Campus og studiemiljø - Bygningsstyrelsen

petition express it, wants the workplace to create disruptions and
social interaction. It should buzz with researcher life. This inspires
both the researcher and not least the students.
However, this buzz does not emerge when the corridor with researcher
offices is long and shut off, and the researcher is not
present. Maybe the researcher’s right to his/her own private office
needs to be reconsidered. Might there be better ways of using the
space and each other’s resources?
There are examples of a few places where they experiment with the
design of the researcher workplace and attempt to create differentiated
environments with multifunctional rooms in which more people
can work at the same time. 10 VIPs from Humanities now have their
permanent workstations in one open-plan room along with PhD
students and students writing their theses at E-learning Lab, Aalborg
University. The common office strengthens the academic environment
and renders activities visible to passers-by. Each semester, 1-2
students writing their thesis are offered a workstation in the room,
and thus they work in the same room as the institute’s professor.
This gives the students an equal contact to teachers and researchers
and a taste of working life and rules of conduct applicable to a
workplace. To E-learning Lab, the advantage is that they are increasing
their chances of attaching potential PhD students to the set-up.
Thinking along the same lines, Aalborg University has established a
growth house where PhD students and students writing their theses
work in the same room. It is worth noticing that all of the above
workstations are equipped with the same furniture. I.e. there is no
difference between what is offered to a student or a researcher.
A little anecdote illustrates another aspect of the value of creating
equality: It is said that the first rector at Roskilde University decided
that he only needed a 12 m 2 office. Naturally, this set standards
for what researchers and other employees at the university could
demand.
At the University of Southern Denmark in Kolding, users and management
have decided that researcher workstations in a future large
new building are to support the researchers’ request for visibility
and collaboration. The competition programme emphasises a greater
differentiation of workstations than what is traditional. The office is
not considered the permanent property of the researcher – it can be
shared or lent out for periods of time. This makes it possible to introduce
more spacious spatialities, which can support some of the other
work tasks that researchers have apart from the actual research.
The challenges in creating attractive environments for students
and researchers are found in the schism that on the one hand, users
require peace and quiet for in-depth studies, whilst on the other
hand, they also need exposure and a framework that supports collaboration.
This applies to both student reading places and researcher workplaces.
It is striking that while students request new measures and
frameworks that support their learning and lifestyle, researchers are
conspicuously silent and typically do not want spatial changes.
udFordringer / CHallenges
The researchers’ reluctance when it comes to changing the traditional
one-man office seems to be a fear of noise, limitations in private
conversations, and for some the fear of losing status or a sense of
belonging. Even so, an increasing number of Danish researchers see 3
more advantages than disadvantages in choosing solutions where
they share the areas with others to a higher degree. They opt for arranging
the workplace so that they have differentiated possibilities
that support the specific work situation. The researcher can both
seek out space for quiet in-depth studies and find a place for exposure
and collaboration. All according to his or her need.
Modern laboratory facilities
The modern university has up-to-date facilities available to its researchers
and students. This means that the laboratories have to make it possible
for students and researchers to experiment by means of modern
facilities and technology. And at the same time ensure that this happens
in a way that stimulates collaboration and knowledge sharing.
In Denmark, we are facing modernisation of many university laboratory
buildings. Most of them were built during the 1960s and 1970s
and have to be upgraded in order to meet new needs. This applies to
requirements about environment and sustainability, the need for
more specialised equipment and for physical flexibility in the layout
in order to accommodate changing grants and research projects.
Apart from the technical needs, there is also a need for new spaces
for collaboration, as traditionally, the focus has been on the conventional
workflow in the laboratory without any particular consideration
being given to an informal and cross-disciplinary environment.
The Blizard Building at Queen Mary’s in London is an example of a
laboratory building that works with space for collaboration and desires
to make this visible. The building has a large room from which
there is a view to both laboratories and meeting rooms floating like
cells and DNA strings, clearly indicating the academic subject area
of the house. Naturally, the open laboratories cannot be classified or
live up to strict safety requirements that differ from country to country.
However, the house does suggest a way in which laboratories can
be planned to disseminate knowledge and facilitate collaboration.
The future ‘Protein Center’ (The Novo Nordisk Foundation Center
for Protein Research) at the University of Copenhagen is an example
of a laboratory that also incorporates space, which will stimulate
the contact between the leading researchers who are to use it. The
project, which will be ready for use in 2009, also accommodates
many new technical focus areas. The project involves a thorough
modernisation of a section of the existing Panum building, which
has conventional wiring in the floor. The new design does away with
this by moving wiring to the ceiling and also by removing heavy
installations from the laboratory tables. This ensures flexibility for
continual rearranging in step with changing projects and grants.
The challenges in creating up-to-date laboratories are first of all financial,
as significant costs are involved, and there are also structural
limitations in the existing buildings that are to be modernised.
167