Search results

Facilitating campus interactions – critical success factors according to university facility directors

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to investigate which critical success factors (CSFs) influence interaction on campuses as identified by the facility directors (FDs) of Dutch university campuses and to discuss how these compare with the literature. Design/methodology/approach: All 13 Dutch university campus FDs were interviewed (office and walking interview), focussing on CSFs relating to spaces and services that facilitate interaction. Open coding and thematic analysis resulted in empirically driven categories indicated by the respondents. Similarities and differences between the CSFs as previously identified in the literature are discussed. Findings: The following categories emerged: constraints, motivators, designing spaces, designing services, building community and creating coherence. The campus is seen as a system containing subsystems and is itself part of a wider system (environment), forming a layered structure. Constraints and motivators are part of the environment but cannot be separated from the other four categories, as they influence their applicability. Research limitations/implications: This study was limited to interviews with FDs and related staff. The richness of the findings shows that this was a relevant and efficient data collection strategy for the purpose of this study. Practical implications: By viewing the campus as an open system, this study puts the practical applicability of CSFs into perspective yet provides a clear overview of CSFs related to campus interaction that may be included in future campus design policies. Social implications: This (more) complete overview of CSFs identified in both literature and practice will help FDs, policymakers and campus designers to apply these CSFs in their campus designs. This improved campus design would increase the number of knowledge sharing interactions, contributing to innovation and valorisation. This could create a significant impact in all research fields, such as health, technology or well-being, benefitting society as a whole. Originality/value: This study provides a comprehensive overview and comparison of CSFs from both literature and practice, allowing more effective application of CSFs in campus design policies. A framework for future studies on CSFs for interaction on campuses is provided.

Climate adaptation in design education

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the insights gained by testing in a design studio a particular research-by-design strategy, focusing on the generation of innovative solutions for climate change adaptation. The strategy is based on the Design Thinking Process and has been applied in the climate adaptation design studio, which took place in 2022 at a Master of Architecture degree program in the Netherlands. The case study area was the Zernike university campus in Groningen, the Netherlands, which is situated in the verge between the city and the surrounding rural landscape, facing the urgent climate change challenges of the wider region, mainly floodings due to increased frequency of rainfalls and sea level rise. Furthermore, the area faces particular challenges, such as the increasing demand for serving additional needs, beyond the current educational and business related functions, such as (student) housing. Three indicative design research projects were selected to illustrate the tested research-by-design strategy, while systematic input has been collected from the participating students regarding the impact of this strategy on their design process. The results reveal that this strategy facilitates the iterative research-by-design process and hence offers a systematic approach to convert the threats of climate change into opportunities by unravelling the potentials of the study area, resulting in place-based, innovative and adaptive solutions.

Lector Moral Design: “Mediawijsheid bepaal je samen”

Mediawijsheid staat niet op zichzelf, er is sprake van een generatiekloof. Dat stelt Bart Wernaart, lector Moral Design Strategy bij Fontys Hogeschool Economie en Communicatie (FEC). “Ik heb een redelijk groot vertrouwen in het techno-morele kompas van onze studenten.”

Living in a pod

Background and aim – In practice, phone pods and office booths, hereafter referred to as pods, have proven their added value and popularity in open-plan offices. How would that work in another context, such as in higher education? This study explores use and user perceptions of these pods in an atrium on a Dutch university campus.Methods / Methodology – After placing nine pods, the effects were studied through document analysis, guest journey, direct observation (behaviour, indoor climate, bacteria, fungus), interview, and survey.Results – Students use the pods mainly for seven activities: meeting, project work, noise-free work, study, phone call, relaxation, or hang out. Students report a positive general experience of the pod, a very positive experience when entering the pod, and hardly any negative experiences. They feel at ease and the pods ensure better concentration. Finally, pod users reported to be a little less nervous than other atrium users.Originality – The studied pods are mostly applied in open-plan offices. By placing them in an atrium at a Dutch university campus the pods are exposed to different users, generating new user-related findings.Practical or social implications – In order to perform well, students need a variety of places on campus. An atrium is normally crowded, loud, and noisy. Pods provide an extra option, a space within a space, that students use and appreciate. By adding these tiny spaces to their repertoire, universities seem to be better aligned with user needs. Facility managers and researchers could consider experimenting with pods in other lively contexts.

We kunnen meer doen dan we beseffen

Stepping into design-based education

This book provides insight into an ambitious project to re-invent the educational method practiced at NHL Stenden. The predecessors used different ap­proaches to the delivery of education. One of them used Competency-Based Education, whilst the other practiced Problem-Based Learning. The choi­ce to combine the advantages of both methods, as well as to develop an entirely new concept that provided a better response to the fast and ever-in­creasing pace of changes in the workplace, was made by both institutions together. This approach was called Design-Based Education (DBE). Given the significant changes required of stakehol­ders to facilitate learning according to the new DBE approach, it is important to take stock of what the­se changes mean in terms of teaching and learning and to ascertain from early steps how everybody can stay, or step, on board.