Application for the
Founders Endowment Fund and the Chancellor’s Fund for Research and Scholarship
Support
Applications are evaluated by the Founders Endowment Award Committee, which is composed
of faculty, staff, and students of the University of Washington Tacoma.
All applications are blind reviewed. Please include the applicant's name on this page only.
This page will be removed prior to review of the grant proposal.
Questions about the application procedures should be addressed to Shelby Fritz at (253) 6925754 or sfritz@u.washington.edu.
PROPOSAL DEADLINE:
February 15, 2008
Submit completed proposal to:
Shelby Fritz
Office of Academic Affairs
Box 358430
1.
Which fund are you applying for?
Founders Endowment
Chancellor’s Fund for Research and Scholarship Support
2.
Name of Applicant: Timothy Bostelle, Library
Erica Coe, Library
Rebecca Etheridge, Teaching and Learning Center
Stern Neill, Milgard School of Business
3.
Title of project: Learning Caves at UW Tacoma
4.
Please check the appropriate category:
5.
Is the project for which you are requesting funds part of another funded project:
Yes
No
Faculty
Staff
Student
If YES:
a. Describe how the proposed this award does not duplicate funded activities.
5.
Is this a group project?
Yes
No
a. Did any members of the group receive funds from the Founders Endowment
fund or the Chancellor’s Fund for Research and Scholarship Support from the
previous year?
Yes
No
b. If yes, describe what their role is in the project.
6.
Director’s Signature required
The director's signature below indicates that the applicant's campus unit will provide
support for administrative tasks associated with this grant (such as processing travel
reimbursement requests). Administrative support does not include carrying out the
activities of the grant proposal.
________________________________________________________________
Name, Title, and Date
7.
Purpose and Objectives:
Describe the purpose and objectives of the proposal. Discuss the activities required to
achieve the objectives. If you are applying for the Founders Endowment Award, please
indicate how your proposal supports enhancement of instruction related scholarship,
enhancement of facilities, enhancement of teaching or enhancement or student learning
(please limit your response to two pages).
Learning that is experiential and cooperative requires physical space that accommodates
learner needs. Physical space can influence behavior in both positive (approach) and
negative (avoidance) ways (Mehrabian and Russell 1974). Our interst is in a learning
spaces that performs both a facilitator and socilalizer role. While the campus offers many
teaching spaces, access is limited to learning spaces that enable individuals and groups to
access and share information and ideas outside of the classroom.
This project seeks to develop and implement a learning space where students can create
and apply knowledge. The overall goal is to enhance student learning through the
development of a semi-private space where individuals and groups can develop meaning,
understanding, and/or solutions. The space, called a learning cave, would address the
following requirements:
a. Serve as a refuge for knowledge creation and application
b. Provide access to information and technology
c. Facilitate collaborative learning
d. Allow for flexible arrangement
To meet these requirements, the learning cave should have the following features:
flexible, comfortable furniture that can accommodate individuals or groups of 6-7
students, computing and networking capabilities, and ambient conditions that enable
independent and collaborative learning. Appendix A provides a visual example of
learning cave design.
In identifying a location for the learning cave, the UW Tacoma library was chosen given
its centrality to the campus and availabity of suitable space. More importantly, the library
is primarly a place for learning (Loder, 2000; DeRosa, 2005; Whitmire, 2001).
Observation of existing reservable collaborative study rooms in the library indicates high
usage. During peak use times in the quarter, groups are not able to find a space in the
library to work and often seek an empty classroom or other areas on campus.
Providing additional collaborative space, especially with flexible furniture arrangements,
comfortable seats, information access, and interactive technology is essential to the
success of our students. A social environment, where students can exchange information
and collaborate on course projects, is also beneficial for student learning (Van Note
Chism, 2005; Oblinger, 2005). Based on an understanding of student needs, best
practices at other universities, and insights from the literautre, we have developed the
following schematic. This proposed learning cave would occupy exisitng space next to
the library’s reference desk.
Figure 1: UWT Learning Cave Schematic
After implementation, we will assess student use of this space, which would inform the
development of additional learning spaces throughout the campus. This might also
inform the design and development of a learning commons at UW Tacoma. A learning
commons would provide multiple informal spaces with information and technology
access for individual and groups. Appendix B provides an example of a learning
commons at Emory University.
As a cooperative endeavor among faculty and staff, this project supports the campus’s
commitment to the educational experience and responds to student needs through learnercentered design. This project also supports the priorities of the Founder’s Endowment
Fund by deploying an innovative enhancement of facilities and, most importantly,
enhancement of student learning.
8.
Importance
Explain the proposal’s significance to the UW Tacoma campus community.
As educators, we understand that not all learning occurs in the classroom. With the
adoption of service-based and collaborative forms of learning that occur outside
classroom walls, students require the necessary space, technology and information to
support such innovative pedagogy. Just as a flexible, networked classroom contributes
positively to student engagement, collaboration, flexibility, and learning (Neill and
Etheridge, in press), a learning cave offers a learner-centered solution. By implementing
a learning cave, the campus is building the knowledge and infrastructure necessary to
meet student needs and supporting its tradition of innovative teaching. In addition to
providing evidence of UW Tacoma’s commitment to learning, this space provides a
prototype to respond to student needs along with an opportunity to assess space features
and usage to inform future physical space design.
9.
Timeline
Provide a planning timeline that indicates approximately when the proposed activities
will take place, and when the project will be completed. Funds granted must be spent and
proposed activities completed by December 31, 2009.
Date
Spring 2008
Summer 2008
Autumn 2008
Winter 2009
Spring 2009
Spring 2009
Autumn 2009
Activity
Convene project group to discuss learning needs and finalize design
Equip space in library and notify faculty of space availability during
Autumn faculty development workshop on service learning
Allow students to use space; poll students about experience
Allow students to use space; poll students about experience
Allow students to use space; poll students about experience
Convene faculty, students, and staff groups to discuss experiences
Share findings at UWT faculty development workshop
10.
Budget Request
Resource needs should be discussed in part 5 in conjunction with the purpose and objectives of
the grant. Complete the chart below and provide a detailed description of each budget item as
directed in the application information.
Budget Summary:
Budget Item
Amount
Salaries
Benefits
Hourly Wages
Contract Personal Services
Other Services (e.g. long distance, printing)
Supplies and Materials
Equipment
Travel
Other (list)
34,211
Total Budget Request
$ 34,211
Salaries
Benefits (indicate benefit rate for each salary position)
Hourly Wages
Contract Personal Services
Other Services
Supplies and Materials
Equipment
Please refer to Appendix C, which includes three budget scenarios. The recommended budget is
Scenario One ($34,211), which provides for all features and full functionality. Scenario Two and
Three are also included to reflect scaled down versions. Scenario Two uses less technology,
while Scenario Three supplements existing student spaces on the first and second floor of the
library.
Travel
Appendix A
Learning Cave Example
Source: Scott-Webber (2004)
Appendix B
Learning Commons Example
Source: The Computing Center at Cox Hall, Emory University (2007)
http://www.cet.emory.edu/cox/coxmap/index.html
Appendix C
Equipment Budget
Scenario One: This budget meets all project requirements and is the preferred solution.
Equipment
Furniture
1. Chairs
2. Tables
3. Sofa
4. Whiteboard screens
Computing and networking capabilities
5. TeamSpot software (2) *
6. 42” flatpanel monitors (2)
7. Servers (2)
8. Conduits and wiring
9. Wireless routers (2)
Ambient Conditions
10. Wall
11. Accent wall paint
12. Task lighting
TOTAL
Amount
11,062
6,255
1,006
908
6,000
2,800
2,000
1,000
100
2000
580
500
$34,211
Scenario Two: This budget reduces the amount of technology by providing a single
collaborative learning studio and removes the wall partition that separates the learning cave from
the library. This would reduce the rooms facilitating and socializing function.
Equipment
Furniture
1. Chairs
2. Tables
3. Sofa
4. Whiteboard screens
Computing and networking capabilities
5. TeamSpot software (1) †
6. 42” flatpanel monitor (1)
7. Server (1)
8. Conduits and wiring
9. Wireless router (1)
Ambient Conditions
10. Accent wall paint
11. Task lighting
TOTAL
Amount
11,062
6,255
1,006
908
4,500
1,400
1,000
500
50
580
500
$27,761
TeamSpot requires an annual subscription. We are seeking Founders’ Endowment funding to pilot a one-year
subscription of this collaborative technology. If this pilot is successful, other funds would be used to maintain the
service.
†
A single license is more expensive.
*
Scenario Three: This budget includes a retrofit for existing student spaces on the first and
second floor of the library. The existing space has limited capabilities and the existing furniture
is inadequate for student needs. This budget scenario would enhance the furniture and ambient
conditions and would add a single collaborative learning studio.
Equipment
Furniture
1. Chairs
2. Tables
3. Sofa
Computing and networking capabilities
4. TeamSpot software (1) †
Ambient Conditions
5. Accent wall paint
6. Task lighting
TOTAL
Amount
11,062
2,887
1,006
4,500
580
250
$20,285
References
DeRosa, C. (2006). College students’ perceptions of libraries and information resources. Dublin,
Ohio: OCLC Online Computer Library Center. Retrieved 12 February, 2008 from
http://www.oclc.org/reports/perceptionscollege.htm
Emory University (2007). The Computing Center at Cox Hall. Retrieved 4 February, 2008 from
http://www.cet.emory.edu/cox/coxmap/index.html.
Loder, M. W. (2000). Seating patterns and improvements in a small college library: A case
study. College and Undergraduate Libraries, 7(2), 83-94.
Mehrabian, A and Russell, J. A. (1974). An Approach to Environmental Psychology. Cambridge,
MA: M.I.T. Press.
Neill, S. and Etheridge, R. (in press). Flexible learning spaces: The integration of pedagogy,
physical design, and instructional technology. Marketing Education Review.
Oblinger, D. (2005). Leading the transition from classrooms to learning spaces. EDUCAUSE
Quarterly, 28(1), 14-18.
Scott-Webber, L. (2004). In Sync: Environment Behavior Research and the Design of Learning
Spaces, Ann Arbor, MI: Society for College and University Planning.
Van Note Chism, N. (2006). Challenging traditional assumptions and rethinking learning spaces.
In D. G. Oblinger (Ed.), Learning Spaces (pp. 16-27). Washington, D.C: EDUCAUSE.
Whitmire, E. (2001). A longitudinal study of undergraduates’ academic library experiences. The
Journal of Academic Librarianship, 27(5), 379-385.