ARCADE

31.2
Current
Issue

• Issue Archive
• About
• Blog Archive
• Advertise
• Events
• Partner
• Newsletter
• Sponsor

ARCADE's mission is to
incite dialogue about design
and the built environment.

• Subscribe
• Pick Up Current Issue
• Donate

• Twitter:

  Tuesday 21st May 2013

  @arcadenw

  Can't say it enough: Thank you to everyone who supported ARCADE via #GiveBIG! So grateful to be part of such a generous, inspired community!

  Continue Reading →

• Make Way for the Carbon Accountants: Seeing Building Materials in a New Light

  Hans-Erik Blomgren
  

  From Issue 31.2:

  Tuesday 21st May 2013
  ARCADE 31.2
  Spring 2013

  I can remember a short 15 years ago, nearly at the start of my career as a structural engineer, when “sustainability” and “green design” were just becoming household terms in the building industry. Although it seems a bit laughable now, to many at the time, the idea that the environmental impact of a building’s design and construction would be a mandated consideration for future projects was truly a foreign concept.

  Today, my perspective is that we are really only at the end of the beginning when it comes to building sustainably. Sustainable building design, or at least its most commonly used metric, the LEED Credit System, is still in its nascent stages; it is a growing, changing organism that has yet to reach a real state of maturation and begin to attain its aim of making a measurable impact in reducing, and even turning back, the building industry’s detrimental environmental effects at the global scale.

  For those unfamiliar, the LEED system assigns “credits” to a building that contribute to an overall score representing the building project’s environmental impact with the goal of calling attention to and rewarding sustainable design decisions. The portion of the current LEED credit system score that structural engineers have the most direct ability to influence is under the Materials and Resources Credit Category. Current metrics for those resource credits are generally limited to specifying recycled content in structural materials and determining whether they were sourced locally and responsibly. These are good steps—steps which have caused the industry to react and change, but in practice, they tend to be prescriptive. They encourage very little engagement and innovation on the part of the structural engineer to shape more dynamic change.

  On the horizon, however, and possibly as soon as the next version of LEED is released this year, a more sophisticated and powerful tool, lifecycle accounting, will begin to be at the disposal of designers and engineers within the LEED system, allowing us to directly measure and compare the environmental impact of common building materials through analysis of their production, usage and disposal.

  Coca-Cola is credited as the first company to formulate a business decision about its product based on lifecycle accounting. In 1969, they were confronted with the decision to continue using glass bottles or change to plastic. Instead of using the simple metric of material “first-cost” – the cost of the materials in manufacturing – they pioneered a holistic study of the complete lifecycle cost of their soda containers. Even though plastic bottles were a more expensive petroleum-based material, they were the favored choice because they were made at the same plant as the soda; lighter weight, reducing overall transportation costs; less breakable; and at the time, easier to recycle.

  Today, when you walk into a Tesco supermarket in London, you will find that labels on many of the products include a summary statement of their embodied carbon (the universal metric for measuring global warming potential), determined via lifecycle accounting methods. This is not a measure of the carbon contained within the product but rather, the total equivalent carbon released into the atmosphere during the extraction of the product’s raw materials and then through manufacturing, packaging and transporting it to store shelves. Tesco’s intent in labeling products this way is to encourage manufacturers to work toward reducing the environmental impacts of their products by giving the consumer the power of information and the choice to make the most environmentally responsible purchase.

  Similarly, and unbeknownst to many, nearly two decades of global academic research has been occurring to collect an accurate inventory of data and develop the standards by which we can measure and declare a building product’s environmental impact. Locally here in Seattle, it is encouraging to note that groups such as the Carbon Leadership Forum, Consortium on Research for Renewable Industrial Materials (CORRIM), Architecture 2030, Preservation Green Lab and The International Living Future Institute have all been playing a part in the research, advocacy and application of carbon accounting in designing the built environment. The complexity and magnitude of the task can’t be underestimated. Thankfully, there are many dedicated hands laying the groundwork.

  

  A breakdown of the embodied carbon for typical building elements shows that the superstructure accounts for up to 45% of the total. Sources: “Embodied CO2 of Structural Frames,” The Structural Engineer, May 2012; S.C. Kaethner BSc, CEng, MIStructE, Arup; J.A. Burridge MA, CEng, MIStructE, MICE, The Concrete Centre.

  Studies show that the lion’s share of a typical, new commercial building’s embodied carbon is contained within its superstructure. With lifecycle accounting tools made available, it is the structural engineer who should be prepared to find him or herself thrust into the sustainability limelight. Structural engineers will be invaluable players at the design table, well-suited to play the role of carbon accountants. As the field advances in the coming years, on a project specific basis, engineers will be able to utilize in their work the structural materials (wood, steel, concrete, etc.) and systems (truss, moment frame, arch, etc.) which play the best roles in minimizing the building’s total embodied carbon and other environmental impacts.

  

  Figure 2. The objective of forthcoming sustainability requirements for building materials is to decouple resource use from economic growth while reducing the overall environmental impact. Source: CEN/TC 350—Sustainability of Construction Works

  The highest-level aim of developing carbon accounting standards is to achieve resource efficiency in the built environment at a national scale. Structural engineers need to invest in and embrace the possibility of their important role. By use of their skills, imagination and influence at the design table, engineers can play an essential part in society’s future by ensuring that our resource use doesn’t continue to increase with our economic growth, while also decreasing the overall environmental impact of building. Isn’t it fantastic to imagine what sustainable design will look like in another 15 years?

  Hans-Erik Blomgren PE, P.Eng, SE, is an associate at Arup, a global multidisciplinary consulting firm and a lead structural engineer in their Seattle office. He has worked in the Pacific Northwest region over his 15-year career and most recently contributed to the design and construction phases of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Campus in Seattle.

   

  Share this article:
  Continue Reading →

• This Week's Sponsor:

  Mithun

  
  

  Thank you to all
  our sponsors

  

  Mithun is a leading sustainable design practice that creates lasting places for people. The firm’s innovative and collaborative spirit encompasses architecture, landscape architecture, planning, urban design and interior design services—a multidisciplinary approach that unites human and natural systems within the built environment. mithun.com

  Continue Reading →

• Collective Legacy: Architects in Eastlake

  Jeffrey Karl Ochsner
  

  From Issue 31.2:

  Monday 13th May 2013
  ARCADE 31.2
  Spring 2013

  

  The former Steinhart, Theriault and Anderson office, 1955-56. Photo: Hart Boyd

  Gene Zema was the first architect to build in Seattle’s Eastlake neighborhood. In 1953, he acquired a lot at 200 E. Boston Street, at the corner of Eastlake, and constructed a small building on the alley side to house his office. Zema knew the area because he had grown up in the Cascade neighborhood, which in the 1920s and 1930s was home to many Russian immigrant families. He recalls that in the early 1950s, Eastlake was quite inexpensive. The neighborhood included many old houses and, of course, the floating homes, which at that time were often little more than shacks. Zema prospered at the Boston Street location, and in 1960-62 he designed and built a much larger multi-story building around a courtyard. This exemplary work of Northwest Regional Modernism briefly served as his home as well as his office and over time became a gallery for his emerging Japanese antiquities business. In the prologue to the book, Gene Zema: Architect, Craftsman (2012), Grant Hildebrand, who worked in Zema’s office in the late 1960s, describes the “rich ambience” of the space and notes that his personal fascination with well-crafted building made it “difficult to get anything done.”

  

  George Suyama Architects office, 1982-83. Photo: Chris Eden 

  Steinhart, Theriault and Anderson were next. They acquired the lot at 1264 Eastlake (at the corner of Galer near the intersection of Fairview) and moved into their own office in 1956. For this highly visible site, the firm designed a dramatically cantilevered, minimal glass-box floating above the landscape, reflecting the influence of Mies van der Rohe and, possibly, the example of the California “Case Study” houses (although the Seattle building predated the iconic cantilevered Stahl house in Los Angeles, designed by Pierre Koenig, by four years). The cantilever was achieved using wide-flange steel beams; the rest of the structure is wood frame and floor-to-ceiling glass. The south-facing wall is opaque, but since the building is typically seen from the north or west, the solid side is seldom noticed. A series of thin, horizontal, wood slats on the narrow west end are the one concession to the climatic effects of the western sun. The building was a striking presence when it was built; it remains so today.

  

  Architect Gene Zema's office, 1960-62. Photo: Ray Welch

  Kirk/Wallace/McKinley relocated to the Eastlake neighborhood when the I-5 freeway construction required the demolition of their rental office at 615 Lakeview. David McKinley recalls the area was quiet, convenient, affordable and had a casual atmosphere that was great for architects. Their new office building, at 2000 Fairview Avenue E., constructed in 1959-60, is a rectilinear structure elevated above parking, exemplifying the systematic application of by-pass wood construction typical of Northwest Regional Modernism. In their Guide to Architecture in Washington State (1982), Woodbridge and Montgomery described this building and the community psychiatric clinic to the north (dating from 1962, also by Kirk/Wallace/McKinley), as “refined expressions of the wooden post-and-beam pavilion” and added that “the matchstick quality of the structural expression” was a “hallmark” of Kirk’s work. This office building received an AIA Seattle Honor Award in 1961.

  In the 1970s other architects moved into the neighborhood. The Bumgardner Partnership moved into the building at 2021 Minor, dating from 1923, in December 1970. The firm remodeled the interior in 1971, cutting a large lightwell/stairway in the middle of the space to connect the two floors, replacing the windows and adding a new entry. Two years later, John Morse relocated his office to 2033 Minor, a house dating from the early twentieth century. The same year, George Suyama moved his firm to 2002 Eastlake. A decade later, Suyama moved again but stayed in the neighborhood. His new office, at 121 E. Boston Street, was a building of his own design. As Hildebrand noted in Suyama: A Complex Serenity (2011), the exterior of wood and brick, with a courtyard overlooking the street, “makes a strikingly sympathetic contribution to the ambience of the neighborhood.”

  

   Kirk Wallace McKinley office, 1959-60. Photo: Western Architect & Engineer, November 1961

  By the 1980s, however, many of the first generation of Eastlake architects were moving on. Zema had wound down his office in the mid-1970s and thereafter concentrated on his Japanese antiquities business. He retained the Eastlake office building, which for many years housed his gallery, and he still owns it today. In 1980, Kirk/Wallace/ McKinley became McKinley Architects, and by 1984 they relocated to Downtown, Seattle. Bumgardner had moved downtown a year or two earlier. Steinhart, Theriault, and Associates maintained an address on Eastlake for 30 years, but their practice slowed by the mid-1970s. Since the 1980s their building has been occupied by others. Suyama moved his firm to Belltown in 1997; his former space is now a restaurant.

  Architects still have offices in Eastlake today—too many of them to name here. Few, however, have constructed their own buildings. The built legacy of the architects from the early 1950s to the early 1980s is a remarkable one—a reminder of the emergence of Northwest Regional Modernism and of a generation of architects who contributed so much to the city.

  Jeffrey Karl Ochsner is a professor in the Department of Architecture at the University of Washington. He is the author of Lionel H. Pries, Architect, Artist Educator: From Arts and Crafts to Modern Architecture (2007) and Furniture Studio: Materials, Craft and Architecture (2012). He thanks Gene Zema, David McKinley and Jennie Sue Brown for sharing their recollections.

  Share this article:
  Continue Reading →

• Twitter:

  Friday 10th May 2013

  @arcadenw

  We're excited to present at the @PSFK Seattle conference this sunny Friday morning! Honored to be included!

  Continue Reading →

• Creativity – A Critical Skill for Success

  Jon Perera
  

  From Issue 31.2:

  Thursday 9th May 2013
  ARCADE 31.2
  Spring 2013

  Our economic growth and health as a nation rely on our collective ability to innovate. The most successful innovations – across healthcare, education, R&D, manufacturing and the environment – result from the combination of creative thinking, world-class technology and cutting-edge design. Going beyond the core competencies associated with STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) to embrace the concept of STEAM (championing art and creativity in education) is imperative to drive the economy forward.

  Today’s professionals agree. Consider the results of “Adobe Creativity and Education: Why It Matters,” a recent Adobe-sponsored study of 1,000 college-educated professionals in the United States over age 25, all with at least a four-year degree. Of those surveyed, 71% believe that creative thinking should be taught as a course, like math and science. Further, 91% agree that there is more to success in school than focusing only on course material. 85% agree creative thinking is critical for problem solving in their career.

  To better prepare our students for the challenges of today’s global workplace, creativity can no longer be treated as an elective in education; it must be core to the way we teach and learn and promoted across the fields of STEM. We think this will also benefit education: For example, students are more engaged when a complex theory is explained through a movie or a simple animation and display better understanding of material when asked to create a visual presentation on a given subject. Through project-based collaborative learning, educators can link core concepts, technology and creativity to further challenge and encourage students to look for new ways to solve problems, express their ideas and communicate with peers.

  There is still much to be done. A separate “Adobe State of Create” study found that only 39% of those surveyed believe that they have creative skills, yet more than 60%, including hiring managers of tomorrow, view creativity as important. Students, educators and employers in all industries are demanding creative skill-sets that are critical to solving tomorrow’s challenges. By embracing STEAM and integrating Science, Technology, Engineering, Art and Math, educators can help bridge the creativity gap within the global economy and help ensure the success of the next generation.

  Jon Perera is vice president of Adobe’s education organization and is responsible for the company’s strategy across K–12 and higher education. Adobe’s objective is to unleash the creativity of all students, educators and schools around the world, and Perera believes creativity is key to the re-invention of education, student success and economic growth.

  Share this article:
  Continue Reading →

• Blue Man to Blue School: Encouraging Innovation

  Matt Goldman
  

  From Issue 31.2:

  Tuesday 7th May 2013
  ARCADE 31.2
  Spring 2013

  

  Photo: Andrea LaBarge Mills

  Innovation does not happen in a vacuum. It typically requires people who have extraordinary skills, knowledge of the rules of diverse disciplines and an added desire to integrate and break those rules. It is from this rule-breaking, “trickster” energy that I believe true innovation grows.

  My entire career, and life, has been devoted to tapping into my own creativity and that of those around me to create innovation. I am a founder of Blue Man Group, an organization that started as an outrageous idea: inspire creativity in both our audiences and ourselves and speak “up” to the intelligence of those at our shows while reaching “in” to their childlike innocence. We wanted to create a special kind of organization to benefit both our audiences and ourselves—a place where people continually learn and grow. We wanted to recombine influences to make something new.

  The basic mission and values of Blue Man Group have transferred remarkably well to an educational setting. At Blue School in New York, we have created a pre-primary and primary educational program where creativity is cherished and encouraged and children fall in love with the joy of learning. Our approach is to weigh creativity, innovation, self and social learning and collaboration as heavily as all the academic subjects in order to be responsive to the whole child. In short, we absolutely believe that we can create the conditions in which innovation flourishes by giving our young inquirers the tools to navigate and integrate the skills of scientists and artists, heroes and innocents, group members and “tricksters.”

  At Blue School, students learn to be more flexible thinkers, collaborators and responsive to different situations. For example, kindergartners’ studies focus on the world within their classroom and outside the school as they become inquisitive researchers, scientists and group members, working artists and explorers; in one assignment, the kindergarten class broke into three research groups to study how people cross the East River, compiling their research through visual representation and dramatic play to learn experientially. In other lessons, our 4th and 5th graders learn through their studies of literature, analyzing the specific traits and roles that various characters assume. Our 2nd graders are currently engaged in an activity that melds math, science and art, studying the Brooklyn Bridge to understand its construction and making their own reconstructions of it in several study groups. In all cases, this way of working allows students to practice the skill of metacognition; lessons provide them with opportunities to understand the choices they have in life and in group dynamics.

  In Blue Man group, there is no separating art from science from technology from math from engineering. It is the integration and recombination of all these disciplines that leads to our show on stages worldwide. One scene from a past Blue Man performance went as far as explaining and demonstrating the phenomenon of synesthesia—hearing colors or seeing sound. We also give our audiences a tour through the human brain. In all cases, we try to combine science and art in a way that is informative, accurate, funny, accessible and entertaining.

  I had a recent email exchange with my friend and Blue School Advisory board Member Dr. Dan Siegel about the movement of STEM to STEAM (adding Art and Design to STEM education and practice), and he replied with an interesting scientific perspective:

  "The mind integrates both internal and external perceptual streams to create the experience of reality and life. When education provides only the externally organized domain of knowledge – as with science, technology, engineering and math – the internal contribution to living and making sense of lived reality is under-involved. The risk of such externally constrained didactic emphasis and structure is that the freedom of new possibilities, the open space of imagination, the new ways of combining old things, each central to innovation, may be not only undervalued, but also under-developed. The freedom to create new approaches is fostered with internal perception—the way we focus attention on our internal experience.

  Art is a human expression that brings the inside out. In diverse ways, art is a skill and communication that requires internal perception for both its expression and for deeply appreciating its meaning within perception. We inquire how art makes us feel, the bodily sensations it evokes, the emotions that arise, the associations with other experiences. Art expands how we think, too, as it challenges our previously existing models of reality and invites us to imagine alternate approaches to life. Art inspires us to SIFT the mind as we experience our internal world of Sensations, Images, Feelings and Thoughts. SIFTing our internal experience sets the stage for the art of STEAM to empower the mind to move beyond what externally exists and imagine new ways at the heart of the innovation we need for living and thriving in our ever-changing world."

  Dr. Siegel hit the nail on the head. I don’t just believe that the integration of Science, Technology, Engineering, Art and Math – STEAM – is a good thing—I believe that it is absolutely essential for creating the innovation required to change the trajectory of our world toward a sustainable and harmonious future in the limited timeframe we have in which to work.

  Matt Goldman is the board vice chair and co-founder of Blue School. He co-founded Blue Man Group, which opened Off-Broadway at the Astor Place Theatre in 1991. Throughout their long association, the founders of Blue Man Group have been fascinated by the interconnections between learning, creativity and community and how, combined with new teaching techniques and breakthroughs in neuroscience, the educational experience can be enhanced. It is these interests that led them and their life partners to start Blue School. Matt also sits on the Clark University LEEP Advisory Board working to re-imagine liberal arts undergraduate education, and on the Advisory Board of Blinknow/Kopila Valley School in Surkhet, Nepal.

  Share this article:
  Continue Reading →

• More Than a Cabinet of Curiosities: Innovations in Biophilia

  Neal Overstrom
  

  From Issue 31.2:

  Wednesday 1st May 2013
  ARCADE 31.2
  Spring 2013

  For more than 75 years, the Rhode Island School of Design’s (RISD)  Edna Lawrence Nature Lab’s teaching collection of natural history specimens has been used as inspiration in myriad studio projects.

  

  RISD’s Edna W. Lawrence Nature Lab. Photo: Michael Benson

  Somewhat reminiscent of a Victorian “cabinet of curiosities,” the Nature Lab is a memorable space, and many alumnae write that it was one of their favorite placeson campus. In my time at RISD I, too, have become appreciative of its uniqueness and an ever more ardent advocate for the value of biology in an art and design education.

  Part of the reason is that inspiration from nature is timeless and taps into our innate affinity for the living world, what biologist E. O. Wilson termed “biophilia.” Through careful observation, comparison and composition, students examine the fundamentals of pattern, form, texture and color found in nature. In addition, the collection provides opportunities for studying the relationship between physical structure and function— essentially, how individual organisms have created design solutions for survival through evolution and how these might be applied in new areas of bio-inspired design such as biomimicry.

  Beyond being a source of inspiration and natural history, however, the Nature Lab is playing an emerging role as a forum for broader conversations about human inquiry, the biological influences on art and design and their relevance in addressing the environmental, economic and social problems we face today.

  Through a grant from the National Science Foundation to the Rhode Island EPSCoR network (Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research), RISD, the University of Rhode Island, Brown University and six other institutions of higher education in the Ocean State are working to broaden their research capacities and advance innovation in science and engineering, particularly with regard to climate change and its impact on marine ecosystems.

  RISD’s niche focuses on creating collaborative studios and workshops bringing together artists, designers, scientists and students to explore topics around data visualization and science communication. To date, five semester-long studios have been completed with varied themes such as designing oyster habitats that also raise public awareness of coastal ecosystems, presenting climate-science issues through e-books and apps for mobile devices and developing interactive graphics for analyzing large data-sets related to the genetics and disease resistance in shellfish.

  As diverse as these projects have been, the confluence of both art and science has required all students, regardless of their academic backgrounds, to deal with technical considerations, develop some understanding of biological systems and generate narratives that would create greater meaning around environmental information for either scientists or the public. In addition, it encourages them to consider what happens when we bring together the type of qualitative, subjective inquiry we typically associate with art and the quantitative, objective inquiry we associate with science in a studio setting to explore complex problems. Many would point out that art and science are fundamentally different processes—notably that science typically wants to answer its questions with the fewest possible outcomes and arrive at a solid conclusion. Artistic inquiry has no such constraints. Yet increasingly, we see evidence that these seemingly disparate ways of thinking are actually linked. For example, Albert Einstein famously relied on mental imaging as a tool in problem solving, something that recent studies have shown can be enhanced by artistic training.

  Can encouraging students to work in both modes – gliding back and forth along an art-science continuum unfettered at one end and constrained at the other – indeed help them tackle complex issues or design problems?

  In her recent book The Watchman’s Rattle, sociobiologist Rebecca Costa argues that our ability to address increasingly complex challenges is inhibited by widely held cultural beliefs and the relatively slow pace at which the human brain can evolve. She proposes that we foster new modes of investigation whereby both right and left sides of the brain work in conjunction, something Costa believes leads to the type of spontaneous, intuitive insight that has previously led to great discoveries.

  The EPSCoR initiative has more than two years of studios still remaining, and the wider lessons of such collaborations remain to be assessed. However, it’s already become clear that this type of integrated thinking around technology, biology and our human-nature connection can only help us meet the future in more insightful and sustainable ways.

  Neal Overstrom, director of the Edna Lawrence Nature Lab at RISD, is an environmental educator and designer interested in the ways pattern, form and living elements in the built environment can reinforce the human-nature connection.

  Share this article:
  Continue Reading →

• This Week's Sponsor:

  Mithun

  
  

  Thank you to all
  our sponsors

  

  Mithun is a leading sustainable design practice that creates lasting places for people. The firm’s innovative and collaborative spirit encompasses architecture, landscape architecture, planning, urban design and interior design services—a multidisciplinary approach that unites human and natural systems within the built environment. mithun.com

  Continue Reading →

• Cultivating Creativity and Curiosity with STEM

  Ainissa Ramirez
  

  From Issue 31.2:

  Tuesday 30th Apr 2013
  ARCADE 31.2
  Spring 2013

  When it comes to learning in the twenty-first century, many schools have it upside-down; many want you to memorize the correct answers. World-class learners of the twenty-first century, however, need to know how to figure things out, and this requires using the skills of artists and scientists.

  

  Scientist Anissa Ramirez in her lab demonstrating the arrangement of atoms using blue dots on the back of books, and showing how a small shift in the books changes this arrangement. This demo can be found in her video for Material Marvels. Photo: Wes Choi 

  Artists and scientists are not too different from each other. Both groups use trial-and-error, need patience, apply imagination, are friends with failure, possess curiosity and draw on creativity. These elements are part of the artist’s palette and the scientist’s toolkit. Artists and scientists both know that the human endeavor is about discovery, which is often accompanied by revising and improving upon an idea. Having the right answer does not have the premium it once had now that Google exists. The mantra that knowledge is power is now dead. Information is everywhere and cheap.

  In an age of Google and Big Data, we need thinkers—those who know what to do with all of this information. Humans still have the market on thinking; there isn’t an algorithm for it yet. Important twenty-first century skills are creativity/curiosity, critical thinking/problem solving and collaborative/communication skills—the 5Cs. These are skills that artists and scientists use all the time.

  These twenty-first century skills are innate to children, but they are often “educated” out. Every school year, millions of five-year-olds enter kindergarten armed with creativity and curiosity, but somewhere along the way, they are lost. Picasso once said, “Every child is an artist. The problem is how to remain an artist once we grow up.” We need to bring these skills back. Artists and scientists could take a leadership role in showing how to present these skills to children. If schools cannot show them these skills, then the rest of us must.

  A PERSONAL JOURNEY

  Keeping kids creative is not just a moral imperative but an economic one. We do not have a crystal ball, but we do know that the careers, opportunities and challenges of the future will require creative problem solvers. And, from my vantage as a scientist, one of the best ways to encourage creativity and curiosity is by improving Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) education. STEM requires creativity to discover new things and stokes the fires of curiosity with one question leading to another.

  In the tradition of Isaac Asimov, Carl Sagan, Neil Degrasse Tyson and Bill Nye, there need to be scientists to inspire our youth and the next generation with STEM. After a decade of working in academia, I took a leap and traded in my science-professor hat for a science-popularizer one. I became a science evangelist to get kids excited.

  STEM is inherently fun, but schools are too constrained or unable to show that. In response, I developed a short video series called Material Marvels to showcase cool materials at work, like solar cells, nanomaterials and space shuttle tiles. In these videos, I try to hook audiences with big demonstrations (often with a blowtorch) and then teach the science concepts once they are drawn in. In the series Science Xplained, I make videos about general science topics, such as the physics of football. I’ve learned from this exercise that kids (and adults) want to understand; they just need information to be presented in an approachable and engaging way.

  NEXT STEPS?

  To improve schools, both artists and scientists must take part in the conversation. We need all hands on deck to get children excited about learning. One way we can all get involved is to show the importance of creativity and curiosity in our work. Creative parents beget creative children. If children see that creativity is valued, they will try to emulate it. Being surrounded by creative activities makes creativity seem less foreign and less onerous. If you are creative, expose children to your creative endeavors. Invite them to your tinker space or studio. Get their hands dirty doing something fun (while teaching them along the way). Make kid-friendly descriptions of what you do. If you are creative and have STEM leanings, consider writing a children’s book on science, create engaging posters, images or videos or put science in your performance or piece. We must give children ways to nurture their curiosity and creativity at every opportunity possible. Supporting children who think and create is our best legacy.

  Ainissa Ramirez  (@blkgrlphd) is a science evangelist who is passionate about getting kids of all ages excited about the subject. Before taking on this call, she was an associate professor of mechanical engineering at Yale University. She has spoken at TED on the importance of STEM education and authored an accompanying book called Flip this Class (TED books). Currently, she is writing a book on the science behind football with sportswriter and New York Times best-selling author Allen St. John entitled Newton’s Football (ballantine books). 

  Share this article:
  Continue Reading →

Back to Top

• Issue Archive
• Blog Archive
• Events
• Newsletter

ARCADE
1201 Alaskan Way, Suite 200, Pier 56
Seattle, WA 98101-2913

Twitter Facebook RSS

Terms of Use Privacy Policy

Site by IF/THEN and Varyable