ERIC ED581285: Transforming Facilities to Achieve Student Success. APPA Thought Leaders Series 2017

2017·1.5 MB·English

by  ERIC

T R A N S F O R M I N G
Facilities to Achieve
Student Success
2017
Published by:
APPA is the association of choice serving educational facilities professionals and their institutions. APPA’s mission
is to support excellence with quality leadership and professional management through education, research, and
recognition. APPA’s Center for Facilities Research (CFaR) engages in a deliberate search for knowledge critical to
educational facilities management and to policy making in education. CFaR encourages the study of the learning
environment, appropriate management strategies, and their impact on education.
APPA
1643 Prince Street
Alexandria, Virginia 22314-2818
www.appa.org
www.appa.org/research/cfar/tls.cfm
Sponsorship assistance generously provided by:
Copyright © 2017 by APPA. All rights reserved.
International Standard Book Number: 1-890956-99-6
Produced in the United States of America
C O N T E N T S
Transforming Facilities to Achieve Student Success
SECTION 1: Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
n Fostering student success in higher education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

n Achieving success through collaboration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

SECTION 2: Improving Student Success in Higher Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
n Student success and the big picture of higher education in 2017 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

n The challenge of defining success . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

n Case Study in Facilities Modernization: Wellesley College . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

SECTION 3: The Role of Facilities in Fostering Student Success . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
n How the facilities organization supports students . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

n The view from different disciplines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

TLS
SECTION 4: Using Facilities Modernization to Reduce Barriers to Success . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3
n A slow-motion campus crisis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

n Supporting success with facilities modernization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

n Making the case for facilities modernization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

n Facilities modernization priorities and opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

n Case Study in Facilities Modernization: University of Massachusetts at Amherst . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

SECTION 5: Building Support for Facilities Modernization with Collaboration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
n Achieving true collaboration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

n Facilities modernization through collaboration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

n Remaking the facilities organization to be more collaborative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

SECTION 6: Ten Questions to Drive Student Success through Facilities Modernization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
n Case Study in Facilities Modernization: Triton College . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

SECTION 7: Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
APPENDIX A: Selected Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
APPENDIX B: Participants at the 2017 APPA Thought Leaders Symposium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
TLS
4
2 0 1 7 A P P A T H O U G H T L E A D E R S S E R I E S
Section 1:
Executive Summary
The year was 1973. The Carnegie Commission on Fostering student success in higher
Higher Education released a comprehensive report education
summarizing six years of investigating colleges and
In April 2017, representatives of colleges and universities
universities across the United States. Higher education
from across the United States and Canada assembled
was facing unprecedented challenges, including changing
at the APPA Thought Leaders symposium to discuss
social norms and turmoil over the Vietnam War. One of
the topic of student success . Attendees included senior
the most pressing concerns, however, was very familiar
campus leaders and representatives of academic affairs,
to audiences today: money.
student affairs, and facilities organizations . They debated
broad trends and issues confronting higher education and
Students were flocking to degree programs at un-
considered how institutions can help students succeed .
heard-of rates, and institutions were struggling to keep
up . The commission predicted a nationwide shortfall of
Success is a complex term, and participants at the
$26 billion a year by 1980 if enrollment trends contin-
symposium struggled to define it . Success starts with
ued . What to do? TTLLSS
retention and graduation, but it can expand to include
11
factors from personal career goals to social responsibility .
“Weed ’em out,” the commission said .
However success is defined, colleges and universities
recognize that they have a responsibility to prepare
“Encouraging higher educational institutions to use
students to succeed, and they are investing in programs
their resources more effectively, the commission report
and projects to help identify at-risk students, improve
proposes that ‘reluctant attenders’ should be encour-
academic support, and expand student services .
aged to leave,” reported The New York Times . Pushing
less-than-enthusiastic students out the door could slash
The primary question of the symposium was how the
nearly $10 billion—roughly 20 percent—of annual costs .
facilities organization can help further the success
of every student . The APPA members represented at
Other recommendations of the Carnegie Commission
the symposium—all dedicated members of the broader
wouldn’t be out of place in a report written today—the
campus community—believe they have a crucial role
commission called for institutions to clarify their pur-
to play in fostering success . Without safe, clean, func-
poses, preserve and enhance quality, and achieve more
tional spaces, education cannot thrive . Participants at
effective governance . But the charge to show students
the symposium identified the following priorities for the
the door is almost shocking in 2017 .
facilities organization:
It’s not clear how the commission identified “reluctant n
Address the basics.
attenders,” but it’s not hard to imagine many were stu- n
Create a student-focused built environment.
dents struggling to adapt to higher education . Today, n
Support the academic goals of the institution.
institutions recognize their responsibility is not to weed n
Strive for inclusivity and fairness.
out, but to invite in . What’s more, today’s colleges and n
Integrate technology.
universities are taking seriously the charge to help all n
Promote sustainability.
students succeed . n
Serve as good stewards of campus resources.
n
Engage students in the facilities organization.
n
Do no harm.
A P P A T H O U G H T L E A D E R S S E R I E S 2 0 1 7
Thought Leaders participants recognized that, all too campus—the objective is to make the greatest impact
often, facilities get in the way of student success when possible on the college or university’s goals .
campus buildings fail . The high cost of upkeep of aging
structures, many constructed during the boom of the Achieving success through collaboration
1960s and 1970s when the Carnegie Commission was
Undertaking a facilities modernization program involves
active, has left many buildings in disrepair . Outdated
years of effort from facilities leaders and requires the
heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC)
backing of the campus community . Without strong
systems, leaking roofs, and unreliable elevators plague
support from departments across the entire campus,
campuses . Students don’t learn well next to buckets
modernization efforts will founder .
positioned to catch dripping rain .
Gaining support while identifying the needs and goals
No institution has the funds to fix every pesky detail of
of campus leaders demands a collaborative process . For
every building, but colleges and universities are finding
help understanding effective collaboration, the Thought
ways to make strategic investments in their existing
Leaders symposium turned to the Arbinger Institute,
buildings through facilities revitalization and mod-
whose process emphasizes an outward mindset that
ernization . This approach uses capital funds to revive,
recognizes the goals and priorities of others . Crafting a
renovate, and reset the clock on campus buildings . It is
collaborative facilities modernization program not only
a forward-thinking process that can encompass a range
helps the facilities organization achieve its goals, it also
TLS of tasks including maintenance (i .e ., fixing leaks or re-
helps the entire institution achieve broader goals and
2 pairing infrastructure) and programmatic updates (i .e .,
move toward student success . Symposium participants
renovating classrooms to address changing pedagogy) .
outlined strategies for creating a collaborative facilities
The goal is to thoughtfully target reinvestment in exist-
modernization program and examined ways to make the
ing assets to extend their life and revitalize their role on
entire facilities organization more collaborative .
campus .
The symposium concluded with participants developing
It is important to differentiate revitalization and mod-
a list of self-assessment questions . APPA encourages
ernization from the old—and utterly exhausted—term
facilities organizations in particular, and college and uni-
“deferred maintenance .” The concept of deferred main-
versity leaders in general, to consider these questions as
tenance may have been useful once, but at this point it
they seek to support the success of their students:
only serves to prompt a rash of finger-pointing . Most
facilities leaders have come to dread the phrase, which
smacks of failure on their part of maintain their cam- 1. How does our institution define student success?
puses and discounts the hard work they have done to How can the facilities organization specifically sup-
keep colleges and universities running smoothly . It is port student success at our college or university?
time to shift the focus away from backlogs of repairs and
2. How does facilities revitalization and modernization
instead consider the goals of the institution .
contribute to student success?
3. How is the facilities organization a barrier to support-
This is a key message of this report: that through
ing student success?
strategic investment in their facilities, colleges and
universities can support student success, position the 4. How will investment in modernization support long-
campus for the future, and serve as good stewards of term institutional success?
campus assets . Thought Leaders participants agreed
5. Where do we start in making our processes more
on the importance of an approach to campus facilities
collaborative? What is our plan for adopting a col-
investments that is student-centered and future-focused .
laborative approach to facilities revitalization in
The process must reflect the mission and vision of the
particular?
22 00 11 77 AA PP PP AA TT HH OO UU GG HH TT LL EE AA DD EE RR SS SS EE RR II EE SS
it is today . Perhaps it’s not surprising that institutions,
6. How do we select and engage stakeholders in a col-
overwhelmed by a deluge of students, wanted to turn
laborative modernization process?
some of them away . But by 1973, the doors of higher
7. How do we prioritize modernization needs?
education had been thrown wide open, and it was too
8. How do we establish and maintain discipline in the late, even then, to slam them shut again .
facilities renewal and revitalization process?
Today, colleges and universities are not only propping
9. How do we say “no” without alienating those who
open the doors, they are waving from the front steps .
have partnered in collaboration?
Once students are inside, colleges and universities are
10. How do we communicate the risk of using capital
finding concrete, creative ways to help students thrive .
dollars for work that does not further modernization?
As caretakers of the structures of higher education, facil-
ities organization leaders will continue to do their part to
When the Carnegie Commission wrote its report nearly
support students as they reach their goals and proceed to
45 years ago, higher education was very different than
their futures—well-prepared for whatever comes next .
TTLLSS
33
A P P A T H O U G H T L E A D E R S S E R I E S 2 0 1 7
Section 2:
Improving Student Success in Higher Education
Student success and the big picture of might actually be much higher, since it does not include
higher education in 2017 debt for students who attended for-profit institutions .)
Student success has become a top priority for colleges
These two crises have focused attention as never before
and universities . There’s an air of urgency around the
on student success . The need for an education has never
topic—a sense that institutions have an imperative to
been greater, and the cost to the individual student has
better support their students . One way to understand the
never been higher . To shortchange students attempt-
issue is to place it in the context of two colliding crises
ing to secure their place in the middle class—and often
in higher education: increased demand for a degree and
finding themselves in debt before earning their first pay-
reduced state support for colleges and universities .
check—is irresponsible . Colleges and universities have
a social and ethical imperative to help their students
Not so long ago, a degree from a college or university
TLS succeed .
was a rare achievement . Today, Americans without a
4
degree are hard-pressed to support their families . Of
And yet too often, students fail . Around 61 percent of
the 11 .6 million jobs created after the Great Recession
full-time undergraduates enrolled in public colleges and
of 2008, 8 .4 million went to those with at least a bache-
universities graduate with a degree in six years; the rate
lor’s degree, according to the Center on Education and
is 66 percent for students at private nonprofit institu-
the Workforce at Georgetown University . Another 3
tions, according to the National Center for Education
million jobs went to individuals with an associate’s de-
Statistics . That leaves roughly a third of students with
gree or some college education . The long-term financial
some college experience but no degree, and often with
payoff for a degree is enormous: People with a bachelor’s
significant debt . The situation is far worse at public
degree earn 40 percent more over the course of their lives
community colleges, where only 22 percent of full-time
than those with a high school diploma . It is difficult to
students complete a degree or certificate within four
overstate the significance of this societal shift . Until the
years .
early 1980s, more than 70 percent of Americans entered
the workforce right out of high school .
These students have not only failed to accomplish what
they set out to do, they also are far more likely to strug-
At the same time, public support of higher education
gle to pay back the debt they acquired in the attempt .
has declined precipitously across the United States .
While it’s shocking to learn about students who have
Most states are contributing less to public colleges and
borrowed hundreds of thousands of dollars, those stu-
universities than they did before the recession . While
dents generally make steady progress paying back their
state support for higher education increased slightly in
20161, it has yet to recover from a high point in 2008,
according to research by the advocacy group Young
1 The actual situation is difficult to summarize . According to the 2016 State
Invincibles reported in U.S. News and World Report . Col- Higher Education Finance report from the State Higher Education Exec-
leges and universities turned to families to make up the utive Officers, overall support for higher education fell by 1 .8 percent per
full-time equivalent student in 2016 . However, the nationwide average is
difference, and so tuition has soared, dragging student
dragged down by Illinois, where a budget crisis forced appropriations to
debt along with it . Average undergraduate debt for the drop by 80 percent from 2015 . Eliminate Illinois from nationwide calcu-
class of 2015 is a staggering $30,100, according to the lations, and overall support increased by 3 .2 percent . Support rose in 33
states and declined in 17 .
Institute of College Access and Success . (This figure
2 0 1 7 A P P A T H O U G H T L E A D E R S S E R I E S
Data Point:
Understanding the student loan crisis
Low debt, high default
Dollar amount of
student loan debt
On the surface, it would be
$1,000 to $5,000 34% much harder to pay back
$5,000 to $10,000 29% $100,000 than $5,000—but not
without a college degree. In fact,
$10,000 to $25,000 24%
the higher the debt, the more
$25,000 to $50,000 21%
likely it is to be paid back, since
$50,000 to $100,000 21% those who have borrowed
more than $100,000 18% significant sums most likely
land well-paying jobs in
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% medicine or law.
Percent of borrowers who default on loans
TLS
5
Source: Federal Reserve Bank of New York Consumer Credit Panel and Equifax, The New York Times. Data represent
graduate and undergraduate borrowers who left school in 2009 and defaulted by 2014.
loans . They likely either graduated from well-regarded education environment . Campus leaders are compelled
institutions or completed graduate degrees, and their to aid students in reaching their potential—to graduate
income is higher as a result . Only 7 percent of gradu- on time, with as little debt as possible, and with the
ate-school borrowers default . Conversely, borrowers qualifications that will enable them to repay that debt
with the smallest debts are the most likely to default . and secure a future .
In one 2015 study of students from Iowa’s 16 commu- Moreover, society as a whole is pressuring institu-
nity colleges by the Association of Community College tions to better serve their students . Accreditation is
Trustees, the default rate for students who had borrowed beginning to be tied to student success (although the
less than $5,000 was nearly 32 percent . (Nationally, the accreditation agencies generally have not defined suc-
rate is slightly higher, at 34 percent .) cess or explained how success will be measured) . What’s
more, many states have linked some percentage of fund-
Why is it so difficult for low-borrowing students to keep ing to metrics such as retention, graduation, and job
up with payments? Because they likely never completed placement . There is clear logic in rewarding effective
a degree . Almost 90 percent of Iowa community college institutions with higher funding, but such programs have
defaulters left college with no degree or certificate, and often failed to achieve their goals, according to a study
60 percent had fewer than 15 credits . Less than a semes- by the Century Foundation . “Research shows that tying
ter’s worth of credit is unlikely to increase a student’s financial incentives to performance measures rarely re-
income at all, and that $5,000 debt could haunt them for sults in large or positive outcomes that are sustained over
decades . time .” In this study, states that use performance-based
funding do not outperform other states; any differences
There is a growing sense that institutions must help between them are statistically insignificant .
their students avoid the pitfalls of the current higher
A P P A T H O U G H T L E A D E R S S E R I E S 2 0 1 7
Why is this the case? Paying for performance is highly The challenge of defining success
successful in many other economic situations, but, as the
So far, we’ve discussed “student success” without defin-
report points out, those are generally fairly straightfor-
ing it . Sometimes, success is presented as shorthand for
ward transactions . The reasons any student thrives or
graduation; at other times, it is presumed to encompass
fails are complex and multifaceted and involve
much more . But operating without a definition is a
numerous factors outside the institution’s control .
problem . The old adage “You can’t manage what you
There is no single, clear path institutions can take to
can’t measure” comes to mind—because you can’t mea-
improve results . Certainly, institutions can—and have—
sure what you can’t define . Individual institutions need
identified many of the factors that contribute to success,
to decide what they mean by success so they can deter-
and they are working to improve those factors .
mine if they’re making progress toward improving it .
Ineffective academic advising is a good example—poor
During the 2017 APPA Thought Leaders symposium,
advising can delay time to graduation by failing to help
participants were asked to give their own definitions
students keep their focus on their end goal . Many cam-
of success . Some definitions were straightforward and,
puses are seeking to improve advising and are seeing
therefore, would be relatively easy to measure:
real results, according to the Association for the Study
of Higher Education report, Piecing Together the Student
n
Success Puzzle: Research, Propositions, and Recommenda- Maximum throughput in shortest time with highest
TLS tions . graduation rate.
n
6 Graduate on time. Increase income over lifetime of
Another major challenge in tying student success to state employment, over alternative of not attending college.
funding comes down to definitions . What do we mean Improve standard of living.
by “success”? How do we measure it?
Others wanted to emphasize the personal nature of
success:
Data Point:
n
Student graduates “on time” based on their individual
Defining student success
goal. Student acquires the knowledge, experience, and
San Jose State University growth that he/she desired.
Many wanted success to include a societal component,
San Jose State University (SJSU) works actively and
with the assumption that higher education has a broader
collaboratively to help students identify and strive
purpose than training students for careers:
toward their maximum potential, whether it leads
to an SJSU degree or not. San Jose State Universi-
n
ty’s student success framework provides a rich and Student success is preparing an individual to be a pro-
diverse learning environment to engage students ductive member of society by educating them so that
not only in mastering core subject areas but also they can get a job, continuously educate themselves to
in developing and refining their competencies in understand current events, and value other perspectives.
creativity, critical thinking, problem solving, quanti-
And some framed success in the broadest terms:
tative literacy, information literacy, communication,
and collaboration. The ultimate goal of our student
n
success efforts is to produce citizens who possess Student success is graduating with a degree and the
intellectual, social, and life skills that are adaptable, life skills to be an enlightened contributor to society.
culturally respectful, transformative, productive, and It’s making considered decisions and taking productive
responsible. steps in life’s journey. It’s looking back at your educa-
tional experience with no regrets.