<%BANNER%>
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Title Page
 The Board of Control
 Introduction
 Table of Contents
 List of Tables
 List of Illustrations
 Part I: The scope of the study
 Part II: The available instructional...
 Part III: The use of instructional...
 Part IV: Interpretation of the...


PALMM FAMU



The utilization of instructional space in the State University System
ALL VOLUMES CITATION SEARCH THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/AM00000208/00001
 Material Information
Title: The utilization of instructional space in the State University System
Physical Description: 3 v. : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Florida -- Board of Control
Publisher: s.n.
Place of Publication: Tallahassee
Creation Date: 1958
Publication Date: [1958-63]
Frequency: biennial
regular
 Subjects
Subjects / Keywords: Classroom utilization   ( lcsh )
College buildings -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
serial   ( sobekcm )
 Notes
Dates or Sequential Designation: Fall 1958-Fall 1962.
 Record Information
Source Institution: Florida A&M University (FAMU)
Holding Location: Florida A&M University (FAMU)
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 18581635
System ID: AM00000208:00001

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front Cover 1
        Front Cover 2
    Title Page
        Page i
    The Board of Control
        Page ii
    Introduction
        Page iii
    Table of Contents
        Page iv
    List of Tables
        Page v
        Page vi
        Page vii
    List of Illustrations
        Page viii
    Part I: The scope of the study
        Page 1
        Page 2
    Part II: The available instructional space
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
    Part III: The use of instructional space
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
    Part IV: Interpretation of the data
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
Full Text
"w"'V


W..'4



A.



it,




Iq
'jk
X.7 :a
ml le' r..
U
N
R
R
I t
.. .. .......
N
n' ? 4
.. ... .... ... ..........
IN
S

Ar P. W r

oll, I



.. .....
S.; J

IVII
4 qqti. P


cw.

JAI
... .. ....
wt'
U-1
Fg mg
Sri

1A


MIX

YT.- _-A
xA'
;P1
V. M;
1"M




--w

A'f
A.






43:1.

xLj y



r7 C7
'ZM 1 W47p! I,;

WIFE
vz
MW
F
-Aft ...........
'4m.

A

















UNIVERSITY
OF FLORIDA
LIBRARIES
L I B --_ R RI.



M2












THE UTILIZATI

INSTRUCTIONAL

THE STATE UNI


ON OF

SPACE IN

VERSITY SYSTEM


FALL 1958







The Board of Control
Tallahassee















THE BOARD OF CONTROL


J. J. Daniel
Chairman
Jacksonville


J. K. Hays
Vice-Chairman
Winter Haven


James J. Love
Quincy


Ralph L. Miller
Orlando


S. Kendrick Guernsey
Jacksonville


James D. Camp
Fort Lauderdale


Frank M. Buchanan
Miami







J. B. Culpepper
Executive Director
Tallahassee















Office of the Board of Control
Tallahassee, Florida
November 1, 1959



This is a report on the use of instructional space in the State University
System of Florida during the fall semester 1958.

The staff of the Board of Control provided each of the institutions, viz.,
the University of Florida, the Florida State University, and the Florida
Agricultural and Mechanical University, with identical directions, defini-
tions, and forms for collecting and reporting the data on which this report
is based.

These directions, definitions, and forms were adapted from the Manual for
Studies of Space Utilization in Colleges and Universities by John Dale
Russell and James I. Doi (published by the American Association of Colle-
giate Registrars and Admissions Officers, Athens, Ohio, 1957). Hence,
there is not only a high degree of uniformity in the data collected from
the Florida institutions, but there is also the possibility in due time of
making comparisons of the Florida data with that derived elsewhere on the
basis of the Russell and Doi Manual.

This report is designed to summarize the data which were judged to be of
the most interest and value outside the Universities. Full reports of the
institutional studies are available in the Office of the Board of Control
and in the respective institutions.

Part I of this report provides information that is necessary for the inter-
pretation of the data included in other parts of the report. Part II shows
the amount of instructional space that was available during the fall
semester 1958. Part III reports several measures of the use that was
made of the available instructional space during the same term. The final
section of the report, Part IV, relates the findings of this study to the
anticipated enrollments that are expected in the State University System.



Myron R. Blee
Educational and Research Officer
















TABLE OF CONTENTS


List of Tables .............


List of Illustrations .........


Part
I. The Scope of the Study . .


II. The Available Instructional Space


III. The Use of Instructional Space .


IV. Interpretation of the Data .


Page
v


viii


.........













LIST OF TABLES


Table


I. Available Instructional Space, By Type of
Space and By Institution, Fall 1958

II. Characteristics of Instructional Space,
By Type of Space and By Institution,
Fall 1958 . . .

III. Instructional Space in Temporary Buildings,
By Type of Space and By Institution,
Fall 1958 . . . .

IV. Instructional Load Related to the Number of
Student Stations and to the Floor Area
in All Types of Instructional Space, By
Institution, Fall 1958 . . .

V. Utilization of All Types of Instructional
Space, By Institution, Fall 1958 . .

V-A. Distribution of Instructional Rooms By the
Number of Periods Used Per Week, All
Types of Instructional Space, Fall 1958

V-B. Extent of the Variation in the Utilization
of Instructional Space Among Buildings,
By Institution . . . .

VI. Average Number of Periods Rooms and Student
Stations Were Used Per Week, By Type of
Instructional Space and By Institution,
Fall 1958 .. . . . .

VII. Average Number of Periods Rooms and Student
Stations Were Used Per Week, By the Hour
of the Day and By Institution, All Types
of Instructional Space, Fall 1958 .

VII-A. Variation By Period of the Day in the Use
of Student Stations, All Types of
Instructional Space, Fall 1958 . .

VIII. Average Number of Periods Rooms and Student
Stations Used Each Day of the Week, All
Types of Instructional Space, Fall 1958


4



6



. . 8




. . 9


Page


. .




















VIII-A. Variation By Day of the Week in the Use
of Student Stations, All Types of
Instructional Space, Fall 1958 . . 21

IX. Average Number of Periods Rooms and Student
Stations Were Used Per Week By the
Capacity of the Rooms and By Institution,
All Types of Instructional Space, Fall
1958 . . . . . 23

X. Percentage of Student Stations Actually
Used During Periods Rooms Were Assigned,
By Type of Instructional Space and By
Institution, Fall 1958 . .. .. ... .. 24

XI. University of Florida, Class Size in Re-
lation to Room Capacity, All Types of
Instructional Space, Fall 1958 . .. 26

XII. Relation of Class Size to Capacity of
Rooms Used, All Types of Instructional
Space, Fall 1958 .. . .. . . 27

XIII. Extent to Which Instruction Was Carried On
in Rooms Not Regularly Available for
Class Activities . . . .... .29

XIV. Comparison of the Rate of Utilization of
Rooms and Student Stations, Fall 1953 -
Fall 1958, All Types of Instructional
Space . . . . ... .. .. 30

XIV-A. Total Number of Student Semester Hours of
Instruction Produced During the First
Semester, Second Semester, Summer Session,
For the Years 1956-57 Through 1958-59,
By Institution . .. . . 42

XV. Variations in the Student Capacity of All
Instructional Rooms Available in the
State University System, Fall 1958,
Associated With Each of Several Percent-
ages of Student Stations Occupied When
Rooms Are in Use . . . .... 44


Table


Page

















XVI. Amount of Floor Space in Instructional
Rooms That Would Be Required in the
State University System For 63,200
Full-Time-Equivalent Students at Each
of Several Designated Levels of
Utilization ................... .. 48


vii


Table


Page














LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS


Figure Page

I.. Distribution of Instructional Space,
By Type and By Institution . . . 5


II. Average Number of Periods Rooms and
Student Stations Were Used Per Day,
All Types of Space, Fall 1958 . .... 22

III. A Comparison of Room-Period Utilization
in Florida Universities With That of
90 Other Institutions, All Instructional
Rooms, Fall 1958 . . . . 32

IV. A Comparison of Average Number of Periods
Per Week That Student Stations Were
Used in Florida Institutions With
Utilization in 84 Other Institutions,
Fall 1958 . . . . 34


viii











PART I

THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY


The Problem The study on which this report is based was set up (1) to

identify the amount of instructional space that was available in the State

University System during the fall semester 1958, and (2) to determine the

extent to which the available instructional space was used during that term.


Identification of Instructional Space Instructional space was defined as

comprising those rooms which were available throughout the day to house

regularly scheduled class activities.


Under this definition, the occasional use of space such as faculty offices

or research laboratories to house regularly scheduled class activities did

not bring such space into the study. Neither did the occasional use of

classrooms for nonclass activities exclude rooms from consideration so long

as they were available for assignment for class use throughout the day.


Three measures were used to express the amount of instructional space

available as follows:

Rooms Instructional space as defined above was classified by type

of room, i.e., (1) general classrooms, (2) seminar rooms, (3) teach-

ing laboratories (including shops), and (4) teaching auditoriums.


Student Stations A student station was defined as an identifiable

accommodation for one student in an instructional room. Thus, a

student station may be a seat in a classroom or a workspace in a

laboratory.












Square Feet of Floor Area The floor area included was the net

usable floor space in instructional rooms.


The Use of Instructional Space In this study, instructional space was

considered to be in use during the time that it was assigned to house

regularly scheduled class activities. Such additional use as was made of

instructional space for other instructional activities and services and for

noninstructional activities was not counted.


All of the regularly scheduled class activities were counted regardless of

the time of the day or evening at which the use occurred.


The basic unit of time for reporting use was a period of approximately fifty

minutes.


A room-period of use was defined as the use of one room by a class group

for one period. Similarly, a student-station-period of use was defined as

the use by a student of one student station for a single period. These two

measures were used to express the magnitude of the instructional operations

that were housed in instructional space.


The Extent of Use of Instructional Space The average number of periods

per week (or per day) that rooms and student stations were used has been

employed to express the extent to which instructional space was used.













PART II

THE AVAILABLE INSTRUCTIONAL SPACE


The Total Available Instructional Space During the fall semester 1958,

in the three State universities then in operation, there were 28,173 student

stations using 591,519 square feet of floor space in 745 rooms which were

available throughout the day for regularly scheduled class activities.


Table I reports (1) the number of rooms, (2) the number of student stations,

and (3) the number of square feet of floor area, all distributed by type of

instructional space, for each of the institutions and for the system as a

whole.


Figure I shows the total floor area (591,519 square feet) distributed by

institution and by type of space.


Table II shows (1) the number of square feet of floor area per student

station for each type of instructional space in each institution. These

figures are especially important because the number of student stations in

each room was determined by counting the number of accommodations rather

than by using an optimum amount of space per station to determine room

capacity. Hence, the figures shown in part 1 of Table II reveal the extent

to which the institutions differ in the average amount of space used per

student station in each type of instructional room.


Table II also shows (2) the average capacity of rooms by number of student

stations, and (3) the average number of square feet of floor area per room

for each type of space.








TABLE I

AVAILABLE INSTRUCTIONAL SPACE
By Type of Space and By Institution
Fall 1958


1. Number of Rooms

University of Florida
Florida State University
Florida A & M University

Entire System


2. Number of Student Stations


University of
Florida State
Florida A & M

Entire System


Florida
University
University


Square Feet of Floor Area


University of
Florida State
Florida A & M

Entire System


Florida
University
University


All Types
General Teaching Teaching Instruc-
Class- Seminar Labora- Auditor- tional
rooms Rooms stories iums Space


195
130
78

403




8,266
5,271
3,383

16,920




129,130
84,637
50,061

263,828


18
8
1

27




334
201
22

557




7,147
3,788
247

11,182


147
84
67

298




3,746
2,158
1,423

7,327




140,565
64,221
72,623

277,409


9
5
3

17




2,162
864
343

3,369




22,550
9,930
6,620

39,100


________________________________________ ______________ I ________________ I ________________


369
227
149

745




14,508
8,494
5,171

28,173




299,392
162,576
129,551

591,519






FIGURE I


DISTRIBUTION OF INSTRUCTIONAL SPACE
By Type and By Institution


General Classrooms


44.6%


Seminar
Rooms


Entire System
591,519 Sq. Ft.


i
i
Teaching Laboratories /

46.9% /

.


.. ......




General Classrooms


52.1%


Teaching Laboratories


47.0%


SSeminar
/ Rooms
Teaching


Teaching
Laboratories
39.5%


o F lo rid a....** .............. ........ .........
of Florida ...... ..............................
Sq. Ft.
Seminar General
Rooms P:2S Classrooms
Teaching$ 5. 38.6%
Auditoriums

Teaching
Laboratories

56.1%
................... 5 6 [ ........
Florida A & M University
129,551 Sq. Ft.

5


Florida State University
162,576 Sq. Ft.


Seminar
Rooms


University
299,392







TABLE II

CHARACTERISTICS OF INSTRUCTIONAL SPACE
By Type of Space and By Institution
Fall 1958


1. Average Number of Square Feet
Per Student-Station

University of Florida
Florida State University
Florida A & M University

Entire System


2. Average Number of Student-
Stations Per Room

University of Florida
Florida State University
Florida A & M University

Entire System


3. Average Number of Square Feet
of Floor Area Per Room

University of Florida
Florida State University
Florida A & M University

Entire System


All Types
General Teaching Teaching Instruc-
Class- Seminar Labora- Auditor- tional
rooms Rooms stories iumi Space


15.6
16.1
14.8

15.6





42
41
43

42


662
651
642

655


21.4
18.8
11.2

20.1


19
25
22

21


397
473
247

414


37.5
29.8
51.0

37.9





25
26
21

25


956
765
1,084

931


10.4
11.5
19.3

11.6


240
173
114

198


2,506
1,986
2,207

2,300


20.6
19.2
25.1

21.0





39
37
35

38


811
716
869

794


...











Space in Temporary Buildings For the entire system there were 2,232

student stations using 58,776 square feet of floor area in 77 rooms which

were in temporary buildings, i.e., in buildings deemed to be unsuited for

indefinite use in the future.


Table III shows (1) the number of rooms, (2) the number of student stations,

and (3) the floor area in temporary facilities used for instructional

space. That table also shows (4) the floor area in the 77 rooms in tempo-

rary buildings expressed as a percentage of the total floor area of all

of the instructional rooms in each type of space.


Instructional Space Related to Instructional Load During the fall semester

1958 the total instructional load in the State University System was 22,440

full-time-equivalent students.


Table IV shows the relationship between the number of full-time-equivalent

students and (1) the number of student stations in each institution and

(2) the number of square feet of floor space occupied by those stations.






TABLE III
INSTRUCTIONAL SPACE IN TEMPORARY BUILDINGS
By Type of Space and By Institution
Fall 1958


1. Number of Rooms

University of Florida
Florida State University
Florida A & M University

Entire System

2. No. of Student-Stations

University of Florida
Florida State University
Florida A & M University

Entire System

3. Area in Square Feet of
Floor Space

University of Florida
Florida State University
Florida A & M University

Entire System

4. Percent of Total Instructiona:
Space in Temporary Buildings

University of Florida
Florida State University
Florida A & M University

Entire System


All Types
General Teaching Teaching Instruc-
Class- Seminar Labora- Auditor- tional
rooms Rooms stories iums Space


13
5
9

27



588
215
433

1,236




10,410
3,461
6,766

20,637




8.1
4.1
13.5

7.8


0
0
0

0



0
0
0

0
0


0
0
0-

0




0.0
0.0
0.0

0.0


46
1
3

50



937
15
44

996




34,352
447
3,340

38,139




24.4
0.7
4.6

13.8


0
0
0

0



0
0
0

0


0
0
0

0


0.0
0.0
0.0

0.0


59
6
12

77


1,525
230
477

2,232




44,762
3,908
10,106

58,776


15.0
2.4
7.8

9.9


---









TABLE IV


INSTRUCTIONAL LOAD RELATED TO THE NUMBER OF STUDENT STATIONS AND TO THE FLOOR AREA
IN ALL TYPES OF INSTRUCTIONAL SPACE

By Institution

Fall 1958


University
of Florida


Florida
State
University


Florida
A & M
University



Entire System


All Available Space Permanent Space
Student Stations Floor Area Student Stations Floor Area
No. FTE Total No. FTE Total No. Sq. Ft. of. Total 'o. FTE Total No. Sq. Ft. of
Students No. Students Sq. Ft. FTE Students No. Students Sq. Ft. FTE Student


12,585




7,347




2,508



22,440


14,508




8,494




5,171



28,173


1.15




1.16




2.06



1.26


299,392




162,576




129,551



591,519


23.8




22.1




51.7



26.4


12,983




8,264




4,694



25,941


1.03




1.12




1.87



1.16


254,630




158,668




119,445



532,743


-a-I. j


20.2




21.6




47.6



23.7














PART III

THE USE OF INSTRUCTIONAL SPACE


While it is possible to derive one or two figures to express the extent

to which instructional space is used in any given institution, it is

necessary to develop a set of figures if the data are to be very useful.


The figures which are given in the first section of this part, therefore,

must be considered in relation to the other figures which show utilization

for (1) each type of space, (2) each hour of the day, (3) each day of the

week, and (4) rooms of different student capacities.


Data are included to show the relationship between (1) the size of the

class groups which were housed and (2) the capacity of the instructional

rooms to which they were assigned.


Finally, note is taken of the extent to which regularly scheduled class

activities were accommodated in rooms that were not available throughout

the day for such use, and, hence, were not included as instructional space

in this study.


The Over-all Utilization of Instructional Space Table V reports, for

each institution and for the system as a whole, (1) a single figure to

show the extent of the utilization of all types of instructional rooms

and (2) a single figure to show the extent of the utilization of student

stations.








TABLE V


UTILIZATION OF ALL TYPES OF INSTRUCTIONAL SPACE

By Institution

Fall 1958


Room Use Student Station Use

Student- Ave. No. of
Station- Periods
Instit n Room-Periods Ave. No. of No. of Periods Stations
No. of Used During Periods Room Student Used Used
Rooms Week* Used Per Week Stations Per Week** Per Week

University of Florida 369 8,323 22.6 14,508 214,095 14.8


Florida State University 227 4,490 19.8 8,494 112,544 13.2


Florida A & M University 149 2,362 15.8 5,171 47,547 9.2


Entire System 745 15,175 20.3 28,173 374,186 13.3


*The number of room-periods of use shown in this column, when related to the total number of room-periods
available in a 44-period week, shows a rate of utilization of 51.3% at the University of Florida, 45.0'
at the Florida State University, 35.9% at the Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University, and 46.10
for the State University System as a whole.

**The number of student-station-periods of use shown in this column, when related to tae total number of
student-station-periods available in a 44-period week, shows a rate of utilization of 33.5% at the
University of Florida, 30.0% at the Florida State University, 20.9% at the Florida Agricultural and
Mechanical University, and 30.2% for the State University System as a whole.











That table shows that, for the system as a whole, the instructional rooms

were used on the average of 20.3 periods per week. The table also shows

that student stations for all three of the institutions taken together

were used, on the average, 13.3 periods per week.


While these over-all figures are convenient to use, they fail to take into

account the differences among the institutions with respect to the varying

amounts of each of the types of instructional space. They also fail to

indicate some of the bases on which the extent of the utilization attained

can be evaluated.


From Table V-A it can be observed that the number of periods which rooms

were used per weekvaried from 0 to 48. For the system as a whole, nearly

one fourth of the rooms were used not more than 15 periods per week, and

one tenth of the rooms were used more than 30 periods per week.


The wide range in the extent to which the utilization of instructional

space varies among the buildings is apparent in Table V-B. There it can

be seen that utilization ranged from 3.0 to 40.0 periods per week. When

only the buildings with 10 or more instructional rooms are considered, the

range is from 9.0 to 37.8 periods per week.


Utilization by Type of Instructional Space Table VI shows the average

number of periods per week that the rooms and student stations in each

type of instructional space were used.


Inasmuch as the figures show the average number of periods used, it is

unnecessary to make any allowances for the fact that laboratories are

frequently used on a double-period basis whereas general classrooms are

usually used for one period at a time.
12






TABLE V-A

DISTRIBUTION OF INSTRUCTIONAL ROOMS BY THE NUMBER OF PERIODS
USED PER WEEK

All Types of Instructional Space

Fall 1958


*The University of Florida had ten
unused to house class activities.


rooms in temporary


buildings which were


available for use but


**The Florida State University had four rooms in temporary buildings which were available for use but
unused to house class activities.


University Florida State Florida A & M Entire System
No. of of Florida University University
Periods
Per Week No. of Per Cent No. of Per Cent No. of Per Cent No. of Per Cent Cumulative
Rooms of Total Rooms of Total Rooms of Total Rooms of Total Per Cent

46 50 9 2.4 1 0.4 1 0.7 11 1.4 100.0

41 45 10 2.6 6 2.6 2 1.3 18 2.4 98.6

36 40 33 8.8 11 4.8 2 1.3 46 6.0 96.2

31 35 42 11.1 14 6.1 9 6.0 65 8.5 90.2

26 30 54 14.2 27 11.7 7 4.6 88 11.6 81.7

21 25 61 16.1 45 19.5 32 21.2 138 18.1 70.1

16 20 56 14.8 37 16.0 24 15.9 117 15.4 52.0

11 15 38 10.0 40 17.3 23 15.2 101 13.3 36.6

6 10 38 10.0 '31 13.4 22 14.6 91 12.0 23.3

0 5 38 10.0 19 8.2 29 19.2 86 11.3 11.3


379* 100.0 231** 100.0 151 100.0 761 100.0








TABLE V-B


EXTENT OF THE VARIATION IN THE UTILIZATION
OF INSTRUCTIONAL SPACE AMONG BUILDINGS

By Institution


i I Buildings With 10 or !ore
All BuildingsI Instructional Rooms *
Institution Lowest Ave. No. Highest Ave. No. Lowest Ave. No. Highest Ave. No.
of Periods Per of Periods Per of Periods Per of Periods Per
Room Per Week Room Per Week Room Per Week Room Per Week

University
of Florida 3.0 40.0 9.0 37.8

Florida State
University 9.5 30.2 9.5 30.2

Florida A & M
University 5.8 33.0 10.6 26.0


*The following information shows these buildings by institution. The name of each building is given
followed by (1) the number of instructional rooms and (2) the average number of periods those
rooms were used:


University of Florida
McCarty 3
Floyd 1(
Leigh 2E
Physics 1(
Military li
Benton li
Norman 21
Matherly 3!
Temp.Bldg. E 11
Walker 1l
Peabody 2]
Engineering 3"
Anderson 1V


9.0
17.3
20.0
20.2
21.6
23.1
23.3
24.7
27.8
29.2
29.3
32.2
37.8


Florida State University
Geology 12
Home Economics 20
Conradi 16
Science 17
Business 35
Education 27
Bldg. A 16
History 29


9.5
11.5
17.1
17.1
18.6
22.4
24.3
30.2


Florida A & M University
Jones 23
Benneker 10
Perry-Paige 21
Benneker Annex 13
Tucker 34


10.6
12.1
12.3
14.3
26.0









TABLE VI


AVERAGE NUMBER OF PERIODS ROOMS AND STUDENT STATIONS
WERE USED PER WEEK*

By Type of Instructional Space and By Institution

Fall 1958


Room Use Student Station Use
Type of University Florida Florida University Florida Florida
Instructional of State A & M Entire of State A & M Entire
Space Florida University University System Florida University University System

General
Classrooms 25.9 23.8 19.8 24.0 16.0 14.8 11.1 14.6

Seminar
Rooms 15.3 9.0 16.0 13.5 8.3 4.4 2.5 6.7

Teaching
Laboratories 19.2 14.3 11.7 16.1 14.8 10.4 6.4 11.9

Teaching
Auditoriums 20.7 21.5 6.3 17.8 10.9 12.5 2.8 10.5

All Instructional
Space 22.6 19.7 15.8 20.3 14.8 13.2 9.2 13-3



*Percentages of use on a 44-period week can be approximated by dividing each of these averages by 44.












Utilization by Period of the Day The average number of periods per week

that rooms and student stations were used during each period of the day is

shown in Table VII.


From that table it can be observed for the system as a whole that the

heaviest use of rooms was made from ten to eleven o'clock in the morning.

During that period the average room was used for three of the six mornings

of the week.


Similarly, the table shows that for the system as a whole, during the three

periods of highest use, student stations were used on the average of two

periods per week.


In the first section of Table VII-A, the actual number of student-station-

periods of use is shown for each institution and for the system as a whole.


For each institution, the index number of 100 was assigned to the period

of the day in which the heaviest use was made of student stations. An

index number for each of the other periods was derived by expressing the

number of student-station-periods used as a percentage of the number used

during the base (peak) period. The index numbers for each of the institutions

are shown in the second section of Table VII-A.


That table shows, for example, that, for the system as a whole, the load

placed upon the student stations during the period from four to five o'clock

in the afternoon was 27% of that carried during the period in which the

load was the heaviest, i.e., from nine to ten in the morning when student

stations were used on the average of two periods per week.








TABLE VII


AVERAGE NUMBER OF PERIODS ROOMS AND STUDENT STATIONS
WERE USED PER WEEK
By the Hour of the Day and By Institution
All Types of Instructional Space
Fall 1958


Room Use Student Station Use
Hour University Florida Florida University Florida Florida
of the of State A & M Entire of State A & M Entire
Day Florida University University System Florida University University System


-9 AM
- 10
-11

- 12
-1 PM
-2
-3
-4
-5
-6

-7
-8
-9
- 10


1.4
2.9
3.1

3.0
2.5
1.7
2.5
2.1
1.5
0.8

0.1
0.3
0.4
0.3


2.4
3.0
3.1
2.8
1.2
2.0
2.3
1.4
0.7
0.1

0.1
0.3
0.2
0.1


1.8
2.6
2.7
2.4
0.08
0.9
2.4
1.9
0.8
0.0

0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0


1.8
2.8
3.0
2.8
1.6
1.6
2.4
1.9
1.1
0.4

0.1
0.3
0.3
0.2


1.1
2.1
2.1

2.2
1.7
1.2
1.6
1.2
0.7

0.3
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.1


1.8
2.2
2.1

1.9
0.7
1.4
1.5
0.8
0.4

0.02

0.03
0.1
0.1
0.1


1.2
1.7
1.6

1.5
0.02
0.5
1.2
1.0
0.4

0.0

0.1
0.1
0.04
0.0


1.3
2.0
2.0


2.0
1.1
1.1
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.2

0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1


4. 4


*Where class periods
time of beginning.


have not begun exactly on the


hour, the nearest hour


has been shown as the






TABLE VII-A


VARIATION BY PERIOD OF THE DAY IN THE USE OF STUDENT STATIONS
All Types of Instructional Space
Fall 1958


Period of the University of Florida State Florida A & M Entire
Day Florida University University System


Number of Student-Station-
Periods Used Per Week


8
9
10
11
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9


9 AM
10
11
12
1 PM
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10


15,888
30,199
31,000
32,296
2T4,102
17,928
22,867
17,168
10,182
4,912
1,064
2,270
2,346
1,873


15,255
18,168
16,972
15,802
6,175
11,227
12,074
6,715
3,071
154
281
1,237
1,129
473


6,120
8,550
8,085
7,908
112
2,445
6,302
5,081
1,993
0
399
363
189
0


37,263
56,917
56,057
56,006
30,389
31,600
41,243
28,964
15,246
5,066
1,744
3,870
3,664
2,346


2. Index of Use*


9 AM
10
11
12
1 PM
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10


49
94
96
100
75
56
71
53
32
15
3
7


84
100
93
87
34
62
66
37
17
1
2
7
6
3


72
100
95
92
1
29
74
59
23
0
5
4
2
0


65
100
98
98
53
56
72
51
27
9
3
7
6
4


*The index number for each institution for each hour of
the day is the percentage that the number of student-
station-periods used that hour is of the highest number
of student-station-periods used in that institution for
any hour of the day.












Utilization by the Day of the Week Tables VIII and VIII-A show similar

variations in the extent of use of instructional space by the day of the

week.


From Table VIII it can be observed that, for the system as a whole, student

stations were used on the average of three periods each day on Monday and

Wednesday; and from Table VIII-A it can be seen that the student-station-

period use on Thursday was 74% of the load on Monday.


In Figure II a graphic presentation is made of the data that show the average

number of periods that rooms and student stations were used during each day

of the week for each of the institutions.


Utilization by Capacity of the Rooms Table IX shows the average number

of periods per week that rooms of different capacities were used. It can

be observed, for example, that, for the system as a whole, rooms with

accommodations for from 41 to 60 students were used twice as often as were

the rooms with fewer than eleven student stations. Likewise, it will be

noted that student stations in rooms holding from 41 to 50 students were

used almost twice as often as were the stations in rooms which could

accommodate not more than ten students.


The Relationship Between the Size of Classes and the Capacity of the Rooms

to Which They Were Assigned It may have been noted that student stations

were used less frequently on the average than were the rooms.


Table X shows the extent to which all of the student stations were occupied

during the period in which the rooms were assigned. It may be observed

there that, at the University of Florida, during the periods in which the









TABLE VIII


AVERAGE NUMBER OF PERIODS ROOMS AND STUDENT STATIONS
USED EACH DAY OF THE WEEK

All Types of Instructional Space

Fall 1958


Room Use Student Station Use

Day of the Week University Florida Florida University Florida Florida
of State A & M Entire of State A & M Entire
Florida University University System Florida University University System

Monday 5.2 4.4 3.1 4.5 3.5 3.0 1.9 3.0


Tuesday 4.2 3.7 3.0 3.8 2.8 2.3 1.7 2.5


Wednesday 5.1 4.3 3.1 4.4 3-3 3.0 1.8 3.0


Thursday 3.8 3.6 2.8 3.5 2.4 2.3 1.6 2.2


Friday 4.1 3.6 2.8 3.7 2.7 2.6 1.6 2.4


Saturday Morning 0.1 0.1 1.0 0.3 0.03 0.02 0.6 0.1








TABLE VIII-A


VARIATION BY DAY OF THE WEEK IN THE USE OF STUDENT STATIONS
All Types of Instructional Space
Fall 1958


Day of the University of Florida State Florida A & M Entire
Week Florida University University System

1. Number of Student-Station-
Periods Used Per Week

Monday 50,580 24,511 9,749 84,840

Tuesday 40,751 19,370 8,725 68,846

Wednesday 48,599 24,596 9,393 82,588

Thursday 35,009 18,995 8,400 62,404

Friday 38,670 21,077 8,411 68,158

Saturday 486 184 2,869 3,539




2. Index of Use*

Monday 100 100 100 100

Tuesday 81 79 89 81

Wednesday 96 100 96 97

Thursday 69 77 86 74

Friday 76 86 86 80

Saturday 1 1 29 4


*The index number for each institution for each day of
the week is the percentage that the number of student-
station-periods used that day is of the highest number
of student-station-periods used in that institution for
any day of the week.









Figure II

AVERAGE NUMBER OF PERIODS RCOMS AND STUDENT STATIONS
WERE USED PER DAY

All Types of Space

Fall 1958


University of
Florida


IT W TF S

Days of the Week


Florida State
University


TW TF S


Florida A & M
University


3

2 ...... ..... ................
2

1...

0 TW
M T W T F S


Rooms


................... Student Stations


Entire
System


Hours

of
ro
the

Day







TABLE IX
AVERAGE NUMBER OF PERIODS ROOMS AND STUDENT STATIONS
WERE USED PER WEEK
By the Capacity of the Rooms and By Institution
All Types of Instructional Space
Fall 1958


University Florida State Florida A & M
of Florida University University Entire System
Student Student Student Student
Room Station Room Station Room Station Room Station

1-10 12.5 8.8 4.0 4.1 13.8 15.2 12.7 11.8

11-20 16.8 12.4 12.2 9.6 11.1 7.0 14.2 10.5

21-30 21.2 14.5 19.3 13.6 13.6 8.0 19.5 13.3

31-40 26.4 16.7 20.7 13.3 18.9 11.3 22.7 14.4

41-50 26.3 17.0 23.7 13.3 18.6 10.7 24.4 15.0

51-60 26.6 15.0 28.1 17.8 18.7 9.8 25.6 14.8

61-80 31-3 18.0 27.4 12.8 25.2 11.0 24.8 14.2

81-100 16.5 7.4 30.0 12.1 4.0 1.9 18.6 8.0

101-150 19.3 9.3 25.0 20.0 17.4 5.0 18.8 8.2

151-250 14.0 8.2 18.5 10.7 23.0 13.1 24.5 10.5

250 + 28.7 13.5 13.0 22.4 13.5

All 22.6 14.8 19.7 13.2 15.8 9.2 20.3 13.3









TABLE X


PERCENTAGE OF STUDENT STATIONS ACTUALLY USED
DURING PERIODS i XCj ,S ERE ASSIGNED

By Tiype or' Instriuccional Space ar: Ly institution

Fall 1958


General Teaching Teaching All Types
anstruc-
Class- Seminar Labora- Auditor- istruc-
rooms Rooms stories ium tonal
Space


University of Florida 62% 54% 77% 53% 65%


Florida State University 60 52 69 60 62


Florida A & M University 51 16 59 43 52



Entire System 61 51 73 54 62











rooms were in use an average of 65% of the stations were occupied. Similar

data by type of instructional space are shown for each of the institutions.


Closely related data are shown in Table XI which reports, for the system as

a whole, the relationship between (1) the number of class meetings* per week

for each size of class group and (2) the capacity of the rooms in which the

classes met.


The figure 619 which has been underscored in the table reports the fact

that this number of class meetings with groups of from 11 to 20 students

met in rooms ranging in capacity from 41 to 50 students. The figures in

the column above and below the figure 619 show the number of meetings of

groups of from 11 to 20 students which met in each of the other categories

of rooms.


Figures which appear in Table XI below and to the left of the heavy diagonal

line show the number of meetings in rooms in which the capacity of the rooms

exceeded the enrollment.


Figures in the cells immediately above and to the right of the heavy

diagonal line show the number of class meetings held in rooms in which the

capacity approximated the enrollment. The other figures to the right and

above the heavy diagonal line show meetings in which the rooms had too few

accommodations for the number of students enrolled.


Table XII shows these same relationships in still another way. It is shown,

for example, that, for the system as a whole, 17.4% of the class meetings*



*Here a class meeting is considered to be of one period's duration.





TABLE XI
University of Florida
CLASS SIZE IN RELATION TO ROCM CAPACITY
All Types of Instructional Space
Fall 1958
ik-- nP mnt )t ^ T.T^I i -Cumu-


Room
Capacity




1 to 10

11 to 20


21 to 30



31 to 40


41 to 50


51 to 60


61 to 80


1 11 21
to to to


--- *--- ---- *

333 41 20

764 1216 114 151



645 11261i 1452 521



509 918 167C 878j


619


116


81 to 1o 41 11

101 to 150 47 20

151 to 200

201 to25Q

251- Ove 51


um Cl i dss tio engsPer ee
For Classes of Each Group


50








81


841 108 3721




152 295 117


13 99 65
137199: 65~


2 25 22
---------..
22 37! 44

3 1


7


51 61 81 l01
to to to to
60 80 loo 150
-. -.15... 0...., .

.......... ...... ... ... ..


151 :201
to to


200


251
anil '


250 Over


1 t t


93 16 31


49 56

151 15 9!

11 19 '4

6 1'


Total


Per-
cent-
age


lativ

Per-
cent-
age


394; 2.6 .2.6

2109i 14.0 16.6



3286 21.8; 38.4
____ ___ j __


4084


3206


- 27.1


21.31


4 4 44-


-+t-----.----44-


33* 12

36 |


15 3 3 3?

9 4 8 56
Si 'I '*


13d


65.5



86.8


92.4


95.8

96.7


287 1.9 98.6

51 0.3 98.9

45 0.31 99.2

116 0.8 100.0


- .4 -i22i-j 1 _____- ______ -,- ______________________


Total 2614 4162

Percent 17.4 27.6

Cum. Per
cent. 17.4 45.0


4447 2491


228


59 15,055


t- -1- --- I. 4- 4 -I ___ I J ____


29.5 16.5 4.8


74. 91.0o 95.8


1.5


97.3


0.9


98.2


0.5 0.6


98.799.3


0.2


o.4


+ 4 4


99.5 P9.6


o00o.o


-- --- 1 4 4


-I-- -' '~ "


3 3 15'

5 9 2


i I I I '


I I


1 41
-n t .n


i1


844







TABLE XII
RELATION OF CLASS SIZE TO CAPACITY OF ROOMS USED

All Types of Instructional Space
Fall 1958


University of Florida State Florida A & M
Size of Florida University University Entire System
Class & % of Class % of Room of Class ofClass Room ooom of Class % of Room
Capacity Period Periods Period Periods Period Periods Period Periods
of Rooms Meetings Used (By Meetings Used (By Meetings Used (By Meetings Used (By
(By Size Room (By Size Room (By Size Room (By Sizt. Room
of Class) Capacity) of Class) Capacity) of Class) Capacity) of Class) Capacity)

1-10 13.7 1.6 15.2 0.2 34.2 10.4 17.4 2.6

11-20 31.0 14.9 24.1 12.1 22.5 14.9 27.6 14.0

21-30 28.9 24.7 35.2 20.4 21.4 14.2 29.5 21.8

31-40 17.6 23.8 17.0 33.3 12.0 27.7 16.5 27.1

41-50 4.8 23.1 4.8 21.8 4.7 14.0 4.8 21.3

51-60 1.5 5.8 1.6 5.8 1.4 4.7 1.5 5.6

61-80 1.1 2.6 0.6 3.2 1.0 6.3 0.9 3.4

81-0oo 0.5 0.8 0.4 1.4 0.5 0.2 0.5 0.9

101-150 0.4 1.6 0.6 0.6 1.2 5.3 o.6 0.3

151-200 0.1 0 0.3 0.2 0 1.2 0.1 0.3

201-250 0.1 0.2 0.1 1.1 0 0 0.1 0.3
250 0.3 1.0 0.1 0 1.1 1.1 0.4 0.8
250+ j 0.3 1.0 0.3 0 0.i \ i.i 0.4 0.8











were of groups not in excess of 10 students; but only 2.6% of all of the

meetings were held in rooms with 10 or fewer students.


It can be determined from the data shown in Table XII that 74.5% of all

of the class meetings were held with fewer than 31 students enrolled; and

only 38.4% of all of the class meetings were held in rooms which did not

exceed 31 student stations.


Extent to Which Instruction Was Carried On In Rooms Not Regularly Available

for Class Activities The limited extent to which rooms that were not

regularly available to house class activities, e.g., faculty offices and

teaching laboratories, were used for that purpose is shown in Table XIII.

That table also shows the extent to which instruction was given without

the use of any rooms to house organized class activities.









TABLE XIII


EXTENT TO WHICH INSTRUCTION WAS CARRIED ON
IN ROCMS NOT REGULARLY AVAILABLE FOR
CLASS ACTIVITIES


Student Semester Hours of
Student-Station- Student-Station-Periods in Credit Earned Without Regular
Periods in Rooms Rooms Not Regularly Available Class Meetings
Which Were Regu- % of Student-
larly Available % of Number in Station-Periods
for Classes Rooms Regularly in Rooms Regu-
Number Available Number larly Available


University of
Florida 214,095 1,835 0.9 3,696 1.7


Florida State
University 108,734 985 0.9 2,025 1.9


Florida A & M
University 47,547 52 0.1 12 0.03



Entire System 390,376 2,890 0.7 5,733 1.5








PART IV
INTERPRETATION OF THE DATA


Section III has been devoted to the reporting of data which show (1) the

magnitude of the regularly scheduled class activities which were carried

on (in terms of the number of room-periods and student-station-periods used.)

and (2) the average number of periods that instructional rooms and student

stations were used to house those activities.


In Section IV, some bases for the interpretation of the data showing the

extent to which rooms and student stations were used during the fall term

1958 will be suggested.


Comparison With Earlier Year Under the auspices of the Council for the

Study of Higher Education in Florida, the State Universities developed space

utilization data for fall semester 1953. While slightly different techniques

were used to develop those data, they are, in general, comparable to those

which were reported in Part III for fall semester 1958.


TABLE XIV
COMPARISON OF THE RATE OF UTILIZATION OF ROOMS AND STUDENT STATIONS
FALL 1953 Fall 1958

All Types of Instructional Space

Ave. No. of Periods Ave. No. of Periods Student
Rooms Used Per Week Stations Used Per Week

University of Florida
Fall 1953 25.4 14.1
Fall 1958 22.6 14.8
Florida State University
Fall 1953 25.0 15.9
Fall 1958 19.8 13.2
Florida A & M University
Fall 1953 25.7 16.5
Fall 1958 15.8 9.2
Entire System
Fall 1953 25.3 14.9
Fall 1958 20.3 13.3











The differences between the data for the fall semester 1953 and the fall

semester 1958 are sufficiently great as to indicate that a higher rate of

utilization of instructional rooms obtained in every case in the earlier

year throughout the system. While there appears to have been some decrease

in the rate of utilization of student stations at the Florida State Uni-

versity and the Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University, the student

station utilization rate at the University of Florida appears to have

increased slightly.


In general, it appears that instructional space as herein defined was not

used as intensively fall semester 1958 as it was in the fall of 1953.


Comparisons With Other Institutions There are no established norms for

space utilization in institutions of higher learning at the present time.

Data which are being developed in colleges and universities across the

nation at the present time should permit the building of normative data

which will be useful for comparative purposes.


Russell and Doi, however, have summarized some space utilization data that

are thought to be satisfactory for the roughest kind of comparisons. Their

data were developed in the early nineteen fifties in more than 90 insti-

tutions across the country, and they are thought to be indicative of the

general level of utilization which was being made of instructional space

at that time.


Figure III shows the Russell and Doi data for room utilization of space of

all types. The vertical line is used to show the range of the average

number of times per week that instructional rooms were used. Percentile









Figure III

A COMPARISON OF ROOM-PERIOD UTILIZATION IN FLORIDA
UNIVERSITIES WITH THAT OF 90 OTHER INSTITUTIONS*

All Instructional Rooms
Fall 1958


Percentile
Rank


Ave. No. Periods Rooms
Used Per Week


99 -r- 36.0


90-


- 25.5


80 23.5
U.F. 22.6 Periods/wk


70 + 21.5


60 20.4 Entire System 20.3 Periods/wk

<-F.S.U. 19.8 Periods/wk


50 -- 19.4


40- 17.8


30-- 16.8


-- -----F.A.M.U. 15.8 Periods/wk
15.5


10+ 12.5


6.0


*Russell and Doi, Manual for Studies of Space Utilization in Colleges and
Universities, 1957, P. 97.











ranks are shown for each of the averages given, and they are to be inter-

preted as follows: 99% of the institutions used their instructional rooms

on an average of fewer than 36.0 periods per week; in 50% of the institutions,

rooms were used for an average of fewer than 19.4 periods per week; and in

only 1 per cent of the institutions were rooms used, on an average, fewer

than 6.0 periods per week.


Horizontal arrows indicate the average number of periods that all types of

instructional rooms in the Florida institutions were used.


It can be observed that, except for the Florida Agricultural and Mechanical

University, the arrows indicating the 1958 figures for Florida institutions

are above the 50th percentile of the 90 institutions.


The average number of periods that student stations were used per week are

shown in Figure IV. In the first section of that figure, data are shown

for student stations in general classrooms, and in the other section, data

are reported for student stations in teaching laboratories. This figure

has been constructed in the same way in which Figure III was developed.


From Figure IV it can be observed that data for student stations in general

classrooms for all of the Florida institutions fell at or above the 50th

percentile point. On that measure the University of Florida and the

Florida State University were above the 75th percentile of the 90

institutions.


Figure IV also shows that the extent to which student stations in teaching

laboratories were used in the Florida institutions ranks those institutions

a little lower than was true for the use of stations in the general classrooms.

33










Figure IV


A COMPARISON OF AVERAGE NUMBER OF PERIODS PER WEEK THAT STUDENT STATIONS WERE
USED IN FLORIDA INSTITUTIONS WITH UTILIZATION IN 84 OTHER INSTITUTIONS*

Fall 1958


General Classrooms


Teaching Laboratories


Percentile
Rank
99

90 -


Ave. No. of Periods
Student Stations Used
Per Week
25.0


17.8


70 13.5

60 12.1


--U.F.-16.0 Periods/wk

-F.S.U.-14.8 Periods/wk
.Entire System-14.6 Period


Percentile
Rank
99-

90-

80-
s/wk


Ave. No. of Periods
Student Stations Used
Per Week
- 36.0

19.3

- 16.2
.-------- U.F.- 14.8 Periods/wk


70 t 13.9


50+ 11.1--- FAMU 11.1 Periods/wk


40o- 9.8

30 -- 9.0

20- 8.5


60 12.0

50 10.9


40-

30-

20-

10-


6.6

3.0


1-


Entire System- 11.9 Periods/wk
F.S.U.- 10.4 Periods/wk


9.8

8.2

6.4--- FAMU 6.4 Periods/wk

4.2

1.0


*Russell and Doi, p. 99.











In general, it may be concluded from the data shown in Figures III and IV

that the Florida institutions compare very favorably with the 90 institutions

with respect to the extent to which use was made of instructional space.


The Outlook in Space Utilization While there are differing points of

view concerning the level of utilization of instructional rooms that is

considered to be optimum, it is now more generally recognized that colleges

and universities will have to find ways of making fuller use of instructional

space than has been common up to this point.


It is being seen that enrollment increases will undoubtedly outdistance

our successful efforts to provide additional building space for instructional

programs. Furthermore, it is being observed that the level to which faculty

salaries must be advanced if colleges and universities are to be properly

staffed requires that no more resources be invested in the construction,

operation, and maintenance of the physical plant than is required for the

adequate housing of the programs to be provided.


Institutions of higher learning across the nation are now seeking ways in

which to make more effective use of all of their resources, including the

physical plants. In Florida, where the enrollments are increasing even more

rapidly than is generally true throughout the nation, and where faculty

salaries need to be advanced to a level which will make them more nearly

competitive on the national market for faculty talent, it is especially

important that the faculties and the administration of each institution

demonstrate the ingenuity and the self-discipline necessary to achieve a

significantly higher rate of utilization of the instructional space

available.









Possible Approaches to the Increased Utilization of Instructional Space -


The intensive studies of the use of instructional space in the institutions

of the State University System which have been summarized in the preceding

parts of this report suggest several approaches to the attainment of fuller

utilization of that space. While these approaches will undoubtedly have

occurred to the careful reader of the tables shown in Part III, they will

be enumerated here, and some indication of the extent to which each of them

might be useful will be given.


1. The load on the instructional facilities should be extended more

uniformly over the hours of the day.


The Findings It has been shown in Table VII that the use of in-

structional facilities was concentrated during a few hours in the

morning; that it decreased during the afternoon; and that it was

almost negligible during the evening hours. It was observed that

student stations, during each of the periods of heaviest use, were

occupied on the average of two days a week; and it was also observed

that the utilization of student stations during the period from four

to five o'clock in the afternoon was approximately one-fourth of the

utilization during the peak morning hours.


The Observation Assuming that the utilization of instructional

space during the period of fullest use was not restrictive of the

educational program, it would appear to be entirely reasonable to

expect the extension of the instructional load carried in 1958

during the peak periods more uniformly throughout the day.


If the number of student-station-periods used throughout the entire









system during the period from nine to ten o'clock in the morning

(56,917) were to be maintained for each of seven periods, and if

15% of the load for those seven periods were to be carried after

four o'clock in the afternoon, the total number of student-station-

periods per week would be increased from the 370,375 actually used

to 458,181.* This increase of 23.7% would represent the use made of

instructional space by 5,165 full-time-equivalent students.**


Without making any contention that the institutions should be ex-

pected to spread their instructional load over the hours of the day

in the exact pattern used in this illustration, it is concluded that

it is reasonable to judge the needs for additional instructional

space of each type in terms of the capacity of existing facilities

if used more uniformly throughout the hours of the day.


2. The load on instructional facilities should be extended more

uniformly over the days of the week.


The Findings It has been shown in Table VIII that the use of in-

structional facilities was unevenly distributed throughout the days of

the week. It was observed that, for the system as a whole, the use

varied from Monday, on which day student stations were used on the

average of 3.0 periods to Saturday when the use was almost negligible.



*The calculations on which this was based are shown below:
7 Periods Before 4:00 p.m. 338,439 91.4% 56,917 x 7 = 398,419
After 4:00 p.m. 31,936 8.6% Plus 15% 59,762
370,375 458,181
**Assuming that a full-time-equivalent student occupies an average
of 17 student-station-periods per week.










The Observation Assuming that the utilization of instructional space

on the day of fullest attained use was not restrictive, and assuming

further that neither (1) special instructional activities such as

military drill and instruction nor (2) other activities in which large

groups of students need to engage must of necessity preclude the fuller

utilization of instructional space on any one or more days of the week,

it would appear to be reasonable to expect that the instructional load

carried on the peak day in 1958 could be extended more evenly through-

out the day.


If the number of student-station-periods used throughout the entire

system on Monday (84,840) were to be used on each of the other days

through Friday, and if one-fourth of that daily load were to be

carried on Saturday morning, the total number of student-station-

periods per week would be increased from the 370,375 actually used

to 445,410.* This increase of 20.3% would represent the use made of

instructional facilities by 4,388 full-time-equivalent students.


Without claiming that the distribution of the instructional load

used in this illustration is an exact pattern which should be followed,

it is concluded that the total capacity of the instructional rooms

existing at any one time should be appraised in the light of a more

uniform distribution of the instructional load throughout the week.



*The calculations on which this was based are shown below:

84,800 x 5 424,200
( of 84,840 21,210
445,410









3. The load on instructional facilities might very well be extended

more uniformly among the several buildings on the campus.


The Findings It has been shown in Table V-B that instructional

rooms were in use,on the average, during four times as many periods

in the most fully utilized building as they were in the buildings

with the lowest average room-periods of use per week.


The Observation While there are many factors which influence the

extent to which rooms in any building will be used, it is not un-

reasonable to consider the possible use that might have been made of

each type of instructional facility in a building if each type had

been used to the extent that the same type was actually used elsewhere

on the same campus.


At the University of Florida, McCarty Hall was the building in which

the instructional rooms were used for a smaller average number of

periods (9.0) than was true for any other major building on that

campus. If each type of instructional space in that building had been

used at a rate attained for the respective types of space across the

entire campus, McCarty Hall could have accommodated 1,050 full-time-

equivalent students rather than the 293 that it did serve. Further-

more, if each type of space in McCarty Hall had been used to the

extent actually attained in the most fully utilized buildings on the

campus (Anderson and Leigh), McCarty Hall could have served 1,500

full-time-equivalent students. Hence, that particular building might

very well have served from 3 to 5 times as many students as it did

without exceeding the rates actually attained on the campus of the

University of Florida.













At the Florida State University, the building with the least used

instructional rooms (the Geology Building) could have served almost

twice as many students (514 rather than the 262 full-time-equivalent

students actually served) if each type of room in that building had

been utilized to the extent that similar facilities were used in

Conradi and the History building on that same campus. The number

of full-time-equivalent students served in the Home Economics Build-

ing could have been increased by two-thirds (from 353 to 586) if

similar conditions could have prevailed in that building.


At the Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University, the rooms in

Jones Hall were used, on the average, a smaller number (10.6) of

periods per week than were the rooms in any other major building on

that campus. Had each type of instructional room in Jones Hall been

used at the respective rate attained in Tucker Hall, the number of

students served could have increased by 75% (from 424 to 745).


While it would be unwise to assume that each type of instructional

room will be used to the same extent in every building across the

campus, there are ways in which the extreme variations among the

buildings can be reduced. It is concluded that it is necessary to

take space in each and every usable building into account at a

reasonable rate of use when the total capacity of instructional rooms

is being determined.











4. The load on instructional facilities might be extended more uni-

formly throughout the year.


While this study of the use of instructional space was limited to the

first semester, other data can be used to indicate the extent to which

the instructional load has been distributed uniformly throughout the

entire year, including the summer session.


Table XIV shows that, for the system as a whole, during the last three

years the instructional loads carried during the second semester and

the summer sessions were 92.2% and 20.7% respectively of the in-

structional load which was housed during the first semester.


If three full semesters had been operated during each of the three

years, and if as many students had registered during both the second

semester and the summer session as registered for the first semester,

the instructional load would have been 40.9% higher than that which

actually materialized.*


While the success of a plan to provide a full academic program through-

out the entire calendar year depends upon many factors, it appears

that the implications of such a plan for the fuller utilization of the

physical plant warrant a careful study to determine when and under

what conditions it might be successful in the State University System

of Florida.



*This figure was calculated as follows: The product of 3 X 942,329
(2,826,987) student semester hours is 40.9% larger than the actual
total for three terms (2,005,718 student semester hours of credit).







TABLE XIV-A

TOTAL NUMBER OF STUDENT SEMESTER HOURS OF INSTRUCTION PRODUCED
DURING THE FIRST SEMESTER, SECOND SEMESTER, SUMMER SESSION
FOR THE YEARS 1956-57 THROUGH 1958-59

By Institution


First Semester Second Semester Summer Session
% of First Semester % of First Semester


University of Florida 520,127 473,874 91.1 88,085 16.9


Florida State University 311,764 293,335 94.1 62,193 19.9


Florida A & M University 110,438 101,412 91.8 44,490 40.3



Entire System 942,329 868,621 92.2 194,768 20.7









5. The size of class groups can be more nearly matched to the number

of accommodations in the instructional rooms to which they are assigned.


The Findings It has been shown in Table X that an average of 624

of the student stations were occupied during the periods that in-

structional rooms were in use.


The Observations Russell and Doi have reported information for 81

institutions which indicate that more than one-half of the institu-

tions from which similar data were available did less well than the

Florida universities in filling their instructional rooms to capacity

during the periods that they were in use.*


However, some of the institutions appeared to have been more successful

than were the Florida institutions; and there are significant advantages

to be gained from the more careful matching of the size of classes to

the size of rooms.


Table XV shows the number of student-station-periods that would have

been possible for the system as a whole if each of the percentages

showing the extent to which the rooms were filled had been attained.

If the student stations could have been filled to the percentages

shown, the increases in capacity would have been possible without

increasing the number of hours that the rooms were in use.


It is concluded in the management of existing space and in the planning




*Russell and Doi, Manual for Studies of Space Utilization in Colleges
and Universities, Page 100, report 53.37 and 63.0% for general class-
rooms and teaching laboratories respectively as the median for 81
and 79 institutions respectively.











TABLE XV


VARIATIONS IN THE STUDENT CAPACITY OF ALL INSTRUCTIONAL ROOMS
AVAILABLE IN THE STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM, FALL 1958, ASSOCIATED
WITH EACH OF SEVERAL PERCENTAGES OF STUDENT STATIONS OCCUPIED
WHEN ROOMS ARE IN USE



Percentage of Student Increased Capacity in
Stations Occupied When No. of Student-Station- Full-Time Equivalent
Rooms Are in Use Periods Accommodated Students*

62** 370,377**

65 385,700 901

70 415,350 2,645

75 445,050 4,393

80 474,700 6,137

90 534,050 9,628


*Assuming that a full-time-equivalent student requires
17 student-station-periods per week.

**Actually attained in system as a whole first semester
1958.









of additional instructional space, careful attention should be given

to the matter of matching class size to room size.


6. The academic program can be so administered as to (a) eliminate

unnecessary duplicate and repeat sections of courses which are

essential to serve the purposes of the institutions and (b) reduce

the number of courses that are not necessary to accomplish those

purposes.


Unnecessary Duplicate and Repeat Sections Ineffective use of

both teaching personnel and instructional space results when more

sections are given in any course than are actually required to

accommodate the total number of students enrolled in that course.


For the year 1953-54, the Council for the Study of Higher Education

in Florida reported that, among the three State universities, from

2 to 140 of the student semester hours of instruction was given in

small duplicate sections, i.e., in sections during one semester

that would not have been required if the average size of sections

in courses with multiple sections had been 25 students.


The Council reported also that, in the same institutions from 0.5

to 5% of the student semester hours of instruction was given in small

repeat sections, i.e., in sections during the two semesters that

would not have been required if courses were to be offered only once

during the academic year except when the total enrollment exceeded

20 students.


While there are no current data to show conditions which now prevail

with respect to small duplicate and repeat sections, it is clear










that the giving of unneeded sections places an unnecessary load on

instructional space.


Unnecessary Course Offerings No data are now available for the

State University System of Florida to indicate the number of courses,

among the total offerings of the institutions, which could be elimi-

nated without sacrifice to the effectiveness with which the institutions

meet their objectives. As new courses are developed to meet new and

changing needs, other courses may become obsolete. Still other

courses may have come into being without succeeding to attract many

students or to fill any necessary place in established instructional

programs.


It is generally agreed that there is a certain amount of "deadwood"

among the course offerings in most institutions, although there may

be difficulty in making positive identification of it.


To the extent that there are such courses which are given from time

to time, such "deadwood" places an unnecessary load on instructional

space.


While it is not possible with the data at hand to appraise the ex-

tent of the load that may have come from unnecessary duplicate and

repeat sections and from the giving of unnecessary courses, it is

clear that the careful management of this aspect of the instructional

program permits more effective use of instructional space as well as

of teaching personnel.


While the data which have been developed in this study do not provide a

ready answer as to the extent to which instructional rooms ought to be

46









used, they have suggested ways in which increased use will undoubtedly be

attained in the future as the State University System undertakes to provide

high quality services to rapidly growing numbers of students.


The Need for Additional Space in Instructional Rooms by 1970 The best

information that is currently available indicates that 158,000 students

will be enrolled in colleges and universities in Florida during the fall

semester in 1970, and it has been judged that 63,200 of these students

will be enrolled in the institutions which will then comprise the State

University System.


To provide a basis for projecting the amount of space in instructional

rooms that will be needed in the State University System by 1970, it has

been assumed that (1) accommodations in instructional rooms will be needed

for 63,200 full-time-equivalent students, (2) the amount per student

station of floor area in instructional rooms will be 21.0 square feet

(the amount found to be available in 1958), (3) each full-time-equivalent

student will continue to require the use of 17 student-station-periods

per week, and (4) the 77 rooms that were found in 1958 to be in temporary

buildings will be replaced with space in permanent structures.


On the basis of these assumptions the amount of space in instructional

rooms that will be required in 1970 has been calculated for each of several

rates of use. The results of these calculations are reported in Table XVI.


The first line of Table XVI shows the projection of space on the basis of

the rate of use of student stations that was found in 1958, i.e., an

average of 13.3 periods per week. Reading from left to right across the

first line, it can be observed that, with this rate of use, there would

47








TABLE XVI


AMOUNT OF FLOOR SPACE IN INSTRUCTIONAL ROOMS THAT WOULD
BE REQUIRED IN THE STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM FOR
63,200 FULL-TIME-EQUIVALENT STUDENTS AT EACH
OF SEVERAL DESIGNATED LEVELS OF UTILIZATION


Requirements for 63,200 FTE Students in 1970

No. Sq. Ft.
Ave. No. of No. of Stu- of Space in No. Sq. Ft. No. of add'l
Periods Stu- dent Stations Instructional No. of Floor Space No. of In- Instructional
dent Stations Per FTE Rooms Per FTE Student in Instruc- structional Rooms above
Used Per Wk Student Student Stations tional Rms* Rooms** 1958***

13.3**** 1.26 26.4 80,782 1,696,422 2,137 1,469
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

15.0 1.13 23.73 71,627 1,504,167 1,894 1,226

17.0 1.00 21.00 63,200 1,327,200 1,672 1,004

20.0 0.85 17.85 53,720 1,128,120 1,421 753

22.5 0.76 15.76 47,751 1,002,771 1,263 595

25.0 0.68 14.28 42,976 902,496 1,137 469


30.0 0.57 11.97 35,813 752,073 947 279

34.0 0.50 10.50 31,600 663,600 836 168

*Based on the 1958 average of 21.0 square feet of floor space in instructional rooms per
student station.
**Based on the 1958 average of 794 square feet per room.
***Includes replacements for 77 temporary rooms now in use.
****The top line is based on the rate of use attained in 1958 for the system as a whole.










continue to be 1.26 student stations using 26.4 square feet of floor area

in instructional rooms for each full-time-equivalent student. Continuing

across the first line, the table shows that, for 63,200 full-time-equivalent

students, 80,782 student stations using 1,696,422 square feet of floor

area in instructional rooms would be required. In the last two columns,

the first line shows (1) that this floor area could be represented by

2,137 rooms of the average size found in 1958 and (2) that 1,469 of these

rooms would be in addition to the 668 rooms that were found in permanent

buildings in that same year.


Each of the other lines in Table XVI shows similar data for the indicated

rates of use which are given in the left-hand column. The extent to which

the higher rates of use would decrease the number of additional rooms

needed to accommodate a total of 63,200 full-time-equivalent students can

be determined from the right-hand column.


For the use of student stations at the rate of 17.0 periods per week, it

can be observed that one student station would be required for each full-

time-equivalent student; thus, it would be theoretically possible to

"station" the entire student body during any one period. Similarly, the

bottom line, with the most extreme rate for which calculations were made,

i.e., the average use of student stations during 34.0 periods per week,

shows the theoretical need for one student station for every two full-time-

equivalent students.


Since, during a five and one half day week, students need to occupy stations

3.1 periods per day, these statistics might lead to the conclusion that the

use of student stations on the average of 34.0 periods per week would be

possible. While there is no known evidence to demonstrate that this could

49










not be done, present practices make it clear that severe difficulties would

be encountered if institutions were to be required to operate at that level

in the immediate future.


In the years between now and 1970, it is more reasonable to expect that

the rate at which student stations are used in the State University System

of Florida will move into the middle range shown in Table XVI, i.e., from

15.0 to 25.0 periods per week. Even this will require adjustments in the

administration of the instructional programs that will vary from minor to

major proportions depending upon the extent to which the rate of utilization

approaches the higher of the two figures.


Even so, it should be possible to achieve a significantly higher rate of

utilization without impairing the quality of instructional services. Further-

more, if at least a portion of the economies that could be thus effected

were to be dedicated to the support of more adequate faculty salaries, ad-

vances in the rate of use of instructional space might very well constitute

a step in the qualitative improvements of instructional services.


Limitations The calculations given in the preceding section are subject

to certain limitations which should be expressed.


In the first place, only a small portion of the total amount of space that

will be required for 63,200 full-time-equivalent students is involved in

those calculations.

It does not include any residential space, i.e., space for student
housing, food services, health services, and other student services.

It does not include any space to house the research and service
activities in which universities engage.

It does not include space to house administrative services and
plant and grounds operations.










It does not include library space (except as instructional rooms
may be located in library buildings).

It does not include gymnasiums, auditoriums other than teaching
auditoriums, indoor physical education facilities, or music
practice rooms.

It does not include all of the space that is necessary to house
the total of the instructional services. It does not include
offices for the teaching faculty, nor does it include area in
instructional buildings for halls and service facilities.

It does include only that space which is in rooms which were regularly

available throughout the days of the week to house scheduled class activi-

ties, viz., general classrooms, seminar rooms, teaching laboratories, and

teaching auditoriums.


The functional inventories of all physical plant space which are currently

underway will provide a basis on which to determine the percentage of the

total space that falls within the consideration of this report. It is

noted, however, that, even in buildings which are devoted almost entirely

to instruction, only from one third to one half of the total net floor

area is included in instructional rooms of the type considered in this

report.


Secondly, the calculations were devised for the system as a whole. This

means that careful planning will be necessary if additional instructional

space is to be developed where and in such a way that it can be fully

utilized.


Thirdly, there is no good reason to believe that the instructional pro-

grams will always be organized in such a way as to require 17.0 student-

station-periods per week. As a matter of fact, the reported consideration

by the faculty of one of the universities of a plan under which a com-

bination of directed independent study and attendance in a seminar during

51










two periods per week to earn three hours of credit would make a significant

contribution to the reduction of the amount of space required per full-

time-equivalent student. The extent to which open circuit telecasts will

influence this figure will depend in part on the way in which students

are grouped for instruction given with that media. Any marked change in

the number of student-station-periods required per full-time-equivalent

student would modify the calculations shown in the preceding section.


Fourthly, the calculations have to be interpreted without the benefit of

objective evidence concerning the relationship between the rate of use of

instructional facilities and the quality of instructional programs. While

there is no evidence to demonstrate that the higher rates of utilization

which were suggested would impair quality of instructional services,

neither is there adequate evidence to determine just how much higher the

rate can go without jeopardizing the quality of instruction.