SOCIAL SPACES AND INTERACTIONS AMONG ACADEMIC STAFF AND

FACULTY MEMBERS

∗
Yusuf Jatau, Parastoo Pourvahidi

Faculty of Fine arts, Design and Architecture, Cyprus International University, Nicosia 99258, Cyprus

Abstract

This study is concerned with social interactions in terms of the spaces that academics and faculty
members have on a traditional university campus. The research evaluates the likes, dislikes, challenges and
recommendations regarding relaxing spaces or places where faculty members can take a breaks on campus, areas
of socialization among academic staff and how these impact interactions between them. By employing recorded
interviews with different academic personnel as well as varied faculties. There is a consistent theme found in the
study about absence of proper designated relaxation areas for faculty members with almost every respondent
citing crowded spaces , lack quiet zones, influence of weather conditions and over saturation by students on choice
of relaxation space. The findings stress the importance of making changes on campus to meet faculty needs and
recommendations for customizable spaces that encourage socializing and relaxation in order to improve staff
participation.
Keywords:
Faculty Interactions, Academic Staff, Relaxation Areas, Socialization Zones, Break Times.

1. Introduction

The establishment of venues on campus, in which all lectures and faculty members can

gather to exchange thoughts, unwinds have a discussion is necessary. This study delves into the

effects of social interactions (Schreiner et al.,2021), SLS value and relationship teaching

activities as an analysis to see how face-to -face experiences are maintained in online learning

environment (Hunter, Knoff,and Glatt ,1973).

In addition, considering the challenges related with limited areas for relaxation and

socialization of faculty members (Leal Filho et al.,2021) physical campus design influencing how

faculties interact (Times Higher Education, 2020) Social spaces this review will explore in detail
to understand how dynamic these areas are and some problems encountered in them as well

solutions for improvement.

1.1. Research Statement

The study aims at giving a wholesome description of the delicate social spaces and

interventions among academic personnel and faculty members in higher learning

institutions. In particular, it explores the multidimensional nature of these social spaces

by focusing on their layout, accessibility and impact upon faculty interactions. This study

is aimed at testing the synergy, efficiency and consistency of these components towards

creating diverse inclusive atmosphere for higher learning institutions.

1.2. Aim / Objectives

Understanding Social Space Dynamics: The main goal is to understand the dynamics of

social spaces on university campuses. This encompasses the study of these areas in

terms of design, layout and accessibility besides analysing usage by academic staffs and

faculty members.

Impact on Faculty Interactions: The study is set to evaluate the influence that social

spaces have on faculty interactions. Its objective is to reveal the how these spaces

encourage or impede socializing, working together and relaxation among academic’s

staff members that have an ultimate effect both on their sense of wellbeing and

productivity.

1
 Challenges and Recommendations: One of the key objectives is to establish what issues

exist in regards to establishing suitable social spaces for faculty members and offer

feasible recommendations concerning design improvement as well

Promoting Socialization: The primary goal of the study is to find ways in which social

spaces may be designed and managed so as to foster among all academic staff and

faculty members, a sense community that emphasizes inclusivity, diversity while

encouraging interaction.

1.3. Research Questions

Design and Utilization of Social Spaces: What type of design exists in terms of social

spaces on university campuses and what extent have they addressed resting space for

academic staff, faculty members?

Impact on Faculty Interactions: How does the socializing of faculty occur, and are there

some spaces themselves which promote increased interaction? And how they affect the

health and performance of faculty members?

Challenges and Recommendations: What are the main problems that are faced by

academic staff and faculty members, in terms of relaxation? In addition to a real

possible recommendation.

Promoting socialization: How can social spaces be organized and equipped for

encouraging sociability, inclusivity, diversity of relations that foster a sense of belonging

among the academic staff?

2
1.4. Research Methodology

This research methodology utilizes qualitative and quantitative approaches to study the

dynamics of social spaces and interactions between academic staff or faculty members in a

university setting. The methodology includes:

Literature Review: A critical review of the literature to provide further understanding

and revelations on knowledge, discoveries as well as implications that relate to social

spaces academic interaction and surrounding spaces within higher educational

institutions.

Case study: The selection of the case study was done by the careful examination of

different universities in Cyprus. Criterion such as the availability of the information, the

relevance to the research topic, and the resources availability were considered. The

chosen university in Cyprus which is kept confidential, presented a strong case study

because of its multi-cultural student and faculty body, international curriculum, and

challenges within the institution. The selection sought to make sure that the case study

featured the important issues that related to the research objectives while protecting

the anonymity and privacy of the interview candidates.

Surveys and Interviews: Conducting surveys and interviews with academic staff and

faculty members to gather firsthand insights into their experiences with social spaces,

interactions, and preferences on campus.

3
 Observations: On-site observations of social spaces within university campuses to assess

their design, accessibility, and utilization by academic staff.

Data Analysis: Employing both qualitative and quantitative data analysis techniques to

analyse survey responses, interview transcripts, and observational data. Collation of

responses through one-on-one interviews and analysis of responses using data analysis

software like NVIVO and MAXQDA to properly identify codes and themes.

Recommendations and Strategies: Providing practical recommendations and strategies

for improving the design, accessibility, implementation and utilization of social spaces to

enhance faculty interactions and well-being.

This study is intended to provide a critical insight into the manner in which social spaces

influence academic staff and faculty members within university campuses. Through the analysis

of design, use, challenges and opportunities that are associated with these spaces this article

aims to deliver significant conclusions which will help in building more inclusive institutions

providing a nurturing climate for higher educational establishments.

2. Literature review

Faculty satisfaction, collaborations and productivity in the higher education

environment is also influenced by how people interact with each other socially on campus as

well factors such spaces that are conducive for academic staff/faculties members. This

literature review summarizes the results of different research studies, which reveal how

important these aspects are.

4
 Academic interactions reveal their complicated nature in research conducted by

Schreiner, et al. (2020). This paper published in The Journal of Higher Education emphasizes the

role that academic, social and deeper life relationships between faculty members play as

factors which leads to a more vibrant sense of community engagement.

While Jamieson (2003) and Oblinger’s work address the issues of designing social

learning spaces in universities. In their works published in The International Journal for

Academic Development and EDUCAUSE Quarterly, these researchers reveal the influential role

of informal SLS on all dimensions – academic as well as social development at universities. From

this perspective, their results demonstrate the role of these sites in promoting intellectual

cultural unities and knowledge circulation groups between faculty members.

Hunter, Laursen & Seymour (2007) offer observations on the wider range of socially

related interactions in academic settings. According to their findings published in Research in

Higher Education, it is beneficial when both face-to-face and virtual interactions are promoted

as these have a positive effect on faculty wellbeing and perceptions of community.

Social interactions in academic environments have been heavily impacted by the COVID-19

pandemic. In the research featured in BMC Public Health, Leal Filho et al. (2021) outline how

severely mental health and well-being of academic staff members and students were affected

by the pandemic situation set up under COVID 19 condition in their cross-sectional study, they

require universities to take on the responsibility of adaptation and reconsideration on social

spaces as well as interaction strategies based upon changes in circumstances.

5
 Additionally, the physical setting of a campus greatly influences faculty behaviours. A Times

Higher Education (2021) study looks into how the arrangement of departments and shared

spaces directly affects faculty members’ interaction frequency and quality. The study that took

place on the campus of Massachusetts Institute of Technology shows how physical closeness

between faculty offices and common areas improve communications and cooperation.

Based on these results, Oblinger et al. (2000) in their work published at ResearchGate

recommend developing interactive formal teaching rooms and creative informal learning

spaces that respond to the changing requirements of both educators and learners. These

recommendations re-emphasize the need to balance campus design with evolving social

dynamics in academic spaces.

Cox and Orehovec’s (2007) research ensure the need for varying social environments in

residential colleges, representing faculty-student interplay. This demonstrates the need for

establishing spaces that are built to accommodate various types of communications, including

those between faculty members themselves for private conversations.

From the point of view given by Duran, Kelly, and Keaton (2005), e-mail use among faculty

has both positive aspects and weaknesses for interactions with students or colleagues. Their

analysis of a survey on faculty from two schools, one private and the other public university

shows that as auxiliaries to physical one’s digital spaces are vital. It implies the creation of

virtual platforms for communication between employees that ensure confidentiality (Duran,

Kelly & Keaton 2005).

6
 It is these findings from the works of Komarraju, Musulkin and Bhattacharya 2010; Halawah

(2006) that shed light on a fundamental paradigm regarding professional development being

linked to faculty interactions where such areas are meant for experienced members in order to

be free of prejudices against student underneath their presence.

As Goldstein (1999) notes caring relationships are vital for the co-construction of mind

between teachers and learners. She uses Noddings’s ethic of care to define relational zone as a

point where cognitive and affective components intersect in the process of learning. She also

applies this idea to the faculty world, arguing that harmonious relationships among staff may

contribute to personal development and enhance academic climate.

Li and Pitts (2001) surveyed faculty from two universities to investigate their virtual office

hours, defined as ‘a time when the instructor is online answering queries via e-mail or other

electronic means’ 175). They discovered that benefits and limitations of virtual office hours for

communication between faculty member and student which included convenience, flexibility,

easy accessibility bis anonymity. They also recommended the use of virtual office hours to make

faculty-faculty interaction, through creating online groups or chat rooms on where

academicians can share ideas and information but protecting their privacy.

2.1. Social Interaction Dynamics in Academic Environments

Universities do not only function as places of learning but also dynamic communities

characterized by interpersonal relationships among faculty members which cannot be

separated from the academic endeavour. As Mulrooney & Kelly (2020) observe, these

7
interactions are part of various constellations in the social fabric of university life that create a

sense of identity and community. The quality of these relationships can affect faculty

satisfaction and productivity that impacts the overall Academic climate.

Social spaces though of great importance to many academic institutions, are difficult in

finding appropriate areas for faculty relaxation and interaction. Leal Filho et al. (2021)

expressed that the COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated social spaces design demand, thereby

revealing why isolation affects mental health and how physical space promotes interactions.

Campus spatial configuration has a distinct influence on how faculties engage with one

another. According to a study reported by Times Higher Education (2021), spatial arrangements

have an impact on the frequency and quality of interactions between faculty members.

Informal conversations and discussions with well-organized faculty lounges and collaborative

areas promote a culture of collaboration in the academy.

2.2. Influence of External Factors on Social Space Utilization

Social spaces are also influenced by factors outside the setting such as weather conditions and

campus location. According to ResearchGate (2022), outdoor social spaces may be

underutilized due to the bad weather, and so faculty is forced into indoor areas in some cases

where no one’s needs are fully met.

Overall, the reviewed literature highlights need for various types of social spaces designed

specifically to host faculty interactions involving both relaxation and private discussions. These

areas should be democratic and offer chances of engaging in private communications between

8
the faculty members. Developing such spaces does not only facilitate the process of

professional development but also makes academic institutions collegial and supportive

environments.

The importance of these results suggests the need for physical and social places that

address various faculty members’ needs, in which they can interact, rest or to share

confidential conversations but not forget about student participation. It is essential in these

spaces to find a compromise between inclusion and privacy, which creates an atmosphere that

encourages collaboration as well as relaxation or professional development for faculty

members. Based on these observations, proposals come forward to improve the social spaces

of universities. Social Connection Strategies mentioned by Inside Higher Ed (2021). Moreover,

physical settings that are secure and cozy must be ensured for meaningful interactions.

3. Analysis

This report examines the academic and social interactions among faculty members of a

university in Cyprus which is kept anonymous, focusing on the availability of such social spaces,

preferences and challenges faced by academic staff during break times and periods of

relaxation. The study explores their favoured areas on campus, identifies challenges

encountered, and gathers insights to propose potential improvements in creating conducive

spaces for faculty members.

3.1. Sample Questions

The interviews were structured around several key questions:

9
Break Time Preferences: Asking them what they do during breaks or between classes.

Preferred Campus Areas: Determining where they went or liked the best for rest and peace.

Challenges Faced: Knowing what challenges or barriers they faced during breaks.

Ideal Spaces: Finding out insights on type of spaces or facilities they would like as faculty

members.

Student Interactions: Assessment the impact of students on both their interactions and choice

of places.

Recommendations: Promoting the sharing of tips on enhancing or designing spaces specifically

for faculty.

PRIMARY THEMES CODES

PLACES TO VISIT  GRADUATUATION THEATER WALKWAY

 ARENA WALK WAY

 PICOBELLE

 NATURE CAFE

 BREAK POINT

DIFFICULTIES FACED  LACK OF QUIET SPACES

 UNCOMFORTABLE SEATS (NATURE CAFE)

10
  LACK OF DESIGNATED AREAS FOR STAFF

 PRIVACY

 BUSY SCHEDULE

 DISTANCE

 STUDENT CROWD

RECOMMENDATIONS  INTERFACULTY INTERACTIONS

 OUT DOOR CAFE

 BREAK ROOM/ KITCHIENETTE

3.2. CODES

Table 1: The codes highlight specific patterns, themes or information gotten from the faculty

members interviewed.

Table 2: Analysis of Primary Themes and Codes

Table 1 SHOWING THE PRIMARY THEMES AND CODES

11
CODES No. of participants No. of References

1 PLACES TO VISIT 25 58

1.1 GRADUATUATION THEATER WALKWAY 5

1.2 ARENA WALK WAY 7

1.3 PICOBELLE 4

1.4 NATURE CAFE 20

1.5 BREAK POINT 22

2 DIFFICULTIES FACED 25 72

2.1 LACK OF QUIET SPACES 7

2.2 UNCOMFORTABLE SEATS (NATURE 7

CAFE)

2.3 LACK OF DESIGNATED AREAS FOR STAFF 16

2.4 PRIVACY 7

2.5 BUSY SCHEDULE 6

2.6 DISTANCE 6

2.7 STUDENT CROWD 23

3 RECOMMENDATIONS 25 30

3.1 INTERFACULTY INTERACTIONS 5

3.2 OUT DOOR CAFE 8

12
 3.3 BREAK ROOM/ KITCHIENETTE 17

Table 2 SHOWING THE NO. OF REFERENCES FOR EACH CODE

PLACES TO VISIT

This main theme stresses out the various locations in campus that each faculty member

would prefer to go during their breaks. It is first important to locate in sites where such

individuals love spending their time when studying social spaces and interactions between

academic staffs and the faculty members within university campuses. Obviously, this theme will

discuss the different social spaces found at universities so that by identifying its places for

recreation and both casual or work-related interactions we can estimate how our environment

influences these professionals.

Chart 1 SHOWING THE NO. REFERENCES FOR THE PLACES TO VISIT

Break Point
13
 As one of the most mentioned areas, Break Point is recognized for its high traffic and

popularity among students and faculty alike. It serves as a central meeting point on campus, but

this also means it's often crowded and noisy. While it's a social hub, the busy nature of this area

sometimes detracts from its appeal for those looking for a quiet break.

“I like Break Point, because it is closer to my office”

“Uh, there are specific places that I like to be there. For example, the, uh, student center is a

very lively place. That's the break point? Yes, yes, the break point. That place is nice.”

Nature Café

Nature Cafe is frequently mentioned as a popular yet problematic spot due to its

bustling nature and uncomfortable seating. The cafe's lively atmosphere is a double-edged

sword; while it's a central social spot, the constant noise and crowded conditions make it less

ideal for those seeking a calm environment. The uncomfortable seating arrangements add to

the discomfort, making extended stays less appealing.

“But there's also the nature cafe, which I find a bit more relaxed compared to breakpoint.”

“I usually try to get out of my office, you know? Sometimes I just want to get a change of scene.

I get a coffee at the Nature Café, but it's like a mini student area there.”

Arena Walkway

14
 The Arena Walkway is described as a preferred spot for its relative calmness, especially

during certain times of the day like post-lunch hours. Faculty members value this area for brief

escapes from their busy schedules, enjoying the less crowded ambiance. It's seen as a

convenient location for relaxing walks or informal discussions without the typical campus

hustle.

“I just walk around the campus, looking for a quiet spot. Near the back of the campus, there’s a

little area by the sports fields – it's peaceful, but there's nowhere to sit. So its like a dilemma.”

“But there is no place that you can see, you should walk. Maybe that was the problem. I'm

sometimes I feel very scared. I mean, there is nobody there. For example, in the Arena side,

when you walk around, I feel that I should walk. I shouldn't sit over there. But those are the

preferrable areas.”

Graduation Theater Walkway

Interviewees frequently mention this walkway as a tranquil escape from the campus's

lively atmosphere. It's depicted as an ideal place for contemplative walks or quiet discussions,

away from the usual student crowds. Faculty appreciate its serene environment, which

contrasts with the more active areas of the campus, making it a sought-after spot for those

seeking peace and solitude.

“I often take a short walk. It's one of the few ways to clear my mind, especially when the

weather is nice. But again, finding a quiet route is a challenge, sometimes after taking lunch I

like to walk before I go the class or the office, sometimes I walk along the graduation theater”

15
“There's also this place behind the prep school building, the graduation area. We sometimes sit

there and talk as well.”

Picobelle

This campus restaurant stands out in the discussions for its quieter setting. Faculty

prefer it for its peaceful atmosphere, which provides a stark contrast to the more bustling areas

of the campus. Picobelle is appreciated for offering a space where faculty can enjoy a quiet

meal or a break, without the usual interruptions of a busy campus environment.

“I sometimes go to Picobelle, because its not crowded.”

“also there is one which is the next to the, uh, stable area. There, there is a, um, restaurant. It's

a Picobella. Ah, Picobella. That, that place is also very nice. You can, uh, sit there, you can have

your lunch, and the environment is also beautiful.”

Difficulties Faced

Academic staff and faculty members often encounter a range of challenges when

navigating the social spaces on university campuses. This theme aims to shed light on the

difficulties they face, which can include overcrowded areas, inadequate quiet zones, and

external factors like weather conditions. By examining these challenges, we can better

comprehend the obstacles that hinder productive social interactions and well-being.

Understanding the difficulties faced is a crucial step toward developing solutions and

recommendations to enhance the campus experience for faculty members.

16
Chart 2 SHOWING THE NO. OF REFERENCES FOR DIFFICULTIES FACED

Student Crowd

The presence of students in many communal areas is seen as a barrier to faculty

relaxation. Faculty look for spaces where they can escape the lively student atmosphere,

indicating a need for more exclusive staff areas.

“The loud music at the breakpoint area, it is more youth oriented, youngsters oriented, which is

not, um, providing us a quality time to spend actually. So whenever the breakpoint area is more

empty, That is the time for us to go and sit there and relax. But when it gets crowded, um, it is

no longer a place for us.”

“Because we don't have such a thing in here. If you go to the coffee shop in here, since it is

surrounded by the student, you cannot think properly it's but when I go to the coffee shop and

there aren't too many strangers over there I can think much more better”

Lack of Designated Areas for Staff

17
 There's a pronounced need for designated staff areas, as expressed by faculty members.

The lack of such spaces means there are few places where staff can relax or hold private

discussions away from the student body, leading to a feeling of being constantly amidst student

activities.

“there's a lack of designated areas for staff and I think most of us will like a place like that

maybe even inside the department, outdoors are good but even the indoor spaces can be

manageable as well”

“Yeah, I mean, because There is no place like gathering area, um, not neither inside nor outside

gathering area for specifically for, for staff.”

Uncomfortable Seats (Nature Cafe)

Specific criticism is directed towards the seating at Nature Cafe. Faculty find the seating

arrangements uncomfortable, which affects their overall experience and willingness to spend

time there. This discomfort is a significant drawback for a place that otherwise serves as a key

social spot on campus.

“Okay. You sit there and you want to live as soon as possible because they haven't been

designed ergonomically.”

“The atmosphere is perfect, but it has a problem. The furniture is not comfortable, it as a

problem of ergonomics. And as a teacher, you cannot sit on top of the chair. It's very formal

that there is student over there.”

Privacy

18
 The theme of privacy is prominent, with faculty expressing concerns over the lack of

private spaces on campus. They highlight the need for areas where they can engage in

confidential discussions or have some personal time without the intrusion of the campus

crowd.

“But mostly what I really need, uh, privacy is the first thing”

“Another aspect is privacy sometimes I don’t want to be around a lot of people because I want

to think or just relax.”

Busy Schedule

Faculty's busy schedules significantly impact their social interactions and break times.

The ability to quickly access a relaxing or quiet space is limited, leading to compromises in their

choice of break areas. This affects the quality of their downtime and their overall work-life

balance.

“And for example, some days when I'm having too many courses, during the break time, I prefer

to come to the office and having some meditation or relaxation. Before the other course, which

is starting sometimes I'm listening to some music, during break time for I mean, preparing a cup

of tea or coffee and drinking in the office.”

“Maybe once or twice a week, when I can. The workload is a lot sometimes, and finding time for

a proper break is not always easy”

19
Distance

The proximity of break areas to workspaces is an important consideration for faculty.

They prefer locations that are easily accessible, not requiring significant time to reach, which is

particularly important given their tight schedules.

“No, no, not, not exactly. I cannot find any. I don't have any. And if it is, since our location

recently is far, reaching to that point is taking time, and then going there, coming back, it's

another thing.”

“But I have a problem. My classes, my office is in EH building, and classes are in the CL building,

and break point somewhere in the middle. So I'm not comfortable with it, because they are

more far away. If I for example, forget my bag. I should go back.”

Lack of Quiet Spaces

A recurring theme in the interviews is the concern over the lack of quiet spaces on

campus. Faculty express a need for more areas where they can unwind, have private

conversations, or simply enjoy a moment of solitude. This indicates a gap in the campus

environment, where the bustling nature of student life dominates.

“The students are great, but during breaks, I prefer quieter places. It's hard to find such spots on

campus.”

20
 “Exactly, It's all about balance, right? I mean, I do enjoy the liveliness of the campus, but

sometimes, you just need a space where you can, umm, talk without too much background

noise”

Recommendations

In response to the challenges and opportunities identified in the previous themes, this section

focuses on providing actionable recommendations for improving the design, accessibility, and

utilization of social spaces within university campuses. These recommendations aim to address

the needs and preferences of academic staff and faculty members, fostering a more inclusive,

diverse, and supportive environment. By offering practical solutions, we can contribute to the

creation of campus spaces that enhance faculty interactions and overall well-being.

Chart 3 SHOWING THE NO. OF REFERENCES FOR RECOMMENDATIONS

21
Break Room/Kitchenette

The need for a dedicated break room or kitchenette within faculty areas is highlighted.

Such facilities would provide a private and comfortable space for faculty to relax, away from the

student-dominated areas of the campus.

“Interior generally. Um, every working place, they have a kind of kitchenette, like a break room,

like a break room. Yes. Um, it's different than meeting room because meeting room is a working

area, but kitchenette is a kind of relaxing area and mostly in, in, because I have been in some

other schools and this, this is a kind of, as you mentioned, a kind of space that Academic staff

can meet there without disturbed, being disturbed.”

“So I mean if we are going to have an space like a dining room or like a seating area, in the

faculty in the building that we are working or close to the building, I think I can use it in a more

beneficial way.”

Outdoor Café

Outdoor cafes are mentioned favorably for their ambiance, but practical concerns like

weather protection and comfort are also noted. These concerns suggest a need for better-

designed outdoor spaces that can accommodate different weather conditions.

“So, if, if we have such a thing like, like cafe, specifically for staff, um, or any type of area like

that, that would be, um, that would be, I mean, yeah, that would be good.”

22
 “um, an outdoor area where we can have a coffee, maybe talk a bit, but, you know, in peace”

Interfaculty Interactions

There's an expressed desire for more spaces conducive to interfaculty interactions.

Such areas would facilitate better communication and collaboration between departments,

which is currently seen as lacking.

“During the Design Week, for example, can make the whole campus social life a little different.

Even if you have an improved faculty life, you can have it even more. I mean, what's because I

like doing interdisciplinary work. And I go to others faculties, seminars, documentary screenings,

everything, I realized none of my colleagues expected to go or none of those come to our

activities. So I think we should improve that as well.”

“let's say interdisciplinary activities, not just architecture or faculty, I don't know who is in the

psychological faculties just downstairs, for example. So more interdisciplinary activities.”

3.3. Analysis of Cluster Points

The study reveals that specific locations on the University campus, notably Break Point and

Nature Café, are preferred by faculty members for break times. However, these popular spots

are also identified as cluster points, often facing issues of overcrowding. This suggests a

significant challenge: the available facilities for staff breaks are insufficient, as the preferred

locations are consistently too crowded. This finding highlights a need for more varied and

23
spacious break areas on campus to accommodate faculty preferences without the drawback of

overcrowding.

Table 3: Faculty Preferences for Campus Locations and Cluster analysis

Location Number of Description

References

Break Point 22 Highly frequented, but often crowded and noisy

Nature Café 20 Popular for its ambiance but has uncomfortable seating

Picobelle 4 Experiences both low traffic and minimal preference from

faculty members. This indicates that it is one of the least

utilized areas for breaks on campus.

Arena 7 Experiences both low traffic and minimal preference from

Pathway faculty members. This indicates that it is one of the least

utilized areas for breaks on campus.

Graduation 5 Experiences both low traffic and minimal preference from

Theater faculty members. This indicates that it is one of the least

utilized areas for breaks on campus.

Table 3 SHOWING CLUSTURED LOCATIONS AND DESCRIPTION ON CAMPUS

24
 CLUSTER PIE CHART

Break Point Nature Café Picobelle

CIU Arena Pathway Graduation Theater
Graduation Theater
9%
CIU Arena Pathway
12%
Break Point
38%

Picobelle
7%

Nature Café
34%

Chart 4 PIE CHART ILLUSTRATING THE PERCENTAGE BREAKDOWN

The accompanying pie chart provides insights into the break preferences of faculty members,

highlighting the Breakpoint and Nature Café as the most sought-after locations. The popularity

of these areas is primarily attributed to their central positioning within the academic setting.

However, a closer examination reveals that despite their favorability, these locations are

perceived as less conducive due to various factors.

Interviews conducted with faculty members served as the primary source of information

regarding the negative aspects associated with these preferred locations. Firstly, the chart

depicts that both the Breakpoint and Nature Café experience elevated crowd levels. The central
25
nature that attracts faculty members is also responsible for heightened foot traffic, resulting in

a more congested environment.

Secondly, the presence of students in these areas emerged as a noteworthy concern during the

interviews. While faculty members appreciate the central locations, the simultaneous presence

of students can contribute to an environment that is perceived as less conducive to relaxation

and unwinding during breaks.

Additionally, the interviews revealed that noise levels in these preferred areas are a significant

factor affecting their conduciveness. The central positioning, combined with increased crowd

and student presence, tends to elevate ambient noise, potentially causing distractions for

faculty members seeking a quiet and peaceful break.

In summary, insights obtained from interviews with faculty members underscore concerns

related to crowd density, student presence, and noise levels in the Breakpoint and Nature Café.

While these locations are favored for their centrality, the collective impact of these factors may

contribute to the perception that they are less than ideal for faculty members seeking a

conducive break environment.

4. Discussion and findings

The exploration of social spaces and interactions among academic staff and faculty

members on university campuses has yielded insightful observations and implications. Drawing

from the works of Schreiner et al. (2020), Jamieson (2003), and Oblinger (2005), the study

affirms the significance of well-designed social spaces in fostering academic, social, and deeper

26
life interactions. These interactions are crucial for a strong sense of community and

engagement within academic institutions.

The data analysis revealed prevalent themes around preferred social spaces, difficulties

faced, and recommendations for improvement. Places like Break Point, Nature Café in the case

study emerged as popular yet problematic areas due to issues like overcrowding and

uncomfortable seating elements. These findings align with the challenges noted by Leal Filho et

al. (2021) and the Times Higher Education (2021) study, emphasizing the impact of physical

campus design on faculty interactions.

Findings in relation to the case study

 Preferred Social Spaces: Faculty members frequently visited Break Point and Nature

Café, indicating a preference for centrally located, social hubs. However, these areas

were often criticized for being too crowded or noisy.

 Difficulties Faced: Common difficulties included lack of designated areas for staff,

privacy concerns, distance from offices and uncomfortable seating in places like Nature

Café.

 Recommendations for Improvement: Suggestions included the development of break

rooms or kitchenettes specifically for staff, and the establishment of outdoor cafes that

offer a balance between social interaction and tranquility.

4.1 Recommendations for Campus Improvement

The recommendations put forth by interviewed faculty members provide actionable

insights for ameliorating the campus environment. The articulated need for secluded spaces,

27
both indoor and outdoor, underscores the importance of privacy and tranquility for faculty

relaxation. The unanimous preference for outdoor quiet zones signifies a desire for spaces

harmonized with nature, fostering a conducive environment for rejuvenation.

Indoor space

Academic Staff Lounge/breakrooms: The proposed Academic Staff

Lounge/breakroom which should be provided for each department or for each

building that hosts more than one department serves as an indoor haven for

faculty members seeking privacy and a tranquil environment for short breaks. The

indoor space should be designed to cater to various needs, ensuring it meets the

preferences expressed by academic staff during the interviews. Key features of the

indoor space include:

Kitchenette/Break Room: Include a well-equipped kitchenette or break room within

the lounge, offering faculty members a space to prepare and enjoy refreshments in a

relaxed setting.

Comfortable Seating: Ensure the availability of comfortable and ergonomic seating

options to enhance the overall experience for faculty members spending time in the

lounge.

Outdoor space

Complementing the indoor space, the proposed outdoor area will aim to

provide faculty members with a serene natural environment for relaxation

and informal interactions. The outdoor space should be designed to align with

28
 the preferences expressed by faculty members, balancing nature and

comfort. Key features of the outdoor space include:

Outdoor Café: Establish a designated outdoor café providing faculty members with a

space to enjoy refreshments in a natural setting.

Walking Paths: Incorporate walking paths within the area with good shading to

protect against the weather, allowing faculty members to take short walks during

breaks, promoting physical well-being and relaxation.

Flexible Seating Options: Provide a variety of seating options, including benches or

lounge chairs, allowing faculty members to choose their preferred spot for

relaxation.

Location: As distance has been noted as an important factor considered by faculty

members in choosing a break location, the proposed outdoor break area should be

centralized as much as possible in order for it to be easily accessible and convenient

for all academic staff to reach from the different buildings on the campus.

By implementing the Staff Lounge and Academic Staff Garden/cafe with the

outlined features, the proposed solution aims to address the identified gaps and

create a comprehensive indoor-outdoor space that caters to the diverse needs and

preferences of academic staff at Cyprus International University. This will also

promote interdisciplinary interactions as the outdoor space will provide a place

where academic staff from different departments can meet, start friendships,

collaborate and share ideas in a comfortable environment.

29
5. Conclusion

The study on "Exploring Social Spaces and Interactions Among Academic Staff and Faculty

Members" reveals critical insights into the dynamics of faculty interactions and their utilization

of campus social spaces. The findings highlight a distinct preference for certain locations, which

due to their popularity could face issues of overcrowding. This underscores a broader issue for

the need of break areas for faculty, necessitating the development of more and varied spaces.

The study emphasizes the need for strategic campus planning to create environments that not

only accommodate but also enhance faculty well-being and interaction. Implementing the

recommendations from this research can lead to more effective use of campus spaces,

fostering a more vibrant and engaging academic community.

30
 References

a) Cox, B. E., & E. Orehovec. (2007). "Faculty-Student Interaction Outside of the

Classroom: A Typology from a Residential College." The Review of Higher Education,

30(4), 343-362.

b) Duran, R. L., L. Kelly, & J. A. Keaton. (2005). "College Faculty Use and Perceptions of

Electronic Mail to Communicate with Students." Communication Quarterly, 53(2), 159-

176.

c) Komarraju, M., S. Musulkin, & G. Bhattacharya. (2010). "The Role of Student-Faculty

Interactions in Developing College Students' Academic Self-Concept, Motivation, and

Achievement." Journal of College Student Development, 51(3), 332-342.

d) Halawah, I. (2006). "The Impact of Student-Faculty Informal Interpersonal

Relationships on Intellectual and Personal Development." College Student Journal,

40(3), 670-678.

e) Goldstein, L. S. (1999). "The Relational Zone: The Role of Caring Relationships on The

Construction of Mind." American Educational Research Journal, 36(3), 647-673.

31
f) Li, L., & J. P. Pitts. (2001). "Does It Really Matter? Using Virtual Office Hours to

Enhance Student-Faculty Interaction." Journal of Information Systems Education,

20(2), 175-185.

g) Schreiner, L.A., et al. (2020). "The Influence of Academic, Social, and Deeper Life

Interactions on Students' Psychological Sense of Community." The Journal of Higher

Education.

h) Jamieson, P. (2003). "Designing more effective on-campus teaching and learning

spaces: a role for academic developers." The International Journal for Academic

Development. Link

i) Oblinger, D. (2005). "Leading the transition from classrooms to learning spaces."

EDUCAUSE Quarterly.

j) Hunter, A.B., Laursen, S.L., & Seymour, E. (2007). "Research insights for promoting

social connections." Research in Higher Education.

k) Leal Filho, W., et al. (2021). "Impacts of COVID-19 and social isolation on academic

staff and students at universities: a cross-sectional study." BMC Public Health.

l) "Making college campuses more sociable." (2021). Times Higher Education.

m) Oblinger, D., Jamieson, P., Fisher, K., Gilding, T., Taylor, P., & Trevitt, C. (2000). "Social

Learning Spaces and Student Engagement." ResearchGate.

32
33