Classroom Space Utilization Committee

1. Classroom Space Utilization Committee Fall 2006 Update

2. Context • Created in Spring 2006 to identify strategies, policies, and practices that will improve utilization and position FIU for future growth in its students and programs. • The November 2005 Revenue Estimating Conference projected a steep decrease in available PECO funds after 2006-07. • FIU had the lowest overall utilization rate in the SUS based on the OPPAGA study. • The current and near-future size and complexity of FIU requires that the institution be proactive in providing the most advantageous learning schedule for our students.

3. Florida PECO Funds ProjectionEstimate from November 2005 The current PECO projection from the September 2006 BOG meeting for 2007-08 is $318M and for 2008-09 is $143M.

4. Classroom Utilization – OPPAGA StudySpring 2005Data Elements: M-F 8 a.m. to 8 p.m.

5. OPPAGA StudySUS and FIU Classroom UtilizationSpring 2005

6. The OPPAGA Study • The OPPAGA study looked at classroom utilization by time of day and day of week. • We must assume that the Legislature will use this and/or similar data to rely on the future release of PECO funds. • The SUS does calculate classroom utilization slightly differently, but the change in outcome for FIU is minimal. Under the OPPAGA calculation we have the lowest utilization within the SUS, and with the BOG calculation, we are third to last. Neither of these calculations will make us sufficiently competitive for the limited amount of PECO funds projected to become available within the next few years. • In the last legislative session, discussions on this topic centered around a recommendation for a “minimum utilization standard”. It is unlikely that any standard adopted would be less than the current SUS average. • We must be competitive for PECO funding in light of the fact that we are projecting substantial growth in the decade to come.

7. Recommendations Endorsed Unanimously by CSUC • Technological improvements to classrooms (media and wireless) • For FY 2007, Media enhancements were awarded $491,000 in Strategic Initiative funding • Scheduling priorities • Publishing and implementation of annual schedule • Elimination of non-standard class durations. • These non-standard durations currently number 58, ranging from 45 minutes to 480 minutes • MWF/TR Schedule • MWF – 50 minute schedule until 5 p.m. only • All evening classes and TR schedule will remain on the current 75 minute block

8. Response to Open Forum and Comments to Faculty Senate • An alternate model was proposed that utilized Fridays (MW, WF, MF), but kept the 75 minute time block. • Disciplines requiring flexibility may use a multi-hour block approach. To mitigate any further disturbances to the schedule, the start/stop times of all courses must coincide with the master university schedule. • Increased centralization of larger classroom scheduling to maximize university effectiveness. • Local control of certain classrooms may be warranted. Requirements for maintaining control are recommended via the FSU model which requires a minimum utilization per block of rooms per time of day. • Centralized scheduling for all rooms >60. • Delay of implementation until Fall 2007. • Combine smaller classrooms into fewer larger classrooms where possible. • Consideration of phased opening of classes with limitation of add/drop (cf. FSU). • Planning will be required to set a final exam schedule that minimizes time conflicts.

9. Alternate Model compared to Proposed Model • The alternate model (MW, WF, MF) keeps the 75 minute time block but relies on paired classrooms. Classes scheduled on the WF time block meet in different rooms on each day. • This requires a “PAIRING” of like classrooms. For example, if your course required a media enhanced classroom, to teach one course under this model you would need access to 2 media enhanced classrooms. You would also need classrooms with closely-matching capacity to maximize the benefit of this model. • Classrooms without an appropriate pair/match would not see an increase in utilization. • Creates six new time blocks per week. • This model could pose a challenge for a streamlined final exam schedule and for the university’s ability to maintain a ghost schedule (as part of the DRU). • _____________________________________________________________________________ • The proposed model (MWF- 50 Min blocks from 8 am to 5 p.m. only) does not rely on any pairing or configuration of classrooms. • Creates 15 new time blocks per week. • These extra sections should provide increased access to specific classrooms such as media enhanced rooms and large classrooms which are currently in short supply. • This model provides for a pedagogical mix between the 50 min and 75 min class periods.

10. Advantages of the CSUC Proposal • Provides for multiple pedagogical approaches • Provides for increased utilization of large classrooms • Provides for increased utilization of media classrooms • Provides for increased opportunities for GTA instruction • Provides for increased ability for FIU to be more competitive for PECO dollars with the legislature • Provides for increased ability for students to plan and manage their educational career (and time-to-degree) with an annualized schedule • Can reduce the number of times students come to campus from the current mode of four per week to a mode of three

11. Revised Phased Implementation

12. Proposed Schedule New M-W-F Schedule T–R or S Schedule 7:00 to 7:50 am 6:40 to 7:55 am 8:00 to 8:50 am 8:00 to 9:15 am 9:00 to 9:50 am 9:30 to 10:45 am 10:00 to 10:50 am 11:00 to 12:15 pm 11:00 to 11:50 am 12:30 to 1:45 pm 12:00 to 12:50 pm 2:00 to 3:15 pm 1:00 to 1:50 pm 3:30 to 4:45 pm 2:00 to 2:50 pm 3:00 to 3:50 pm 4:00 to 4:50 pm 5:00 to 6:15 pm 5:00 to 6:15 pm 6:25 to 7:40 pm 6:25 to 7:40 pm 7:50 to 9:05 pm 7:50 to 9:05 pm 9:15 to 10:30 pm 9:15 to 10:30 pm