Diverse Alternative Learning Visions 2026–2066: Transforming and Reframing the University as a Lifelong Social Design Lab

  • Ian Pollock
  • Lonny J. Avi Brooks


California State University, East Bay (CSUEB) represents one of the most diverse campuses in the United States, and has started a number of programs in long term and futures thinking to celebrate diverse, alternative visions of the future. In the summer of 2016, for five weeks, multiple university stakeholders, including the University President, deans, faculty, staff and the university advancement team, engaged onsite in a futures design thinking process to envision a new Twenty first century commons space at the university. The ultimate goal was to transform and expand the university’s central library within the next ten years (by 2026) and for the next fifty years (to 2066). Six teams of stakeholders participated in forecasting, a human-centered design process shaping a twenty-first approach to education. In assessing this forecasting efforts, the following question was addressed: How did design futures thinking shape our vision of the new library and information commons space on the CSUEB campus? Although initial steps have been taken to realize the outcomes from this project, additional important work is needed to institutionalize full innovative changes.


Social design Forecasting Human-centered design Diverse space Alternative visions Information commons 


  1. Burliuk, D., Kruchenykh, A., Mayakovsky, V., & Khlebnikov, V. (1912). Slap in the face of public taste. In A. Lawton & H. Eagle (Trans. and Ed.), Russian Futurism through its manifestoes, 1928 (pp. 51–52). Washington, DC: New Academia Publishing. Google Scholar
  2. Candy, S. (2010). The futures of everyday life: Politics and the design of experiential scenarios (Doctoral dissertation). Department of Political Science, University of Hawaii at Manoa.Google Scholar
  3. Evans, B. (2016, July 26). Lucien Kroll and the dilemma of participation. The Architectural Review. Retrieved from
  4. Hassan, Z. (2014). The social labs revolution: A new approach to solving our most complex challenges. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.Google Scholar
  5. Hines, A., & Bishop, P. J. (Eds.). (2006). Thinking about the future: Guidelines for strategic foresight. Washington, DC: Social Technologies.Google Scholar
  6. IDEO. (2015). The field guide to human-centered design.Google Scholar
  7. Institute for The Future. (2013, April 26). Framework: Public Imagination. Reconstitutional Convention Palo Alto, CA. Retrieved from:
  8. Nagy, P., & Neff, G. (2015). Imagined affordance: Reconstructing a keyword for communication theory. Social Media + Society, 1(2). New York: Sage. Scholar
  9. Nakamura, L. (2013). Cybertypes: Race, ethnicity, and identity on the internet. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Schreiber, D., & Berge, Z. L. (1998). Editors. Distance training: How innovative organizations are using technology to maximize learning and meet business objectives. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Google Scholar
  11. Starr, S., & Griesemer, J. (1989). Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39. Social Studies of Science, 19(3), 387–420. Scholar
  12. Sullivan, L. H. (2004). The tall office building artistically considered. Lippincotts Magazine, March 1896.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ian Pollock
    • 1
  • Lonny J. Avi Brooks
    • 1
  1. 1.California State UniversityHaywardUSA

Personalised recommendations