Week 3 – Tuesday, 1/19, 5-6pm
Register

The CBE strategic planning process has made clear that our community seeks to increase equity through our work in the built environment. At the same time, the college can and should embody those same equitable and inclusive principles in how we operate and the culture we create. We know CBE racial demographics are not currently meeting our goals to reflect the state or country, yet focusing solely on diversity may not be the answer. What practices do we value that are consistent with our EDI values? Are there any that are not? Does belonging mean different things to different people?

Facilitators: Adela Mu (Master of Urban Planning student) + Claudia Vergara (Associate Director of Advancement, CBE)

As you think about this conversation, here are a few links to get you started.

• Equity: Strive for fairness of results/outcomes rather than equal access to opportunity.
• Diversity: Vibrant and healthy community involves recognizing and supporting differences.
• Inclusion: Create an environment where everyone can participate and everyone belongs.

Thank you to the UDP Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Committee for the above definitions. Also check out the College’s recently updated EDI website.

Week 5 – Tuesday, 2/2, 5-6pm
Register

What do we mean by just/justice? Can built environments promote and/or embody justice? What does the “right to the city” mean? The topic of reparations is controversial, should CBE take a stand? What are frameworks for better understanding different points of view on this controversy?

Facilitators: Rachel Berney (Associate Professor, Urban Design + Planning) + Sara Cubillos (Seattle Public Utilities)

Week 7 – Tuesday, 2/16, 5-6pm
Register

We have heard different perceptions in CBE about the phrases “climate action” and “climate solutions.” What do we know about the similarities or differences in these ideas? Is there an approach that will make CBE’s work more effective? Should CBE take an advocacy role on climate issues and if so how should it balance this position with its relationship to built environment industries?

Facilitators: Anthony Hickling (Managing Director, Carbon Leadership Forum) + Gundula Proksch (Associate Professor, Architecture)

What does profit mean in the built environments? What does it mean to our College? Is profit distinct from flow of money, economic value, wealth or value? Is it a driver, an outcome or something else? Are there disciplinary differences in how we teach about or talk about money? Are these similar to other disciplinary differences or does money trigger more deeply held differences?

This conversation will be facilitated by Gregg Colburn (Assistant Professor of Real Estate) and Jen Davison (Assistant Dean for Research).

What does craft mean within our departments, curriculum and fields? Is there overlap in these definitions? Is it a modern term, historical or something else? In thinking about the role of craft in pedagogy, should we teach it? How do we teach it? How does craft relate to technology? To history?

This conversation will be facilitated by Catherine De Almeida (Assistant Professor of Landscape Architecture) and Jack Hunter (Digital Fabrication Tech and Lecturer in Architecture).

Design and design thinking were central components of the 2012 draft strategic plan, yet in this planning process, were rarely mentioned by the task groups. Was the omission due to an assumption that design is ubiquitous in our College? Is the omission a sign of success, that the college has changed, an indication that we agree on what it means, a way to avoid past unresolved conflicts raised by the term, or something else? Do we have a clear agreement on what design and design thinking are and the role they play in our college? We want to explore what has changed, if anything, and discuss the import of this word in 2012 that may not be useful to our planning process now.

This conversation will be facilitated by Susan Jones (Affiliate Associate Professor of Architecture and Founder of AtelierJones, LLC) and Laura Osburn (Research Scientist at the Center for Education and Research in Construction, CERC).

What does it mean to be a professional? What education prepares graduates to enter or lead professions in the architecture, engineering, construction (AEC) industries?

When our classes take on community projects where the community has a clear need, do we take on a commitment of a profession-quality deliverable? What if the open-ended explorations of the course take the work in a different direction? What if circumstances change, such as in the ways we accommodate students in Spring 2020 to opt-in to final projects? Are we modeling behavior that is unprofessional?

This conversation will be facilitated by Branden Born (Associate Professor of Urban Design and Planning) and Rachel Faber Machacha (Academic Advisor & Graduate Program Assistant in Construction Management).

Contact: Kate Simonen (ksimonen@uw.edu)

CBE encompasses unique sets of expertise covering the whole life cycle of built environments, from financing, planning, designing, construction, to use (facility management). The strategies and action items we select to implement our goals focus on aligning our expertise within UW and stepping out to drive change in our local, state, regional and global communities.

Goal 1: Rapidly decarbonize and enhance climate resilience of the UW campus.

Strategy 1.1: Form a Steering Committee to provide support, guidance, and oversight on climate and the campus built environment

• Action Item: Recruit expertise to the Committee within and outside the CBE.

A concentration of expertise in decarbonization and resilience. Faculty and perhaps key administrators plus student representatives to launch in Fall, 2020.

• Action Item: Establish administrative relationships for the Committee within UW.

Candidate administrative relationships at UW: Facilities, Faculty Senate, Provost’s Office. Examples of ongoing teams to join: Energy Roadmap (facilities), Sustainability Action Plan Executive Committee (facilities).

• Action Item: Formalize the Role of the Committee within UW Plans and Procedures.

Possible roles: review and approval in the Capital Planning Process; pre-schematic design review of Capital Projects for MEP, renewables, and embodied carbon; produce a climate-specific appendix to the Campus Master Plan; review UW financial investments for climate implications and green bonds; oversee a campus-wide climate revolving fund for capital investments; oversee strategies for the energy and transportation sectors; update of emergency management plans with climate impacts.

Strategy 1.2: Actively engage in University-, City-, State-, and Global-level resilience and climate action planning efforts

Promote integration of climate measures with campus planning, budgeting, finance, capital planning, and campus life. Seek out opportunities to scale up.

• Action Item: Promote the integration of climate action into the UW Capital Planning Process, the UW Sustainability Action Plan, and the Campus Master Plan

Start by articulating a more active role in the UW campus plans. Example: integrating measures of greenhouse gas emissions, embodied carbon, and resilience dividend into the prioritization of investments in the UW capital plan. Example: promote campus decarbonization targets in keeping with the UW Climate Impacts Group recommendations.

• Action Item: Develop climate scenarios and action plans to enhance resilience in decision-making for UW campuses and their environments

Create a systematic, all-hazards framework for addressing the challenges of climate for the built environment

• Action Item: In the medium term, scale involvement from the University-level up to City- and State-level resilience and climate action planning

Use campus-scaled scientific study of climate impacts to scale to a Washington Statewide version of California’s Cal-Adapt system, with a systematic framework for addressing the built environment.

Goal 2: Encourage CBE students, alumni, faculty, and staff to actively participate in resilience and climate planning, solutions and action.

Highlight different research and applied research efforts

Strategy 2.1: Host regular annual CBE climate action seminars, speaker series, and field trips/tours

• Action Item: Establish a BE seminar series co-taught by college-wide team of faculty with expertise in climate and the built environment

Representation of the five departments is critical to achieve consistency with department-level curricula

• Action Item: Develop and fund a speaker series of climate activists and their organizations

Invite the dynamic energy of climate activist groups into the CBE

• Action Item: Organize and support cross-curricular events such as field trips or tours of sites indicative of climate problems and solutions in the built environment

Self-standing events can become the backbone of multiple curricular offerings across the college, if open for instructors to sign up their classes for attendance.

Strategy 2.2: Encourage student interest, experimentation, and career opportunity at the intersection of climate and the built environment

• Action Item: Host a college-wide culminating showcase of graduating student research, designs, and technologies on climate and the built environment

One model for this could be the Information School’s Capstone Event, a showcase which features over 100 tables of student work and attracts 100’s of employers every year

• Action Item: Engage the CBE in the development of climate scenarios and action plans to enhance resilience for UW campuses

Would be led by faculty and supported by the administration, and could take the shape of a plan or a recurring college-wide studio to visit each of the major shocks and stressors for the campus due to climate change

• Action Item: Offer a wide range of curriculum choices that address climate solutions, offer problem and subject centered learning, and provide service opportunities through community based projects, awareness campaigns and research

Service-learning activities could focus on the University as a test bed, for issues faced by neighboring, national or international communities.

Goal 3: CBE should have a communications strategy in place to help us speak in a unified voice toward climate action

Strategy 3.1: Communicate in a unified voice toward climate action

• Action Item: Align expertise and interests within CBE regarding climate change

Convergence research entails integrating knowledge, methods, and expertise from different disciplines (departments, colleges, universities and industry partners) to form novel frameworks to catalyze discovery and innovation.

• Action Item: Create an aligned value definition of sustainability in built environments. 
• Action Item: Promote CBE participation in multi-disciplinary teams and the incorporation of a climate agenda

Examples: Team Science, Sustainability Science, NSF Growing Convergence Research, EarthLab, Urban @ UW

Strategy 3.2: Launch a CBE communications strategy for climate-related research, teaching, and service

• Action Item: Develop a lexicon and/or repository of communication materials on climate and the built environment

Consider the fast pace of research, development, and policy-making in this field, and the time-saving possibility of tapping into written works, graphic communications, and applications specific to our Campus, City, State, Region, as well as the need to elevate our own research products and policy papers.

• Action Item: Update web communications with climate-forward content

Could highlight the research, teaching, and service activities of CBE members and alumni, and provide context for these activities

• Action Item: Fortify CBE alumni, industry, and advancement networks with those who are curious about or share an interest in climate solutions for built environments

Industry concern grows with the financial sector’s growing awareness of vulnerability of built assets to impacts.  To bolster reputation and possibly returns, firms are beginning to announce ambitious climate targets that implicate their own physical assets. Washington State policy is similarly advancing more ambitious targets. All of these are drivers of change for the built environment.

Goal 4. Establish CBE as a leader in climate action education and research.

Strategy 4.1: Organize CBE climate research expertise, with affiliates in UW, into a formal UW City Climate Institute

One possible model is the UW Clean Energy Institute, filling the gaps in UW expertise from bench science to commercialization and scaling of clean energy technology

• Action Item: Host and support coordinated meetings to link researchers with opportunities such as research announcements and requests for applied research
• Action Item: Raise funding pursuant to applied and basic research on climate and the built environment, in the State of Washington and beyond

The UW Clean Energy Institute was launched in 2013 with a $40M allocation from the WA State budget.

• Action Item: Leverage the university’s power as a demonstration model for establishing ambitious decarbonization rates

Setting goals, executing strategies and verifying results so that we mitigate risk, adapt for uncertain future and demonstrate solutions that can scale to our State and beyond

Strategy 4.2: Establish a climate-forward strategy for recruiting and retaining CBE expertise in climate research and education

• Action Item: Perform a gap analysis of basic and applied climate research and educational expertise in CBE

Complete the analysis by Winter, 2021.

• Action Item: Recruit and raise funds to endow faculty and graduate research positions that fill gaps and expand opportunity with CBE climate expertise

Target foundations as well as industry partners to provide equal opportunity to fill gaps in the five departments

• Action Item: Engage all five departments to create a curricular plan for CBE to comprehensively address climate and built environment in our educational offerings

Leverage the gap analysis to make a curricular plan, to be implemented within the next three academic years.

Contact: Nancy Dragun (dragun@uw.edu) and Laura Osburn (lbusch@uw.edu)

Document communication processes, people, and tools and aid in identifying gaps which might require additional resources

ACTION #1: Make communications resources clear
Metrics/KPI’s:

1. earned media- internal to UW; external to UW
2. number of submissions to comms help form or new story form per quarter
3. number of people helped per month;
4. number of emails sent by 3rd party tools per month
5. number of people trained

ACTION #2: Ensure everyone has options to communicate in ways that are accessible, secure, and honor opt-out rules
Metrics/KPI’s:

1. track number of emails sent by 3rd party tools per month
2. standardize an accessibility review process and apply it to our communications

Document communication processes, people, and tools and aid in identifying gaps which might require additional resources

ACTION #3: Where cost effective, ensure all Dean’s lectures and other key CBE events are livestreamed or at a minimum recorded for later viewing by those students and alumni that cannot attend events in person.
Metrics/KPI’s:

1. track number of people joining via livestreaming or accessing recording after the event.
2. track number of submissions to comms help form or new story form per quarter

Cultivate and in turn, propel stories that impact on the CBE mission and values as identified by the strategic planning process.

ACTION #1: Define an overarching strategy for generating, propelling and disseminating the CBE story as departmental stories; develop the framework of overall CBE story/brand as guidelines for further communications.
Metrics/KPIs

1. click through and read rates
2. social media and digital story engagements and donations
3. earned media rates
4. shares across our networks
5. recruitment of students, volunteers
6. long-term engagement of alumni, donors, etc.

Contact: Rachel Berney (rberney@uw.edu) and Rick Mohler (remohler@uw.edu)

Here is our Deliverable 1, written up using the template provided in the Charter to create the beginning of Deliverable 2.

Goal 1: Focus on college-age recruitment

Strategy: Attract undergraduate students to CBE coursework starting as freshmen   

Actions:

• Increase CBE visibility within UW
• Increase enrollment into CBE undergraduate classes, minors, and programs
• High school outreach and recruitment – leverage/connect with existing programs on campus such as the Robinson Center, Hip Hop Architecture, 2050 Workout, and the tech camp that uses Gould Hall in the summer

KPIs:

• ABB revenue increases for freshman, sophomore, and non-majors (and helps support future outreach work)
• Increased student diversity in application and enrollment
• Leverage/create select large-lecture classes (blockbusters) such as Arch 150
• Track marketing efforts and changes in attitudes before/after

 

Goal 2: Create/support interdisciplinary opportunities in UG and Grad programs

Strategy: Leverage college-wide strengths as bridges across departments

Actions:

• Encourage students to understand cross-disciplinary needs (e.g. CBE professional program exchange/practice class)
• Require interdisciplinary engagement to address contemporary challenges
• Increase support for interdisciplinary research involving students within CBE
• Advance CBE reputation in technology, craft, history/theory, public-interest design, climate and so forth
• Maximize role and benefit of Fab Lab within CBE
• Provide a college-wide design-build program
• Co-locate studios from different disciplines within same space – break-down the spatial divisions
• Support coordination among departments for the studio scheduling and selection process
• Require more coursework outside home department

KPIs:

• Students take coursework outside their department
• Track marketing efforts
• Track interdisciplinary enrollments in relationship to opportunities
• Build a catalog of college-wide design-build courses
• Track what is actually done in terms of scheduling and selection

Strategy: Build and coordinate infrastructure for community-engagement efforts

Actions:

• Increase collaboration and partnerships between CBE and community groups
• Engage a practice-based curriculum focused on equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI)
• Foster increased interdisciplinary engagement
• Consolidate existing community engagement efforts into a CBE Community-Engagement Center

KPIs:

• Create a college-wide community engagement center (consider the Center for Livable Cities, LCY, and Urban@UW)
• Create an Assistant Dean position to run the community engagement center
• Increased engagement with underserved communities
• Increased diversity in student, staff, and faculty groups

 

Goal 3: Create/support interdisciplinary opportunities in the PhD and Post-Doctoral Programs

Strategy: Augment College PhD Programs

Actions:

• Increase viability and standing of Ph.D. programs
• Support CBE-wide research and scholarship
• Increase teaching opportunities for PhD candidates in pre-major and professional degree programs
• Provide support for sponsoring faculty of PhD students and program administration

KPIs:

• Assessment of marketing efforts
• Increased funding support for Ph.D. students (e.g. TA-ships, RA-ships, etc.)
• Increased acceptance of those opportunities
• Decreased reliance on individual faculty to support Ph.D. students
• College-wide programmatic support – provide support from ABB funds from goal 1

Higher-level issue: need more funding for PhD students to compete with other universities. Need to reform the TA-ship-focused method of supporting doctoral students.

Contact: Kim Sawada (sawada@uw.edu), group lead

Revised Goals:

Provide the educational and workplace conditions that prioritize physical and mental well-being of students, faculty and staff.

+Develop policies and best practices resources and intranet toolkit for CBE students, faculty and staff for their learning, teaching and personal well-being. This CBE toolkit should be specific to the needs of our students, such as learning in a studio environment and should also refer to resources in the Husky Experience Toolkit. 

1. Review existing college, departmental and studio policies for unmet needs. Identify areas where new resources need to be developed. Consult with faculty particularly those involved in CBE Raising Resilience Initiative to learn more about their outcomes.
2. Look at HWB policies and documents in other units and from other institutions, such as UW Austin’s “Texas Well-Being.”
3. Produce resource material and organize a launch/rollout campaign. Host this information on CBE Intranet, review at orientations and include on syllabi.
4. Implement identified strategies and best practices
5. KPI: Evaluate effectiveness by taking inventory of stress levels throughout the quarter and looking at click through rates on HWB information resources page.

It was surprising to learn that roughly half of the student respondents were aware of campus-wide student directed HWB (Health and Well-Being) services and resources.  And fewer than half of those students utilized them.  This could indicate an opportunity to highlight and strengthen the connection to campus services.

Through the results of CBE Strategic Planning Survey, we were able to sketch a picture of student, staff, and faculty stress levels at different points in the quarter.  This information can be used to target HWB messaging to these respective groups.  This messaging should include resources as well as tips to deal with stress.  Additionally, this information along with student check-ins at targeted times in the quarter can be used by staff and faculty to gauge when to introduce preventative and

Promote and support innovative research and teaching on health and well-being issues that informs and directs best practices in our professions.

+Sponsor and host events that showcase the HWB work of our faculty, students, alumni, research centers and labs.

1. Explore interest and viability of hosting and annual public lecture or event around an HWB topic, possibly in coordination with another campus unit or initiative, such as the Population Health Initiative, School of Public Health, College of the Environment etc..
2. Host continuing education opportunities that engage and bring together our professional communities around current topics of research in CBE
3. KPI: Evaluate activities by attendance and feedback to determine areas of improvement and continuation

Connect current faculty research related to health and well-being to other opportunities at the UW.  Connecting with other academic units and capitalizing on already identified initiatives holds the potential to allow us to expand capacity.

+Expand and Strengthen our relationships with other campus units through shared new interdisciplinary HWB courses and undergraduate minors and graduate certificate programs.

1. Inventory our resources including faculty expertise, programs, labs, centers and facilities
2. Connect with leadership in other units across campus as a meet and greet and to explore synergies and opportunities to share resources.
3. Identify unmet needs and opportunities for additional specialized coursework and programs around HWB, such as developing new interdisciplinary courses and/or certificate programs to serve both CBE students as well as students and programs in allied disciplines such as the School of Public Health, and College of the Environment, which has both undergraduate and graduate programs and students.
4. KPI: Evaluate initiatives based on the number of new initiatives generated, participation and enrollment numbers and feedback such as course and program evaluations.

Contact: Jennifer Dee (jendee@uw.edu) and Ann Huppert (ahuppert@uw.edu)

Goal: Identify Humanities + Histories + Futures values, ethics, narratives within the CBE

Action: Inventory existing HHF-related efforts within the CBE and survey student interests in research into humanities and historically-established lines of investigation

Survey and assess existing:

• Courses in history, theory, urbanism, ethics, humanities, futures, communication and presentation tactics
• Research activities – funded and non-funded or under-funded projects
• Centers and Labs (i.e., Green Futures Lab, Center for Preservation and Adaptive Reuse)
• Programs (i.e., the CBE PhD; the Dean’s Distinguished Lecture series)
• Interdisciplinary Initiatives

Measure:

Analysis will include identifying what is missing, overlapping and synergetic, redundant

Success measured by completion of information-gathering

Assessment of our current position relative to aspirational programs including:

• CCA Humanities and Sciences (fostering “spirited inquiry”) https://www.cca.edu/humanities-sciences/
• Rutgers -STEH program (Science, Technology, Environment, and Health (STEH) https://history.rutgers.edu/graduate/doctoral-program/major-programs-a-fields/53-academics/graduate-phd-program/260-graduate-study-in-history-of-sciencetechnology-environment-and-health/

Goal: Establish a Center for Humanities+Histories+Futures

To amplify and develop support for teaching, research and service in this critical area.

To provide a platform for communication and interaction with other areas in the strategic plan such as technology and climate action around shared values and narratives in order to envision humane and just futures within the College and the professions.

Actions:

• Coordinate and broadcast information via a website about relevant courses, research, programs, scheduled events across the UW and Seattle to serve as a clearinghouse/network*
• Generate and support innovative H+H+F curricula, events such as lectures, symposia, workshops, initiatives within and for the College**and broader University and civic communities
• Highlight and support faculty research, positioning H+H+F-focused research as an existing and central component of CBE activity
• Build capacity for student communication competency and develop support for ongoing activities such as communications-focused efforts, ie writing and professional presentation skills, within the College.

*Urban@UW is a model to develop structure for H+H+F Center website
**Simpson Center is a model for hosting symposia, lectures with associated short 1 credit seminars, or workshops that promote interdisciplinary discourse and interaction.

Measures:

• Attendance and participation in new activities
• Increased website hits/list-serv membership
• Measure queries of interest from prospective students

Contact: Jennifer Davison (jnfrdvsn@uw.edu), group lead

Strategies and key performance indicators for improving interdisciplinary research (IDR) within CBE

CBE recognizes that IDR is a powerful method of addressing today’s complex challenges, engaging many ideas for more just solutions, and preparing built environments leaders for our collective future. To increase the number, diversity, and quality of IDR efforts, including collaborations across disciplines, units, campuses and sectors, we recommend three goals, with the following associated strategies and KPIs. Each of these goals, the strategies to achieve them, and the KPIs of the strategies and goals, are interrelated (please see

Appendix 1 for details).

1. Better understand and communicate CBE’s interdisciplinary research.

1. 1. Create shared definitions, and examples, of IDR in CBE, so that we develop a shared understanding and increase visibility.
   2. Aggregate, analyze and synthesize data on IDR: create a robust data capture and management infrastructure with attendant capacity to maintain and analyze the data.
   3. Communicate/connect across CBE’s IDR efforts.
   4. Communicate externally about CBE’s IDR.

Key performance indicators to measure progress toward this goal include:

• More stories are told about IDR and its impacts.
• Robust documentation and tracking of IDR exists across CBE.
• CBE provides regular college-wide reports about IDR and the drivers, barriers and impacts are shared strategically, enabling researchers and the college to assess, adapt, and achieve these strategies and goals.

2. Increase administrative support for interdisciplinary research in CBE.

1. 1. Have staffing dedicated to leading the strategies and efforts to achieve IDR goals, as described herein.
   2. Provide advancement and research development support.
   3. Provide administrative support for grants and service contracts that specifically relieves fiscal barriers for both cross-campus and community partnerships.
   4. Provide project management including convening/events/coordination.
   5. Provide trainings for IDR for faculty and staff.
   6. Provide support for teaching faculty to integrate IDR into curricula through practical training, exercises and/or experience.

Key performance indicators to measure progress toward this goal include:

• Additional FTE supported by CBE that has a specific job description, roles/responsibilities and measures of success that relate to improving IDR as above.
• IDR projects and programs’ burdens are reduced.
• More IDR funding opportunities are accessed and attained.
• More courses explicitly state and engage in IDR methodologies, exercises, or experiences.

3. Align college-level incentives and address institutional barriers to interdisciplinary research.

1. 1. Align promotion and tenure criteria to acknowledge the value of IDR.
   2. Provide professional development, funding, and awards for faculty, staff, and students that communicate how CBE values IDR.
   3. Align relevant search criteria and position descriptions to acknowledge the value of IDR.
   4. Examine and address barriers in academic programs so that more students can undertake more intentional skill-building in collaborative research.
   5. Examine and address barriers within funding and fiscal mechanisms and make changes in policies and procedures to more effectively support IDR.

Key performance indicators to measure progress toward this goal include:

• Departmental and College-wide P&T guidelines state the importance of IDR, describe how faculty can document it, and provide criteria for evaluation.
• New faculty and staff positions explicitly describe how a candidate’s IDR work is/will be expected and/or supported, as appropriate.
• College-level awards for IDR are implemented for faculty, staff, students, and research teams.
• College-level seed grants or other small support opportunities are implemented.
• New fiscal and funding policies and procedures are adopted and utilized, leading to quicker nd for IDR grants and post-grant administration.

Appendix 1 IDR Strategies and KPIs
Appendix 2 IDR Presentation Notes

Contact: Jeff Hou (jhou@uw.edu)

Strategies & Actions

1. Establish a Center for Local/Global Initiatives (tentative name) with dedicated space and staff to serve as a key mechanism for accomplishing the goals in creating synergistic projects, to coordinate, support, and promote local and global activities at CBE, to develop EDI capacity, including support for student and faculty leadership and outreach through local and global engagement, and to engage community partners and potential supporters. Goals 1, 2, 3
2. Develop and regularly update a centralized database of global and local activities at CBE through systematic collection and documentation that can be accessed online through the CBE website. Leverage these activities and records for enhancement of CBE reputation, profile, recruitment, and advancement efforts. Goals 1, 2 
3. Create a need-based faculty grant and a student scholarship fund to support study abroad and international collaborations at the level of $100,000 a year to make study abroad and other international programs accessible to faculty and students regardless of their level of financial resources.  Goal 3

Metrics + KPIs

• Establishing the Center: Defining missions, activities, and structure, allocation and amount of budget, the formation of a steering committee, regular meetings and reports, list of activities and accomplishments
• Development of global/local activity database: Completeness/coverage of database, accessibility, searchability, development of materials for outreach, evidence of CBE reputation in local/global engagement
• Curriculum, courses, and programs that engage in local/global engagement: Number of existing and new courses, programs, etc.; student enrollments; community partners engaged; faculty involvement
• Student recruitment from underserved and underrepresented populations: Number of recruits, scholarships and financial aids offered
• Student & faculty leadership: Number of projects supported, funds allocated, project impact
• A need-based scholarship for study abroad and international collaboration: Amount raised and distributed

Contact: Meegan Amen (meegan@uw.edu) and Kimo Griggs (kimog@uw.edu)

GOAL 1

Improve efficiency, synergy and equity through a holistic review of current space allocation; identify opportunities; and explore additional resources.

Strategies:

Allocate space to promote community engagement.

• College level studio assignments by program level. For example, Graduates/Architecture; undergraduates/Gould.
  • Proximity allows for student engagement in underutilized public areas and promotes collaboration.
  • Organize activity zones floor by floor or by adjacency.
• Improve Student Services Accessibility
  • Reduce office closures (lunch, all-college meetings, part-time or flex-hour employees, etc.).
  • Improves safety and community by relocating empty summer faculty offices.
  • Possibly creates new secured student breakout spaces in lobbies
  • Departments can share student employee support.
• Research proximity or combining resources (increasing student researchers/ hourly employment, etc.) and PIs exposed to research intersectionalit

 

Create a Materials Store and Career Center.

Review under-utilized spaces and associated costs and the value to the student experience.

Continue to identify and implement  interior and exterior place/space opportunities. See comprehensive list of ideas.

GOAL 2

Review instructional space allocation—CBE studios and classrooms—through the lens of space and (student) time management.

Strategies:

Re-evaluate the entirety of Time Schedule Construction by quarter and year.

• Improve student life balance by consolidating the instruction window.
• Review class time-length to optimize learning.
• Minimize evening instruction, particularly after studio.
• Scheduling consistency for 1) recruitment and 2) life-balance.
• No class through a set lunch hour so rooms are available for clubs/info sessions.
• Evaluate curriculum (e.g. 007) for redundancy: offer college wide for better efficiency.
• Schedule and publicize annual schedules as a recruiting tool.

Determine college space capacities.

• Identify the appropriate spaces, infrastructure and technology needs that provide the most forward and inclusive instruction and research.
• Review increased faculty:student studio ratios, hot desks, etc., and improved student outcomes.
• Review course offerings over entire year for equally weighted quarters (both quantitative and student stress load).
• Explore instruction mediums that improve accessibility and free physical space.
• Confirm dual degree, certificate, minor, department electives, and freshmen and sophomore courses don’t overlap.

GOAL 3

Explore how college space can create opportunities for the cross-fertilization of cultures within the college.

Strategies:

Design public and instruction break-out space for student learning and mental needs including daylight, quiet, and personal engagement.

Display current student studio work in  public beyond just review so students can identify like-focused cohorts across disciplines and create community.

Tiers of display everywhere possible (curated/impromptu, digital/analog, inside/outside, etc.). Likewise, prominently showcase alumni accomplishments to exemplify how the CBE community reaches beyond campus and making students feel an affinity for CBE.

Improve ventilation, lighting, and building access systems.

GOAL 4

Create space guidelines to provide guidance and continuity while incentivizing spontaneous and planned creativity.

Strategies:

Create a visual sense of community between Gould and Architecture Halls by creating a committee to evaluate a uniform space and place guidelines/templates for furniture, paint color, blinds, signage, etc..

Document space-use policies.

Support non-destructive, temporary student work; leave breathing room for tactical urbanism.

Align with the University, as able, to create space guidelines.

KPIs (timeline TBD)

• Review student enrollment and employment data annually for increases.
• Asses improved student experience/life-balance through annual student exit survey (Student Experience task group).
• Has student assistance for research increased?
• Visually and anecdotally, are constituents engaging our space more? Less public clutter?

Contact: Manish Chalana (chalana@uw.edu)

CONTEXT AND DRAFT KPIs – CBE SOCIAL JUSTICE, EQUITY AND INCLUSION TASK GROUP

DRAFT – UPDATED 03/13/20

Overarching objective: UW CBE recognizes that current and emerging built environment practitioners & educators have a duty to work to undo and  address historic systemic injustices in the built environment professions. To achieve this, the Social Justice + Equity Task Group of the CBE Strategic Plan is setting goals that center diversity, equity and inclusion in all of our work, and use it as a lense for cultivating a welcoming and empowered college culture. 

GOAL 1: CLIMATE & CULTURE  Cultivate and Ensure an inclusive College identify, climate and culture that fosters a welcoming environment for all students, faculty and staff particularly those groups that have been historically underrepresented in our professions.

Strategies

1. Integrate social justice and EDI in all aspects of the CBE’s operations
2. people understand the importance of Equity Diversity Inclusion( EDI) and have self-awareness and skillfulness in actions

Potential KPIs

1. EDI established as a key pillar of the strategic plan and commitment is reflected in an increasing number of public documents and processes
2. Standing committee established to review overarching concerns and promotion of EDI and social justice concerns. Additional targets set after first year
3. College IDI score – moves towards adaptation by x%
4. Annual student climate survey and exit surveys established to affirm improvements in culture and support. Targets set after first year
5. X% increase  topics and lectures by leaders from historically underrepresented communities and/or integrating topics that address concerns prominent in these communities 
6. Affinity groups established to support safe environments for support, grassroots engagement; supported by financial and communications support
7. Establishment and x% increase in funding for department grassroots efforts to support social justice and EDI 
8. Increase visibility online and recognition for faculty, staff and students that model and champion EDI and social justice goals and objectives, measured by online articles/stories and awards (exact measure TBD by SJEDI Committee – however it is named and constituted)

GOAL 2: PEOPLE & PROCESS  Create systems that center and honor voices of historically underrepresented communities. (Add wording about the most impact and benefit from these efforts in our learning community.)

Strategies

1. promote a curriculum that engages multiple and diverse topics and voices in all CBE courses; centering and honoring voices of historically underrepresented communities
2. increase recruitment admissions, retention and allocation of financial support and scholarships for underrepresented students
3. increase hiring and retention of underrepresented faculty and staff

Draft KPIs

1. Curriculum guidelines established to support review to further integrate multiple and diverse topics and voices in all CBE courses; centering and honoring voices of historically underrepresented communities
2. X% year over year decline in student reporting concerns re: equity and inclusion (need to discuss best measures)
3. X% year over year increase in admissions of students from historically underrepresented communities
4. X% year over year increase in retention of  students from historically underrepresented communities 
5. Increase staff FTE to support centralized student services
6. Increase in scholarship and financial aid to underrepresented students
7. Increase in candidate pools for staff hires by x%
8. Increase in staff hires from  historically underrepresented communities by x%
9. Increase in candidate pools for faculty hires by x% 
10. Increase in faculty hires from  historically underrepresented communities x% 
11. Align and integrate total business planning process and communications plan; set measures over the course of the first year and review annually after
12. Departments and college reviews HR policies and on-boarding annually, looking thru the lens of diversity, communicates results and plans for improvements to stakeholders
    

GOAL 3: LEARN &  MODEL  Learn best practices and be accountable for integrating social justice and EDI practice to benefit the college and the professions and communities we work in.

Strategies 

1. Create spaces and offer resources to cultivate grassroots ideas furthering
   social justice and EDI into college wide practices to model best practices
2. Develop and showcase equitable practice in education to transform professions 

Draft  KPIs

1. x% increase in number of grassroots activities at both the department and college level
   (can be correlate to the climate survey and/or exit surveys)
2. Guidelines for best practices for curriculum development and classroom management established, reviewed annually and integrated into faculty evaluation
3. Activities and systems to track, evaluate and determine best practices for behavior: institutional, group and individual levels 
4. Publication of papers or conference presentations at professional conferences (or other means to share stories, resources and knowledge demonstrating learning in the field )

Contact: Megan Herzog (herzomeg@uw.edu)

Goal 1: Expand CBE Student Outreach

Strategy: Identify and develop CBE interagency relationships to promote student recruitment

Actions:

1. Consult with the following entities to improve referrals to CBE degree programs:
   1. U W General Advising: UAA, OMAD, SAAS, and University Honors
   2. Other academic institutions such as high schools, community colleges, Bachelor programs, etc.
   3. UW Career Center Interest Communities
   4. UW Graduate School and GO-MAP
   5. Metrics/KPIs: Schedule meetings quarterly and annually
2. Encourage faculty to take an active role in recruitment and use current, research-based strategies
   1. Metrics/KPIs: All 100- and 200-level CBE courses will provide information about CBE majors
   2. Metrics/KPIs: Track how students find out about programs
3. Identify and develop resources that will allow us to recruit and retain a diverse student population such as:
   1. Establish a CBE general fund
   2. Help students identify funding via scholarships, grants, work-study/TA positions, etc.
   3. Metrics/KPIs: CBE degree programs to compile and strengthen existing efforts in a shared document

Goal 2: Improve CBE culture, resources, and opportunities for students

Strategy: Identify, assess, and mitigate sources of friction towards student success

Actions:

1. Research and identify areas of improvement regarding student health and well-being
   1. Implement a required training, such as Husky Health & Well-being, for all faculty & staff on UW student wellbeing and how to support a student in distress. Ensure it meets the Policies being established by Health & Wellbeing Task Group and any future policies at the University level.
      1. Metrics/KPIs: Record those that attend trainings
   2. Partner with UW Resilience Lab on their Well-Being for Life & Learning Initiative
      1. Metrics/KPIs: Track Faculty participation rates
   3. Reduce student anxiety around design critiques by providing faculty constructive feedback training; develop best-practices and share with outside reviewers
      1. Metrics/KPIs: Develop and then record those that attend trainings
   4. Host a series of recurring wellbeing events, such as those offered UW Mindfulness, Yoga & Meditation
      1. Metrics/KPIs: Schedule events and track number of attendees
   5. Familiarize CBE students with health and well-being resources on campus and how to take advantage of them
      1. Metrics/KPIs: Integrate at orientations or welcome days
2. Promote an equitable, diverse, and inclusive learning environment for all CBE students
   1. Metrics/KPIs: Track reported incidents
3. Ensure students are referred to by their preferred names and pronouns
   1. Metrics/KPIs: Faculty make note on the first day of every class
4. Ensure all CBE students obtain one or more Internships in their field; Additional High-Impact Learning Experiences such as hands-on learning, study abroad, and research & leadership projects should be emphasized
   1. Metrics/KPIs: Track student internship participation rates
5. Expand interdisciplinary learning opportunities — both internal to CBE and with other Colleges at UW
   1. Metrics/KPIs: Promote cross-listed courses and concurrent degrees
6. Train CBE administrators on existing data (SERU, exit interviews, Course Evaluations, survey feedback, UW-IT data analysis) to identify barriers students experience and then work to remove those barriers
   1. Metrics/KPIs: Track participation rates
7. Ensure courses take advantage of online tools to accommodate different learning styles; lectures, events live-streamed and/or recorded
   1. Metrics/KPIs: Verify presence of instruction materials online; Track number of participants in live streams or viewing recorded events
8. Identify where building environments can be changed to benefit students including:
   1. Increasing informal gathering / discussion / collaboration spaces and dedicated team project spaces
   2. Applying biophilic design
   3. Providing access to comfort amenities such as vending and coffee machines
   4. Metrics/KPIs: Gauge student satisfaction
9. Provide additional tools to prepare for post-graduation success, such as:
   1. Portfolio workshops and reviews
   2. Writing workshops
   3. Encourage Faculty to translate classroom work into career skills to improve Student resumes such as “What the Husky Experience Means in the Classroom”
   4. Metrics/KPIs: Record number of workshops conducted per year and attendance numbers
10. Develop and Implement a regular CBE culture survey
    1. Metrics/KPIs: Report out results of CBE culture survey at All College meetings

Goal 3: Strengthen connections with CBE alumni

Strategy: Identify, strengthen, and maintain comprehensive engagement opportunities

Actions:

1. Develop a uniform CBE exit interview and 6-month post graduation s urvey similar to the Office of Educational Assessment
   1. Metrics/KPIs: Track statistics and results of survey
2. Share alumni success stories
   1. Metrics/KPIs: Post stories on CBE websites and amplify via social media
3. Establish CBE alumni ambassadors to assist in recruiting new students, job placement for graduates and expanding the CBE brand recognition
   1. Metrics/KPIs: Track ambassadors and their efforts
4. Develop alumni profiles similar to Arts & Sciences’ There’s a Job for That
   1. Metrics/KPIs: Track site metrics and engagement with students

Contact: Tyler Sprague (tyler2@uw.edu)

1. Make the CBE Task Group a permanent, college-recognized advisory group (CBE Tech, or TAC)This group will serve as a resource to faculty, staff and students interested in CBE technology issues. This group would meet once per quarter to discuss CBE Tech issues, assess & maintain college-defined directions, and advise the Dean on larger Technology decisions, including funding of college resources.  The group will have representation from each department (at minimum), and welcome involvement from tech partners outside CBE.  For reference, this group would be like both College Council, and the departmental Professional Advisory Councils.
2. Develop a cohesive teaching approach to CBE TechnologyDepartments work with CBE Tech to identify knowledge/skills common to CBE, incorporate them into shared lower-level courses & tutorials, and facilitate advanced tech seminars.  Departments would maintain upper-level, discipline-specific courses

Develop College-level, introductory course(s)

This would be an opportunity for CBE faculty & staff to collaborate on a course, establish college identity and attract freshmen to CBE.

For Example: BE1XX – Technology and the Built Environments

Freshman-level, intro course providing intro to Rhino, ArcGIS, ‘Bluebeam’, Adobe, fabrication as means to address BE issues.  Course instructor adjustments would be needed to staff the course, and scale with demand.

Develop/Expand College-level interdisciplinary Course(s)

This would allow undergrad/grad students to learn about integrated methods and technologies used in a collaborative environment to carry out projects in built environment.

For example: BE5XX – Design+Build Project Studio

Students attend an integrated studio (taught by Arch/CM departments) to learn about design/construction tools and collaborations required in the design and pre-construction process.

Organize College-level Resources (on-line)

This would entail collecting technology resources in a single location – including short, curated on-line videos that provide introductory skill-based instruction, tutorials from other sources (UW licenses, UW library, Public Library), and other tech resources. This could be utilized by students enrolled in classes as foundation, or others interested.  Compensation would be needed for creation of videos, assessment, and maintenance of resource.

Schedule College-level Tech Seminars (CBE Tech Seminars)

This would entail organization of short sessions – single lecture, spring break course – intended to advance new tech knowledge in CBE.  Seminars could be offered by grad students, high-level professionals, faculty, etc. – as peer-to-peer knowledge-sharing of cutting-edge ideas and expertise.  These would be scheduled in advance (like lecture series), intended to place CBE in a larger tech conversation, and open to all.  Minimal compensation would be needed for instructors, organizers.           

3. Facilitate research connections within the professional communityAssist faculty in identifying potential research partners, articulating the value of CBE perspective & capabilities to the larger community.  Similar to the Architectural Research Consortium, this program would help organize masters level research aligned with professional community and promote interdisciplinary research.
4. Establish a technology-focused, Ph.D. level research track, fundedPursue technology-focused support from the larger Seattle tech community, through partnerships with visionary firms and institutions (outside the professional community).  This would require larger amounts of funding (coordination with UW advancement), only possible through high-level strategic partnerships.   In order to achieve this, CBE would need a consistent message articulating the value that the CBE perspective brings to solving larger issues, and the visibility of research produced (in both academic and public realms).

Metrics + KPIs

Metrics

1. Is there an active CBE Tech group? Do they effectively advise the Dean, and is this advice considered?  Is there discourse and clarity in College-wide decisions?
2. Are there college-wide CBE technology courses? Are the courses well attended, online tutorials used, and do the seminars present leading ideas?  Are students able to meet their technology needs?
3. Are faculty empowered to explore new technology-enabled research directions?
4. Do students feel like they are prepared for the technology issues they face in the future?
5. Does the college maintain a dialogue and relationship with technology companies?

Specific KPIs for the identified strategies

1. Reporting regular meetings and tracking members’ participants. Ensuring representation of college-wide technology-related programs and resources, tech task group self-evaluation.
2. Number of developed courses and tech seminars, students’ satisfaction, Tech task group evaluation. Long-term KPIs: a) tracking progress based on an established roadmap containing identified BE technologies and ideas, b) tracking progress based on the feedback from industry partners.
3. Number of newly added consortium members, number of granted research projects, Tech task group evaluation. Long-term KPI: industry partners’ feedback
4. Amount of funding, number of opportunities created for PhD-level students/postdoc researchers, CBE PhD students/ postdoc researchers’ feedbacks, tech task group evaluation.

Contact: Kate Simonen (ksimonen@uw.edu)

Rationale (What does your topic mean for CBE and our stakeholders? What is CBE doing currently? Why do we care?)

Unprecedented environmental, economic and social changes are predicted over the coming decades. These changes can happen by default, disruption or design. We have a unique window of opportunity – now is the time to act decisively in order to ensure that our students, College, University, State and partners in research around the world are prepared to respond effectively to an uncertain future. The need for urgent action is clear; in order to meet global climate targets we need to reduce emissions globally by 50 percent in the next ten years, and reach net zero emissions–the point at which any remaining emissions can be removed from the air–by 2050 [1]. Buildings are responsible for about half of these emissions [2], cities and their associated physical and energy infrastructure for nearly 75 percent [3], and systemic changes will be required in order for construction, buildings, cities and landscapes to decarbonize. We need to simultaneously ensure that these transitions support increased equity and opportunity for all.

We envision a College of Built Environments (CBE) recognized as a center of climate action enabling collaboration between disciplines, the University, professional industry and the State such that the region becomes a model for how to meet global climate targets while enhancing equity, social and biological diversity and delight. We in the CBE at the University of Washington have unique capacities and significant ethical responsibility to lead towards a beautiful, equitable and sustainable future. Our research touches communities and supports cities around the world as they embark on their own journey toward sustainability. We can inspire and enable creative and bold solutions to complex challenges if we face them with optimism, resilience, collaboration, and rigor.

Research: (Summarize your research and community outreach. What did you learn? What is important to our stakeholders?)

The scientific community, represented by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, states with certainty that global average temperatures are rising due to greenhouse gas emissions from human activities have reached levels unprecedented in an empirical record of the Earth’s atmosphere reaching back 800,000 years.[4] At the time of writing, global average temperatures have already risen by 1 degree Celsius, and forecasts of business-as-usual emissions portend temperatures that bring catastrophic change for people and the ecosystems on which we depend. Expressed as a global carbon budget,[5] the goal of limiting the rise of global average temperature to 2 degrees or less, set in the Paris Agreement of 2015 [6], allows parties around the world to realize that temperatures rise with each ton of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions, and will continue to do so until those emissions end. To meet this goal, emissions will have to be reduced by 2050 to only those for which carbon can be reliably sequestered from the atmosphere. Considering that rates of global greenhouse gas emissions have yet to peak, the United Nations Environment Programme [1] notes that humanity may well overshoot our global carbon budget, placing us in aggressive pursuit of practices for a carbon negative outcome in order to stabilize temperatures at 2 degrees above pre-industrial levels (pre-1880).

To transition away from the activities and infrastructure that generate emissions requires concerted research, education, and public action in fields that are found within the CBE at the University of Washington. Our academic disciplines are focused on land use, energy, industry, buildings, transport, and cities, all implicated in the problem and in search of solutions. CBE has the expertise to be a source of solutions for our campus, city, region, nation, and world.

Rising temperatures release energy into the planet’s atmospheric and hydrologic systems with cascading effect on the biophysical world. The scientific community has defined relationships between emissions, warming, and climate variability, with increasing certainty, and is rapidly determining the extent of impacts that accompany these changes, such as sea level rise, flood, drought, wildfire, extreme storms, and the breakdown of biophysical features, such as permafrost, that further accelerate warming by releasing stores of methane from the seas and soils.[4] These shifts, which carry more energy and afflict more damage on built and natural systems, multiply existing threats to social, economic, and environmental systems. Scientists today are in a race to document the myriad effects, numbering among them species extinctions, food shortages, water crises, community displacement, exacerbated economic inequality, conflict over resources, desertification, and ecosystem collapse.[7]

To become resilient in the face of these acute and chronic stressors requires research, education, and public action, on the part of the disciplines found in the CBE at the University of Washington.  Urban design and planning, real estate, architecture, landscape architecture, and construction management have the collective capacity to reshape the elements of human settlement to be robust to the hazards that come, and to enhance the sustainability of human endeavors and the ecosystems we share with a biodiverse world.

In writing this chapter of the CBE Strategic Plan, our college community commits to climate action with determination to resolve the problems ahead and a wellspring of knowledge and spirit that gives the communities of research, education, and practice that we serve the capacity to thrive. In preparation for this Strategic Plan, outreach included questions to gauge student, faculty, staff, and professional committee interest in a variety of roles for CBE in climate action. Among all of these groups, 85 to 95 percent agreed or strongly agreed that all students in the college should graduate with an understanding of how the knowledge and skills of their field can be leveraged to impact, mitigate, and adapt to climate change.

As the generation that shoulders a greater proportion of climate impacts over time, students are attuned to this burden and their responses show that they would like the college to lend strength and support to their fight with climate change. Students overwhelmingly agree that CBE should be a resource and advocate for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. More than 80 percent of students agree or strongly agree that the college should advocate for a UW-wide goal of carbon negative emissions, and that CBE should become a resource for its implementation. Furthermore, students believe they would benefit from efforts at CBE to shape our curriculum into pathways (e.g., degrees, certificates, continuing education) for climate change expertise, and to establish a center for climate action collaboration between industry, government, the professions, and the wider array of disciplines at the University of Washington.

Within all survey groups over 90 percent of respondents agree or strongly agree that all students should graduate with an understanding of how their field can impact, mitigate and adapt to climate change and over 70 percent feel the same about the college being a center of climate action.The following three graphs plot the results of the primary climate questions in the stakeholder survey.

Goals  (Articulate suggested strategic goal(s). What should the CBE do?)

Following a clear rationale for CBE involvement in climate action and informed by our research into student, faculty, and community perspectives on this issue, we propose the following four goals guide continued strategic planning on climate action by the College:

• Goal 1: Rapidly decarbonize and enhance climate resilience of the UW campus.
• Goal 2: Encourage CBE students, alumni, faculty, and staff to actively participate in resilience and climate planning, solutions and action.
• Goal 3: CBE to develop a communications strategy to help us speak in a unified voice toward climate action
• Goal 4. Establish CBE as a leader in climate action education and research.

—– Endnotes

[1] United Nations Environment Programme (2019). Emissions Gap Report 2019. UNEP, Nairobi. http://www.unenvironment.org/emissionsgap

[2] Global Alliance for Building and Construction (GABC) (2019) Global Status Report

[3] Seto K.C., S. Dhakal, A. Bigio, H. Blanco, G.C. Delgado, D. Dewar, L. Huang, A. Inaba, A. Kansal, S. Lwasa, J.E. McMahon, D.B. Müller, J. Murakami, H. Nagendra, and A. Ramaswami, 2014: Human Settlements, Infrastructure and Spatial Planning. In: Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Edenhofer, O., R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. Savolainen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel and J.C. Minx (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA

[4] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2014): Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 151 pp.

[5] C. Le Quéré, R. M. Andrew, J. G. Canadell, S. Sitch, J. I. Korsbakken, et al. 2016. Global Carbon Budget 2016. Earth System Science Data, 8:605-649. doi:10.5194/essd-8-605-2016.

[6] Paris Agreement to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Dec. 12, 2015, T.I.A.S. No. 16-1104.

[7] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2018). Global warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty [V. Masson-Delmotte, P. Zhai, H. O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P. R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J. B. R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M. I. Gomis, E. Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, T. Waterfield (eds.)]. World Meteorological Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, 32 pp. https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/

Contact: Nancy Dragun (dragun@uw.edu) and Laura Osburn (lbusch@uw.edu)

Rationale

Communication Processes

All organizations must have clearly defined processes and tools to deliver communications to a variety of stakeholder groups. This subgroup focused on reviewing a variety of approaches to standardizing, simplifying and  possibly centralizing communications within CBE. Receiving information by email was the clear choice of the three survey audiences  (student, staff/faculty, and external) when asked how they preferred to receive college/department communications.

Departments currently use a variety of tools and email lists to deliver communications to students, staff/faculty, and external audiences in very different ways. The difference in communication delivery and process is often due to lack of knowledge of available tools, and lack of training on their use, in order to improve the consistency of communication development and delivery throughout the college.

Interdisciplinary Communication

This subgroup is dedicated to connecting faculty, staff, and students to research opportunities, community partners, and industry partners to encourage interdisciplinary engagement and promote earned/professional skills. Achieving this goal is key for CBE staff, faculty, students, as well as external stakeholders. While specialists in specific disciplines are often sought after and rewarded, the current world struggles with large, complex problems (e.g., climate change, housing affordability) that require expertise from multiple disciplines to solve. And while all disciplines in the college are inherently interdisciplinary, any time a building is built or we engage in urban planning, we are interacting with an entire ecosystem of people, places, and objects, all of which require expertise found in fields such as geography, material science, engineering, technology, communication, organizational science, and cultural studies.

(Note: The work of this subgroup overlaps substantially with that of the Interdisciplinary Research task group.  For this reason we are minimizing our stated rationale as it will likely be redundant with theirs.  Our originally stated rationale can be found in Appendix 1.)

Storytelling

This subgroup’s goal is to define a strategy for development of compelling CBE stories and definition of our brand for faculty, staff, students and alumni.  Storytelling is a fundamental human experience that unites people and drives stronger, deeper connections. How we tell our stories is paramount to leading effective communications and strategic development of our college. Currently the story of CBE is not clear to most, and as a result, stories come primarily out of individual departments and, while strong and compelling, contribute to the “silo” effect that we have long recognized.  The College’s identity remains largely unclear to both internal and external audiences.

CBE occupies a nuanced and important space in the Pacific Northwest. In a rapidly changing metropolis, the faculty, staff and students of CBE bring expertise and involvement to topics that are community-focused and high press priority. CBE as a unit is a vast and central laboratory for study, exploration, and discovery across intersecting disciplines, and across professional and academic achievements. The goal of CBE communications strategy at all times is to propel the mission and vision of the college, across the many disciplines and communities CBE and UW impact.

The need for a concise CBE vision is clear. The UW has prioritized marketing and communications work with the endorsed goals of: attracting and developing Washington and the world’s most promising students; growing public and private support for the UW’s shared mission; becoming a destination for world class faculty and staff; and growing internal passions without and around the university and our communities.

Research

Communication processes

Our research focused on how to standardize and simplify communication processes for our external, faculty/staff, and external audiences (alumni/professional council).  We gathered data from a variety of sources to better understand preferred communication options and to identify gaps in communication processes.  Internally we participated in the CBE survey, relying upon questions in that directly asked how students, faculty/staff, and alumni preferred to receive communications. In all audience categories, email was chosen as the way that these audiences wanted to receive information, so the majority of discussion was devoted to ways CBE could standardize and simplify email tools and processes.

Interdisciplinary Communication

In the process of assessing and creating our rationale and methods, this subgroup participated in the initial crafting of survey questions along with the larger committee, and have subsequently arrived at the goals outlined below, via assessment of the answers provided by survey participants. In addition to this, we engaged in cross-committee communication with the Interdisciplinary Research Committee. The overlap in our work enabled us to draw conclusions as to how interdisciplinary communication can best serve the needs of CBE and its stakeholders. In particular, we relied on the IDR group’s “Incentives and Barriers of IDR for CBE” and “Interdisciplinary Research Activities in CBE” documents to formulate our suggestions. We know that over 42 faculty/staff respondents and 36 students were involved in interdisciplinary research. We also found that the most resonant stories for external survey respondents were community connections (43.12%) and faculty research (39.45%). This data and the work of the Interdisciplinary Research Task group influenced the direction of our thinking; that we need stories that will help promote research, get the word out, and generate excitement and interest in building connections to others.

Based on our research, the subgroup determined that we should focus on the communication aspect of interdisciplinary engagement, rather than the skills-building aspect of learning how to best collaborate and engage, which we believe is a part of the Interdisciplinary Task group’s work.

Storytelling

Our subgroup utilized the CBE survey results to assess what types of stories most resonate with different audiences. From conversations, formal and informal brainstorming sessions, strategic planning, and trainings, both internal and external to CBE, we developed several strategy drivers. Strategy drivers are not externally facing messages; rather, they guide the creation of external messaging and marketing tactics based on targeted audiences and prioritization of those audiences. (See Appendices 3 and 4.)

Goals

1. Communication processes

Create a unified culture of communications across the college to the extent possible that is efficient, easily managed, readily accessible to the proper audiences, and workable for our different administrative structures.

2. Interdisciplinary Communication

Make CBE known to internal and external audiences as a fundamentally interdisciplinary community of engaged researchers and educators working together to solve problems across scales of the built environment through local and global initiatives.

3. Storytelling

Make CBE known to internal and external audiences through compelling and memorable stories that resonate with broad social and personal concerns.

APPENDICES:

1. For faculty, higher level research courses may require faculty to have expertise in areas beyond their own. Being able to connect with members of the academic and nonacademic community outside of CBE will help broaden faculty expertise and expose students to knowledge from other fields that impact their own. For administrative staff, interdisciplinary engagement can mean building greater connections with others working in our local community, and learning from other academic institutions in areas that support the college’s day to day work. For research staff, interdisciplinary research can be key to generating funding on complex projects, building a larger network of research partners, and expanding upon potential outlets for communicating one’s work. It also means the potential to work with and research topics of importance to industry and community partners to improve the AEC industry and our community’s at large.

For students, while classwork emphasizes that interdisciplinary connections and community engagement are an effective means to understanding course material and the complexities that they will encounter in their future careers, it has been difficult to make these connections. They face barriers, such as understanding the different languages and communication styles of disciplinary communities outside of one’s own. Enhancing and promoting our interdisciplinary engagement in research and with community and industry partners can help build our reputation.

Currently CBE has promoted interdisciplinary work for our range of CBE stakeholders through courses such as the Integrated Design Studio and the ARC program, and through the individual activities of faculty and staff who have made their own connections across different colleges, off-campus communities, and industry partners. However, there has been little career incentive for individuals to make these connections.  Connecting students and researchers to industry and community partners requires time and resources to promote CBE’s reputation and to develop trusting stakeholder relationships.

2. The below list highlights those audiences in order of priority:

• Students – current and prospective
• Alumni – including professional certificates
• Faculty/staff – past, current, and prospective
• Individual donors – active, past, and prospective
• Industry partners
• Government partners and agencies seeking expertise
• Media/Press

3. We can accomplish this through:

• Identifying interdisciplinary engagement within CBE
• Provide easy-to-find, centralized information for external stakeholders on current interdisciplinary research at CBE based on themed topics
• Provide training or help to internal CBE stakeholders to build out their communications about their work in ways that create evocative, resonating stories that reach across campus and to industry and other community stakeholders.

4. Strategy drivers from the larger University branding and marketing guidelines, existing and past CBE marketing materials, and input from the first several rounds of strategic planning and survey questions include:

• Growth, continuous learning and challenges are essential tenets of a meaningful life
• Show clear pathways from majors and departments to careers
• Added career center support/ messaging a distinct possibility
• Exploration, discovery, innovation and complexity drive CBE
• Showing a variety of academic and professional opportunities and outcomes demonstrates the breadth of impact
• Seattle is an important component of the UW CBE narrative

5. Ideas for development of story framework:

• Facilitated roundtable discussion among CBE community
• Another survey, specific to this topic: what are the keywords/themes of CBE?
• 1:1s conducted by CBE Comms committee with key representatives of each constituency
• Other approaches TBD

Contact: Rachel Berney (rberney@uw.edu) and Rick Mohler (remohler@uw.edu)

RATIONALE

The Curriculum and Pedagogy group has been working to define three broad and aspirational goals, including supportive processes in place or needed within the CBE to accomplish what we set out to do. The first goal is Engagement and Leadership, which we see as bookends to the undergrad and grad experience. This means that we are focusing on pre-college-age recruitment as well as bolstering our connections to, use of, and opportunities to serve professionals and their development. The second is an Interdisciplinary CBE- Undergraduate and Professional Degree Programs and the third in an Interdisciplinary CBE – PhD and Post-Doctoral Programs.  The latter two are focused on building new CBE opportunities and supporting and enhancing current ones at multiple levels.

Using this framework we identified the following draft goals and related strategies.

Engagement and Leadership

Strategy 1     Strengthen connections with middle and high school students

• Increase exposure to potential students of the allied college disciplines
• Increase opportunities for a diverse undergraduate student population
• Support teaching opportunities for CBE students

Strategy 2     Attract undergraduate students to CBE coursework starting as freshmen

• Increase CBE visibility within University
• Increase enrollment to college undergraduate programs
• Increase ABB revenue (i.e. Arch 150)

Strategy 3     Leverage the PACs

• Expose students to other disciplines
• Leverage potential efficiencies in delivering required coursework
• Increase engagement between departmental PAC’s

Strategy 4     Develop continuing education short courses including those focused on providing CE credits for registered/accredited professionals that build on CBE strengths

• To be developed

Interdisciplinary CBE – Undergraduate and Professional Degree Programs

Strategy 1     Bridge required coursework across College departments

• Expose students to other disciplines
• Leverage potential efficiencies in delivering required coursework
• Consider hiring lecturers at College level so that they could teach in multiple programs

Strategy 2     Establish an interdisciplinary capstone experience across multiple professional degree programs

• Expose students to other disciplines
• Increase interdisciplinary research within College
• Leverage potential efficiencies in delivering capstone coursework
• Establish interdisciplinary collaborative thesis projects

Strategy 3     Leverage college-wide strengths as bridges between departments

• Expose students to other disciplines
• Increase interdisciplinary research within CBE
• Develop CBE reputation in technology, craft, history/theory, public-interest design, climate and so forth
• Maximize role and benefit of Fabrication Lab within CBE
• Co-locate studios from different disciplines within same space – break-down the spatial divisions
• Co-ordinate logistics between departments such as the studio selection process
• Require more coursework outside departments

Strategy 4     Establish/support College-level interdisciplinary design/build studios 

• Expose students to the applied practices of disciplines across CBE
• Increase interdisciplinary research/outreach within CBE
• Enhance CBE reputation in design-build education

Strategy 5     Establish/support minor programs in multiple departments

• Expose students to other disciplines at the undergraduate level
• Encourage increased interdisciplinary engagement
• Allow students from beyond CBE degree programs to engage with CBE coursework, faculty and students

Strategy 6     Establish a College-wide community engagement center

• Increase collaboration and partnerships between CBE and community groups
• Engage a practice-based curriculum focused on justice, equity, diversity and inclusion (JEDI)
• Foster increased interdisciplinary engagement

Interdisciplinary CBE – PhD and Post-Doctoral Programs

Strategy 1     Bolster College PhD Programs

• Increase viability and standing of Ph.D. programs
• Support CBE-wide research and scholarship
• Increase teaching opportunities for PhD candidates for pre-major and professional degree programs
• Provide support for sponsoring faculty of PhD students and program administration

Strategy 2     Establish a College Post-Doctoral Program

• Enhance College-wide research and scholarship
• Advance teaching opportunities for post-PhD education
• Prepare the next generation of university/college educators
• Establish an “Emerging Educator in Built Environments” post-doc program

RESEARCH

Outreach and research included the College Strategic Planning event held on 12/11/19 and the College Strategic Planning Survey which asked faculty and staff to rank the proposed strategies within each goal.

The overarching goals and related strategies were presented to faculty and staff at the 12/11/19 event which prompted a high level discussion and a number of comments as outlined in Appendix 1.  The results of the survey are outlined in Appendix 2 and survey comments are outlined in Appendix 3.

GOALS

Based upon the discussions during the 12/1/19 event and the survey results outlined in Appendix 2 we propose that the College focus on the following three goals and related strategies.

Engagement and Leadership

Strategy 2     Attract undergraduate students to CBE coursework starting as freshmen

• Increase CBE visibility within University
• Increase enrollment to college undergraduate programs
• Increase ABB revenue (i.e. Arch 150)

Interdisciplinary CBE – Undergraduate and Professional Degree Programs

Strategy 3     Leverage college-wide strengths as bridges between departments

• Expose students to other disciplines
• Increase interdisciplinary research within CBE
• Develop CBE reputation in technology, craft, history/theory, public-interest design, climate and so forth
• Maximize role and benefit of Fabrication Lab within CBE
• Co-locate studios from different disciplines within same space – break-down the spatial divisions
• Co-ordinate logistics between departments such as the studio selection process
• Require more coursework outside departments

Interdisciplinary CBE – PhD and Post-Doctoral Programs

Strategy 1     Bolster College PhD Programs

• Increase viability and standing of Ph.D. programs
• Support CBE-wide research and scholarship
• Increase teaching opportunities for PhD candidates for pre-major and professional degree programs
• Provide support for sponsoring faculty of PhD students and program administration 

Appendix 1 

Comments from 12/11/19 College Strategic Planning Event

• Co-locate disciplinary studios
• Think big about co-mingling disciplines
• The College is not only about studio – how can the College be more inclusive
• Recognize that service learning can take multiple forms
• Consider when interdisciplinary engagement occurs (early/later engagement)
• Require more coursework outside one’s department

Appendix 2

Results from Faculty/Staff survey (81 respondents)

Engagement and Leadership

Strategy 1     Strengthen connections with middle and high school students

Lowest Ranking – 13

Highest Ranking – 12

Strategy 2      Attract undergraduate students to CBE coursework starting as freshmen

Lowest Ranking – 1

Highest Ranking – 44

Strategy 3      Leverage the PACs

Lowest Ranking – 14

Highest Ranking – 14

Strategy 4      Develop continuing education short courses including those focused on providing CE credits for registered/accredited professionals that build on CBE strengths

Lowest Ranking – 20

Highest Ranking – 9

Interdisciplinary CBE – Undergraduate and Professional Degree Programs

Strategy 1     Bridge required coursework across College departments

Lowest Ranking – 6

Highest Ranking – 14

Strategy 2     Establish an interdisciplinary capstone experience across multiple professional degree programs

Lowest Ranking – 7

Highest Ranking – 5

Strategy 3     Leverage college-wide strengths as bridges between departments

Lowest Ranking – 4

Highest Ranking – 18

Strategy 4     Establish/support College-level interdisciplinary design/build studios

Lowest Ranking – 8

Highest Ranking – 11

Strategy 5     Establish/support minor programs in multiple departments

Lowest Ranking – 10

Highest Ranking – 8

Strategy 6     Establish a College-wide community engagement center

Lowest Ranking – 11

Highest Ranking – 16

Interdisciplinary CBE – PhD and Post-Doctoral Programs

Strategy 1     Bolster College PhD Programs

Lowest Ranking – 11

Highest Ranking – 56

Strategy 2     Establish a College Post-Doctoral Program

Lowest Ranking – 46

Highest Ranking – 32

Appendix 3

Comments from Faculty/Staff survey:

• I hope that the discussion of interdisciplinary initiatives provides wide opportunity for engagement of faculty
• Fight tribalism. There is value in taking classes in other departments EVEN IF they don’t explicitly talk about disciplinary differences. We share enough vocabulary and values to learn with each other and students can adapt to variations in scale, focus, etc. given the chance. Just do it.
• interdisciplinarity is a means not an end. We should use these proposals to identify what are the values, forms of knowledge that will allow truly productive exchange across disciplines both within the CBE but also link to other departments in the University. Without this work of critically defining healthy differences (not minimizing them as the way to foster interdisciplinarity) as well as shared interests and values, I don’t believe that more interdisciplinary curricula and pedagogies will ever gain true traction.
• Having CBE students exposed to other disciplines seems really important.
• Merge the two PhD programs. UDP doesn’t feel they are part of the college and currently both programs don’t want to collaborate together. They are such a small group, relative to a department, and have shared experiences, they would be of great support to each other but there are currently physical barriers impeding that. Get UDP out of the Grad School would help.
• Focusing on low-hanging fruits such as re-packaging existing lower level curriculum in the College as part of a connected introduction into the disciplines can help drive income which opens opportunities for a lot of these other ideas.
• Support for the PhD program is largely needed. PhD programs are a big part of the research output of any department and college. They are also a great opportunity for interdisciplinary CBE collaborations.
• All of these activities sound great AND each activity should highlight the desired impact.
  Bake in a stronger WHY
• How would success be measured for middle and high school outreach and participation programs? What are opportunities for participating students after the conclusion of the outreach program? Is continued engagement and possible UW matriculation part of the pipeline plan?  CM is involved in ACE, a well-established and resourced extracurricular program for high school students.  Are there other such programs that the CBE can partner with?
• Raising visibility among all students on courses offered to all CBE students needs to be professionalized. Right now posters on courses are produced by individual instructors with varying degrees of graphics ability. It would be great if each Department or the College could have a POC that could produce quality PDF and hard copy flyers of particularly new courses/studios so that all CBE students are more aware of their options. Also offering training on ways faculty can increase JEDI content in their courses would be welcomed.
• More priority placed in pedagogy and ways of teaching. More priority placed on how to teach within and engage with topic of race, gender, power, rights, as it relates to space and design.
• Pathways for jr college transfer direct to Junior year to enable a 4 year pathway.
• Much more support existing interdisciplinary CBE Certificate Programs in Urban Design and In Historic Preservation — programs have a long history of bringing students together across participating departments
• Affordable housing. The UofW wages have not kept up with this PNW economy.

Contact: Kim Sawada (sawada@uw.edu), group lead

Introduction

Human and community health have always been central to the design and construction of built environments. The imperative to increase human comfort and health is in the foreground of Vitruvian theory and feng shui in ancient times, and in modern architecture’s embrace of extensive glazing for health and sanitation in the early 20th century. It fell somewhat out of explicit focus in disciplinary education and practice in the course of the 20th century as physical health concerns were absorbed into laws and codes. It has come increasingly back to consciousness for design and construction as scientific research has produced greater understanding of mental and emotional components of health and their connections to physical factors.

CBE is keeping pace with social changes in our understanding of a healthy “workplace” for faculty, staff, and students. Some CBE faculty are active in new areas of research connected to human health, and some are introducing health and wellbeing topics into coursework. We need to care about these issues in order to stay relevant in our disciplines, and in order to provide our students with the knowledge base they will need as professionals.

Since writing our December Universe Map, we collected examples of how health and well-being is currently represented topically and in practice in three spheres: the CBE, the UW and in our professions. Our strategy for this report was to undertake this investigation and then look for relationships, patterns, and voids in our notes that would help us identify a position(s) for our group and inform our subsequent Strategies and KPIs report.

Our task group has learned about health and well-being issues together, across our disciplines, professions and responsibilities, which gave us a wide breadth of knowledge and experience from which to navigate through this process. We began with an exploration of nomenclature and keywords used in describing human health and well-being and also conducted an inventory of CBE courses and research. We also received input from those that attended our World Café presentations with additional feedback from the Gould Court tabling event and the Strategic Planning Survey that went out to students, staff, faculty and external constituencies.

In our research and interactions, we discovered many overlaps with other task groups, which illustrates that health and well-being permeates nearly every aspect of the CBE, especially in teaching, research and space planning. Our concluding position is that “health and well-being” can and should be both a leading priority and a lens by which to make strategic decisions and evaluate their impact and guide how our college proceeds in the CBE, UW and professional spheres. Our strategic goals are to 1) serve the immediate needs and anticipating the future needs of our students, staff and faculty 2) support innovative research that informs and directs best practices in our professions and 3) develop interdisciplinary partnerships within the UW population health initiative to raise its national and international profile in an area of universal importance- health and well-being.

CBE Sphere

Student Feedback

The most commonly expressed student health and well-being concerns are around anxiety and stress. Stressors, as noted by students in the Strategic Planning Survey, include overall workloads, finances, time management, food insecurity and job/professional prospects.

Time management does not refer to just time management skills and strategies, but includes asking CBE to acknowledge time limitations, particularly of the quarter system and factoring in commute times, workloads and deadlines across their entire course loads, work schedules and family responsibilities. Students are asking for more scheduling flexibility with their required courses that includes offering courses with more time options. Commuters specifically noted that evening classes are difficult as busses do not run as frequently, lack of childcare and it makes for a long day. Some students preferred evening classes because it allowed them to work and raise their families during the day. Students also noted that there seemed to be more emphasis of time and effort on studio than other classes that they felt were equally important.

The UW has tools and services to support students with these challenges. They can be accessed through the Husky Experience Toolkit, Husky Health and Well-Being and LiveWell. However, only half the student respondents were aware of these services and a minority of those aware of these resources utilized them. There is a clear opportunity to better connect students to these resources. This also raises the question of whether or not students feel connected to campus enough to be aware of and utilize resources, including writing and career services.

Students also contributed many readily attainable suggestions such as regular 10 min breaks every hour, more fresh air and outdoor time when the weather permits, beginning class with a mindfulness exercise and the availability of healthy snacks.

In design education, studio courses are known to be intensive, time consuming experiences and the associated spaces are like second homes to students. We have studio policies from both Landscape Architecture and Architecture in the addendum. These polices contain references to practices that concern the health and well-being of students in the studio environment. Additionally, faculty and students have discussed with us their individual practices and experiences, which include both best practices and unmet needs. Select CBE faculty participated in the CBE Raising Resilience Initiative which was led by Julie Johnson and Brooke Sullivan and funded by a 2019 UW Resilience and Compassion Initiatives Seed Grant available through the UW Resilience Lab. This initiative explored, “How may the intersections of resilience and well-being; systems thinking; and biophilic design enrich our pedagogy and better support our students.” Existing studio policies may not be sufficient to current students’ needs and that an inclusive process to revise and update them would be advised.

Related to space planning, students, particularly students not in studio programs, have expressed a desire for clean, quiet spaces or alcoves to rest, work spaces with tech equipment to meet and work on group projects, natural light and greenery. PhD students expressed the need for space to work, hold office hours, and meet with people connected to their research. Recent improvements to Gould Hall and the court area have reclaimed underutilized square footage to create more space for student use and activities. The outcomes for the Place, Space and Resources Task Group will likely continue to look at needs and identify improvement opportunities.

Faculty and Staff Feedback

Faculty and staff also expressed an interest and need for wellness support. For faculty and staff, the UW has the Whole U program, which organizes activities across campus that center around faculty and staff well-being.

Courses

Fewer than fifty percent of student respondents reported to have had coursework that touched on issues of human health and well-being. We have identified twelve courses across all CBE academic units that address human health and well-being listed in the addendum. There is a clear potential for additional offerings across disciplines.

This also raises the question of how students define health and well-being. The list of keywords in the addendum may help faculty connect students with alternative terminology and related concepts to illustrate the breadth of how CBE addresses health and well-being issues.

Research

By looking at the history of CBE departments and the work of our current research centers and labs, it is clear that CBE has been actively investigating how to improve human health and well-being from its very beginnings. The global conversation has been elevated in recent decades as research has provided more insight into the cumulative and exponential nature of the negative effects of poverty and environmental degradation on human health and well-being. When looking at the UW sphere, there is momentum and resources behind the Population Health Initiative that if we can establish a strong connection to this, can amplify the work that we do.

See addendum for list of research centers and labs.

UW Sphere

The UW Population Health Initiative has identified three pillars of population health: human health, environmental resilience, and social and economic equity. CBE’s research labs and center squarely situates the college to address these issues as they relate to the built environment and contribute to the goals of this campus-wide initiative. The college’s proximity to the new Population Health Building also presents an opportunity to engage and collaborate. Additional articles are included in the addendum.

https://www.washington.edu/populationhealth/about/

Our research also led us to the School of Public Health (SPH), which has both undergraduate and graduate programs. Andy Dannenberg, a member of our task group shares appointments in both SPH and CBE. Looking at his research and courses, there is a clear relationship between our disciplines. Our CBE course inventory and research directory revealed that we in fact have many faculty and courses that address issues related to population health from a variety of approaches and scales. There are still unexplored opportunities for interdisciplinary coursework, programs, research, public lectures etc…

PROFESSIONAL Sphere

The Professional Sphere includes both research and practice by faculty in our respective areas, and the professional communities we regularly engage. As with the UW Sphere, research and teaching that can impact professional practice in meaningful ways will accelerate and amplify our potential to improve the quality of human health and well-being. Our respective professional organizations are identifying and articulating their priorities related to health and well-being, giving CBE an effective means to engage, and to disseminate relevant work.

Conclusion

CBE initiatives should use health and well-being as a lens to look for nexus, synergies and interstitial opportunities across the college, university and professional spheres. The needs of the individual CBE student, faculty and staff well-being should be addressed immediately and with strategic consideration for future long-term planning and investments. Focusing on strengthening our connection to both the UW and Professional Spheres will enable us to access additional resources, elevate our presence and research and allow us to engage and disseminate our knowledge on a greater scale.

APPENDIX – HEALTH AND WELL-BEING TASK GROUP (PDF)

Contact: Jennifer Dee (jendee@uw.edu) and Ann Huppert (ahuppert@uw.edu)

RATIONALE

Our increasingly complex world requires engagement with history and the humanities in order to address the critical challenges – climate action, equity – that we face.

CBE’s degree programs train students in strategic approaches and technical skills that are required by their chosen professions. However, it is their common preparation in the values, stories and experiences of the built environment that allows them to excel as designers, planners, analysts, developers and builders.

Research and teaching in the areas of history and humanities promote critical thinking about human concerns and values in relation to the built environment, and provide a framework for putting them into practice. A critical understanding of the past enables insight into the present and envisioning the future in both academic and public dialogues.

The task group mission is to employ histories, humanities and futures as modes for engaging in critical discourse, practice based in values including those of curiosity, imagination, equity, diversity and inclusion, and communicating effectively.

The scope of Humanities, Histories and Futures is profoundly interdisciplinary and connects the departments and programs of the CBE across all areas of teaching, research and service. Humanities, Histories and Futures provide the platform for integrating the professions and disciplines of the built environments, and for communicating the scholarship, practical knowledge and vision produced in the CBE to the University and broader communities and publics at large.

RESEARCH

We broadened our input through interviews with department representatives beyond the task group makeup (RE, UDP, CM). We identified wide interest but also curriculum capacity, structural and scheduling challenges.

We explored intersections across the university, with programs including CHID, Simpson Center, connections to digital humanities and data science, qualitative methods and the importance of narrative.

We have begun to develop potential course models and content, and topics for symposia and other events.

Our external explorations have included examining the role of history/humanities in other programs nationally.

GOALS

• Build CBE support for research and scholarship in Humanities+Histories+Futures for students and faculty; amplify student enrollment and engagement in existing history and humanities-focused programs (for ex. BE PhD, Architecture MS History/Theory); foster the value of writing as a core communication skill within the college.
• Develop and integrate college-wide, interdisciplinary courses that include a humanities perspective.
• Develop symposia, workshops, and other events to highlight existing strengths in CBE scholarship and research in Humanities+Histories+Futures, foster connections across the University, and engage nationally and internationally.
• Amplify our existing history/theory collective of research, scholarship and teaching to lead in envisioning and articulating future narratives for just, responsible and resilient communities that improve human experience that improve human experience.

Contact: Jennifer Davison (jnfrdvsn@uw.edu), group lead

Rationale

Across the disciplines of the built environment, and around the world, the questions we ask and the challenges we face are increasingly complex. Now more than ever, methods to address these issues must engage multiple perspectives in order to identify holistic answers and durable solutions. Interdisciplinary research is increasingly seen as a viable and powerful tool for addressing such complex challenges.

Interdisciplinary research, as defined by the NSF, is “a mode of research by teams or individuals, that integrates information, data, techniques, tools, perspectives, concepts, and/or theories from two or more disciplines or bodies of specialized knowledge to advance fundamental understanding or to solve problems whose solutions are beyond the scope of a single discipline or area of research practice.” In the College of Built Environments (CBE), interdisciplinary research includes multiple methodologies (e.g., action research; historical research) as well as different scales, from an individual employing multiple disciplines in their work, to collaborative research with private-sector, public-sector, and community partners. Interdisciplinary research has been shown to effectively advance knowledge that spans disciplines, foster innovative solutions, and provide relevant, transferrable skills for academic and non-academic career success. In engaging the priorities of community partners, interdisciplinary research allows for greater and more equitable societal impact. Funding opportunities, including sponsored research as well as partnerships with public and private entities, increasingly require such collaborative approaches to ensure positive and robust impacts. Interdisciplinary research enhances the reputation of the College of Built environments for all of these reasons, and the funds generated through interdisciplinary research help CBE support its researchers. Notably, as found in the UW-wide Faculty 2050 survey and Carnegie community engagement assessment, and mirroring broader findings in literature on academic research patterns, women, people of color and other underrepresented scholars are more likely to undertake collaborative approaches like interdisciplinary research. Support of interdisciplinary research can therefore have a direct positive impact on diversity, equity and inclusion in our college and fields. Lastly, interdisciplinary research, while often requiring extra effort, can be extremely fun and rewarding. For all of these reasons, the Interdisciplinary Research Task Group believes that CBE should more effectively generate, support, and amplify interdisciplinary research efforts. A greater number, variety, and quality of interdisciplinary research efforts led by CBE will lead to more beneficial impact for our academic fields, for our students, and for society.

Research Results

Our research approach, detailed in appendix 1, focused on three questions:

1. What interdisciplinary research is being done in CBE?
2. What are the incentives and barriers of interdisciplinary research for CBE?
3. What are successful models of interdisciplinary research that CBE could learn from? Constrained by group bandwidth, the methods we ended up completing included utilizing focus groups at the CBE World Cafe meeting on December 11, 2019; participating in the CBE survey for internal and external audiences; and representative documentation of existing interdisciplinary research efforts. We documented interdisciplinary research efforts (appendix 2) based on the above definition of interdisciplinary research. This database is a snapshot of CBE’s activities, including research centers, institutes, labs and individual projects, compiled from various sources as outlined in our research approach (appendix 1). It is not comprehensive, serving as an example of useful information that CBE could collectively learn from (see goal 1).

The initial survey analysis (appendix 3) and visualizations (appendix 4) of standardized questions, combined with the focus group discussions (synthesized in appendix 5), demonstrated clear patterns in the perceptions of faculty, staff, students, and external partners with respect to incentives and barriers for interdisciplinary research in CBE.

Perceived incentives align with and inform the stated rationale above, including: addressing real-world problems; creating new knowledge and learning critical skills; and accessing more funding opportunities.

Perceptions of barriers to interdisciplinary research in CBE ranged from logistical to institutional to cultural. Many students and external partners indicated a lack of awareness of interdisciplinary research in CBE and/or how to get involved. Faculty and staff cited funding, fiscal administration, and time as significant barriers. Multiple people identified promotion and tenure criteria that are at odds with the needs, timelines and outputs of interdisciplinary research. Internal stakeholders noted the challenge of undertaking interdisciplinary research within the boundaries of degree programs, as well as various incompatibilities across disciplines and sectors that underpin the greater amount of effort that interdisciplinary research usually takes.

Goals

Achieving the following three goals should collectively lead to an increase in the number, variety, and quality of interdisciplinary research activities in the College of Built Environments.

1. Better understand and communicate CBE’s interdisciplinary research. By documenting, tracking and communicating the efforts and outcomes across CBE’s interdisciplinary research activities, we can first establish baselines and metrics that we’d like to improve upon. We can then identify redundancies, gaps, procedural difficulties and exemplary practices across efforts, leading to implementation of practices that allow for greater efficiency and more positive impacts. Further, by bringing more visibility to our interdisciplinary research we can create a shared understanding of what we do, why, and ways that stakeholders can get involved.
2. Increase administrative support for interdisciplinary research in CBE. Provide staffing and processes to support researchers to find opportunities for funding, achieve successful proposals and contracts, and manage resources for interdisciplinary research. Develop coordinated, efficient processes for grant-based research, service contracts, and projects that may not have additional/external funding.
3. Address institutional barriers to interdisciplinary research within CBE. Those in CBE who are most productive in interdisciplinary research consistently state that extra work is required for it to be successful, even without extra institutional barriers. By exploring and thoughtfully addressing key levers and alignment in hiring, promotion and tenure, curricular, and other college and departmental policies and procedures, CBE can take steps to a) not disincentivize, and b) further incentivize interdisciplinary research.

APPENDICES (PDF FORTHCOMING)

Contact: Jeff Hou (jhou@uw.edu)

Rationale

1. As a college in a major public research university, it is CBE’s mission and responsibility to serve the greater public through knowledge creation and dissemination. One of the ways to do so is through public engagement in teaching, research, and service locally and globally.
2. The challenges facing the built environments transcend political and territorial boundaries. The greater Seattle region, and the state of Washington, is globally connected. Our teaching, research, and service activities should respond to this complexity by linking local and global scales.
3. As a college of professional disciplines, local and global engagements provide opportunities to collaborate with community and industry partners and produce knowledge that advances the professions.
4. Local and global engagement is an existing strength within CBE with programs such as neighborhood design/build, Livable City Year, Storefront Studio, and a large number of study abroad programs in locations ranging from Scandinavia to Asia, Australia, and New Zealand.
5. Our strength in local and global engagement and our collective ties to many local and global partners have not been fully communicated and leveraged in our visibility as a College. There are opportunities for us to play a stronger leadership role by linking local and global affairs in the built environment.

Research

Our research so far has relied primarily on the Strategic Planning Survey distributed to faculty/staff, students, and external stakeholders. The survey questions we prepared have focused on identifying current and recent activities of engagement outside CBE (for faculty/staff and students) and inside CBE (for our external stakeholder such as alumni and professionals), priority areas for CBE in terms of future actions, and support needed from the College for local and global engagement. We intend to further inquire about ongoing and planned local/global engagement activities within the College and engage those who are doing such work. For now, from the survey results, we identify the following key findings –

1. Activities — The survey finds faculty/staff to be engaged in a variety of activities including research collaboration (22.5%), community engagement (20.5%), study abroad program (18.5%), academic exchange (13.2%), service-learning (10.6%), and contracted service (10.6%). For the students, the top activities are study abroad (29.0%), community engagement (21.7%), and research collaboration (21.7%). For the external stakeholders (predominantly alumni), the top activities are public lectures (20.3%), design workshops and charrettes (18.6%), studio reviews (13.8%), and gallery exhibitions (13%). The data from the survey were not sufficient for us to generate a complete map of activities at CBE.
2. Spatial distribution — The results show strong ties to local governments and communities in Puget Sound with additional ties to entities at the state and federal levels, along with activities and connections around the world particularly in Asia.
3. Priority areas for CBE – The top three items identified by all the respondents combined are research and engagement in climate resilience (46.6%), recruit students from underserved/underrepresented communities (39.6%), and research collaboration with industries and professions (39.6%), followed by empower underserved/underrepresented communities (36.6%) and research and engagement in social justice + equity (31.1%).
4. Support needed from the College – For this question, the top three items identified by all the respondents combined are outreach to local partners (48.0%), support faculty & student leadership through seed funding (43.5%), support & expand current initiatives (e.g., LCY, BE studios) (42.7%), followed by communicate more effectively current activities (40.7%).
5. Faculty/staff, students, and external stakeholders – Despite some differences and discrepancy, the responses do generally mirror each other across the three populations which suggests consistency in the responses.
6. Taken together — The results suggest a need to provide support and coordinate outreach efforts at the college level, provide support for faculty and student leadership, and engage/empower underserved and underrepresented communities, including recruiting from those communities. They also suggest a high level of interest in research and engagement in climate resilience.
7. Task group opinion — As a task group, we see opportunities to link issues of climate resilience, health/well-being, and social justice and equity to take full advantage of the expertise and capacity in CBE. In addition, it’s important to note that while some areas were not ranked as highly as others, they were still identified by a significant portion of the CBE community. Therefore, they are not necessarily less significant or deserving of attention and support.

Goals (3)

1. Create synergistic projects that facilitate local and global collaboration at the intersection of critical issues such as climate resilience, health and well-being, and social justice and equity.
2. Strengthen capacity to coordinate, support and promote local and global activities in the College (including documenting and communicating activities and results as well as supporting current initiatives).
3. Develop EDI capacity including programs to support faculty and student leadership and outreach through local and global engagement, including engaging and empowering underserved and underrepresented communities.

APPENDIX 1 Research approaches for IDR TG
APPENDIX 2 CBE IDR projects or centers
APPENDIX 3 survey analysis for IDR Task Group
APPENDIX 4 Incentives and Barriers of IDR for CBE

Contact: Meegan Amen (meegan@uw.edu) and Kimo Griggs (kimog@uw.edu)

RATIONALE

As the infrastructure to all college operations, being both inspirational and aspirational, reflecting a daily embodiment of our disciplines current best practices and future possibilities, place, space and resources is a critical core college asset. How Place is conceived, Space is utilized, and Resources allocated serve as the foundation for the college to support learning, teaching, research, and community. Without each of these elements—and without all of them working in concert—the very idea of a College of Built Environments collapses.

RESEARCH

While the Place, Space and Resource Task Group has only recently been constituted, membership is comprised of faculty, staff, and students that have long contributed to these conversations. We have absorbed the findings and thinking of a student-centered space planning committee and other members have worked together, and with other CBE constituents for many years to improve, furnish and administer space and resources within the College. Work performed during the prior decade has included significant outreach to students, faculty and staff.

In identifying task group goals we specifically relied on:

• 2019 Student Space Committee survey (student to student)
• College-wide Space charrette
• Strategic Plan Open House and Survey

GOALS

Improve efficiency, synergy and equity through a holistic review current space allocation, identify efficiencies, under-utilization, and research expanding resources.

• Are our current spaces efficiently used or provide constituent value?
• Are there amenities at other institutions that are absent in CBE (e.g. virtual reality or 3D printing)?
• What resources could be more accommodating and improve access (expanded computing services, more online curriculum)?
• Can we create space for student services that improve equity (e.g. space for donated Fabrication Lab materials to lower student program costs) or alleviate student time and stress (e.g. on-site Materials Store)?
• How might we reimagine office space differently than the departmental model?
• Examine how the physical resources of the College can be used to encourage greater participation and engagement by the public, a wider range of the student body, faculty and staff from other programs and all others that our activities and interest affect, and are affected by.

Review instructional space allocation—CBE studios and classrooms—through the lens of space and time management efficiency, evaluate program growth potential and what space is necessary to achieve it.

• Explore course scheduling that maximizes classroom allocation efficiencies and invites greater student life-balance by providing students greater control of their schedule through block scheduling.
• Are the proper rooms assigned to CBE classrooms and studios?
• Find the maximum enrollment capacity, or even if such a thing exists, and identify a strategy that shares capacity efficiently.
• Identify instruction-free time periods to promote cross-departmental conversations to flourish and promote college wide conversations and initiatives.
• Fully align with the University’s Learning Policy so our students can explore all that campus and our departments have to offer (certificates and minors).

Explore how college space can create space(s) for a college culture to be cultivated and flourish while encouraging collaboration and constituent mental well-being.

• Consider how our current spaces impacts our built environment culture. How might spatial alterations inspire and nurture a more creative culture (e.g. plants, wall color, soft furniture, and acoustics, light).
• Balance the need for space to fit specific needs (classrooms, studios, and breakout spaces) with the emotional and physical need of the community (distraction free spaces, kitchen space, conversation and collaboration).
• Identify spaces and resources that are not currently contributing in a positive way and reimagine their utility (e.g. Architecture Hall 2^nd floor foyer, Gould Hall north lawn or the southern Varey Garden, Gould balconies, building ventilation).
• Evaluate how reimagining studio allocation away from a departmental model could promote student and program collaboration that could encompasses a building and not simply a room.
• How can we create continuity between Gould and Architecture Halls so that one always feels an active participant in the college?
• Explore ideas for greater visibility and improved communication of what is happening in, and around, the college.
  • How can we showcase alumni achievements within our space to inspire current students?
  • How can we bring out current student work into our public spaces to identify collaboration opportunities?

Create college-wide standards so that currently opaque procedures are defined, as able, to promote a culture that creativity is an asset the college strives to support.

• Create Facilities Space Guidelines
• Create college-wide standards to share across spaces, buildings and activities to provide recognizable themes representative of the College as well as UW and each department.
  • Signage, furnishings, exhibitions, lighting, use of materials, recognition awards and building improvements might be included in this approach.
  • Clear communication of these standards will hopefully provide a dialogue that assumes everyone wants to get to “yes” and encourages student spontaneity and creativity while respecting space limitations.
• Establish policies for use of spaces, standards and guidelines for design & communication (how the College presents itself, how information is presented, palette of standard materials, recommendations for use etc.).
• Who has after-hours access to the Digital Commons? How are class times determined? How are studios assigned? Some practices have rationales behind them, that if known, show thought and fairness: without writing them down, perceptions change to cold and unaccommodating. Or maybe review would show some current policies are indeed unfair.

Contact: Manish Chalana (chalana@uw.edu)`

Vision: Center EDI in the developing Strategic Plan of CBE so that it percolates/informs/shapes the outcome of all task groups.

Cultivate an inclusive College climate / culture – people understand the importance of EDI, have self-awareness and skillfulness in actions, urgency to start immediately recognizing that internalizing this type of change takes time

Goal 1. Cultivate an inclusive College climate / culture – people understand the importance of EDI, have self-awareness and skillfulness in actions, urgency to start immediately recognizing that internalizing this type of change takes time.

• • Cultivate an inclusive departmental and college climate that is welcoming to all, embraces differences, promotes and accommodates diversity, equity, and inclusion of all students, faculty, and staff
  • Faculty, staff, students understand what EDI is, why it is important and what it entails and actively engage in personal and individual behavior change to embed it in CBE culture
  • Deepen our understanding of our unintended bias, as individuals and collectively, and cultivate skills and practices to circumvent and reinvent the way we work
  •  Activities:
    • Co-create shared definitions and approach to creating an equitable college and society/built environment
    • Expand partnership with UW and the community to foster inclusivity and equity
    • Identify and support trainings for students, staff and faculty

Create systems that support EDI and accountability (both financial and representation) in admissions and hiring practices to address disparity

Goal 2. Create systems that support EDI – representation, accountability, admissions and hiring practices, financial support from financial aid and scholarships to pay equity.

• Recruit, retain and graduate a demographically diverse and excellent student body
• Recruit, retain diverse and excellent faculty and staff
• Departments and Dean’s Office accept accountability by implementing new initiatives to achieve those goals
• Develop systems and structures that hold individuals and departments accountable and support EDI
• Use transparent models and metrics for understanding and communicating areas of success and weakness in funded EDI efforts and programs
• Coordinate efforts to further a common vision and further best practices and successful efforts and programs that forge professionals committed to equitable outcomes
• Built Environment practitioners engage communities in facilitating more inclusive, healthier, and vibrant places through a commitment to addressing deep social inequities.
• Activities

• • Document department and college level efforts within each unit around EDI
  • Develop new EDI guidelines for CBE courses by type: Studio; Seminar; Lecture; Large Class; Study Abroad and Online
  • Make CBE Curriculum Committee responsible for reviewing new and revised courses for EDI content
  • Encourage and reward faculty for revising their courses to meet the new EDI Guideline
  • Ensure that technology in pedagogy is accessible to all students
  • Trainings to disrupt status quo to create an equitable workplace and classrooms
  • Address pipeline problems with underrepresented minority students
  • Use existing and create new scholarships to recruit underrepresented minority students
  • Address existing disparity in teaching load and pay gaps between faculty based on demographic
  • Establish a professional practice to understand multiple publics and understand cross-sectional needs. Professional programs to train students in topics of cultural competency, racial literacy, and tending to difference.
  • Create an action-oriented curriculum that highlights the complexities of real world projects, especially projects focused on gentrification, anti-displacement practices, and resource distribution.
  • Create a participatory learning environment that encourages deep listening, negotiating, and facilitation. These components will give students and faculty adequate tools to work professionally among different communities.
  • Use transparent models and metrics for understanding and communicating areas of success and weakness in funded EDI efforts and programs
• Built Environment Practitioners core role is to serve diverse communities through collective decision making and advocacy.

Model of best practice and leader in the field – Become a leader in the field and model of best practice and be a – develop and showcase models of equitable practice and best practice in education and our fields, recognize, respect and support innovative student led EDI efforts

• • Develop and showcase models of equitable practice and best practice in education and our fields
  • Recognize, respect, and support innovative student led EDI efforts
  • Demonstrate ownership and reflect on unsuccessful efforts that have not furthered or undermined equity, diversity, and inclusion within the college and professions
  • Serve as a leader in the field modeling best practice
  • Activities
    • Identify and implement low barrier changes that support EDI immediately
    • Review practices and programs of peer institutions

Contact: Megan Herzog (herzomeg@uw.edu)

Goals

1. Identify and develop CBE student recruitment strategies
2. Assess and improve CBE culture, resources, and opportunities for students
3. Strengthen and maintain coordinated connections with CBE alumni

Rationale

T o facilitate the best experience for students in the College of Built Environments (CBE), we need to explore and support their values such as equity, diversity, and inclusion; school and life balance; personal and professional growth; and freedom of expression.

To promote a positive relationship with CBE, we suppose that the student experience begins at the time the student becomes interested in the University of Washington (UW) and continues throughout their post-graduate life. In order to best serve our students, we need to track students’ perceptions of their educational experience from the time they apply to their program to the time they graduate, as well as their connections back to their program as an alumnus.

The online CBE Strategic Planning Survey and in-person Strategic Planning Open House help u s understand the whole student experience. These outlets provide student insight regarding academics as well as culture, resources, and opportunities in CBE. These results will help us prioritize College-wide short- and long-term goals

It is important that the CBE student experience align with the UW Husky Experience which encompasses the transformative educational experiences—inside and outside the classroom—that help our students discover their passions in life and work, become independent thinkers and citizens, and gain the skills that lead to meaningful and rewarding lives and careers.

Research

Our research focused on gathering data from a variety of sources to better understand the student relationship with CBE and how that can be improved. Our methods were as follows:

1. We engaged with the CBE Strategic Planning Survey as well as the CBE Strategic Planning Open House to receive direct student feedback.
2. We spoke with the UW Office of Academic & Student Affairs to understand the University’s approach when drafting the UW Husky Experience. We asked, “What questions should we be asking to identify problem areas and how should we gauge how successful our students are in their careers and how fulfilling their time is in CBE?”
3. We analyzed the current (2019) and previous (2015, 2014) versions of the Student Experience at a Research University (SERU) survey, and the Office of Educational Assessment (OEA) Alumni 6-Month Surveys, as both will continue to be conducted by UW in the future.
4. We analyzed data from UW Profiles. In reviewing this data we focused on apparent trends in student opinions and how those translated into success. We focused on areas where CBE had statistically significant results compared to UW students as a whole.

Additional time should be spent analyzing data available from UW-IT on common pathways to and through majors. In addition, data on student health and well-being may be available through the Student Health Consortium, Student Mental Health Task Force, Student Course Evaluations, and other similar resources.

As we conducted this research, we noticed a number of common ideas, which have been organized into the three phases of the student experience: (1) pre-CBE, (2) during their time in CBE, and (3) post-graduation. These ideas will inform the action recommendations as part of Deliverable 2: Strategies and KPIs. The following ideas informed our three goals:

Pre-CBE

1. 1. UW should implement a comprehensive enrollment strategy
   2. CBE should work with pre-major, athletic, and other academic institutions to improve referrals to CBE degree programs
   3. Ensure our majors and departments are included in Undergraduate Common Interests and Meta-Major initiatives at the University-level
   4. Assist our prospective and current students in finding funding via scholarships, grants, work-study, or TA positions whenever possible
   5. Develop resources for international students to assist in the VISA process as well as their transition to a new learning environment
   6. Establish CBE resources that will allow us to retain diverse and curious students so that they know they are supported when they choose CBE

During CBE

1. CBE should ensure all students obtain one or more Internships in their field
2. Additional High-Impact Learning Experiences such as community learning, study abroad, and faculty research should be emphasized
3. Expand interdisciplinary learning opportunities — this should include partnerships not only internal to CBE but to other Colleges at UW such as business and engineering
4. Promote an equitable, diverse, and inclusive learning environment for all CBE students
5. Where is the friction to student success and how do we mitigate it?
   1. Identify barriers students experience by utilizing Course Evaluations, survey feedback, and UW-IT data analysis, and then work to remove the barriers
   2. Do clear paths to graduation exist for all degree programs? Do our degrees accommodate a wide variety of minors or certificates? Are they built to accommodate study abroad or similar course changes? Are we doing enough to ensure our students graduate on-time or even early?
   3. Ensure courses take advantage of Canvas, Panopto and similar tools to accommodate different learning styles
6. Research and identify areas for improvement regarding student health and well-being
   1. College-wide plan for stress reduction
   2. Integrate mindfulness or similar practices into coursework
   3. CBE students and faculty should be more familiar with health and well-being resources on campus and how to take advantage of them
   4. Implement a required training for all faculty/staff on UW student wellness resources similar to Safe Campus training
   5. Reduce student stress around design critiques by providing faculty constructive feedback training
7. Shift student building environment by increasing informal gathering / discussion / collaboration spaces and dedicated team project spaces
8. Apply biophilic design throughout Gould and Architecture Halls
9. Consider block scheduling and limit scheduling courses no later than 6:00PM
10. Provide access to comfort amenities such as vending machines and espresso machines after-hours
11. Provide additional tools to prepare for post-graduation success, such as:
    1. Portfolio workshops and reviews
    2. Writing workshops

Post-CBE

1. Establish mentorship programs
2. Obtain and implement feedback from CBE alumni on skills and tools required in their workplace
3. Share alumni success stories, invite them to speak with current students
4. Establish CBE alumni ambassadors to assist in recruiting new students, job placement for graduates and expanding the CBE brand recognition nationally and internationally

APPENDIX – STUDENT EXPERIENCE TASK GROUP

Contact: Tyler Sprague (tyler2@uw.edu)

Rationale

What does your topic mean for CBE and our stakeholders? What is CBE doing currently? Why do we care?

The development, use and consideration of technology is a central part of CBE’s teaching, research and community-building efforts.  CBE and its stakeholders take a broad view of technology, using the term to encompass a wide range of tools for design, visualization, making, organization, management and communication, as well as the products of those practices.  These tools and capabilities change rapidly, and require thoughtfulness in their use.  The CBE community widely accepts the value of technology as an essential facilitator of CBE’s pursuit of larger goals.

Currently, CBE Departments remain disconnected in their teaching of technology-centered courses, and students are largely expected to manage their own technology needs.  This allows Departments to meet their discipline-specific requirements, but often results in overlapping course content and little cross-college understanding.  CBE funds its technology resources through a combination of the UW-wide Student Technology Fund (for larger initiatives) and College-level funding (staffing, smaller technology needs).

Each department utilizes technology for research in discipline-specific ways.  These are driven by individual faculty members interests and capabilities, and these activities are largely isolated from other faculty members and students.  In addition, technology-centered research is often disconnected from coursework.  In general, CBE has an undefined relationship to technology (some areas ahead of practice, other areas behind).

Our task group is to help establish a college-wide platform for the discussion and use of technology within our disciplines. Given CBE’s place within the University of Washington, the supportive professional communities, and the larger Puget Sound region, a conscious and deliberate engagement with technology offers a promising path forward to both lift the profile of CBE and substantively address the grand challenges of our time.

Research

What did you learn? What is important to our stakeholders?

Our task group collected information on technology in CBE in several different ways – including two surveys, Task Group discussions, and targeted emails to faculty and staff.

From these sources, we learned that students largely rely on their own technology to complete coursework demands, with cost as the primary barrier to use.  The primary concern was about learning the required software (often assumed, not taught) and called for more workshops and online tutorials for gaining skills.  Students are accepting of technology in their education and their future careers, and appreciate the design/ visualization/ collaboration capabilities it offers.  Several students called for education in software that they would directly use in their profession.

Our external stakeholders appreciated the tech-awareness & perspective of our graduates, but the most important quality was the ability to continuously learn (as technology changes).  This was followed closely by a desire for systems/ critical/ design thinking in their work, and solid communication/ leadership skills that improves with technology (doesn’t get worse).

In general, our stakeholders expressed a sense that the disciplines must critically expand technology-enabled design & facilitation capabilities, to not only to ‘keep up,’ but advance the field.  Our stakeholders saw huge potential for 1) interdisciplinary partnerships to leverage CBE’s position, 2) to support a community-centered technology that encouraged public engagement and social equity, and 3) to be “Tech Nimble,” especially in Seattle and use tech to address grand challenges.

Our faculty and staff expressed a strong desire for more integration between departments to foster a ‘culture’ of technology which is currently fragmented across the college.  Existing faculty are intellectually transitioning from a mindset of tech-focused specialization, to a broader, more ubiquitous use by generalists.  New research directions may arise from this sharing of interests, perspectives and abilities.  Faculty education and growth in the area of technology has not typically been supported.  Faculty saw a benefit to a series of low-level, core technology courses shared across the college to be take prior to more advanced courses.

Faculty and staff also acknowledged the danger of CBE’s current ambiguous/fractured relationship to technology.  With funding levels for resources and labs diminishing, CBE members voiced concern about the loss of reputation, status, and students that may come with further erosion of support.  Growing a culture that acknowledges and values technology is essential to the future reputation of the college.

Goals

What should CBE do?

Three Strategic Goals:

1. Enable our students to be leaders in technology in their future careers, by modeling a critical understanding, educating for both knowledge and skill, and removing barriers to technology use.
2. Enable faculty & staff to develop expertise and become leaders in technology, by fostering a culture of accessible, explorative, ubiquitous use of technology across the college.
3. Foster interdisciplinary, leading research partnerships through outside collaborations with tech industry and local communities, by leveraging the unique perspective, position and resources of the college, and its ability to address grand challenges.

APPENDIX 1 – TECHNOLOGY TASK GROUP (PDF)
APPENDIX 2 EXTERNAL SURVEY – TECHNOLOGY TASK GROUP (PDF)
APPENDIX 2 STUDENT SURVEY – TECHNOLOGY TASK GROUP (PDF)

Contact: Kate Simonen (ksimonen@uw.edu), group lead

Unprecedented environmental, economic and social changes are predicted over the coming decades. These changes can happen by default, disruption or design. We have a unique window of opportunity, now is the time to act decisively in order to ensure that our students, College, University and State are prepared to respond effectively to an uncertain future. The need for urgent action is clear, in order to meet global climate targets we need to reduce emissions globally by 50% in the next ten years[1]. The built environment is responsible for nearly half of these emissions[2] and systemic changes will be required in order for our buildings, construction, cities and landscapes to decarbonize. Simultaneously we need to ensure that the transitions support increased equity and opportunities for all.

We envision the College of Built Environments increasingly recognized as a center of climate action enabling collaborations between the professions, University, industry and the State such that the region becomes a model for how to meet global climate targets while enhancing equity, social and biological diversity and delight. We in the College of Built Environments at the University of Washington have unique capacities and significant ethical responsibility to lead towards a beautiful, equitable and sustainable future. We can inspire and enable creative and bold solutions to complex challenges if we face uncertainty with optimism, resilience, collaboration, and rigor.

In order to do this we propose that the CBE explores the following as part of strategic planning:

1. Explore development of an interdisciplinary think tank.
2. University as test bed establishing ambitious decarbonization rates test bed to demonstrate success Setting goals, executing strategies and verifying results so that we mitigate risk, adapt for uncertain future and demonstrate solutions that can scale to our State and beyond.
3. Offer a wide range of curriculum choices that address climate solutions including both mitigation and adaptation, offer problem and subject centered learning, and provide service opportunities through community based projects, awareness campaigns and research. Service-leaning activities could focus on the University as a test bed, neighboring, national or international communities.
4. Actively engage in University-, City- and State-level resilience and climate action planning efforts. Start by understanding the College’s role and/or articulating a more active role in the UW Climate Action Plan, in line with strategic planning efforts. Leverage the ongoing development of the UW Sustainability Plan (to be delivered April 2020) as a means of further formalizing the College’s role in climate change-related planning efforts. In the medium term, scale the College’s involvement from the University-level up to City- and State-level resilience and climate action planning.
5. Communicate in a unified voice toward climate action, (1) by aligning various expertise and interests within CBE regarding climate change, and (2) by creating an aligned value definition of sustainability in built environments. Convergence research is a means for solving vexing research problems that are complex problems focused on societal needs such as climate action to reduce global emissions and address systemic changes necessary to decarbonize. It entails integrating knowledge, methods, and expertise from different disciplines (departments, colleges, universities and industry partners) to form novel frameworks to catalyze discovery and innovation.
6. Growing Convergence/collaboration research to be multidisciplinary within the CBE and across the UW, as well as other Universities and Industry Partners for the highest collective impact. Important to the success of growing convergence is developing action items and measurement tools.

 

[1] United Nations Environment Programme (2019). Emissions Gap Report 2019. UNEP, Nairobi. http://www.unenvironment.org/emissionsgap

[2] Global Alliance for Building and Construction (GABC) (2019) Global Status Report

Contact: Rachel Berney (rberney@uw.edu) and Rick Mohler (remohler@uw.edu), group leads

The Curriculum and Pedagogy group is working to define three broad and aspirational goals, including supportive processes in place or needed within the CBE to accomplish what we set out to do. We are focused on Engagement and Leadership, which we see as bookends to the undergrad and grad experience. This means that we are focusing on pre-college-age recruitment as well as bolstering our connections to, use of, and opportunities to serve professionals and their development. We also focus on an Interdisciplinary CBE including building new opportunities and supporting and enhancing current ones. Finally, we are focused on Internal Empowerment, the means by which we support sustainable change in the CBE over time. To date we have identified the following draft goals and strategies.

ENGAGEMENT & LEADERSHIP

Strategy 1     Strengthen connections with middle and high school students

• Increase exposure to potential students of the allied college disciplines
• Increase opportunities for a diverse undergraduate student population
• Support teaching opportunities for CBE students

Strategy 2     Attract undergraduate students to CBE coursework starting as freshmen

• Increase CBE visibility within University
• Increase enrollment to college undergraduate programs
• Increase ABB revenue (i.e. Arch 150)

Strategy 3     Leverage the PACs

• Expose students to other disciplines
• Leverage potential efficiencies in delivering required coursework
• Increase engagement between departmental PAC’s

Strategy 4     Develop continuing education short courses that build on CBE strengths

• To be developed

INTERDISCIPLINARY CBE

Strategy 5     Bridge required coursework across College departments

• Expose students to other disciplines
• Leverage potential efficiencies in delivering required coursework
• Consider hiring lecturers at College level so that they could teach in multiple programs 

Strategy 6     Establish an interdisciplinary capstone experience across multiple professional degree programs

• Expose students to other disciplines
• Increase interdisciplinary research within College
• Leverage potential efficiencies in delivering capstone coursework
• Establish interdisciplinary collaborative thesis projects

Strategy 7     Leverage college-wide strengths as bridges between departments

• Expose students to other disciplines
• Increase interdisciplinary research within CBE
• Develop CBE reputation in technology, craft, history/theory, public-interest design, climate and so forth
• Maximize role and benefit of Fabrication Lab within CBE
• Co-locate studios from different disciplines within same space – break-down the spatial divisions
• Co-ordinate logistics between departments such as the studio selection process
• Require more coursework outside departments

Strategy 8     Establish/support College-level interdisciplinary design/build studios 

• Expose students to the applied practices of disciplines across CBE
• Increase interdisciplinary research/outreach within CBE
• Enhance CBE reputation in design-build education

Strategy 9     Establish/support minor programs in multiple departments

• Expose students to other disciplines at the undergraduate level
• Encourage increased interdisciplinary engagement
• Allow students from beyond CBE degree programs to engage with CBE coursework, faculty and students

Strategy 10   Establish a College-wide community engagement center

• Increase collaboration and partnerships between CBE and community groups
• Engage a practice-based curriculum focused on justice, equity, diversity and inclusion (JEDI)
• Foster increased interdisciplinary engagement 

Strategy 11   Bolster College PhD Programs

• Increase viability and standing of Ph.D. programs
• Support CBE-wide research and scholarship
• Increase teaching opportunities for PhD candidates for pre-major and professional degree programs
• Provide support for sponsoring faculty of PhD students and program administration

Strategy 12   Establish a College Post-Doctoral Program

• Enhance College-wide research and scholarship
• Advance teaching opportunities for post-PhD education
• Prepare the next generation of university/college educators
• Establish an “Emerging Educator in Built Environments” post-doc program

INTERNAL EMPOWERMENT

Strategy 13   Acknowledge current role of the CBE Curriculum Committee and recommend changes to their scope and staffing to better serve the goals that come out of the Strategic Planning process

Other comments:

• Consider relationship between science and design. Science identifies problem while design seeks a solution.  We need to be more proactive in delivering this message.
• Look at the emerging role of technology within the disciplines in the college. Future of coding, etc.

Contact: Kim Sawada (sawada@uw.edu), group lead

The World Health Organization defines health as “the state of complete mental, physical and social well being.”^[1]  This task group acknowledges that a state of ‘complete’ health may not be an imperative but that one can have health issues but still be in a good state of health.   There are many variations on the definition of well-being.  Most definitions include reference to being in a positive condition or state in which a person has good health, psychological and emotional satisfaction, and can thrive. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention states, “Well-being is a positive outcome that is meaningful for people and for many sectors of society, because it tells us that people perceive that their lives are going well.”^[2]   We define the CBE to be students, staff, faculty, alumni and professional advisory groups, buildings, programs, centers, academic departments and resources.  We are still working on defining “stakeholders” and may include “groups we serve” separately.

Our task group has defined the scope of our work to include first developing an understanding of how health and well-being is currently represented, valued and practiced in our college and respective professions.    This is to include an inventory of health and well-being focused content in coursework we teach, faculty work, research, practices and initiatives.  We will also investigate how health and well-being is represented in the professional standards of our respective industries.  We would also like to work on a process that documents how CBE health and well-being research and initiatives have influenced practitioners and policy-makers.  We will then begin an exploration of opportunities for improvement; growing our impact; greater collaboration with organizations, programs and departments within and external to the CBE; advanced specialization and concentration opportunities for students.

Overlaps/Synergies with other Task Groups:

College culture, vision + values- How is health and well-being represented, valued and practiced in our college?

Student Experience- What are student health and well-being needs and current resources?

Climate Action- Environmental health and sustainability

Social justice + equity- How is health and well-being a social justice and equity issue?

Curriculum + pedagogy- Opportunities for new courses, undergraduate minor and graduate certificate. Share coursework with Global Health and Public Health.

History + Humanities- How does Health + Well-Being relate to History + Humanities? New courses?

General question- Is there a central directory of past and current research by CBE faculty and centers that can be indexed or searched by topic?

 

[1] https://www.who.int/about/who-we-are/frequently-asked-questions

[2] https://www.cdc.gov/hrqol/wellbeing.htm#two

Contact: Jennifer Dee (jendee@uw.edu) and Ann Huppert (ahuppert@uw.edu), group leads

CBE’s degree programs train students in strategic approaches and technical skills that are required by their chosen professions. However, it is their common preparation in the values, stories and experiences of the built environment that allows them to excel as designers, planners, analysts, developers and builders.

Facing an increasingly complex world, we maintain that engagement with history and the humanities in the CBE are essential in preparing students to:

• develop fluency in qualitative research, including critical evaluation of information sources, and contested/evolving narratives
• make informed and innovative decisions about human concerns shape the built environment
• envision and articulate future narratives for just, responsible and resilient communities that improve human experience
• communicate these values clearly and persuasively to a wide audience.

More broadly, research and teaching in the areas of history and humanities promotes critical thinking about human concerns and values in relation to the built environment and provides a framework for putting them into practice. A critical understanding of the past enables insight into the present and envisioning the future in both academic and public dialogues.

The task group mission is to employ histories, humanities and futures as modes for engaging in critical discourse, practice based in values including those of curiosity, imagination, equity, diversity and inclusion, and communicating effectively.

The scope of Humanities, Histories and Futures is profoundly interdisciplinary and connects the departments and programs of the CBE across all areas of teaching, research and service. Humanities, Histories and Futures provide the platform for integrating the professions and disciplines of the built environments, and for communicating the scholarship, practical knowledge and vision produced in the CBE to the University and broader communities and publics at large.

Contact: Jennifer Davison (jnfrdvsn@uw.edu), group lead

The task group on Interdisciplinary Research (IDR) will develop strategies to prioritize collaboration and build capacity for the CBE community to collaborate effectively on research within CBE, across the UW campus, and with off-campus partners. We undertake this in recognition of the value of IDR for addressing complex topics and challenges, advancing new knowledge, providing transferrable skills for academic and non-academic career tracks, and engaging the priorities of community partners for greater and more equitable impact.

We adhere to the NSF’s definition of IDR as “a mode of research by teams or individuals, that integrates information, data, techniques, tools, perspectives, concepts, and/or theories from two or more disciplines or bodies of specialized knowledge to advance fundamental understanding or to solve problems whose solutions are beyond the scope of a single discipline or area of research practice.” In addition, we recognize that IDR in CBE includes different methodologies (e.g., action research; historical research), as well as different scales, from an individual employing multiple disciplines in their work, to collaborative research with private-sector, public-sector, and community partners.

Our research approach is grounded in the key constraints of time/capacity, and the broader goal of developing robust processes for continued conversation and alignment that can extend beyond the Task Group’s charge.

To inform goals, strategies and metrics of success, we will ask the following research questions:

1. What IDR is being done in CBE?
2. What are drivers and barriers of IDR for CBE (both internal and external forces)?
3. What are successful models of IDR support that CBE could learn from (at other units, universities and institutions)?

Our approach includes assessing previous inventories, e.g., Marina Alberti’s efforts, Carnegie self-assessment, Urban@UW; internal/external surveys; interviews with key stakeholders inside/outside CBE, including related Task Groups; and assessment of literature and other materials.

Contact: Jeff Hou (jhou@uw.edu), group lead

The scope of the Local/Global task group is to research and develop strategical goals and priorities concerning how CBE is positioned locally and globally. Tentatively, the local is defined as the Pacific Northwest region, and the global refers all that is outside the region. Through the strategic planning exercise, we are interested in understanding how CBE currently interacts with the local and global communities (schools, institutions, governments, civil society groups, social and geographical communities, etc.), how we can leverage our local connections for global engagement, and vice versa, and how we can be better engaged in critical issues facing the region and the world.

In terms of areas of focus, we are interested in exploring ways that CBE can strengthen its partnership with local and global communities through service-learning programs, community-university partnerships, collaboration with industries, and contracted research/service to firms, institutions, governments, civic organizations, etc., as well as other potential initiatives including outreach to local schools to engage youths and under-represented communities in the region. Globally, we are interested in ways to strengthen our engagement through study abroad programs, academic exchange, and research/teaching collaboration, to position ourselves globally in the face of complex challenges beyond regional and national borders. In researching the topics above, we are interested in existing and potential models of funding and operation, as well as questions concerning ethical principles on travel, global educational engagement, and professional practices.

To develop strategic goals and priorities, we would like to first catalog the connections with local and global communities that are already in place to identify areas of strengths, gaps, and potentials. Through the College survey, we would also like to ask the CBE community to prioritize areas of focus and activities and to identify additional, potential areas of local and global engagements.

Contact: Meegan Amen (meegan@uw.edu) and Kimo Griggs (kimog@uw.edu), group leads

The charge of the Place, Space, and Resources Task Group is to understand and assess the current conditions within our college, and to propose potential futures that best support the aspirations of other task groups. We view those conditions through lenses of allocation, maintenance, perception of and actual “ownership”, effectiveness, functionality, utility, appropriateness to current use, and how proposed resources might encourage new activities and behavior.

We hope to explore possible scenarios through:

• Re-imagining “ownership” to explore ideal conditions and recognize missed opportunities. This should also allow us to identify missed opportunities, underutilization and misallocation.
• Examining how scheduling works, and might work in the future.
• Exploring how our PS&R affect the capacity of our programs and The College as a whole.
• Imagining how our PS&R might promote the values of our College in direct and indirect ways.
• Identifying how the student experience, research directions and access/equity are visibly represented and supported through our PS&R.
• Identifying if, and how students, faculty, staff and departments are being held back through the lack, or perceived lack of appropriate PS&R.
• Identifying how our resources compare to those of other institutions.

We realize that the success of the goals of other Strategic Planning tasks groups are largely dependent on how concerns and ideas around Place, Space and Resources are incorporated into an overall strategic vision and plan. We hope to thoughtfully support the work of other task groups through discussion and supporting data.

Contact: Manish Chalana (chalana@uw.edu), group lead

The Social Justice & Equity Task Group proposes to make equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) central to CBE’s mission in the area of research, teaching and outreach.  This Task Group will begin the process of centering EDI and social justice by engaging the other task groups to ensure that EDI values remain central to the development of CBE’s new strategic plan. Ultimately, our goal with this effort is to identify structural problems and disrupt systemic biases around power and privilege to make CBE truly committed to EDI values and a more welcoming environment to all its members.

In that regard we aim to: (1) define a shared philosophy and values around EDI and social justice while embracing and enhancing a diversity of views and values; (2) to identify a useful theory of change to articulate and pursue; and (3) to understand our best potential for positive impact.

We plan to work with the theory of “positive deviance” (PD; Pascal et al, 2010) whichs seeks to draw innovation and inspiration from looking at issues from diverse perspectives.  The aim of the PD process is to draw out the collective potential of the college to apply it to specific problems requiring intercultural competence, behavior or social change.

We will begin by defining key concepts – equity, diversity, inclusion and social justice, drawing on the ongoing efforts already underway in the College.  However, we intend to push beyond relational  demographics to further our goals around EDI and to achieve meaningful outcomes. We therefore seek to gather data on various ongoing research, teaching and outreach efforts related to EDI as a baseline to then identify specific areas for greater growth and the advancement of new initiatives.

Contact: Nancy Dragun (dragun@uw.edu) and Laura Osburn (lbusch@uw.edu), group leads

The College of Built Environments brings together multiple related disciplines that help organize and build healthy communities in light of the innumerable challenges our regions face. As this college continues to evolve to meet the needs of our constituents, the Communications and Storytelling task group will identify gaps in communication to be able to define the needs of CBE community members.  Our group has three goals:

1) Centralize and simplify communication processes and resources for external, faculty/ staff, and alumni audiences

2) Connect faculty, staff, and students to research opportunities, community partners, industry partners to encourage interdisciplinary engagement and promote earned/professional skills

3) Define a strategy for development of compelling CBE stories and definition of our brand for faculty staff, students, and alumni

As much of our scope falls under the umbrella of new and/or existing CBE staff in our task group working in marketing/PR and information and communication technologies, we believe our best strategy will be to support the people who will be generating and implementing solutions as a part of their daily work.

Further, our group recognizes while there is a need for consistent use of the UW brand across all CBE units, additional resources (including professional web design services) are needed.  Time, expertise, and funds will be required to meet the needs of both brand and design in a way that is representative of CBE.

Outside of scope will be developing broader and more creative training and recruitment, due to a lack of sufficient time and resources within our task group. Activities that would fall under regular IT and marketing activities are also out of scope. These activities will not be carried out in the group as some of these already fall under the roles and responsibilities of current and new staff and we wish to avoid redundancy in effort.

Contact: Megan Herzog (herzomeg@uw.edu), group lead

Our task group exists to enhance students’ holistic educational experience from their first point of contact with CBE, into their role as alumni, across disciplines in the College of Built Environments.

We aim to begin this process by narrowing topics that are important to the student experience, and interfacing with students, staff, faculty, and alumni to receive feedback on those topics. We have narrowed the topics to (1) Recruitment + Retention, (2) Student Health + Well-being, (3) Quality of Curriculum, (4) Connection to Resources + Opportunities, (5) Career Development, (6) College Culture + Identity, and (7) Alumni Relationships.

We plan to interface with our audience in two ways, through online survey responses and an open dialogue in Gould Court. Our online survey will be a part of the larger CBE survey, to be sent out in early January. Questions garnered by the task group, related to the topics include:

(1) Recruitment + Retention: How did you learn about your program? What drew you to your program?

(2) Student Health + Well-being: Do you find it easy to strike a good balance between school, work and other personal responsibilities? What kind of resources could the college offer to improve students’ health and well being?

(3) Quality of Curriculum: Is the quality of the courses you are taking what you expected? Do you have suggestions for improvement of the curriculum? If so, please explain.

(4) Connection to Resources + Opportunities: What is your preferred form of communication on how you would like to receive notices on jobs, scholarships, and upcoming events?

(5) Career Development: What is your level of confidence in finding a job in your chosen field after graduation? What aspects of career development would you like to see offered?

(6) College Culture + Identity: What is the biggest strength of your program? What are the weaknesses you see in the program?

(7) Alumni Relationships: How would you like to stay connected to CBE?

Throughout these interactions, we aim to uphold the CBE Strategic Plan values of transparency, inclusivity, collaboration, and equity.

 

Contact: Tyler Sprague (tyler2@uw.edu), group lead

Big View

The goal of our Task group is to help establish a college-wide platform (common forum) for the discussion and use of technology in teaching, research and community activities.

Our group views technology broadly – as a term encompassing a wide range of means used to meet teaching and research ambitions (both old and new, currently used and prospective) – and sees its value as an essential facilitator of CBE’s pursuit of larger goals.

Given CBE’s place within the University of Washington, supportive professional communities, and the larger Puget Sound region, technology offers a promising path forward to both lift the profile of CBE and substantively address the grand challenges of our time.

Currently, CBE Departments teach technology-centered courses separately, and students are largely expected to manage their own technology needs.  This allows Departments to meet their discipline-specific needs, but often results in overlapping course content and little cross-college understanding.  Our Task group sees interdisciplinarity as a key advantage of CBE, and technology can help enable much more collaborative, ground-breaking work.

Ambitions

– Encourage a critical philosophy/position on technology within CBE that fully acknowledges potential benefits and drawbacks.

-Empower all in CBE to speculate on, learn about and thoughtfully integrate technologies into their teaching and research activities, and promote ubiquitous technology over specialized technology.

-Ensure equity in student access to technology, and a baseline ability to meet the technical requirements of offered courses.

– Prioritize proficiency of technical knowledge over skills, while preparing students to become lasting leaders in their field (do not settle for the state of the art)

– Position the college at the forefront of technology in the AEC industry and on-par with peer institutions by fostering innovative research that is also rooted in the traditions and values of the CBE.