Abstract
Universities planning the provision of space for their teaching requirements need to do so in a fashion that reduces capital and maintenance costs whilst still providing a high-quality level of service. Space plans should aim to provide sufficient capacity without incurring excessive costs due to over-capacity. A simple measure used to estimate over-provision is utilisation. Essentially, the utilisation is the fraction of seats that are used in practice, or the ratio of demand to supply. However, studies usually find that utilisation is low, often only 20–40%, and this is suggestive of significant over-capacity.
Our previous work has provided methods to improve such space planning. They identify a critical level of utilisation as the highest level that can be achieved whilst still reliably satisfying the demand for places to allocate teaching events. In this paper, we extend this body of work to incorporate the notions of event-types and space-types. Teaching events have multiple ‘event-types’, such as lecture, tutorial, workshop, etc., and there are generally corresponding space-types. Matching the type of an event to a room of a corresponding space-type is generally desirable. However, realistically, allocation happens in a mixed space-type environment where teaching events of a given type are allocated to rooms of another space-type; e.g., tutorials will borrow lecture theatres or workshop rooms.
We propose a model and methodology to quantify the effects of space-type mixing and establish methods to search for better space-type profiles; where the term “space-type profile” refers to the relative numbers of each type of space. We give evidence that these methods have the potential to improve utilisation levels. Hence, the contribution of this paper is twofold. Firstly, we present informative studies of the effects of space-type mixing on utilisation, and critical utilisations. Secondly, we present straightforward though novel methods to determine better space-type profiles, and give an example in which the resulting profiles are indeed significantly improved.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Beyrouthy, C. (2008). Models, solution methods and threshold behaviour for the teaching space allocation problem. Ph.D. thesis, School of Computer Science, University of Nottingham.
Beyrouthy, C., Burke, E. K., Landa-Silva, J. D., McCollum, B., McMullan, P., & Parkes, A. J. (2006). Understanding the role of UFOs within space exploitation. In Proceedings of the 2006 international conference on the practice and theory of automated timetabling (PATAT 2006) (pp. 359–362), Brno, Czech Republic. http://www.asap.cs.nott.ac.uk/publications/pdf/ajp_patat2006.pdf.
Beyrouthy, C., Burke, E. K., Landa-Silva, D., McCollum, B., McMullan, P., & Parkes, A. J. (2007a). The teaching space allocation problem with splitting. In Burke, E. K., & Rudova, H. (Eds.), Lecture notes in computer science (Brno, Czech Republic) : Vol. 3867. Practice and theory of automated timetabling VI: revised selected papers from the 6th international conference, PATAT, Aug 30–Sep 1, 2006 (pp. 228–247). Berlin: Springer. ISBN 978-3-540-77344-3. http://www.asap.cs.nott.ac.uk/publications/pdf/ccb_patat2006.pdf.
Beyrouthy, C., Burke, E. K., Landa-Silva, D., McCollum, B., McMullan, P., & Parkes, A. J. (2007b). Improving the room-size profiles of university teaching space (Technical Report). School of Computer Science, University of Nottingham (2007b).
Beyrouthy, C., Burke, E. K., Landa-Silva, D., McCollum, B., McMullan, P., & Parkes, A. J. (2008a, under revision). Threshold effects in the teaching space allocation problem with splitting. European Journal of Operational Research.
Beyrouthy, C., Burke, E. K., Landa-Silva, D., McCollum, B., McMullan, P., & Parkes, A. J. (2008b). Conflict inheritance in sectioning and space planning. In Proceedings of the 7th international conference on the practice and theory of automated timetabling (PATAT 2008).
Beyrouthy, C., Burke, E. K., McCollum, B., McMullan, P., & Parkes, A. J. (2008c). Evaluating the space planning benefits of partitionable rooms. In Proceedings of the 7th international conference on the practice and theory of automated timetabling (PATAT 2008).
Beyrouthy, C., Burke, E. K., Landa-Silva, J. D., McCollum, B., McMullan, P., & Parkes, A. J. (2009). Towards improving the utilisation of university teaching space. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 60, 130–143. ISSN 0160-5682. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602523.
Bleau, B. (1981). Planning models in higher education: Historical review and survey of currently available models. Higher Education, V10(2), 153–168. doi:10.1007/BF00129129.
Bollobas, B. (1985). Random graphs. London: Academic Press.
Boronico, J. (2000). Quantitative modeling and technology driven departmental course scheduling. Omega, 28(3), 327–346.
Bullock, N. (1974). Modeling the demand for teaching space. Environment and Planning, 1, 69–103.
Burke, E. K., & Petrovic, S. (2002). Recent research trends in automated timetabling. European Journal of Operational Research, 140(2), 266–280.
Carter, M. W., & Laporte, G. (1998). Recent developments in practical course timetabling. In Selected papers from the second international conference on practice and theory of automated timetabling (pp. 3–19). Berlin: Springer. ISBN 3-540-64979-4.
Fizzano, P., & Swanson, S. (2000). Scheduling classes on a college campus. Computational Optimization and Applications, 16, 279–294.
HEFCE (1999). Estates management statistics project (Technical Report). Higher Education Funding Council for England (1999). Report 99/18. http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/1999/99_18.htm.
ILOG (2005). Provider at the time of use of CPLEX. (ILOG later acquired by IBM). http://www.ilog.fr/.
McCollum, B., & McMullan, P. (2004). The cornerstone of effective management and planning of space (Technical Report). Realtime Solutions Ltd, Belfast (2004). http://www.realtimesolutions-uk.com/SpaceManagment.doc. Accessed July 2007.
McCollum, B., & Roche, T. (2004). Scenarios for allocation of space (Technical Report). Realtime Solutions Ltd, Belfast. http://www.realtimesolutions-uk.com/Scenarios.doc.
Mirrazavi, S. K., Mardle, S. J., & Tamiz, M. (2003). A two-phase multiple objective approach to university timetabling utilising optimisation and evolutionary solution methodologies. Journal of Operations Research Society (JORS), 54(11), 1155–1166.
Rossi-Doria, O., Blum, C., Knowles, J., Sampels, M., Socha, K., & Paechter, B. (2002). A local search for the timetabling problem. In Proceedings of the fourth international conference on the practice and theory of automated timetabling (PATAT 2002) (pp. 124–127), Gent, Belgium.
Rossi-Doria, O., Sample, M., Birattari, M., Chiarandini, M., Dorigo, M., Gambardella, L., Knowles, J., Manfrin, M., Mastrolilli, M., Paechter, B., Paquete, L., & Stützle, T. (2003). A comparison of the performance of different metaheuristics on the timetabling problem. In Lecture notes in computer science : Vol. 2740. Selected papers from the fourth international conference on the practice and theory of automated timetabling (PATAT 2002) (pp. 329–351), Gent, Belgium. London: Springer.
Schaerf, A. (1999). A survey of automated timetabling. Artificial Intelligence Review, 13(2), 87–127. ISSN 0269-2821. doi:10.1023/A:1006576209967.
Selim, S. M. (1988). Split vertices in vertex colouring and their application in developing a solution to the faculty timetable problem. The Computer Journal, 31(1), 76–82.
Space Management Group (SMG) (2006). Space utilisation: practice, performance and guidelines (Technical Report). UK Higher Education Space Management Project.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Beyrouthy, C., Burke, E.K., McCollum, B. et al. University space planning and space-type profiles. J Sched 13, 363–374 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10951-010-0178-9
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10951-010-0178-9