Members Present: Michael Babcock – Co-Chair, Richard Rudnicki – Co-Chair, Bill Freese, Jennisse Waters, Mac Burgess, Paul Edlund, Jacqueline Frank, Rob Maher, Katie Ivester
Proxies: Carter Dorsett (for Brad Haderlie)
Members Absent: Lenny Triem – ASMSU President, Tony Campeau
Staff & Guests: Robert Stockdale, Elizabeth Pritchard

ITEM No.1 – Approval of May 14, 2025, Meeting Minutes

The minutes from the May 14, 2025, Classroom Committee meeting were unanimously approved.

ITEM No.2 – RECOMMENDATION – 2026 Classroom Renovation Schematic Design Final Review

Robert Stockdale guided the Classroom Committee through the proposed changes to capacity and orientation of the Reid Hall classrooms that will be renovated during the summer of 2026. Robert began with Reid Hall rooms 101 and 102, which the Committee had previously voted to maintain as separate rooms and to reduce the capacities of. Robert noted that the project architect had shifted the rooms’ orientations to reduce students’ distance from the front of the classroom. Robert then presented the proposed changes to Reid Hall 103, for which the Committee had previously voted to implement fixed tables and a reduction in capacity. Robert explained that the choice in furniture would allow the classroom to have a capacity of 84, representing a loss of 50 seats. Robert continued to explain that even with fewer seats, the room would not meet MSU’s standard for space per student, but that the room’s terraced design helps mitigate some of the issues at that density and the room will have more space per student than Reid Hall 104, a classroom that was recently renovated and has since received positive feedback from students and faculty.

Bill Freese mentioned that faculty members had asked that air conditioning be considered for Reid Hall 103. Elizabeth Pritchard replied that she would make note of that issue and that it will be addressed during the next design phase.

Robert Stockdale next introduced the proposed design for Reid Hall 105, which replaces tablet-armchairs with fixed tables, but with no impact on the room’s capacity. Robert mentioned that, like Reid Hall 103, the classroom will not meet MSU’s space standards, but that the terraced seating is beneficial toward addressing the issues that arise with more dense classrooms. Richard Rudnicki added that additional screens may be incorporated into the design to serve students at the back of the room, which would require the removal of some seats. Richard asked that the vote for approval on this item include the approval of a capacity of 161 or fewer seats for Reid Hall 105. Elizabeth Pritchard said that preliminary potential designs including the additional screens show a loss of 10 to 15 seats.
Mac Burgess asked how frequent it is that the Committee approves designs that do not meet the University’s classroom standards. Richard Rudnicki replied the about 40% of the classrooms on campus do not meet MSU’s space standards, and that the changes proposed for Reid 105 will significantly improve the room while allowing for maximum utilization. Richard explained that the space standard is one of the items that Planning, Design & Construction has flagged for review as part of the update to the Classroom Design Guidelines because it is such a common issue. Richard clarified that the room designs being presented meet all code requirements, so the space standards need to be understood as self-imposed guidelines.

Robert Stockdale next showed the design for Reid Hall 126, which removes a door to the classroom to allow for a change to a width-wise orientation and additional seats. Robert noted that this increase from 37 to 44 seats would reduce the space per student, but that the change in room orientation would allow students to be closer to the front of the room. Richard Rudnicki added that Reid Hall 126 does not currently meet the space standard, but that the proposed changes would greatly improve the learning experience in the room. Mac Burgess asked whether whiteboards would be considered given that the new design for the room features two screens. Richard answered that whiteboards, AV, and other details for the room would be considered and brought to the Committee as the designs are refined through the next phase of design.

Michael Babcock pointed out that Tony Campeau, University Registrar, while absent, had been engaged prior to the meeting and had given his approval of the changes to the capacity for the rooms.

The Committee then reviewed the designs for each classroom again. Carter Dorsett asked how the tiered floors in Reid Hall 101 and 102 would be handled. Richard Rudnicki answered that the tiers will be removed, so the rooms would be flat with tiered furniture. Carter asked whether the position of projector in Reid 103 would impact the view of student in the rear of the classroom. Richard replied that the room is similar to Reid 104, which has a tall ceiling that prevents the projector from blocking the view of any student, but that the potential for any issue will be discussed with Academic Technology & Outreach. Richard then noted that the design team is considering the back row in Reid Hall 105 as they may not be ideal for students, which is another reason why he asked that the approval for the room’s change in capacity be for 161 or fewer seats.

Michael Babcock motioned to approve the changes in capacities and orientations of Reid Hall rooms 101, 102, 103, 105, and 126.
Jennisse Waters seconded the motion.
The motion was approved unanimously.

ITEM No.3 – RECOMMENDATION – Leon Johnson 346 Renovation – Capacity and Room Layout

Robert Stockdale presented the updated layout to Leon Johnson Hall 346, which was revised based on the discussions held during the previous Classroom Committee meeting. Robert described how this new design for Leon Johnson Hall 346 removes the seating directly adjacent to the room’s walls, provides a middle aisle running up to the front three rows to help provide access to seating, and reduces the capacity of the room from 88 to 72 seats. Robert noted that the room remains under the space standard of 25 square feet per student. Richard Rudnicki added that the classroom floor will be flat and tiered furniture will be used. Michael Babcock mentioned that Tony Campeau had given his approval on the change to the room’s capacity.

Michael Babcock commented that this update was an improvement on the previous design as it offers much better access to seating. Mac Burgess asked whether the number of seats in the front three rows was necessary, or if it was possible to remove some seats to allow for the center aisle to run from the back to the front of the room so that instructors could more easily walk around the classroom and engage with students. Jennisse Waters replied that the design team had considered that option and came to the present design as a compromise between sightlines, circulation, and maintaining a capacity above 70. Jennisse noted that the design team was very much open to guidance as to whether the center aisle should also segment those front three rows. Jacqueline Frank asked what the occupancy range is for medium-sized classrooms. Richard Rudnicki answered that medium-sized classrooms have a capacity between 50 and 100 seats.

Mac Burgess, Katie Ivester, and Jennisse Waters each expressed their preference to walk around the room when teaching. Rob Maher stated that he did not see any issue with the center aisle ending behind the front three rows and that he would appreciate the additional seats that the current design provided. Katie asked how many seats would be lost if the center aisle was to go through them. Elizabeth Pritchard answered that it would result in a loss of four to six seats. Richard Rudnicki noted that the removal of an additional four seats would mean that the capacity of the room would be reduced by a total of 20 seats, and that the impact of that change would need to be assessed by the Office of the Registrar. Richard then clarified that this room is not planned for use during the Fall 2025 semester.

Michael Babcock motioned to approve layout of the Leon Johnson Hall 346 with the center aisle continuing through the front three rows, contingent on the Office of the Registrar confirming that the loss of the additional seats will not impact the use of the classroom.
Mac Burgess seconded the motion.
The motion was approved with 9 ayes and 1 nay.

[Following the meeting, Tony Campeau was informed of the Committee’s recommendation, and he stated that the approved change in capacity is acceptable for course scheduling purposes.]

ITEM No.4 – OPEN DISCUSSION

Jennisse Waters stated that Planning, Design & Construction is actively working on the revisions to the Classroom Design Guides and that the feedback from the Classroom Committee and faculty is being used to inform that review. Michael Babcock asked whether a faculty member should be included as part of the working group to advise on potential changes. Jennisse answered that the project is in its data collection phase, but that the involvement of a faculty member would be helpful as the revised guidelines begin to be crafted. Rob Maher spoke on the insight that faculty members can bring to the revision process regarding details that become readily apparent when teaching in classrooms. Jennisse replied that such knowledge is helpful in updating the guidelines, especially when considering how students and faculty use technology. Jennisse added that the revisions to the design guidelines will be brought to the Classroom Committee throughout their development.