Space Management: Changing Policies in a Changing Environment SAIR 2011

WCU

• • • •

9,352 students Master’s Comprehensive Mountain location Resident and Distance

Factors Related to Scheduling

• • • • • • • •

Well over 10,000 students, faculty, staff Largely residential 6 academic colleges, 30 departments, 120+ programs 10 main academic buildings 240+ teaching spaces New, large building coming online as 2 nd campus Space management – more highly scrutinized Series25 scheduling software (CollegeNet)

Scheduling Approach – Events

• • • •

Very decentralized Approximately 150 schedulers Rationale All areas use R25

Scheduling Approach – Courses

•

Two types of rooms

– General pool – Pre-assignable (labs, conf. rooms, gyms, etc.) • • •

General pool assignments – centralized process Optimized placement based on size, location and features Group review and tweaking of process (transparency)

•

Pre-assignable controlled directly by depts.

Current Climate

• • • • • • •

Economy Importance of data in decision-making More scrutiny internally and at the state-level More and larger classes New demands No renovations/furniture/technology Accuracy

Strategies

• • • •

Changing policies Proactive approach Data transparency & use More inclusive decision-making

Policy Changes

•

Formal policies

– Space Management • Which bodies have authority • How space is assigned • How to request – Camps & Conferences • How spaces can accommodate different types of groups

Split the Space Management Committee

•

Space Management (SMC)

– Older and more authority – Reports to Executive Council – Advisory •

Academic Space Management

– Grants some authority to academic folks – Spreads responsibility and accountability – Creates buy-in – Reports to SMC

Proactive Approach

• •

When space is coming online, call for proposals Factors for consideration

– Consolidation of departments – Prior agreements and identified need – Space has same general usage type – Little/no renovation needed

Proactive Approach

•

Look for low-hanging fruit

– Low-cost opportunities • Add a door • Add a feature (like a white board) • Which rooms can accommodate additional seats • Better align room sizes with class sizes or vice versa • Ask depts to open additional seats when assigned to large space

Data Transparency and Use

• • •

Access to scheduling system

– Anyone who requests – Several dept heads very involved

Reports shared

– Internal and State reports – Easy to read/interpret – Stored in central repository

Clear standards

– Campus uses State standards – All space evaluated on same set of standards

Space Standards

•

General Purpose

– 35 hr/week – 18 sf/station – 65% seat utilization •

Labs

– 20 hr/week – 75% seat utilization – sf/station varies depending on discipline

More inclusive decision-making

• • • •

Space proposals Academic Space Management committee gives academic units a strong voice Class placement review Building Tours

Course Placement

Building Tours

• • • • •

Tour each academic space (Friday afternoon) Invite all interested parties Get a feel for space

– Classroom size – Classroom layout – Seat density – Mix of room types – # and size of conference rooms – Offices sizes

Review utilization Provides transparency

Contact Information

Alison Joseph, Research Speciali st [email protected]

opie.wcu.edu

(828) 227-7239