In 2000, just over 33 percent of U.S. college students had cellphones; by mid-decade, nearly 90 percent did. Our first Buildings & Grounds guest blogger, Mary Jo Olenick, explains how campuses have been affected by this millennial shift:

BC

Before cellphones, social interactions on campuses were largely initiated by face-to-face contact, either through scheduled events or chance meetings at common gathering spaces. Physically placing yourself in a public gathering area was an important aspect of socialization. As a result, buildings and campuses were designed to encourage chance interactions. Gathering spots were located throughout the campus at intersections and crossroads where you could be seen. You could hang out and wait for friends or peruse posted information. In residential facilities, lobbies, lounges, and corridors were perceived as critical to social networking, and they were purposefully designed to provide places to hang out, gather, collect, wait, observe, and eventually make contact with people.

AC

After cellphones spread across campuses, these traditional common spaces began to seem obsolete. Students have no need to wait in lobbies, lounges, or corridors to connect, and no need to read posted notices to stay informed. They have no need to take circuitous routes through their campuses to locate friends — cellphones let them contact friends instantly. New acquaintances are also initiated and validated through cellphone networks. These networks facilitate new interactions and social opportunities by providing linkages between diverse groups.

Less than a decade ago, architects and planners focused on developing hang-out spaces for campuses. Now the challenge is to respond to how today’s students actually build and live in their social networks. Wide corridors in residence halls will not generate social interaction if there is a stigma to being seen in a public space without your friends. At the very least, you should be seen talking to them on your cellphone. In fact, the broad corridors touted in recent residence-hall design may well be a terrible waste of space.

Likewise, if lounges, lobbies, and other common areas no longer serve as spontaneous, informal gathering areas, perhaps that space should be used instead for other functions —- multimedia rooms or black-box theaters, for instance.

Corridors previously used to connect typical four-person living units can be absorbed into larger “super suites.” These suites, with anywhere from eight to 16 students, offer the critical mass to support private bedrooms and appropriate bath-to-bed ratios without costing too much. In addition, capturing the corridor space within the suite helps create common spaces large enough for a variety of activities within the living unit. The larger living group also helps prevent the social isolation that can occur with a four-person-suite. The super suite can create a truly unique living experience, defining college life in the new millennium just the way the double-loaded corridor and common bath defined the college experience of yore.

Residential campus buildings can play an important role in a college’s educational mission — if they are relevant to the students who live there. By understanding how students build relationships in their AC world, we can create facilities that engage students and foster the kind of vibrant academic community that we value.

Mary Jo Olenick is an architect who leads the S/L/A/M Collaborative’s higher-education practice. She will contribute occasionally to Buildings & Grounds during March.