I've been doing this job for 20 years, and I've never once worked on a project where the budget or schedule allowed for anything resembling "programming" as it's taught in school.

locate south.  figure out where the sun shines in relation to the south.  put the entry over there so that you don't have people slipping and falling in winter shade (unless you don't have winter where your project is).  orient major street intersections in that direction too.  also dominate views.  if you can put a mountain range somewhere off in the distance, i would have it south/southwest.

look at the height and area regulations table in the building code.  that's a good starting part too.  that sort of programming is common in real life, if i understand what you mean by "programming."

did you see that video w/ barke ingles where he twisted a building like a milk carton?  i would totally include some sort of milk carton analogy.

Here is a helpful site...

http://www.wbdg.org/design/dd_archprogramming.php

Pretend you are the client, not the architect. Define the parameters of the project: site, budget, function, use, etc. Then put on your architect beanie and define other parameters such as site conditions, zoning, etc. Say Abracadabra three times while turning counterclockwise and Shazam! You have a program.

Hey guys, maybe I should have been a little more clear.

This portion of the assignment is us deciding what is in the program - we have not been given any information as to what spaces 'should' be in the building. We are just beginning to look into what amount of what space should be included; essentially developing what the client might give us at the start. (IE: How many studios? Classrooms? Living spaces?)

That's not programming, that's making shit up.

i second curtkram, start with the givens, the site. it'll inform you where the entrance/s is are, where the main facing parts are, where the courtyards-if any-are. if you have already been given the site, then look into the land usage regulations - percentage of land that may be used, how many storeys/height, possibly basements and how far the can extend out. this way you will have sized up the space made available to you.then perhaps you can refer to some precedents that approximates your project in its nature and perceived scale. a study of these precedents will educate you on the required proximity and functional interface between certain spaces. you may also let your imagination step in: perhaps you would like to create more public space between one function and the other, perhaps you see the library as a hermetic space rather than a social one and you situate it somewhere discreet...etc. 

if you haven't been given a site, then again you refer to some precedents that accords with your expectation of scale. you derive from these the spaces (overall, typical room size, typical hall size, number of toilets needed, number of toilet stalls needed..etc). then you match it with a site which accommodates your requirements. in fact, it sounds like you really need to be looking at precedents very very soon.

from that point onwards (or even simultaneously if you've been given the site already) you will then know how to subdivide the building/s. at this point you can come up with concepts and parti diagrams. this because you can now rationalize the conjoinment of functions and spaces. again, you are free to interpret but only if you do so within a broadly comprehensive framework (this last word doesnt really mean anything, i know..but i hope you get the gist)

and as you're laying the spaces out, now is the time to start rationalizing the structure.

 if you're brave, you can always re-caricaturize your design. but its not easy. 

also, don't worry if there is an element of ambiguity. sometimes, while sketching out parti's and sections, you may find yourself drawing a few lines that give the first indication of the project's sensibility (aesthetic/experiential in tandem with the functional). these may (or eventually may not, sometimes what seems at first sight to be powerful ends up being naive) give your project an identity and things can fall into place more predictably from thereon. 

but most importantly, start, don't ask too many questions. look at precedents that will suit you. in my opinion, and having seen other people (especially here) contextualize OMA historically, i think OMA's work is not easy to "refer to" (correct me if i'm wrong). we can so easily glib over the aspects of his work that actually seem unprogrammatic-like and deliberately ambiguous. perhaps he gives, solely as a pedagogical reference, too much interpretation, too much subversion? 

anyway, good luck