Report on the 3 April 2008 FuturePresent Symposium at GSD[FuturePresent Organizing Committee]

May 23, 2008

The following report discusses the FuturePresent symposium held at the Harvard Graduate School of Design on April 3, 2008. FuturePresent was organized by Social Change and Activism (SoCA), a GSD student group.

I. Overview

Consensus among student organizers—that minority underrepresentation in the design fields is a problem shared across minority groups—led to changing the original name of the symposium, Black Community: FuturePresent, to Our Communities: FuturePresent. The urgent need to re-situate the dialog of architecture and of design involves not only Black communities, but also Hispanic and Native American communities (etc), and a polyvalent discourse between minority communities and an historically Eurocentric design community. From the symposium program:

The FuturePresent symposium and initiative at the Harvard Graduate School of Design serves to amplify discussion of the interrelationship between marginalized cultural environments, (schools of) architecture, and renewed leadership of minority architects. FuturePresent seeks to energize a network of students, professionals and academics to think critically across the design disciplines and to proactively and in collaboration work to increase diversity within landscape/architecture, urban planning and design.

In terms of this overall goal—specifically that of empowering and activating a new, younger generation of minority leaders within the design fields—the conference was a notable success. Perhaps most exciting to GSD students was the attendance of a diverse set of minority student leaders from across the country. Students individually interpreted the symposium literature that we sent to every design school in the United States, and ultimately joined the discussion regardless of their being Indian, Asian-American, African, African-American, Hispanic or Caucasian. This dynamic response was the most powerful dimension of the conference: Consistent with what the GSD itself is experiencing now, students nation-wide are not only questioning outmoded attitudes and cultural biases within design pedagogy, but are eager to collectively work to advance multicultural perspectives and a higher degree of social engagement within the disciplines.

Funding from the Provost Office was instrumental in covering the cost of speakers and symposium overhead as well as making possible the attendance of student leaders (e.g. presidents of school chapters of NOMAS, the National Organization of Minority Architecture Students) from a host of schools outside the Boston area, including UVA, Cornell, CCA, Hampton, SCI-Arc, Tuskegee, Woodbury, FAMU, Howard, Morehouse and the University of Cincinnati. Historically black architecture schools such as FAMU, Howard, Hampton and Tuskegee sent full delegations of up to four students plus a faculty advisor.

The conference statement deliberately framed FuturePresent as “symposium and initiative”...and the symposium itself was organized as three panels and two presentations in the morning, with the afternoon dedicated to workshops—small groups developing action items under the overall theme. Notes from the workshop are appended to this report, as is the symposium program.

II. Outcomes

Minority Recruiting

The April 2008 FuturePresent event was a singular example of the positive correlation between diversity, within the cultural terrain of the academic project, and minority recruiting, within student

demographics of the institution. Following the FuturePresent event, several student attendees have been in touch with GSD students about planning ahead to apply to the GSD when they complete their undergraduate education; they were amazed to have witnessed an event like FuturePresent—a high-powered discussion between leaders in the design fields, many of whom were minorities, that encouraged students to participate as part of that conversation.

One black student participant, who had been admitted to the GSD this year as an advanced degree MArch II candidate, noted that the symposium convinced him that Harvard was an incredible intellectual environment. It is also worth noting that he was a student of a GSD alumnus and past president of SoCA, who had recommended that he apply to the GSD. Another attendee, who while a Morehouse student had met a current SoCA member during a Harvard recruiting event in Atlanta, attended the event to find out more about design, and to assess if it might be good career match. Having attended FuturePresent, the student had the chance to discuss the different programs at length with a number of GSD students, receive portfolio advice, and now plans to apply to the GSD's landscape architecture program—as a step toward rethinking eco-tourism in his native Belize. On the advice of current students, he is taking a drawing class and taking an intensive landscape architecture short course this summer.

Given that there are currently no black students in the landscape architecture program, a handful in the urban planning and design programs and only one black student enters the MArch I program each year, these are major steps forward for the GSD. The key here is that this type of effect only achieves lasting gains in terms of diversity when sustained over time.

Future Events

There has been overwhelming interest in sustaining the “initiative” aspect of the FuturePresent concept. Many of the presenters and student participants, as well as other attendees such as a contingent from Architecture for Humanity in Texas, noted that at present it is hard to identify exemplary institutional leadership that is repositioning the design disciplines in terms of the coupled diversity and social engagement addressed by FuturePresent. Clearly, this is a unique opportunity for the Graduate School of Design, also coming off the related success of the student-organized Systems for Inclusion Conference, which drew 400 students and professionals from across the county and the world for a summit on socially-engaged design, to demonstrate the type of long-term and visionary leadership required to affect foundational change within the design disciplines.

Initiatives where the GSD could show leadership in continuing the FuturePresent agenda:

1. Workshop/Publication

The idea of a publication was floated both before and after the symposium. However, besides lack of funding, the decision was made not to proceed with a publication at this stage primarily because high interest does not necessarily translate into a quality publication. Any major publication on the issue of diversity within the design disciplines should emerge from a serious and sustained discussion between scholars and authors. It could be strategic to sponsor or host a working group of selected students, faculty and practitioners who could present initial findings, discuss texts in-progress, and ultimately lead to an edited volume which synthesizes the collective research.

If the GSD were to take the lead on a project such as this, the direct effect on the institution would be significant both internally, in terms faculty research and student projects, and externally, in terms of an alternate perception of the GSD as less “corporate” and more engaged with issues of cultural diversity.

2. Online Forum/Community

A primary challenge to building diversity that emerged during the symposium was essentially an underdeveloped capacity for communication: young minorities, having never heard about the design disciplines, do not consider design as a potential career choice; design schools have a difficult time recruiting minority students, because the institutions do not know how to target minority students; and young minority professionals do not always feel fully linked into a network for advice and professional development.

Development of an online news thread could with relatively little overhead have a huge impact in addressing these existing challenges. Embedding a news thread with user-generated content (anything from thoughts about architectural projects to discussion of current events from a minority/design perspective to links to work or collaboration) within a social networking site such as Facebook would operate virally to establish a database of minority design students and young professionals.

Such a news thread could also mesh with websites such as Youtube, where more and more young architects and students are posting videos of projects and presentations. Increased exposure of such work—and the association of design as a career with faces of young minority students studying design—could be an effective outreach measure to introduce young minorities to design.

3. Community Design Lab

At present the GSD offers few opportunities for students to learn about community development through design and participatory process within real communities. The GSD Community Service Program (CSFP) offers grants for summer projects and has shown a marked spike in student interest. However, core and option studios are largely divorced from community design work.

Developing the model of a “Community Design Lab” or “Clinic” at the GSD could serve to coordinate student projects, faculty research and studio investigations. Students could carry out longer-term projects in Boston-area communities with institutional support or help with faculty research. An on-going core or options public interest design studio, available to all disciplines, could outreach to Boston's underserved/underrepresented minority communities.

There is clearly enormous potential for synergy between the resurgence of student-initiated projects in communities globally and the GSD's strong faculty and studio culture. Members of SoCA have initiated an internal discussion on this point and plan to discuss options with the GSD administration in the Fall of 2008.

4. Minority Recruiting

This issue has clearly been a driver for many of the underrepresented minority students at the GSD taking such an active role in student groups and organizing. We are most aware of the deficiencies at the School, not only in terms of the student body (which is hugely diverse, just not in terms of economic background and underrepresented minorities who are American citizens), but also the diversity of the faculty.

Conversations with non-GSD students at FuturePresent underscored the critical importance of the GSD showing leadership from the top to address the issue of diversity at the School. First, a task force on diversity must include students. Second, the School has to clarify its position on targeted financial aid for underrepresented minority students.

III. Notes from Workshop

During the afternoon workshop sessions, symposium participants broke into small groups to discuss strategies for advancing the goals of FuturePresent. Each group took a different key term as initial point of departure (Community, Activism, Academia, Practice, Outreach, Partnerships); notes from those conversations are appended to the end of this report. The degree of overlap suggests that certain issues were significantly important to attendees.

1. Communities

1.1. Identify different “communities” (academic, ethnic, cultural, geographic, political) and learn to speak each community's language a) Re-situate discussion of “community” within architectural education b) Consider new models for community housing (co-housing, rent-to-own, etc)

1.2. In community-engaged design education, learning goes both ways: students learn about a given community and the community learns about design a) Bring studio-based curriculum in closer contact with real communities b) Include community members as guest lecturers or consultants as part of studio c) Value community work on par with other forms of academic research

1.3. Minority recruitment: counteract the problem that many minorities do not know about or consider architecture, planning, etc. as a career option a) Marketing campaigns, participation through programming b) Increase the number, scope of summer youth design programs

1.4. Minorities within the design community a) Critical importance of mentoring

1.5. Creating a design culture of service (including pro bono design) a) Americorp model: work for government for a year b) Legal aid model: integrate service within education and practice c) Public architecture's 1% solution d) Student loan forgiveness for service jobs post-graduation e) Extend school credit for community projects f) Design/build studios

2. Activism

2.1. Education: Feature community as part of curriculum a) Long-term: change NAAB standards to reflect this priority b) Short-term: push for opportunities at individual schools c) Find local organizations that can use volunteers with design skills d) Student organizations are the leaders for building design activism movement

2.2. Culture of Activism a) Long-term: AIA Code of Ethics b) New models of social entrepreneurship c) Public Architecture's 1% solution d) Pro bono design, consultation, education and networking

3. Academia

3.1. Awareness of pros/cons of “diversity” a) “Students of color” vs. “Students of culture”

3.2. Expanding sphere of academic debate and regulation a) Inter-generational discussion b) Students, faculty, administration, NAAB, communities

3.3. Curriculum should engage real context, early-on and including fieldwork

3.4. Cross-disciplinary course offerings a) Intra- and Inter- design schools b) Intra-university partnerships

3.5. Inter-college student alliances, networks a) 2-year/4-year + MArch, other advanced degrees including doctoral

3.6. Pedagogical resources a) Professional development of educators b) Shifting lens of “technology” c) Building databases for pedagogy

3.7. Goals of education a) Specific trade/specialization b) Broader design education

4. Practice

4.1. Likely trend within the profession to become more specific and less general a) This also requires education that is general, in order to accommodate multiple

specificities b) Parallel to shift toward mass customization c) Architects can become more like clients and less of a typical profession

4.2. Opportunities for minority architects and perspectives in emerging markets

5. Outreach

5.1. Increased recruiting needs re-branding campaign for design a) Introduce design to larger demographic b) Designers solve problems – share solutions to a larger network c) Clearly convey how architecture relates to other disciplines d) Capture new audiences

5.2. Web forum a) Internet is hugely under-capitalized resource for promotion of design, design education,

and as recruiting tool b) Targeting minority students on social networking sites (Youtube, Facebook, etc) c) Featuring minority faces and design perspectives on websites d) Archiving discussion, actions, and design strategies e) Anchor perspectives of minority architecture students (e.g. Archinect blog) f) Develop viral web-based directory of minority design students (which automatically over

time becomes a directory of minority professionals or graduates of design education)

5.3. Highlighting role models a) Phased between students and working professionals

5.4. Expand the network of student groups/organizations between schools a) Facilitate partnerships and knowledge-sharing b) Work together for more effective and sustained outreach

5.5. Attend community meetings to share design perspectives to communities

6. Partnerships

6.1. Partnership as preservation of the discipline, not compromise a) Marginalization of the profession b) Problem requires partnership, interdisciplinary response

6.2. Between people (mentoring) a) ARE/IDP licensing process b) ARE success teams (peer mentoring/support groups) c) Tips on career, engaging the profession d) “Speed dating” for mentors e) Mentoring in communities outside the design community

6.3. Between the local and the global (dialog) a) Institutions need to be grounded locally, where they “meet the ground,” i.e., engaging

surrounding communities b) Simultaneous need to engage global realm c) A way of thinking that is not in isolation (we now live in a world of outsourcing)

6.4. Between HSBCs and other schools (institutional) a) Helps both students and institutions

6.5. Between schools and communities a) How effective is design/build? b) Forces or hinders interaction? c) How to quantify the “quality” of the design? (Community's or school's metrics?) d) Product delivery: CM vs. architect e) Partner with building trades schools

6.6. Between disciplines (inter- and cross-disciplinarity) a) Change from autonomy of academia to collaboration between disciplines b) Can institutions find mentors? c) Insular faculties, trying to climb the professional ladder, at times proves

counterproductive and fosters “architalk”

6.7. Student design and initiative a) Forces students to engage, take a stand on issues and develop real partnerships