Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize

Research on Learning Space Design:

Present State, Future Directions
by Susan Painter, Janice Fournier, Caryn Grape, Phyllis Grummon, Jill Morelli, Susan Whitmer, and Joseph Cevetello
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize ii

Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions

by Susan Painter, Janice Fournier, Caryn Grape, Phyllis Grummon, Jill Morelli, Susan Whitmer, and Joseph Cevetello

Society for College and University Planning

www.scup.org
© 2013 by the Society for College and University Planning
All rights reserved. Published 2013.
ISBN 978-1-937724-17-7

A b o ut the S o ci e t y f o r Co l l ege a nd Un i v er s it y A b o ut The Perry Ch ap m a n Pr i z e

Pl a nn i n g (SCUP)

The Hideo Sasaki Foundation, under the auspices of the Society

The Society for College and University Planning is a community for College and University Planning (SCUP), seeks to honor the
of higher education planning professionals that provides its intellectual contributions of M. Perry Chapman.
members with the knowledge and resources to establish and
achieve institutional planning goals within the context of best As the 2008 recipient of SCUP’s K. C. Parsons Founders’
practices and emerging trends. For more information, visit www. Award for Distinguished Achievement in Higher Education
scup.org. Planning, Chapman was committed to developing and sharing
knowledge to advance integrated planning and interdisciplinary
W h at is Int egrat ed Pl anning? collaboration in higher education.
Integrated planning is the linking of vision, priorities, people, and
the physical institution in a flexible system of evaluation, decision- Chapman’s influence on campus planning and design spanned
making and action. It shapes and guides the entire organization more than four decades. He affected colleagues, institutions,
as it evolves over time and within its community. firms, and community organizations through his insight,
mentoring, writing, and speaking. He raised the standard of
A b o ut the H i deo Sasa k i F o undat i o n planning theory through research and analysis of the relationship
between the campus as a place and its impact on learning and
The mission of the Hideo Sasaki Foundation is to support community.
inquiry, research, and continuing education in planning and
design, with an emphasis on the value of collaboration between In honor of Perry Chapman’s passion for developing and sharing
disciplines. The Foundation currently sponsors the annual Boston knowledge and his commitment to integrated planning and
Architectural College Distinguished Visiting Critic (DVC). The interdisciplinary collaboration a prize of $10,000 will be awarded
DVC conducts an advanced studio for those seeking to study annually from 2012 through 2016. This prize funds research
with highly accomplished design practitioners. The Hideo Sasaki in the planning and design of institutions of higher education.
Foundation is funded by a trust established by Sasaki Associates, The prize is intended to further the research, development,
Inc. and family, friends, and colleagues of Hideo Sasaki. and dissemination of emerging knowledge to improve campus
environments in support of their institution’s mission.

SCUP is grateful to The Hideo Sasaki Foundation for its support

of The Perry Chapman Prize. For more information, visit www.
scup.org/perrychapman.

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize iii

Co ntent s

I . I ntro duct i o n a nd Purp ose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 VI . W h at W e F o und :

Ca m pus Des i gn a nd L e a rn i n g O utco m es.. .............. 19
Research Context
Overview
Goals of the Project
Student Engagement and Recruitment
Recruitment and Retention
II . O ur A pproach ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Engagement and Community

Defining Learning Spaces Landscape and Walkability

III . Des i gn M e th o d o l o g i es: Sustainability

State o f the Fi el d . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
VII . Theo re ti c a l Fr a m e w o rk s:
Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Design Cre ati n g Per specti v e i n the Fi el d
o f L e a rn i n g Space Des i gn Rese a rch....................... 26
Case-Study and Anecdotal Studies

Conceptual Analysis VIII . L e a rn i n g Space Des i gn Rese a rch :

W h at Hav e W e L e a rned
a nd W here A re W e Go i n g? .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .........................28
IV. F o r m a l L e a rn i n g Spaces:
W h at Hav e W e L e a rned?.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Improve Learning Space Design Research Methods
Establish an Agreed-Upon Taxonomy
Defining Space of Learning Space
Establish Broader Research Targets
Research Results: Formal Learning Environments Conduct Longitudinal Research
Benchmark Research Establish Measures of Behavior
Classroom Design, Furniture, and Flexibility Strive to Answer the Fundamental Questions:
What is Learning and How is it Evaluated?
V. I nf o r m a l L e a rn i n g Spaces:
W h at Hav e W e L e a rned?.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 13 M ov i n g F o rwa rd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......................... 31

Defining Space
Ack n o w l ed ge m ent s.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......................... 31
Research Results: Informal Learning Environments
Libraries as Informal Learning Spaces
Social Learning Spaces Referen ces Cited.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......................... 32
Corridors, Mobility, and Incidental Spaces
Referen ces Co nsulted.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......................... 35

A ppend i x A : E va luati o n F o r m .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .........................36

A ppend i x B : Auth o r A ffi l i ati o ns.. . . . . . . . . . . . ......................... 37

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 4

I . Introducti on and Purp ose Rese a rch Co nte x t

The question of how the physical environment affects

In the current climate of rapidly rising higher education
teaching and learning is rooted in the connections between
costs and increasing concern about the need to support
architecture, design, and psychology. Professionals and
stronger retention and graduation rates, focus has turned to
laypeople alike may well ask why we don’t already understand
emerging pedagogies and the development of new templates
which factors in the built or natural environment can be
for learning spaces. In response, planners, architects, and
used to encourage or produce the specific behaviors, such as
institutions are seeking to establish a body of knowledge that
collaboration and learning, that are of interest to classroom
will guide the design, remodel, and use of new and existing
designers, teachers, and administrators. Why hasn’t the
learning spaces. Parallel to this is an increasingly urgent need
cross-disciplinary field of psychology and design already
to evaluate these learning spaces by developing research to
yielded those answers?
determine whether and how they fulfill their purposes.

If you follow the paper trail of the initial, highly optimistic

Across the world, facilities staff, learning specialists,
connections made between psychology and architecture/
academic researchers, architects, and designers have
design in the early 1950s–early 1970s, you will clearly
launched a broad range of investigations to address the
see scholars’ anticipation that psychology could supply
questions being raised by the new research on learning space
architects and designers with specific information about
design. These run the gamut from a few rigorously designed,
the way people respond to the physical environment. This
conducted, and analyzed research projects to more anecdotal
body of information could, it was thought, serve almost
descriptions of experiments and projects undertaken to test
as a set of specifications that could be used directly in the
specific classroom configurations. In addition, there are a
design process, much as information about necessary light
number of articles that review the existing literature and
levels is used to design a building’s lighting. A number of
provide more philosophical approaches for how teaching and
new journals, conferences, and symposia were launched to
learning activities can be effectively housed and deployed.    
provide a home for this new cross-disciplinary field, and
a significant amount of scholarly activity was undertaken
Although several hundred articles and a number of books on
during the late 1960s through the 1970s. The new discipline
these topics had been written by the fall of 2012, the field is
of Environmental Psychology was established, and the
still at an early stage of development.  A first step in creating
Environmental Design Research Association (EDRA) came
value from this existing body of work is to gather, summarize
into being.
and evaluate how far the field has come in identifying the
elements that will allow us to thoughtfully design learning
Over the next 10 years, however, it became clear that
spaces and evaluate their impact.  This was the purpose of
psychology research paradigms were not set up to respond
the project being reported in this paper:  a literature review
to the specific questions posed by the architecture, design,
undertaken by a small group of researchers and campus
and planning professions and the kind of immediately
architects/planners who had applied for and been awarded
applicable information these disciplines were seeking was not
a grant from the Hideo Sasaki Foundation in honor of Perry
forthcoming. Aside from standards generated in the field of
Chapman and administered through the Society for College
ergonomics for sizing spaces and furnishings to fit the human
and University Planning.
body, architects and designers did not receive the fact-based
data trove they had hoped for. As a result, the potential
connections between these two realms of knowledge were

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 5

never solidified, and by the 1980s architects and designers This project was undertaken to encourage all those involved
had gone down their own pathways.   in the development and evaluation of learning spaces—facility
directors, provosts, academic administrators, architects,
For their part, psychologists did not seek to develop their designers, planners, and university-based researchers—to
research by taking direction from architecture or any other look seriously at opportunities to measure how their designs,
field; rather, as in other scholarly fields, they pursued the plans, and spaces really affect the teaching-learning equation.  
questions they and their field defined as important and
relevant. The field of environmental psychology research is The focus of this research review is three-fold:
largely unknown to most architects, even though a number of
architects and designers are members of EDRA and present »» to identify, gather, and catalog research-based
regularly at its conferences.   information on how the physical design of learning
spaces affects the activities and outcomes that occur
Starting in the late 1980s and gaining traction over the within these spaces;
past decade, the field of evidence-based design (EBD) has
emerged. The term “evidence-based design” is a conscious »» to identify, gather, and catalog research-based
borrowing from the medical field and its interest in using information on how the campus as a holistic
scientific research as a way to link medical practice with environment affects learning and the other missions of
health care outcomes, a practice termed “evidence-based the institution; and
medicine.” Architects and designers who use EBD as the basis
»» to evaluate these existing bodies of research and provide
for their design work started in the area of health care design
direction for future research.
and have now moved into the K–12 field, with a few incursions
into the higher education landscape.    
We anticipate that our report will be used by those who are

Despite these advances, we do not yet have a body of data charged with designing and implementing new classrooms,

on the design of learning spaces that can guide those who laboratories, gathering areas, libraries, study spaces, and

must make decisions about the design, construction, and student lounges. This research review may also have an

deployment of classrooms, gathering spaces, lounge and study impact on the kinds of furnishings and equipment being

areas, libraries, and, indeed, the campus as a holistic learning developed by manufacturers seeking to develop furniture-

space. based solutions and on higher education administrators

seeking to create the most flexible settings possible.

Goa l s o f the Pro ject

We are encouraged by the message continually coming from

By turning our focus now to the impacts of learning the scholarly community that the most exciting and useful

space design, the planning/design/architecture research knowledge in any field comes from thoughtfully designed and

community has a new opportunity to bring our disciplines carefully executed cross-disciplinary research. The research

together with social science research for the purpose of we review in this report begins to move us in that direction.

addressing the most fundamental concern of the higher

education mission: assessing what helps teachers teach and
students learn.

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 6

II . Our Approach Defi n i n g L e a rn i n g Spaces

For this project, we gathered, cataloged, and evaluated data

The group that came together to undertake this research
related to a broad range of learning spaces, reflecting the
consists of seven professionals in the fields of design and
current understanding that learning is meant to take place in
higher education. The group includes an educational
spaces that include but are not limited to classrooms. Based
psychologist at a large research university; a campus architect
on the content of these research reports, the wide variety of
at a large research university; a planner/design psychologist
campus learning spaces were categorized as:
who serves as director of research for an architecture and
planning firm; an assistant professor of clinical education and
»» Formal learning spaces such as classrooms and
program manager of campus learning environments at a large
laboratories (section IV)
private university; a research director at a large furniture
manufacturer; a psychologist/educational planner; and an »» Informal spaces such as libraries, group study spaces,
architectural designer at an architecture firm. The team and gathering areas (section V)
members’ affiliations and brief resumes are included in an
appendix to this report. »» The campus as a whole, including the built and natural
environments (section VI)
The team began in exploratory mode, using extensive online
database searches that included EDUCAUSE, ProQuest, The report’s findings are organized to reflect these three
Avery Index, PsychInfo, and ERIC to identify articles, books, categories, with two additional sections. Section VII
dissertations, and reports that address the topic of higher summarizes and evaluates literature reviews and papers or
education learning space design. The search criteria were books that set out a philosophical framework or approach to
based on how closely a research report related to the topic of the field. Section VIII summarizes what we have learned from
learning space design, how rigorous the research was, and our evaluations and identifies gaps in the research to guide
whether the research attempted to address learning outcome those moving forward in this field.
measurements. A separate search effort targeted materials
that addressed the design of the campus as a whole, including
both the built and natural environments.

Electronic copies of the research reports were distributed

for team members to read and evaluate. On the basis of team
evaluations, the reports most closely related to the topic of
higher education learning space design and those containing
other useful information were then redistributed to the group
for a second evaluation. The evaluation form is included in
the appendix to this report.

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 7

III . Desi gn M ethod olo gies: Case-Study a nd A necd ota l Stud i es

State of the Fiel d
Overall, the methodologies used in the lion’s share of studies
we reviewed tended strongly toward anecdotal or case-study
E x per i m enta l a nd Q uas i - E x per i m enta l Des i gn
research. Case-study research is qualitative in nature and can
provide detailed descriptions of a real-life situation in a real-
Just as spaces, buildings, and campuses are designed, so are
life context. The studies reviewed for this report frequently
research studies. The design of a study—both its methods
involved a multi-method approach in which questionnaires,
of transforming a research question into a set of subjects,
focus groups, and interviews were gathered from users
conditions, and measurements and the way the data are
of the spaces in question. There were many attempts by
analyzed—is what determines the validity of the study’s
these researchers to employ rigorous methods, including
results and the legitimacy of the researchers’ conclusions.
ethnographic studies with precise behavioral coding
protocols that added validity to the research. The findings
Our original goal was to identify research reports that
in these articles should not be dismissed simply because
incorporated what social scientists call experimental
they are not fully experimental in nature. Because the field
or quasi-experimental research designs. We found very
is at an early stage of development, these more exploratory
few studies that fulfilled the criterion for experimental
approaches are a valid way of investigating the experimental
research: studies in which subjects (students or teachers, for
conditions, data collection methods, research instruments,
example) are randomly assigned to experimental and control
and outcome variables that can be used in more rigorous
conditions. We found more studies that qualified as quasi-
research in the future. These case-study reports are useful
experimental: research that is conducted experimentally
in identifying instructors’ and students’ perceived needs in a
but that must compensate for the lack of random assignment
range of learning environments, and, when viewed as a whole,
through research design and/or statistical procedures. The
the anecdotal studies produce tangible results that shed light
few examples of experimental and quasi-experimental studies
on learning outcomes.
that do exist are fairly rigorous and provide both a glimpse of
what can be accomplished in an experimental design and an
Co n cep tua l A n a lys i s
inquiry into the opportunities and limitations presented to
the ambitious researcher.
About a quarter of the research reports we reviewed were
in the form of conceptual analysis; the authors developed
The overall shortage of experimental research is
theoretical frameworks and in other ways reflected on the
understandable in a field that is still in its infancy. In
human-environment interaction aspect of learning space use.
addition, institutional course structures and room
In some cases, the authors reviewed past research on both
assignments are complicating factors that are usually beyond
formal and informal learning spaces. These papers generally
the control of researchers. Course sections are typically
concluded with prescriptions for further research for other
ready made in the scheduling office, and researchers do not
researchers and learning space designers.
usually have the opportunity to randomly assign students to a
specific classroom or assign classrooms to specific instructors
or courses. The limitations of the studies reviewed for this
report are mentioned in the discussions below.

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 8

IV. For m al L e arning Spaces: »» L ecture Ha l l :

What Have We L e arned? Large-capacity auditorium with tiered seating plan,
podium at front, clearly visible division of a front and

In addition to the information our investigations yielded back of the classroom.

about the methods used by researchers, we developed
a taxonomy of learning spaces that helps to inform the
research results we report. This review is not meant to be
an exhaustive catalog of all the research on formal learning
spaces, but rather is focused on those studies that are most
relevant and most reliable.

Defi n i n g Space

Formal learning environments are learning spaces used for

regularly scheduled classes. They can have sloped or flat
Image © AC Martin
floors, they can be large or small, and their furnishings may
be fixed or loose. We identified five types of formal learning
»» T echno logy- Infused Cl assroom :
spaces with these general characteristics:
Similar to the layout of the traditional classroom but
»» T ra ditiona l Cl assroom : includes such amenities as computers at the lecture
Flat floor plan, forward-facing desks and chairs, podium podium, overhead digital projectors, manually or
at front. Clearly visible division of a front and back of mechanically operated projection screens, and/or
the classroom. video and Internet viewing capabilities; although the
technology-infused classroom is the standard classroom
at many institutions, it is probably not standard at many
colleges and universities.

Image © AC Martin

Image © AC Martin

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 9

»» Laboratory: »» Activ e L e arning Cl assroom/

Ne x t Generation L e arning Space:
Spaces equipped with formal/traditional, often fixed
These learning spaces have been modified from
lab equipment for use in experimentation, creation,
their original or “traditional” status to include easily
and design that is associated with specific, discipline-
moveable furniture, readily accessible outlets, ports,
based course content. Laboratories may or may not be
computers, mobile whiteboards, projectors, video,
designed to have a clear division between the front and
Internet, and/or other learning accessories. These
back or between the instructor’s space and the students’
classrooms are generally designed with the intention
space.
of eliminating the division between the back and front
of the classroom and replacing it with a more user-
centered design. These classrooms have generally
been designed to accommodate diverse pedagogies,
to ease the transition between teaching modes, and
deliberately engage students in a more interactive
learning environment than traditional classrooms. In
addition, these spaces are usually designed to facilitate
and increase mobility for both instructors and students
with the aim of increasing interaction.

Image © AC Martin

Image © AC Martin

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 10

Rese a rch Result s: F o r m a l L e a rn i n g En v i ro n m ent s Bench mark Rese arch

A series of studies conducted at the University of Minnesota
The field of higher education is under significant pressure (Brooks 2012; Walker, Brooks, and Baepler 2011; Whiteside,
to justify its very existence as a place. Questions that were Brooks, and Walker 2010) serves as a benchmark for the
unthinkable a decade ago are being asked regularly now: state of current research on learning space design. This
“What is the role of a physical place for the higher education research used quasi-experimental methods and a rigorous
student?” “Why do we need a physical environment when data collection system, along with sophisticated statistical
learning can take place online?” At the same time, and in analysis. The results discussed below are all statistically
response to the needs articulated by business and other significant, meaning that these results are unlikely to have
sectors that will eventually employ college graduates, occurred by chance alone.
educators have embraced new pedagogies that focus on
collaboration, team learning, and the use of technology as These studies compared science students’ grades, teacher
a classroom teaching tool and a shaper of the classroom behavior, and student behavior in two classrooms: a
environment.   traditional classroom and a flexible, technology-enhanced
active learning classroom (ALC). In one of the studies, the
Perhaps as a result of these pressures, or because the researchers observed the same instructor teaching two
assessment of active learning and experimental classroom sections of the same course in the two different classroom
formats will influence the way many of these spaces are types. One notable aspect of the Minnesota studies is that
built, the preponderance of research on formal learning the researchers used students’ ACT scores to predict their
environments focuses on active learning classrooms. expected performance in these science courses and then
The shared focus of most research on formal learning compared this with their actual performance.
environments is the connections among teaching techniques,
physical environments, and learning outcomes. The physical environment clearly had an impact on both the
teacher and students:
Through a series of case studies and other descriptive reports,
it has been generally agreed that active learning techniques »» Students taking a course in an ALC classroom achieved
used in purpose-built spaces are associated with enhanced higher grades than students taking the same course in a
learning. (A good, brief review of this literature is included traditional classroom.
in Brooks 2012.) However, there are only a few high-quality
studies to support this conclusion. We reviewed 14 studies »» In the traditional classroom, the teacher was more

that addressed the impact of technology in a flat-floor likely to lecture and there was measurably less class
classroom, student and faculty experiences in active learning discussion.
classrooms, and/or team-based experiences in technologically
»» In the ALC classroom, the teacher was more likely to
enhanced classrooms. Only some of these studies attempted
move around the room and more likely to consult with
to measure learning outcomes. Two additional papers
individuals and groups.
addressed general classrooms and their qualities (Jessop,
Gubby, and Smith 2012; Sanders 2011); both used primarily »» Marker boards were used more in the ALC classroom;
observational techniques. there were more of these boards available in the ALC
and that they were used more frequently by both
students and teachers than in other classrooms.

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 11

»» ALC classrooms are better accepted by urban students class session. However, even in classrooms that contain loose
than by rural students and more positively evaluated furniture, Henshaw, Edwards, and Bagley (2011) point out
by first- and second-year students than by juniors and that some instructors may be resistant to rearranging the
seniors. furniture and that even those who start out the term willing
to physically reorganize the classroom may tire of the novelty

The researchers point out that the format of classroom space and accept the traditional arrangement even though it limits

appears to shape instructor behavior and class activities, their teaching options.

which in turn seems to shape student behavior. For example,

the ALC room lends itself to group work, which frees up the Van Horne et al. (2012) conducted an extensive initiative at

instructor to leave the podium and consult with students. the University of Iowa. The university developed a design for

The concomitant de-emphasis on lecture means there is more a technology-infused learning environment (TILE classroom)

class discussion. to align with emerging teaching strategies. The design was
based on the SCALE-UP model of round tables, wheeled

The University of Minnesota research does have distinct chairs, and technology and lighting to support visual media.

limitations. Whiteside, Brooks, and Walker (2010) do The rooms accommodate 36 to 72 students, and faculty

demonstrate the impact of space on learning outcomes, but members must be trained before they are permitted to teach

their research refers to a single semester of a single course in them.

taught by a single instructor. The experimental design of

this research needs to be replicated and conducted in other Based on feedback from 12 instructors and 400 students in

classrooms and at other institutions. For these reasons we science courses and a program of systematic observations in

should be cautious in our confidence in their conclusions. the classrooms, the researchers present a series of results that
speak specifically to those who are trying to increase student
engagement and promote collaborative learning:
Cl assroom D esign, Furniture, and Fl e x ibil it y
Given that classroom design has an impact on teaching
methods, instructor behaviors, and student activities and »» Students in TILE classrooms received higher grades

in response to institutions’ efforts to create classrooms that than students who had previously taken those same
promote group discussion and active learning, a number courses from the same instructors in traditional
of researchers have looked at the ways furniture and room classrooms.
arrangements can assist new pedagogies.
»» Students credited the classroom format with
their increased willingness to participate in class,
Many of the active learning designs are “in-the-round”
their increased sense of responsibility in finishing
rather than instructor- or podium-focused; an instructor’s
assignments, and their increased desire to work
podium might be mobile or placed more in the center of the
room. Students are seated at tables that encourage group collaboratively.

interaction, which may be round, rectangular, lozenge, or »» Students who perceived that the course material
octagonal in shape and which may incorporate screens and
was well-suited to the TILE environment were more
other technology. In many cases, students’ chairs are wheeled
interested in taking another course in this type of
to facilitate movement.
classroom.

Flexibility appears to be a key feature: instructors want to be

able to lecture as well as supervise group work in the same

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 12

The university’s commitment to this new form of classroom is »» Students made suggestions for improving the design,
broad. The faculty training programs help faculty adapt their including larger tablets and incorporation of power
courses to this new environment, and student instructional outlets.
technology assistants are available to support faculty in the
use of these classrooms. Research data, such as the finding Dane’s (2009) study of instructors’ perceptions of the Deakin
that faculty do not always use the technology available in the Immersive Learning Environment (DILE) classrooms at
classrooms, are fed back into the faculty training program. Deakin University in Australia also looks at how space
The university has also made those responsible for room shapes pedagogy and instructor behavior. The DILE
scheduling part of the project so that the rooms are used in classroom/studio is arranged in an unusual L-shaped format
the most appropriate way. that includes a boardroom table arrangement, computer
stations, standing-height tables, and a lounge area; it is
Henshaw, Edwards, and Bagley (2011) report on an used by multi-media classes. Although the study focuses on
experimental classroom at the University of North Carolina instructors’ perceptions of the DILE classroom as a teaching
that was designed specifically to promote classroom environment, Dane makes the particular point that students’
interaction. This unique classroom was equipped with “swivel perceptions and concerns should occupy a central role in the
desks” that, although fixed to the floor, revolve 360 degrees, development of classroom spaces by quoting one of the faculty
making it possible for students to quickly transform a more members who took part in the study:
traditional-seeming classroom into one that makes it easy to
form groups. Ten instructors taught undergraduate courses in
Students need to feel comfortable in the space; they
humanities and social and natural sciences in this classroom.
need to feel that they own it . . . the ability [to move]
things like furniture, and any of the other resources . . .
Based on instructor and student surveys and video recordings
So whilst I have an ideal of how the rooms would be set
of the classes, the results of this series of case studies support
up, it’s irrelevant . . . it is the students who are in control
the notion that classroom format can positively affect student
of the way in which the room is set out and I think that’s
engagement:
really important . . . (Dane 2009, p. 62)

»» Both instructors and students reported that the room

Dane makes two specific recommendations: institutions
supported student interaction.
should make design decisions based on the pedagogy to be
»» Students reported that the room arrangements used in the classroom and faculty should be trained to use
contributed to the quality of their interactions. For ACLs and technology-enhanced classrooms to make the best
example, students mentioned that this classroom use of institutional resources.
arrangement allowed them to get to know their fellow
students in ways that sitting in a traditional classroom Greg Sanders’ (2011) article “What Makes a Good

did not. Classroom?” reports a series of observations made over the

course of several years at four-year flagship institutions,
»» Students said the classroom design contributed to public four-year institutions, and a community college. He
their willingness to ask questions or participate in focused particularly on the flexibility of classrooms and the
discussions. way classroom furniture supports or impedes switching
between instructional modes. In one instance, students
»» Instructors reported that the room could be quickly
in classrooms furnished with long rows of straight tables
converted into and out of small group discussions.
that accommodated eight students each took about three

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 13

minutes to change from lecture to group work, while in V. Infor m al L e arning Spaces:
classrooms equipped with hexagonal or straight tables that What Have We L e arned?
accommodated fewer students, the transition time was
approximately 30 seconds.
Defi n i n g Space

Sanders, an architect, designed a prototype classroom based

The research studies reviewed focused on three types of
on his observations that addresses elements such as room
informal learning spaces:
size and shape, ceiling height and shape, daylight and views,
finishes, acoustical control, electrical supply for student use,
»» Libraries:
furniture and adjustability, connectivity, lighting controls,
student arrangement and area requirements, instructor Within libraries, research has focused on study areas,

arrangement and area requirements, and technology and computer banks, alcoves, lobbies, and unassigned
media. spaces. In many cases these spaces had been modified
or deliberately designed to create more interactive,
The similarity of these studies in their methodology and collaborative, and communal learning environments.
focus on technology-enhanced classrooms makes it clear
that researchers need to look at other types of classrooms.
Teaching laboratories, studios, seminar rooms, and
auditoriums all could benefit from the type of scrutiny that
is offered to active learning classrooms. In addition, an
exploration of methodologies that would address the gap in
the measurement of outcomes would also benefit the long-
term research on educational environments of all kinds.

Image © AC Martin

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 14

»» G at hering Spaces: »» Corrid ors and spaces cre at ed

wit hin corrid ors:
Areas of the campus spacious enough to accommodate
Transitional areas connecting various learning
large groups of individuals interacting informally for
environments, classrooms, offices, restrooms, and
academic, social, and personal purposes; often several
lobbies. At some institutions, alcoves along the walls,
of these purposes are combined, for example, sharing
unused lobby areas, and spaces in courtyards and
a pizza while discussing studies and social activities
plazas may be intentionally furnished to accommodate
or a group study session involving focused participant
informal learning activities; others may have minimal
interaction. These spaces may include food service
furnishings.
areas, student unions, student centers, and outdoor
spaces.

Image © AC Martin

We identified a number of papers addressing informal

learning spaces; these are primarily anecdotal or
ethnographic, employing both quantitative and qualitative

Image © AC Martin methods.

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 15

Rese a rch Result s: I nf o r m a l L e a rn i n g En v i ro n m ent s spaces. Researchers used student diaries/logs, interviews,
focus groups, and design charrettes as methods of collecting
Most of us are likely to focus on classrooms when thinking data. Most of the research we report here is in the form
about how the environment affects learning, yet a of case studies. Despite that, we have uncovered common
considerable portion of students’ learning happens outside threads that relate students’ perceived needs to their learning
of formal spaces. Students intent upon completing group outcomes.
or individual assignments often roam the campus looking
for places to work. Particularly in institutions where a Libraries as Informa l L e arning Spaces
preponderance of students live off-campus, the need for on- Two studies in particular create a framework for studies
campus study space is critical. Informal learning spaces may of libraries as informal learning spaces. Yale University
be “found spaces” such as empty classrooms, cafeterias and librarian emeritus Scott Bennett’s (2006) study found that
dining halls, or hallways outside of faculty offices; others are 80 percent of collaborative spaces—those designed to bring
purposefully provided, including libraries, study lounges, together information technology, technological staff, and
group study rooms, furnished alcoves in corridors and public other student support services—exist within libraries. In
areas, and outdoor spaces such as patios and plazas. spite of this, he presents data from 66 universities showing
that their libraries were underperforming for 60 percent of
The current demand for informal learning spaces seems to their students and 80 percent of their instructors. Bennett
exceed their supply. In Bennett’s (2006) essay on library points out that collaborative space serves not only the needs
design, “Designing for Uncertainty,” one student stated the of students but also the librarians, the technology, and the
case poignantly: “At the present moment I feel like I have to library staff. He recommends a mission-based approach to
go off campus to find a nice environment to study” (p. 24). library design, noting that this approach “insists, as its point
In an atmosphere in which institutions want to promote of departure, that students are before all else learners and
engagement and connection, this is clearly an outcome to be that library space design should be primarily concerned not
avoided. with services but with learning” (p. 18).

Connecting student learning outcomes to planning and The second important study is a comprehensive ethnographic
design is an even greater challenge with informal learning research project conducted at the River Campus Libraries at
spaces than with formal classrooms. Informal spaces lack the University of Rochester. Foster and Gibbons (2007) looked
even the benefit of having a room scheduling system or a way at student work processes related to writing research papers.
of predicting who will be in what room and when. Whatever They gathered information to address questions about why
lack of rigor we have found in the body of work on classroom students choose to work at the library, where else they might
design, we find that it is even more challenging to apply work, and what aspects of the library facilitated their work.
rigorous research designs and data collection methodologies The researchers used mapping exercises, student-gathered
to informal learning spaces. photographs, surveys, interviews, and design charrettes.
Their findings paint a detailed picture of students’ study lives
Research on informal learning spaces focuses primarily that has implications for institutions that want to make the
on student behaviors: the daily journeys students take as library relevant to those lives:
they navigate spaces on campus; the role of technology
as a disrupting, enabling, or modifying agent; and the »» Students are highly scheduled and on the go all of the
relationships among students, their perceptions, their social time. There is no “average” day for a student. Academic,
experiences, and the physical qualities of informal learning social, recreational, work, volunteer, and personal

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 16

activities are all in the mix and each day is different. »» Resources: students included library materials in their
They eat on the go and carry their belongings with them, designs, ranging from academic and reference books to
although they don’t carry their laptops. leisure magazines and DVDs.  

»» Students’ schedules are “offset” from librarians’

Radcliffe, Wilson, Powell & Tibbetts (2008; 2009) edited a
schedules.
series of case studies that addressed both libraries and other
»» Students study in the library, at home/in their dorms, kinds of campus spaces. With regard to libraries, the authors
and in the computer lab. They use computer technology concluded that despite the existence of online resources, a
throughout the day and in multiple locations. physical place is still important and students like coming to
the library when they have staff support in person and their

The researchers also reported results from the design “own space” in the library. Other needs revealed by these case

charrettes that show student needs and preferences: studies included:

»» Flexibility: spaces that meet a variety of needs. Students »» Flexibility of spaces: the design needs to accommodate

want to move easily among the spaces. Group and different needs at different times of year; spaces can

individual study areas are important, as are spaces to evolve and be repurposed even throughout a single

relax, a café, and computing and media viewing areas.    semester.  

»» Comfort: spaces that provide comfort and have a “family »» Variety of spaces: the library serves as a social learning

room” atmosphere. This includes easy access to coffee hub that must balance group collaborative spaces, quiet

and food, natural light, and an environment with discussion spaces, silent spaces, individual learning

soothing textures, sounds, and great warmth. The space spaces, and social spaces.

should support sitting, slouching, putting one’s feet up, »» Convenience: students value easy access to water
and lying down.   fountains and toilets, the ability to eat and drink in

»» Technology: technology and tools should be intuitively library areas, and multiple access points to the library;

integrated into the space. This includes high-end these optimize students’ time.  

technology such as media players, smart boards, and »» The nature of a learning task dictates how students use
plasma screens as well as low-tech items such as power space in the library.
outlets, staplers, and three-hole punch tools.
»» Older students tend to use the library more than
»» Staff support: Students rarely made distinctions younger students.
between the types of staff they needed in the library;
»» Visual elements, such as windows, art exhibits, and
rather, they expected to interact with a generic staff
color, attract users.
member who would be able to provide reference
assistance, check out materials, answer IT questions, »» The presence of other people attracts users.
and brew a great latte. There were very few mentions
»» Available support services attract users.
of a reference or information desk. Librarians cannot
assume that they know how students do their academic
work or what they need.

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 17

S ocia l L e arning Spaces students to study spaces during first-year orientation,

Universities and colleges are building gathering areas welcome week, transfer orientation, and any other
dedicated to “social learning.” These are designed for group departmental-, college-, and university-level welcoming
interaction and are distinct from “quiet please” library areas, sessions or celebrations.  
although they may be located in a library.
»» Realize that students’ assignments and their study

A two-part study conducted by the University of Queensland choices play an important and understated role in the

(Matthews, et al. 2009, 2010) sought to measure the impact of future design and redesign of informal learning spaces.
informal social learning spaces (SLCs) on student engagement By understanding the curricular tasks assigned to
as measured by the National Survey of Student Engagement students as well as their study needs and preferences,
(NSSE). Using correlational analyses (statistical associations we may be able to “encourage students to spend more
that do not suggest a causal direction), the researchers found time on campus, increase engagement, and improve
that students who used informal learning spaces reported retention” (in Whiteside 2010, Concluding Implications
higher levels of engagement and that the use of SLCs was and Recommendations).
related to the social aspects of student engagement. The
SLC seems to foster peer-to-peer interaction and student Crook and Mitchell (2012) identified four types of social
collaboration and is not seen by students as suitable for connections students make in the course of their campus
individual study. The researchers also found that SLCs were experience:
perceived as noisy, which discouraged some students from
using them.   
»» Focused collaboration: occasions of traditional and
relatively intense joint problem solving (planned and
Whiteside, Brooks, and Walker (2010) at the University of
outcome-oriented)
Minnesota examined the extent to which, if at all, formal
and informal learning environments shape teaching and »» Intermittent exchange: when students convene for
learning. Their conclusions, drawn from research on informal independent study that permits occasional and
learning spaces, show that students select a wide variety of improvised to-and-fro questioning and commentary
spaces in which to study, including their home or dorm room,
the library, coffee shops, and computer labs. They study, on »» Serendipitous encounter: chance meetings with peers in

average, nearly two hours per session, mainly in the early which study-related issues (and perhaps other matters)
evening. Technology is ubiquitously integrated into their are discussed briefly and on the fly
study time, and students are reluctant to change their study
»» Ambient sociality: in which students identify the
location, even if the space does not meet their study goals.
importance of simply “being there” as participants in
Like Radcliffe et al. (2009), the researchers found that the
the studying community
type of assignment greatly affects a student’s choice of study
environment.  
Randall and Wilson (2009) focused on a central area in Bond
University’s main space, and their observations echoed those
Whiteside and her colleagues make a series of
of Crook and Mitchell (2012). They found that this space was
recommendations:  
used for five different purposes:

»» Promote campus study environments before students

»» Group work activity
develop study routines. It is important to introduce

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 18

»» Socializing »» Provide dedicated spaces for quiet individual work

»» Private moments or individual study (relaxing or »» Establish or enhance spaces for collaborative work and
reading) study

»» Interaction with staff »» Increase access to printing

»» Career development »» Consider aesthetics and comfort

»» Continue to involve students in the design of spaces

Randall and Wilson suggest that dedicated on-campus
“breakout” spaces are needed to encourage students to stay on
The studies of libraries, social learning spaces, and incidental
campus between classes, leading to more informal learning
spaces reveal a common thread: the importance of including
experiences and greater opportunities for socialization.  
student voices in the design process associated with the
creation of new social learning spaces. The SLCs described
Corrid ors, M obil it y, and Incidenta l Spaces
by Matthews, Adams, and Gannaway (2009) incorporated
A few studies addressed the use of corridors and incidental
student input into the design process, and the other sources
spaces or the location and use of study spaces on campus.
cited here refer to the wide range of student uses for, and
Architects and designers are increasingly making use of
needs in, every space. Open spaces, natural lighting, and the
“found spaces” in buildings by furnishing them, often
freedoms not found in more controlled gathering areas like
with built-in seating and power outlets. Students use such
libraries where quiet and calm are expected have been shown
spaces briefly or for longer periods during the time between
to allow students to engage with one another in a manner that
classes, while waiting for a class to begin, or while waiting to
is more conducive to the learning experience:
meet with a faculty member. Having the appropriate space
available at the appropriate time can encourage students
Social learning spaces can provide students with an
to work on their assignments without having to go across
outlet to develop social networks with peers that can
campus to the library or other dedicated study area.
lead to greater engagement in active and collaborative

Fournier, Lane, and Lyle (2010) report on a study at the learning and that facilitates the sharing of knowledge
University of Washington on students’ study behaviors to meet academic challenges. (Matthews, Adams, and
and desired features of campus study spaces. The study Gannaway 2009)
investigated how students were using laptops and other
mobile devices on campus, how they were using existing
computing centers, and what features were important to
students in future study space designs. The researchers used
surveys, focus groups, log data from computing centers, and
design charrettes. Based on their findings, they made these
recommendations:

»» Continue to provide general-access workstations and

high-end software

»» Minimize obstacles to laptop use

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 19

VI . What We Found: to student learning. Working farms, forests, arboretums,

Ca m pus Desi gn and L e arning Outco m es greenhouses, gardens, and more became part of not just
land-grant institutions, but many others as well (Griffith
1994). The campus landscape has remained a significant
Ov erv i e w
place for teaching and learning for students in programs
such as natural resources management, sustainability/
Permanent, physical campuses arose from the need to house
ecology, agriculture, forestry, and numerous other disciplines.
tutors and their students in a safe environment. The invention
Campuses built to provide such opportunities did not follow
of the printing press allowed the first institutions to move out
the classic designs of the first institutions; instead, open space
from under the wings of religious organizations and facilities.
and “zones” for disciplines became far more common than
Now, many places could house books for scholarly study
closely clustered buildings designed to protect students from
and research, not just places with monks and scribes. The
the lures of the outside world.
Protestant Reformation changed the way in which clergy were
educated and promoted an informed laity. These cultural and
The sustainability movement on campuses today has also
technological changes created the impetus for institutions
increased the use of the physical plant as a place that provides
of higher learning to move beyond their typical locations.
teaching and learning opportunities (Barlett and Chase
However, the “ivory tower” that began with the Universities of
2004). Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
Paris, Oxford, and Cambridge laid the groundwork, literally,
(LEED®) and other sustainable buildings provide students
for the design of higher education campuses for centuries to
with the opportunity to understand basic principles of energy
come (Dober 1996).
and water use. Residence halls provide readings on students’
energy utilization, educating them on the consequences of
Nine colleges were chartered in the colonies between 1636
their actions and encouraging them to reduce their usage.
and 1780, and while they had similar curricula, their physical
In addition, campuses have also embraced the use of land
locations varied. Most grew without much planning, although
for students to build gardens that help provide the campus
some strove to emulate the architecture and layout of their
with local food and teach organic and sustainable gardening
European predecessors. As communities grew around these
principles.
early institutions, the original plans, if there were any, often
had to be accommodated. In the mid- to late 1800s, the
The post–World-War-II period in the United States saw the
advent of the Morrill Land-Grant Acts (Association of Public
advent of professionalism in campus design and planning and
and Land-Grant Universities 2008) and the arrival of the
an increased sense of how the physical environment could
German concept of the university led to a distinct change in
support the purposes of higher education. While campuses
the planning and purposes of higher education (Dober 1996).
may have many of the same stated purposes—for example,
The university concept—a place for research and a multiplicity
Boyer’s (1997) knowledge creation, transmission, application,
of disciplines—created one of the first divides in the mission
and preservation—or even the same Carnegie Classification,
of postsecondary education between the liberal arts and
they are all physically different. This has created a
the professions. Further, the applied research advocated in
fundamental research problem in that there is little ability
land-grant institutions meant that campus planning no longer
to conduct controlled or randomized experiments on the
applied solely to facilities.
potential effects of campus design. Instead, we must postulate
that certain broad characteristics of the physical campus can
The focus on the agricultural and mechanical arts that
evoke trust, attachment, inquiry, or other human reactions
accompanied the creation of land-grant institutions meant
that help contribute to an institution’s identity.
that the physical campus now contributed significantly

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 20

While reviewing the history of campus planning and the survey was completed during spring semester 2005.
design, it quickly becomes clear that design principles The demographics of the survey respondents were clearly
are not generally focused on creating learning outcomes. skewed toward full-time students, with 95 percent reporting
Rather, the physical layout of the campus tends to focus on as such. However, at the time of the survey, the national
safety, security, walkability, and the desire to encourage rate of full-time students was 62.4 percent (National Center
or create community (Strange and Banning 2001); the for Education Statistics 2005). The skew toward full-time
first three necessary to accomplish the last. Given these students may have influenced the conclusions of the survey
overarching goals for campus plans, the rest of this section since it over-sampled the traditional campus population,
considers research related to campus design and (1) student which is likely to have stronger views on campus design.
engagement, including recruitment; (2) walkability and
landscaping’s effects on campus aesthetics and health; and Reynolds’ survey revealed that the most “essential” or
(3) examples of sustainability in campus design as a learning “very important” institutional characteristics that potential
tool. students consider are related to the academic quality of the
major, preparation for a career, and excellent and accessible
Student En g age m ent a nd Recru it m ent professors. The overall quality of campus facilities was
ranked sixth and the location of the institution, eighth. An
Recruitm ent and Re t ention attractive campus was selected as essential or very important
A study by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of by 50.6 percent of the respondents, ranking 14th out of
Teaching reported by Boyer (1987) indicated that nearly half 18 options. Reynolds’s findings on the importance of data
of the students surveyed said the friendliness of the students related to academic quality in students’ decision making
they met during a campus visit most affected their choice were reinforced by a recent survey from the United Kingdom
to enroll in a college. The rest of the paragraph that offered (Burrell 2013). The topics about which students most wanted
those results is one of the most quoted on the influence of information were the course content of potential majors
campus design on student matriculation decisions: (77 percent), the academic reputation of an institution (57
percent), the distance from home (57 percent), and the quality
But it was the buildings, the trees, the walkways, the of the academic facilities (57 percent). These results mirror
well-kept lawns—that overwhelmingly won out. The those of Reynolds when considering similar questions.

appearance of the campus is, by far, the most influential

Reynolds proceeded with a finer analysis of those facility
characteristic during campus visits, and we gained the
categories that respondents rated as extremely or very
distinct impression that when it comes to recruiting
important in their decision to attend an institution. Again,
students, the director of buildings and grounds may be
the most highly ranked facilities were those associated with
more important than the academic dean. (Boyer 1987,
academic activities, the major, the library, sophisticated
p.17)
technology, and classrooms. Open space was ranked below
residence halls, exercise facilities, and the bookstore in its
Subsequent research has refined this somewhat glorious
effects on attendance.
view of the effects of campus design on would-be students.
In particular, Reynolds’ (2007) study, while limited to four-
Nevertheless, much is made of the first impression that a
year schools, provides an updated context for how facilities
campus makes on the likelihood of a student choosing a
and open space contribute to recruitment and, possibly, to
school. Part of this view is based on the relationship between
retention. The data for the study reported here included
a student actually making a campus visit before enrolling and
13,782 students attending participating US institutions;

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 21

the subsequent decision to enroll. A recent study indicated spent in a campus library were related to the retention of
that 70 percent of students choose to attend a college they students in general for both semesters.
visited, with most visiting fewer than four schools (Russell
2002). As Strange and Banning (2001, p. 12) note, “From the What we know about the influence of facilities and campus
view of prospective college students, the physical features are design on recruitment and retention comes primarily from
often among the most important factors in creating a critical surveys of students after they have selected an institution.
first impression of an institution.” Most research focuses on four-year institutions, with
virtually none on community colleges. The condition of
As we look more deeply into the literature, it would seem academic facilities is of the greatest importance to students,
that the physical campus might also influence a student’s and they generally remain satisfied with those facilities in
decision not to attend an institution. In particular, the lack their academic major. Students who use academic facilities
of cleanliness and maintenance of campus facilities and open with greater frequency are also more likely to be retained.
spaces is significant in Reynolds’ (2007, p. 70) respondents’
rejection of an institution. Further, Reynolds (2007, p. 73) Engagem ent and Communit y
notes that “women appear to be more influenced than men by The rise of interest on campus in increasing student
the condition of an institution’s facilities.” Given the gender engagement and involvement grew out of research in the
imbalance in most US institutions toward women, this would 1980s and 1990s by a variety of authors, including Astin
seem to make meeting basic standards a must for student (1993), Kuh, Schuh, and Whitt (1991), and Pascarella and
recruitment. Terenzini (1991). The theories on which they based their
investigations led them to understand that satisfaction with
Unfortunately, Reynolds’ research indicates that students the educational experience, as well as the ability to benefit
experience an increasing dissatisfaction with their institution from it, relied in part on a student’s partaking in specific
as they move from freshman to senior status, along with a activities on campus. These activities reflected how frequently
decreasing view of the quality of maintenance. Tempering students interacted with instructors and faculty, the amount
these findings were ones that found that students with of time they spent studying or using academic resources, and
different grade point averages were equally satisfied with how academically oriented their peers were. It also became
campus facilities. clear that informal learning had a vital role to play in student
life and that offering more opportunities for chance meetings
There are few studies on the effects of facilities on retention. that lead to dialogue would be of benefit to students, faculty,
A notable one looked at the use of facilities at the University and staff.
of Maryland using a stratified, random sample of second-
semester freshmen (Mallinckrodt and Sedlacek 1987). The Campus designers and planners quickly understood that
sample was 52 percent female and consisted of 100 US they could make spaces that invited interaction and informal
White students, 78 US Black students, and 29 international learning. Designers have addressed this by working to
students. The researchers used a 24-item questionnaire create campus plans and designs that lead to both social and
to determine the range of campus facility use among the academic conversations through the placement of buildings,
participants. The sample cohort was followed; by the next fall, walkways, and amenities (Kenney, Dumont, and Kenney
80 percent of the 207 students had returned and 75 percent 2005). Much of the discussion in campus design and master
were retained through the spring. The strongest predictor of planning over the past 50 years has been on achieving both
retention was the use of the library; both the use of academic “placemaking” and “placemarking” on campuses.
facilities for studying and research and the number of hours

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 22

Placemaking is the structuring of the overall design, A number of studies help to shed light on how these principles
the broader skeleton, the articulated patter, that is, the have been validated in practice. Let us say first that there are
campus plan . . . Placemarking, in contrast, involves a great number of case studies available on specific campus
the definition, conceptualization, and orchestration of projects that sought to follow these guidelines. While case
certain physical attributes which give a campus a visual studies can be very helpful in understanding specific issues

uniqueness appropriately its own. (Dober 2003, pp. 4–5) or parameters, they may have limited generalized utility as
models for other campuses. Nevertheless, since all campuses

The desire to bring a human scale to campus design are unique, we are not left with many resources beyond

paralleled findings on the importance of encouraging those studies that research a single campus or associated campuses.

who live and work on campus to engage with one another in Thus, the rest of this section will focus on examples of such

activities that advance the institution’s mission. As Sensbach research since we know of only one comparative review of

(1991, p. 11) noted, “Scale, not style, is the essential element multiple campus design elements.

in good campus design.” What we find is that the grand scale

of buildings, including high-rise residence halls, has begun to Temple (2009) studied the effects of the design of York

return to Jefferson’s concept of the campus as an “academical University (UK), which was created to encourage encounters

village.” This view of the campus as a village, or perhaps a among students, staff, and faculty. The university, designed in

series of villages, places increased emphasis on a number 1962, has as one of its aims “the encouragement of informal

of key design principles that are seen as enhancing student interactions” (Temple 2011, p. 142). While the university

engagement: enrollment has continued to grow, respondents in Temple’s

survey and interviews indicated that the original design was
still serving its intended purpose. Many reported that it was
»» A pedestrian campus environment reinforced by
helpful to have the possibility of “bumping into people” for a
appropriate closeness of buildings (density) and by
variety of reasons both academic and social and for building
juxtaposition of activities that complement one another
the generally friendly atmosphere of the campus.
(mixed use)

»» Indoor and outdoor social spaces scattered throughout Open space, in particular, has proven to be significant in
the overall framework of the campus (not just at the encouraging interactions that foster professional identity
campus center) while also allowing for “weak” interdisciplinary ties across
the campus. Greene and Penn (1997) conducted a study of the
»» Informal settings that provide opportunities for effects of open space on the development of both disciplinary
interaction; providing food in multiple locations is and global ties among the four campuses of the Pontificia
clearly a draw Universidad Católica de Chile (PUC). Greene and Penn used
spatial structure analysis (i.e., analysis of the configuration
»» Integration into the wider community to take advantage
of open spaces on each of the four campuses), observations of
of community-based learning resources and to
those spaces, and a survey of reported social interactions to
contribute to (and learn to be a responsible part of) the
form the basis of their investigations. They found that strong
larger community
disciplinary ties built in the social, open spaces near academic
»» Access to technology and digital communications buildings helped encourage weaker ties (Granovetter 1982)
across disciplines and campuses to give students a sense of
»» Places and opportunities to participate in co-curricular the integration of the campus globally.
activities (Kenney, Dumont, and Kenney 2005)

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 23

Abu-Ghazzeh (1999) investigated the features of outdoor reflection when looking at ways to encourage involvement and
space that increase the likelihood of impromptu encounters community on campus.
among students, faculty, and staff at the University of
Jordan in Amman. He used a variety of methods to test La nds c ape a nd Wa l k a b i l it y
his hypotheses, including forced-choice selection of
spaces, behavioral observations of spaces, and interviews Strange and Banning (2001) reviewed research on the aspects
to determine what open spaces on campus were preferred of campus space that engender positive responses from users.
and how they were used. Virtually every one of his 140 They identified “the call for community, the call for territory,
participants was able to indicate a preferred outdoor space. the call for landscape, and the call for wayfinding” (p. 28).
The common feature of these spaces was that vegetation We have talked about the call for community. The call for
formed boundaries that allowed participants to feel “away territory involves a focus on the safety of the campus; that
from the academic environment” (Abu-Ghazzeh 1999, p. 795). is, do community members have a sense that they can see
enough to be safe? How often do they confront places that
Abu-Ghazzeh also discovered differences among staff, could hide a predator? Do they perceive avenues of escape?
students, and faculty in how they viewed various open spaces. While we are not covering studies related to safety, suffice
For example, the Milk Bar, a long open area that featured it to say that a sense of security is an essential ingredient in
food, space for socializing, and a place to relax, was seen creating a campus learning environment. As we know, people
as “entertaining” by 80 percent of students but only by 37.5 do not engage in higher-order activities if they do not feel safe
percent of faculty and staff. His participants appreciated and secure. The rest of this section will review research on
and visited both built spaces—tables and chairs, areas near a the effects of landscaping and walkability as two additional
building, the Milk Bar—and more natural/rural settings with facets of campus design that can potentially have an effect on
seclusion, lawns, and wooded areas. The needs of participants learning.
for quiet study or encounters with others guided their choice
of space. Abu-Ghazzeh advises planners to consider the As Kenney, Dumont, and Kenney (2005, p. 138) note
ways in which users select open spaces based on their needs
and to understand that those needs change with increased A well-ordered landscape structures and reinforces
experience in a university setting. the big idea in the campus plan; defines the campus’s
outdoor spaces; provides, through pedestrian and
The research on how campus design encourages engagement vehicular circulation, effective means for movement
is sparse at best. Clearly, however, design affects the number
of people, automobiles, and goods; expresses the
and type of interactions that take place outside of buildings
institution’s roots in its site and region; and expresses
in the common areas of campus open space. Basic research
the institution’s unique culture and identity.
on non-verbal communication, including the importance
of proxemics (Hall 1966; Sommer 1969), has led designers
In an effort to find out which aspects of campus design are
to focus on how they can bring people together so that
most significant to students, Eckert (2012) created a valid
conversations can occur serendipitously. Research reinforces
and reliable survey of students’ reactions to features in the
the idea that campus members view and use open space for
outdoor campus environment. After building the survey,
two primary purposes, to remove themselves from others and
Eckert used it to assess the views of students across eight
to engage in a variety of social interactions. Thus, designers
large, regional, public universities in Ohio. Eight thousand
must consider the need for both human commerce and quiet
students were randomly selected (1,000 per campus) and
e-mailed invitations to participate. A total of 1,522 usable

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 24

responses were received (about 21 percent of the sample). The The second study used a post-occupancy evaluation of a
survey assessed the importance of a feature or concept (e.g., campus open space to assess its effects on studying behavior.
cleanliness, cohesiveness) as well as students’ satisfaction Spooner (2008) examined the use of the Memorial Garden
with the attractiveness, amount, and functionality of those at the University of Georgia through a survey and walk-
items. through interviews. A convenience sample of students
walking through the garden was used, and 67 surveys and
The survey included 22 different elements. The elements rated interviews were conducted. Sixty-six percent of the students
as most important included cleanliness, lighting, walkways, indicated that they study in the Memorial Garden. Most of
maintenance, parking, and planned design. Interestingly, these students study individually, as the post-occupancy
Eckert reports that students from campuses with more analysis indicated that the places for sitting, primarily granite
cohesive design indicated that element was more important benches, did not encourage group work. Overall, Spooner’s
to them than did students from campuses without such analysis indicated that the Memorial Garden is successful in
cohesion, who were primarily neutral about that element. providing outdoor space for academic engagement.
Students were largely satisfied with the attractiveness of
elements on their campuses, but somewhat less enthusiastic Spooner (2011) provides additional insight into the
about the amount and functionality of those elements. More walkability of campus design through his review of 37 master
importantly, the survey was able to differentiate student plans to assess how they addressed the need for students to
satisfaction among campuses with varying quality and spend only 10 minutes walking between classes. He noted in
amounts of these elements. A campus that is interested in his review that campus designers are increasingly concerned
knowing how its students perceive open space and how it not only about the time required for that walk, but also
might be improved would do well to administer this survey. about the variety of experiences that may enhance students’
perceptions of the campus. Spooner focused his own study
Plazas hold a special place in society and on campus. Two on how the perception of time was affected by the variety of
studies we noted addressed ways in which research may visual experiences on six different pathways on the University
advance our understanding of how these spaces may be of Georgia campus. Following the completion of each walk,
used to promote learning. The first study, by Goldfinger close to the same number of feet, the 48 students in the study
(2009), identifies the ways in which creating a branded were asked to estimate how much time they thought the walk
space, Democracy Plaza, contributed to civic engagement took and to take a short survey on what they recalled seeing
and civil discourse at Indiana University-Purdue University during the walk and whether they perceived it positively or
Indianapolis (IU-PUI). The university designed the space negatively. The results of the research indicated that walks
and its policies to provide students with opportunities to with more positively rated elements (i.e., more visually
become civically engaged through the exchange of ideas. interesting) were perceived as both shorter and taking less
Democracy Plaza contains chalkboards on which members time than walks with more negative ratings. Factors that
of the university can write about and comment on matters affected ratings included whether a path was straight or
of political and civic importance to the campus. The space is required a turn, at what angle architecture was viewed,
also used for events, speeches, and other forms of activity that and how heavy the traffic was on adjacent streets. Spooner
create engagement. The space has been “widely acknowledged concluded that designers could affect the perception of time
by students, faculty, and staff across the university … and, hence, walkers’ sense of accomplishing their goals as
as a space where people have an opportunity to express quickly as possible.
themselves and take part in robust deliberations about issues
of civic concern” (Goldfinger 2009, pp. 75–76).

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 25

Well-designed landscaping contributes to a campus’s sense planners’ behavior such that they increasingly include
of security and the satisfaction of its members. Students students in design teams for open spaces. Throughout the
often study outside and find that welcoming open spaces are design profession, the inclusion of students can be seen as
a key part of their academic engagement. Social activities providing new opportunities for learning. We know of no
and collaborative learning also take place in open space, studies that directly address the learning outcomes of student
but require different design considerations. Places for inclusion in open space design projects, but case studies
groups to gather require appropriate furniture and are often reporting on such inclusion can be found (Franz 2004).
enhanced by the availability of food and beverages. While
those campuses in milder climates make more use of outdoor It is also clear that numerous campus environmental science
spaces for these activities, virtually all campuses have places programs, such as the National Wildlife Federation’s Campus
that promote the use of open space for these purposes. Ecology Network (National Wildlife Federation n.d.), use
campus open space, special research areas, and experimental
Susta i n a b i l it y gardens to provide students with course content, which may
influence learning outcomes. The website of the Association
The sustainability movement on campus began in the 1970s for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education
with the advent of Earth Day and an increased awareness, (n.d.) provides numerous examples of academic practices
by students in particular, that protection of the environment that engage students in the campus outdoor environment.
is a critical issue. The grassroots efforts of students faded Given that accreditation activities routinely require the
somewhat until the 1990s and 2000s when climate change demonstration of student learning outcomes, we hope that
became a major scientific and political issue. The creation researchers will investigate how those outcomes may result
of the American College & University Presidents’ Climate from campus design and landscaping. While designers believe
Commitment in 2006 has ushered in an era in which that physical resources, in this case the campus ecological
sustainability goals are now part of over 600 campuses’ landscape, can be profitably integrated with educational
master planning efforts (American College & University programming (Kenney, Dumont, and Kenney 2005), we
Presidents’ Climate Commitment n.d.). The movement for believe far more research needs to be done in this area for
sustainability on campus is only likely to increase. In 2008, a master planners to successfully incorporate specific learning
survey reported that 13.5 percent of students selected a school outcomes into their site designs.
based on sustainability concerns (Grummon 2008). Campus
designers and master planners now seek LEED® certification
so that they can advance their campuses’ efforts to be
responsible stewards of the environment. In particular, the
importance of landscaping in sustainable design is recognized
by LEED.

The ways in which campus landscapes are used for teaching

were covered briefly in the overview to this section. A focus
on environmental education and sustainable practice has
expanded the use of open space in some important ways.
Aside from providing students with the opportunity to study
issues of environmental quality and landscape preservation,
the sustainability movement has fostered a change in

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 26

VII . Theoreti c al Fr a m e work s: involvement, and an experience of community. In reviewing

Cre ating Per specti ve in the Fiel d of the literature, the authors identify how environments
L e arning Space Desi gn Rese arch contribute to or detract from a sense of belonging and safety
on campus, for example, through campus design features
as well as through territoriality and defensible space,
In addition to studies investigating the efficacy of specific
organizational size, and campus culture. Especially relevant
types of learning spaces, we reviewed a number of resources
may be the chapter on the nature and characteristics of
that offer conceptual analyses and theoretical frameworks
human communities and the implications for the design of
for learning space design and research. The authors of
educational spaces in regard to how well they include, involve,
these books and articles argue that too little attention has
and grant to students full membership in these settings.
been paid to research on the connections between space
and institutional effectiveness in higher education and that
Community and social learning are themes echoed in “First
the majority of studies that have been conducted have not
Questions for Designing Higher Education Learning Spaces.”
been well-conceived. Their analyses integrate findings from
In this article, Scott Bennett (2007) argues that “the higher
a broad range of disciplines and illuminate central issues,
education community has exempted its investments in
dilemmas, and possibilities that emerge in this process.
physical space from the obligation it has otherwise accepted
Many raise questions intended to guide more thoughtful and
of evaluating outcomes and demonstrating value” (p. 23).
fruitful investigations into the relationships between space
To escape what he calls “this trap of good intentions and
and learning, and they caution against simplistic responses to
inaction,” Bennett proposes six questions that should be
trends in education, pedagogy, and campus building design.
asked before any new construction or renovation begins
and persistently throughout the life cycle of a structure;
Again, the following discussion is not intended to be
these questions concern planning, programming, design,
exhaustive, but rather to select the analyses that are the most
construction, occupancy, and adaptive reuse. Although
useful and that point to a direction moving forward.
Bennett’s focus is on the design of informal spaces where
students are responsible for their own learning (e.g., group
In their book Educating by Design, Strange and Banning
study space, learning commons, computer labs), his questions
(2001) conceive of the university environment as a whole
are worthy of consideration in regard to formal learning
and consider how all its dimensions—architectural features,
spaces as well.
layout, and spatial design, as well as dynamic systems and
practices—“shape and influence the behavior of those who
First and foremost, and consistent with the issues raised in
pursue its opportunities” (p. xii). They seek answers to very
this report, Bennett’s questions prompt us to think about
broad but fundamental questions for any postsecondary
what brick and mortar buildings can provide that virtual
institution: What makes a college or university successful in
spaces cannot. Bennett argues that it is the social dimension
attracting, challenging, and retaining students? What are the
of campus life that provides the rationale for a residential
patterns and design characteristics of supportive educational
experience, and he quotes John Seely Brown in describing
settings? And, most important for learning spaces research,
“multiple communities of scholars and practices … broad
what are the criteria by which an educational environment
access to people from different fields, backgrounds, and
can be judged as effective?
expectations, as well as opportunities for intensive study”
(Bennett 2007, p.21) that combine to create new ideas and
Strange and Banning propose that educational environments
knowledge. Citing data from the National Survey of Student
are most powerful when they offer students three conditions:
Engagement (NSSE) and other studies, Bennett also argues
a sense of security and inclusion, mechanisms for

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 27

that space design can help students balance socializing and and university building designs should give greater
productive study and can (and should) encourage a re- consideration to “the social underpinnings of education.”
imagining of professional roles for faculty, librarians, and Welcoming and flexible spaces, including informal gathering
information technologists as well as students. If we are to spaces, “should be seen as part of the support to learning
shift from an instructional model of “knowledge delivery” to through developing the wider learning landscape” (p. 238).
one supporting the co-construction of knowledge as Bennett
contends, then spaces should include design elements to help Temple also points out that the well-supported finding that
“relax traditional understandings of faculty and student roles cleaner, tidier school learning environments lead to better
and open the door to other possibilities” (p. 21). learning outcomes actually complicates studies of new
spaces and their impacts. It is unclear, he says, whether it
Bennett ends his article by encouraging institutions to is the “newness” of the new spaces or the cleaner, brighter
experiment with learning space design, pointing out that environment that caused the results the researchers cite or
furniture offers a low-cost, potentially powerful approach whether some other elements are responsible.
to the design of learning spaces. “Just as it is important to
ask the right questions early in a project,” he writes, “so it is Temple also draws attention to other areas of research—
essential to experiment early with promising answers, before how management of space issues affects students and staff,
large sums are invested in ‘preconceptions and prejudices’ the role of space in creating more productive learning
rather than in a ‘reliable base’ of information” (p. 24). and research communities, how specific design features
may encourage new ideas and creativity—that have
The perspective Bennett’s article presents is equally as received inadequate attention. While he acknowledges the
relevant today as it was at the time of publication in 2007. methodological challenges in conducting rigorous studies,
Institutions, manufacturers, architects, and designers have, Temple unequivocally advocates for more research on the
in fact, proceeded with some of the experiments Bennett connections between space, learning, and institutional
suggested, and a number of the articles reviewed in the prior functioning. With greater sensitivity to these interactions,
sections on formal and informal learning spaces are focused Temple writes, “it seems possible that relatively small
on furniture solutions and a range of new classroom formats. improvements may be amply rewarded in learning benefits”
(p. 239).
As suggested by the title of his article “Learning Spaces in
Higher Education: An Under-Researched Topic,” Paul Temple Perhaps the most thorough, and certainly the most recent,
(2008) is dismayed by the current lack of studies addressing analysis is Jos Boys’ (2011) Towards Creative Learning
the role of physical space in higher education. As we have Spaces: Re-thinking the Architecture of Post-Compulsory
attempted to do in this report, Temple sifts the available Education. Consistent with her colleagues reviewed
literature for conclusions that appear well-warranted, above, Boys argues that the subject of learning spaces
highlights areas of research in which claims have been is “worryingly under-theorised” (p. 4). She asserts that
made but for which there is not yet adequate or convincing seemingly commonsense, simplistic associations between
evidence, and encourages further research in areas that seem different types of learning and space actually prevent
to offer the greatest promise. evaluators from recognizing problems in the way they
conceive these relationships and keep them from giving
Temple makes the case that, given the number of studies careful consideration to methodological issues. For Boys, key
pointing to the importance of social interaction in student questions about what we mean by “space” and how space may
learning and institutional effectiveness as a whole, campus be related to learning remain unanswered. In addition, Boys

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 28

contends that contemporary debates on the topic of learning VIII . L e arning Space Desi gn Rese arch :
spaces tend to ignore both recent shifts in educational theory What Have We L e arned
and practice and current ideas in architectural and cultural and Where Are We Go ing?
theory.

The field of learning space design research is in the early

To combat this problem, Boys (2011, p. 9) dives deeply into
stages of development. Both the project team and other
how thinking about learning and space has been framed from
authors who have had the opportunity for lengthy and
the perspectives of different disciplines and roles:  
exhaustive investigations into the state of this field have
identified more gaps and unknowns than reliable research
. . . for architects, space is the physical setting in findings. But these gaps certainly can point the way forward
which learning takes place. For educational theorists for researchers, institutions, architects, and designers.
it may either be absent entirely or is predominantly
a conceptual space, leading to the use of abstract I m prov e L e a rn i n g Space Des i gn Rese a rch M e th o ds
terminology for describing aspects of learning. To
an estates planner, learning spaces are a limited and The easiest way forward is to improve how learning space
costly resource that must be effectively distributed. design research is conducted so that future studies are
For teachers and students, learning spaces are a set of consistent with respected social science research methods
given physical, virtual, organisational and durational and analyses. We recommend that researchers develop their
frameworks into which a variety of activities must be research teams to include those from other disciplines who

fitted. can help them design a replicable study, choose valid and
reliable instruments for measuring outcomes, and select and

Over multiple chapters, Boys critically examines both the execute appropriate data analyses. Much will be gained by

gaps between common thinking and contemporary theories an increase in the amount of thoughtfully designed, carefully

within each discipline and the problematic intersections executed cross-disciplinary research.

across these perspectives. Boys presents a more complex and

nuanced understanding of the relationships between learning The field of learning space design research relies on quasi-

and space. experimental research methods: essentially ways of arranging

conditions and measurements to compensate for the fact that

While the conceptual analyses presented by these authors the researcher does not usually have the power to randomly

may not translate directly into design solutions, they do assign students, instructors, or courses to specific classrooms

offer much-needed perspective and, in some cases, practical or teaching environments. Architects, facilities directors,

suggestions for moving forward. Their ideas and frameworks librarians, and education specialists are not expected to

are essential for proceeding beyond simplistic responses be conversant with these methods, but they need to look

to trends in architecture, education, and campus planning; for someone who is. For those who want to delve more

for thoughtfully exploring the complicated relationships deeply into the questions of research design, the classic text

between space and institutional effectiveness; for enriching Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research

opportunities for collaboration; and for expanding our by Donald T. Campbell and Julian C. Stanley (1963) is still in

repertoire of evaluation strategies for judging a space print and considered seminal.

“successful.” All of these authors call for action, arguing for

deeper, more meaningful ways of examining exactly how Furthermore, most of the literature examined for this report

design may contribute to better postsecondary education. makes little reference to existing commonly agreed-upon

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 29

measures. For example, the National Survey of Student of the conclusions of this research must be considered with
Engagement (NSSE) and the Faculty Survey of Student caution, if not suspicion
Engagement (FSSE) are widely known studies of engagement
that are seldom referenced. In a similar way, common The field sorely needs studies that use systematic, consistent
learning outcome instruments such as the ACT, SAT, and research methodologies over longer expanses of time
even course letter grades are rarely referenced in the existing (multiple years) at a variety of higher education institutions in
learning space research. a variety of learning spaces. The University of Minnesota ACL
classroom research study is one example of this phenomenon.
Establ ish an Agreed - Upon Ta xonom y The research on the ACL classroom was carefully conducted,
of L e arning Space referenced outside measures of student achievement,
Currently, learning space research lacks a common lexicon, and seemed to tie learning space design to outcomes.
taxonomy of space types, or even agreement as to what Unfortunately, the lack of replication since the initial study is
constitutes formal and informal learning environments. causes us to wish for the continuation of such research over
Meta-analysis of research is therefore difficult, as is the multiple semesters, with multiple instructors and students
ability to create reproducible experimental research that and at other institutions.
can be shared broadly throughout the higher education,
architecture, and design communities. Establ ish M e asures of Beh avior
The hallmark and foundation of modern research in both
Establ ish Broa d er Rese arch Targe ts the social and natural sciences is the ability to reproduce
Researchers also need to be broad in their choice of research results. The test of reproducibility is enforced in fields like
targets. The majority of the research reviewed for this report drug research, but rare in the field of learning space research.
was in the area of formal learning spaces—classrooms, for This is ironic, given the large sums spent by institutions
the most part. Although some of the studies targeted courses in construction, technology, and furnishings for physical
in the humanities and social sciences, the early development campuses. We suggest that establishing the benchmark
of active learning classrooms was focused on providing of reproducibility is an important goal for learning space
flexible and appropriate spaces for science and engineering research. Every study does not need to be done in the exact
courses and thus many of the studies focus on those fields. same way, but an important way to improve our field is to
Researchers need to look at the wide range of disciplines develop consistent, reliable methods for measuring teaching
taught in universities and colleges and the kinds of learning and learning behaviors and to make those measures available
spaces those disciplines need. They should also look at ways to other researchers so that a solid body of evidence can be
to measure the effectiveness of flexible teaching spaces that built.
can be used by multiple disciplines.
Striv e to A nsw er t he Fundam enta l Q uestions:
Conduct Longitudina l Rese arch W h at is L e arning and How is it Eva luat ed?
The field of learning space research lacks systematic, The biggest challenge for learning space design researchers
longitudinal research. In general, most of the studies involves the fundamental question that underlies this report
reviewed for this report were examples of one-off, highly and all of the research reports reviewed in this study: What is
customized research. We have been unable to identify any learning and how is it evaluated? In the course of collecting
research that has sought to determine the interactions and reviewing a large body of research and writing, we found
between learning space and learning over any time frame that the existing research does not sufficiently address this
longer than a single semester. Thus, the validity and efficacy question.

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 30

In research on the impact of the physical environment, the perception; by continuation, retention, or graduation rates;
characterization and measurement of the “outcome” (or or by some other measureable markers? (See also Straumanis
dependent) variable is critical for creating meaning out of 2012.) As reflected in the research we reviewed, it is clear that
data. In learning space design research, we must confront, the field of learning space design research has not yet reached
at some point, the question of what learning is and how it any conclusions on the question of how to measure learning
can be measured. What constitutes “learning”? How do outcomes. Much work still remains, and it is our hope that
we know if students have learned something? How can we this review of the current state of learning space research
reliably make the connection between learned material will encourage researchers to conduct the type of rigorous,
and the environment within which it was learned? These systematic, reproducible, and longitudinal inquiries that will
questions are epistemological and philosophical as well as yield insight into what works and what does not in higher
pedagogical and methodological. The research that attempts education learning environments.
to answer them, however, must be practical, measurable,
and reproducible if it is to have any impact or application for It is worth noting that we may be pressured to generate these
learning space design. definitions more quickly than the usual research time frames.
With the current economic pressures on higher education; the
In collegial conversations about post-occupancy evaluations increasing competition from for-profit institutions, MOOCs,
and learning-outcome research projects, the evaluation of and other online and accessible learning alternatives; and
a true learning outcome has been characterized more than the escalating demand placed on colleges and universities to
once as “the gold standard.” However, few of the projects demonstrate that the costs of students’ education are justified
we reviewed have come close to this standard. Many of the by the salaries their degrees will ultimately earn them, we
projects do not attempt to directly or indirectly measure a may be called upon to prove the efficacy of our learning
learning outcome. Rather, they present data on frequency spaces much sooner than we had imagined.
of use; faculty evaluation of the efficacy of a space, its
arrangements, or its technology; student opinions about the
space or its furnishings; or an appraisal of building systems
such as lighting and thermal comfort.

In part, this gap is a discrepancy between the overall goal of

learning space design research and what researchers are able
to measure, in a practical sense. Unfortunately, it also reflects
a lack of consensus across postsecondary education about
how learning outcomes can be meaningfully measured. Above
we refer to the need for consistent ways of measuring teaching
and learning behaviors. Learning outcomes are not the same
thing as learning behaviors. Students can pay attention to the
teacher or participate in class discussions but those behaviors
are only indicators that they may have learned something.

The field has yet to develop a way of conceptualizing learning

outcomes. Can these be assessed by tests or examinations;
by grades or GPA; by faculty assessment; by students’ self-

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 31

M ov ing Forward Acknowl ed ge m ents

To begin your own research project or to take your research The authors are grateful for the grant support provided
program to the next level, we encourage you to make use of through the Perry Chapman Prize and the Sasaki Foundation
the Society for College and University Planning database that allowed this work to be conducted. We are also indebted
where all materials cited in this report are accessible. to the Society for College and University Planning (SCUP) for
encouraging this project and for making available material
We hope to receive feedback from researchers, educators, support in the form of database searches and overall direction
facility directors, architects, designers, and manufacturers for the project. As they are important to the community of
and encourage those interested in learning space design learning space design researchers, the materials cited in this
research to join us in a research community that will support report will be included in and accessible through the SCUP
and encourage the progress that has already been made in database.
this new field of study.

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 32

References Cited Boys, J. 2011. Towards Creative Learning Spaces: Re-

thinking the Architecture of Post-Compulsory Education.
New York: Routledge.
Abu-Ghazzeh, T. M. 1999. Communicating Behavioral
Research to Campus Design: Factors Affecting the Perception Brooks, D. C. 2012. Space and Consequences: The Impact of
and Use of Outdoor Spaces at the University of Jordan. Different Formal Learning Spaces on Instructor and Student
Environment and Behavior 31 (6): 764–804. Behavior. Journal of Learning Spaces 1 (2). Retrieved April
28, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://libjournal.uncg.
American College & University Presidents’ Climate edu/ojs/index.php/jls/article/view/285/282.
Commitment. n.d. Mission and History. Retrieved
April 28, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www. Burrell, A. 2013. How Students Use Data to Choose
presidentsclimatecommitment.org/about/mission-history. a University. University World News, no. 265,
March 30. Retrieved April 28, 2013, from the World
Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Wide Web: www.universityworldnews.com/article.
Education. n.d. Home page. Retrieved April 28, 2013, from php?story=20130328141317897.
the World Wide Web: www.aashe.org.
Campbell, D. T., and J. C. Stanley. 1963. Experimental and
Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities. 2008. The Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. n.p.: Cengage
Land-Grant Tradition. Washington, DC: Association of Public Learning.
and Land-Grant Universities. Retrieved April 28, 2013, from
the World Wide Web: www.aplu.org/document.doc?id=780. Crook, C., and G. Mitchell. 2012. Ambiance in Social
Learning: Student Engagement with New Designs for
Astin, A. W. 1993. What Matters in College? Four Critical Learning Spaces. Cambridge Journal of Education 42 (2):
Years Revisited. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 121–39.

Barlett, P. F., and G. W. Chase, eds. 2004. Sustainability on Dane, J. 2009. Deakin University Immersive Learning
Campus: Stories and Strategies for Change. Cambridge, MA: Environment (DILE): An Evaluation. In Learning Spaces
MIT Press. in Higher Education: Positive Outcomes by Design, ed.
D. Radcliffe, H. Wilson, D. Powell, and B. Tibbetts, 61–66.
Bennett, S. 2006. Designing for Uncertainty. Retrieved
Brisbane, Australia: The University of Queensland. Retrieved
April 28, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.
April 28, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.uq.edu.au/ne
libraryspaceplanning.com/assets/resource/Designing_for_
xtgenerationlearningspace/5.4.pdf.
Uncertainty.pdf.

Dober, R. P. 1996. Campus Planning. Ann Arbor, MI: Society

———. 2007. First Questions for Designing Higher Education
for College and University Planning.
Learning Spaces. Journal of Academic Librarianship 33 (1):
14–26. ———. 2003. Campus Design. Ann Arbor, MI: Society for
College and University Planning.
Boyer, E. L. 1987. College: The Undergraduate Experience in
America. New York: Harper & Row. Eckert, E. 2012. Assessment and the Outdoor Campus
Environment: Using a Survey to Measure Student Satisfaction
———. 1997. Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the
with the Outdoor Physical Campus. Planning for Higher
Professoriate. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Education 41 (1).

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 33

Foster, N. F., and S. Gibbons, eds. 2007. Studying Students: Grummon, P. T. H. 2008. Trends in Higher Education.
The Undergraduate Research Project at the University August. Ann Arbor, MI: Society for College and University
of Rochester. Chicago: Association of College Research Planning. Retrieved April 28, 2013, from the World Wide
Libraries. Retrieved April 28, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.scup.org/asset/49251/scup_trends_8-2008.pdf.
Web: www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/
Hall, E. T. 1966. The Hidden Dimension. New York:
publications/booksanddigitalresources/digital/Foster-
Doubleday.
Gibbons_cmpd.pdf.

Henshaw, R. G., P. M. Edwards, and E. J. Bagley. 2011. Use of

Fournier, J., C. Lane, and H. Lyle, III. 2010. Designing
Swivel Desks and Aisle Space to Promote Interaction in Mid-
Campus Learning Spaces: A Report on Students’ Current
Sized College Classrooms. Journal of Learning Spaces 1 (1).
and Future Needs. Seattle, WA: Learning & Scholarly
Retrieved April 28, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://
Technologies, UW Information Technology, University of
libjournal.uncg.edu/ojs/index.php/jls/article/view/277/170.
Washington. Retrieved April 28, 2013, from the World Wide
Web: www.washington.edu/lst/research/papers/2010/ Jessop, T., L. Gubby, and A. Smith. 2012. Space Frontiers
Designing_Campus_Learning_Spaces.pdf. for New Pedagogies: A Tale of Constraints and Possibilities.
Studies in Higher Education 37 (2): 189–202.
Franz, A. 2004. Restoring Natural Landscapes: From
Ideals to Action. In Sustainability on Campus: Stories and Kenney, D. R., R. Dumont, and G. S. Kenney. 2005. Mission
Strategies for Change, ed. P. F. Barlett and G. W. Chase, and Place: Strengthening Learning and Community Through
229–40. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Campus Design. Westport, CT: American Council on
Education, Praeger Series on Higher Education.
Goldfinger, J. 2009. Democracy Plaza: A Campus Space for
Civic Engagement. Innovative Higher Education 34 (2): Kuh, G. D., J. H. Schuh, and E. J. Whitt. 1991. Involving
69–77. Colleges: Successful Approaches to Fostering Student
Learning and Development Outside the Classroom. San
Granovetter, M. S. 1982. The Strength of Weak Ties: A
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Network Theory Revisited. In Social Structure and Network
Analysis, ed. P. V. Marsden and N. Lin, 105–130. Beverly Mallinckrodt, B., and W. E. Sedlacek. 1987. Student Retention
Hills, CA: Sage. and the Use of Campus Facilities by Race. NASPA Journal 24
(3): 28–32.
Greene, M., and A. Penn. 1997. Socio-Spatial Analysis of
Four University Campuses: The Implications of Spatial Matthews, K. E., P. Adams, and D. Gannaway. 2009. The
Configuration on Creation and Transmission of Knowledge. Impact of Social Learning Spaces on Student Engagement. In
In Space Syntax First International Symposium, Preparing for Tomorrow Today: The First Year Experience
Proceedings: Volume I: Complex Buildings, 13.1–13.15. as Foundation: First Year in Higher Education Conference
London: Space Syntax Network. Retrieved April 28, 2013, Proceedings. Townsville, Queensland, Australia: FYHE.
from the World Wide Web: http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/1754/1/
Greene-Penn1997.pdf. Matthews, K.E. 2010. Engaging students in their space—
designing and managing social learning spaces to enhance
Griffith, J. C. 1994. Open Space Preservation: An Imperative student engagement. In Proceedings of the International
for Quality Campus Environments. Journal of Higher Society for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
Education 65 (6): 645–69. Conference. International Society for the Scholarship of

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 34

Teaching and Learning Conference, Liverpool, U.K., 19-22 Sommer, R. 1969. Personal Space: The Behavioral Basis of
October 2010. Design. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

National Center for Education Statistics. 2005. Integrated Spooner, D. 2008. Assessing the Learning Value of Campus
Postsecondary Education Data System. Washington, DC: U.S. Open Spaces through Post-Occupancy Evaluations. Planning
Department of Education (nces.ed.gov/ipeds/) for Higher Education 36 (3): 44–55.

National Wildlife Federation. n.d. National Wildlife ———. 2011. Ten Minutes Wide: Human Walking Capacities
Federation Campus Ecology: Get Involved. Retrieved April and the Experiential Quality of Campus Design. Planning for
28, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.nwf.org/Campus- Higher Education 39 (4): 11–22.
Ecology/Get-Involved/Join-the-Campus-Ecology-Network.
Strange, C. C., and J. H. Banning. 2001. Educating by Design:
aspx.
Creating Campus Learning Environments That Work. San
Pascarella, E. T., and P. T. Terenzini. 1991. How College Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Affects Students: Findings and Insights from Twenty Years
Straumanis, J. 2012. What We’re Learning about Learning
of Research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
(and What We Need to Forget). Planning for Higher
Radcliffe, D., H. Wilson, D. Powell, and B. Tibbetts, eds. Education 40 (4): 6–11.
2009. Learning Spaces in Higher Education: Positive
Temple, P. 2008. Learning Spaces in Higher Education: An
Outcomes by Design. Brisbane, Australia: The University of
Under-Researched Topic. London Review of Education 6 (3):
Queensland.
229–41.
Randall, M. and G. Wilson, G. (2009) Making it My Street:
———. 2009. From Space to Place: University Performance
The Bond University “Street” Area. In, Learning Spaces in
and Its Built Environment. Higher Education Policy 22 (2):
Higher Education: Positive Outcomes by Design. Proceedings
209–223.
of the Next Generation Learning Spaces 2008 Colloquium,
1st and 2nd October, University of Queensland, Brisbane, pp. ———. 2011. Learning Spaces as Social Capital. In Re-Shaping
107–110. Learning: A Critical Reader, ed. A. Boddington and J. Boys,
137–46. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Reynolds, G. L. 2007. The Impact of Facilities on Recruitment
and Retention of Students. New Directions for Institutional Van Horne, S., C. Murniati, J. D. H. Gaffney, and M. Jesse.
Research, no. 135, 63–80. 2012. Promoting Active Learning in Technology-Infused TILE
Classrooms at the University of Iowa. Journal of Learning
Russell, J. 2002. On Campus Visits, Bid for High Marks
Spaces 1 (2). Retrieved April 28, 2013, from the World Wide
Schools Work to Woo Pupils. Boston Globe, September 7.
Web: http://libjournal.uncg.edu/ojs/index.php/jls/article/
Sanders, G. 2011. What Makes a Good Classroom? Retrieved view/344/280.
April 28, 2013, from the World Wide Web: http://uplan.
Walker, J. D., D. C. Brooks, and P. Baepler. 2011. Pedagogy
uoregon.edu/Research/WhatMakesAGoodClassroom2011.
and Space: Empirical Research on New Learning
pdf.
Environments. EDUCAUSE Quarterly 34 (4).
Sensbach, W. 1991. Restoring the Values of Campus
Whiteside, A. L., D. C. Brooks, and J. D. Walker. 2010. Making
Architecture. Planning for Higher Education 20 (1): 7–16.
the Case for Space: Three Years of Empirical Research on
Learning Environments. EDUCAUSE Quarterly 33 (3).

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 35

References Consulted Matthews, K. E., V. Andrews, and P. Adams. 2011. Social

Learning Spaces and Student Engagement. Higher Education
Research & Development 30 (2): 105–120.
Attis, D. 2010. Maximizing Space Utilization: Measuring,
Allocating, and Incentivizing Efficient Use of Facilities. Orr, D. W. 1993. Architecture as Pedagogy. Conservation
Washington, DC: Advisory Board Company, Education Biology 7 (2): 226–28.
Advisory Board.
Runyan, K. M. 2011. Hybrid College: The In-Between Places of
Dugdale, S., R. Torino, and E. Felix. 2009. A Case Study in Learning. Master’s thesis, Corcoran College of Art + Design.
Master Planning the Learning Landscape: Hub Concepts for
Shuetz, P. 2005. UCLA Community College Review: Campus
the University at Buffalo. EDUCAUSE Quarterly 32 (1).
Environment: A Missing Link in Studies of Community
Eckert, E. L. 2012. Examining the Environment: The College Attrition. Community College Review 32 (4): 60–80.
Development of a Survey Instrument to Assess Student
Stojcevski, A., S. W. Bigger, R. Gabb, and J. Dane. 2009.
Perceptions of the University Outdoor Physical Campus. PhD
Engineering Problem-Based Learning Spaces at Victoria
diss., Kent State University.
University. In Learning Spaces in Higher Education: Positive
Gallagher, A., A. Pearce, and R. McCormack. 2009. Learning Outcomes by Design, ed. D. Radcliffe, H. Wilson, D. Powell,
in the Learning Commons: The Learning Commons at City and B. Tibbetts, 53–60. Brisbane, Australia: The University of
Flanders and St Albans Campuses. In Learning Spaces in Queensland. Retrieved April 28, 2013, from the World Wide
Higher Education: Positive Outcomes by Design, ed. D. Web: www.uq.edu.au/nextgenerationlearningspace/5.3.pdf.
Radcliffe, H. Wilson, D. Powell, and B. Tibbetts, 99–105.
Wollin, D. D., and M. Montagne. 1981. College Classroom
Brisbane, Australia: The University of Queensland. Retrieved
Environment: Effects of Sterility Versus Amiability on
April 28, 2013, from the World Wide Web: www.uq.edu.au/
Student and Teacher Performance. Environment and
nextgenerationlearningspace/5.11.pdf.
Behavior 13 (6): 707–716.
Hamilton, D. K., and D. H. Watkins. 2008. Evidence-Based
Design for Multiple Building Types. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley
& Sons.

Herzog, S. 2007. The Ecology of Learning: The Impact of

Classroom Features and Utilization on Student Academic
Success. New Directions for Institutional Research, no. 135,
81–106.

Jamieson, P., K. Fisher, T. Gilding, P. G. Taylor, and A. C. F.

Trevitt. 2000. Place and Space in the Design of New Learning
Environments. Higher Education Research & Development
19 (2): 221–36.

Logdlund, U. 2010. Constructing Learning Spaces?

Videoconferencing at Local Learning Centres in Sweden.
Studies in Continuing Education 32 (3): 183–99.

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 36

Appendi x A : E valuati on For m

Title: Research methodology/outcome measures:

»» Faculty Interviews
Author(s):
»» Student Interviews

Date of Publication: »» Observation (time-series/other)

»» Questionnaire
Goal of ‘Article’/research:
»» Survey

Content: »» Photo survey

»» Focus group
Visual Material (Note quantity for each):
»» Experiential task
»» Photographs:
»» Log/diary/journal
»» Drawings:
»» Other:
»» Diagrams:

»» Charts/tables: Brief description of research/study parameters

(methodology):
»» Other:

Precedent studies mentioned (if any):

Type of setting: (e.g., classroom, laboratory, library, study/
gathering areas, etc.):
List of external links (if any):

Location of the research (identify the university or college or

Possible shortcomings in research method or outcomes:
other setting):

Summary of Findings/Conclusion:
Reference material: Bibliography/References/None

Does this research or document specifically measure

Research design:
teaching/learning outcomes?
»» Comparison study

»» Baseline study: pre/post Areas of future research needed (if any):

»» Experimental (random assignment)

Additional Notes:
»» Quasi-experimental

»» Anecdotal/ Case study

»» Conceptual analysis

»» Literature review

»» Other:

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 37

Appendi x B: Author Affil i ati ons Ca ry n Gr ape

Architectural Designer
Moore Ruble Yudell Architects & Planners
J oseph Ce v e tel l o
Caryn Grape, a graduate of Keene State College in Keene,
Director, Learning Environments
University of Southern California New Hampshire, holds a Bachelor of Science in Architecture.
In her pursuit of becoming a licensed architect, she is
Joseph Cevetello is director of learning environments,
now gaining valuable experience working at Moore Ruble
information technology services at the University of Southern
Yudell Architects & Planners in Santa Monica, California.
California (USC). In this role, he directs strategy, vision, and
As a veteran presenter at SCUP–47 (SCUP’s 47th Annual,
operations for USC’s learning environments and provides
International Conference, 2012) she possesses a strong
leadership toward fulfilling the strategic goals for educational
interest in the design and planning of higher education
technology. He has primary responsibility for a new initiative
facilities.
to build and support learning spaces to enhance learning,
teaching, research, and outreach on campus. He received his
master’s degree and his doctorate from the Harvard Graduate
J i l l M o rel l i
School of Education. His research and teaching interests
Director of Facilities
encompass how online learning technologies affect adult University of Washington-Seattle Campus
learner and teacher interaction/collaboration and how media
Jill Morelli is a Fellow of the American Institute of Architects
influence student perspectives of learning.
and the director of facilities at the University of Washington
School of Medicine, a position she has held for six years. Prior
to that, she was the university architect at the Ohio State
Ja n i ce E . F o urn i er
University. In her present position, she manages space for
Research Scientist, University of Washington Information
Technology a college-level unit of one million square feet, projects from
University of Washington-Seattle Campus $5,000 to more than $160 million, and asset management
after it is constructed. She handles the teaching and research
Janice Fournier is an educational psychologist with a
mission of the school, ranked second in federally funded
background in the learning sciences and human development
research in the United States.
and cognition. Her research focuses on learning in both
formal and informal settings. She has worked for over 10
years at the University of Washington (UW), beginning
at the Program for Educational Transformation Through
Technology (PETTT) and later joining UW information
technology. She conducts educational research on teaching
and learning with technology as well as user research to
inform the design of web applications and campus learning
spaces.

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
Research on Learning Space Design: Present State, Future Directions | Report from the Recipients of the 2012 Perry Chapman Prize 38

Susa n L . Pa i nter University of Salford in the United Kingdom. Whitmer

Director, Research Studio & Senior Planner extends her passion for education by sharing her knowledge
AC Martin Partners, Inc. and expertise at workshops and conferences. She has written
numerous white papers and co-authored several articles on
Susan Painter is senior planner and director of research at
learning spaces, including peer-reviewed papers for Open
AC Martin in Los Angeles, California, where she specializes
House International and the National Collegiate Inventors
in university campus master plans and campus residential
and Innovators Alliance 2011 conference.
communities. Her current research is a series of behavioral
post-occupancy studies on AC Martin’s recent education
projects. Susan was tenured associate professor of psychology
and architecture at Carleton University in Ottawa, Canada Ph y l l i s Gru m m o n

for 12 years and instructor in the University of California, Los Director of Planning and Education
Society for College and University Planning
Angeles interior architecture program for 14 years. She was
elected Fellow of the Canadian Psychological Association in Phyllis Grummon has been the Director of Planning and
1991 for her distinguished service to the field of psychology. Education for the Society for College and University Planning
Her design psychology work with Constance Forrest, a doctor (SCUP) for ten years. During that time, she launched the
of psychology, has been featured on the NBC Today Show, SCUP Planning Institute, wrote Trends to Watch in Higher
in the Los Angeles Times, and in many books and articles, Education, supported the growth of the higher education
including in the Handbook of Environmental Psychology. institutional plans database, was on the Editorial Board of
Susan serves as principal researcher for the research on Planning for Higher Education, as well as contributing to
learning space design sponsored by the 2012-13 Perry SCUP in many other ways. Prior to joining SCUP, Phyllis
Chapman Prize. Grummon was the Director of University Planning at
Michigan State University. She will be retiring from SCUP on
June 30, 2013.
Susa n T. W h it m er
Research Lead, Education
Herman Miller, Inc.

Susan Whitmer is a lead researcher in education at Herman

Miller, Inc. She has been immersed in research with the
company for over 25 years. Whitmer is currently tasked with
studying the trends, challenges, and opportunities that will
impact the future of the learning experience. She conducts
field research and gathers data from students, teachers, and
administrators—information Herman Miller uses to inform
thought leadership and the development of new education
solutions. Whitmer has dedicated much of her life to another
of her passions: learning. A voracious student, Whitmer
earned a degree in design from Ringling College of Art and
Design in Sarasota, Florida, as well as a license in interior
design. She has a master of business administration from
Brenau University in Gainesville, Georgia and a master
of science in accessibility and inclusive design from the

w w w . s c u p. o r g / p e r r yc h a p m a n
 R em ove S i lo S W o R k C o l l a b o R a t i v e ly U S e R e S o U R C e S W i S e ly

You’ve heard the stories . . . What is I n t e g r a t e d P l a n n I n g ?

. . . every budget meeting is a trial because priorities aren’t Integrated planning is the
established. linking of vision, priorities,
. . . an institution goes on probation because it did not “pass” people, and the physical
planning on its accreditation review. institution in a flexible system
of evaluation, decision-making
. . . a system opens multiple new buildings on campuses
and action. It shapes and guides the entire organization as it
across the state but does not have the funding to operate
evolves over time and within its community.
them.
. . . a new president’s leadership falters because his or her
staff resists working transparently or collaboratively.

Benefits of I n t e g r a t e d P l a n n I n g

ALIGN INSTITUTIONAL M AKE ACCREDITATI O N WORK FO R YOU

PRIORITIES
The SCUP Planning Institute helped put integrated planning to
WITH RESOURCES
work at a Southern university and it resulted in a “no concerns
Three years of using an or problems” accreditation review.
integrated budget process, one
CO NTAIN AN D REDUCE COSTS
where funding decisions were transparent and clearly tied
to strategic goals, brought about “the end of whining” for a As part of a comprehensive sustainability effort, integrated
Midwestern, regional university. planning meets the requirements of the American College and
University Presidents Climate Commitment (ACUPCC), and that
adds up to savings in utilities for campuses across the country.

Core Competencies for I n t e g r a t e d P l a n n I n g

Senior leaders excel when the people who report to them E N G A G E T H E R I G H T P E O P L E : Identify the people who
understand how essential it is to need to be in the room and work with them effectively.
» engage the right people SPEAK THEIR L ANGUAGE: Create and use a common
» in the right conversations planning vocabulary for communicating.
» at the right time and KNOW HOW TO MANAGE A PL ANNING PROCESS:
» in the right way. Facilitate an integrated planning process and manage
change.
Integrated planning might not solve every problem on campus,
but it is sure to provide a solution to the most important issues. PRODUCE A SHARED PLAN: Produce an integrated plan
To be effective, and for you as a senior campus leader to be that can be implemented and evaluated.
successful, everyone who plans on your campus needs these R E A D T H E P L A N N I N G C O N T E X T: Collect and filter relevant
core competencies: information.
GATHER AN D DEPLOY RESOURCES: Identify alternative
and realistic resource strategies.
 This intensive, three-step program on integrated planning in
Whether you are new higher education is designed to develop the six competencies
to the field or are an of integrated planning in participants.
experienced professional,
Taken in sequence, the SCUP Planning Institute Steps I, II, &
you will find the institute
III represent a unique merging of the knowledge of experts in
is a concrete way to
planning with a dedication to using assessment to continuously
create an effective
enhance each workshop’s outcomes for participants.
network of planning
colleagues, learn best Institute faculty members are drawn from across the country
practices, and grow in and the world, from all types of institutions. They facilitate
your career. learning through engaging exercises, small group work, and
analysis of the SCUP Walnut College Case Study.

Attend as a SCUP member and save

S C U P P l a n n I n g I n S t I t U t e The Steps in Brief on registration: www.scup.org/join

STEP I: FOUN DATI O NS O F PL AN N IN G STEP III: INTEGR ATED PL AN N IN G—

IN HI GHER EDUC ATI O N WO RKIN G WITH REL ATI O NSHIP RE ALITIES

S T e P I is the 30,000-foot view of integrated planning. S T e P I I I begins the process of managing the changes
The aim of this step is to provide participants with a envisioned and set into motion by Steps I and II. It’s all
clear understanding of what integrated planning models about the people—individuals who can stop a process
generally look like, what elements are important in dead in its tracks, or pick it up and run with it. It brings
integrated planning, and how the big picture ideas, such as the language of organizational change and psychology
mission, vision, and values, impact integrated planning. It is into the everyday office where it can inspire, convince, or
also an introduction into the vocabulary of planning. mediate the cultural, social, and political dynamics that
Participants in the initial workshop in the series of three make change a real challenge.
use SCUP’s Walnut College Case Study to apply the basic Step III focuses on the cases that campuses bring to the
elements of integrated planning. The value of evidence- workshop for its active learning component. Through
based planning is emphasized, as is the central place that the development of a change profile, each participant
the academic mission holds in focusing and driving campus creates strategies for moving an integrated planning
decisions. process forward on campus. Understanding the nature of
relationships on campus—up, down, and sideways—and
STEP II: FO CUSED KN OWLED GE FO R I NTEGR ATED
PLANNING PROCESSES
how they affect the planning and change processes can
make the difference in achieving the institution’s goals.
S T e P I I takes a look at the process of planning. What
does it take to create a plan? What details are involved in
fleshing out a plan? What does a planning document look THE SCUP PLANNING INSTITUTE
like? And what moves a plan into action? This step expands ON YOUR CA MPUS

the vocabulary of each individual discipline into the range Tough economic times require a time-tested approach to
of another—academics, facilities, and budget/finance. strategic planning. The most effective planning comes
The intersection of academic, resource/budget, and from an integrated approach that is structured, assessed,
facilities planning defines a nexus for learning-specific and successfully implemented. SCUP now offers members
lessons in integrated planning. The SCUP Walnut College the opportunity to bring the planning institute to your
Case Study is the basis for practicing an integrated campus with your team!
planning process that results in a plan reflecting the Bring the institute to your campus and you’ll . . .
collaboration of all functional areas at Walnut College. In » Be positioned for accreditation
the process of creating the plan, participants will gain a » Receive a program focused on your institution
deeper understanding of the needs and issues confronting » Create an integrated planning process that
key functional areas on campus during a planning initiative. works for your campus
» Save money on travel and registration
BRIN G THE BEN EFITS O F INTEGR ATED PL AN N IN G Multiple campuses can collaborate on offering a planning
TO YOUR CA MPUS: institute to help defray costs. everyone benefits through
www.scup.org/planninginstitute | [email protected] using integrated planning processes.