NIATT
University of Idaho
115 Engineering Physics Building
Moscow, ID
83844-0901
208/885-0576
208/885-2877 (fax)
NIATT@uidaho.edu
Sincere thanks
to the
sponsors
who are making this conference possible.
|
| |
Workshop 3 - Sustainable Transportation Working Group
Seminar - Spring 2006
Initial Planning - Discussion on 2 December
2005
Present: Michael Dixon, J.D. Wulfhorst, Nick Sanyal, Don Crawford, Ray
Dezzani, Michael Kyte
There is an interest in this group to begin a seminar for the spring semester
2006 that would provide an opportunity to learn about sustainable transportation
concepts in the context of the proposed ring road in the city of Moscow.
The seminar would meet weekly and last 90 minutes. Following are notes
from today's discussion:
-
Possible attributes for a sustainable transportation working group
- The seminar could be linked to Geography
580, a seminar in transportation planning that will be taught by Ray Dezzani
in the spring semester.
- This work could be linked to Environmental
Science 497, the senior seminar.
- Funding may be available from Idaho's
share of the Safe Routes to School program that was a part of the recently
passed SAFETEA-LU (surface transportation program reauthorization).
- Encyclopedia of Geo-Informatics might be
reference for interdisciplinary studies.
- What tools or methods do we need to
develop for dealing with sustainable transportation in an interdisciplinary
framework?
- How can we share information between
existing courses that will support the ideas that we will address in this
seminar?
- What do we need to learn ourselves about
working in an interdisciplinary team?
Other seminar participants: Bill
McLaughlin, Steve Hollenhorst, Bruce Haglund, Barb Anderson, Steve Drown, and
community participants from track 4 of the sustainable transportation
conference.
Possible course description:
This seminar will provide participants with the opportunity to learn about the
principles and concepts of sustainable transportation and to apply these
principles and concepts to the proposed ring road project in the City of Moscow.
Weekly meetings will be held in which participants will discuss reading
assignments and develop and assess technical material.
Planning meeting - 9 December 2005
Present: Michael Dixon, Nick Sanyal, Don Crawford, Ray Dezzani, Bill
McLaughlin, Michael Kyte
1. The consensus time for the seminar is
Mondays from either 100-230 pm or 130-300 pm.
2. Possible locations are Morrill Hall 202, NIATT conference, or McClure 207.
Crawford, Dezzani, and Kyte will check on room availability and room capacity.
3. The desired number of participants is 12 to 15.
4. A seminar has been set up in Civil Engineering; participants can either
register here or set up their own seminar in their home department.
5. The title of the seminar is "Sustainable Transportation Working Group".
6. Discussion on what results we might expect, including a collaborative journal
article, contributing to the knowledge on ring roads, a series of collaborative
papers on technical issues, policy issues, and process issues. Another
suggestion was a pedagogical focus, learning how to do interdisciplinary work.
What are the barriers that exist for us, and how do we remove them. We
need to collect data on the process and how we work together. What is
already know about how to influence or support how interdisciplinary groups work
collaboratively. What are the barriers for student involvement? How
can we focus on faculty development?
7. Assignment for next meeting: Each participant will write a page
addressing the following questions: (1) outputs: what do we expect to produce,
(2) outcomes: what are we able to do differently as a result of this experience,
(3) activities that we need to do to make the outputs and outcomes possible, and
(4) who else to include and what other dimensions are needed.
8. Kyte will set up the web site (which is this site for now). We will
explore available collaborative electronic tools with David Schlater from CTI in
a meeting next week.
Homework questions and answers - 12 December
2005
Each participant will write a page
addressing the following questions: (1) outputs: what do we expect to produce,
(2) outcomes: what are we able to do differently as a result of this experience,
(3) activities that we need to do to make the outputs and outcomes possible, and
(4) who else to include and what other dimensions are needed.
|
Bill
McLaughlin (posted 12 December 2005)
Outputs
(Immediate products of the seminar produced by
the participants):
-
Identification of
the barriers and facilitators that seminar participants hold prior
to participating in a boundary crossing (e.g., across disciplines,
across faculty members and students, across practicing professionals
and academics) learning experience that includes faculty, practicing
professionals, and graduate and undergraduate student participants.
-
A draft journal
article which outlines and/or identifies transportation planning
policy issues and likely community impacts connected to a ring road
transportation corridor in a small, rural, university community.
-
A draft journal
article which compares and contrasts problem solving frameworks
created by various disciplinary teams (e.g., social sciences,
transportation engineering, planning, biophysical sciences),
interdisciplinary teams, and/or practice oriented teams (e.g., city
planners, field level transportation engineers). These frameworks
will address a ring road transportation proposal in a small, rural,
university community.
-
A draft journal
article which describes the workings of teams or groups involved in
addressing a ring road transportation proposal in a small, rural,
university community.
-
A draft journal
article which identifies and describes the likely impacts to the
biophysical, social, economic, and human settlement patterns of a
small, rural, university community.
Outcomes
(Things that participants in the seminar will
be able to DO in their positions and outside of the University
after participating in the seminar):
Participants will be able to:
- Work comfortably
across disciplines, and between academics and practicing field
oriented professionals
- Recognize
language and conceptualization barriers when working in diverse
teams/groups and know actions to take to facilitate group learning
and understanding
- Appreciate what
other disciplines add to solving complex, messy problems situated in
ongoing, dynamic, overlapping systems (e.g., ecosystems, economy,
community) and know about tools (e.g., GIS, modeling) that might be
useful in such situations
- Identify and
appropriately use and value alternative thinking strategies (e.g.,
scientific thinking, design oriented thinking, critical thinking)
when confronted with complex problems
Activities
(In and outside the classroom):
Who Else to
Involve (Proposed course make-up):
-
Up to 6
university professors (2 social scientists, 2 biophysical
scientists, 2 engineers)
-
At least 3
graduate students
-
At least 3
undergraduate students
-
At least 3
practicing professionals (2 technical and 1 elected official)
Comment:
Maybe the class can be larger than 15 participants if we truly envision
working in teams. The above suggested organization creates a secure
environment for all participants.
|
|
Michael Kyte (Posted 12 December
2005) Outputs:
- Weekly journal that we prepare in
last ten minutes of each seminar and share on class web site.
- 1-2 papers, done collaboratively,
on either technical topic or process topic (one halfway through
semester and one final paper).
Outcomes:
- More effectively know how to work
in interdisciplinary teams.
- Know how to more effectively
document process collaboratively.
Activities to make these possible:
- Include readings that provide us
learning opportunities in interdisciplinary teams, collaborative
approach to work.
- Technical activities (faculty and
students) that advance our understanding of ring road and its
various implications
- Readings on sustainable
transportation.
- Readings on ring roads and related
issues.
- Development of technical tools
that can support analysis.
Who else to include?/Other
dimensions?
- Who from the community?
- Which students?
- How to decide who gets in?
- Someone from political science?
business? law?
- Public participation
|
|
Nick Sanyal (Posted 13 December 2005)
Outputs and Products:
-
A whitepaper summarizing key, innovative professional
literature-an annotated bibliography perhaps.
-
A manuscript that that looks at the pedagogical
process of moving from single disciplines to a trans-disciplinary
team
-
A workbook that the community could use to contribute
their perceptions of likely impacts (good and bad).
-
A reflective journal that could be analyzed for the
paper (#2) above.
-
A technical paper/analysis.
Outcomes or New Abilities:
-
Be able to work collaboratively in interdisciplinary
settings without feeling insecure, inferior/superior.
-
Know how to effectively work in teams.
-
Be able to share, from your perspective/discipline,
so others can add to or take advantage of what each knows by adding
his/her own.; e.g., modeling of social science data.
Activities:
-
Focused identification and sharing of knowledge in a
non-technical, yet robust way.
-
Reflection
-
Field visits and observations
-
Interviews and invited experts.
-
Shared readings, discussions—participation!
Who is Missing:
-
We are currently all mostly middle aged and mostly
white men.
-
Policy person.
-
Community person; someone form Pullman/WSU
|
|
JD Wulfhorst
(Posted 15 December 2005)
Outputs:
- First and
foremost, I would develop, record, produce, & advertise, a
working dialogue about the process we’re embarking on,
including any needed protocols. Ideally I see the group needs to be
fluid, dynamic, and allowing for change (not necessarily all w/in
the confines of a semester, but more so over time if we hope for
this to be sustained).
- For the Spring
06 term, a ‘white paper’ on a tbd topic seems in order, as this is
innovative enough, and has the possibility of so many directions, I
hesitate to PLAN TO bite off more than a new group could chew. I
would see these as a potential series, all of which could then also
be developed into manuscripts following some review & dialogue from
a broader community they come from.
- I hope for a
broader, and much more (symbolically) formal institutionalization of
a University/municipal partnership arrangement to address common
issues of sustainability, with an intentional design of appropriate
interdisciplinary perspectives.
Outcomes:
- Explicit
awareness & acknowledgement of potential approach differences. To
do this, I recommend the group entertain an early-semester exercise
(designed by an interdisciplinary Philosophy seminar team-taught by
O’Rourke/Eigenbrode and in relation to the UI-IGERT project) that
would allow for collective introspection on what capital, values,
and objectives the individuals bring to and harbor within the group.
- Continuation of
a pulse reading related to collective morale at UI, in Moscow,
and/or w/in special interests as the University continues to move
through an innovative, transitional period to re-define itself as
more sustainable.
Activities:
- Some readings
that would stimulate discussion and allow those with time and
interest to identify and gather additional materials.
- Field-based
tours and/or workshops to engage different stakeholders trying to
discuss the issues, i.e., Ring Road.
- Rotating list of
guests that listen and/or engage (but not with the intent that they
would always ‘present’ to the STWG).
Other
Folks/Dimensions:
- Seems vital to
me to get someone from Architecture/Landscape Architecture involved
in this.
- From my
perspective, the more students and community/professional folks we
get to engage & commit to this the better it would be. As such,
perhaps we need a process to ‘draw straws’ for the faculty slots? (I’m
amenable to some kind of allocation as early as the Fri, 12/16
meeting re: this). Seems awkward to leave anyone out that wants
to participate, but have the good problem of a potential bog with
too many of us trying to do too much, if unorganized.
|
Michael Dixon (Posted 16 December
2005)
Outputs:
-
White paper
discussing the knowledge and tools required for comprehensive
transportation planning
-
White paper
describing the characteristics of a viable comprehensive planning
process
-
History of
Moscow development, describing how Moscow evolved to its current
state
-
Documented
implementation of a comprehensive planning process from community
goals to performance measures to alternatives analysis
Outcomes:
-
Cohesive
long-term sustainable transportation study group that advances the
consideration of community development impacts on the economy,
society, and environment.
-
Identify
important high-priority issues in sustainable transportation
-
Compose
improved practices for addressing issues in sustainable
transportation
-
Develop tools
that increase the viability of comprehensive planning processes
-
Explain
sustainable transportation and why it should be practiced to the
public
-
Integrate
additional faculty and students into the group
Activities that
we need to do to make the outputs and outcomes possible
-
Regularly
revisit our goals (planned outputs and outcomes)
-
Regular
informed discussion and exercises (bring in outside participants
when needed)
-
Vote on
highest priority outputs and outcomes
-
Select
individual or group to oversee progress towards a specific output
and/or outcome.
-
Each group or
individual has 5 minutes, weekly, to present progress towards an
output and/or outcome (we may want to focus on one outcome or output
at a time, until it is completed)
-
No more than
two or three outputs that require an individual or group to monitor
progress
-
No more than
two or three outcomes that require an individual or group to monitor
progress
-
Out-of-seminar
investigation, review, writing, assignments, development
Who else to
include and what other dimensions are needed:
- We need to make
sure that we have sufficient qualifications/skills to address the
economic, social, and environmental aspects of transportation, land
use, public policy, and politics.
|
|
|
Planning meeting - 16 December 2005
Present: Bill McLaughlin, Don Crawford, JD Wulfhorst, Nick Sanyal, Mike
Dixon, Barb Anderson, Nels Reese, Michael Kyte, Ray Dezzani, Eric Delmelle,
David Schlater.
Discussion on collaboration technology, with
help from David Schlater from CTI. Consideration given to recording each
seminar with audio available on seminar web site. Group decided to use
WebCT for discussions and FrontPage for document and information storage.
The FrontPage site will be linked to and accessible from the WebCT site.
Seminar logistics: Time set for Mondays, 130 pm
to 300 pm. Two credits. Starting date: Monday, January 30th.
Enrollment limit of 20. Faculty expected to enroll in the seminar include:
Reese, Dixon, McLaughlin, Crawford, Sanyal, Anderson, Wulfhorst, Kyte, Dezzani,
Delmelle (10). That leaves slots for up to 10 students and community
members. Each faculty member will recruit one student or community member.
Possible community members to invite include: Walter Steed, Les MacDonald, other
representative from the transportation commission, county planners, other
participants in track 4 from the conference, Kenton Bird or communications
student, someone from Daily News.
Initial seminar sessions.
- Session 1: land use and comprehensive
planning; future directions for Moscow and Pullman.
- Session 2: transportation issues: city,
ITD, WashDOT, others.
- Session 3: Disciplinary panel talking
about various issues
- Schedule processing sessions between each
of these three sessions.
- Invite Portland planners? Invite
UDOT "context sensitive solutions" group?
Action items/assignments:
1. Ray Dezzani will check on room availability including seminar rooms in TLC.
2. Michael Kyte will meet with Jenine Cordon from CTI next week to set up WebCT
and FrontPage web sites for the seminar.
3. Homework assignment for next meeting: identify and document initial reading
assignments or web links that can be used in preparation for first course
meeting.
4. Mike Dixon will confirm course as CE400 and CE 501, Sustainable
Transportation Seminar.
|