to spread out backpacks, tablets, laptops, and snacks. Providing storage space for backpacks and other materials in chairs or tables maximizes work space by reducing clutter.

SMALL GROUP MEETING SPACE

* Even informal meeting spaces need to provide opportunities to display and connect. A power pole provides abundant outlets, delivering power, data, and communication.

* Display options should provide both low-tech

(markerboard) and high-tech (flat screen) solutions for maximum adaptability.

* Multifunction furniture provides added flexibility in meeting spaces. Some pieces can change depending on the user's orientation, e.g., forward-facing as a chair with a writing surface; rear-facing as a chair with back support.

DELIVERING ADAPTABILITY: FACULTY AND ADMINISTRATIVE SPACES

Higher education spaces are typically associated with students--learning spaces, social spaces, living spaces, etc.

Yet faculty and administrative spaces can comprise 30 to 50 percent of an institution's interior space. Planning in this area is affected not only by workplace trends, but also by idiosyncrasies unique to higher education.

Natural light is the universal preference in faculty and administrative spaces whether private or open, office or meeting. This often means carving out a windowed office, which results in long, narrow spaces. Such rectangular spaces necessitate using the walls perpendicular to the window for space-efficient storage and display. Additional efficiencies can be gained by using the vertical space found in slim footprints for added storage.

PRIVATE OFFICE SPACE

* Adaptable furniture, such as tables that readily shift from desk to meeting surface, encourages communication and the exchange of ideas.

* Lightweight, easy-to-move chairs work for impromptu visitor seating and can be pushed or pulled quickly from a private office to a common meeting/lounging area nearby.

* Faculty often have more substantial storage

requirements than other office professionals. Besides holding a wealth of books, display areas are also used as an opportunity to personalize the surroundings with visual reminders of studies, travels, cultural influences, and families.

OPEN WORKSPACE

* Long hours at a computer necessitate comfortable, flexible furniture and adjustable elements such as monitor arms.

* An ample work surface and extensive storage are often needed to lay out and house materials generated by professors and their students.

MEETING SPACE

* Casual gathering areas situated near faculty offices and seminar rooms accommodate both spontaneous and scheduled group meetings. Lightweight tables and chairs provide flexibility for varying group sizes and/or meeting locations.

* Meeting spaces should provide opportunities to display and connect. A screen on a rear wall accommodates

technology while markerboards and display tools facilitate collaboration.

ADAPTABLE ENVIRONMENTS LINK THE PAST WITH PRESENT AND FUTURE LIMITLESS LEARNING

Forecasts call for a growth of about 1.5 million college students over the next 15 years. Despite broad changes in how education is being delivered and a rapidly changing technological landscape, this growing, diverse population must still be accommodated on both new and existing campuses.

While the "collisions" of culture and construction on campus are real, a peaceful and productive coexistence can endure. By delivering adaptability in space, technology, and furnishings, old-world buildings and traditions can successfully survive amid a continual influx of new--students, technology, pedagogies, buildings, and more.

Designing space that seamlessly transitions from one use to another, providing furnishings that easily adapt to different users, integrating technology within an infrastructure that allows efficient, non-disruptive upgrades, and creating a variety of spaces to meet users' needs for both engagement and quiet are crucial elements in delivering adaptability.

With these important strategies in place, it is possible to create environments that promote limitless learning, preserving the rich traditions already established on campus while creating barrier-free spaces for the students, faculty, and community members who use the campus today and will do so in the future.

SPECIAL THANKS

Peter Bacevice, Ph.D.

Strategic Consultant

DEGW

Kurt Borsting

Director

Titan Student Union

California State University, Fullerton

David Broz, AIA

Firmwide Education Leader

Senior Associate

Gensler

Niraj Dangoria

Associate Dean

Facilities Planning and Management

Stanford University School of Medicine

Paul Gootenberg, Ph.D.

Professor of History and Sociology

Stony Brook University

Julie B. Grove, AIA

Architect/Project Manager

University of Wisconsin-Madison

Ronald Kassimir

Associate Provost Research

The New School

Paul R. Mason, R.A.

Project Manager

Facilities & Construction

Austin Community College District

Gordon McCray, Ph.D.

Senior Associate Dean of Undergraduate and

Auxiliary Programs

BellSouth Mobility Associate Professor

Wake Forest University

Joseph A. Rondinelli

Director

Shepley Bulfinch

Jessica Rubin

Senior Interior Designer

Ballinger

Janet M. Semler

Director, Planning & Construction

Swarthmore College

Ellen Simpao, Ph.D.

Staff Counselor

Fashion Institute of Technology

Catherine Swanteson

Interior Designer

Facilities Planning & Construction

Texas A&M University

Kate Wendt

Director of Interiors/Associate Principal

Tsoi/Kobus & Associates

Bruce Wood

Principal

Kallmann McKinnell & Wood Architects Inc.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

AcademicPub Blog. 2011. Higher Education Trends Driving Custom Books. June 17. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://blog.academicpub.com/2011/06/higher-education-trendsdriving-custom.html.

American School & University. 2011. 21st-Century Learning Q&A: Architekton, Thomas Reilly. November 1. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://asumag.com/exclusive/21st-centurylearning-qa?page=26.

--. 2011. 21st-Century Learning Q&A: Baskervil, Susan Orange. November 1. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://asumag.com/exclusive/21st-century-learning-qa?page=20.

--. 2011. 21st-Century Learning Q&A: Bond Wolfe Architects, Susan Pruchnicki. November 1. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://asumag.com/exclusive/21st-century-learningqa?page=13.

--. 2011. 21st-Century Learning Q&A: Clark Nexsen Architecture & Engineering, Chris E. Brasier. November 1. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://asumag.com/exclusive/21stcentury-learning-qa?page=23.

--. 2011. 21st-Century Learning Q&A: College of Business Administration, University of Nebraska at Omaha, Louis G. Pol. November 1. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://asumag.com/exclusive/21st-century-learning-qa?page=15.

--. 2011. 21st-Century Learning Q&A: DLR Group, Jim French. November 1. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://asumag.com/exclusive/21st-century-learning-qa?page=10.

--. 2011. 21st-Century Learning Q&A: Dober Lidsky Mathey, Art Lidsky. November 1. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://asumag.com/exclusive/21st-century-learningqa?page=17.

--. 2011. 21st-Century Learning Q&A: Dougherty + Dougherty Architects, LLP, Brian Paul Dougherty. November 1. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://asumag.com/ exclusive/21st-century-learning-qa?page=19.

--. 2011. 21st-Century Learning Q&A: Earl Swensson, Wendell Brown. November 1. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://asumag.com/exclusive/21st-century-learningqa?page=21.

--. 2011. 21st-Century Learning Q&A: Fred Quinn & Associates, James D. Branscum. November 1. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://asumag.com/exclusive/21st-centurylearning-qa?page=11.

--. 2011. 21st-Century Learning Q&A: Freese and Nichols, Inc., Alfred Vidaurri, Jr. November 1. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://asumag.com/exclusive/21st-century-learningqa?page=2.

--. 2011. 21st-Century Learning Q&A: Goodwyn, Mills and Cawood, Gary L. Owen, Jr. November 1. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://asumag.com/exclusive/21st-century-learningqa?page=4.

--. 2011. 21st-Century Learning Q&A: HHSDR Architects/ Engineers, Joseph C. McLaughlin. November 1. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://asumag.com/exclusive/21stcentury-learning-qa?page=18.

--. 2011. 21st-Century Learning Q&A: HMFH Architects, Inc., Laura Wernick. November 1. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://asumag.com/exclusive/21st-century-learningqa?page=3.

--. 2011. 21st-Century Learning Q&A: Little, Tomas Jimenez Eliaeson. November 1. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://asumag.com/exclusive/21st-century-learningqa?page=7.

--. 2011. 21st-Century Learning Q&A: Rowland Design, Tricia Trick-Eckert, Tim Wise, and Sarah Marr-Schwartzkopf. November I. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http:// asumag.com/exclusive/21st-century-learning-qa?page=12.

--. 2011. 21st-Century Learning Q&A: SHW Group LLP, Don Hensley. November 1. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://asumag.com/exclusive/21st-century-learningqa?page=6.

--. 2011. 21st-Century Learning Q&A: The Estopino Group, Brent Williams. November 1. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://asumag.com/exclusive/21st-century-learningqa?page=5.

--. 2011. 21st-Century Learning Q&A: TMP Architecture, Inc., John J. Castellana. November 1. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://asumag.com/exclusive/21st-century-learningqa?page=22.

Arieff, A. n.d. Higher Education's Changing World. Dialogue 21: Thinking About Community, 2-13. Gensler. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.gensler.com/uploads/ documents/D21_04_13_2012.pdf.

Ashburn, E. 2008. Students Pool Is Expected to Dip and Diversify. Chronicle of Higher Education, March 28. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://chronicle.com/article/StudentPool-Is-Expected-to/11092.

--. 2011. Students' Characteristics Haven't Changed Much, but Attitudes Have. Chronicle of Higher Education, August 21. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://chronicle.com/ article/Characteristics-Havent-Changed/128608/.

Atkins, L. 2011. Your Mom Really Is Going to College: Older College Students Are Increasing in Number. Huffington Post, September 13. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www. huffingtonpost.com/larry-atkins/adult-college-students_b_954199. html.

Auletta, K. 2012. Get Rich U. New Yorker, April 30. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.newyorker.com/ reporting/2012/04/30/120430fa_fact_auletta.

Basken, P. 2012. Quest for College Accountability Produces Demand for Yet More Student Data. Chronicle of Higher Education, May 17. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http:// chronicle.com/article/Quest-for-College/131910/.

Baum, S. 2010. Student Demographics: As Students Change, Colleges Must Follow. Chronicle of Higher Education, August 22. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://chronicle.com/ article/Almanac-2010-Student-Demographics/123919/.

Belkin, D. 2012. Tough Times for Colleges --and College Towns. Wall Street Journal, July 22. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000087239639044 433 0 9 0 45775374528743104 24.

Belkin, D., and S. Thurm. 2012. Deans List: Hiring Spree Fattens College Bureaucracy--And Tuition. Wall Street Journal, December 28. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://online. wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000142412788732331680457816149071604 2814.

Berg, B. W., and N. C. Mininni. n.d. Breaking Down Silos: Mixing the Disciplines. Wiser Symposium on Nursing Simulation. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.wiser.pitt.edu/ sites/wiser/ns08/RR3_BreakingDownSilos.pdf.

Bradley University. n.d. The Campaign for a Bradley Renaissance: Engineering and Business Converge. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://campaign.bradley.edu/updates/ engbusconverge.shtml.

Brooks, D. 2012. The Campus Tsunami. New York Times, May 3. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.nytimes. com/2012/05/04/opinion/brooks-the-campus-tsunami.html?_r=0.

Brown, R. A. 2010. Renovate and Reuse: Higher Education's New Mantra. Contract, September 9. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.contractdesign.com/contract/design/Renovateand-Reuse--3012.shtml.

Business Wire. 2010. Research and Markets: 2011 Trends to Watch in Education Technology--An Insight into Factors Driving Higher Education's Need for Technology. News release, December 1. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.businesswire. com/news/home/20101201005922/en/Research-Markets-2011-TrendsWatch-Education-Technology.

Cain, S. 2012. The Rise of the New Groupthink. New York Times, January 13. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.nytimes.com/2012/01/15/opinion/sunday/the-rise-of-the-newgroupthink.html?pagewanted=all.

Campbell, A. 2011. New Digital Tools Let Professors Tailor Their Own Textbooks for Under $20. Chronicle of Higher Education, October 9. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http:// chronicle.com/article/New-Digital-Tools-Let/129309/.

Casselman, B. 2012. The Cost of Dropping Out. Wall Street Journal, November 23. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887324595904578 117400943472068.

Cavenagh, R. 2005. The Faculty Office Revisited. In Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2005, ed. P. Kommers and G. Richards, 2611-16. Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.editlib.org/p/20471.

Choitz, V., and H. Prince. 2008. Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/ ETAOP%202008-09%20-%20Flexible%20Learning%20Options%20 for%20Adult%20Students.pdf.

DeParle, J. 2012. For Poor, Leap to College Often Ends in a Hard Fall. New York Times, December 22. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.nytimes.com/2012/12/23/education/poorstudents-struggle-as-class-plays-a-greater-role-in- success.html.

Feldman, D. 2012. Newsflash: College Is a Bargain. New York Daily News, June 3. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.nydailynews.com/opinion/newsflash-college-bargainarticle-1.1088501.

Field, K. 2009. In Interview, Education Secretary Cites Need for Improvement in College Completion and Cost Control. Chronicle of Higher Education, May 1. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://chronicle.com/article/In-Interview-Education/47227.

Fischer, K. 2011. Colleges Adapt to New Kinds of Students from Abroad. Chronicle of Higher Education, May 29. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://chronicle.com/article/CollegesEducate-a-New-Kind-of/127704/.

Flynn, W. J., and J. Vredevoogd. The Future of Learning: 12 Views on Emerging Trends in Higher Education. Planning for Higher Education 38 (2): 5-10. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www1.scup.org/PHE/FMPro?-db=PubItems.fp5&-lay=ART&format=read_full.htm&ID_pub=PUB-L7KuhFxKKaU7z8yxwH&t_ Pub_PgNum=5&-Find.

Forbes. 2012. Forbes Publishes Rankings of America's Top Colleges: Princeton University Is No. 1. News release, August 1. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.forbes.com/sites/ forbespr/2012/08/01/forbes-publishes-rankings-of-americas-topcolleges-princeton-university-is-no-1/.

Gelis, J. 2003. Adaptable Workplaces. FacilitiesNet, August. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.facilitiesnet.com/ designconstruction/article/Adaptable-Workplaces--1603#.

Gensler. 2011. No More Teachers, No More Books? Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.gensler.com/uploads/ documents/Education_Roundtable_Survey_11_10_2011.pdf.

--. n.d. Changing Course. Connecting Campus Design to a New Kind of Student. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.gensler.com/uploads/documents/Changing_Course_ Survey_10_08_2012.pdf.

--. n.d. The Power of a Campus in a Digital World. Grummon, P. T. H. 2009. Trends in Higher Education 6 (1). Ann Arbor, MI: Society for College and University Planning. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.scup.org/asset/53017/SCUP_ TrendsWeb_v6n1.pdf.

--. 2009. Trends in Higher Education 6 (2). Ann Arbor, MI: Society for College and University Planning. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.scup.org/asset/55250/SCUP_ TrendsWeb_v6n2.pdf.

--. 2011. Trends in Higher Education 7 (1). Ann Arbor, MI: Society for College and University Planning. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.scup.org/asset/56324/SCUP_TrendsWeb_ v7n1.pdf.

--. 2012. Trends in Higher Education 8 (1). Ann Arbor, MI: Society for College and University Planning. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.scup.org/asset/60318/SCUP_TrendsWeb_ v8n1.pdf.

Hanford, E. 2011. Don't Lecture Me: Rethinking the Way College Students Learn. American Radio Works, podcast audio. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http:// americanradioworks.publicradio.org/features/tomorrows-college/ lectures/.

Hoffman, J. 2012. Speak Up? Raise Your Hand? That May No Longer Be Necessary. New York Times, March 30. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.nytimes.com/2012/03/31/us/clickersoffer-instant-interactions-in-more- venues.html?pagewanted=all.

Hooper, E. 2012. Coventry University Hub. Contract, March 12. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.contractdesign.com/contract/design/features/CoventryUniversity--6897.shtml.

Hoover, E. 2013. Minority Applicants to Colleges Will Rise Significantly by 2020. Chronicle of Higher Education, January 10. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://chronicle.com/ article/Wave-of-Diverse-College/136603/.

Kadlec, D. 2012. Why College May Be Totally Free Within 10 Years. Time, October 12. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://business.time.com/2012/10/12/why-college-may-be-totallyfree-within-10-years/.

Kamenetz, A. 2010. DIY U: Edupunks, Edupreneurs, and the Coming Transformation of Higher Education. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing.

Kazis, R., A. Callahan, C. Davidson, A. McLeod, B Bosworth, V Choitz, and J. Hoops. 2007. Adult Learners in Higher Education: Barriers to Success and Strategies to Improve Results. Employment and Training Administration Occasional Paper 2007-03.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://files. eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED497801.pdf.

Kiefer, A. 2011. Enhancing Student Success Through Principled Space Planning and Interior Design. Contract, March 23. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.contractdesign.com/contract/ design/Enhancing-Student-Su-4693.shtml.

Korn, M. 2012. Schools Tout Free Courses to Lure Alumni Back. Wall Street Journal, September 5. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10000872396 390444772804577619863594915438.

Lawlor Group. 2011. Trends & Observations for 2011: Seven Forces Impacting Higher Education. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.thelawlorgroup.com/sites/default/files/pdf/ trends_2011.pdf.

Levine, A. 2012. Teachers + Tech = Better Learning. New York Daily News, September 12. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.nydailynews.com/opinion/teachers-tech-betterlearning-article-1.1157019.

Lewin, T. 2012. Beyond the College Degree, Online Educational Badges. New York Times, March 4. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.nytimes.com/2012/03/05/education/beyondthe-college-degree-online-educational- badges.html?gwh=DBD4191B7A FEC5DCF54F5C6EC220DAE8.

--. 2012. Instruction for Masses Knocks Down Campus Walls. New York Times, March 4. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.nytimes.com/2012/03/05/education/moocs-largecourses-open-to-all-topple-campus-walls.html.

--. 2013. Students Rush to Web Classes, but Profits May Be Much Later. New York Times, January 6. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.nytimes.com/2013/01/07/education/ massive-open-online-courses-prove-popular-if-not-lucrative-yet.html.

Marcus, J. 2012. Why Is College Enrollment Dropping? Time, May 31. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http:// content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2116059,00.html.

Martin, A., and A. W. Lehren. 2012. A Generation Hobbled by the Soaring Cost of College. New York Times, May 12. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.nytimes.com/2012/05/13/ business/student-loans-weighing-down-a-generation-with-heavy-debt. html.

McGee, J. B. n.d. Teaching Millenials. Presentation, University of Pittsburgh. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.ame.pitt.edu/documents/McGee_Millennials.pdf.

Meloy, D. 2012. Students: Opinions on the Office. Monday Morning Quarterback, January 30-February 5.

Mitchell, J. 2012. New Course in College Costs. Wall Street Journal, June 10. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303296604577 454862437127618.

Morse, R., and S. Flanigan. 2011. How U.S. News Calculates the College Rankings. U.S. News & World Report, September 12.

Nair, P. 2003. Imperatives for Change in Higher Education. DesignShare, January. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.designshare.com/index.php/articles/change-highereducation.

National Center for Education Statistics. 2007. The Condition of Education 2007. NCES 2007-064. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http: //nces.ed.gov/pubs20 0 7/200 70 64 .pdf.

--. 2012. Digest of Education Statistics 2011. NCES 2012001. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://nces.ed.gov/ pubs2012/2012001.pdf.

--. 2013. Projection of Education Statistics to 2021. NCES 2013008. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http:// nces.ed.gov/pubs2013/2013008.pdf.

National Student Clearinghouse. 2012. "Hey Mom. Off to Class Today?" Rapid Growth in Two Year Degrees for Adult Learners. News release, October 16. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.studentclearinghouse.org/about/media_center/press_releases/ files/release_2012-10-16.pdf.

--. 2012. Snapshot Report: Adult Learners. Spring. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http:// nscresearchcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/SnapshotReport4_Adult_ Learners.pdf.

Neuman, D. J. 2012. Design Shaping the 21st Century College Campus. Contract, March 16. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.contractdesign.com/contract/design/Design-Shapingthe-2-6938.shtml.

New York Times. 2013. The Trouble With Online College. February 18. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.nytimes. com/2013/02/19/opinion/the-trouble-with-online-college.html?_r=0.

North Carolina State University. 2007. About the SCALE-UP Project. North Carolina State University Department of Physics. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.ncsu.edu/per/ scaleup.html.

O'Neill, M. 2009. Research Case Study: Design for Learning Spaces in Higher Education. Knoll Research Paper. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.knoll.com/media/931/11/wp_ LearningSpacesHigherEd.pdf.

--. 2012. Adaptable by Design: Shaping the Work Experience. Knoll Research Paper. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.cbi-nc.com/white-papers/WP_AdaptablebyDesign.pdf.

Rickes, P. C. 2009. Make Way for Millennials! How Today's Students Are Shaping Higher Education Space. Planning for Higher Education 37 (2): 7-17. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://www1.scup.org/PHE/FMPro?-db=PubItems.fp5&lay=ART&-format=read_full.htm&-error=error.htm&ID_pub=PUB- Mn0t57HKysR0L78l1Q&t_Pub_PgNum=7&-SortField=t_Pub_ PgNum&-Find.

Ripley, A. 2012. College Is Dead. Long Live College! Time, October 18. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://nation. time.com/2012/10/18/college-is-dead-long-live-college/.

Ross-Gordon, J. M. 2011. Research on Adult Learners: Supporting the Needs of a Student Population that Is No Longer Nontraditional. Peer Review 13 (1). Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.aacu.org/peerreview/pr-wi11/prwi11_rossgordon.cfm.

Ruffo, J. A. 2009. Introduction--The Dynamics of Change: Millennial Students' Impact on Their Total Collegiate Experience. Planning for Higher Education 37 (2): 5-6. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www1.scup.org/PHE/FMPro?-db=PubItems.fp5&lay=ART&-format=read_full.htm&-error=error.htm&ID_pub=PUB- fxc5LUBw9DvGs9zgbB&t_Pub_PgNum=5&-SortField=t_Pub_ PgNum&-Find.

Rummel, A., M. L. MacDonald, and J. Cornelius. 2011. Drivers of Student Retention: The Need for Service Marketing. Academy of Marketing Studies Proceedings 16 (2): 29-32. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.alliedacademies.org/public/ proceedings/Proceedings29/AMS%20Proceedings%20Fall%202011.pdf.

Sanburn, J. 2012. Higher-Education Poll. Time, October 18. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://nation.time. com/2012/10/18/higher-education-poll/.

Schatz, M., and J. F. Williams. 2010. The 21st-Century Library. Contract, July 5. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.contractdesign.com/contract/design/The-21st-CenturyLib-2487.shtml.

Schepp, D. 2012. Top 6 Reasons Adult College Students Drop Out. AOL Jobs, August 13. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2012/08/13/top-6-reasons-oldercollege-students-drop-out/.

Sheehy, K. 2012. U.S. News Ranks Top Online Degree Programs. U.S. News & World Report, January 10.

Sinha, R. 2011. Transforming Technology Trends to Provide Value Innovation for the Higher Education Sector. SiliconIndia, March 2. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www. siliconindia.com/magazine_articles/Transforming_Technology_ Trends_to_Provide_Value_Innovation_for...-IRFR784773971.html.

Society for College and University Planning. 2005. Trends in Higher Education. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.scup.org/asset/49327/trends%20layout%202-05.pdf.

Swail, W. S. 2002. Higher Education and the New Demographics: Questions for Policy. Change, July-August, 15-23. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.educationalpolicy.org/pdf/ higherED_demographics02.pdf.

Tanaka, S. 2012. At Freshman Orientation, Helping Mom and Dad Let Go. Wall Street Journal, July 24. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10000872 396390444025204577546922089035282.

Thaler, M. 2011. What Makes a Great Learning Space? GenslerOnCities (blog), July 7. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.gensleron.com/cities/2011/7/21/what-makes-a-great-learningspace.html.

U.S. Department of Education. 2006. A Test of Leadership: Charting the Future of U.S. Higher Education. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.sheeo.org/sites/default/files/publications/Test%20of%20 Leadership.pdf.

Vedder, R. 2012. Five Reasons College Enrollments Might Be Dropping. Bloomberg, October 22. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World

Wide Web: www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-22/five-reasonscollege-enrollments-might-be-dropping.html.

Waite, P. S. 2012. Campus Landscaping: Impact on Recruitment and Retention. Society for College and University Planning, webcast audio, January 26. Presentation materials retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://fmsc.fullerton.edu/documents/ CampusLandscaping.pdf.

Wartzman, R., and R. Hoder. 2012. Don't Encourage Students to Skip College. New York Times, Motherlode (blog), December 3. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://parenting.blogs. nytimes.com/2012/12/03/dont-encourage-students-to-skip-college/.

Webley, K. 2012. Rethink College: 3 Takeaways from the Time Summit on Higher Education. Time, October 19. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://nation.time.com/2012/10/19/rethinkcollege-3-takeaways-from-the-time-summit-on-higher- education/.

Wilen-Daugenti, T., and A. G. R. McKee. 2008. 21st Century Trends for Higher Education: Top Trends, 2008-2009. San Jose: Cisco Internet Business Solutions Group, Cisco Systems. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.cisco.com/web/about/ac79/docs/ wp/21st_Century_Top_Trends_POV_0811.pdf.

Williams, A. 2012. Saying No to College. New York Times, November 30. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www. nytimes.com/2012/12/02/fashion/saying-no-to-college.html.

Williams, J. 2012. A High-Tech Fix for Broken Schools. Wall Street Journal, August 15. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB200008723963904441847 04577587452644436784.

Wymer, T. 2010. Proportional Planning for the Adaptable Workplace. Knoll Research Paper. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.proxymity.com/documents/cms/docs/06_Knoll_ ProportionalPlanning_AdaptableWorkplace.pdf.

--. 2010. The Changing Private Office. Knoll Research Paper. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.knoll. com/media/731/474/wp_changing_private.pdf.

Young, J. R. 2010. As Textbooks Go Digital, Will Professors Build Their Own Books? Chronicle of Higher Education, October 8. Retrieved November 15, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://chronicle.com/ article/As-Textbooks-Go-Digital-Will/124881/.

AUTHOR BIOGRAPHY

DR. MICHAEL O'NEILL is senior director of workplace research for Knoll, working with corporate, healthcare, and higher education organizations to understand how planning and design affect peoples' health and performance--and business outcomes. He can be reached at moneill@knoll.com.
COPYRIGHT 2013 Society for College and University Planning
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2013 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:FEATURE ARTICLE
Author:O'Neill, Michael
Publication:Planning for Higher Education
Article Type:Report
Geographic Code:1USA
Date:Oct 1, 2013
Words:8881
Previous Article:Leading the way in sustainability through hassle-free green revolving funds: green revolving funds ensure that energy efficiency projects receive...
Next Article:Built environments impact behaviors: results of an active learning post-occupancy evaluation: the study shows that rigorous research methods embedded...
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2022 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters |