Beyond Acres: Mapping Campus Size to Academic Excellence and Space Productivity: A Critical Analysis of NIRF-Ranked Technical Institutions Using the Rational Space Index and the Land Utilisation Efficiency Index

References

[1] Barker, R. G. (1968). Ecological psychology: Concepts and methods for studying the environment of human behavior. Stanford University Press.

[2] Berto, R. (2014). The role of nature in coping with psycho-physiological stress: A literature review on restorativeness. Behavioral Sciences, 4(4), 394–409. MDPI

[3] Bitner, M. J. (1992). Servicescapes: The impact of physical surroundings on customers and employees. Journal of Marketing, 56(2), 57–71. SAGE

[4] Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press.

[5] de Vries, H., Kaminsky, J., & Bhattacharya, P. (2020). Campus environment and student satisfaction in Indian technical institutions: A multi-site survey. Journal of Higher Education Policy, 18(3), 45–67.

[6] Doorley, S., & Witthoft, S. (2012). Make space: How to set the stage for creative collaboration. Wiley.

[7] Fraser, B. J. (1998). Science learning environments: Assessment, effects and determinants. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), The international handbook of science education (pp. 527–564). Kluwer Academic.

[8] Galoyan, T., & Poghosyan, G. (2020). Campus green space and academic performance: A cross-national study of engineering universities. Environment and Behavior, 52(7), 785–812.

[9] Hartman, S., & Baldwin, C. (2021). Place attachment, alumni engagement, and institutional giving: A longitudinal study across 42 UK universities. Higher Education Research & Development, 40(4), 791–808.

[10] HEFCE Space Management Group. (2006). Space management in higher education: A guide to practice. Higher Education Funding Council for England.

[11] Heschong Mahone Group. (1999). Daylighting in schools: An investigation into the relationship between daylighting and human performance. Pacific Gas and Electric Company.

[12] Jamieson, P., Fisher, K., Gilding, T., Taylor, P. G., & Trevitt, C. (2000). Place and space in the design of new learning environments. Higher Education Research & Development, 19(2), 221–237.

[13] Kaplan, R., & Kaplan, S. (1989). The experience of nature: A psychological perspective. Cambridge University Press.

[14] Kim, J., & Kim, J. (2007). Daylight performance of educational facilities and its effect on student learning outcomes in South Korea. Building and Environment, 42(4), 1729–1737.

[15] Lynch, K. (1960). The image of the city. MIT Press.

[16] Ministry of Education, Government of India. (2023). National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF): India Rankings 2023 — Engineering category. Ministry of Education. NIRF

[17] Mollerup, P. (2005). Wayshowing: A guide to environmental signage principles and practices. Lars Müller Publishers.

[18] NAAC. (2023). National Assessment and Accreditation Council: Accredited institutions database. National Assessment and Accreditation Council.

[19] Nasar, J. L., & Cubukcu, E. (2011). Evaluative appraisals of environmental aesthetics. Psychological Reports, 108(1), 16–26.

[20] Oblinger, D. (Ed.). (2006). Learning spaces. EDUCAUSE. EDUCAUSE

[21] QS Quacquarelli Symonds. (2024). QS World University Rankings 2024. QS.

[22] Scannell, L., & Gifford, R. (2010). Defining place attachment: A tripartite organizing framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(1), 1–10. ScienceDirect

[23] Seppänen, O., & Fisk, W. J. (2006). Some quantitative relations between indoor environmental quality and work performance or health. HVAC&R Research, 12(4), 957–973. Taylor & Francis

[24] Sharma, R., & Nair, S. (2023). Online versus on-campus: Longitudinal outcomes for engineering students during COVID-19 and return-to-campus phases. Economic and Political Weekly, 58(14), 34–42.

[25] Shield, B. M., & Dockrell, J. E. (2008). The effects of environmental and classroom noise on the academic attainments of primary school children. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 123(1), 133–144. PubMed

[26] Story, M. F., Mueller, J. L., & Mace, R. L. (1998). The universal design file: Designing for people of all ages and abilities. NC State University, Center for Universal Design.

[27] UGC (University Grants Commission). (2022). UGC regulations on campus space norms for higher education institutions. Ministry of Education.

[28] Ulrich, R. S., Simons, R. F., Losito, B. D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M. A., & Zelson, M. (1991). Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 11(3), 201–230. ScienceDirect

[29] Winterbottom, M., & Wilkins, A. (2009). Lighting and discomfort in the classroom. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(1), 63–75. ScienceDirect

[30] Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. Taylor & Francis

@article{1723517,
      author = {Madhumita Roy},
      title = {Beyond Acres: Mapping Campus Size to Academic Excellence and Space Productivity: A Critical Analysis of NIRF-Ranked Technical Institutions Using the Rational Space Index and the Land Utilisation Efficiency Index},
      journal = {Iconic Research And Engineering Journals},
      year = {2026},
      volume = {10},
      number = {3},
      pages = {3797-3808},
      issn = {2456-8880},
      url = {https://www.irejournals.com/formatedpaper/1723517.pdf},
      abstract = {In India, the amount of land provided to technical institutions has been regarded as an indirect indicator of institutional quality, as regulations, accreditation criteria, and planning practice for universities emphasize larger campuses. This paper questions this assumption through a three-step study. First, it reviews international research from environmental psychology, architecture, and higher education literature on how certain attributes of built environments have been correlated with measurable student performance. Second, it compares the top ten technical institutions in the 2023 National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) Engineering ranking in terms of campus area, number of students, NIRF score, NAAC grade, retention rate, and design approach. Thirdly, it proposes two unique spatial productivity indicators, namely the Rational Space Index (RSI) and the Land Utilisation Efficiency Index (LUEI).For instance, Jadavpur University, with a campus spread across 84 acres, registers an RSI of 66.3 and ranks 10th in the country, while IIT Kharagpur, with a campus spread across 2,100 acres, registers an RSI of 8.2 and ranks 6th in the country. Space utilization efficiencies in these institutes average 58%, compared with an international standard of 75%, and six institutes have under-utilization gaps exceeding 20 percentage points. Given land's finite, non-renewable nature and its high opportunity cost in the institutional context, the study recommends that ranking schemes and land allocation practices prioritize spatial productivity over spatial size. Based on empirical evidence, the study suggests six recommendations, including mandatory audits of space productivity and incorporating RSI and LUEI into the NIRF framework.},
      keywords = {campus design, spatial productivity, NIRF ranking, land-use efficiency, technical education, environmental psychology},
      month = {September},
  }