Monmouth College's Center for Science and Business Designed for Integrated Education

When Monmouth College's Center for Science and Business (CSB) opens in the fall, it will be noteworthy, in part, for its unconventional combination of academic departments. The three-story, 138,000-sf facility integrates classrooms and offices for faculty in not only chemistry, physics, biology, and psychology, but also business, accounting, and mathematics.

The mix of disciplines might raise a few eyebrows, but it represents a very strategic decision for the 160-year-old liberal arts institution with an enrollment of 1,300 located in a rural community in western Illinois. Supporting a pedagogical approach that emphasizes small classes and breadth of knowledge, the CSB embodies the school’s long-term commitment to integrated learning.

“We wanted to put together a building where people from very different disciplines might learn from each other things that could help them be better in their own specialties,” says College President Mauri Ditzler, Ph.D. “The future of the Midwest is based on agriculture and agribusiness. To be successful, industry leaders will need to know how to grow more grain, process it more efficiently, and sell it around the world. This intersection of science and business, as represented in the CSB, fits our institution and our region, and our history.” 

Integrated Learning

According to Ditzler, “The hardest thing for any college to do is to teach the intermingling of knowledge.”

Often, the effort expended on drilling down into a specific field of study comes at the expense of broader learning. Monmouth aspires to supplement the specialized knowledge that students acquire in their majors with information that creates a more broad-based context. This approach goes beyond crossing disciplines to actually integrate learning.

As an example, Ditzler cites the equations and classification schemes that organize vast amounts of information in the fields of chemistry and biology. Monmouth challenges students to find ways of transferring those organizational skills, using similar formats to create a logical progression of ideas in a speech or writing assignment, for instance.

“We are always asking how to take something you learn in one course and apply it to another, even if the subjects don’t seem to have a relationship,” he says.

“We push out the edges of a subject and connect history, politics, and economics,” adds Michael Connell, J.D., Ph.D., professor and chair of the department of political economy and commerce, the school’s business program. That’s what happens in the beer program coursework, which deals not only with chemistry and biology, but with factors that led breweries to be established in certain locations and the cultural climate of the time.

“We show students how all these pieces are connected,” says Connell.

“This is a fundamental feature of what makes us unique,” adds Ditzler.

Three-Dimensional Layout

The CSB helps Monmouth realize its vision for integrated education by co-locating complementary disciplines and maximizing the opportunities for cross-pollination among both faculty and students.  

With a layout configured to promote interaction, the CSB is organized into two wings, or neighborhoods, which intersect in a central common space on each of the building’s three floors.  The departmental neighborhoods don’t have rigid boundaries, but they do cluster disciplines that are “natural partners”—those likely to have the most logical or frequent professional touchpoints. 

Still concerned that the horizontal adjacencies were not sufficient to bring about the desired interdisciplinary overlap, the design team went one step further, utilizing the building’s verticality to broaden connections.

Ditzler describes it as “thinking in three dimensions.”

“Don’t just look side-to-side in two dimensions,” he advises. “Look up and down and think about the occupants above and below.”

That concept translates physically into an open, unifying central staircase that serves as the primary pedestrian corridor, and a three-story great room with lines of sight upward to 20 different faculty offices, visually linking the multiple departments.

“When you are integrating knowledge and bringing people together, what is really important is how many people—faculty and students—you can get to interact,” says Ditzler. “A significant part of that in our design is the big open space of the great room, where you can see lots of offices at once. We wanted to use every tool we could to make the links, emphasizing that diverse course content fits together.” 

The CSB also propagates cross-disciplinary influences with small, flexible classrooms and the location of faculty offices.

Science labs are versatile enough to be used for both physics and psychology classes.

“Unlike large universities, we don’t have individual, isolated research groups overseen by a specific faculty member,” says Christopher Fasano, Ph.D., professor and chair of the physics department. “Some of the laboratories are used only a couple of days a week, and, because of our emphasis on small class size, they work well for other courses.”

Offices are intermixed with classrooms, creating an environment where students can drop in on professors informally between classes.

“This is how we want to interact with students,” notes Fasano.

Three Important Lessons

Having been involved in six previous construction or remodeling projects, Ditzler mentions three lessons he learned in the course of CSB planning that he wishes he had acquired earlier in his career.

The first is that “the best building is the one that best fits your institution.” Building committees usually travel around the country, identifying best practices and features they’d like to incorporate in their own projects, he explains. However, they need to avoid duplicating those features without imagining how they would work on their own campus.

For example, one school had instructional labs designed for only 12 students, according to faculty preference. It looked like a great idea, but it would not work for instruction where the economic model called for labs in the 25-person range.

“American education is characterized by diversity, and each institution needs to understand its mission, focus, and curriculum,” he says. “A concept might be well executed on another campus, but there is no guarantee it will work on yours.”

His second observation is a reminder that the timeline from conception to occupancy can extend to a decade, often longer than the average term of a college president. Many of those involved in the planning process will not be there upon project completion. That means there will be “a remarkable evolution” in the building concept from start to finish. 

“Don’t assume that the first ideas discussed will be the important ones when the building opens,” cautions Ditzler, noting that as much as half of a department’s faculty can be hired over a seven- or eight-year period. In many cases the newcomers came on board because they were excited about the new building, which should far outlast those involved in its planning and design.

“Don’t design a facility based on the wishes of those who are never going to be there. Think about the institution and its future trajectory.” 

Finally, Ditzler posits, “you don’t have to win every argument if you can design some flexibility into the building.

“It is not necessary to resolve every debate during the planning process,” he says. “This relates back to the other lessons: the building has to fit the institution, but you cannot be completely locked in time. Things change.”

Take the question of classroom and office locations in the CSB. Some faculty wanted the two different types of space to be clustered in separate areas, while the administration called for them to be intermingled.

“Everyone naturally has his own ideas, which can lead to endless arguments. We decided not to assign offices, not even to assign classrooms, until late in the process, to give us as much flexibility and interchangeability as possible,” he says.

The architects’ plan to make breakout rooms and faculty offices the same size also helped resolve the clash.

Pragmatic, Strategic, and Inspirational

At least part of the initial impetus for the CSB’s science-business combination was pragmatic, with the single-building concept expanding fundraising opportunities and generating efficiencies in construction and utility costs.

Another part was strategic, creating a physical manifestation of the various blends of science and business that led to success for many Monmouth College graduates.

Ultimately, though, the CSB is expected to be inspirational, concludes Ditzler.

“Our $40 million investment goes beyond simply reflecting the college’s long-term commitment to integrated learning and has taken on a strong role in shaping the campus’s future focus and master plan.”

By Nicole Zaro Stahl

This report is based on a presentation Ditzler gave at the 2012 Tradeline College and University Science Facilities conference.