The University has also shifted focus from the strictly undergraduate programs to a balance including teaching, research, and graduate programs. The number of engineering faculty have doubled since 2001 as well.

“It wouldn’t have been possible had we not received funds and progressed with our new building,” says Dr. Marek Dollár, dean of the University’s College of Engineering and Applied Science.

A state-assisted university in Oxford, Ohio, Miami University has approximately 16,000 students plus 5,000 students on regional campuses in Hamilton and Middletown. The highly-ranked, doctorate-intensive institution is frequently referred to as “public Ivy,” according to Dollár.

“We are recognized for the quality of our undergraduate programs, faculty and student interaction, high selectivity, and our focus on providing a broad education,” he says. “We are in the business of educating the whole person.”

With that philosophy in mind, Miami University officials decided to expand the areas of engineering and computing (where they only offered a few programs). The growing shortage of engineers and computer scientists, both nationally and in Ohio, prompted the decision, Dollár says. Miami University believed it could distinguish itself by offering an education that would produce liberally educated engineers. Sixty percent of students who graduate with engineering degrees end up in non-technical jobs three to five years after graduation, he explains.

“We wanted to create an education that will help in other areas like management, medicine, and law,” Dollár says. “Because Miami has a strong liberal arts education, it made sense to do it at Miami.”

Although they weren’t sure exactly what they wanted when they undertook the SEAS building planning, University personnel had definite priorities: close faculty/student interaction, small group instructional settings, hands-on laboratory experiences, project-based learning, enhancing communication skills, and providing opportunities for students to work with faculty on research.

“It was important for us to convey the message that the school is not just about training future professionals,” Dollár says. “We are teaching differently; the educational process is now more about how students learn, rather than how we teach. The prevailing feeling is students learn well in groups and when they interact closely with faculty.”

Miami University chose architects Burt Hill to design the building, and provided them with a list of requirements. Then a group of administrators, faculty, and students met with the architects in a weeklong series of “discovery sessions.”

“It was a very time-consuming, exhaustive experience, but in retrospect it was valuable because it helped us to understand better what we needed,” Dollár says. “The synergy, I believe, opened the door to several innovative approaches.”

Although the process didn’t stop there, the sessions gave the architects enough insight to create a design Miami merely needed to “tweak at the edges,” Dollár says. The end result was an approximately 100,000-sf, three-floor building with a combination of classroom sizes on each level, for a construction cost of approximately $20 million.

Varied Learning Environments and Flexible Construction

From a dozen ideas, Miami University chose three learning environments (LE) that would promote three main teaching styles: round table discussions, teamwork, and lectures. Learning Environment 1 consists of a 500-sf space appropriate for 20 students; the 1,100-sf LE 2 accommodates 40 students; and LE 3, at 2,500 sf, was designed for lecture classes with up to 90 students. Too many sizes would have complicated the design and made the building too expensive.

“We realized there was no way we would get enough funds to support the huge facility we had in mind,” Dollár says. “Burt Hill did an excellent job in combining sizes, using the space efficiently, and providing the necessary flexibility.”

The SEAS facility consists of two wings with high-bay areas, connected by a welcoming open space with plenty of windows to let in natural light (a third, computer science, wing will be connected later). The ground floor and second floor house a mix of laboratories, classrooms, and faculty offices. The first floor holds classrooms and laboratories. Offices were purposefully placed near classrooms so faculty could interact more with students. Miami needed only one lecture classroom due to its smaller class sizes.

The high-bay areas have ceilings that span two floors—plenty of space for the tall, heavy equipment used in labs for courses like manufacturing processes, materials, quality control, computer integrated and manufacturing systems, and robotics. Eighty percent of the labs include a ceiling-mounted “busway” running the length of the room. The busways provide electrical connections, eliminating the hazards of floor cables.

The layout of the laboratories allows for smooth movement between instructional spaces, as well as making them attractive and easily accessible. As a result, it’s not unusual to see up to 50 students interacting there, Dollár says—freshmen working alongside seniors working with Master’s students. There are areas where students can do quiet work, too.

“You see different groups that not only interact within the teams, but also are capable of observing what other people do.”

All equipment is on wheels, except where size and safety concerns prohibit such flexibility. This comes in handy when equipment—oscilloscopes are one example—is used in more than one discipline. Even the chairs and tables are lightweight and movable. Reconfiguration can be done easily and quickly. The idea was to prepare Miami for whatever unknowns the future may bring.

“It’s about flexibility and efficient use of space,” Dollár says. “We ended up with 40 percent less space than we thought we would need. It saved us a lot of money.”

In the smallest classrooms, the faculty can meet with groups of 20 students. Rather than lecturing, faculty put materials on the Web, and students prepare their homework for discussion.

“We rely on this model more and more,” Dollár explains.

The mid-sized classrooms are configured two ways: with rows of desks in a lecture style, and with desks arranged in smaller groups. The second configuration allows faculty to work with students in five-to-eight-person teams that can easily interact with other groups. Each classroom is equipped with state-of-the-art audio/visual equipment and projection systems. The entire facility has wireless computer access.

Creating a Welcoming Environment

The SEAS building includes plenty of room where students can gather, in small spaces and an open common area. Vending machines are plentiful and some parts of the building are open 24 hours, seven days a week.

“We wanted to make sure our students spend time beyond their class time in the building,” explains Dollár.

The architectural style used makes the SEAS facility very inviting. The exterior resembles the modified Georgian style of architecture typical on Miami University’s campus, which Dollár says was no easy feat. Banks of windows line all three floors at the building’s entrance, and the open common areas feature floor-to-ceiling windows.

“We wanted to create a distinct sense of arrival. We wanted to maximize access to natural light,” Dollár says.

The Impact and Lessons Learned

Miami University plans to conduct a formal assessment of the new facility once students and faculty have spent a year in the place. Anecdotally, it’s been well-received, Dollár says.

“I can tell you the students love the place, they hang around here, and the instruction has gone smoothly,” he says. “Everyone seems to love the building.”

The building is very safe, secure, and energy-efficient. The SEAS facility is environmentally sensitive and not only meets, but in most instances exceeds, applicable building codes and regulations.

The University encountered a few glitches during construction but no significant delays, Dollár says, with the project taking about four years to complete. Minor problems regarding acoustics and white boards were easily resolved. The strongest lesson learned was the importance of constant communication. An associate dean, Dr. Christine Noble, served as the main liaison for the University, and together with a program project manager for Miami’s physical facilities, kept in constant touch with the architects.

Miami University has certainly seen a positive impact on faculty recruitment and retention, faculty teaching and scholarship activities, student learning, and the institution’s ability to provide innovative curriculum, says Dollár.

The new facility complements the University’s existing philosophies, such as encouraging strong relationships between faculty undergraduate students. The goal, above all, has always been to provide a high quality education.

“This new building helps the faculty reinforce attitudes that have been in place. In an ugly, undercut space with no tools that’s very difficult to do. So a building like this just promotes our mission.”

By Taitia Shelow

We welcome your Questions and Comments

Copyright 2008 Tradeline Inc.
All Rights Reserved
ISSN: 1096-4894