|
![]() |
|
| UFDC Home |
myUFDC Home | Help | RSS
|
|

HIDE
| Front Cover | |
| Title Page | |
| The board of control | |
| Letter of transmittal | |
| Table of Contents | |
| List of Tables | |
| List of Illustrations | |
| The scope of the study | |
| The available instructional... | |
| The use of instructional space | |
| Interpretation of the data | |
| Rates of utilization and instructional... | |
| Conclusion |
ALL VOLUMES
CITATION
SEARCH
THUMBNAILS
PAGE IMAGE
ZOOMABLE
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Full Citation | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
STANDARD VIEW
MARC VIEW
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Table of Contents | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Front Cover
Front Cover Title Page Page i The board of control Page ii Letter of transmittal Page iii Table of Contents Page iv List of Tables Page v Page vi Page vii List of Illustrations Page viii The scope of the study Page 1 Page 2 The available instructional space Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 The use of instructional space 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 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Interpretation of the data 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 Page 53 Page 54 Rates of utilization and instructional space needs Page 55 Page 56 Page 57 Page 58 Page 59 Page 60 Page 61 Conclusion Page 62 Page 63 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Full Text | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
e 37a:2 UT- LJ ATi JO OF J]ST -RUC ]JOi\AL IN THE erjI W-~AWS State u university S system F7L THE BOARD OF TALLAHASSEE CONTROL FLORIDA THE THE BOARD OF CONTROL J. J. DANIEL Chairman Jacksonville JAMES J. LOVE Quincy RALPH L. MILLER Orlando S. KENDRICK GUERNSEY Jacksonville FRANK M. BUCHANAN Miami BAYA M. HARRISON, JR. St. Petersburg CHARLES R. FORMAN Ft. Lauderdale J. B. CULPEPPER Executive Director Tallahassee The Office of the Board of Control Tallahassee, Florida June 1, 1961 This is an analytical report on the use, during the fall semester 1960, of the space that was then dedicated to instruction in the State University System of Florida. Institution by institution, as well as for the system as a whole, account is taken of (1) the amount and type of instructional space available, (2) the extent to which that space was used for regularly scheduled instruction- al activities, and (3) the patterns of that use by the hour of the day and by the day of the week. While the report gives an accounting of the use made of instruc- tional space during a given term, it also suggests ways of attain- ing, up to a point, the more intensive utilization being required by the fact that instructional loads are increasing more rapidly than instructional space is being added. This volume summarizes the studies which were made in each of the institutions, viz., the University of Florida, the Florida State University, the University of South Florida, and the Florida Agri- cultural and Mechanical University. The institutional studies were made on the basis of directions, definitions,and forms which were adapted by the staff of the Board of Control from the Manual for Studies of Space Utilization in Colleges and Universities by John Dale Russell and James I. Doi (published by the American Asso- ciation of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers, Athens, Ohio, 1957). The full reports of the institutional studies are available in the respective universities and in the Office of the Board of Control. The compilation of this report has been a responsibility of Robert N. Willis, Assistant Educational and Research Officer. The first report in this series was based on the fall semester 1958, and the next one will be made for the fall semester 1962. In the meantime, the Board of Control expects to publish an inventory of all avail- able space in the State University System showing the use to which it is being put in providing housing for programs of research and extension as well as instruction. Myron R. Blee Educational and Research Officer TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES . . . . v LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS . . . viii Part I. THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY . . 1 II. THE AVAILABLE INSTRUCTIONAL SPACE . 3 III. THE USE OF INSTRUCTIONAL SPACE . .. .12 IV. INTERPRETATION OF THE DATA . ... 33 V. RATES OF UTILIZATION AND INSTRUCTIONAL SPACE NEEDS . . . . .55 VI. CONCLUSIONS . . . ... .62 LIST OF TABLES Table I. Available Instructional Space, By Type of Space and By Institution, Fall 1960 . . II. Characteristics of Instructional Space, By Type of Space and By Institution, Fall 1960 . . . . . III. Instructional Space in Temporary Buildings, By Type of Space and By Institution, Fall 1960. IV. Instructional Load Related to the Number of Student Stations and to the Floor Area in All Types of Instructional Space, By Institution, Fall 1960 . . . Page IV-A. Average Number of Student Stations Occupied Per Week by a Full-Time-Equivalent Student, By Type of Space and By Institution, Fall 1960 10 V. Utilization of All Types of Instructional Space, By Institution, Fall 1960 . . ... 13 V-A. Distribution of Instructional Rooms By the Number of Periods Used Per Week, All Types of Instructional Space, Fall 1960 . 15 V-B. Extent of the Variation in the Utilization of Instructional Space Among Buildings, By Institution, Fall 1960 . . .. 16 VI. Average Number of Periods Rooms and Student Stations Are Used Per Week, By Type of Instructional Space and By Institution, Fall 1960 . . . . . 18 VII. Average Number of Periods Rooms and Student Stations Are Used Per Week, By Hour of the Day and By Institution, All Types of Instructional Space, Fall 1960 . ... .19 Table VII-A. Variation By Period of the Day in the Use of Student Stations, All Types of Instructional Space, Fall 1960 . . VIII. Average Number of Periods Rooms and Student Stations Are Used Each Day of the Week, All Types of Instructional Space, Fall 1960 . VIII-A. Variation by Day of the Week in the Use of Student Stations, All Types of Instructional Space, Fall 1960 . . IX. Average Number of Periods Rooms and Student Stations Are Used Per Week By the Capacity of the Rooms and By Institution, All Types of Instructional Space, Fall 1960 . . X. Percentage of Student Stations Actually Used During Periods Rooms Are Assigned, By Type of Instructional Space and By Institution, Fall 1960 . . . . . XI. Entire System, Class Size in Relation to -Room Capacity, All Types of Instructional Space, Fall 1960 . . . . XII. Relation of Class Size to Capacity of Rooms Used, All Types of Instructional Space, Fall 1960 . . . .. XIII. Extent to Which Instruction Is Carried On In Rooms Not Regularly Available for Class Activities, Fall 1960 . . . XIV. Comparison With Earlier Years of the Rate of Utilization of Rooms and Student Stations, All Types of Instructional Space, By Institution . . . . . 21 S. 22 . 23 S. 26 S. 27 . 28 * 30 S 31 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 1959-60, By Institution . . . . Page Table Page XV. Variations in the Student Capacity of All Instructional Rooms Available in the State University System, Fall 1960, Associated With Each of Several Percentages of Student Stations Occupied When Rooms Are in Use . . . .. 51 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 . ... .56 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure Page I. Distribution of Instructional Space, By Type and By Institution, Fall 1960 .. 5 II. Average Number of Periods Rooms and Student Stations Are Used Per Day, All Types of Space, Fall 1960 . .. 24 III. A Comparison of Room-Period Utilization in Florida Universities With That of Other Institutions, Fall 1960 . .. 36 IV. A Comparison of Average Number of Periods Per Week That Student Stations Are Used in Florida Institutions With Utilization in Other Institutions, Fall 1960 . . . . 39 V. A Comparison of the Percentage of Student Stations Used When Rooms Are Actually in Use in Florida Universities With That of Other Institutions, Fall 1960 . 40 VI. A Comparison of the Square Feet of Assign- able Floor Space Per 100 Hours of Student Occupancy Per Week in Florida Universities With That of Other Institutions, Fall 1960 . . 41 viii PART I THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY The Problem The study on which this report is based has been set up (1) to identify the amount of instructional space available in the State University System and (2) to determine the extent to which the available instructional space is used. Plans have been made for these studies to be conducted during the second year of the biennium, using the fall semester data in each case, in order that this summary report covering the entire State University System may be completed and issued just prior to the convening of the Legislature. This present report is based on the 1960 fall semester. Definition of Instructional Space Instructional space is defined as com- prising those rooms which are available throughout the day to house regular- ly scheduled class activities. Under this definition the occasional use of such space as faculty offices or research laboratories to house regularly scheduled class activities has not been treated as instructional space for those times when used as such. Neither does the occasional use of classrooms for nonclass activities exclude rooms from consideration so long as they are available for assignment and for class use throughout the day. The following three measures are used to express the amount of instructional space available: Rooms Instructional space as defined above has been classified into four broad categories according to the functions the various rooms serve. These four types of instructional rooms are (1) general class- rooms, (2) seminar rooms, (3) teaching laboratories (including shops), and (4) teaching auditoriums. Student Stations A student station is defined as an identifiable accommodation for one student in an instructional room. A student station may be a seat in a classroom or a work space in a laboratory. Square Feet of Floor Area The floor area included is the net usable floor space in instructional rooms. The Use of Instructional Space In this study instructional space is con- sidered to be in use during the time that it is assigned to house regularly scheduled class activities. Such additional use as is made of instructional space for other instructional activities and services and for noninstruc- tional activities is not counted. All of the regularly scheduled class acti- vities are counted regardless of the time of the day or evening at which the use occurred. The basic unit of time for reporting use is a period of approximately fifty minutes. A room-period of use is defined as the use of one room by a class for one period. Similarly, a student-station-period of use is defined as the use by a student of one student station for a single period. These two measures are used to express the magnitude of instructional operations housed in in- structional space. The Extent of Use of Instructional Space The average number of periods per week (and per day) that rooms and student stations are used has been employed to express the extent to which instructional space is used. PART II THE AVAILABLE INSTRUCTIONAL SPACE The Total Available Instructional Space As of the fall semester 1960, in the four State universities now in operation, there are 33,845 student sta- tions using 706,570 square feet of floor space in 859 rooms which are avail- able throughout the day for regularly scheduled class activities. The number of student stations and the amount of floor space has increased by approxi- mately 20% over 1958, whereas the number of instructional rooms increased by 15%. 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 (706,570 square feet) distributed by in- stitution and by type of space. Table II shows (1) the number of square feet of floor area per student sta- tion for each type of instructional space in each institution. The figures are especially important inasmuch as the number of student stations in each room is 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 four institutions differ in the average amount of space used per student sta- tion in each type of instructional room. TABLE I AVAILABLE INSTRUCTIONAL SPACE By Type of Space and By Institution Fall 1960 All Types General Teaching Teaching Instruc- Institution Class- Seminar Labora- Audi- tional rooms Rooms stories toriums Space I. Number of Rooms University of Florida 250 13 167 12 442 Florida State University 124 13 84 6 227 Florida A. & M. University 75 2 67 1 145 University of South Florida 34 0 9 2 45 Entire System 483 28 327 21 859 2. Number of Student Stations University of Florida 10,527 214 4,258 2,601 17,600 Florida State University 5,121 216 2,057 1,262 8,656 Florida A. & M. University 3,183 42 1,376 680 5,281 University of South Florida 1,472 0 410 426 2,308 Entire System 20,303 472 8,101 4,969 33,845 ............ ................ ..... .......... . ........ . . . ..... . ...................... ......................... ...................... ..... .......................... I .................................... 3. Square Feet of Floor Area University of Florida 163,084 4,217 180,367 26,701 374,369 Florida State University 79,646 4,475 64,462 12,371 160,954 Florida A. & M. University 46,375 494 71,178 9,164 127,211 University of South Florida 17,582 0 9,586 16,868 44,036 Entire System 306,687 9,186 325,593 65,104 706,570 Figure I DISTRIBUTION OF INSTRUCTIONAL SPACE By Type and By Institution Fall 1960 UNIVERSITY; OF FLORIDA 374,369 square feet General Classrooms 43.6% Teaching Laboratories 48.2% Cr2 01 FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY 160,954 square feet General Classrooms 49.5% STeaching Laboratories S40.0o o: M FLORIDA A & M UNIVERSITY 127,211 square feet General Classrooms Teaching Laboratories 36.5% d 56.0% . a: 00 .. . .. : P . UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA (44,036 square feet) General Teaching Teaching Classrooms 39.9% Labs 21.8 Auditoriums 38.3% ENTIRE SYSTEM 706,570 SQUARE FEET 01 o "W () DM 0 *H c3 o o o u Ocd ;t m 0 HC . O I to Cd Id TABLE II CHARACTERISTICS OF INSTRUCTIONAL SPACE By Type of Space and By Institution Fall 1960 All Types General Teaching Teaching Instruc- Institution Class- Seminar Labora- Auditori- tional Rooms Rooms stories ums Space 1. Average Number of Square Feet Per Student-Station University of Florida Florida State University Florida A & M University University of South Florida Entire System 2. Average Number of Student- Stations Per Room University of Florida Florida State University Florida A & M University University of South Florida Entire System 3. Average Number of Square Feet of Floor Area Per Room University-of Florida Florida State University Florida A & M University University of South Florida Entire System 15.5 15.6 14.6 11.9 19.7 20.7 11.8 0 15.1 19.5 42 41 42 43 42 652 642 618 517 635 16 17 21 0 17 324 344 247 0 328 42.4 31.3 51.7 23.4 40.2 25 24 21 46 10.3 9.8 13.5 39.6 21.3 18.6 24.2 19.1 13.1 20.9 .... .... ................................ ... 217 210 680 213 25 237 39 ............. I........................ I .............................................. I .......................................... 1,080 767 1,062 1,065 996 2,225 2,062 9,164 8,434 3,100 847 709 877 979 823 __ __ I I i _ _ Table II also shows (2) the average number of student stations per room, and (3) the average number of square feet of floor area per room for each type of space. Space in Temporary Buildings For the entire system there are 2,425 stu- dent stations using 69,382 square feet of floor area in 84 rooms housed 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. Also shown in Table III is (4) the floor area in the 84 rooms in temporary buildings expressed as a percentage of the total floor area of all the in- structional rooms in each type of space. Instructional Space Related to Instructional Load The total instructional load in the State University System for the fall semester 1960 is 25,980 full-time-equivalent students, which represents an increase of 16% over the fall semester 1958, when the instructional load was 22,440. 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 in both permanent space and permanent and temporary space combined. Table IV-A reports the average number of student-station-periods occupied per week by a full-time-equivalent student. Utilization data for each type INSTRUCTIONAL By Type of TABLE III SPACE IN TEMPORARY BUILDINGS Space and By Institution Fall 1960 All Types General Teaching Teaching Instruc- Institution Class- Seminar Labora- Auditori- tional rooms Rooms stories ums Space 1. Number of Rooms University of Florida Florida State University Florida A & M University University of So.Florida Entire System 2. No. of Student-Stations University of Florida Florida State University Florida A & M University University of So.Florida Entire System 3. Area in Square Feet of Floor Space University of Florida Florida State University Florida A & M University University of So.Florida Entire System 4. Percent of Total Instructional Space in Temporary Buildings University of Florida Florida State University Florida A & M.University University of So.Florida Entire System 31 5 8 0 44 1,135 247 296 0 1,678 21,404 2,905 4,244 0 28,553 13.1 3.8 9.2 0 9.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 o 4 0 40 715 o 32 0 747 38,089 0 2,740 0 40,829 21.1 0 3.8 0 12.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 __ __ __ __ 2. 1 __ _ 67. 5 12 0 84 1,850 247 328 0 2,425 59,493 2,905 6,984 0 69,382 15.9 1.8 5.5 0 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 1960 All Available Space Permanent Space Student Stations Floor Area Student Stations Floor Area Institution No. FTE Total No. FTE Total No. Sq.Ft.of Total No.FTE Total No. Sq.Ft.of Students No. Students q. F FT Stuld No. Students Sq. Ft. FTE Stud. oUniversiy 13,229 17,600 1.33 374,369 28.3 15,750 1.19 314,876 23.8 of Florida Florida State University 8,503 8,656 1.02 160,954 18.9 8,409 0.99 158,049 18.6 Florida A & M University 2,847 5,281 1.85 127,211 44.7 4,953 1.73 120,227 42.2 University of South Florida 1,401 2,308 1.65 44,036 31.4 2,308 1.65 44,036 31.4 Entire System 25,980 33,845 1.30 706,570 27.2 31,420 1.21 637,188 24.5 TABLE IV-A AVERAGE NUMBER OF STUDENT STATIONS OCCUPIED PER WEEK BY A FULL-TIME-EQUIVALENT STUDENT By Institution and Type of Space Fall 1960 General Seminar Teaching Teaching All Instruc- Institution Classrooms Rooms Laboratories Auditoriums tional Space University of 11.42 0.10 4.18 2.30 18.00 Florida Florida State 11.05 0.15 3.05 1.62 15.87 University Florida A & M University 13.86 0.13 3.48 0.29 17.75 University of South Florida 14.26 ---- 3.38 3.37 21.01 Entire System 11.72 0.11 3.69 1.92 17.44 * None available at present. of room and for all institutions are given. It can be noted that the use of seminar rooms is similar for all institutions, whereas there is a good deal more variation among the institutions in the use of teaching audi- toriums as an instructional facility. PART III THE USE OF INSTRUCTIONAL SPACE Several measures have been developed to indicate the use of instructional space. While it is possible to derive one or two figures to express the ex- tent 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 in comprehending the scope of the utilization of instructional space and in making recommendations for changes which would bring about more efficient use of such space. 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 also included to show the relationship between (1) the size of the class groups which are housed and (2) the capacity of the instructional rooms to which they are assigned. Finally, note is taken of the extent to which regularly scheduled class acti- vities are accommodated in rooms not available throughout the day for such use, and hence, are 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) the number of rooms and student stations within each type of instructional space, (2) the gross number of times per week the rooms and student stations are used, and (3) the average TABLE V UTILIZATION OF ALL TYPES OF INSTRUCTIONAL SPACE By Institution Fall 1960 of Florida General Classrooms Seminar Rooms Teaching Laboratories Teaching Auditoriums All Instructional Space Florida State University General Classrooms Seminar Rooms Teaching Laboratories Teaching Auditoriums All Instructional Space Florida A & M University General Classrooms Seminar Rooms Teaching Laboratories Teaching Auditoriums All Instructional Space University of South Florida General Classrooms Seminar Rooms Teaching Laboratories Teaching Auditoriums All Instructional Space Entire System General Classrooms Seminar Rooms Teaching Laboratories Teaching Auditoriums All Instructional Space No. of Rooms 250 13 167 12 442 124 13 84 6 227 75 2 67 1 145 34 o 9 2 45 483 28 327 21 859 Ro Usudent P n TT' s r I. -- f - -- ---- --- 4 Room-Periods Used During Week 5,496 151 2,608 237 8,492 3,337 136 1,234 140 4,847 1,496 40 751 6 2,293 774 0 203 42 1,019 11,103 327 4,796 425 16,651 Average No. of Periods Rooms TTUs Per Uoeer 22.0 11.6 15.6 19.8 19.2 26.9 10.5 14.7 23.3 21.4 19.9 20.0 11.2 6.0 15.8 22.8 0.0 22.6 21.0 22.6 23.0 11.7 14.7 20.2 19.4 No. of Student St.+.tinn 10,527 214 4,258 2,601 17,600 5,121 216 2,057 1,262 8,656 3,183 42 1,376 680 5,281 1,472 0 410 426 2,308 20,303 472 8,101 4,969 33,845 Student-Station- Periods Used Per Week 151,120 1,259 55,270 30,441 238,090 93,943 1,254 25,905 13,816 134,918 39,463 359 9,905 816 50,543 19,980 0 4,742 4,720 29,442 304,506 2,872 95,822 49,793 452,993 Average No. of Periods Stations Used Per Week 14.4 5.9 13.0 11.7 13.5 18.5 5.8 12.6 10.9 15.6 12.4 8.5 7.2 1.2 9.6 13.6 0.0 11.6 11.1 12.8 15.0 6.1 11.8 10.0 13.4 U- ______ ___________ __________ Institution University --- J~a_ e. _ -- "- - TABE V UTLZTO 0FAL TYPE OF INSTRUCIONALSPAC Room Use Student Station U number of times the rooms and student stations are used. These averages represent basic indexes of the extent of the utilization of each type of instructional space. Table V shows, for the system as a whole, that all instructional rooms are used on the average of 19.4 periods per week whereas general classrooms are used 23.0 periods per week. The table also shows that the average occupancy of student stations throughout the system and in all types of instructional space is 13.4 periods per week. Further comparisonscan be made within each of the four institutions and for each type of instructional space. By doing so, differences can be noted among the institutions with respect to the varying amounts of each of the types of instructional facilities. Other bases on which the extent of utilization attained can be evaluated are presented in Table V-A and V-B. Table V-A reports the number of periods that instructional rooms are used per week. These room-periods of use are grouped in convenient intervals of 4, as shown in the extreme left column of Table V-A. It can be seen that intervals of room-period use range from 0-3 to 48-52. The actual number of periods which rooms are used varies from 0 to 50, however. For the entire system about 25% of the rooms are used less than 11 periods per week, about 25% are used more than 28 periods per week, while 50% of the rooms are used between approximately 11 and 28 periods per week. Nearly 12% of all instructional rooms are used 3 or less periods per week. It is interesting to note, however, that over 3% of the rooms are being used 40 or more periods per week. The median number of periods the rooms are used each week is 19.5. Of the 99 in- structional rooms presently being used throughout the system 3 or less periods per week, 62 of these are used not more than 1 period per week, TABLE V-A DISTRIBUTION OF INSTRUCTIONAL ROOMS BY THE NUMBER OF PERIODS USED PER WEEK All Types of Instructional Space Fall 1960 Univ.of Fla.State Fla.A-&,M Univ.of Entire System No. of Florida Univ. Univ. So. Florida Periods No-of Per Cent No.of Per Cent No.of Per Cent No.of Per Cent No.of Per Cent Cumulative Per Week Rooms of Total Rooms of Total Rooms of Total Rooms of Total Rooms of Total Per Cent 48 52 2 0.5 2 0.8 0 0 10 0 4 0.5 100.00 44 47 4 0.9 2 0.8 2 1.4 1 2.2 9 1.0 99.5 4o 43 9 2.0 4 1.8 2 1.4 1 2.2 16 1.9 98.5 36 39 26 5.9 20 8.8 3 2.1 2 4.4 51 5.9 96.6 32 35 36 8.1 21 9.3 9 6.2 4 8.9 70 8.1 90.7 28 31 40 9.0 28 12.3 12 8.3 10 22.2 90 10.5 82.6 24 27 51 11.5 28 12.3 12 8.3 1 2.2 92 10.7 72.1 20 23 54 12.2 20 8.8 14 9.7 9 20.0 97 11.3 61.4 16 19 54 12.2 23 10.1 15 10.3 4 8.9 96 11.2 50.1 12 15 43 9.7 29 12.8 16 11.0 7 15.6 95 11.1 38.9 8 11 31 7.0 18 7.9 16 11.0 4 8.9 69 8.0 27.8 4 7 30 6.8 18 7.9 21 14.5 2 4.4 71 8.3 19.8 0 3 62 14.0 14 6.2 23 15.9 0 0 99 11.5 11.5 442 100.0 227 100.0 145 100.0 45 00o.o 859 100.0 TABLE V-B EXTENT OF THE VARIATION IN THE OF INSTRUCTIONAL SPACE AMONG By Institution Fall 1960 UTILIZATION BUILDINGS All Buildings Buildings With 10 or More Instruct. Rooms* Lowest Ave. No. of Highest Ave. No. Lowest Ave. No. Highest Ave. No. Periods Per Room of Periods Per of Periods Per of Periods Per Institution Per Week Room Per Week Room Per Week Room Per Week University of University of 3.0 36.8 7.8 36.8 Florida Florida State 8.1 32.7 10.3 32.2 University Florida A & M 2.5 26.8 9.8 26.8 University University of So.Florida 17.5 29.0 17.5 29.0 * The following information shows these (1) the number of instructional rooms per week; buildings by institution. The name of each building is given followed by (10 or over), and (2) the average number of periods those rooms were used University of Florida Temp.Bldg.I 12 McCarty 40 Floyd 12 Physics 19 Benton 18 Military 13 Med.Sci.Bldg. 15 Temp.Bldg.E 16 Norman 24 o Leigh 20 Matherly 35 Engineering 40 Walker 14 7.8 9.9 16.4 17.2 17.2 19.2 19.5 20.9 21.2 22.1 23.5 24.1 27.2 Peabody 21 Anderson 18 27.8 36.8 Florida State University Geology 11 10,3 Home Economics 21 13.5 Science 15 18.8 Conradi 16 19.7 Education 32 20.4 Business 29 24.1 Bldg. A 13 27.7 History 29 32.2 Florida A & M University Jones 23 Benneker 10 Perry-Paige 24 Benneker Annex 14 Tucker 35 9.8 12.9 13.0 13.8 26.8 University of South Florida Science 19 187 Univ. Center l4 21.9 Administration 12 29.8 whereas 2 of the 859 instructional rooms available throughout the entire system are being used as much as 50 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. This variation ranges from 2.5 to 36.8 periods per week. When only the buildings with 10 or more instructional rooms are considered, the range is from 7.8 to 36.8 periods per week. Utilization by Type of Instructional Space Table VI presents in a more accessible form than does Table V the average number of periods per week that the rooms and student stations in each type of instructional space are used. Inasmuch as the figures show the average number of periods used, it is un- necessary 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. Utilization by Period of the Day The average number of periods per week that rooms and student stations are used during each period of the day is shown in Table VII. From that table it can be observed that for the system as a whole the heaviest use of rooms is made from 9 to 10 o'clock and 10 to 11:00 in the morning. During those two periods the average use of all rooms is 2.8 times per week. Similarly, the table shows that for the entire system, during the period of highest use, student stations are used on the average of 2.1 periods per week. Treatment of the noon hour as well as morning and afternoon TABLE VI AVERAGE NUMBER OF PERIODS ROOMS AND ARE USED PER WEEK* STUDENT STATIONS By Type of Instructional Space and By Institution Fall 1960 Room Use Student Station Use Type of Room Univ. Florida Florida Univ.of Univ. Florida Florida Univ.of of State A. & M. South Entire of State A. & M. South Entire Florida Univ. Univ. Florida System Florida Univ. Univ. Florida System General Classrooms 22.0 26.9 19.9 22.8 23.0 14.4 18.5 12.4 13.6 15.0 Seminar Rooms 11.6 10.5 20.0 11.7 5.9 5.8 8.5 6.1 Teaching Laboratories 15.6 14.7 11.2 22.6 14.7 13.0 12.6 7.2 11.6 11.8 Teaching Auditoriums 19.8 23.3 6.0 21.0 20.2 11.7 10.9 1.2 11.1 10.0 All Instructional Space 19.2 21.4 15.8 22.6 19.4 13.5 15.6 9.6 12.8 13.4 *Percentages of use on a 44-period week can be approximated by dividing each of these averages by 44. TABLE VII AVERAGE NUMBER OF PERIODS ROOMS AND STUDENT STATIONS ARE USED PER WEEK By the Hour of the Day and By Institution All Types of Instructional Space Fall 1960 Room Use _Student Station Use Hour Univ. Florida Florida Univ.of Univ. Florida Florida Univ.of of the of State A & M South Entire of State A & M South Entire Day* Florida Univ. Univ. Florida System Florida Univ. Univ. Florida System 8 9 AM 1.1 2.3 1.8 2.4 1.6 0.9 1.9 1.3 1.5 1.3 9 10 2.6 3.1 2.5 3.1 2.8 j 2.0 2.4 1.6 1.9 2.1 10 11 2.7 3.2 2.8 1.9 28 2.0 2.4 1.7 1.2 2.0 11 12 2.6 3.0 2.4 2.2 2.0 2.1 1.5 1.4 1.9 2.7 12 1 PM 2.2 1.3 0.1 2.1 1.6 1.1 0.02 1.3 1.2 1 2 1.4 2.1 1.2 2.1 1.6 1.1 1.6 0.7 1.1 1.1 2 3 2.1 2.5 2.3 2.0 2.2 1.4 1.7 1.3 1.2 1.5 3- 4 1.7 1.8 1.7 2.3 1.8 1.1 1.1 0.9 1.3 1.1 4 5 1.3 1.0 0.6 0.8 1. 0.6 0.6 0.2 0.5 0.6 5 6 0.7 0.1 0.1 .1 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.01 0.1 0.2 6 7 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.3 0.2 0.1 .1 0.1 0.5 0.1 7 8 0.2 0.4 0.1 1.4 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.04 0.6 0.2 8 9 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.02 0.3 0.1 9 10 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.04 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.01 0.1 *Where class periods have not begun exactly on the hour, of beginning. the nearest hour has been shown as the time scheduling of instructional space by the various institutions can also be noted. 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 is assigned to the period of the day in which the heaviest use is made of student stations. An index num- ber for each of the other periods is 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 entire system, the load placed upon student stations during the period from 4 to 5 o'clock in the afternoon is 27% of that carried during the period in which the load is heaviest, i.e., from 9 to 10 in the morning when student stations are used on the average of 2.1 periods per week. 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 entire system, student sta- tions are used on the average of 3.1 periods on Monday and 3.0 periods on Wednesday; and from Table VIII-A it can be seen that the student-station- period use on Thursday is 71% of the load on Monday. In Figure II a graphic presentation is made of the data which show the average number of periods that rooms and student stations are used during each day of TABLE VII-A VARIATION BY PERIOD OF THE DAY IN THE USE OF STUDENT STATIONS All Types of Instructional Space Fall 1960 Period of Univ. of Fla.State Fla.A & M Univ. of Entire the Day Florida Univ. Univ. So.Florida System 1. Number of Student-Station- Periods Used Per Week 9 AM 10 11 12 1 PM 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 15,531 35,665 35,942 35,962 27,443 18,729 24,722 18,679 11,304 5,868 1,000 2,457 2,439 2,349 16,606 20,836 21,149 17,776 9,813 13,443 14,805 9,264 5,614 848 532 1,928 1,668 636 7,078 8,547 9,185 7,835 84 3,862 7,097 4,938 983 37 584 199 114 0 3,469 4,480 2,754 3,248 2,908 2,465 2,808 2,974 1,103 162 1,113 1,300 625 33 42,684 69,528 69,030 64,821 40,248 38,499 49,432 35,855 19,004 6,915 3,229 5,884 4,846 3,018 2. Index of Use* 8 9 AM 9 10 10 11 11 12 12 1 PM 1 2 2-3 3-4 4 5 5-6 6-7 7-8 8-9 9 10 43 99 99 100 76 52 69 52 31 16 03 07 07 07 99 l00 84 46 64 70 44 27 04 03 09 08 03 93 100 85 01 42 77 54 11 0.4 06 02 01 0 77 100 ~6T 72 65 55 63 66 25 04 25 29 14 0.7 61 100 99 93 58 55 71 52 27 10 05 08 07 04 *The index number for each institution for each hour of the day is the per- centage 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. TABLE VIII AVERAGE NUMBER OF PERIODS ROCMS AND STUDENT STATIONS ARE USED EACH DAY OF THE WEEK All Types of Instructional Space Fall 1960 Room Use Student Station Use Day of Univ. of Fla.State Fla.A & M Univ.of Entire Univ.of Fla.State Fla.A & M Univ.of Entire The Week Florida Univ. Univ. So.Florida System Florida Univ. Univ. So.Fla. System Monday 4.5 4.6 3.2 4.4 4.3 3.2 3.5 2.1 2.9 3.1 Tuesday 3.6 4.2 2.7 4.5 3.7 2.5 2.9 1.5 2.6 2.5 Wednesday 4.4 4.6 3.2 4.9 4.3 3.1 3.5 2.1 2.6 3.0 Thursday 3.2 3.9 2.7 5.0 3.4 2.1 2.6 1.5 2.5 2.2 Friday 3.5 3.9 2.8 3.8 3.5 2.5 3.0 1.9 2.1 2.5 Saturday 0.10 0.08 1.04 0.13 0.25 0.07 0.03 0.58 0.06 0.14 Morning TABLE VIII-A VARIATION BY DAY OF THE WEEK IN THE USE OF STUDENT STATIONS All Types of Instructional Space Fall 1960 Day of Univ.of Fla.State Fla.A.&M. Univ.of Entire the Week Florida Univ. Univ. So. Fla. System 1. Number of Student-Station- Periods Used Per Week Monday 56,663 30,140 10,870 6,579 104,252 Tuesday 43,888 25,200 7,989 5,901 82,978 Wednesday 54,846 30,365 10,790 6,099 102,100 Thursday 37,122 22,471 8,078 5,834 73,505 Friday 44,265 26,473 9,774 4,885 85,397 Saturday 1,306 269 3,043 144 4,762 2. Index of Use Monday 100 99 100 100 100 Tuesday 77 83 73 90 80 Wednesday 97 100 99 93 98 Thursday 66 74 74 87 71 Friday 78 87 90 74 82 Saturday 02 01 28 02 05 Figure II AVERAGE NUMBER OF PERIODS ROOMS AND STUDENT STATIONS ARE USED PER DAY All Types of Space Fall 1960 University of. Florida M T W T F S Days of the Week Florida State University 3 M T W T F Florida A & M University MT WT F S University of South Florida 0 M T W T F S Rooms S student Stations Hours of the Day 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 are used. It can be ob- served, for example, that, for the system as a whole, rooms with capacities for accommodating 31 or more students tend to be used more frequently than rooms capable of accommodating fewer than 31 students. In some cases the use is as much as 2 to 3 times greater. The most frequently used rooms in terms of size are the rooms in which there are 51 to 60 student stations. The least frequently used are those containing 10 or fewer student stations. The Relationship Between the Size of Classes and the Capacity of the Rooms to Which They Are Assigned It may be noted that student stations are used less frequently on the average than are the rooms. Table X shows the extent to which all student stations are occupied during the periods in which the rooms are assigned. It may be observed that at Florida State University, during the periods in which rooms are in use, an average of 65% of the stations are 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 entire sys- tem, the relationship between (1) the number of class meetings* per week for each of several sizes of class groups and (2) the room capacities in which the classes meet. The figure 21 underscored in the table indicates that this number of class Here a class meeting is considered to be of one period's duration. TABLE IX AVERAGE NUMBER OF PERIODS ROOMS AND STUDENT STATIONS ARE USED PER WEEK By the Capacity of the Rooms and By Institution All Types of Instructional Space Fall 1960 University Florida State Florida A & M University of Entire of Florida University Universityv South Florida ystem Capacity Room Student Room Student Room Student Room Student Room Student Station Station Station __Station Satio 1-10 6.5 9.0 7.9 5.2 9.5 9.7 0.0 0.0 7.6 8.5 11-20 13.6 11.6 12.1 9.3 10.8 6.9 22.0 8.9 12.7 9.9 21-30 18.4 13.9 18.0 15.7 16.1 10.1 18.3 16.0 18.0 13.9 31-40 22.6 14.9 25.7 18.0 17.7 11.3 25.1 15.6 22.6 15.5 41-50 23.7 15.6 25.6 16.8 21.4 13.4 24.3 13.3 23.9 15-3 51-60 29.4 15.9 29.7 17.2 25.2 12.8 26.3 13.5 28.8 15.7 61-80 22.3 11.9 32.5 17.9 22.0 10.3 20.3 9.8 24.4 12.8 81-100 25.5 13.0 24.5 10.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.4 12.6 101-150 15.9 7.5 23.3 18.7 25.3 9.8 0.0 0.0 19.1 10.1 151-250 19.8 9.2 29.2 16.6 29.0 12.9 21.0 11.1 22.6 11.3 250 + 33.5 17.5 19.5 1-3 6.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 23.1 9.0 All 19.2 13.5 21.4 15.6 15.8 9.6 22.6 12.8 19.4 13.4 TABLE X PERCENTAGE OF STUDENT STATIONS ACTUALLY USED DURING PERIODS ROOMS ARE ASSIGNED By Type of Instructional Space and By Institution Fall 1960 General Teaching Teaching All Types Class- Seminar Labora- Auditor- Instruc- Institution rooms Rooms stories iums tional Space University of Florida 63% 45% 68% 52% 62% Florida State University 66 57 76 47 65 Florida A & M University 55 43 64 20 55 University of South 58 52 53 56 Florida Entire System 62 49 68 49 62 Table XI Entire System CLASS SIZE IN RELATION TO ROOM CAPACITY All Types of Instructional Space Fall 1960 Number of Class-Period Meetings Per Week Room For Classes of Each Group Cumu- Capa- lative city 1 11 21 i 31 41 51 61 81 101 151 201 251 Per- Per- to to to to to to to to to to to and ITotal cent- cent- 10 20 30 40 50 60 80 100 150 200 250 Over age age 1 to 10 298 1oo 8 3 409 2.4 2.4 11 to 20 855 1114 204 13 12 2 2200 13.2 15.6 21 to 30 504 1110 938 248 57 52 2909 17.5 33.1 31 to 40 534 1016 1574 884 153 21 37 4 4223 25.4 58.5 41 to 50 247 708 963 964 445 48 65 3440 20.7 79.2 51 to 60 124 226 354 338 250 69 19 1380 8.3 87.5 61 to 80 96 162 216 250 289 143 103 6 2 1267 7.6 95.1 81 to 100 3 6 31 32 48 35 10 13 178 1.1 96.2 lOltol50 24 25 17 48 31 25 51 25 36 17 6 305 1.8 98.0 151to 200 51 0 5 9 11 9 16 18 44 126 0.8 98.8 201 to 250 6 5 5 3 2 9 6 7 38 31 10_ 122 0.7 99.5 251- Over 5 7 6 2 3 2 2 6 9 10 14 26 92 0.5 100.0 Total 2701 4479 4321 2794 1301 363 361 79 129 67 30 26 16,651 Per- centage 16.2 26.9 25.9 16.8 7.8 2.2 2.2 0.5 0.8 0.4 0.2 0.1 100. Cum. Percent- 16.2 43.1 69.0 85.8 93.6 95.8 98.0 98.5 99.3 99.7 99.9 100. age .- I ___ ________ meetings occur each week with class groups ranging in size from 51 to 60 students and meeting in rooms having a capacity of from 31 to 40 student stations. The figures in the columns above and below the figure 21 show the number of meetings of groups of from 51 to 60 students which meet each week in each of the other categories of room capacities. Figures appearing in Table XI below and to the left of the heavy diagonal line show the number of class meetings in rooms in which the capacity of the rooms exceeds the enrollment. Figures in the cells immediately above and to the right of the heavy diagonal line show the number of class meetings being held in rooms in which the capacity approximates the enrollment. The other figures to the right and above the heavy diagonal line indicate the number of meetings being held in rooms in which the enrollment exceeds the number of student stations. These same relationships are seen in still another way in Table XII. For example, for the entire system 16.2% of the class meetings are composed of groups not in excess of 10 students, although only 2.4% of all the meetings are being held in rooms with 10 or fewer students. From the data shown in Table XII it can also be determined that 69.0% of all the class meetings are held with fewer than 31 students enrolled, whereas only 33.1% of all class meetings are held in class rooms which do not exceed 30 student stations. Extent to Which Instruction Is Carried On In Rooms Not Regularly Available for Class Activities The limited extent to which rooms that are not regularly RELATION OF CLASS Table XII SIZE TO CAPACITY OF ROOMS USED All Types of Instructional Space Fall 1960 Univ. of Florida Fla. State Univ. Fla. A & M Univ. Univ. of So. Fla. Entire System W o W- 0 W 0 ca- 0 ) W b0 ra) W 4-H F1 D M 4-) M M4-O Size of ro L o r ) o oq H t o o ~ -H 0 w Sd i W d 01 C *) H d tC 09 Id 0 0 UH d -H OP r d 0 0 U rd m 0 0 0 0 -H m P O u Class & o r0 ) M oo P.i-i dO C o M H co a ) o o r.o od-0 co M 0 P o Capacity 0"4C i 0 r- 0 q" 0- o 0 "4 C 0 Sd O k O ) Ui o" 3 0O Q H o of Rooms -40 o A 4P __ u P, Flp-- 1M a4 u "Z!u n- -c u 1-10 13.1 2.3 16.1 1.5 31.3 6.2 8.5 0 16.2 2.4 11-20 31.8 13.9 22.9 11.2 21.2 18.8 17.6 4.3 26.9 13.2 21-30 23.2 18.4 27.4 16.0 22.2 17.6 50.9 16.2 25.9 17.5 31-40 16.6 22.1 19.0 34.5 14.9 21.7 11.5 17.3 16.8 25.4 41-50 7.9 20.6 9.2 18.5 5.9 18.6 4.9 35.8 7.8 20.7 51-60 2.5 9.7 1.8 6.8 2.0 5.5 2.1 10.3 2.2 8.3 61-80 2.6 7.1 1.8 8.0 1.5 6.7 2.0 12.0 2.2 7.6 81-100 0.7 1.8 0.3 0.5 0.3 o 0.3 o 0.5 1.1 101-150 0.9 1.9 0.7 1.4 0.6 3.3 0.8 0 0.8 1.8 151-200 0.3 0.9 0.6 o o 1.3 1.0 2.1 0.4 0.8 201-250 0.1 0.5 0.2 1.2 0.1 0 0.4 2.0 0.2 0.7 250 + 0.3 0.8 o 0.4 0 3.0 0 0 0.1 0.5 .3 ii .3. TABLE XIII EXTENT TO WHICH INSTRUCTION IS CARRIED ON IN ROOMS NOT REGULARLY AVAILABLE FOR CLASS ACTIVITIES Student Semester Hours of Student-Station-Periods of Oc- Studt S r H s Credit Produced Without Regular Student-Station- cupancy in Rooms Nct Regularly C Class Meetings Periods in Rooms --ailaable Class Which Are Regu- of Student- Institution larly Available Number % of Number in Number Station-Periods for Classes Rooms Regularly in Rooms Regularly Available Available University of Florida 238,090 9,551 4.0 Florida State 134,918 284 0.2 3,527 2.6 University Florida A & M 50,543 308 0.6 9 0.02 University University of 29,442 36 0.1 0 0.0 South Florida Entire System 452,993 628 0.3** 13,087 2.9 wj *No data available from the University of Florida. **Does not include University of Florida. available to house class activities shown in Table XIII. Faculty offices and research laboratories are examples of the types of space referred to here. Table XIII also shows the extent to which instruction is given without the use of any rooms to house oragnized class activities. PART IV INTERPRETATION OF THE DATA Part III has been devoted to the reporting of data which show (1) the magnitude of regularly scheduled class activities 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 are used to house these activities. In Part IV some bases for interpreting the data will be suggested. At least two comparisons with the fall semester 1960 data can be made: (1) com- parison of present space utilization with previous utilization and (2) comparison of space utilization in Florida with utilization in insti- tutions outside Florida and throughout the nation. Comparison With Earlier Years At the present time space utilization data are available for 1953, 1958, and, with the issuing of this report, 1960. Under the auspices of the Council for the Study of Higher Education in Florida, the State universities developed data for the fall semester 1953 which are, in general, comparable to the data for 1958 and 1960. The fall semester 1958 report was compiled by the Board of Control from data also fur- nished by the State universities. This present fall semester 1960 report is comparable in both scope and content to the 1958 report. Table XIV reports the average number of periods that both rooms and student stations were used during the fall semesters of 1953, 1958, and 1960. Sev- eral trends can be noted in the data. For example, both rooms and student Table XIV COMPARISON WITH EARLIER YEARS OF THE RATE OF UTILIZATION OF ROOMS AND STUDENT STATIONS All Types of Instructional Space Average No. of Average No.of Periods Periods Rooms Student Stations Institution Used Per Week Used Per Week Used Per Week Used Per Week University of Florida Fall 1953 Fall 1958 Fall 1960 Florida State University Fall 1953 Fall 1958 Fall 1960 Florida A & M University Fall 1953 Fall 1958 Fall 1960 University of South Florida* Fall 1960 Entire System Fall 1953 Fall 1958 Fall 1960 25.4 22.6 19.2 25.0 19.8 21.4 25.7 15.8 15.8 14.1 14.8 .13.5 15.9 13.2 15.6 16.5 9.2 9.6 22.6 12.8 25.3 20.3 19.4 14.9 13.3 13.4 *Formally opened for classes Fall 1960. stations were utilized at a higher rate in 1953 for the system as a whole. It can also be observed that rather significant changes in room use have taken place since 1953, whereas most of the changes since 1958 have been relatively slight. Comparison With Other Institutions The Russell and Doi manual* published in 1957 included normative data based on 90 institutions of higher learning. These norms were subsequently used in the analysis of space utilization in the 1958 study referred to earlier. Since that time, Doi and Scott** have prepared normative data based on 217 colleges and universities, including junior colleges and public and private degree-granting institutions broken into three groups on the basis of the number of student-credit-hours pro- duced. Separate norms are presented for each category of institution and for all institutions combined. The tables presented in this report are based on the norms for all institutions combined. Figure III shows the Doi and Scott norms, presented in percentile units, for room-period utilization of both general classrooms and teaching labora- tories. Immediately to the right of each percentile rank is the average num- ber of room-periods of use which corresponds to the various percentile positions. Percentiles show the percentage of the group falling below a *John Dale Russell and James I. Doi, Manual for Studies of Space Utilization in Colleges and Universities, American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers, 1957- **James I. Doi and Keith L. Scott, Normative Data on the Utilization of Instructional Space in Colleges and Universities, American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers, 1960. Figure III A COMPARISON OF ROOM-PERIOD UTILIZATION IN FLORIDA UNIVERSITIES WITH THAT OF OTHER INSTITUTIONS* Fall 1960 General Classrooms Teaching Laboratories Percentile Rank (N=216) Ave. No. of Periods Student Stations Used Per Week Percentile Rank (N-205) 99 99 -r 45.0 90 27.3 F.S.U.-26.9 80 -25.0 Entire System-23.0 70 ----22.8----U.S.F.-22.8 <-U.F.-22.0 60-- 20.5 50- 40- 30-- 20-- 10-- 1 -I F.A.M.U.-19.9 - 19.1 90 -22.4 Ave. No. of Periods Student Stations Used Per Week -- 39.0 U.S.F.-22.6 80 19.0 70- 16.7 E_ U.F.-15.6 - 15.4 <-sF.S.U.-14.7 S, CEntire System-14.7 40j- 12.3 40 12.3 18.0 16.9 15.8 13.5 9.3 30- 20- 10- 1- 1. F.A.M.U.-11.2 L 11.1 - 10.0 - 8.3 - 3.0 *Ibid.,pp. 4-5. 6o- 0-n given score or, in this case, a given average number of room-periods of use for general classrooms and teaching laboratories. For example, it can be seen in Figure III that 99% of all institutions on which the norms are based* use their general classrooms on the average of less than 45.0 periods per week and their teaching laboratories on an average of less than 39.0 periods per week. In 50% of the institutions, general classrooms were used on an average of fewer than 19.1 periods per week, whereas for teaching laboratories the rate was 14.1 periods per week. Only in 1% of the institu- tions was the average use of general classrooms and teaching laboratories less than 9.3 and 3.0 room-periods per week respectively. The standings of the Florida institutions with respect to the "national" norms are indicated by the horizontal arrows. It can be observed that all 4 Florida institutions are utilizing their gen- eral classrooms at rates exceeding the 50th percentile, i.e., exceeding 50% of the 216 institutions on which the norms are based. More than 85% of the 216 norming institutions fall below Florida State University in the rate of utilization of general classroom space. From Figure III it can also be noted that the Florida institutions differ more with respect to the rate of use of teaching laboratories than they differ with respect to the rate of use of general classrooms. Whereas Florida A & M University exceeds only about 30% of the institutions in the *The number of institutions on which the several norms are based varies from comparison to comparison; the exact number for each comparison is given below the percentile rank heading. average number of teaching laboratory room-periods utilized per week, the University of South Florida exceeds over 90% of the same institutions. Three other basic comparisons are presented: (1) Figure IV gives a comparison of the average number of student stations used per week for general class- rooms and teaching laboratories, (2) Figure V gives similar data showing the percentage of student stations in use when rooms are actually assigned, and (3) Figure VI shows the square feet of assignable floor space per 100 hours of student occupancy per week. The standings of the Florida institu- tions on these figures are read in exactly the same way as in Figure III. In Figure VI the number of square feet of assignable floor space per 100 hours of student occupancy takes into account (1) the amount of space avail- able per student station and (2) the frequency of use of that space. The more the instructional space is used, the less will be the amount of space in relation to the hours of student occupancy. An examination of Figure VI will reveal that all Florida institutions have less general classroom space per 100 hours of student occupancy than over 60% of the institutions reported in the Doi and Scott manual. With regard to teaching laboratories, however, the same conclusion does not hold for all the Florida institutions. While the University of South Florida and Florida State University have less than 250 square feet of assignable floor space for each 100 hours of student occupancy, an amount smaller than exists in over 80% of the institutions, Florida A & M University, on the other hand, has more than 700 square feet, an amount smaller than exists in only about 15% of the institutions. Figure IV A COMPARISON OF AVERAGE NUMBER OF PERIODS PER WEEK THAT STUDENT STATIONS ARE USED IN FLORIDA UNIVERSITIES WITH THAT OF OTHER INSTITUTIONS* Fall 1960 General Classrooms Teaching Laboratories (N=197) Percentile Rank Ave. No. of Periods Student Stations Used Per Week Percentile Rank (N=186) 99 -- 42.7 90 --18.9 F.S.U.-18.3 80 --15.5 0 Entire System-15.0 U.F.-14.4 U.S.F.-13.6 70 -13.0 SF.A.M.U.-12.5 60 --12.0 50 - 30 - - 10.8 9.9 - 9.0 20 8.1 6.5 1 1 1.0 10 - 80 - 70 - Ave. No. of Periods Student Stations Used Per Week -13.7 <- U.F.-13.0 F.S.U.-12.6 ---Entire System-ll.8 i-11.6-- U.S.F.-11.6 60 --10.6 50 -- 9.1 4o -- 7.8 30 - __ F .A.M.U.-7.2 - 6.9 - 4.3 1 1.0 * Ibid., pp.6-7. 20 -- 5.6 99 -35.1 90 -16.3 Figure V A COMPARISON OF THE PERCENTAGE OF STUDENT STATIONS USED WHEN ROOMS ARE ACTUALLY IN USE IN FLORIDA UNIVERSITIES WITH THAT OF OTHER INSTITUTIONS* Fall 1960 General Classrooms Teaching Laboratories Percentile (N=180) Rank Percentage of Student Stations Used When Rooms Were Actually in Use 99 82.0 F.S.U.-66.3 90- 65.3 .--... -U.F.-63.4 80 --6. -----Entire System-62.5 70-- 59.0 U.S.F.-57.8 60-- 57.1 50--. 55.0 F.A.M.U.-54.8 o4- 52.5 30- 51.0 20- 47.5 -43.7 - 14.5 Percentile (N=170) Rank 99 90 Percentage of Student StatioinsUsed When Rooms Were Actually in Use 99.1 -80.9 80 -,_-.7 70- 72.0 E 60o .S.U.-75.6 entire System-68.0 ..66 -U.F.-67.5 F.A.M.U.-63.9 40o 59.3 30o 54.0 20 49.4 U.S.F.-51.7 20-~- 49.4 10 41.3 1- 25.6 * Ibid., pp.8-9. u -F -3.f-7 Figure VI A COMPARISON OF THE SQUARE FEET OF ASSIGNABLE FLOOR SPACE PER 100 HOURS OF STUDENT OCCUPANCY PER WEEK IN FLORIDA UNIVERSITIES WITH THAT OF OTHER INSTITUTIONS * Fall 1960 General Classrooms Teaching Laboratories Percentile (N=166) Rank Square Feet of Assignable Floor Space Per 100 Hours of Student Occupancy Per Week Percentile (N=157) Rank Square Feet of Assignable Floor Space Per 100 Hours of Student Occupancy Per Week 99 T- 39.0 99 44.0 90 --188.7 81.7 F.S.U.-84.8 U.S.F.-88.0 Entire System-101.1 102.0 U.F.-107.9 -----119F.A.M.U.-117.5 119.7 80- -U.S.F.-202.2 F.S.U.-248.8 -259.8 70 --297.9 < U.F.-326.3 60 -339.8----Entire System-339.8 50- 397.0 60--132.2 50--147.2 40--160.4 30-- 183.9 20--218.8 10--267.8 1- 406.2 40- 466.0 30- 524.3 20--616.3 E -F.A.M.U.-718.6 10--845.9 1-1893.0 * Ibid., pp.12-14. I 5 . In general, it may be concluded from the data shown in Figures III through VI that the Florida institutions compare very favorably with the 217 institutions reported in the Doi and Scott manual with respect to the extent to which use is currently being made of instructional space. If the present rate of space utilization is maintained, however, the amount of additional instructional space that will be necessary in order to serve all of the qualified youth who will be seeking admission by 1970 to institutions within the State University System of Florida would be equivalent to roughly 3 times the instructional space at the University of Florida or as much as 27 times that now available at the University of South Florida (See Part V). Aside from the practical problem of obtaining the capital funds that would be required to provide this amount of space, and aside from the question of the time required for such a massive construction program and of the attendant disruption of normal campus activities, it would be uneconomical and would most likely retard the development of programs of high quality to use scarce funds for the operation and maintenance of more instructional space than the amount that is essential to facilitate those programs. In consideration of these factors, it is widely recognized that it will be necessary for colleges and universities to attain significantly higher rates of utilization of instructional space in the very near future. Some of the approaches to the more intensive use of space are listed below. Possible Approaches to the Increased Use of Instructional Space Several approaches to the attainment of fuller utilization of instructional space in the institutions of the State University System are suggested by the data summarized in the preceding parts of this report. While these approaches may have already occurred to the careful reader of this report, they will be enumerated here, and some indication of the extent to which each of them might be useful will be given. 1. Extending the load on instructional facilities more uniformly over the hours of the day. The Findings Table VII indicates the extent to which this approach is possible as a means of accommodating increased enrollments without the necessity of increasing the amount of instructional space. It was shown in Table VII that the use of instructional facilities is concen- trated around the prime morning hours; that it decreases during the afternoon; and that it is almost negligible during the evening hours. It was also observed that the utilization of rooms and student stations during the period from 4 to 5 o'clock in the afternoon is approximately one-fourth of the utilization during the peak morning hours. The Observation Assuming that utilization of instructional space during the period of fullest use is not restrictive of the educational program, it appears reasonable that the instructional load carried in 1960 during the peak periods might be extended more uniformly through- out the day. If the number of student-station-periods used throughout the entire system during the period from 9 to 10 o'clock in the morning (69,528) were to be maintained for each of seven periods and if 15% of the load for those seven periods were to be carried after 4 o'clock in the afternoon, the total number of student-station-periods per week would be increased from 452,993 actually used to 559,700.* This increase of 23.6% would represent the use made of instructional space by 6,119 full-time-equivalent students. Without contending that the institutions should be expected to spread their instructional load over the hours of the day in the exact pattern used in this illustration, it seems reasonable to judge the needs for additional instructional space for each type of space in terms of the capacity of existing facilities if used more uniformly throughout the hours of the day. 2. Extending the load on instructional facilities more uniformly over the days of the week. The Findings It has been shown in Table VIII that the use of instruc- tional facilities is unevenly distributed throughout the days of the week. It was observed that, for the entire system, the use varies from an average of 4.3 room-periods of use on Monday and Wednesday to negligible use on Saturday. Student-station use varies from an average of 3.1 periods on Monday to negligible use on Saturday. Use of these facilities on Tuesdays and Thursdays averages very near one period less than on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. * The calculations on which this is based are shown below: 7 periods before 4:00 p.m. 410,097 = 90.5% 69,528 x 7 = 486,696 After 4:00 p.m. 42,896 = 9.5% Plus 15% = 73,004 452,993 =lo0.o0 559,700 ** Assuming that a full-time-equivalent student occupies an average of 17.44 student-station-periods per week. The Observation If the same assumption is made for the utilization of instructional space by days of the week as was made for such use by hours of the day, namely, that the utilization of instructional space on the days of fullest attained use is not restrictive of the educational program, and if the further assumption is made that neither (1) special instructional activities such as military drill and in- struction 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 1960 could be extended more evenly throughout the week. If the number of student station-periods used throughout the entire sys- tem on Monday (104,252) were to be used on each of the other days through Friday, and if 25% of that daily load were to be carried on Saturday morning, the total number of student-station-periods per week would in- crease from 452,993 actually used to 547,323.* This increase of 20.8% would represent the use made of instructional facilities by 5,409 full- time-equivalent students.** ----------------------------- *The calculations on which this is based are shown below: Monday-Friday 104,252 x 5 = 521,260 Saturday 104,252 x.25 = 26,063 547,323 **Assuming that a full-time-equivalent student occupies an average of 17.44 student-station-periods per week. Without suggesting 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. 3. Extending the load on instructional facilities more uniformly among the several buildings on campus. The Findings It has been shown in Table V-B that instructional rooms in the most heavily utilized buildings are used about four times as much as instructional rooms in 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 unreasonable to consider the possible use that might be made of each type of instruc- tional facility in a building if each type were used to the extent that the same type is actually used elsewhere on the same campus. At the University of Florida, the 40 instructional rooms in McCarty Hall are being used at the rate of 9.9 periods per week. If each type of instructional space in that building were used at the rate being attained by the respective types of space across the entire campus, McCarty Hall would be accommodating 1,029 full-time-equivalent students rather than the 435 it is presently serving. Further, if each type of space in McCarty Hall were used to the extent attained by Anderson Hall, McCarty Hall would be serving 1,581 full-time-equivalent students.* Hence, it appears possible that McCarty Hall could serve from 2 to 4 times as many students as it presently does without exceeding the rates actually being attained in buildings elsewhere on the campus of the Uni- versity of Florida. At the Florida State University, the Geology Building, the building with the least used instructional rooms, could serve almost twice as many stu- dents (471 instead of the 262 full-time-equivalent students presently being served) if each type of room in that building were utilized to the extent that similar facilities are being used in the History Building on that same campus. The number of full-time-equivalent students served in the Home Economics Building could be increased by 78% (from 314 to 559) if similar conditions prevailed in that building. At the Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University the rooms in Jones Hall are used, on the average, a smaller number of periods per week (9.8) than are the rooms in any other major building on that campus. If each type of instructional room in Jones Hall were used at the respec- tive rate being attained in Tucker Hall, the number of students served *These full-time-equivalent figures are derived from the numbers of student stations occupied in each type of space, assuming that a full- time-equivalent student occupies 17.44 student stations per week. The estimate of the number of full-time-equivalent students a building could be serving is made by multiplying the average number of student stations occupied in the building whose rate of utilization is being compared by the number of student stations in the building for which projection is being made and then dividing by 17.44. could be increased from 396 to 760. If the nineteen rooms in the Science Building at the University of South Florida were being used at the same rate as the twelve rooms in the Administration Building, the number of students served would in- crease from 776 to 1,228. About 1,203 full-time-equivalent students could be served if the rate for the Science Building were the same as the rate for the University Center. 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. Extending the load on instructional facilities more uniformly through- out the year. While this study of the use of instructional space is limited to the first semester, other data can be used to indicate to what extent the instructional load has been distributed uniformly throughout the entire year, including the summer session. Table XIV-A shows that, for the entire system, during the last four years the instructional loads carried during the second semester and the sum- mer sessions were 91.8% and 20.4% respectively of the instructional load 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 1959-60 By Institution First Semester Second Semester Summer Session Institution % of First Semester % of First Semester University of Florida 714,114 645,469 90.4 119,294 16.7 Florida State University 426,504 400,407 93.9 84,582 19.8 Florida A & M University 149,446 137,949 92.3 59,291 39.7 Entire System 1,290,064 1,183,825 91.8 263,167 20.4 which was housed during the first semester. If three full semesters had been operated during each of the four 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 41.4% 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 would be successful in the State University System of Florida. 5. Matching the size of class groups 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 62% of student stations are occupied during the periods that instructional rooms are in use. Also, it was shown in Figure V that in the Florida institutions a greater percentage of student stations, on an average, are occupied when the rooms are actually in use than is the case in the majority of the institutions on which the Doi and Scott norms were based. *This figure was calculated as follows: The product of 3 x 1,290,064 (3,870,192) student semester hours is 41.4% larger than the actual total for 3 terms (2,737,056 student semester hours of credit). The Observation Although more than half of the institutions from which similar data were available did less well than the Florida univer- sities, about two-thirds of the institutions clearly appear to have been more successful than were the Florida institutions with respect to the number of student stations occupied once the rooms had been assigned. There are significant advantages to be gained from the more careful match- ing of the size of classes to the size of the rooms. Table XV shows the TABLE XV VARIATIONS IN THE STUDENT CAPACITY OF ALL INSTRUCTIONAL ROOMS AVAILABLE IN THE STATE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM, FALL 1960, ASSOCIATED WITH EACH OF SEVERAL PERCENTAGES OF STUDENT STATIONS OCCUPIED WHEN ROOMS ARE IN USE Percentage of Student No. of Student-Station- Increased Capacity Stations Occupied When Periods Accommodated in Full-Time-Equiva- Rooms Are in Use lent Students* 62** 452,993 ------------------------------------------------------- 65 478,050 1,474 70 514,800 3,636 75 551,600 5,800 80 588,350 7,962 85 625,150 10,127 90 661,900 12,289 *Assuming that a full-time-equivalent student requires approximately 17 student-station-periods per week. **Actually attained in the system as a whole during the fall semester 1960 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 of additional instructional space, careful attention should be given to the matter of matching class size to room size. 6. Administering the academic program so as (a) to eliminate unnecessary duplicate and repeat sections of courses which are essential to serve the purposes of the institution and (b) to 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 then in opera- tion, from 2 to 14 percent 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 sec- tions in courses with multiple sections had been 25 students. The Council reported also that in the same institutions from 0.5 to 5 percent 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 had been 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 instruc- tional space. Unnecessary Course Offerings No data are available for the State Uni- versity System of Florida to indicate the number of courses, among the total offerings of the institutions, which could be eliminated 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 having succeeded in attracting many students or filling any necessary place in established instructional programs. It is generally agreed that there is a certain amount of "deadwood" among the course offerings in many 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 extent 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 teach- ing personnel. PART V RATES OF UTILIZATION AND INSTRUCTIONAL SPACE NEEDS 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 of 1970, and it has been judged that 63,200 of these stu- dents will be enrolled in the institutions which will then comprise the State University System. In order to provide a basis for projecting the amount of space in instruc- tional 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 will be 20.9 square feet (the amount found to be available in 1960), (3) each full-time-equivalent student will continue to use exactly 17.44** student- station-periods per week, and (4) the 84 rooms now 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. A similar table was also reported in the 1958 space utilization study. The projections *There are presently 25,980 full-time-equivalent students being accommodated in the State University System of Florida. **Two-place decimals are used to establish a more precise index in order to give projections a closer relationship to present rates of use. 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. at Present Rate of Use Ave. No. of No. of Stu- of Space in No. Sq. Ft. No. of Addi- Periods Stu- dent Stations Instructional No. of Floor Space No. of In- tional Instruc- dent Stations Per FTE Rooms Per FTE Student in Instruc- structional tional Rooms Used Per Week Student Student Stations tional Rms* Rooms** above 1960*** 13.38**** 1.30 ----------_ ---- _I -------.----------- 15.0 17.44***** 20.0 22.5 25.0 30.0 34.88 1.16 1.00 0.87 0.78 0.70 0.58 0.50 24.2 20.9 18.2 16.3 14.6 12.1 10.4 82,377 73,481 63,200 55,110 48,987 44,088 1,721,679 1,535,753 1,320,880 1,151,799 1,023,828 921,439 767,866 660,440 1,866 1,605 1,400 1,244 1,120 933 802 1,317 1,091 830 625 469 345 158 27 *Based on the 1960 average of 20.9 square feet of floor space in instructional rooms per student station. **Based on the 1960 average of 823 square feet per room. ***Includes replacement of 84 temporary rooms now in use. ****The top line is based on the rate of use attained in 1960 for the system as a whole. *****The present number of student-station-periods occupied by one FTE student per week. 27.2 2,092 of the 1960 data yield slightly different estimates of the needs for 1970, however, which are attributable to the changes in the rate of utilization from 1958 to 1960. The top line in Table XVI shows the projection of space needs on the basis of the rate of use of student stations found in 1960, i.e., an average of 13.38 periods per week. Reading from left to right across the top line, one can observe that at this rate of use, there would continue to be 1.30 student stations using 27.2 square feet of floor area in instructional rooms for each full-time-equivalent student. Continuing across the top line, the table shows that, for 63,200 full-time-equivalent students, 82,377 student stations using 1,721,679 square feet of floor space in instructional rooms would be required. In the last two columns the top line shows (1) that this floor area could be represented by 2,092 rooms of the average size found during the fall semester 1960, and (2) that 1,317 of these rooms would be in addition to the 775 instructional rooms found in permanent buildings at the present time. 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 deter- mined from the right-hand column. For the use of student stations at the rate of 17.44 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, showing the most extreme rate for which calculations were made, i.e., when the average use of student stations is 34.88 periods per week, outlines the theoretical need for 63,200 full-time-equivalent students when there are two full-time-equivalent students for every student station. Since during a five-and-one-half-day week, each full-time-equivalent student is presently occupying 3.2 student-station-periods per day, these statistics might lead to the conclusion that the use of student stations on the average of 34.88 periods per week would be possible. While there is no evidence to demonstrate that this could not be done, present practices make it clear that several difficulties would be encountered if institutions were required to operate at that level in the immediate future. In the years between now and 1970, it appears more reasonable to expect that the rate at which student stations are used will move into the middle range shown in Table XVI, i.e., from 15.0 to 25.0 periods per week. Even at this rate, adjustments in the administration of the instructional programs will be required that will vary from minor to major proportions, depending upon the extent to which the rate of utilization approaches the higher of these 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, advances in the rate of use of instructional space might very well constitute an impor- tant 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 would be required for 63,200 full-time-equivalent students is involved in those calculations. Space necessary for the following type accommodations, activities, or services is not included: (1) Residential space, i.e., space for student housing, food services, health services, and other student services. (2) Research and service activities in which universities engage. (3) Administrative services and plant and grounds operations. (4) Library services (except as instructional rooms may be located in library buildings). (5) Gymnasiums, auditoriums other than teaching auditoriums, indoor physical education facilities, or music practice rooms. (6) Faculty offices, hallways, service facilities, and other such space necessary to house the total of the instructional services. Only that space which is in rooms regularly available throughout the days of the week to house scheduled class activities is included, viz., general classrooms, seminar rooms, teaching laboratories, and teaching auditoriums. Space inventories of all physical plant operations are currently underway and 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, how- ever, that even in buildings which are devoted almost entirely to instruction, only one-third to one-half of the total net floor area is included in in- structional 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 programs will always be organized in such a way as to require 17.44 student-station- periods per week. For example, the reported consideration by the faculty of one of the universities of a plan under which a combination of directed in- dividual study and attendance in a seminar during two periods per week to earn three hours of credit would make a significant contribution to the re- duction 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, of course, 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. Al- though there is no evidence to demonstrate that the higher rates of utiliza- tion which were suggested would impair the quality of instructional ser- vices, neither is there adequate evidence to determine just how much higher the rate can go without jeopardizing the quality of instruction. PART VI CONCLUSIONS While there are differing points of view concerning the level of utiliza- tion 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 by 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 levels more competitive with those of lead- ing universities in the search for and retention of faculty talent, it is especially important that the faculties and administration of each institu- tion demonstrate the ingenuity and self-discipline necessary to achieve a significantly higher rate of utilization of the instructional space available. While the data developed in this study do not provide a ready answer as to the extent to which instructional rooms ought to be used, they have suggested ways in which increased use will undoubtedly be obtained in the future as the State University System of Florida undertakes to provide even higher quality services to rapidly growing numbers of students. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| MILLISECOND | CLASS.METHOD | MESSAGE |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | sobekcm_page_globals.constructor | |
| 0 | sobekcm_page_globals.constructor | Application State validated or built |
| 0 | sobekcm_database.verify_item_lookup_object | |
| 0 | sobekcm_page_globals.constructor | Navigation Object created from URI query string |
| 0 | sobekcm_database.verify_item_lookup_object | |
| 0 | sobekcm_page_globals.display_item | Retrieving item or group information |
| 0 | sobekcm_page_globals.get_entire_collection_hierarchy | Retrieving hierarchy information |
| 0 | sobekcm_assistant.get_entire_collection_hierarchy | |
| 0 | cached_data_manager.retrieve_item_aggregation | |
| 0 | cached_data_manager.retrieve_item_aggregation | Found item aggregation on local cache |
| 0 | item_aggregation_builder.get_item_aggregation | Found 'all' item aggregation in cache |
| 0 | system.web.ui.page.page_load (ufdc.page_load) | |
| 0 | sobekcm_page_globals.constructor.on_page_load | |
| 0 | html_echo_mainwriter.add_style_references | Adding style references to HTML |
| 0 | html_echo_mainwriter.add_text_to_page | Reading the text from the file and echoing back to the output stream |
| 54 | html_echo_mainwriter.add_text_to_page | Finished reading and writing the file |