TO: John Butler, Chair, Classrooms Committee

FROM: Rosalie F. Maddocks, Chair, Subcommittee 3

DATE: March 6, 1999

The scheduling records on which this analysis is based were taken from RARCAS SCHS "Schedule Course or Building Summary" screens on February 11 (small and medium-sized rooms) and March 2 (large lecture halls), Spring Semester 1999.

The Fall 1998 list of 186 general purpose classrooms with their seating capacities was posted on the Classrooms Committee website as CC document 7B. The Spring 1999 list of 184 rooms is the same except for the removal of two rooms (204 and 210 FH). No online data could be found for three rooms (ARC 201, 202, FH 127).

A compilation of these section data by college has been posted on the Classrooms Committee website as CC document 7E, which includes plots of sections versus room capacity.

The RARCAS CALS summary screens were compiled by building and posted as CC 7F.

Comparable summaries for the 22 largest rooms only based on Fall 1998 data were posted as CC 3 and 4.

Each of these rooms is allocated to one of ten colleges for the initial round of schedule development (see RAR Class Schedule Development Information Packet for Spring 99). No room is assigned exclusively to the College of Pharmacy, although during certain hours Pharmacy has the use of three rooms otherwise assigned to HFAC and ENGR.

The number of rooms assigned to each college is as follows:

Architecture 7

Business 23

Education 17

Engineering 15

Humanities, Fine Arts & Communication 50

Natural Science and Mathematics 31

Social Sciences 23

Social Work 5

Technology 4

Later in the schedule-building processes, other colleges can obtain access to these rooms, so that actual usage departs from the initial allocation model. The statistics analyzed below do not distinguish these "guest" sections. The effect is that a college can schedule a room efficiently either by using it for its own courses or by making it freely available to other colleges.

Three of the professional colleges (Hotel & Restaurant Management, Law, Optometry) have their own facilities and do not use general purpose classrooms. The Honors College uses rooms assigned to other colleges.

The general purpose classrooms are intended primarily for regularly scheduled sections of 3-credit lecture-recitation courses. Laboratories, studios, "break-out" discussion groups and other formats are scheduled in class-labs and other "proprietary" space. The following types of aberrant sections were manually deleted from the data:

The number of sections scheduled per room ranges from a high of 18 (room 110 Melcher) to a low of 0 (210, 212, 214 FA) (see CC document 9). In the current University Time Bands Policy, there are a total of 22 non-overlapping time bands in a week, so 18 of 22 (82%) is very high utilization!

The most heavily scheduled room on campus is not a large lecture room! It is room 110 Melcher with a capacity of 66 students, scheduled for 18 sections. Runners-up are room 114 Melcher with 17 sections (capacity 66) and 136 SR with 16 sections (capacity 80). No large lecture room has more than 15 sections scheduled in Spring 99.

A total of 1779 sections are scheduled into these 175 rooms, which gives an average of 10.17 sections per room. At 3 hours per section, this is an average utilization of 30.5 hours per week.

However, the Coordinating Board sets a standard of 38 hours per week for general-purpose classrooms, which would be an average of 12.7 sections per room. See HD 4 (Undergraduate Council Report) and more CB data in HD 5 and 6.

The Undergraduate Council in 1997 (HD 4) was told that the largest classrooms are in shortest supply relative to demand. It might be supposed that the density of scheduling would reflect this. Therefore, the number of scheduled sections versus room capacity was plotted for the rooms assigned to each of nine colleges (CC9). The results show only a weak trend.

In most colleges that have rooms of all sizes (ENGR, NSM, BUS) the middle-sized rooms (40-99 capacity) have about the same density of scheduling as the large rooms (<100). In HFAC, although Aud1 AH is fairly tightly scheduled, the other large rooms are not, and the usage of middle-sized rooms is highly variable among departments. In all colleges, the small rooms (<30) show distinctly lower utilization.

Overall, the fairly wide range of variation probably arises from the specific character of particular rooms as well as uneven fit of room allocation to actual needs. Undesirable rooms, such as 104 C, stand out in these data by their low utilization.

The distribution of classrooms by capacity is discontinuous and uneven, so that, for example, there are rather few classrooms on campus with capacities of 70 to 90. Because a small class can be scheduled in a large room but not vice versa, the larger rooms would be expected to have disproportionate use. It appears that the small rooms (<30) are the "least needed" by this measure and therefore are the most appropriate candidates to be removed from the general list and adapted to other uses.

The general-purpose classrooms are regarded as a common resource that is in short supply. Therefore, it is appropriate to examine patterns in room scheduling to determine whether colleges are making full, economical use of the rooms allocated to them. The graphic plots provide a visual measure of room usage by colleges (CC 9). The number of sections divided by the number of rooms provides a rough index of efficiency:

Architecture (41 sections, 7 rooms) 5.86

Business (235 sections, 23 rooms) 10.22

Education (136 sections, 17 rooms) 8.0

Engineering (158 sections, 15 rooms) 10.53

Humanities, Fine Arts & Communication (483 sections, 50 rooms) 9.66

Natural Sciences and Mathematics (387 sections, 31 rooms) 12.48

Social Sciences (245 sections, 23 rooms) 10.65

Social Work (51 sections, 5 rooms) 10.2

Technology (43 sections, 4 rooms) 10.75

The sections/room index ranges from a high of 12.48 (NSM) to lows of 5.86 and 8.0 (ARCH, EDUC). Most colleges have indexes above 10 (BUS, ENGR, SS, SW, TECH). For HFAC the index is 9.66, but there is significant variation among departments. If the numerous LCC sections (non-credit) were included, the index would probably be comparable to other colleges. The low scores of 5.86 and 8.0 are anomalous and deserves attention.

It is of interest that 12.48 (NSM) is very close to the standard set by the Coordinating Board, which has been regarded by some people as unrealistic in our urban setting. This shows that the standard is not unattainable, at least in certain areas.

The CALS screens, like the other data compiled by the Classrooms Committee and Undergraduate Council, show an overwhelming preference for the prime time bands. In room after room, the pattern is the same. Though perhaps all units comply with the minimum requirement (scheduling 40% of sections and 40% of large sections outside of prime time), the result for the campus is less than optimal use of general-purpose classrooms.

Early mornings, afternoons (after 2:30), and evenings (after 7:00) are especially under-utilized. It is likely that a review of historical data would show a significant decline from earlier decades, when the campus had a more aggressive committment to afternoon and evening degree programs.

Examination of the SCHS screens shows that, except in the most undesirable rooms, guest sections (offered by another college) are in non-prime times, suggesting that colleges rarely grant access to prime rooms in prime times.

The vast majority of sections scheduled into most of these rooms comply with the University Time Bands Policy. (See the Undergraduate Council Report (HD 4) for recommendations concerning this policy and its academic ramifications.)

A notorious exception is the College of Business, which schedules hour-and-a-half classes on MW mornings. This transgression is compensated in part by several positive features:

A more conspicuous violator of the University Time Bands Policy is the College of Education, in which numerous sections taught in general-purpose classrooms neither begin nor end on a time band.

For the University, because general-purpose classrooms are involved, the College of Education scheduling practices produce inefficient packing and uneconomical use of a resource. For students, the absence of a predictable pattern produces both empty time between classes and conflicts with courses elsewhere in the university.

In combination with the low sections/room index, the capricious scheduling pattern suggests that, by comparison with other colleges, the College of Education has more classrooms allocated to it than it needs.

The lowest sections/room index (5.86) is earned by the College of Architecture. This index is based on only seven rooms. Room 150 ARC, is scheduled for 14 sections, about average for large lecture halls. Rooms 109, 219 and 402 ARC are scheduled for only 7 to 9 sections, somewhat low for rooms of 33 to 60 capacity. Possibly the geographic location of this building makes these rooms less desirable for courses outside of Architecture, or perhaps something about the rooms themselves is responsible for their low utilization.

Room 215, whose capacity is only 14, is scheduled for only 3 sections, and no scheduling data could be found for rooms 201 and 202 (capacity 12). Perhaps the general-purpose status of these smaller rooms should be re-examined.

Very rarely does any section in any college have a quota larger than the seating capacity of the room. Yet, University historical add/drop data and instructors’ attendance records tell us that after the first week or two of most classes there will be plenty of vacant seats.

In many cases, the section quota is distinctly less than room capacity and seems to have been set by some other consideration. Possibly the discrepancies arise because, although there is no general shortage of classrooms, rooms of just the right size may be in short supply. For example, although numerous sections of English have quotas of exactly 27, they must be taught in rooms seating 30, 35, 40, and 50.

The College of Pharmacy teaches its courses all over the campus map, which must get tiresome! Pharmacy has the use of Lect2 D2 mornings and 104 C afternoons, but no large lecture hall is allocated exclusively to the college. Four of the 14 sections scheduled in Lect2 D2 this semester are Pharmacy courses. Not one of the three sections scheduled in 104 C is a Pharmacy course.

Four rooms with capacities of 48 to 62 are allocated to Pharmacy (9 AH, 116 M, 121 SR, 138 SR). 56 sections are scheduled in these four rooms, for a very respectable sections/room index of 12.5. However, not one of these sections is a Pharmacy course! The majority are offered by SS, with some by HFAC and a few by NSM.

This pattern is puzzling. It is likely that the rooms allocated to Pharmacy do not fit the college needs, and this allocation should be re-examined.