In this section we discuss the political contexts relevant to our project. We want to achieve our goal of making Acopian more inviting to non-engineers and of making Acopian a better learning environment for engineers. To do this, we must consider all those who could be affected by the implementation of our designs. We begin with a discussion of our methodology. Next, we orient you to our stakeholders. These are community members who feel affected by the engineering culture in some way or who possess knowledge that is relevant to our work. We explain the ways that we have used our stakeholders to carry our design forward. Finally, we address decision makers and the political feasibility of our project.
Methodology: Community-engaged Design
In this project, we wanted our community members to be the driving force behind our design process. There are numerous groups who are knowledgeable about our topic, which we will discuss further in this section. Our goal of creating a more inclusive and interdisciplinary environment in Acopian and the Lafayette engineering department is not an easy task. However, those who have identified our engineering culture as a problem or who have a stake in our community (within engineering, Lafayette College, and beyond) are most equipped to address it. For that reason, we have taken a community-engaged design approach.
This design practice is generally centered on racial, class, and gender inequity in the design process. Community-engaged design looks to decrease “the inherent inequality in access to information and resources in typical relationships between designers, planners, and the communities they serve,” (Boone, 2016). Although a racial, class, and gender equity lens should be considered in all design projects, the practice can be applied generally to mean that community members must be integral in the process. For our purposes, we have worked with the idea that “community engaged design must build in local ownership of the process, outcomes, and benefits, both in material (property, wealth) and non-material (decision-making) ways. With ownership, community stakeholders become empowered and attain an agency to articulate and shape their needs in their own voice,” (Griffin, 2016). What does this mean in the context of our project? We want as many stakeholders as possible in the engineering and greater Lafayette community to feel some sense of ownership over this project.
One way to ensure equitable inclusion in the design process is to conduct a thorough stakeholder analysis. To do this, one possible method is to start by generating as many relevant names of people, organizations, institutions, etc. as possible. Then, these names can be plotted on a graph of influence vs. interest (Metris Arts Consulting). In almost all design projects, a lot of weight is given to the voices of those who have high interest and high influence. However, the benefit to this method is to identify stakeholders in two other important categories. The first is high interest, low influence. These are voices that are historically dismissed because they may not have the power to push forward implementation. Still, they are impacted and have a valuable perspective. An example of this stakeholder type might be an art student who has interest in a design project but seems far removed from engineering. The second category is high influence, low interest. These voices are important to include because they are more likely in a position to aid in implementation, even if they are less interested in the project. An example of this stakeholder type might be a member of the Board of Trustees.
Who Thinks This is a Problem
Several groups of the Lafayette community should be involved in the discussion of the engineering culture at Lafayette. The students and professors who constantly use Acopian are just one group of many. Acopian is always advertised to prospective families through the perspective of administration officers and tour guides. A physical display of values representing Acopian would provide a clear idea to prospective families. This presentation also affects the surrounding Lafayette community which includes students and professors of other disciplines. It can be a gateway for the rest of the community to understand the kind of culture and values the engineering division at Lafayette truly wants to display to the rest of campus.
Engineering students are the first and immediate group who believe there is a problem surrounding the engineering culture at Lafayette. A response from a student at Lafayette, who is currently part of the mechanical engineering program, to the question of “What is the current engineering culture?” says, “There’s definitely a superiority thing. But I would say within engineering it’s very collaborative and very inclusive. But yeah, they definitely see themselves as separate from the rest of the campus,” (Student 3, 2018). The problem with engineering culture is presented clearly by this student. Engineers have the sense of feeling like a superior student. In some scenarios this creates an unnecessary distance between them and other disciplines on campus. Engineers have been exposed to the need for collaboration within their discipline. In the book Engineering and Sustainable Community Development multiple historical examples show the success and failures of community development projects if engineer does not bring in a perspective outside of the technical realm (Lucena et al., 2010). Even if students would deny the need to collaborate with other majors, the idea to include more perspectives towards a common goal is undeniably similar to collaborating with multiple areas of study. Even among engineering students between the Bachelor of Science and Bachelor of Arts majors, there are discrepancies regarding the level of interdisciplinary programs offered in the engineering department. The ability to collaborate with majors that are not housed in Acopian is very limited.
Figure 7: Mechanical Engineering Drag Race (Zovko.C, 2018)
This absence does not let engineers question other majors to try and gain another perspective on a problem. The Engineering Studies curriculum constantly presents students with courses and outside events to try and engage in an interdisciplinary program. Even with these additions, students feel the engineering culture is not up to a standard that truly represents what the college wants to endorse as an “interdisciplinary educational program” because not every student is given the opportunity to work in a multi-discipline collaborative environment that promotes inclusion of many majors offered on our campus.
Engineering professors also believe a change should come or at least an opportunity for change should be available. Through many of my Engineering Studies courses at Lafayette, teachers have strived to create the direction of courses to incorporate multiple areas of different Lafayette majors. The policy studies course, EGRS 251, highlights not only the technical side of engineering but also begins to make students think of the other factors that have to be considered when talking about a problem. The government has different levels to achieve specific milestones, different levels of society have different opinions regarding issues, or a technology can be used in different ways than the developer intended which creates a new field of expertise. Learning about these various nuances for what would normally be viewed as a simple technology or straightforward law is a valuable outcome that teachers want to bring to students. In the previous capstone report from 2017 the authors referenced Scott Hummel, the head of the engineering department, and he stated the direction of engineering at Lafayette could follow a more interdisciplinary route. Funding is available, so the idea of creating these newer and more complete courses are on the minds of professors in Acopian and the donors who support the future of engineering culture at Lafayette (Blake et al., 2017).
The admissions realm views the current engineering culture as a problem. Admissions officers and tour guides constantly depict Acopian as a building that is interdisciplinary by combining the outside world with the technical knowledge provided by engineering professors of Lafayette. However, this idea is not constantly presented. A student who works as a tour guide for Lafayette college admissions said,
I think the engineering culture at Lafayette is relatively interdisciplinary, which is what I say on my tours…However, I don’t think that is advertised enough, and I think the school should work much harder to promote engineering studies classes, and other business-related engineering courses, to students outside of the department because I think they offer valuable academic and life skills that go unnoticed at this school. (Student 4, 2018)
Advertising a strong and enticing point but not consistently displaying these values will diminish the merit for the future of engineering culture. Changing the culture now and being able to publicly present it to prospective families can create a stronger relationship between not only the incoming students who are interested in engineering and Acopian but also with the non-engineering majors. If students are able to feel like they can be connected to a place even before they step foot on campus, a stronger impression is produced. Creating these connections that reach all incoming students who took a tour of Acopian can influence the future generations to promote and accept a more interdisciplinary approach to their work. A current student at Lafayette who is a Psychology and Governmental Law double major referenced one of the first classes that Lafayette requires as an incoming freshman, the First Year Seminar, and found that even though her class was in Acopian and taught by an engineering professor, there is so much to write about after learning the technical aspects. The student feels there is more to engineering that just building stuff in a lab and the discipline can be very versatile (Student 4, 2018). Trying to create this interdisciplinary culture is possible at Lafayette but trying to reach students before they come to Lafayette could improve the process of shifting our culture in the future.
The rest of the Lafayette community which includes primarily students but also professors from other disciplines of the college can identify the current problem with the presentation of engineering as a true interdisciplinary culture. Even though majority of their time is not spent inside of Acopian part of their reasoning to not enter the building is because of the uninviting nature that surrounds the architecture.
If Acopian was advertised as a less intimidating and more welcoming environment to students of all majors, I would definitely study there. Right now, Acopian just reminds me of late nights and headaches based on what I’ve heard from my engineering friends… (Student 4, 2018)
This is one quote from a student at Lafayette who is not part of the Engineering Studies program, but her message resonates with many other students through the Lafayette community. Stories from friends or alumni depict Acopian as a place that brings hardships and stress. The students who are part of the engineering majors and work in Acopian each day present the building as a symbol that intimidates many other disciplines from thinking about using the building. Terrifying other students from a building through stories of headaches and stress does not promote the inclusive and collaborative culture that Lafayette engineers should present.
Who is Knowledgeable about This Topic
Several groups of people helped guide our design and application of this project in a positive direction. First there are the art professors on and off Lafayette’s campus who can provide our group with valuable information. The perspective an artist brings to any art piece includes a level of creativity with a mix of technical application. Creativity is necessary to ignite the interests in students, teachers, and other members of the community who will interact with the piece. A technical perspective in the artists’ work is important because the correct way to apply the art piece or a more effective medium to present art will be included in an accomplished artist. In an article that argues the necessary use of studios in higher education, artist’s use this space to gather “material knowledge.” This idea ranges from how the art piece would interact with other areas surrounding the art piece to how an observer would react if they could touch it or even be a simple test in visual stimulation (McHugh, 2014). An artist will be able to manipulate the deep intricacies to create a full piece that engages the community and is implemented through the most effective medium. Also, if a local artist works on the project, a deeper connection could be achieved, not only to Lafayette college, but also the surrounding community in Easton can be incorporated into the art piece.
Another important group included in our project will be the psychology department. They will give us more insight into the intricacies of the human mind and what exactly creates reactions from outside influences. In particular, our group wants to ensure a sense of wellness is projected in the art piece and make Acopian a building that promotes a more calming or relaxing environment for students, professors, or tour groups. This will influence the goal to start a new culture connected to Acopian. An interdisciplinary structure is the foundation for a more inclusive and collaborative culture that our group is working towards. A direct connection to an interdisciplinary course is the mindset of students and faculty who use the building. In the book Creating interdisciplinary campus cultures: a model for strength and sustainability the author, Julie Thompson Klein, states three different methods to promote the growth of interdisciplinary programs. The starting point for all alternatives is understanding the most productive way to think about important questions and understanding the correct environment to hold these discussions. The most effective method is through a “transformative” model which includes elements of the other two models, “modification” and “integration.” Klein describes this model as “It recognizes the need to address new issues, such as gender equity, ethnicity, multiculturalism, globalism, ethics, the environment, health, and educational policy. These issues pose questions and make demands that are only partly engaged at present” (Klein, 2010, p.68). There are many issues in our current society to discuss and there is a lack of conversation surrounding these values that require examination. A place that welcomes this kind of conversation is necessary and requires more than just a larger space. The help of psych professors and students will provide a closer understanding regarding the application of colors, lighting, or significant details on images that create a mental process that could be analyzed. Their field will open the possibility to understand the complexities attached to the human brain that influence the urgency to discuss topics outside of a student’s respective field and promote collaboration.
The admissions office is another source of valuable information because they are in charge of presenting our school to prospective families. Administration officers and tour guides highlight aspects of Acopian to visitors and knowing what they say and their reasoning behind it influences the design of a public display like our mural during a tour. Presentation of buildings on tours is an important part of the college selection process. In the article “How do high school students structure an important life decision? A short-term longitudinal study of the college decision-making process” The authors details several factors high school students consider as they make a decision for college. The study included three separate rounds of evaluating these students decisions and the trend after the third round of trials showed an increase in importance surrounding factors like “Campus appearance,” “Campus atmosphere,” and “Location” and decrease in “Admissions requirements,” “Course Offerings,” and “Class Size.” The author says:
…information easily obtainable from a college brochure or catalog (e.g. , requirements, procedures, statistical summaries) becomes relatively less important as information about an institution’s ‘character’, perhaps obtained from campus visits, is acquired… Admissions officers might consider what information to present to prospective students and when to present it. (Galotti et. al, 1994, P. 604)
As a high school student forms their decision the importance of what they see and experience during a college visit becomes more important than any information session or section on the admissions website. The buildings and atmosphere leave a stronger impact on a prospective student. To ensure our group presents the correct environment we analyzed two sets of perspectives when interviewing representatives from the admissions office. First, we can see how admissions wants to “market” the engineering building of Lafayette to prospective families. Understanding their approach to the building will be valuable to incorporate in the design because our goal with this project is to put the engineering culture Lafayette college represents as a proud display on Acopian. The admissions office will not have to feel like they are misrepresenting the culture of Acopian because tour guides and admissions officers can physically point to images that represent an interdisciplinary culture.
Figure 8: A tour given at Lafayette (“Admissions visit,” n.d)
Understanding the goals from the admissions office will also bring a certain level of knowledge we can use from prospective families. The typical college selection process causes families to visit many schools aside from Lafayette College because there are many available. Students, on average, choose usually between four different schools (Galotti et. al, 1994, P. 602-603). Some schools will have pieces of art or designs of buildings that stand out from the rest. Olin college has a beautiful engineering building that always engages visiting families. The New School in New York has high aesthetic appeal even though it is surrounded by countless buildings. Gaining insight from the admissions group about colleges that prospective families visit and resonate with aspects of other campuses can be information we apply to our buildings.
Our group is another viable source who is knowledgeable about the topic. Many hours of research, writing, revisions, and presentations not only demonstrate our knowledge about the topic but also push forward the goal of previous capstone reports and continue providing a basis for future reports on this topic. There are many mediums that can be used to address the problem surrounding the engineering culture at Lafayette college. The alternatives our group created will be described in later sections of this report and each are very unique. However, gaining the initial understanding about the current engineering culture through interviews and hearing Acopian described as a “place of stress” or “not very welcoming” is most important because the problem does not change. Explaining and expanding on the problem about engineering culture at Lafayette College provides valuable insight for decision makers and future projects relating to this topic.
Identifying the Needs and Desires of our Community
We have conducted interviews with students from a range of fields, including engineering, art, and psychology. We’ve consulted with engineering and art faculty, as well as with administrators and student tour guides. These interviews have served two main functions. The first was to help us define our problem and clarify our goals and desired outcomes. We asked questions about their experience with the engineering culture (either as an insider or an outsider), which revealed, as we have discussed, concerns about the perceived exclusivity and sometimes single-mindedness of engineering. “It’s no dark secret that some engineers have […] the idea that their way of designing and modeling is vastly superior and it’s not necessarily. It may be repeatable, but it is just one model of the human experience,” says Professor Kerns of the Art Department. One of his main goals for this project is for an art installation to inspire “connectivity” and “intellectual unity” (Kerns, 2018).
We asked specific questions about the built environment: what do students look for in a study space? Without being bound by structural limitations, what would students ideally change about Acopian? In a panel of engineering and art double majors, three students identified a number of qualities they look for in a good learning environment. Among them were natural light and plants. One junior explained why he values greenery indoors: “I think it’s just that you can see the nature; you don’t feel like you’re stuck in some building,” (Student 1, 2018). This information helped us to pinpoint areas where the space and culture leave room for improvement. Although we cannot alter the structure of Acopian, knowing these values allowed us to begin to think of designs that might imitate natural light, for example.
The second main function of the interviews was to receive input on the actual design of the art installation. At first, we asked interviewees if they had any general elements that they would like to see incorporated. The engineering/art student panel expressed interest in introducing more color into the building in the form of a painted mural. They also liked the idea of having moving parts on the façade (Student 1, 2018). Next, we spoke more specifically about mural design. The students suggested using themes related to each engineering discipline, or drawing on actual professor or student research projects to generate imagery (Student 2, 2018).
Figure 9: Professor Kerns in his studio (“The Octopus Meditations,” 2018)
The two art professors that we interviewed, Ed Kerns and Jim Toia, had vastly different ideas for the design of the installation and each pointed out concerns with the mural idea that we had been exploring up to that point. Kerns remarked, “does the work of art there have to be panels with paint? Could it be something made with light? […] Let’s do something really big.” Additionally, Kerns and Toia both suggested artists that they thought might be beneficial to look to for inspiration. Although these artists are neither stakeholders nor decision-makers for this project, they have expertise in this design field and so they are also important voices to consider in the process. Per Kerns’ and Toia’s recommendation, we looked at Stephen Antonakos and Leo Villareal. Information regarding our investigation of these artists is further discussed in the technical context sections.
We walk a fine line in trying to find a balance between the expertise of our wide variety of stakeholders (as well as the expertise we bring), many of whom have very different visions for this design. However, as we have outlined, equitable representation is a key component of community-engaged design, so it is important that we work through these conflicts. One way that we tried to reconcile this was by looking for overlap. For example, in our first project brainstorm—before we had spoken to any of our interviewees—we had considered using light as an element in our design. Our thought process was, since engineers spend many long nights in Acopian, having an installation that could be visible or even enhanced by darkness might be appreciated. Then, without be prompted, we heard the idea of light come up in our next three interviews, from both students and professors in art and in engineering. We saw similar results with plants and with color. This repetition signaled to us that these three elements might work to connect communities across campus.
Community-engaged design is time consuming and logistically challenging. However, we believe that this approach will ultimately bring us closer to our goal of inclusivity and interdisciplinary practice: “through a commitment to process and the time and resources needed to uncover the intrinsic values shaping community processes, designers, planners, and others can create opportunities for empowering relationships and networks and not just the physical infrastructure of communities,” (Boone, 2016). These valuable conversations have allowed us to examine our three different design options and assess the pros and cons of each. Our investigations into our community’s needs helped us determine what will and will not work and has propelled this project forward.
Decision Makers and Political Feasibility
Much like our stakeholders, decision makers are also crucial components in the political context of this design process. Decision makers include: our team, upper level administrators and engineering faculty such as Engineering Department Head Scott Hummel, the Board of Trustees, and President Alison Byerly.
Figure 10: President Alison Byerly with first-year design students (“Engineering Looks to the Future,” 2016)
With them in mind, we have considered the political factors affecting the feasibility of this proposal. One major incentive that the school has to support this project is its stated commitment to an interdisciplinary education. Scott Hummel writes of the engineering department, “by combining an outstanding technical education with a well-rounded perspective of the humanistic, social, artistic, and global elements of modern problems, Lafayette’s distinctive blend of engineering and liberal arts reinforces our people-centered approach.” The school has a vested interested in continuously working towards better embodying this mission. According to the authors of Art Stairs, “an installation that combines engineering and art is a perfect addition to highlight the interdisciplinary nature of learning engineering on a liberal arts campus,” (Blake et al., 2017).
Our project benefits from the fact that the location for our installation is visible to highly trafficked areas, including Markle Hall, the admissions building. Whereas the Art Stairs project was somewhat hidden in the back of Acopian (Blake et al., 2017), this work could be easily used as a selling point for the school because of its visibility.
To read about our technical and economic contexts, click here.