FLEXspace with LSRS v.3 Integration: Your Key to Future Proofing Learning Spaces
A Q&A roundtable with FLEXspace and LSRS leaders and innovators
A little more than a year ago, the EDUCAUSE Learning Space Rating System was integrated into FLEXspace. Now, users have a "one-stop shop" to access both the media-rich resources of FLEXspace and the quantitative evaluations of the LSRS.
Here, a round table discussion provides five perspectives on what the integration has meant to users. Our participants include: Lisa A. Stephens, the assistant dean of online education at the University at Buffalo School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, and a senior strategist for academic innovation in the Office of the SUNY Provost; Rebecca Frazee, the associate director of FLEXspace.org and a member of the faculty of the Learning Design and Technology Program in the School of Journalism and Media Studies at San Diego State University; Julie Johnston, the director of learning spaces in ITS at Indiana University; Aurora Velasco, the learning environments manager in ITS at San Diego State University; and Elissa Kellett, VP and global higher education practice leader at Leo A. Daly.
Indiana University's new Innovation Hall Collaboration Theater was rated with LSRS v.3.
"What we want to happen next is, when anyone adds a new submission into FLEXspace, it's just part of the process to add the LSRS scores too." —Julie Johnston
Mary Grush: Even though FLEXspace was integrated with the Learning Space Rating System in 2020, FLEXspace and LSRS teams have a long history together.
Lisa Stephens: That's true. Our relationship dates way back to when the EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative (ELI) was just launching its Seeking Evidence of Impact (SEI) initiative. The idea behind that initiative was to find out how best to provide evidence of return on investment in education technologies to campus leadership. One of the questions that came to the forefront of the SEI initiative was "Wouldn't it be nice if we could measure the effectiveness of learning spaces — similar to the way environmental efficiency is measured in buildings?" And so, the Learning Space Rating System was created by a group of energetic architects, classroom designers, and campus leaders from higher education institutions across the U.S. and Canada.
And that was about the same time — I think it was 2012 — that our SUNY provost said, "We're spending millions and millions of dollars every year building and renovating spaces. There's got to be a way to share information more effectively — including pictures and experiences — across all 64 SUNY campuses, to improve outcomes. Do we even have all the right people included in the conversation?" Bear in mind, this was when active learning was gaining in popularity and it was a big shift to think about how to accommodate small group activities in classrooms.
So, while the LSRS was being developed, a SUNY-wide task group began working on a repository that would include pictures and descriptions of learning spaces, relevant research, plus a taxonomy to describe space attributes. We had the FLEXspace beta version by 2013, and the FLEXspace platform now has more than 5,000 participants representing over 1,400 institutions that publish information that is accessed world-wide.
As our efforts continued along separate but parallel paths, we would "check in" with each other over time. We were aware early on that the LSRS was a set of quantitative measures to rate learning spaces; whereas FLEXspace developed along more qualitative lines as a repository where people could contribute exemplars of learning environments, related research, and best practices. Years later, it seemed like all these pieces fit together naturally, so we integrated the LSRS into FLEXspace starting with LSRS version 2.
We were aware early on that the LSRS was a set of quantitative measures to rate learning spaces; whereas FLEXspace developed along more qualitative lines as a repository where people could contribute exemplars of learning environments, related research, and best practices.
Grush: What does FLEXspace and LSRS integration mean, and what are some of the benefits? What can be achieved with the integration that is manifest as truly "better together"?
Julie Johnston: As you know, FLEXspace has a wide variety of resources about learning spaces, and it's notably very image-rich. So when a university wants to see examples of spaces at other institutions, FLEXspace is the way to go. You not only see a variety of images; you also can access the stories behind the images and search a lot of information related to the kind of equipment in the space and what the design intent was. But what the LSRS integration has added is a much more quantitative evaluation of the spaces. Given the LSRS integration with FLEXspace, you can now learn the quality benchmarks that indicate the components that are optimal as part of an active learning strategy.
Separately the LSRS — aside from the integration, that is — is a very rich stand-alone evaluation tool: You can download the evaluation spreadsheet and take a team through the evaluation of your own spaces.
LSRS v.3 Part A measures institutional readiness and the development of a planning, support, and operations process; Part B addresses specific features of physical spaces.
The LSRS tools and supporting website illuminate the rationale for the evaluation of active learning components, but there's not a deep, narrative sense of "here's what's great about the space; here are the areas where it could improve; and this is the nature of this kind of renovation project." Independent from FLEXspace integration, the LSRS doesn't give you media-rich examples from other institutions.
With the integration of the LSRS in FLEXspace it's just better, because not only are we advocating for the LSRS by enriching it with that narrative aspect of FLEXspace, we are also building awareness of spaces generally across all universities.
Grush: Looking down the road a bit, how do you see this integration working in the future?
Johnston: I'm expecting to see more and more users adding their spaces into FLEXspace, and with the integration, also starting to incorporate their LSRS scores into their submissions.
So, if FLEXspace users haven't evaluated their spaces yet with the LSRS, perhaps they would be motivated to go ahead and conduct that evaluation with their team, and add it into their FLEXspace submission. That is the first goal.
What we want to happen next is, when anyone adds a new submission into FLEXspace, it's just part of the process to add the LSRS scores too.
Then, if you really use FLEXspace to its fullest capacity, you could add a video about the space, provide the back story of how it was derived, and maybe include some faculty quotes about the space… The options are endless. The LSRS would just be another rich resource to correlate with the space that's submitted.
I think FLEXspace is evolving into a one-stop shop where you can learn and do so much. It can be an educational tool, or a professional development tool. It could even be a tool for advocating: Some universities or stakeholders might not be clear on what they want for their spaces, and FLEXspace is both a resource to find inspiration and spark conversation and a place for universities to showcase their best practice spaces. We're all wanting to grow and learn from each other and I'm always looking to other universities for good ideas as we evolve our own spaces. FLEXspace with LSRS integration is an outstanding resource for that.
We're all wanting to grow and learn from each other and I'm always looking to other universities for good ideas as we evolve our own spaces. FLEXspace with LSRS integration is an outstanding resource for that.
Grush: Many FLEXspace campuses will soon be experiencing the "new" FLEXspace, with LSRS integration. Aurora, just to give us a practical example, could you sketch out briefly how San Diego State University, a long-time FLEXspace campus, has used the LSRS in the past, and will soon be working with the "new" FLEXspace with LSRS integration?
Aurora Velasco: Yes, of course.
Here at Instructional Technology Services at SDSU, we started using the first version of the Learning Spaces Rating System (LSRS) in 2018 to rate all of our general assignment classrooms. We created an LSRS form via Qualtrics and had a team of two staff members rate each of the rooms. These two staff members were the only ones to rate the rooms, in an effort to maintain consistency in the ratings.
The LSRS ratings turned out to be very helpful as we developed the SDSU 10 Year Learning Environments Assessment Plan (LEAP). Room upgrade decisions for LEAP are based on this data, as well as on room capacities, faculty feedback, and trouble ticket data. As we review room upgrades and remodels, we share LSRS data with faculty, students, Facilities Services, and the Office of Project Management to help us make decisions and prioritize improvements.
As we review room upgrades and remodels, we share LSRS data with faculty, students, Facilities Services, and the Office of Project Management to help us make decisions and prioritize improvements.
As we look forward, especially to our recent upgrade project of making 75 percent of our classrooms Zoom-ready, we will be utilizing the "new," integrated LSRS to rate all of our classrooms in order to ensure up-to-date ratings.
Grush: And given the "new" FLEXspace, with LSRS integration, will you have more options for involving stakeholders in the process? What stakeholders will you be involving more?
Velasco: Yes — we would like to incorporate our ITS Student Assistants to help us evaluate the rooms, as it's the students who ultimately benefit the most from these learning environments.
We would like to incorporate our ITS Student Assistants to help us evaluate the rooms, as it's the students who ultimately benefit the most from these learning environments.
Grush: Thanks, that's a good example. What are some of the other directions, or challenges we might look for as we are watching FLEXspace with LSRS integration? Lisa?
Stephens: I think the biggest challenge at any institution right now is finding a way to assess a space and share that assessment effectively among stakeholders, who experience the challenge of designing or renovating learning environments through the lens of their own expertise. Architects, engineers, A/V staff, faculty, and librarians all see space a little differently. What the integration of FLEXspace and the LSRS offers is a pathway to benchmark space using the LSRS, while using FLEXspace as a "one-stop" resource to see a variety of possible solutions and gain inspiration for a functional fit. It offers a way for everyone involved to be more informed and work together more productively.
What the integration of FLEXspace and the LSRS offers is a pathway to benchmark space using the LSRS, while using FLEXspace as a "one-stop" resource to see a variety of possible solutions and gain inspiration for a functional fit.
The integration is helping bring diverse stakeholders together by including them all in the workflow, right from the 'get go,' if you will. That was always an aspiration, and a feature of FLEXspace, but the integration of FLEXspace and the LSRS offers a powerful new means of connecting stakeholders with common assessment data and a growing body of relatable examples and research. This solidifies and streamlines the workflow. And now, we can involve all of these groups and start the conversation with data.
The integration of FLEXspace and the LSRS offers a powerful new means of connecting stakeholders with common assessment data and a growing body of relatable examples and research.
Grush: Did the LSRS and FLEXspace taxonomies fit together instantly?
Stephens: Not exactly! During the early development of these tools, we understood that every one of those stakeholder groups are expert in their field, and very often they come to the process with a completely different language to describe a space from their own perspective. But as the FLEXspace and LSRS integration evolves, we are confident that — given the mutual conversations and affinity that develops among stakeholders, as well as the more inclusive workflow — the LSRS and FLEXspace taxonomies will become closer and closer over time.
Grush: Lisa, you speak often about engaging the stakeholders. Is there one particular community that you'd like to encourage going forward?
Stephens: The architecture and design community.
A&D people are top-of-the-pyramid experts. And the LSRS and FLEXspace can help elucidate perspectives from faculty, librarians, AV/IT, and academic technology professionals. But a concern frequently expressed is that technology integration is sometimes brought into the planning pathway after initial plans have been made, when it may be more difficult to advocate for certain design features, or when plans may need to be brought up-to-date. So it's important to us to focus on ways to engage the A&D community with campus stakeholders early on. If everyone is included early as a part of an advisory process, the entire planning effort can be more effective.
Grush: Coming from the A&D community, Elissa, do you think it would be helpful in general to get into that conversation with other project stakeholders earlier, as Lisa just mentioned?
Elissa Kellett: Yes, because what makes a good learning environment has space implications. Those issues need to be thought about at the time that you are first putting together a space requirements program — listing the spaces, what they need to be like, and how big they need to be.
That's especially relevant because an active learning environment takes more space per student than a typical classroom space. So it's really important to be in that discussion early so you don't, as a designer, end up being hired to do a project and handed a list of space requirements that's already outmoded in its thinking and may present learning spaces that are too small or a project budget that is underfunded, let's say, in terms of equipment. Plus, in my role, I want to be in the project at the programming or envisioning phase, because that's the part of the project that I'm most involved in.
The conversation among stakeholders also provides a wonderful opportunity for engaging with the client, both before and after a project: before, in the early planning stages, and after, in post-occupancy evaluations to see if the spaces are getting used, or if they are being changed around in the ways that we anticipated. And that's a wonderful conversation and feedback to have on a project.
The conversation among stakeholders also provides a wonderful opportunity for engaging with the client, both before and after a project: before, in the early planning stages, and after, in post-occupancy evaluations to see if the spaces are getting used, or if they are being changed around in the ways that we anticipated.
Grush: And ideally, the FLEXspace and LSRS integration will promote and support that conversation… bringing A&D people into the mix earlier.
Kellett: Yes.
Rebecca Frazee: I agree with Elissa about the value of before-and-after data. We are eager to have more campuses add those post-occupancy stories after they've launched a space and initially documented it in FLEXspace. We think, "Here is this fabulous design and well-appointed space — so how did it go? How did faculty respond? Students? To what extent did it meet or exceed expectations? Where did it fall short? Were there any unexpected positive outcomes?" Maybe the A&D community can help campuses tell that story.
Grush: Elissa, how do you plan on using FLEXspace and the LSRS at your A&D company?
Kellett: I'm really excited about that integration. As the global higher education practice leader at Leo A. Daly, I wanted to give our team all the tools and benchmarks to use, and I think the LSRS is an objective and informative measure of the quality of learning spaces as they relate to active learning. If we score highly, we know we are doing well, and we don't score highly we know what to change with our spaces. FLEXspace is an excellent information sharing forum that will raise the quality of higher education learning spaces by encouraging people to share in a forum where higher education is so well represented.
So, more specifically, what we plan on doing with FLEXspace and the LSRS together, is use the LSRS to evaluate and inform our own designs (those that we do for clients), and then post those designs, with the LSRS scores in FLEXspace so that others can see how we have implemented designs that satisfy a particular client need.
Grush: Elissa, do you have concerns about posting that information so openly, given that you do have competitors out there who can access it freely?
Kellett: No, especially not when I think about how we should be competing on so many other levels, instead — any one of us should be able to design effective learning spaces. And the information we have through FLEXspace and the LSRS should benefit everybody.
Grush: What other aspects of the "new" FLEXspace and LSRS are encouraging to you?
Kellett: An especially interesting point about the LSRS is that one section of it is about what the space is, another part is about how the space is used, and a third component is concerned with who has a seat at the table. That third component is very important, because those with a seat at the table are contributing ideas about how future spaces will be designed — sharing visions of our designs.
An especially interesting point about the LSRS is that one section of it is about what the space is, another part is about how the space is used, and a third component is concerned with who has a seat at the table.
One thing that we plan on sharing in FLEXspace is a set of guidelines that we are developing internally to make sure that the quality of all of our spaces will remain as high as it can be. And this is internal training material that we plan on sharing to help everyone think in terms of the future of their spaces.
Grush: That brings up an excellent point for everyone. When we talk about the FLEXspace/LSRS integration, which is basically a forward-looking planning process, we naturally refer to the future. I'm curious to know if you think of this integration as a kind of opportunity for institutions to "future proof" the spaces they are creating. Lisa?
Stephens: To me, the whole emphasis behind future proofing right now is on serving those who want access to a quality higher education but may not be able to attend traditional classes.
Consider continuing education, which has been an ongoing service to students on most campuses for many years. But now it's also a great way to future proof. Offering remote learners access to the same lectures that everybody on campus is attending in person can be a real value-add. There's a lot of evidence that the workforce needs more agile employees and companies are increasingly willing to support related professional development efforts. Thus, there is a lot of investment in hybrid space that enables students — regardless of location — to access classes in real time, or through a recording, and through online learning management systems.
The more you use FLEXspace — with LSRS integration — the more you fuse the efforts of all stakeholders. And the more you explore all the uploaded research and data, the farther you travel down the path towards future proofing your spaces. And in the end, you and your colleagues will have rounded all the corners to look in on faculty development, student engagement, and technologies to help your program interact with people at a distance, and at scale.
The more you use FLEXspace — with LSRS integration — the more you fuse the efforts of all stakeholders. And the more you explore all the uploaded research and data, the farther you travel down the path towards future proofing your spaces.
It's a structured but fluid process that brings everyone together to look toward the future — and it opens up new opportunities to future proof your space.
One designer commented on a call just yesterday, that we are not designing for the current generation of students; rather, we are easily concerned with five generations… or even more.
Frazee: That's right, and the essence of planning with the tools we now have with FLEXspace and LSRS integration, is to assess your space, or examples of spaces you find from other institutions, against benchmark 'affordances' to ensure that your space can evolve effectively to support and respond to new teaching and learning models and other stakeholder needs over time.
And another way that the integration helps with future proofing is that you're not just looking at a pretty picture. With FLEXspace and LSRS integration, you are looking at all the experience, advice, research, data, and now, LSRS scores, so you know more about how well the space is meeting expectations and intended outcomes.
With FLEXspace and LSRS integration, you are looking at all the experience, advice, research, data, and now, LSRS scores, so you know more about how well the space is meeting expectations and intended outcomes.
And again, if I may repeat, an important aspect of future proofing is to make sure that you're considering all the different multiple perspectives and angles, so that you haven't forgotten about or missed something that will help you make the decision that's right for your project — one that will hold up long term.
And that reminds me, I'd like to emphasize the idea of FLEXspace as a community first and foremost. So it's not just the portal, and it's not just the qualitative examples and the quantitative scoring though the LSRS — it's also about reaching out to others for ideas, insight, and support, and knowing that it's going to help.
[Editor's note: Photo courtesy Indiana University; LSRS graphic courtesy FLEXspace.org]