Columbia University Libraries Journals
Not a member yet
6467 research outputs found
Sort by
Ascending Arousal Network Connectivity in Disorders of Consciousness: A Diffusion MRI Study
No full textThe human brain gives rise to a great variety of conscious experiences. Patients with disorders of consciousness, a state characterized by the dissociation of awareness and wakefulness, are particularly noteworthy. This study attempts to find key biomarkers of the disorder of consciousness state and discover key regions of the brain that govern consciousness. The focus is on the ascending arousal network—a network of nodes and edges representing connections from the brainstem to subcortical (thalamus, hypothalamus, basal forebrain) nuclei and reaching the cerebral cortex. Previous studies using animal models have demonstrated a high prognostic value of the ascending arousal network in relation to consciousness. This study conducts a diffusion tensor imaging analysis and generates a tract count plot to illustrate differences in connectivity between (N=6) healthy controls and (N=6) patients with chronic disorders of consciousness. Each region of interest was isolated to investigate its specific role and impact on consciousness. A principal component analysis was performed to assess the separability of the two cohorts. The results found each of the regions of interest to be significantly (p<0.05) disrupted in patients with disorders of consciousness. They contributed equally to the linear separability of the two cohorts. This is consistent with previous research and hints at the importance of the ascending arousal network in governing consciousness. These changes are likely associated with the many pathological deteriorations associated with an impaired cognitive state, such as neuronal loss, gliosis, and the degeneration of white matter tracts that connect critical areas of the brain involved in consciousness
Deepfakes in Domestic and International Perspective
Full text linkHave you always (or ever) yearned to produce your own recording of Elvis Presley singing great baritone arias from Italian opera? Or to make a movie starring Nicole Kidman as Lady Macbeth? Or a videogame featuring the bully who tormented you in high school suffering repeated tortures worthy of the Christian martyrdoms recounted with gusto in The Golden Legend? You can fulfill all these wishes, and more, thanks to the AI technology enabling the creation of “deepfakes”—known in legal documents as “digital replicas”—capable of simulating the visual and vocal appearance of real people, living or dead. AI programs can also generate musical compositions in the style of well- known composers or performers, as well as video sequences. What may be good fun in private may become pernicious, offensive, and even dangerous, if widely disseminated over social media or through commercial channels. But, at least in the U.S., legal protections for performers and ordinary individuals against digital replicas, are at best, scanty
Responsible AI Starts with Licensing
Full text linkResponsible AI starts with licensing. AI outcomes are strengthened by reliance on responsibly sourced, high-quality copyrighted works. Consent and human centricity are hallmarks of human advancement, and also will enable better AI. The default position of our copyright system is that the person who wishes to use copyright protected works must seek out and obtain a license before engaging in conduct that would implicate any rights protected by copyright law to avoid an infringement claim. This will only seem fair to most observers, given the intellectual and economic labor involved in creating original works, and also in light of the natural and economic justice of granting the creator the right to determine how her works will be used.
Of course, the copyright system contains exceptions in certain cases where authorization may not be needed at all (e.g., fair use in the U.S.) or where rights are limited to non-negotiated licenses (e.g., non-voluntary licenses and/or levies). But these exceptions or limitations to rights, in order to serve the public interest of promoting the creation and distribution of original creative works (as well as to comply with international law), must be carefully circumscribed to avoid unfairly prejudicing the legitimate interests of the author. To be acceptable under the Berne 3-Step test, they exist in areas of market failure.
AI training generally requires the express and voluntarily granted consent of the author. Any other approach threatens fundamental values underlying our copyright system. This observation is grounded in a number of core truths: that AI training requires the reproduction of protected works; that copies of such works are not (only) ephemeral or transitory and are stored in a manner that permits their retrieval for the purpose of producing expressive output that derives from the training data; and that such AI output do, and are likely to, directly compete in the marketplace for expressive works with the works on which the AI was trained, as well as to unfairly displace licensing opportunities that would otherwise exist for authors of the original works.
As we approach how to balance competing interests around AI technologies, we are faced with a litany of arguments that copyright is somehow not fit-for-purpose for this AI. These are the same arguments that were raised with respect to the sound recordings, cable, the photocopier, the internet, and every new technology where one party wanted to make money through uncompensated and unconsented to use of another’s creative works. AI is not as different as the advocates for unfettered, uncompensated reuse pretend
Past and Present Copyright Tribunals for Setting Royalties in the United States
Full text linkI was asked to participate in The Kernochan Center’s Symposium addressing “Past, Present and Future of Copyright Licensing.” I noted that in light of my current role on the United States Copyright Royalty Board, my presentation and discussion participation would focus on the past and the present of statutory Copyright Licensing in the United States. I chose to exclude any personal outlook on the future of Copyright Licensing, leaving that to other participants. The same holds true for this Article, which adheres to the topics addressed in my presentation. Thus, as the Symposium and the public look to potential licensing solutions that may emerge amidst the development of Artificial Intelligence products, my hope is to offer a brief, and high-level, background on how the United States has approached statutory licensing in the copyright realm. In doing so, I often look to the Register of Copyright’s 2015/2016 study, Copyright and the Music Marketplace, and recommend that study as a far more comprehensive portrait of the music licensing landscape at it existed at the time—prior to the enactment of the Music Modernization Act in 2018. Additional Copyright Office publications are available with more comprehensive information regarding the statutory licenses addressed herein
Operational Considerations for Collective Licensing Frameworks in the Music Publishing Industry
Full text linkA large part of my work is to negotiate and issue blanket music publishing licenses that cover the availability for use of full catalogs of music on behalf of the songwriters and rightsholders my company represents. It should not come as a surprise if I were to say that licensing negotiations often center around what is the appropriate value for the use of music (i.e., ample consideration for the rights granted under contract), and that the economics of a deal take the spotlight. After all, the goal is to get music professionals paid for their work.
However, equally important to the success of a deal, and therefore a key component of negotiating a blanket license, is operational—how is the use of music managed, and what are the responsibilities of each of the contracting parties to administer the license and pay the underlying rightsholders. Administering an individual synch license is straightforward—the licensee knows what music will be used and how and relays that to licensor, licensor issues the license, collects payment, and administers the royalties. The thought exercise becomes more complicated with digital service providers (DSPs) whose services and platforms host and make available seemingly limitless quantities of music, where the volume of usage is high or the extent of usage unknowable (or both)
Can the NFL’s Rooney Rule Be Revised?
Full text linkBrian Flores, who led the Miami Dolphins to two winning seasons as head coach, was about to interview for the New York Giants’ head coaching position when he received a suspicious text message. “Sounds like you have landed – congrats!!” from the legendary NFL head coach Bill Belichick. He added, “I hear from Buffalo and NYG (Giants) that you are their guy. . . . Hope it works out if you want it to!!” (Schrotenboer). Flores had not been interviewed yet, so he was confused and reached out for clarification. Belichick admitted he meant to congratulate a different Brian, Brian Daboll, a white coach who was eventually hired by the Giants. Since the Giants had already decided who to hire before interviewing Flores, who is Black, the upcoming interview was a sham interview designed to satisfy the NFL’s Rooney Rule (Harper). “I’ve worked so hard to get to where I am in football to become a head coach, for 18 years in this league, and to go on what was a sham interview,” Flores said, “I was hurt” (Fieldstadt). In January 2022, Flores filed a lawsuit against the NFL alleging racial discrimination in hiring practices, drawing significant attention to the Rooney Rule’s failure almost twenty years after its implementation (Sheinin et al.).
The Rooney Rule, established in 2003, requires NFL teams to interview at least one minority candidate for every head coaching vacancy before making a hire (“Rooney Rule”). This was set in response to a drastically low number of Black head coaches; only three out of thirty-two were Black, while almost seventy percent of NFL players were Black. Despite many qualified minority candidates, even the most successful assistant coaches were unable to land head coaching positions (Garcia-Roberts). In the years following the Rooney Rule’s adoption, there was an immediate improvement, as the number of Black head coaches jumped to seven by 2006 (Sheinin et al.). However, the improvement leveled off. Today, there are only three Black head coaches in the NFL, demonstrating that the Rooney Rule did not meet its goal of increasing the number of minority head coaches long-term. From 2012 to 2022, according to the 2022 NFL Diversity and Inclusion Report, there were fifty-eight white head coaches hired and thirteen Black head coaches hired (Harrison and Bukstein 9). Despite the NFL’s strong Black culture, reinforced by the fifty-eight percent of players nowadays identifying as Black (“Key Findings”), why do Black coaches continuously fail to land and retain head coaching jobs, even with increased interviewing opportunities from the Rooney Rule?
To understand the failure of the Rooney Rule, it’s important to examine the main problems that Black coaches face. Head coaches are hired by team owners and their executives who are predominantly white. Out of the NFL’s thirty-two teams, there are only two non-white majority owners: a Pakistani American and an Asian American (Sheinin et al.). White owners tend to trust white coaches with the responsibility of leading the franchise to success and growth because of their feelings of similarity. For example, white owners frequently say white candidates remind them of themselves when justifying their hires (Sheinin et al.). On the other hand, Black coaches are unable to resonate with white owners as strongly in interviews, possibly because of cultural differences in mannerisms and expressions (Sheinin et al.). In this way, Black coaching candidates are judged beyond their leadership ability or game knowledge, and these biased mindsets are not addressed by simply requiring owners to interview more minority candidates with the Rooney Rule.
For owners intent on hiring head coaches who look like them, the Rooney Rule becomes a check-in-the-box exercise. The Rooney Rule was established with language that was “worded more like a gentlemen’s agreement than a contract”; the possibility of sham interviews was known from the start, but the league hoped the teams would be sincere about their interviews (Garcia-Roberts). However, the “football mentality” of circumventing rules and gaining advantages, prevalent throughout the NFL, conquered the Rooney Rule almost immediately after its passage. Two weeks after its implementation in 2003, Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones hired a white coach named Bill Parcels after a five-hour meeting on a private jet. To satisfy the Rooney Rule, Jones interviewed a Black coach on the phone shortly after (Garcia-Roberts). That same year, before the Detroit Lions hired a white coach named Steve Mariucci, no minority candidates agreed to interview because they all knew the Lions were going to hire Mariucci (Garcia-Roberts). Black candidates rightfully feared that their interviews could be shams, which was extremely demoralizing, as weeks of preparation were required for these pivotal meetings. Anthony Lynn, former head coach of the Los Angeles Chargers, received many more interview offers than he actually accepted because he said he “refused to meet ‘with an organization that had not already interviewed a minority because [he] did not want to be a token interview’” (Sheinin et al.). In some extreme cases, the Black candidates were directly told they were not being seriously considered. In 2004, Maurice Carthon was directly told by an Oakland Raiders senior personnel executive, “[y]ou know, you’re not going to get this job” (Sheinin et al.). In this way, the Rooney Rule negatively affected Black coaching candidates, as they were thrown into interviews where they stood no chance of being hired. The rule became a time waster that benefitted no one in the process.
However, even if owners’ biases were not a factor, this policy would still not be effective, as a research group at the University of Colorado’s Leeds School of Business showed that having one candidate of a certain race or gender in a hiring pool almost never leads to the minority being hired. In their study, they showed 144 undergraduate students profiles of three candidates with the same credentials for an athletic director job. When there were multiple white candidates and one Black candidate, the majority of participants recommended hiring a white candidate, but, when they presented one white candidate and multiple Black candidates, participants tended to recommend a Black candidate for the job. The research group also performed an observational study on various university finalist pools, ranging from three to eleven candidates. When there were two or more minorities in the finalist pool, the odds that a minority was hired were 193.72 times greater than if there was only one minority in the pool (Johnson et al.). These results suggest that the Rooney Rule was set up to fail because of its design, as giving one minority an interview has virtually no sway on the racial biases of team owners.
Even if the Rooney Rule effectively addressed the interviewing process, it would still only be half of the fight. It is equally, if not more, difficult for a head coach to keep his job than to get hired, and Black coaches who get the job still face discrimination. Black head coaches are held to a higher standard than white coaches; they are fired more quickly and are fired, on average, after having better seasons than fired white coaches. Since 1990, Black head coaches who lead their teams to a losing season are fired nine percent of the time, whereas white head coaches are fired four percent of the time for doing the same (“Key Findings”). When they win nine or more games in a season, which increased from a total of sixteen to seventeen games in 2021, Black head coaches are fired eight percent of the time while white head coaches are fired two percent of the time, showing that even success is often not enough for Black coaches to keep their jobs (Sheinin et al.). In a position where it takes time to fully bond with and earn the trust of players, assistant coaches, and other staff members, a lack of patience for success is especially detrimental to Black head coaches. These short leashes are contradictory to the time required to achieve success and further decrease their chances of becoming a long-term head coach. These racial biases faced by Black coaches extend past the interview process into an area unaddressed by the Rooney Rule, and this failure is largely responsible for the lack of Black head coaches in the NFL.
It is evident that the Rooney Rule fails to address the main problems facing Black coaches. But can the Rooney Rule be revised to make it more effective? Some individuals point to corporate hiring policies as a framework for revising the Rooney Rule. Across the board, creating diverse interview committees and committing to a diverse culture have been cited as factors for increased diversity in corporate settings (Reiser and Mackenzie). For example, Mozilla is committed to doubling the percentage of Black and Latinx representation with “dedicated and comprehensive recruiting, development and inclusion efforts” (Baker), and Google is working towards this goal by training their employees on racial consciousness (Langley). However, these strategies are not applicable to the NFL. Hiring efforts for head coach vacancies are typically led by white-dominated positions—owners, general managers, and/or team presidents—meaning there are few opportunities for diverse committees to impact the hiring decisions (Tomlinson). In addition, head coaches play a much greater role in the team’s success than an average corporate employee. Winning games is closely related to “[t]he financial success of the franchise” through fan attendance and television deals, so the NFL will never force teams to hire specific kinds of people for such pivotal positions (Tomlinson). Due to a team-centric power structure in the NFL, the NFL’s policies can only improve diversity if teams respond favorably to them, and history has shown that teams will find ways to circumvent them. Presently, the NFL requires at least two in-person interviews of minority candidates for head coaching jobs as well as for offensive and defensive coordinator positions, but the prospects of increased diversity still seem bleak since the Rooney Rule is still unable to change the biases of team owners (Garcia-Roberts). When trying to bring social change to an institution with a long history of bias, a single rule or policy is not enough to force large-scale change. However, a social movement involving players, coaches, and fans could create enough noise to make a meaningful difference.
To increase Black representation in head coaching, it is helpful to use past social breakthroughs as a model. In Does the Civil Rights Movement Model Still Work?, Nicole Austin-Hillery studies the Civil Rights Movement as a model for present-day applications of social change. She argues that a successful social movement relies on four key features: visionary leaders, legal support from the courts, support of the public, and an effective mass movement (Austin-Hillery 110). A movement to increase Black head coaches has the potential to have all four components. Brian Flores could be a visionary leader, the face of the movement, and a figure who is brave enough to risk his own career for social change. His lawsuit, if successful, could provide direct change through the courts and spark confidence in this movement—like how the Brown v. Board of Education court victory led to desegregation in more than just schools. This could also increase public awareness and support, which are critical, as the NFL is a product for fans. Finally, an effective mass movement would have to come from other coaches and executives of all backgrounds across the NFL who recognize the problem and use their unique platforms to advocate for change.
Some white head coaches have already been advocating for Black coaching candidates. In a meeting between NFL head coaches, executives, and owners just weeks after the Flores lawsuit, current white NFL head coaches broke a “vexing culture of silence” by giving impassioned speeches and challenging the status quo with their honesty (Brewer, “Voices”). Andy Reid, head coach of the recent Super Bowl champion Kansas City Chiefs, said, “I want to know about my guy. . . . About one-third of the teams in this room have interviewed him. I’ve had a few of my guys become head coaches, none of them more prepared than Eric Bieniemy” (Brewer, “Voices”) in reference to the Chiefs’ Black offensive coordinator who was passed over for multiple head coaching positions. More coaches of all races spoke, too, further demanding equality and increasing the discomfort in the room. It is yet to be seen whether this uncomfortably honest meeting will lead to real change. Numerous head coaching positions are expected to be vacant after this season, and the pool of qualified Black candidates continues to grow (Giambalvo).
During the 2016 season, the NFL released a video featuring prominent players from the past and present repeating the phrase “Football is America.” Filled with patriotic imagery and music, the video was supposed to reassert football as “America’s game” after Colin Kaepernick kneeling to the national anthem caused controversy that preseason (Brewer, “Football”). However, the video epitomized a common theme that stands today: the NFL’s shallow responses to social justice issues and false pioneering of support. In a game where predominantly Black players put their bodies and brains on the line every week for the profit of white owners, the teams and executives of the NFL must do more for them than flattering themselves with military symbolism and social justice hashtags. The NFL instituting the Rooney Rule in 2003 was an ambitious idea, but, after almost twenty years of waiting, seeing, and revising, it is time to recognize its failure. NFL owners, executives, and coaches engaging in a movement to increase the number of Black head coaches would be a powerful statement to make to America. If the NFL truly wants to be “America’s game,” it must use its platform to set an example for the nation beyond the gridiron.
WORKS CITED
Austin-Hillery, Nicole M. “Does the Civil Rights Movement Model Still Work?” Legal Change: Lessons from America’s Social Movements, edited by Jennifer Weiss-Wolf and Jeanine Plant-Chirlin, Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law, 2015, pp. 107–16.
Baker, Mitchell. “First Steps Toward Lasting Change.” Mozilla Blog, 18 June 2020, https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/first-steps-toward-lasting-change/.
Brewer, Jerry. “Football Is America. We Shouldn’t Be Satisfied with Either.” The Washington Post, 1 Dec. 2022, https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/interactive/2022/nfl-america-race-bias/.
———. “Voices for Change.” The Washington Post, 17 Oct. 2022, https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/interactive/2022/white-nfl-coaches-hiring-racism/.
Fieldstadt, Elisha. “Brian Flores Says His Giants Interview Was for Show to Satisfy ‘Rooney Rule.’” NBC News, 2 Feb. 2022, https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/brian-flores-says-giants-interview-was-show-satisfy-rooney-rule-rcna14529.
Garcia-Roberts, Gus. “The Failed NFL Diversity ‘Rule’ Corporate America Loves.” The Washington Post, 4 Oct. 2022, https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/interactive/2022/rooney-rule-nfl-black-coaches/.
Giambalvo, Emily. “How NFL Teams Use Black Coaches to Clean Up Their Messes.” The Washington Post, 26 Oct. 2022, https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/interactive/2022/interim-black-nfl-coaches/.
Harper, Shaun R. “Brian Flores’s Lawsuit Shows How Empty the NFL’s Anti-Racism Messaging Is.” The Washington Post, 8 Feb. 2022, https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2022/02/08/nfl-brian-flores-lawsuit-race/.
Harrison, C. Keith, and Scott Bukstein. 2022 NFL Diversity and Inclusion Report: Occupational Mobility Patterns, vol. 11, National Football League, 28 Feb. 2022, https://operations.nfl.com/media/ucri5co3/2022-nfl-diversity-inclusion-report.pdf.
Johnson, Stefanie K., et al. “If There’s Only One Woman in Your Candidate Pool, There’s Statistically No Chance She’ll Be Hired.” Harvard Business Review, 26 Apr. 2016. https://hbr.org/2016/04/if-theres-only-one-woman-in-your-candidate-pool-theres-statistically-no-chance-shell-be-hired.
“Key Findings from ‘Black Out,’ The Post’s Series on Black NFL Coaches.” The Washington Post, 21 Sept. 2022, https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/interactive/2022/takeaways-black-out-nfl/.
Langley, Hugh. “Google Pledges to Introduce ‘Racial Consciousness’ Training for Employees and Boost Diversity among Its Leadership Ranks.” Business Insider, 17 June 2020, https://www.businessinsider.com/google-promises-several-changes-improve-racial-diversity-across-the-company-2020-6.
Reiser, Julie Goldsmith, and Lori Nishiura Mackenzie. “Rooney Rule Regression: Takeaways for Corporate Board Diversity.” Bloomberg Law, 7 Mar. 2022, https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-report/rooney-rule-regression-takeaways-for-corporate-board-diversity.
Schrotenboer, Brent. “Brian Flores’ Suit against NFL Alleges Sham Interviews, Claims Dolphins’ Stephen Ross Asked Him to Tank.” USA Today, 1 Feb. 2022, https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2022/02/01/brian-flores-nfl-claims-sham-interviews-stephen-ross-dolphins-tank/9305491002/.
Sheinin, Dave, et al. “How the NFL Blocks Black Coaches.” The Washington Post, 21 Sept. 2022, https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/interactive/2022/nfl-black-head-coaches/.
“The Rooney Rule.” NFL Football Operations, National Football League, 2022, https://operations.nfl.com/inside-football-ops/inclusion/the-rooney-rule/.
Tomlinson, Sean. “The Terrifying Process of Hiring a New Head Coach in the NFL.” Bleacher Report, 3 Jan. 2017, https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2684789-the-terrifying-process-of-hiring-a-new-head-coach-in-the-nfl.
Air Conditioners: The Hottest Way to Stay Cool
Full text link"You’ll get death threats,” my writing partner joked as I shared my intention to argue against Columbia installing air conditioners in dorm rooms.
And I get it—the university recently announced plans to install air conditioners in all freshman dorm rooms, and, had this news come earlier this fall, I would’ve been ecstatic; after my first night in Wallach, I’d woken up feeling extremely sticky and gross, the suffocating heat and humidity of my room leaving me grumbling all day about the lack of air conditioning in dorms.
However, my grumbling quickly ceased when I discovered that the absence of air conditioners may actually have been a good thing. Air conditioners, it turns out, are extremely harmful to the environment.
Air conditioners depend on substances called refrigerants to facilitate their cooling effects, but these refrigerants are typically highly potent greenhouse gases that are prone to leaking into the environment. For example, R-410A is one of the most commonly used refrigerants, and it has a global warming effect that is two-thousand-times stronger than that of carbon dioxide.
Air conditioners are also highly energy intensive, requiring great amounts of electricity to function. Because electricity is typically generated from fossil fuels which emit greenhouse gases when burned, the energy demand of air conditioners becomes a major source of greenhouse gas emissions; in fact, approximately 117 million metric tons of carbon dioxide are released into the environment each year by the US alone as a result of air conditioner usage.
Thanks to the greenhouse effect, this means that the very devices we use to stay cool are contributing to the rapid warming of our planet. Then, as the planet gets hotter, and it becomes even more important to stay cool . . . well, you can see the problem; air conditioning is not a sustainable solution to heat.
So, if air conditioning isn’t the answer to staying cool, then what is? For starters, there are plenty of long-term, sustainable design features that Columbia could implement in dorm rooms that would decrease the need for air conditioning altogether.
For example, the school could install energy efficient windows, windows that are specifically designed to prevent heat from moving in and out of places. These windows typically make use of insulating frames, special low-emissivity coatings, and multiple panes separated by dense gases to block heat from entering and cold air from escaping. On window exteriors, installing shading devices such as solar screens or retractable awnings could block up to seventy-seven percent of the heat from the sun that would enter our rooms otherwise.
In addition to window upgrades, another sustainable cooling initiative that Columbia could undertake would be to build green roofs, which would involve planting a layer of vegetation to cover rooftops. Green roofs provide insulation for buildings, thereby reducing the amount of heat that travels inside. They also remove heat from the air through a process called evapotranspiration, which has the potential to reduce ambient temperatures by up to 5°F. And green roofs don’t require much maintenance once they’ve been established, so there’s really no reason not to build them.
Energy efficient windows and green roofs are both relatively quick upgrades that could be implemented over the summer while students are away from dorms. They’re also unobtrusive changes (compared to other solutions like passive solar design that would require more drastic, modernist renovations), so Columbia wouldn’t have to desecrate its beloved neoclassical architecture in order to apply them (did you know that Columbia once transplanted a whole building just to keep campus symmetrical?).
Us students come into the equation through using our voices to push for the university to adopt these sustainable cooling designs instead of installing more air conditioners in dorm rooms. We can also advocate for more responsible usage of the air conditioners that already exist on campus.
I’ve had to bring hoodies to lectures in Pupin, despite it being 90°F and sunny outside, because the building’s air conditioning is always blowing at full force. I’ve seen students layering on sweaters in preparation to enter Butler for the same reason. These environmentally reckless practices can be addressed through policy changes that we, as students, have the power to call for.
Asking the university to change its policies isn’t the only way for students to get involved, though. For example, if you’re an engineering student, you could work to revolutionize air conditioning by researching and designing systems that don’t rely on refrigerants to function. Or, if you’re an education student, you could help suggest revisions to the Frontiers of Science climate unit curriculum to teach students about concrete steps they can take to decrease their carbon footprint, such as being more conscientious about air conditioner usage.
These are just some preliminary suggestions—our campus is filled with some of our generation’s brightest minds, so why not use those minds to create a more sustainable future? There’s something that every one of us can contribute, even if that contribution starts out as simple as reaching for the fan instead of the air conditioner the next time things start to get hot (and hot, in NYC, things will get—anyone else remember the 60°F winter of 2023?). Though that may mean sleeping in a room that’s just a bit less hot rather than completely chilled, I’d say it’s a small price to pay for a healthier, cooler planet down the road—wouldn’t you?
WORKS CITED
“Air Conditioning.” Energy.gov, U.S. Department of Energy, https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/air-conditioning.
“All First-Year Residence Halls to Have Air Conditioning Effective Fall 2023.” Columbia Housing, Columbia U, 2 May 2023, https://www.housing.columbia.edu/news/all-first-year-residence-halls-have-air-conditioning-effective-fall-2023.
Bertrand, Savannah. “Fact Sheet: Climate, Environmental, and Health Impacts of Fossil Fuels (2021).” Environmental and Energy Study Institute, 17 Dec. 2021, https://www.eesi.org/papers/view/fact-sheet-climate-environmental-and-health-impacts-of-fossil-fuels-2021.
“Climate Change Effects and Impacts.” Department of Environmental Conservation, https://www.dec.ny.gov/energy/94702.html.
“Energy Efficient Window Coverings.” Office of Energy Saver, U.S. Department of Energy, https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/energy-efficient-window-coverings.
Evans, Paul. “How Do Refrigerants Work?” TheEngineeringMindset.com, 20 Sept. 2017, https://theengineeringmindset.com/how-do-refrigerants-work/.
“Green Roofs.” U.S. General Services Administration, 4 June 2021, https://www.gsa.gov/governmentwide-initiatives/federal-highperformance-green-buildings/resource-library/integrative-strategies/green-roofs.
Gromicko, Nick. “Window Gas Fills: What Inspectors and Consumers Should Know.” International Association of Certified Home Inspectors https://www.nachi.org/window-gas-fills.htm.
Hess, Brad. “HFC Refrigerants Used in Commercial Air Conditioning.” AC & Heating Connect, Copeland LP, 16 Apr. 2021, https://www.ac-heatingconnect.com/facility-managers/hfc-refrigerants-used-commercial-air-conditioning/.
“A Little House with a Long History” News from Columbia's Rare Book & Manuscript Library, Columbia U Libraries Blogs, https://blogs.cul.columbia.edu/rbml/2021/09/15/a-little-house-with-a-long-history/.
“Passive Solar Design.” Sustainability, Williams College, https://sustainability.williams.edu/green-building-basics/passive-solar-design/.
“Refrigeration and Airconditioning - Consumers.” Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water, 18 Oct. 2021, https://www.dcceew.gov.au/environment/protection/ozone/rac/consumers.
Smith, Adam. “Air Conditioner Vs. Fan: Electricity Usage.” EcoEnergyGeek, 20 Apr. 2022, https://www.ecoenergygeek.com/air-conditioner-vs-fan-electricity-usage/.
“Using Green Roofs to Reduce Heat Islands.” United States Environmental Protection Agency, 13 July 2022, https://www.epa.gov/heatislands/using-green-roofs-reduce-heat-islands.
“Using Trees and Vegetation to Reduce Heat Islands.” United States Environmental Protection Agency, 31 Oct. 2023, https://www.epa.gov/heatislands/using-trees-and-vegetation-reduce-heat-islands.
“What Is the Greenhouse Effect?” The National Aeronautics and Space Administration, https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/19/what-is-the-greenhouse-effect/.
“What Is U.S. Electricity Generation by Energy Source?” U.S. Energy Information Administration, 29 Feb. 2024, https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3.
“Window Types and Technologies.” Office of Energy Saver, U.S. Department of Energy, https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/window-types-and-technologies
Polyrhythmic Cognition and Metric Spaces: A Compositional Framework
No full textThis paper introduces a novel approach to rhythm-based contemporary music composition. I propose that recent insights into the cognitive limits of rhythm and meter can be translated into a compositional framework that considers not only the structural and abstract properties of rhythm structures, but also their perceptual impact on an audience. This method enables the preservation of a high degree of structural complexity while enhancing its perceptual effectiveness and minimizing notational intricacy. The approach is facilitated by the use of OpenMusic, a computer-assisted composition software, alongside a visual representation of metric modulation networks that I call a rhythm lattice. To illustrate this approach, I present two examples from my recent chamber music works.
Notes on Contributor
Louis-Michel Tougas is a composer, percussionist, and producer based in Montréal, Québec. His doctoral research at McGill University explores the cognition of polyrhythm and the role of timbre as a form-bearing dimension of music perception. He has taught computer-assisted composition and 20th-century compositional techniques at McGill, and holds degrees in composition and analysis from the Conservatoire de musique de Montréal and the Hochschule für Musik Stuttgart. His music has been performed internationally by ensembles including Talea, the Bozzini Quartet, Ascolta, Quasar Saxophone Quartet, Ensemble Éclat, and Quatuor Mémoire
Ecopedagogy as a Lever for Climate Justice Towards a Just Transition
Full text linkThe article explores critical learning pedagogies focusing on ecopedagogy and emphasizing the importance of adopting a Freirean approach to learning as a lifelong commitment to promoting civically engaged and responsible climate action. It moves beyond the conventional standardised methods of environmental education taught in formal institutions with structured syllabi and courses. The article highlights ecopedagogy as a learning philosophy integrated through grassroots actions. We discuss selected global issues, threatening biological, social, and environmental marginalization, as case studies to inform the article’s dialogue. We examine the definition and interpretation of ecopedagogy in the context of Paulo Freire's vision. We conceptualize ecopedagogy as a pathway to achieving a Just Transition, described as a framework that ensures workers and communities are not left behind as economies shift to sustainable practices. It focuses on fair wages, new job opportunities, and social support for those affected by changes like the move away from fossil fuels. The article proposes a framework that connects ecopedagogy with Just Transition through humanization and critical consciousness. To inform the non-existence of a uniform vision for what just transition entails (Cha & Pastor, 2022), we provide practical applications of this framework in policy and practice, offering recommendations for reconstructing education by implementing ecopedagogy in community-based settings to reconstruct policy aligned to Just Transition
