Category: Blog

The key opportunity for chief academic officers, chief financial officers, and capital planners is to establish a data-informed prioritization process for capital planning efforts — one in which campus projects are prioritized based on how academic, residential, and recreational facilities on campus can be best used to improve enrollment and retention. We recently spoke with capital planning consultant Neil Calfee and had a deep conversation about how the capital planning process is changing (and how it needs to change) and what institutional leaders may want to rethink going forward. Currently the principal of NPC Group, specializing in the creation and negotiation of public/private partnerships, Neil Calfee previously served as Arizona State University’s director of real estate development. He has over 15 years of experience in development and management of complex development projects involving partnerships between government entities and the private sector. What follows are some key takeaways from our conversation: How the Capital Planning Process is Changing When asked what key factors he sees driving the capital planning process now that weren’t so critical 5-10 years ago, Calfee drew attention to three in particular: THE PREVALENCE OF ONLINE LEARNINGCalfee: “Students can now take core classes via the web which might take some pressure […]

We see growing awareness at institutions that housing and recreational facilities can serve as learning spaces and as important factors in student success. But what about the academic facilities themselves — classrooms, the academic library, traditional learning spaces? How can these facilities be used more effectively to improve student learning? To investigate this question, we turned to experts Ken Smith, Virginia Tech’s vice provost for resource management and institutional effectiveness, and Nancy Allen, dean of the main library at the University of Denver. Redesigning Instructional Space Smith points to two qualities that define the modern instructional classroom: Ability to support multiple learning activities within the same class period, with minimal disruption. “In today’s classroom, faculty don’t necessarily stand and lecture while students receive information passively,” Smith notes. “The same session may include lecture, group work, and individual work. You need a classroom that can support all three modes of learning with minimal disruption when transitioning between them.” Seamless integration of technology. “Technology should no longer be a feature of the room but a tool that is available in the room to faculty and students. At Virginia Tech, we worked hard to make technology-integrated classrooms similar enough to other classrooms that there […]

“What I have seen, and this has been a relatively fast path over the last ten years, is the rise of students’ expectations of instant access, a 24/7 mentality about services, and immediacy — that there are immediate answers to their questions and that programs and quality-of-life amenities are in place and ready to respond immediately to their needs. We are called upon in student affairs, classically, to work with the out-of-classroom experience. I think it is passe to say that there is a classroom experience and an out-of-classroom experience. There is a holistic experience. So that expectation of immediacy exists in the classroom, in the residential facility, in the recreational facility, in the student union, etc.” George Brown, University of Alabama This means, Brown continues, that today’s physical campus needs to be seamlessly connected with technology. “You can’t have gaps,” he warns. “It is a fundamental expectation of today’s students and parents that technology can be delivered to them anywhere, at any time.” George Brown is the University of Alabama’s executive director of university recreation and the assistant to the vice president of student affairs for strategic health and crisis planning. He is also a leading thinker on how […]

In recent years, more institutions have looked for innovative, outside-the-box methods of funding their investments in the physical campus — including an array of models for public-private partnerships, mixed-use facilities, and (in a few cases) fundraising for renewal and maintenance. We asked Steven Parfeniuk, vice president of finance and administration at the Sheridan Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning, to offer his insights on public/private partnerships and what institutional leaders need to rethink in order to achieve their capital planning goals. We also invited Kambiz Khalili, assistant vice chancellor for student affairs and executive director of housing and dining services for the University of Colorado at Boulder, to share his lessons learned from CU-Boulder’s innovative approach to leveraging rate increases to avoid the bond market or having to rely entirely on private developers. Whether you turn to a public-private partnership or develop an innovative plan to leverage rate increases, the key is intentional and pro-active planning for investment in the physical campus. Public-Private Partnerships We asked Steven Parfeniuk three questions, and the ensuing conversation was illuminating: WHAT DO INSTITUTIONS NEED TO RETHINK BEFORE SEEKING OUT A PUBLIC/PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP? “Let’s start in the right place,” Parfeniuk suggests, “let’s define partnership.” Parfeniuk stresses that […]

by Daniel Fusch, Director of Research and Publications, Academic Impressions I’ve been with Academic Impressions for over eight years — a pretty significant portion of my life. In this article, as I look toward the new year, I reflect back on my career with AI, how I came here, what it has meant to me, and why I’m excited about the way we’re having an impact on higher education. – Daniel Fusch Falling Out of Love, Falling In Love I love higher education. At one time, I dreamed of a tenured faculty position. I pursued (and achieved) my Ph.D in English and wrote my dissertation without thinking too much about the job market. But back in 2004-06, a funny thing happened on the way to commencement. I fell more and more in love with higher education, and fell out of love with the idea of a faculty research position. We talk about the triad of faculty commitments — teaching, research, and service — and increasingly, service was calling to me: I sat on a curriculum redesign committee as a graduate student representative, and later as an adjunct faculty representative. I co-directed an interdisciplinary conference hosted at our institution. With several fellow […]

Recently, I read Jay D. Kenton’s article “Harvesting the High-Hanging Fruit” in the September/October issue in Change. Kenton, who serves as the interim president for Eastern Oregon University, argues that when it comes to managing the costs of providing a higher education, we are quickly exhausting (if we haven’t already) the “low-hanging fruit” of administrative bloat and costs related to infrastructure and support services. He redirects attention to the “high-hanging fruit,” arguing that the largest, ripest, juiciest fruit to harvest is on the academic side of the enterprise. His analysis is right on target. The need to trim costs on the academic side is difficult work, but it is also the heart of the issue. He cites, for example, the very real costs of: Kenton notes that release time at some institutions can account for 30-40% of faculty time. That’s a cost of millions of dollars that could be rectified without negative impact on faculty employment. There are certainly legitimate reasons why faculty receive release time; the issue arises when the institution doesn’t have clarity on when and why release time is offered and how this is aligned with strategic priorities of the institution. Simply through intentional reallocation of faculty […]