HLW Spaces for Learning Research Report

Students Talk

Spaces for Learning Research Report

We know the nature of learning is changing, so we asked students how their spaces can best evolve with it.

| iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction

2

Respondent Background Info

4

Initial Insights

6

Designing the Students’ Ideal Space for Learning

14

Research Methods & Complete Findings

30

| v

vi |

HLW is a global architecture, planning, research, and design firm committed to promoting a spirit of discovery in our spaces.

Since 1885, HLW has designed and delivered thousands of projects for clients across various industries and sectors. This gives us a diverse and continuously evolving perspective. We work with colleges and universities to envision campus environments that positively impact students at their first campus visit and throughout their entire educational experience.

| 1

Introduction We launched this study by asking current students from colleges and universities around the United States:

How are you learning today, and what spaces do you think will best accommodate your ability to learn in the future?

2 |

At HLW, we’re both designers and problem solvers, and we take a user-centric approach to architecture. This means that when addressing our clients’ needs, we get ahead of change and learn from it.

We understand the diversity of today’s students and how their unique qualities shape the colleges and universities they attend.

We have experience asking questions to discern these qualities and inform the places we design. The more we ask, the more we learn. This has yielded a broad client network whose different voices help us create better design solutions.

| 3

Respondent Background Information Demographics • Our survey received 611 responses from students at 433 schools across 35 states.

• We aimed to gather data from a wide range of individuals.

TYPE OF INSTITUTION BY LOCATION

| 4

TYPE OF INSTITUTION BY GOVERNANCE* Private for-profit

4%

Private non-profit

31% 65%

Public

TYPE OF INSTITUTION BY DEGREE* Special Focus

Doctoral Professional Baccalaureate Associates

Masters

5% 4

%

6

%

15% 18%

52%

Doctoral Research

*Institution type is based on those defined in the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education.

| 5

Initial Insights SHIFTING STANDARDS It is well-known that the way students are learning is changing—at a pace more rapid than its architecture. When HLW designed Columbia’s Engineering Center in the 1960s, for example, the project intent was technical and not pedagogical. Our goal was to expand labs and add an auditorium.

Thanks to innovations, such as mobile technological solutions, formal learning is increasingly able to occur in informal settings.

Both teaching and studying can happen across an array of locations: inside or out of doors; at the cafeteria or in the dorm; with peers or alone. The 21st century campus needs to recognize this and activate its existing infrastructural nodes to become a network in order to support these new learning trends.

We found in our survey that students’ preferences speak to these shifts—and that the architectural solutions necessary to accommodate student demands align with trends HLW has included in our workplace designs for years.

Students’ requests align with trends commonly seen in innovative workplaces: flexible and supportive environments that address the whole user.

6 |

LEARNING FROM WORKPLACE We’ve all heard about the surge of workplace amenities driven by tech mega companies like Facebook, Apple, and Google. HLW understands this well, having written Google’s Project Guide.

The Guide details how food spaces, lounges, and other amenity spaces draw together traditionally disparate groups to encourage interdisciplinary partnerships and creative problem solving. While this approach is commonly associated with Silicon Valley company culture, similar collaborative and enriching environments have become the workplace standard. We understand the advantages of these innovative spaces, and the impact they have on worker retention, satisfaction, and productivity.

In our survey, we saw that students were asking for spaces similar to those found in professional environments. From our experience, we know that these spaces are achievable in both new designs or existing settings.

The spaces students preferred are proven to promote user satisfaction, and could be easily integrated into both new and existing campus settings. | 7

Current Satisfaction Ratings The dataset below represents students’ average ratings of spaces on their respective campuses.

Responses were similar across institution types, despite vast differences in their resources, location, and size.

AVERAGE SATISFACTION RATING OF SPACES

65-74%

Libraries

72

Outdoor Spaces

69 %

Student Center

66 %

Informal Study Spaces

64%

Classrooms

63 %

Residence Halls

55-64%

0-54%

%

52 % Numbers indicate the percentage of students who scored each space as either “very good” (5) or “good” (4) on a 5-point Likert scale.

Students gave many spaces a failing grade.

8 |

Current Study Habits Next, we asked students to explain their study habits—the percentage of time they spend studying individually, in a group, and with a professor or TA. We found consistent patterns across educational settings and focus areas.

STUDY HABITS BY INSTITUTION TYPE By myself

Overall

51%

Associate’s

47 %

Baccalaureate

50 %

Master’s

54%

Doctoral Professional

47 %

With classmates

With a professor/TA

35% 38 %

13 % 15%

37 % 35%

12 % 11% 17 %

35%

Doctoral Research

52 %

14%

34%

Special Focus

48 %

41%

12 %

Numbers indicate the percentage of students who scored each space as either “very good” (5) or “good” (4) on a 5-point Likert scale.

Study habits indicate a need to accommodate individual study, while also providing a range of space types. | 9

Where Students Study When choosing study locations, students experience a sense of place identity, and use spaces that they relate to personally. Their responses frequently highlighted specific ideal study spaces, down to the seat. In some cases, personal preference mattered more than functionality.

Concurrently, many students indicated that busy and loud spaces were detrimental to studying. For these students, spaces with favorable acoustic conditions were more important than those with potentially better seating or other ergonomic features. For example, some students expressed that they would prefer to take over an empty classroom to study rather than work in a thoughtfully designed, but noisy, lounge.

Overall, respondents indicated experiencing a disconnect between spaces that appealed to their social and non-academic needs and those designed for academic activities. They express desire for better alignment of these different needs.

In some cases, personal preference matters more than functionality.

INDIVIDUAL STUDY TRENDS

Libraries

Dorms/ Apartments

GROUP STUDY TRENDS

Libraries

Empty Classrooms (Specialized)

10 |

“I study in dorm lounges, but only if they are empty.”

Outdoor Areas

Study Halls

Dining Halls

Empty Classrooms (Specialized)

“The library has study rooms, but we usually leave campus.”

Study Halls

Outdoor Areas

Cafe/ Coffee shops

Lounges

| 11

What Students Want After assessing and commenting on their current educational spaces, students reported on spaces they would like to see on their campuses.

Many of the requested spaces revolved around more and efficient options for socializing, collaboration, and wellness.

12 |

REPRESENTATIVE RESPONSES INCLUDE:

“Collaborative study spaces where talking is encouraged.”

“Places close by to purchase fresh food.”

“Spaces to de-stress, relax, and focus.”

| 13

Designing the Students’ Ideal Space for Learning The rest of this document takes trends from our survey findings and shares recommendations, based on HLW designs.

Our goal is to help create thoughtful learning environments that support current students’ learning styles, while looking to the future and recognizing campuses are always evolving.

14 |

| 15

D A

G

H

B

16 |

1.

C

E

F

I

Key Findings Coming Together Based on survey responses, here are the trends that students want their spaces to reflect and a visualization of what they could look like.

of 1| Balance Space Types A. Enclosed work rooms for individual and group work B. Booths and semiprivate seating C. Open individual and social seating

on 2| Focus Wellness D. Quiet rooms with acoustic privacy E. Natural materials F. Natural light and views

3| Functional Furniture & Tools G. Convenient materials and resources H. Large work surfaces I. Movable, soft furniture for teaming and group work

| 17

1| Balance of Space Types Respondents reacted positively to spaces that have multifaceted usages that allowed them to feel like they were part of a larger network of peers, even when working alone.

Furthermore, from an enclosed room for group work adjacent to a lounge, to individual seating for heads down study in the open, students want to study in a variety of ways within a single environment.

A

Enclosed work rooms for individual and group work Enclosed work rooms for individual and group work that both provide acoustic privacy and visual access to the rest of the space allow students to concentrate together without feeling isolated.

B

Booths and semiprivate seating Booths and semi private seating offer a middle ground for group work in an open environment.

18 |

C

Open individual and social seating Open individual and social seating makes it easier for students to choose spaces that accommodate both work and socialization.

| 19

1| Balance of Space Types HLW PRECEDENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:

Enclosed space in an open environment.

Students want spaces where they can eat and study at the same time.

20 |

Large tables for individual or group work.

Diverse seating typologies in one space.

Group study room with acoustic privacy and visual access outward.

| 21

2| Focus on Wellness The quality of a space has a big impact on how positively students feel about it.

Elements like plants and natural light that create a more welcoming and healthy environment go a long way.

This theme is one that most aligns with trends HLW has seen in the workplace over the last decade.

D

Quiet rooms with acoustic privacy Quiet rooms with acoustic privacy can be used for individual study and a space to relax and reduce anxiety. Many students expressed a desire for spaces they could access when they are feeling anxious or stressed while at school.

22 |

E

Natural materials Natural materials not only set the tone of a space, they are healthier for the user.

F

Natural light and views More so than appreciating natural light and views, respondents reacted critically to spaces that lack views to the outdoors.

| 23

2| Focus on Wellness HLW PRECEDENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:

Green walls bring plants indoors at a large scale.

Natural light and views.

24 |

Natural materials.

Room for individuals in a group space.

Hubs equipped with wifi and outlets.

Game zones to allow for mental breaks.

Outdoor study spaces with privacy for individuals or groups.

| 25

3| Functional Furniture and Tools Students care about how the space and its components support their studies. Specialized study spaces, like maker spaces, did not resonate as strongly with respondents in the way that multi-use spaces do.

In addition, functionality superseded aesthetic impressions.

G

Convenient materials and resources Convenient materials and resources (whiteboards, tackable surfaces, monitors, outlets) are key elements that students look for when considering whether they would use a space.

26 |

H

Large work surfaces Large work surfaces for students to put their laptop on and spread out their materials makes a big difference for how students perceive a space.

I

Movable soft furniture for teaming and group work Movable soft furniture for teaming and group works allows for adaptability and increases functionality by providing diverse use options.

| 27

3| Functional Furniture and Tools HLW PRECEDENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:

White board with markers and erasers.

Large table surfaces so students can spread out.

28 |

Monitors for group project work.

Reconfigurable furniture allows for flexibility of usage within a space.

A blend of loungy and more formal furniture.

| 29

Research Methods & Complete Findings

30 |

| 31

Research Methods HLW conducted a nationwide survey of college and university students in July 2019.

A panel service was used to identify and recruit respondents in major geographic regions around the United States. Several filtering questions were used to qualify respondents. Once the initial respondents were screened and completed the survey, HLW researchers conducted additional screening and eliminated invalid responses.

Our final clean dataset consisted of 611 complete and valid responses.

Our survey included several images of learning spaces with associated questions about how students would use them. Images were selected to represent archetypal settings found in a range of academic institutions of various types. Each image shared several common characteristics.

They all: • Were professionally photographed.

• Depict people using the settings captured in the image.

• Represent people from a cross section of gender and ethnic diversity.

• Most, but not all, images are of HLW projects.

32 |

IMAGE FEEDBACK Students clicked on part of an image that they did or did not like and commented on the reason why. They were then asked if and how they would use a shown space.

No clicks

More clicks

| 33

Rating of Spaces by Institution Type 75-100%

65-74%

55-64%

0-54%

ASSOCIATE’S COLLEGE Classrooms

52 %

Libraries

64%

Student Center

57 %

Informal Study Spaces

71%

Outdoor Spaces

65 %

Residence Halls

38 %

BACCALAUREATE COLLEGE Classrooms

68 %

Libraries

73 %

Student Center

63 %

Informal Study Spaces

63 %

Outdoor Spaces Residence Halls

70 % 50 %

MASTER’S UNIVERSITY Classrooms

63 %

Libraries

75%

Student Center

63 %

Informal Study Spaces

57 %

Outdoor Spaces Residence Halls

73 % 58

%

Numbers indicate the percentage of students who scored each space as either “very good” (5) or “good” (4) on a 5-point Likert scale.

34 |

| 35

| 36

75-100%

65-74%

55-64%

0-54%

DOCTORAL PROFESSIONAL Classrooms

67 %

Libraries

77 %

Student Center

70 %

Informal Study Spaces

65 %

Outdoor Spaces

69 %

Residence Halls

55%

DOCTORAL RESEARCH Classrooms

54%

Libraries

57 %

Student Center

68 %

Informal Study Spaces

61%

Outdoor Spaces

61%

Residence Halls

54%

SPECIAL FOCUS Classrooms

59 %

Libraries

53 %

Student Center

59 %

Informal Study Spaces

59 %

Outdoor Spaces Residence Halls

53 % 41%

Numbers indicate the percentage of students who scored each space as either “very good” (5) or “good” (4) on a 5-point Likert scale.

| 37

Space Type Synthesis Our space type synthesis breaks down each image included in the survey. Response style was largely oriented around specific items and space usage more than overall aesthetic and design.

Trends included an interest in: tools (white boards, outlets), functional elements (seating, tables), and quality of space (natural light, plants); as well as concerns regarding: noise, cleanliness, and over-crowding.

1|

2|

3|

4|

38 |

5|

6|

7|

8| | 39

1| Respondents loved that this space was open, but also had areas for individual or group study.

Image copyright Steve Hall (Hall+Merrick Photographers)

USAGE Wouldn’t use

15

%

Neutral Would use

19% 66%

USAGE TYPE 100%

0%

40 |

Ind.

Collab.

Social

Other

No clicks

More clicks

649 Likes

107 Dislikes

FURNITURE

USABILITY

D Love the chairs (look comfy, stylish, and good for long periods of study)

U Tables too low (can’t write, eat or use laptop on them)

D Table size good to spread out

U Needs outlets

LOOK & FEEL D Lots of natural light

U Seating too sparse U Floors look slippery U Ceiling looks unfinished

D Modern and cool D Minimalist and organized

OPENNESS CUT OFF

D Stylish and colorful

U Cubicles stifle openness of the space

D Looks high tech D Like the color pops among the whiteness

LOOK & FEEL

OPEN BUT BREAKS DOWN

U Natural light good, but would be better if you could see out of the windows

D Private areas good for group work or individual study

U Too white/bright, not enough color even with the pops - plants could help

D Easy to do heads down work without distraction but can also socialize

U Feels empty and lonely U Too industrial, looks unfinished

D Private, peaceful, calm D Well spaced, not crowded D Reconfigurable

| 41

2| Respondents love idea of study rooms for group work.

The glass walls were a controversial element.

USAGE Wouldn’t use

19%

Neutral Would use

18% 63%

USAGE TYPE 100%

0%

42 |

Ind.

Collab.

Social

Other

No clicks

More clicks

476 Likes

106 Dislikes

LOOK & FEEL

LOOK & FEEL

D Modern, cool design

U Hallways look like dead space

D Plants and natural wood

U Too fancy - looks bland and not fun

D Bright lighting D Design is functional and comfortable

USABILITY

D Not crowded

U Glass concerns (violates privacy, distracting, no view to natural light/outside, awkward visibility into group study, shouldn’t take over the entire wall)

D Clean

FURNITURE / TOOLS D White boards are helpful

U What if one person takes over the group room?

D Monitors would be useful, as long as cables are provided

U Too enclosed and small

USABILITY D Love enclosed space for group work (tutoring, small meetings, filming group projects, etc.)

FURNITURE / TOOLS U Where are the outlets?

U More white boards - can they be the whole wall?

D Auditory privacy is great D Group space that isn’t shared would be useful D Good size

| 43

3| Respondents were conflicted about how useful the space would be as it felt more social than studious.

USAGE Wouldn’t use

18%

Neutral Would use

20% 62%

USAGE TYPE 100%

0%

44 |

Ind.

Collab.

Social

Other

No clicks

More clicks

666 Likes

121 Dislikes

LOOK & FEEL

LOOK & FEEL

D Modern, creative, unique design

U Too open - looks noisy and messy

D Aura seems relaxing and pleasant

U Ceiling lights are tacky

D The lighting (both designed and natural)

U Looks expensive for an academic space

D Plants - even if they aren’t real

U Looks like it’s designed for relaxing, but doesn’t feel like it would be

D Natural wood feels organic D Laid-back but also academic

USABILITY D Looks more social than study - would come to chat D Good for partner work D Could have a large group meet D Stage useful for student performances D More hangout spot than a study spot

USABILITY U Feels more like a coffee shop than study spot U Not realistic for students - where are the outlets? Tables too small or low. etc.

U Too crowded for studying U Stage wouldn’t work for musical performances U Not wheelchair accessible

FURNITURE D Unique set up, variety of seating options D Like the steps D Like the ceiling design D Looks comfortable, but not too comfortable D Booth seating and semi-private rooms in the back useful D Reconfigurable furniture is a plus | 45

4| Respondents like the idea of a relaxing place to do group study, but were concerned it could get overcrowded.

USAGE Wouldn’t use

17%

Neutral Would use

22% 61%

USAGE TYPE 100%

0%

46 |

Ind.

Collab.

Social

Other

No clicks

949 Likes

280 Dislikes

LOOK & FEEL

LOOK & FEEL

D Modern, relaxing, calm

U Colors bland, gray, and cold

D Cool lighting design, makes the space bright

U No natural light/windows

D Clean and well maintained

U Too serious,

USABILITY

More clicks

U Not welcoming

D Able to relax and think

USABILITY

D Collaborative - good for group work

U Too open - would get noisy and crowded

D Openness can accommodate large groups

U Too many groups in same space and people passing through makes it hard to concentrate

D Frosting on back room allows for privacy D Food and drink allowed

U Students would nap on couches

FURNITURE / TOOLS

U Too comfortable for studying

D White boards useful - could always have more

U No space to spread out and work

D Couches look modern and comfortable D Plants are nice

FURNITURE / TOOLS U Tables - too small, not enough, tripping hazard U Couches - don’t motivate to study, too close together, would get dirty U No outlets U No desks for working U Not enough study tools provided (ex: no marker rack for whiteboard) U No clock | 47

5| Seating (booth and individual) was a focus of this image for respondents.

Image copyright Bob Gun

USAGE Wouldn’t use Neutral

24%

Would use

54% 22%

USAGE TYPE 100%

0%

48 |

Ind.

Collab.

Social

Other

No clicks

More clicks

531 Likes

210 Dislikes

LOOK & FEEL

LOOK & FEEL

D Lighting design - warm and comfortable

U Looks crowded and loud

D Color brightens up the room

U Feels like a cafeteria or fast food chain

D Exposed columns are cool

U Columns look ugly

USABILITY

U Don’t like color palette U Carpet looks cheap and tacky

D Like that it’s multifaceted - can group study, individual study, and eat all in the same area

U Lighting too low

D Access to technology & computers

USABILITY

D Like that spaces are configured into social and individual work zones

U Individual seating is too small, doesn’t look comfortable or structurally sound. Also looks strange, lonely, and impractical

FURNITURE / TOOLS

U Feels like private space would still be loud

D Like variety and comfort level D Booth seating is very well received

FURNITURE / TOOLS

D Individual seating interesting - gives personal space in a public context, size of desks is good because you won’t feel guilty about taking up a whole table - overall like the creativity of the design

U Booth design looks like a diner

D Large tables are good for group work

| 49

6| Opinions were split about the space’s elements, but respondents liked seeing a formal learning space re-imagined.

USAGE Wouldn’t use Neutral

23%

Would use

53% 24%

USAGE TYPE 100%

0%

50 |

Ind.

Collab.

Social

Other

No clicks

698 Likes

355 Dislikes

LOOK & FEEL

LOOK & FEEL

D Looks nice and well done

U Drab color scheme

USABILITY D Would be a unique space to work with a group, TA, or professor D Format is awkward in this image, but generally could see how the space is flexible and can be configured well D Interesting to be able to relax while in a formal learning setting

FURNITURE / TOOLS D Whiteboard - big, movable D Seating - good variety, cushions look comfortable, benching is interesting, big tables/desks are good D Chairs on wheels are useful

More clicks

U No natural light U Too busy - impedes focus (floor pattern, lighting, angles, etc.)

U Too fancy for an academic setting

USABILITY U Impractical for lectures, especially if a student arrives late U Doesn’t feel like there are a realistic number of students to make up a class U Difficult to see the board from the bleachers

FURNITURE / TOOLS U Bleacher seating - uncomfortable, no desk, not practical, feet on cushions would get dirty U TV on the ceiling is strange

| 51

7| Respondents loved the variety of seating and natural light, but were concerned the space felt crowded in the middle.

USAGE Wouldn’t use Neutral

26%

Would use

49% 25%

USAGE TYPE 100%

0%

52 |

Ind.

Collab.

Social

Other

No clicks

577 Likes

285 Dislikes

LOOK & FEEL

LOOK & FEEL

D Big windows and natural light

U Too crowded and looks loud

D Modern and cool

More clicks

USABILITY

USABILITY

U No personal space in the middle set up

D Looks like a cafeteria, but can study (nice to be able to charge tech in a space where you’re eating too)

U Don’t believe personal study could happen there

D Good individual seating options in addition to group D Like working alone in a shared space D Flexible configurations

FURNITURE / TOOLS D Tables - like tall ones (good spread out), booths are always a positive, big enough for computers (bonus when you can spread out books too)

U Security concerns (easily stolen property)

FURNITURE / TOOLS U Tables - some too small, need to be able to spread out materials, others too close together U High chairs are impractical, white chairs don’t look comfortable U Need to have outlets

D Ramping is useful for all D Like seats with backs

| 53

8| Respondents like this space for hands on group work, but not all students have that need.

Image copyright Harvey Mudd College

USAGE Wouldn’t use Neutral

25%

Would use

47% 28%

USAGE TYPE 100%

0%

54 |

Ind.

Collab.

Social

Other

No clicks

537 Likes

189 Dislikes

LOOK & FEEL

LOOK & FEEL

D Creative, productive, focused

U No natural light

D Well lit - need to see details

U Messy

D High tech and advanced

U Too much glass

D Color accents bring brightness

USABILITY

USABILITY

U Small and cramped

D Multipurpose space for flexible group work - series of connected rooms

U Group work only

D Good for hands on projects, but not to study

FURNITURE / TOOLS

D Can go between more private rooms and open work space

FURNITURE / TOOLS

More clicks

U Stools - uncomfortable, not good for long-term work U Tables - should be bigger/wider U Cords from ceiling and floor are hazards

D High tables for standing work D Recycling D Clean floors, no carpet D Enough white boards D Flexible/mobile set up

| 55

This study and report were conducted and developed by the following HLW team members: Peter Bacevice, PhD Director of Research Bennet Dunkley, AIA, RIBA Principal and Higher Education Sector Lead Kate Caruso, Assoc. IIDA Senior Interior Designer Nathalie Weiss Design Strategist Kat Smith Design Strategist Natalie Mammarella Graphic Designer

New York New Jersey Los Angeles London Stamford

learning@hlw.com www.hlw.com

Architecture | Interiors | Planning | Strategy | Sustainability