MIT

1. Student Engagement in Campus/Community
Collaboration for Sustainability
Amanda Graham, Ph.D.
Director, Education Office
MIT Energy Initiative
The Campus as a Learning Lab for Community
Sustainability at the 2013 Massachusetts Sustainable
Communities and Campuses Conference
24 April 2013

2. If you want to go fast,
go alone.
If you want to go far,
go together.
community supports campus
campus supports community
For
sustainability,

3. …a framework to create broader
collaboration among Cambridge,
MIT and Harvard, deepen shared
commitment to more healthy,
livable, and sustainable local
community.
May 6:
Cambridge Community Compact for
a Sustainable Future

4. A campus/community
learning laboratory is a
“space” for
experimentation with…
• A variety of approaches and tools
• A team of collaborators (“research group”)
• Leadership and reflection
• Real-world problems and challenges
• Dual outcomes: learning and “experimental”
• Local relevance
AND

5. Who do we need in this lab?
A team to create and share useful knowledge
• Researcher/learners – aka, students
• Subject matter experts – aka, stakeholders
• Leadership – aka, faculty

6. Two examples of campus/community classes to demonstrate

7. Water, Landscape & Urban Design, fall 2012
James Wescoat, Architecture
Focus: creative storm-
water design alternatives
for Kendall Square
• Site was tidal flats
• Dense, paved
• River seems removed
• Stormwater management
major city priority

8. Context: slated for campus
development in MIT 2030 plan to
improve the eastern “gateway” to
campus; major hub within City of
Cambridge; climate change and
superstorm Sandy
Key Stakeholders:
MITIMCO, Campus
Planning, CRWA,
Cambridge Planning Board

9. Method: Design Workshop
• Long, in-depth sessions
• Professional critical review
• Policy/planning mix
• Broad target audience
• Unconstrained deliverable
“Extraordinary
local knowledge
and high-spirited
feedback”
• “Out of the box” thinking
• Low pressure environment
• Exploration of community
culture

10. Key Impact: greater level of key stakeholder understanding of
stormwater management and possibilities for project inclusion
without compromising value proposition
“We planted a seed”

11. Community Energy Innovations: Cambridge Multifamily
Pilot Design, spring 2013
Harvey Michaels, Lawrence Susskind; Urban Studies &
Planning
Focus: develop pilot energy
efficiency program for
multifamily/small commercial
• Hard to reach, underserved
• Persistent market barriers
• Diverse tenants, landlords

12. Context: Massachusetts regulations
require aggressive utility energy
efficiency programs ; NSTAR has
committed funds; City providing in-kind;
successful NSTAR-MIT “Efficiency
Forward” 3-yr campaign to reduce MIT
energy use by 15% (34M kwh)
Key Stakeholders: NSTAR, City of
Cambridge, Department of Public
Utilities

13. Method: Practicum
• 3-hour session
• Specific client; iteration with client
• Constrained deliverable
• Existing partnership
• Creative thinking within constraints
• Translating theory to practice
• Practice professional planner skills: integrate variety of
info/perspectives; what is the role of the planner?
“How to be just feasible enough AND just bold enough”

14. Key Impact: potential adoption of pilot program design
April 26: MIT Community Energy Innovations
Symposium/Workshop – Enabling Efficiency in Multifamily
Housing
• Utility incentives and financing
• Community-based marketing
• Retrofit technology
• Disclosure, bench-
marking, GIS mapping

15. What can we learn from these examples?
Campus/community collaboration provides powerful
learning opportunities
• It matters to students that the collaboration is not an
exercise in a vacuum
• Students learn to deal with limited data, time,
resources, unforeseen developments
Constrained and unconstrained opportunities are
useful, for students and communities
• Constrained contribute more to process of becoming
a professional; unconstrained provides focused
opportunity for exploration (ideas and colleagues)

16. What can we learn from these examples (continued)?
Even “unconstrained” opportunities must have
community-defined elements
• “Just a learning exercise” is not enough
• Accountability to and interaction with people who
contribute to/lead decision-making defines learning
experience
Impact goes beyond class product
• Colleagues, networks, relationships
• Student work seeds the larger process
“everyone who was at that table will think differently”

17. What can we learn from these examples (continued)?
Role of convenor (typically faculty) is critical
• Effective management of expectations aids the cross-
cultural engagement
• Time, scope, incentive
• Outreach coaching for students is necessary
Reflective learning is baked in
Architecture/planning pedagogies are well-suited for
learning laboratory…. Can we extend them?

18. A note on the future of higher education…
How can we leverage the revolution in university
learning – blending digital and residential – to grow
the campus/community learning laboratory for
sustainability?
• Remember: local benefit contributes to relevance
and reward for students.