Reimagining the Academic Workhorse for Student Success

As the population of high school graduates declines and federal investments in higher education shrink, colleges and universities are under increasing pressure to do more with less. Campus leaders are confronting a familiar question: how do we reinvest in the large, utilitarian academic buildings that anchor our campuses?  

These “workhorse” buildings, often constructed between the 1950s and 1980s to accommodate the post-war enrollment boom, may house most of a university’s instructional square footage. They have served generations of students with little fanfare but enormous impact. Today, many of these buildings are nearing the end of their mechanical and spatial life cycles. Decades of deferred maintenance have piled up, and while the price tag may be daunting, the potential return on renewal is equally significant. 

In a 2024 national survey of chief business officers by Inside Higher Ed, 36% identified aging infrastructure and deferred maintenance costs as a top institutional risk, surpassing technology shifts and enrollment vitality. Many campuses can only fund a fraction of the need; 63% reported they could adress only a quarter of identified deficiencies. Meanwhile, the average repair backlog now exceeds $140 per gross square foot, and each dollar deferred can grow to $4 in future capital renewal costs due to inflation and escalation.  

For academic buildings that host thousands of student contact hours each week, deferred maintenance is a strategic opportunity. Instructional space typically represents around 5%-15% of a campus’ total area, yet its performance influences nearly every student and faculty member. Even modest improvements can ripple across learning, scheduling, and retention.  

Renovation is more than fixing backlog. It allows for tactical investment to support campus renewal. Every classroom modernization, every improved sightline, every additional seat and informal space represents a reinvestment in the student experience and in the university’s ability to deliver on its mission of academic excellence. 

Many mid-century academic buildings were designed around an industrial model of education: siloed departments, double-loaded corridors, and “cells” and “bells”—rows of classrooms divided rigidly by both time blocks and CMU walls. These environments reflected an instructor-centered paradigm: 

• Segmented curriculum and passive learning 

• Front-facing instruction with one fixed teaching wall 

• Static furniture and little student movement 

• Ribbon windows, low ceilings, and fluorescent lighting 

• Few choices for students in how or where they learn 

While these buildings have “good bones,” their physical structures reinforce an outdated pedagogy. The result is often opaque, inward-focused, and uniform utilitarian spaces that limit student engagement and flexibility. 

Today’s students and faculty expect something different. Learning is more connected, experiential, and relational. The boundaries between formal and informal spaces have become porous, forming a continuum of learning that extends beyond classroom walls. Successful renovations open up these spaces, both physically and pedagogically, to create variety, visibility, and choice.  

Modern classrooms are student-centered environments that curate collaboration, choice, and active participation. Design responses include: 

• Interior transparency: Adding interior glass into doors and sidelights introduces daylight and visibility to connect classroom learning with campus life. 

• Multiple teaching walls: Flexible technology and writable surfaces allow instructors and students to shift easily among modes of learning. 

• Furniture on the move: Tables and seating that reconfigure quickly support teamwork and different learning activities. 

• Choice and comfort: Adjustable lighting, improved acoustics, and local thermal controls give students and instructors agency in shaping their environment. 

• BYOD-ready infrastructure: As “bring your own device” learning expands, additional power, data, and digital connectivity become essential. 

Incorporating space for collaboration outside the classroom creates vital “third spaces” where students can decompress and build community. We recommend one seat outside instructional space for every five inside — a ratio that supports informal learning, mentoring, and relationship-building between classes. These in-between zones are where ideas are shared, cross-pollination is enriched, and belonging is cultivated.  

Renovations should also consider classroom ratios and orientation. When combining rooms, maintain a maximum proportion of 1:1.5 (depth to width) to preserve clear sightlines and strong acoustics. Rotating the instructional orientation by 90 degrees can bring students closer to the instructor, and widening aisles and de-densifying capacities keeps learners within the 15-foot social zone that allows for strong instructional proxemics and eye contact and ensures the instructor can connect with every learner on a personal level. 

While these design changes may increase the square footage per student, they increase the desirability of rooms, which improves utilization and learning outcomes. Modernized, flexible classrooms are scheduled more frequently, generate higher weekly room hour utilization, and yield better alignment between seat count and enrollment demand. Students in these environments attend more consistently, report greater well-being, and demonstrate stronger engagement and achievement — evidence that design improvements translate directly into better learning.  

While most post-war academic building structures were built to last a long time, they often lack energy efficiency, daylight, and identity. Reskinning these structures by upgrading glazing, insulation, and façade materials can modernize their appearance, improve performance, and re-energize the learning experience. 

Retrofitting rather than replacing is inherently a sustainable act, extending the life of the building while reducing embodied carbon and construction waste. High-performance envelopes, efficient systems, and durable materials lower operating costs and improve comfort, while enhanced daylight, shading, and natural ventilation create healthier, more inviting interiors. Research has shown that better air quality and daylight contribute to improved student attendance, well-being, and cognitive performance, reinforcing the connection between sustainability and learning. 

A new skin does more than save energy. Façade updates provide an opportunity to align outdated buildings with contemporary campus architecture, signaling institutional pride and demonstrating a commitment to renewal rather than replacement. Together, these changes transform “good bones” into a revitalized presence that is efficient, inviting, and emblematic of a forward-thinking academic community. 

Accessibility today must mean more than compliance; it’s about creating a unified, welcoming experience for everyone who enters. Renovations can bring physical, cognitive, and cultural accessibility together in ways that strengthen belonging and community: 

• Physical accessibility: Everyone arrives through the same front door. Modernized circulation routes, elevators, and wayfinding systems make navigation equitable and intuitive.  

• Cognitive accessibility: Predictable layouts, clear signage, and intuitive technology reduce cognitive load and help all learners orient quickly.  

• Cultural accessibility: Spaces that represent and welcome the diversity of campus life, through imagery, materials, and flexibility of use, foster a sense of shared ownership and connection.  

By integrating these layers into every renovation decision, from finishes to furniture to programming, the “workhorse” building transforms into a welcoming environment for learning and discovery. 

Renovating large academic buildings is one of the most powerful and cost-effective investments a university can make. By rethinking proportions and ratios, integrating informal and accessible spaces, reskinning facades, and upgrading technology and energy performance, campuses can transform aging infrastructure into engines of collaboration, efficiency, and student success. 

At Ayers Saint Gross, we see every “workhorse” building as an opportunity: not only to renew the physical fabric of campus, but to advance mission and vision while honoring available resources.  Thoughtful renovations can create more resilient and high-impact learning environments that transform how students experience learning, connection, and discovery every day. 

Shannon Dowling is an architect, space analyst, and educator who focuses on creating research-driven and student-centered learning environments.

References 

Inside Higher Ed, “Why College Deferred Maintenance Is a Growing Risk” (2024)

Strategic Partnerships Report, “Higher Education Facilities Face Growing Maintenance Backlog” (2025).