Tom Hier B IDDISON H IER, L TD. Consultants to Higher Education Customers in Classroom Planning … Pacific Region SCUP Conference Portland, Oregon 21 March

Tom HierTom HierBBIDDISON IDDISON HHIER, IER, LLTD.TD.

Consultants to Higher EducationConsultants to Higher Education

CustomersCustomers in Classroom Planning … in Classroom Planning …

Pacific Region SCUP ConferencePacific Region SCUP ConferencePortland, OregonPortland, Oregon

21 March 200521 March 2005

PresenterPresenter

… … and the and the InsightsInsights They Bring They Bring

2Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

Today’s TopicsToday’s Topics Classroom Planning: Typical and New Approaches

Model Process for Developing a Comprehensive Classroom Plan

Case Study: Stanford University Graduate School of Business

There are many customers for classrooms, but

because classrooms have no natural advocate,

planning for these facilities is often an

afterthought and customers are not provided an

opportunity for timely involvement.

The Neglected Classroom

4Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

ClassroomsClassrooms: Typical Planning Approach : Typical Planning Approach Classroom planning rarely is undertaken in its own right; very often, it is a by-product of other activities. Typically, the need to address classroom space arises from:

1.1. Construction of a New Academic BuildingConstruction of a New Academic Building

2.2. Overall Renovation of an Existing Building Overall Renovation of an Existing Building

3.3. Targeted Maintenance / Renewal ActivitiesTargeted Maintenance / Renewal Activities

4.4. Specific Classroom Renovation Project Specific Classroom Renovation Project

5Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

Classrooms:Classrooms:Typical Planning ApproachTypical Planning Approach In most cases, one or more of the following three groups assumes the lead:

School / Academic Department Office of Campus Architect / Campus Planning Facilities Office

Issues

Interactions, the assumption of lead role, etc., depend on project and particular organizational structure and culture of the institution.

New construction: Not uncommon for little thought to be directed specifically toward classrooms until late in the planning process when it is difficult to make significant changes in overall building program.

Renovation: Key players often left out of the planning process

Overall: Classroom needs are rarely considered systematically –in the context of the entire classroom inventory; rather, they are viewed as one program component of an academic building that may have many uses competing for space.

6Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

New Approach:New Approach:“Comprehensive Classroom Planning”“Comprehensive Classroom Planning”Definition: A holistic approach to determining campus-

wide classroom needs that invites participation from all

constituents of classrooms and takes into account

physical, scheduling, pedagogical, technological,

operational and funding requirements for classrooms.

The result is a “Comprehensive Classroom Plan” – a

roadmap that identifies realistic, implementable solutions

for renovation or construction of classroom space.

7Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

Address need to refurbish and modernize antiquated classroomsPhysicalPhysical

Illuminate scheduling issues, e.g., perceived large supply of rooms but space unavailable when and where needed

Rationalize approaches to determining need for and mix of instructional media

Identify funding required for basic classroom maintenance and upgrades (furnishings, technology, etc.) and beyond

Define control and authority for classroom scheduling, planning and operations

Determine required mix of classroom types to support existing and emerging pedagogies

PedagogicalPedagogical

SchedulingScheduling

Operations / Operations / ManagementManagement

TechnologyTechnology

FundingFunding

Casts a wide net in the issues addressed…

New Approach:New Approach:“Comprehensive Classroom Planning”“Comprehensive Classroom Planning”

8Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

Involves all constituents that “touch” classrooms…C O N S T I T U E N T S T A K E I N C L A S S R O O M S

CONSTITUENT Physical Pedagogy Scheduling TechnologyOperations

/ Mgmt Funding

Faculty

Registrars / Schedulers

Information Technologists

Facility Managers

Provosts / Deans / Business Officers

Students

New Approach:New Approach:“Comprehensive Classroom Planning”“Comprehensive Classroom Planning”

Model Process for Developing a Model Process for Developing a Comprehensive Classroom PlanComprehensive Classroom Plan

10Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

Model Process for Developing a Model Process for Developing a Comprehensive Classroom PlanComprehensive Classroom Plan

Customer Research

Focus Groups

Interviews

Surveys

Feedback

Classroom Committee

Recommend-Recommend-ationsations

Quantitative Quantitative AnalysisAnalysis

Qualitative Qualitative ReviewReview

Constituent Constituent InvolvementInvolvement

Physical inspection of classrooms

Intangibles

Quantitative profile

Room utilization

Seat utilization

Capacity loading

Productivity Measures

Physical changes

Scheduling / policy changes

Classroom “ownership”

Organizational structure

Budgeting and funding

OUTCOME: “The Road Map”OUTCOME: “The Road Map”

11Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

Constituent InvolvementConstituent Involvement

Typical Concerns

Need for more breakout space

More flexibility in classroom furnishings and fixtures

New applications for technology

Need for training and support for in-class technologies

Faculty… are continually advancing new pedagogies that directly affect the nature and mix of classroom space required

What Their Involvement Yields:

Identification of current pedagogical styles

Anticipated changes in pedagogy

Teaching preferences – furnishings, times of days, technology, etc.





12Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.


Typical Concerns

Inability to find adequate and appropriate space at needed times

Responsibility but not authority for classroom management

Registrars / Schedulers… are on the front lines in trying to accommodate competing space demands and, consequently, have a keen sense of what spaces are most in need and insight into the “politics of classrooms”

What Their Involvement Yields

Constraints / limitations on current inventory and schedule

Identification of polices and procedures that can lead to better space utilization

May help catalyze other constituents

13Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.


Typical Concerns

Development of classroom technology standards

Adequate planning for infrastructure, site lines, acoustics, room darkening capabilities, etc.

Long-term flexibility, operation, maintenance, serviceability of technology

Information Technologists…are integral to planning for new in-class technologies and ensuring that campus-wide standards are maintained


Identification of hierarchy of technology needs and baseline standard

Information on technology costs and refresh rates

14Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.


Typical Concerns

Long-term (“life cycle”) operating costs

Performance / durability of materials used

ADA accessibility

Facility Managers… bring the “physical perspective” on proposed renovation / new construction projects


Deferred maintenance and renovation priorities

Standards for new construction

Operations and maintenance considerations

15Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.


Typical Concerns

Ability to demonstrate true need for proposed project

“Ownership” and management responsibility for classrooms resulting from new project

Balancing fiscal and physical resources with faculty concerns

Budget authority

Provosts / Deans / Business Officers… manage the funding plan for significant investments or reinvestments in classrooms and need to be advocates at the senior levels of the institution for funding allocations


Strategic, top level view of goals for instructional space

Political sensitivities re: proposed changes in scheduling and other policies

Institutional imprimatur for change

16Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.


Typical Concerns

Physical condition of classrooms

Adequate ability to access and use technology

Scheduling / timing of classes (e.g., the “8am taboo”)

Integration with other aspects of campus life – library, housing, dining, recreation, etc.

Students… are the end users

What Their Involvement Yields Information on group study practices

Ideas for improving classroom design to accommodate evolving pedagogies

User insight on basic classroom needs

Culture of the pedagogy

17Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

Review of Qualitative FactorsReview of Qualitative Factors

Physical Conditions

Geographical Considerations Ownership & Management

Pedagogical Requirements

Scheduling Responsibility

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Academic Departments Registrar

No

. of

Ro

om

s

4N: Registrar does not schedule

3P: Registrar schedules only partially

2D: Registrar schedules daytime only

1F: Registrar schedules fully





18Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

Quantitative AnalysisQuantitative Analysis

Illustrates adequacy of the existing inventoryQUANTITATIVE PROFILE

Supply vs. Demand by Room Size9am to 5pm

-

2,000

4,000

6,000

1 to

15

16 to

25

26 to

40

41 to

60

61 to

80

81 to

150

151

to 3

00

301

or m

ore

Room Hours (Theoretical Supply)

Room Hours -- Rooms Avail for Registrar Scheduling(Supply "in play")

Class Hours (Demand)





19Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

Room utilization by Time of day Campus area Room size Scheduler

Seat utilization By room Migration patterns

Room Utilization Rates by Scheduler

53%49%

68%

59%

44% 43%42%

35%

17% 17%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

8:30am to 3pm 8:30am to 5pm

Registrar Fully Schedules

Registrar Day Schedules

Science Quad

Acad Depts & Registrar

Acad Depts Only

PRODUCTIVITY MEASURES

They are scheduled into rooms as follows:

For courses with enrollments in the range of:

No. of Class

Meeting Hours 1 to 15 16 to 25 26 to 40 41 to 60 61 to 80 81 to 150 151 to 300 301 or more Undefined \1 Total

1 to 15 2,543 287 1,087 720 281 117 28 16 - 9 2,543

16 to 25 1,647 95 626 533 219 124 30 5 4 11 1,647

26 to 40 114 - 4 12 25 36 28 9 - - 114

41 to 60 101 - - - 14 33 25 23 6 - 101

61 to 80 63 - - - 3 12 13 31 4 - 63

81 to 150 84 - 2 - - - 33 36 13 - 84

151 to 300 78 - - 2 - - 3 30 43 - 78

301 or more 11 - - - - - - - 11 - 11

Total 4,641 382 1,718 1,267 542 322 160 150 81 20 4,641 1/ "Undefined" courses are those for which a room location is not known.

Seat Migration Patterns

Quantitative AnalysisQuantitative Analysis

20Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

RecommendationsRecommendations

Renovation and reconfiguration

Refurnishing

Equipment upgrades

APPLYING THE CLASSROOM “FIX-IT” TOOL KIT

Management Management PoliciesPolicies

Performance Performance MetricsMetrics

Scheduling Scheduling ChangesChanges

Physical Physical ChangesChanges

Standardizng scheduling blocks

Pre-enrollment planning

Policies re: peak vs. non-peak hour scheduling

Utilization targets (room and seat)

Square footage allocations

Conformance to schedule

Classroom “ownership”

Organizational structure

Budgeting and funding





21Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

Outcome:Outcome:The Comprehensive Classroom PlanThe Comprehensive Classroom Plan

1. The “optimal”classroom inventory: how many and of what sizes

2. Upgrades in quality through: Modernization of furnishings and fixtures

Classroom reconfigurations

3. Scheduling policies that facilitate better use of classrooms

4. Technology plan Baseline requirements

Distribution campus-wide

Refresh rates

5. Changes in organizational structure and management policies required to maximize efficient use of classroom resources consistent with the institutional culture and preferred pedagogies

6. Capital investments and phasing / funding plan required to support the implementation of the plan

A ROADMAP

Case Study:Case Study:Stanford Graduate School of BusinessStanford Graduate School of Business Existing Conditions

23Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

Stanford Graduate School of BusinessStanford Graduate School of Business

What should be done to improve existing classrooms if the Graduate School of Business (GSB) remains in its current facilities for 10 years / 15 years / 20 years?

Is there a need for a new building? If so…

Should it be a classroom building?

Critical features from the perspective of instructional space?

Views on location?

CRITICAL QUESTIONS

THE ISSUE: STAY OR MOVE? Existing facility was inadequate to meet the needs of 21st century business school

education

Facility increasingly “competitively challenged” vis-à-vis top tier business schools

24Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

Stanford Constituent InvolvementStanford Constituent Involvement Structure of the effort

Headed up by Associate Dean in coordination with representative from Campus Planning

Focus groups

Faculty

Students

Interviews

Deans

Associate Deans

Campus Planning

25Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

Key Findings from ConstituentsKey Findings from Constituents Hallmarks of the GSB Culture

Great emphasis on teaching / integrated learning

Strong focus on collaborative learning – discussion with and engagement of peers

Students come to GSB because of this culture; renovated and / or new spaces should “preserve and support this culture”

Constraints on scheduling

Heavy use of guest speakers, with courses straddling the lunch hour so that students can interact over lunch

Faculty practitioners with obligations outside of Stanford limit ability to dictate teaching times





26Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

Key Findings from ConstituentsKey Findings from Constituents Mix of Classrooms

Primary need for two basic sizes – small / flexible (25 seats) and large fixed (but not too large, to keep class sizes from creeping up)

Heavy need for breakout rooms with white boards, computer & Internet access, phone conferencing

Room Configurations

Should be “simple and functional”

“Faculty are directing a conversation” with students and guests – nothing (technology, design, podia, etc.) should get in the way

Importance of aisles – so faculty can “move into the audience”

Rear doors – to minimize disruption

Classrooms should not front directly outside – doesn’t convey “seriousness of academic purpose”

27Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

Key Findings from ConstituentsKey Findings from Constituents Light

Critical need for natural light

Technology

Should not distract – “no appetite for technology for technology’s sake”

Reliability and 100% redundancy are critical (“Murphy is alive and well at every lectern”)

Ancillary / Support Spaces

Create spaces that will build and support community outside the classroom proper, and foster congregation among students and with faculty and guests

28Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

Review of Physical ConditionsReview of Physical Conditions





Seating not conducive to collaborative learning

“Technology for technology’s sake”… not a problem here

Natural light?Entry from front of room is a problem

29Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

Quantitative AnalysesQuantitative Analyses1 Profile of Room Inventory1 Profile of Room Inventory

21 rooms – 76% in rooms seating more than 40

Room Inventory by Size

0

20

40

60

80

L112

L104

L103

L107

S13

0

S14

0

S17

2

S14

6

S15

1

S15

2

S16

1

S16

2

S15

0

S17

1

S18

1

S18

2

S17

0

S18

0

S18

3

S46

2

S16

0

Littlefield South Sloan/ Ex

No

of

Se

ats

Distribution of Room Inventory

SeatsNo. of Rooms

Room Size

No. of Rooms

No. of Room Hours \1 Percentage

20 2 1 to 25 4 112 19%

25 2

32 1 26 to 40 1 28 5%

41 1

48 1

50 2

(Sloan) 54 1 41 to 75 16 448 76%

60 3

(Exec Ed) 60 1

62 1

66 3

72 3

Total 21 21 588 100%

1/ Assumes 4 day schedule, 4 periods per day.





30Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

Quantitative AnalysesQuantitative Analyses2 Profile of Courses2 Profile of Courses 90 to 100 courses scheduled per term (excluding summer).

Autumn term most heavily scheduled.

Preponderance of courses were for MBA program.

Course Distribution by Program

ProgramAutumn01-02

Winter01-02

Spring01-02

Autumn01-02

Winter01-02

Spring01-02

Number Percentage

MBA 80 70 76 81% 80% 85%

PhD 10 9 5 10% 10% 6%

Sloan 5 3 3 5% 3% 3%

Other 4 6 5 4% 7% 6%

Total 99 88 89 100% 100% 100%

31Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

Quantitative AnalysesQuantitative Analyses3 Time of Day Issues3 Time of Day Issues Strong adherence to standard time blocks (89% of MBA, 80% of

Exec Ed and 50% of PhD)

Majority of courses (59%) taught in the middle two periods (before and after lunch)

Autumn 01-02

Courses Scheduled by Program and Time Period

MBA PhD Sloan Total

No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct.

Standard Periods

8:00am to 9:45am 12 15% 0 0% 0 0% 12 13%

10:00am to 11:45am 21 26% 1 10% 2 40% 24 25%

1:20pm to 3:05pm 26 33%59%

2 20%30%

2 40%80%

30 32%57%

3:20pm to 5:05pm 12 15% 2 20% 1 20% 15 16%

Total inStandard Periods 71 89% 5 50% 5 100% 81 85%

Non-Standard Periods 9 11% 5 50% 0 0% 14 15%

Grand Total 80 100% 10 100% 5 100% 95 100%

32Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

01-02 Spring Enrollment Distribution

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

01 to05

06 to10

11 to15

16 to20

21 to25

26 to30

31 to35

36 to40

41 to45

46 to50

51 to55

56 to60

61 to65

66 to75

#N/A

Nu

mb

er

of

Co

urs

es

01-02 Winter Enrollment Distribution

0

2

4

68

10

12

14

16

01 to05

06 to10

11 to15

16 to20

21 to25

26 to30

31 to35

36 to40

41 to45

46 to50

51 to55

56 to60

61 to65

66 to75

#N/A

Nu

mb

er o

f C

ou

rses

01-02 Autumn Enrollment Distribution

0

24

6

8

1012

14

16

01 to05

06 to10

11 to15

16 to20

21 to25

26 to30

31 to35

36 to40

41 to45

46 to50

51 to55

56 to60

61 to65

66 to75

#N/A

Nu

mb

er

of

Co

urs

es

Quantitative AnalysesQuantitative Analyses4 Distribution by Course Enrollment4 Distribution by Course Enrollment

Rooms in greatest demand: small (1 to 25) and large (41 to 75)

Autumn and winter: 1/3 of courses are small, ~10% medium and 60% large.

Spring: about 1/3 are small, about ¼ are medium, and half are large.

33Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

Quantitative AnalysesQuantitative Analyses5 Demand vs. Supply – by Room 5 Demand vs. Supply – by Room SizeSize

Significantly more capacity vis-à-vis need in large rooms

Insufficient capacity in the 26 to 40 range

Class Hours vs. Available Room Hours by Size

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

1 to 25 26 to 40 41 to 75

Size

Ho

urs

1 Autumn 01-02

2 Winter 01-02

3 Spring 01-02

All RoomsSloan / Exec Ed Rooms

SUPPLY DEMAND

34Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

Relative number of classes that are poorly aligned (red) and well-aligned (light / medium blue) vs. room’s size (dark blue)

Quantitative AnalysesQuantitative Analyses5 Demand vs. Supply – Course to 5 Demand vs. Supply – Course to Room AlignmentRoom Alignment

Capacity vs. Enrollment By RoomAutumn Term

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

S130 L104 S140 L103 S172 L107 S146 S151 S462 S152 S161 S162 S150 S171 S181 S182 S170 S180 S183

Room

Cap

acit

y &

En

roll

men

t

Number of Seats in RoomClasses Poorly Aligned to Room SizeClasses Well Aligned to Room Size

35Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

Recommendations: Optimal InventoryRecommendations: Optimal Inventory Optimal inventory assuming the current 4 day / 4 period

scheduling pattern and room utilization assumptions of 60% (close to current practice) and 67% (target)

BASELINE (4 day / 4 period)BASELINE PLUS INCREASED UTILIZATION (TARGET 67%)

NEW SCHEDULE (4 day / 5 period); 60% utilization

28 hour week 28 hour week

Class Size

Number of "Peak" Course Hours

(Demand)

Existing Rooms

(Supply)

@ Utilization

RateRooms Needed

Over (Short)

@ Utilization

RateRooms Needed

Over (Short)

1 to 25 92 4 60% 5 (1) 67% 5 (1)

26 to 40 68 1 60% 4 (3) 67% 4 (3)

41 to 65 122 9 60% 7 2 67% 7 2

66 to 80 63 6 60% 4 2 67% 3 3

Total 345 20 20 0 19 1

Note: Calculations exclude S160 used for Executive Education.





36Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

Current classrooms cannot be made adequate given the building’s constraints

Classrooms do not meet competitive / contemporary standards.

Cannot accommodate aisles, which are preferred for pedagogical reasons, and still meet capacity requirements.

Large (~150 seat) classroom – which is desirable for review sessions, outside speakers and potentially some larger courses – cannot be comfortably accommodated within existing building.

Difficult to accommodate any significant number of group study rooms.

The GSB should plan to build a new classroom building.

Regardless of when and where a new classroom building comes on line, improvements should be made to the existing classroom inventory.

Is there a need for a new building?Should it be a classroom building?

Yes…

37Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

RecommendedRecommendedInstructional Space ProgramInstructional Space Program

INSTRUCTIONAL SPACES

Type Number Capacity Configuration(@ 25 to 30 sf / seat)

Auditorium 1 400 to 450 Fixed, theatre style seating1 ~150

Case Study 3 up to 80 Amphitheatre, tiered seating7 up to 65 Model: Wharton

General Purpose Classroom 4 up to 40 Flat floorMoveable tables & chairs

Discussion / Seminar 5 up to 25 Flat floorMoveable tables & chairs

38Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

Suggested ImprovementsSuggested Improvementsfor Existing Classroomsfor Existing Classrooms

“Rightsize” the existing inventory

Current InventoryPer Seat Square Foot

Allocation

Room Size

Ideal No. of Rooms Room

Current Capacity

Seating Type SF 17 20 22 25 28 30

L112 20 Loose (green is preferred sf allocation)

1 to 25 5 S130 20 Loose

L104 25 Loose

S140 25 Loose

26 to 40 4 L103 32 Loose

S172 41 Fixed 850 50 43 39 34 30 28

L107 48 Loose

S146 50 Loose 940 55 47 43 38 34 31

S151 50 Fixed 954 56 48 43 38 34 32

41 to 65 7 S462 54 Fixed

S152 60 Fixed 1,080 64 54 49 43 39 36

S161 60 Fixed 1,090 64 55 50 44 39 36

S162 60 Fixed 1,090 64 55 50 44 39 36

S160 60 Fixed 1,090 64 55 50 44 39 36

S150 62 Fixed 1,077 63 54 49 43 38 36

S171 66 Fixed 1,242 73 62 56 50 44 41

S181 66 Fixed 1,242 73 62 56 50 44 41

66 to 80 3 S182 66 Fixed 1,257 74 63 57 50 45 42

S183 72 Fixed 1,247 73 62 57 50 45 42

S170 72 Fixed 1,252 74 63 57 50 45 42

S180 72 Fixed 1,252 74 63 57 50 45 42

Dedensify classrooms and improve mix where possible, using the “ideal” inventory as a target.

Existing envelopes are not large enough to dedensify the largest rooms to a desirable square footage allocation (shown in green).

39Bh

Biddison Hier, Ltd.

Upgrade furnishings, fixtures and equipmentReplace and reconfigure tables to allow for the addition of aisles where possible

Seats: If loose seats are used where possible, they may be used in new facilities once built.

Lighting: Modernize lighting to create zones and ability to raise and lower illumination levels.

TechnologySignificant investments in technology in the existing facilities are not warranted:

Costs to retrofit

Speed of change in technology

Not required by current pedagogy at Stanford

However, design of a standardized podium would facilitate faculty use, can be maintained more easily by IT staff, and could be easily relocated to any new facility.

Suggested ImprovementsSuggested Improvementsfor Existing Classroomsfor Existing Classrooms

Q & AQ & A

For further InformationFor further InformationPlease contact:

Thomas HierPrincipal

Biddison Hier, Ltd.Consultants to Higher Education4315 Fifteenth Street, NWWashington, DC 20011-7021

Phone: (202) 882-8700Email: [email protected]: www.biddhier.com

Documents

Tom Hier B IDDISON H IER, L TD. Consultants to Higher Education Customers in Classroom Planning … Pacific Region SCUP Conference Portland, Oregon 21 March