More stories

  • in

    Making climate models relevant for local decision-makers

    Climate models are a key technology in predicting the impacts of climate change. By running simulations of the Earth’s climate, scientists and policymakers can estimate conditions like sea level rise, flooding, and rising temperatures, and make decisions about how to appropriately respond. But current climate models struggle to provide this information quickly or affordably enough to be useful on smaller scales, such as the size of a city. Now, authors of a new open-access paper published in the Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems have found a method to leverage machine learning to utilize the benefits of current climate models, while reducing the computational costs needed to run them. “It turns the traditional wisdom on its head,” says Sai Ravela, a principal research scientist in MIT’s Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences (EAPS) who wrote the paper with EAPS postdoc Anamitra Saha. Traditional wisdomIn climate modeling, downscaling is the process of using a global climate model with coarse resolution to generate finer details over smaller regions. Imagine a digital picture: A global model is a large picture of the world with a low number of pixels. To downscale, you zoom in on just the section of the photo you want to look at — for example, Boston. But because the original picture was low resolution, the new version is blurry; it doesn’t give enough detail to be particularly useful. “If you go from coarse resolution to fine resolution, you have to add information somehow,” explains Saha. Downscaling attempts to add that information back in by filling in the missing pixels. “That addition of information can happen two ways: Either it can come from theory, or it can come from data.” Conventional downscaling often involves using models built on physics (such as the process of air rising, cooling, and condensing, or the landscape of the area), and supplementing it with statistical data taken from historical observations. But this method is computationally taxing: It takes a lot of time and computing power to run, while also being expensive. A little bit of both In their new paper, Saha and Ravela have figured out a way to add the data another way. They’ve employed a technique in machine learning called adversarial learning. It uses two machines: One generates data to go into our photo. But the other machine judges the sample by comparing it to actual data. If it thinks the image is fake, then the first machine has to try again until it convinces the second machine. The end-goal of the process is to create super-resolution data. Using machine learning techniques like adversarial learning is not a new idea in climate modeling; where it currently struggles is its inability to handle large amounts of basic physics, like conservation laws. The researchers discovered that simplifying the physics going in and supplementing it with statistics from the historical data was enough to generate the results they needed. “If you augment machine learning with some information from the statistics and simplified physics both, then suddenly, it’s magical,” says Ravela. He and Saha started with estimating extreme rainfall amounts by removing more complex physics equations and focusing on water vapor and land topography. They then generated general rainfall patterns for mountainous Denver and flat Chicago alike, applying historical accounts to correct the output. “It’s giving us extremes, like the physics does, at a much lower cost. And it’s giving us similar speeds to statistics, but at much higher resolution.” Another unexpected benefit of the results was how little training data was needed. “The fact that that only a little bit of physics and little bit of statistics was enough to improve the performance of the ML [machine learning] model … was actually not obvious from the beginning,” says Saha. It only takes a few hours to train, and can produce results in minutes, an improvement over the months other models take to run. Quantifying risk quicklyBeing able to run the models quickly and often is a key requirement for stakeholders such as insurance companies and local policymakers. Ravela gives the example of Bangladesh: By seeing how extreme weather events will impact the country, decisions about what crops should be grown or where populations should migrate to can be made considering a very broad range of conditions and uncertainties as soon as possible.“We can’t wait months or years to be able to quantify this risk,” he says. “You need to look out way into the future and at a large number of uncertainties to be able to say what might be a good decision.”While the current model only looks at extreme precipitation, training it to examine other critical events, such as tropical storms, winds, and temperature, is the next step of the project. With a more robust model, Ravela is hoping to apply it to other places like Boston and Puerto Rico as part of a Climate Grand Challenges project.“We’re very excited both by the methodology that we put together, as well as the potential applications that it could lead to,” he says.  More

  • in

    A community collaboration for progress

    While decades of discriminatory policies and practices continue to fuel the affordable housing crisis in the United States, less than three miles from the MIT campus exists a beacon of innovation and community empowerment.“We are very proud to continue MIT’s long-standing partnership with Camfield Estates,” says Catherine D’Ignazio, associate professor of urban science and planning. “Camfield has long been an incubator of creative ideas focused on uplifting their community.”D’Ignazio co-leads a research team focused on housing as part of the MIT Initiative for Combatting Systemic Racism (ICSR) led by the Institute for Data, Systems, and Society (IDSS). The group researches the uneven impacts of data, AI, and algorithmic systems on housing in the United States, as well as ways that these same tools could be used to address racial disparities. The Camfield Tenant Association is a research partner providing insight into the issue and relevant data, as well as opportunities for MIT researchers to solve real challenges and make a local impact.

    Play video

    MIT Initiative on Combatting Systemic Racism – Housing Video: MIT Sociotechnical Systems Research Center

    Formerly known as “Camfield Gardens,” the 102-unit housing development in Roxbury, Massachusetts, was among the pioneering sites in the 1990s to engage in the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) program aimed at revitalizing disrepaired public housing across the country. This also served as the catalyst for their collaboration with MIT, which began in the early 2000s.“The program gave Camfield the money and energy to tear everything on the site down and build it back up anew, in addition to allowing them to buy the property from the city for $1 and take full ownership of the site,” explains Nolen Scruggs, a master’s student in the MIT Department of Urban Studies and Planning (DUSP) who has worked with Camfield over the past few years as part of ICSR’s housing vertical team. “At the time, MIT graduate students helped start a ‘digital divide’ bridge gap program that later evolved into the tech lab that is still there today, continuing to enable residents to learn computer skills and things they might need to get a hand up.”Because of that early collaboration, Camfield Estates reached out to MIT in 2022 to start a new chapter of collaboration with students. Scruggs spent a few months building a team of students from Harvard University, Wentworth Institute of Technology, and MIT to work on a housing design project meant to help the Camfield Tenants Association prepare for their looming redevelopment needs.“One of the things that’s been really important to the work of the ICSR housing vertical is historical context,” says Peko Hosoi, a professor of mechanical engineering and mathematics who co-leads the ICSR Housing vertical with D’Ignazio. “We didn’t get to the place we are right now with housing in an instant. There’s a lot of things that have happened in the U.S. like redlining, predatory lending, and different ways of investing in infrastructure that add important contexts.”“Quantitative methods are a great way to look across macroscale phenomena, but our team recognizes and values qualitative and participatory methods as well, to get a more grounded picture of what community needs really are and what kinds of innovations can bubble up from communities themselves,” D’Ignazio adds. “This is where the partnership with Camfield Estates comes in, which Nolen has been leading.”Finding creative solutionsBefore coming to MIT, Scruggs, a proud New Yorker, worked on housing issues while interning for his local congressperson, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. He called residents to discuss their housing concerns, learning about the affordability issues that were making it hard for lower- and middle-income families to find places to live.“Having this behind-the-scenes experience set the stage for my involvement in Camfield,” Scruggs says, recalling his start at Camfield conducting participatory action research, meeting with Camfield seniors to discuss and capture their concerns.Scruggs says the biggest issue they have been trying to tackle with Camfield is twofold: creating more space for new residents while also helping current residents achieve their end goal of homeownership.“This speaks to some of the larger issues our group at ICSR is working on in terms of housing affordability,” he says. “With Camfield it is looking at where can people with Section 8 vouchers move, what limits do they have, and what barriers do they face — whether it’s through big tech systems, or individual preferences coming from landlords.”Scruggs adds, “The discrimination those people face while trying to find a house, lock it down, talk to a bank, etc. — it can be very, very difficult and discouraging.” Scruggs says one attempt to combat this issue would be through hiring a caseworker to assist people through the process — one of many ideas that came from a Camfield collaboration with the FHLBank Affordable Housing Development Competition.As part of the competition, the goal for Scruggs’s team was to help Camfield tenants understand all of their options and their potential trade-offs, so that in the end they can make informed decisions about what they want to do with their space.“So often redevelopment schemes don’t ensure people can come back.” Scruggs says. “There are specific design proposals being made to ensure that the structure of people’s lifestyles wouldn’t be disrupted.”Scruggs says that tentative recommendations discussed with tenant association president Paulette Ford include replacing the community center with a high-rise development that would increase the number of units available.“I think they are thinking really creatively about their options,” Hosoi says. “Paulette Ford, and her mother before her, have always referred to Camfield as a ‘hand up,’ with the idea that people come to Camfield to live until they can afford a home of their own locally.”Scruggs’s other partnership with Camfield involves working with MIT undergraduate Amelie Nagle as part of the Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program to create programing that will teach computer design and coding to Camfield community kids — in the very TechLab that goes back to MIT and Camfield’s first collaboration.“Nolen has a real commitment to community-led knowledge production,” says D’Ignazio. “It has been a pleasure to work with him and see how he takes all his urban planning skills (GIS, mapping, urban design, photography, and more) to work in respectful ways that foreground community innovation.”She adds: “We are hopeful that the process will yield some high-quality architectural and planning ideas, and help Camfield take the next step towards realizing their innovative vision.” More

  • in

    Q&A: Exploring ethnic dynamics and climate change in Africa

    Evan Lieberman is the Total Professor of Political Science and Contemporary Africa at MIT, and is also director of the Center for International Studies. During a semester-long sabbatical, he’s currently based at the African Climate and Development Initiative at the University of Cape Town.In this Q&A, Lieberman discusses several climate-related research projects he’s pursuing in South Africa and surrounding countries. This is part of an ongoing series exploring how the School of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences is addressing the climate crisis.Q: South Africa is a nation whose political and economic development you have long studied and written about. Do you see this visit as an extension of the kind of research you have been pursuing, or a departure from it?A: Much of my previous work has been animated by the question of understanding the causes and consequences of group-based disparities, whether due to AIDS or Covid. These are problems that know no geographic boundaries, and where ethnic and racial minorities are often hardest hit. Climate change is an analogous problem, with these minority populations living in places where they are most vulnerable, in heat islands in cities, and in coastal areas where they are not protected. The reality is they might get hit much harder by longer-term trends and immediate shocks.In one line of research, I seek to understand how people in different African countries, in different ethnic groups, perceive the problems of climate change and their governments’ response to it. There are ethnic divisions of labor in terms of what people do — whether they are farmers or pastoralists, or live in cities. So some ethnic groups are simply more affected by drought or extreme weather than others, and this can be a basis for conflict, especially when competing for often limited government resources.In this area, just like in my previous research, learning what shapes ordinary citizen perspectives is really important, because these views affect people’s everyday practices, and the extent to which they support certain kinds of policies and investments their government makes in response to climate-related challenges. But I will also try to learn more about the perspectives of policymakers and various development partners who seek to balance climate-related challenges against a host of other problems and priorities.Q: You recently published “Until We Have Won Our Liberty,” which examines the difficult transition of South Africa from apartheid to a democratic government, scrutinizing in particular whether the quality of life for citizens has improved in terms of housing, employment, discrimination, and ethnic conflicts. How do climate change-linked issues fit into your scholarship?A: I never saw myself as a climate researcher, but a number of years ago, heavily influenced by what I was learning at MIT, I began to recognize more and more how important the issue of climate change is. And I realized there were lots of ways in which the climate problem resonated with other kinds of problems I had tackled in earlier parts of my work.There was once a time when climate and the environment was the purview primarily of white progressives: the “tree huggers.” And that’s really changed in recent decades as it has become evident that the people who’ve been most affected by the climate emergency are ethnic and racial minorities. We saw with Hurricane Katrina and other places [that] if you are Black, you’re more likely to live in a vulnerable area and to just generally experience more environmental harms, from pollution and emissions, leaving these communities much less resilient than white communities. Government has largely not addressed this inequity. When you look at American survey data in terms of who’s concerned about climate change, Black Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Asian Americans are more unified in their worries than are white Americans.There are analogous problems in Africa, my career research focus. Governments there have long responded in different ways to different ethnic groups. The research I am starting looks at the extent to which there are disparities in how governments try to solve climate-related challenges.Q: It’s difficult enough in the United States taking the measure of different groups’ perceptions of the impact of climate change and government’s effectiveness in contending with it. How do you go about this in Africa?A: Surprisingly, there’s only been a little bit of work done so far on how ordinary African citizens, who are ostensibly being hit the hardest in the world by the climate emergency, are thinking about this problem. Climate change has not been politicized there in a very big way. In fact, only 50 percent of Africans in one poll had heard of the term.In one of my new projects, with political science faculty colleague Devin Caughey and political science doctoral student Preston Johnston, we are analyzing social and climate survey data [generated by the Afrobarometer research network] from over 30 African countries to understand within and across countries the ways in which ethnic identities structure people’s perception of the climate crisis, and their beliefs in what government ought to be doing. In largely agricultural African societies, people routinely experience drought, extreme rain, and heat. They also lack the infrastructure that can shield them from the intense variability of weather patterns. But we’re adding a lens, which is looking at sources of inequality, especially ethnic differences.I will also be investigating specific sectors. Africa is a continent where in most places people cannot take for granted universal, piped access to clean water. In Cape Town, several years ago, the combination of failure to replace infrastructure and lack of rain caused such extreme conditions that one of the world’s most important cities almost ran out of water.While these studies are in progress, it is clear that in many countries, there are substantively large differences in perceptions of the severity of climate change, and attitudes about who should be doing what, and who’s capable of doing what. In several countries, both perceptions and policy preferences are differentiated along ethnic lines, more so than with respect to generational or class differences within societies.This is interesting as a phenomenon, but substantively, I think it’s important in that it may provide the basis for how politicians and government actors decide to move on allocating resources and implementing climate-protection policies. We see this kind of political calculation in the U.S. and we shouldn’t be surprised that it happens in Africa as well.That’s ultimately one of the challenges from the perch of MIT, where we’re really interested in understanding climate change, and creating technological tools and policies for mitigating the problem or adapting to it. The reality is frustrating. The political world — those who make decisions about whether to acknowledge the problem and whether to implement resources in the best technical way — are playing a whole other game. That game is about rewarding key supporters and being reelected.Q: So how do you go from measuring perceptions and beliefs among citizens about climate change and government responsiveness to those problems, to policies and actions that might actually reduce disparities in the way climate-vulnerable African groups receive support?A: Some of the work I have been doing involves understanding what local and national governments across Africa are actually doing to address these problems. We will have to drill down into government budgets to determine the actual resources devoted to addressing a challenge, what sorts of practices the government follows, and the political ramifications for governments that act aggressively versus those that don’t. With the Cape Town water crisis, for example, the government dramatically changed residents’ water usage through naming and shaming, and transformed institutional practices of water collection. They made it through a major drought by using much less water, and doing it with greater energy efficiency. Through the government’s strong policy and implementation, and citizens’ active responses, an entire city, with all its disparate groups, gained resilience. Maybe we can highlight creative solutions to major climate-related problems and use them as prods to push more effective policies and solutions in other places.In the MIT Global Diversity Lab, along with political science faculty colleague Volha Charnysh, political science doctoral student Jared Kalow, and Institute for Data, Systems and Society doctoral student Erin Walk, we are exploring American perspectives on climate-related foreign aid, asking survey respondents whether the U.S. should be giving more to people in the global South who didn’t cause the problems of climate change but have to suffer the externalities. We are particularly interested in whether people’s desire to help vulnerable communities rests on the racial or national identity of those communities.From my new seat as director of the Center for International Studies (CIS), I hope to do more and more to connect social science findings to relevant policymakers, whether in the U.S. or in other places. CIS is making climate one of our thematic priority areas, directing hundreds of thousands of dollars for MIT faculty to spark climate collaborations with researchers worldwide through the Global Seed Fund program. COP 28 (the U.N. Climate Change Conference), which I attended in December in Dubai, really drove home the importance of people coming together from around the world to exchange ideas and form networks. It was unbelievably large, with 85,000 people. But so many of us shared the belief that we are not doing enough. We need enforceable global solutions and innovation. We need ways of financing. We need to provide opportunities for journalists to broadcast the importance of this problem. And we need to understand the incentives that different actors have and what sorts of messages and strategies will resonate with them, and inspire those who have resources to be more generous. More

  • in

    Generating the policy of tomorrow

    As first-year students in the Social and Engineering Systems (SES) doctoral program within the MIT Institute for Data, Systems, and Society (IDSS), Eric Liu and Ashely Peake share an interest in investigating housing inequality issues.

    They also share a desire to dive head-first into their research.

    “In the first year of your PhD, you’re taking classes and still getting adjusted, but we came in very eager to start doing research,” Liu says.

    Liu, Peake, and many others found an opportunity to do hands-on research on real-world problems at the MIT Policy Hackathon, an initiative organized by students in IDSS, including the Technology and Policy Program (TPP). The weekend-long, interdisciplinary event — now in its sixth year — continues to gather hundreds of participants from around the globe to explore potential solutions to some of society’s greatest challenges.

    This year’s theme, “Hack-GPT: Generating the Policy of Tomorrow,” sought to capitalize on the popularity of generative AI (like the chatbot ChatGPT) and the ways it is changing how we think about technical and policy-based challenges, according to Dansil Green, a second-year TPP master’s student and co-chair of the event.

    “We encouraged our teams to utilize and cite these tools, thinking about the implications that generative AI tools have on their different challenge categories,” Green says.

    After 2022’s hybrid event, this year’s organizers pivoted back to a virtual-only approach, allowing them to increase the overall number of participants in addition to increasing the number of teams per challenge by 20 percent.

    “Virtual allows you to reach more people — we had a high number of international participants this year — and it helps reduce some of the costs,” Green says. “I think going forward we are going to try and switch back and forth between virtual and in-person because there are different benefits to each.”

    “When the magic hits”

    Liu and Peake competed in the housing challenge category, where they could gain research experience in their actual field of study. 

    “While I am doing housing research, I haven’t necessarily had a lot of opportunities to work with actual housing data before,” says Peake, who recently joined the SES doctoral program after completing an undergraduate degree in applied math last year. “It was a really good experience to get involved with an actual data problem, working closer with Eric, who’s also in my lab group, in addition to meeting people from MIT and around the world who are interested in tackling similar questions and seeing how they think about things differently.”

    Joined by Adrian Butterton, a Boston-based paralegal, as well as Hudson Yuen and Ian Chan, two software engineers from Canada, Liu and Peake formed what would end up being the winning team in their category: “Team Ctrl+Alt+Defeat.” They quickly began organizing a plan to address the eviction crisis in the United States.

    “I think we were kind of surprised by the scope of the question,” Peake laughs. “In the end, I think having such a large scope motivated us to think about it in a more realistic kind of way — how could we come up with a solution that was adaptable and therefore could be replicated to tackle different kinds of problems.”

    Watching the challenge on the livestream together on campus, Liu says they immediately went to work, and could not believe how quickly things came together.

    “We got our challenge description in the evening, came out to the purple common area in the IDSS building and literally it took maybe an hour and we drafted up the entire project from start to finish,” Liu says. “Then our software engineer partners had a dashboard built by 1 a.m. — I feel like the hackathon really promotes that really fast dynamic work stream.”

    “People always talk about the grind or applying for funding — but when that magic hits, it just reminds you of the part of research that people don’t talk about, and it was really a great experience to have,” Liu adds.

    A fresh perspective

    “We’ve organized hackathons internally at our company and they are great for fostering innovation and creativity,” says Letizia Bordoli, senior AI product manager at Veridos, a German-based identity solutions company that provided this year’s challenge in Data Systems for Human Rights. “It is a great opportunity to connect with talented individuals and explore new ideas and solutions that we might not have thought about.”

    The challenge provided by Veridos was focused on finding innovative solutions to universal birth registration, something Bordoli says only benefited from the fact that the hackathon participants were from all over the world.

    “Many had local and firsthand knowledge about certain realities and challenges [posed by the lack of] birth registration,” Bordoli says. “It brings fresh perspectives to existing challenges, and it gave us an energy boost to try to bring innovative solutions that we may not have considered before.”

    New frontiers

    Alongside the housing and data systems for human rights challenges was a challenge in health, as well as a first-time opportunity to tackle an aerospace challenge in the area of space for environmental justice.

    “Space can be a very hard challenge category to do data-wise since a lot of data is proprietary, so this really developed over the last few months with us having to think about how we could do more with open-source data,” Green explains. “But I am glad we went the environmental route because it opened the challenge up to not only space enthusiasts, but also environment and climate people.”

    One of the participants to tackle this new challenge category was Yassine Elhallaoui, a system test engineer from Norway who specializes in AI solutions and has 16 years of experience working in the oil and gas fields. Elhallaoui was a member of Team EcoEquity, which proposed an increase in policies supporting the use of satellite data to ensure proper evaluation and increase water resiliency for vulnerable communities.

    “The hackathons I have participated in in the past were more technical,” Elhallaoui says. “Starting with [MIT Science and Technology Policy Institute Director Kristen Kulinowski’s] workshop about policy writers and the solutions they came up with, and the analysis they had to do … it really changed my perspective on what a hackathon can do.”

    “A policy hackathon is something that can make real changes in the world,” she adds. More

  • in

    Blueprint Labs launches a charter school research collaborative

    Over the past 30 years, charter schools have emerged as a prominent yet debated public school option. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, 7 percent of U.S. public school students were enrolled in charter schools in 2021, up from 4 percent in 2010. Amid this expansion, families and policymakers want to know more about charter school performance and its systemic impacts. While researchers have evaluated charter schools’ short-term effects on student outcomes, significant knowledge gaps still exist. 

    MIT Blueprint Labs aims to fill those gaps through its Charter School Research Collaborative, an initiative that brings together practitioners, policymakers, researchers, and funders to make research on charter schools more actionable, rigorous, and efficient. The collaborative will create infrastructure to streamline and fund high-quality, policy-relevant charter research. 

    Joshua Angrist, MIT Ford Professor of Economics and a Blueprint Labs co-founder and director, says that Blueprint Labs hopes “to increase [its] impact by working with a larger group of academic and practitioner partners.” A nonpartisan research lab, Blueprint’s mission is to produce the most rigorous evidence possible to inform policy and practice. Angrist notes, “The debate over charter schools is not always fact-driven. Our goal at the lab is to bring convincing evidence into these discussions.”

    Collaborative kickoff

    The collaborative launched with a two-day kickoff in November. Blueprint Labs welcomed researchers, practitioners, funders, and policymakers to MIT to lay the groundwork for the collaborative. Over 80 participants joined the event, including leaders of charter school organizations, researchers at top universities and institutes, and policymakers and advocates from a variety of organizations and education agencies. 

    Through a series of panels, presentations, and conversations, participants including Rhode Island Department of Education Commissioner Angélica Infante-Green, CEO of Noble Schools Constance Jones, former Knowledge is Power Program CEO Richard Barth, president and CEO of National Association of Charter School Authorizers Karega Rausch, and many others discussed critical topics in the charter school space. These conversations influenced the collaborative’s research agenda. 

    Several sessions also highlighted how to ensure that the research process includes diverse voices to generate actionable evidence. Panelists noted that researchers should be aware of the demands placed on practitioners and should carefully consider community contexts. In addition, collaborators should treat each other as equal partners. 

    Parag Pathak, the Class of 1922 Professor of Economics at MIT and a Blueprint Labs co-founder and director, explained the kickoff’s aims. “One of our goals today is to begin to forge connections between [attendees]. We hope that [their] conversations are the launching point for future collaborations,” he stated. Pathak also shared the next steps for the collaborative: “Beginning next year, we’ll start investing in new research using the agenda [developed at this event] as our guide. We will also support new partnerships between researchers and practitioners.”

    Research agenda

    The discussions at the kickoff informed the collaborative’s research agenda. A recent paper summarizing existing lottery-based research on charter school effectiveness by Sarah Cohodes, an associate professor of public policy at the University of Michigan, and Susha Roy, an associate policy researcher at the RAND Corp., also guides the agenda. Their review finds that in randomized evaluations, many charter schools increase students’ academic achievement. However, researchers have not yet studied charter schools’ impacts on long-term, behavioral, or health outcomes in depth, and rigorous, lottery-based research is currently limited to a handful of urban centers. 

    The current research agenda focuses on seven topics:

    the long-term effects of charter schools;
    the effect of charters on non-test score outcomes;
    which charter school practices have the largest effect on performance;
    how charter performance varies across different contexts;
    how charter school effects vary with demographic characteristics and student background;
    how charter schools impact non-student outcomes, like teacher retention; and
    how system-level factors, such as authorizing practices, impact charter school performance.
    As diverse stakeholders’ priorities continue to shift and the collaborative progresses, the research agenda will continue to evolve.

    Information for interested partners

    Opportunities exist for charter leaders, policymakers, researchers, and funders to engage with the collaborative. Stakeholders can apply for funding, help shape the research agenda, and develop new research partnerships. A competitive funding process will open this month.

    Those interested in receiving updates on the collaborative can fill out this form. Please direct questions to chartercollab@mitblueprintlabs.org. More

  • in

    Bridging the gap between preschool policy, practice, and research

    Preschool in the United States has grown dramatically in the past several decades. From 1970 to 2018, preschool enrollment increased from 38 percent to 64 percent of eligible students. Fourteen states are currently discussing preschool expansion, with seven likely to pass some form of universal eligibility within the next calendar year. Amid this expansion, families, policymakers, and practitioners want to better understand preschools’ impacts and the factors driving preschool quality. 

    To address these and other questions, MIT Blueprint Labs recently held a Preschool Research Convening that brought researchers, funders, practitioners, and policymakers to Nashville, Tennessee, to discuss the future of preschool research. Parag Pathak, the Class of 1922 Professor of Economics at MIT and a Blueprint Labs co-founder and director, opened by sharing the goals of the convening: “Our goals for the next two days are to identify pressing, unanswered research questions and connect researchers, practitioners, policymakers, and funders. We also hope to craft a compelling research agenda.”

    Pathak added, “Given preschool expansion nationwide, we believe now is the moment to centralize our efforts and create knowledge to inform pressing decisions. We aim to generate rigorous preschool research that will lead to higher-quality and more equitable preschool.”

    Over 75 participants hailing from universities, early childhood education organizations, school districts, state education departments, and national policy organizations attended the convening, held Nov. 13-14. Through panels, presentations, and conversations, participants discussed essential subjects in the preschool space, built the foundations for valuable partnerships, and formed an actionable and inclusive research agenda.

    Research presented

    Among research works presented was a recent paper by Blueprint Labs affiliate Jesse Bruhn, an assistant professor of economics at Brown University and co-author Emily Emick, also of Brown, reviewing the state of lottery-based preschool research. They found that random evaluations from the past 60 years demonstrate that preschool improves children’s short-run academic outcomes, but those effects fade over time. However, positive impacts re-emerge in the long term through improved outcomes like high school graduation and college enrollment. Limited rigorous research studies children’s behavioral outcomes or the factors that lead to high-quality preschool, though trends from preliminary research suggest that full-day programs, language immersion programs, and specific curricula may benefit children.  

    An earlier Blueprint Labs study that was also presented at the convening is the only recent lottery-based study to provide insight on preschool’s long-term impacts. The work, conducted by Pathak and two others, reveals that enrolling in Boston Public Schools’ universal preschool program boosts children’s likelihood of graduating high school and enrolling in college. Yet, the preschool program had little detectable impact on elementary, middle, and high school state standardized test scores. Students who attended Boston preschool were less likely to be suspended or incarcerated in high school. However, research on preschool’s impacts on behavioral outcomes is limited; it remains an important area for further study. Future work could also fill in other gaps in research, such as access, alternative measures of student success, and variation across geographic contexts and student populations.

    More data sought

    State policy leaders also spoke at the event, including Lisa Roy, executive director of the Colorado Department of Early Childhood, and Sarah Neville-Morgan, deputy superintendent in the Opportunities for All Branch at the California Department of Education. Local practitioners, such as Elsa Holguín, president and CEO of the Denver Preschool Program, and Kristin Spanos, CEO of First 5 Alameda County, as well as national policy leaders including Lauren Hogan, managing director of policy and professional advancement at the National Association for the Education of Young Children, also shared their perspectives. 

    In panel discussions held throughout the kickoff, practitioners, policymakers, and researchers shared their perspectives on pressing questions for future research, including: What practices define high-quality preschool? How does preschool affect family systems and the workforce? How can we expand measures of effectiveness to move beyond traditional assessments? What can we learn from preschool’s differential impacts across time, settings, models, and geographies?

    Panelists also discussed the need for reliable data, sharing that “the absence of data allows the status quo to persist.” Several sessions focused on involving diverse stakeholders in the research process, highlighting the need for transparency, sensitivity to community contexts, and accessible communication about research findings.

    On the second day of the Preschool Research Convening, Pathak shared with attendees, “One of our goals… is to forge connections between all of you in this room and support new partnerships between researchers and practitioners. We hope your conversations are the launching pad for future collaborations.” Jason Sachs, the deputy director of early learning at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and former director of early childhood at Boston Public Schools, provided closing remarks.

    The convening laid the groundwork for a research agenda and new research partnerships that can help answer questions about what works, in what context, for which kids, and under which conditions. Answers to these questions will be fundamental to ensure preschool expands in the most evidence-informed and equitable way possible.

    With this goal in mind, Blueprint Labs aims to create a new Preschool Research Collaborative to equip practitioners, policymakers, funders, and researchers with rigorous, actionable evidence on preschool performance. Pathak states, “We hope this collaborative will foster evidence-based decision-making that improves children’s short- and long-term outcomes.” The connections and research agenda formed at the Preschool Research Convening are the first steps toward achieving that goal. More

  • in

    Co-creating climate futures with real-time data and spatial storytelling

    Virtual story worlds and game engines aren’t just for video games anymore. They are now tools for scientists and storytellers to digitally twin existing physical spaces and then turn them into vessels to dream up speculative climate stories and build collective designs of the future. That’s the theory and practice behind the MIT WORLDING initiative.

    Twice this year, WORLDING matched world-class climate story teams working in XR (extended reality) with relevant labs and researchers across MIT. One global group returned for a virtual gathering online in partnership with Unity for Humanity, while another met for one weekend in person, hosted at the MIT Media Lab.

    “We are witnessing the birth of an emergent field that fuses climate science, urban planning, real-time 3D engines, nonfiction storytelling, and speculative fiction, and it is all fueled by the urgency of the climate crises,” says Katerina Cizek, lead designer of the WORLDING initiative at the Co-Creation Studio of MIT Open Documentary Lab. “Interdisciplinary teams are forming and blossoming around the planet to collectively imagine and tell stories of healthy, livable worlds in virtual 3D spaces and then finding direct ways to translate that back to earth, literally.”

    At this year’s virtual version of WORLDING, five multidisciplinary teams were selected from an open call. In a week-long series of research and development gatherings, the teams met with MIT scientists, staff, fellows, students, and graduates, as well as other leading figures in the field. Guests ranged from curators at film festivals such as Sundance and Venice, climate policy specialists, and award-winning media creators to software engineers and renowned Earth and atmosphere scientists. The teams heard from MIT scholars in diverse domains, including geomorphology, urban planning as acts of democracy, and climate researchers at MIT Media Lab.

    Mapping climate data

    “We are measuring the Earth’s environment in increasingly data-driven ways. Hundreds of terabytes of data are taken every day about our planet in order to study the Earth as a holistic system, so we can address key questions about global climate change,” explains Rachel Connolly, an MIT Media Lab research scientist focused in the “Future Worlds” research theme, in a talk to the group. “Why is this important for your work and storytelling in general? Having the capacity to understand and leverage this data is critical for those who wish to design for and successfully operate in the dynamic Earth environment.”

    Making sense of billions of data points was a key theme during this year’s sessions. In another talk, Taylor Perron, an MIT professor of Earth, atmospheric and planetary sciences, shared how his team uses computational modeling combined with many other scientific processes to better understand how geology, climate, and life intertwine to shape the surfaces of Earth and other planets. His work resonated with one WORLDING team in particular, one aiming to digitally reconstruct the pre-Hispanic Lake Texcoco — where current day Mexico City is now situated — as a way to contrast and examine the region’s current water crisis.

    Democratizing the future

    While WORLDING approaches rely on rigorous science and the interrogation of large datasets, they are also founded on democratizing community-led approaches.

    MIT Department of Urban Studies and Planning graduate Lafayette Cruise MCP ’19 met with the teams to discuss how he moved his own practice as a trained urban planner to include a futurist component involving participatory methods. “I felt we were asking the same limited questions in regards to the future we were wanting to produce. We’re very limited, very constrained, as to whose values and comforts are being centered. There are so many possibilities for how the future could be.”

    Scaling to reach billions

    This work scales from the very local to massive global populations. Climate policymakers are concerned with reaching billions of people in the line of fire. “We have a goal to reach 1 billion people with climate resilience solutions,” says Nidhi Upadhyaya, deputy director at Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht-Rockefeller Foundation Resilience Center. To get that reach, Upadhyaya is turning to games. “There are 3.3 billion-plus people playing video games across the world. Half of these players are women. This industry is worth $300 billion. Africa is currently among the fastest-growing gaming markets in the world, and 55 percent of the global players are in the Asia Pacific region.” She reminded the group that this conversation is about policy and how formats of mass communication can be used for policymaking, bringing about change, changing behavior, and creating empathy within audiences.

    Socially engaged game development is also connected to education at Unity Technologies, a game engine company. “We brought together our education and social impact work because we really see it as a critical flywheel for our business,” said Jessica Lindl, vice president and global head of social impact/education at Unity Technologies, in the opening talk of WORLDING. “We upscale about 900,000 students, in university and high school programs around the world, and about 800,000 adults who are actively learning and reskilling and upskilling in Unity. Ultimately resulting in our mission of the ‘world is a better place with more creators in it,’ millions of creators who reach billions of consumers — telling the world stories, and fostering a more inclusive, sustainable, and equitable world.”

    Access to these technologies is key, especially the hardware. “Accessibility has been missing in XR,” explains Reginé Gilbert, who studies and teaches accessibility and disability in user experience design at New York University. “XR is being used in artificial intelligence, assistive technology, business, retail, communications, education, empathy, entertainment, recreation, events, gaming, health, rehabilitation meetings, navigation, therapy, training, video programming, virtual assistance wayfinding, and so many other uses. This is a fun fact for folks: 97.8 percent of the world hasn’t tried VR [virtual reality] yet, actually.”

    Meanwhile, new hardware is on its way. The WORLDING group got early insights into the highly anticipated Apple Vision Pro headset, which promises to integrate many forms of XR and personal computing in one device. “They’re really pushing this kind of pass-through or mixed reality,” said Dan Miller, a Unity engineer on the poly spatial team, collaborating with Apple, who described the experience of the device as “You are viewing the real world. You’re pulling up windows, you’re interacting with content. It’s a kind of spatial computing device where you have multiple apps open, whether it’s your email client next to your messaging client with a 3D game in the middle. You’re interacting with all these things in the same space and at different times.”

    “WORLDING combines our passion for social-impact storytelling and incredible innovative storytelling,” said Paisley Smith of the Unity for Humanity Program at Unity Technologies. She added, “This is an opportunity for creators to incubate their game-changing projects and connect with experts across climate, story, and technology.”

    Meeting at MIT

    In a new in-person iteration of WORLDING this year, organizers collaborated closely with Connolly at the MIT Media Lab to co-design an in-person weekend conference Oct. 25 – Nov. 7 with 45 scholars and professionals who visualize climate data at NASA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, planetariums, and museums across the United States.

    A participant said of the event, “An incredible workshop that had had a profound effect on my understanding of climate data storytelling and how to combine different components together for a more [holistic] solution.”

    “With this gathering under our new Future Worlds banner,” says Dava Newman, director of the MIT Media Lab and Apollo Program Professor of Astronautics chair, “the Media Lab seeks to affect human behavior and help societies everywhere to improve life here on Earth and in worlds beyond, so that all — the sentient, natural, and cosmic — worlds may flourish.” 

    “WORLDING’s virtual-only component has been our biggest strength because it has enabled a true, international cohort to gather, build, and create together. But this year, an in-person version showed broader opportunities that spatial interactivity generates — informal Q&As, physical worksheets, and larger-scale ideation, all leading to deeper trust-building,” says WORLDING producer Srushti Kamat SM ’23.

    The future and potential of WORLDING lies in the ongoing dialogue between the virtual and physical, both in the work itself and in the format of the workshops. More

  • in

    J-PAL North America and Results for America announce 18 collaborations with state and local governments

    J-PAL North America and Results for America have announced 18 new partnerships with state and local governments across the country through their Leveraging Evidence and Evaluation for Equitable Recovery (LEVER) programming, which launched in April of this year. 

    As state and local leaders leverage federal relief funding to invest in their communities, J-PAL North America and Results for America are providing in-depth support to agencies in using data, evaluation, and evidence to advance effective and equitable government programming for generations to come. The 18 new collaborators span the contiguous United States and represent a wide range of pressing and innovative uses of federal Covid-19 recovery funding.

    These partnerships are a key component of the LEVER program, run by J-PAL North America — a regional office of MIT’s Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL) — and Results for America — a nonprofit organization that helps government agencies harness the power of evidence and data. Through 2024, LEVER will continue to provide a suite of resources, training, and evaluation design services to prepare state and local government agencies to rigorously evaluate their own programs and to harness existing evidence in developing programs and policies using federal recovery dollars.

    J-PAL North America is working with four leading government agencies following a call for proposals to the LEVER Evaluation Incubator in June. These agencies will work with J-PAL staff to design randomized evaluations to understand the causal impact of important programs that contribute to their jurisdictions’ recovery from Covid-19.

    Connecticut’s Medicaid office, operating out of the state’s Department of Social Services, is working to improve vaccine access and awareness among youth. “Connecticut Medicaid is thrilled to work with J-PAL North America. The technical expertise and training that we receive will expand our knowledge during ‘testing and learning’ interventions that improve the health of our members,” says Gui Woolston, the director of Medicaid and Division of Health Services. 

    Athens-Clarke County Unified Government is invested in evaluating programming for youth development and violence prevention implemented by the Boys and Girls Club of Athens. Their goal is “to measure and transparently communicate program impact,” explains Paige Seago, the data and outcomes coordinator for the American Rescue Plan Act. “The ability to continually iterate and tailor programs to better meet community goals is crucial to long-term success.”

    The County of San Diego’s newly formed Office of Evaluation, Performance, and Analytics is evaluating a pilot program providing rental subsidies for older adults. “Randomized evaluation can help us understand if rent subsidies will help prevent seniors from becoming homeless and will give us useful information about how to move forward,” says Chief Evaluation Officer Ricardo Basurto-Dávila. 

    In King County, Washington, the Executive Climate Office is planning to evaluate efforts to increase equitable access to household energy efficiency programs. “Because of J-PAL’s support, we have confidence that we can reduce climate impacts and extend home electrification benefits to lower-income homeowners in King County — homeowners who otherwise may not have the ability to participate in the clean energy transition,” says King County Climate Director Marissa Aho.

    Fourteen additional state and local agencies are working with Results for America as part of the LEVER Training Sprint. Together, they will develop policies that catalyze sustainable evidence building within government. 

    Jurisdictions selected for the Training Sprint represent government leaders at the city, county, and state levels — all of whom are committed to creating an evaluation framework for policy that will prioritize evidence-based decision-making across the country. Over the course of 10 weeks, with access to tools and coaching, each team will develop an internal implementation policy by embedding key evaluation and evidence practices into their jurisdiction’s decision-making processes. Participants will finish the Training Sprint with a robust decision-making framework that translates their LEVER implementation policies into actionable planning guidance. 

    Government leaders will utilize the LEVER Training Sprint to build a culture of data and evidence focused on leveraging evaluation policies to invest in delivering tangible results for their residents. About their participation in the LEVER Training Sprint, Dana Williams from Denver, Colorado says, “Impact evaluation is such an integral piece to understanding the past, present, and future. I’m excited to participate in the LEVER Training Sprint to better inform and drive evidence-based programming in Denver.”

    The Training Sprint is a part of a growing movement to ground government innovation in data and evidence. Kermina Hanna from the State of New Jersey notes, “It’s vital that we cement a data-driven commitment to equity in government operations, and I’m really excited for this opportunity to develop a national network of colleagues in government who share this passion and dedication to responsive public service.”

    Jurisdictions selected for the Training Sprint are: 

    Boston, Massachusetts;
    Carlsbad, California;
    Connecticut;
    Dallas, Texas;
    Denver City/County, Colorado;
    Fort Collins, Colorado;
    Guilford County, North Carolina;
    King County, Washington;
    Long Beach, California;
    Los Angeles, California;
    New Jersey;
    New Mexico;
    Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; and
    Washington County, Oregon.
    Those interested in learning more can fill out the LEVER intake form. Please direct any questions about the Evaluation Incubator to Louise Geraghty and questions about the Training Sprint to Chelsea Powell. More