Your search found 3365 results.

Descriptors:
Foreign Countries; Urban Environment; Undergraduate Students; Assignments; Educational Policy; Administrative Policy; Social Justice; Student Attitudes; College Environment; College Role; Introductory Courses; Sustainable Development; Environmental Education; Science and Society; Social Responsibility; Instructional Effectiveness; Campuses; Educational Facilities; Educational Facilities Design; Site Development; Horticulture; Field Trips

Abstract:
This paper presents a campus tour assignment in a first-year undergraduate environmental studies course at York University, Toronto, Canada. As a pedagogical tool, the assignment enables students to interrogate the dominant narratives of a university's immediate physical spaces and to apply broader theoretical and practical concepts to their meanings and understandings. An exploration of three sites on the tour is offered as illustrations: a storm water pond, a woodlot, and a native species garden. Complicating the histories of these sites provides entry points for a variety of conversations and debates in reference to environmental sustainability, social justice, and civic engagement. The main objective of the campus tour is to prompt students to move beyond description to analysis and to raise questions about campus features by making connections to historical choices, policy alternatives and self-reflexivity. Many of the ideas presented could be modified for use on other campuses and could invite a larger discursive discussion on social and sustainability issues. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
High School Students; Disadvantaged; College Preparation; College Readiness; Acceleration (Education); Focus Groups; Interviews; Caring; Student Diversity; Cultural Pluralism; Learning Experience; Transformative Learning; Educational Facilities Design; Data Analysis; Student Attitudes; Identification; Self Concept; Academic Achievement; Social Support Groups; Goal Orientation; Futures (of Society); Delay of Gratification

Abstract:
Focus Group interviews with 31 disadvantaged students in an Early College High School (ECHS) program present insights to students' experience in the hybrid school, specifically regarding their perceptions of college readiness. Student "voice" in research can yield significant information when examining aspects of school design that potentially support postsecondary preparation. Three constructs of college readiness were investigated: academic preparedness, social preparedness, and personal preparedness. Themes and subthemes that emerged in data analysis include the following: "Readiness" with subthemes of Academic Assessment, Autonomy, Discipline, Responsibility, and Management of Time; "Learning Community" with subthemes of Social Acclimation, Corporate Accountability, and Caring Relationships; "Identity" with subthemes of Anonymity, Transitional Tensions and Triumphs, Scholarly "Self," and Mirrored Maturity; and "Productivity" with subthemes of Future Focus and Delayed Gratification. Findings indicate that the ECHS experience supported students' acclimation to college-level work and significantly affected their collegiate identity. (Contains 3 tables.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Asian Culture; Foreign Countries; Institutional Environment; Natural Disasters; Case Studies; Educational Facilities Design; Emergency Programs; Program Evaluation; Nongovernmental Organizations; International Organizations; Change Agents; Economic Development

Abstract:
In May 2008 nearly 90,000 people died in the most powerful earthquake in modern Chinese history. Many were students killed in substandard schools, creating a sensitive disaster zone inside a nation whose civil society organizations are beginning to flourish. This paper examines the education earthquake relief program of an international NGO, and the institutional environment the organization worked in. We argue that the restricted environment prevented implementation of high-impact programs in the most deprived places, but that the NGO needed to use the institutional opening created by the earthquake to establish a presence as an agent in China's development. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Structural Elements (Construction); Educational Facilities Design; Sustainable Development; Conservation (Environment); School Construction; School Buildings

Abstract:
With all of the hype that green building is receiving throughout the school facility-management industry, it's easy to overlook some elements that may not be right in front of a building manager's nose. It is helpful to examine the role floor covering plays in a green building project. Flooring is one of the most significant and important systems in an educational structure. However, regardless of the quality of the floor covering, the real worth of sustainable carpet, vinyl, linoleum, wood, ceramic or tile will be maximized and provide a return on investment if installed by a professional who understands the green building process. In fact, by specifying the qualifications of the floor-covering professional as well as the flooring products, a school facility manager can contribute to the accumulation of LEED points for both new construction and existing buildings via LEED's operations and maintenance categories. Did you know that products and installation materials contribute to LEED in seven of nine categories, and four of those seven areas encompass flooring? Flooring plays a LEED role in Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ), Materials and Resources (MR), Innovation and Design Process (IDP), and Regional Priority. Flooring can help with LEED points in the categories of new construction, major renovation, existing buildings, commercial interiors, schools, retails, healthcare and homes. To shield a LEED project from unnecessary loss of points, facility managers should require that the flooring contractor use trained, certified crews. A flooring contractor needs to be competent and have well-trained installers before they begin the job. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
School Safety; School Security; Facilities Management; Sexual Harassment; Colleges; Administrator Attitudes; Prevention; Educational Facilities Design; Emergency Programs; Violence; Bullying; Weapons; Homicide; Rape; Crime; Homeless People

Abstract:
In a study conducted among more than 980 American four-year and two-year colleges and universities, including institutions such as the University of Michigan, MIT, UCLA and Columbia, security staff and other administrators identified the five leading goals for their security systems: (1) Preventing unauthorized people from entering their facilities; (2) Maximizing the likelihood that students can comply with the intended access design; (3) Providing real-time notification when problems occur; (4) Minimizing the time it takes to lock down the campus; and (5) Finding building occupants quickly in an emergency. However, students do not correlate schools' No. 1 concern, ensuring only authorized entry, with a direct threat to their safety. Violence, threats from non-students, and stalking, among others, are the top five items from which they believe the school should be protecting them: (1) Gun and knife violence/murder/shootings; (2) Rape/sexual harassment/stalking; (3) Muggings/theft/identity theft; (4) Protection from non-students/homeless people/outsiders; and (5) Crimes committed by fellow students (e.g., fights, hate crimes, bullying, hazing and discrimination). Indeed, more than 50 percent of all students mentioned numbers 1 to 3 above. Yet, to make matters worse, when responses were tallied among different departments among the colleges--housing/residential life, facilities management, IT and one-card departments--with the exception of unauthorized entry, there was very little unanimity about the main tasks of their access-control systems. This divergence can be explained by how different departments view their objectives. Facilities and public safety, the key stakeholders in 57 percent of colleges, are more traditional in their approach; IT, one-card and housing departments are more customer/student-oriented. The focus is evolving from the former to the latter. Overall, the great majority of colleges still deploy photo ID cards, magnetic-stripe cards, mechanical keys and barcodes for access control on campus vs. newer, more secure technologies such as proximity and, especially, biometrics and smart cards. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Energy Conservation; Educational Facilities Design; Facilities Management; Educational Environment; Costs; Educational Facilities Improvement; Heat; Climate Control

Abstract:
Facility managers everywhere are tasked with improving energy efficiency to control costs. Those strides cannot be achieved at the expense of system performance and reliability, or the comfort of the people within those properties. There are few places where this is truer than in schools and universities. K-12 schools and university lecture spaces must be kept comfortable to maximize student performance. The question for most schools comes down to budget: What upgrades are needed, and what can be achieved in a retrofit vs. a new system? Similarly, how can new site builds maximize energy efficiency while containing upfront system costs? Finding the capital for major upgrades or high-end alternative energy systems may be difficult for many schools, but modern control techniques can help improve the efficiency of existing legacy systems and new installations by executing HVAC processes more efficiently. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
School Construction; Master Plans; Educational Facilities Design; Educational Facilities Improvement; School Buildings; Information Technology; Planning

Abstract:
An existing facility that is being upgraded or retrofitted today typically is 30 to 45 years old, often with limited natural light, antiquated mechanical systems and retrofitted technology. All too often at the outset of a project, the broader project goals--and even those narrower in scope--seem daunting or altogether impossible when staring at a blueprint for a dark and dated building. But what if a school could see past the physical restrictions of the walls to explore its transformation possibilities? There may be daylight at the end of a dark, enclosed hallway--it's a matter of changing perception. When a school or college begins to assess its facilities to determine what changes must be made to meet future needs and expectations, it is important to establish goals that are independent of the existing facility condition. Too often, an education institution considering a renovation or retrofit project will base its planning decisions on what it envisions could be accomplished reasonably and feasibly with its existing building footprint and layout. These assumptions greatly hinder the master plan and may be limiting in the long term. Instead, schools must look at the big picture. Focus on the long-term goals and what the school wants to achieve as an education institution. This article offers tips for transforming schools by transcending existing facilities. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Disabilities; Accessibility (for Disabled); Sanitary Facilities; Educational Facilities Design; Federal Legislation; Space Utilization

Abstract:
Many stakeholders in the public and private sectors have been involved in establishing minimum accessibility standards for people with disabilities in public buildings. One of the most important spaces in any building is the restroom. Unless a building has a restroom that is compliant with applicable accessibility standards such as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), it may be cited for violations. Most local building codes also carry accessibility requirements, usually referencing ANSI A 117.1. And, local permitting and certificates of occupancy require review and approvals that include restrooms. A building cannot be opened to the public without accessible restrooms. Making sense of accessibility standards has been challenging for commercial architects, designers, developers and education administrators. Accessibility consultants have for many years translated the complexities of the accessibility standards into easy-to-read resource documents complete with layouts. Bobrick's "Planning Guide for Accessible Restrooms" was published in April 2012 and is the latest in the series. This article suggests that schools can use up-to-date resources when planning accessible restroom facilities. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Educational Environment; Educational Facilities Improvement; Educational Facilities Design; Educational Facilities Planning; School Effectiveness; Space Utilization; Interior Design; Cost Effectiveness

Abstract:
School districts across North America are facing a crushing dilemma: invest millions of dollars to maintain outdated, educationally ineffective buildings or seek funding for expensive renovations, additions, and new construction to meet the evolving needs of today's learners. Compounding the issue is deferred facility maintenance. Educational spaces whose designs are based on research in effective learning, where multiple modalities and individualized learning are accommodated, aren't as expensive as one might think. At the most basic level, using a portion of the funds allocated to maintenance for modest renovations leads to leaner, safer, more effective school facilities. This article discusses the kind of 21st century school configuration that not only reduces operational expenditures but also provides a safer and healthier educational environment. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Disabilities; Best Practices; Recreation; Partnerships in Education; Recreational Facilities; Adapted Physical Education; Accessibility (for Disabled); Design Requirements; Educational Facilities Design; Standards; Compliance (Legal); Inclusion

Abstract:
This practice brief highlights the collaborative work among a disability resource professional, a university architect, and students with disabilities to create a campus recreation center with universal design features. This partnership serves to illustrate that building to minimum compliance standards does not necessarily remove barriers to equitable participation for persons with disabilities. It became evident that valuing the disability experience led to high quality design for all. From this project, best practices in inclusive, usable, and equitable design can be observed and applied to future projects. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (29K)