 Up third, we have Penny Kitzopoulos. She's a fourth-year PhD candidate in the Mechanical Engineering Department. In her talk titled, Designing Justice, she calls upon her fellow engineers to learn to design for all. Penny believes engineers should work for and with communities of all people to ensure that we have those communities' best interests at heart when making and creating our designs. She walks us through the design justice network principles to help us rethink our approach to design and put the people who are traditionally marginalized and forgotten at the center of our designs. Penny was born and raised in the island of Crete in Greece. And another interesting fact is that she travels so often in a very engineer-like way, she's created a list of her favorite airports on a five-point grading system. And Atlanta takes the gold. Please join me in welcoming Penny. Thank you, Chloe. And I know the Atlanta is a controversial opinion, so you can talk to me afterwards if you need the details. So I want to first start by asking you the following two questions. What are engineers and who do they work for? Are they scientists, creators, inventors, designers, designers, or all of the above? Would they work for the government, a business, a university, themselves, or once again, all of the above? I want to convince you that it doesn't really matter what our definition of an engineer is or who they may be employed by. What truly matters is that engineers work for and with communities of all people throughout their engineering tenure to ensure that their decisions, their designs, their architectures have those communities' best interests at heart. Now, you might stop me right here and say, well, Penny, this is not exactly a very fresh revelation. And to that I say, well, you may not be wrong. We are still a long way from fully realizing it. There are many examples within our everyday life. Many already documented by the big activists, authors, professors, et cetera, all of our era that show how some engineering designs, although perhaps intended for a good cause, contribute to the systematic oppression and marginalization of all people who do not fit the mold that society has deemed the normal. Let's consider the dreaded airport security. Many of us may dread it for nuisance reasons. I know I do. Just another hassle to go through in order to get to our final destinations. But for many others, it is more than just the simple inconvenience. Black women are frequently singled out for hair pat downs. And while it may be easy to place all the blame to the TSA agents, it is the full body scanner machines that easily get triggered by certain hairstyles. And there are many more examples using these machines alone that show how disproportionately only certain people are affected, such as trans individuals, people with disabilities, and people who wear head wraps for religious reasons. But what can we, the engineers do to put an end to this perpetual injustice? Like it for us, I'm not the first and the last person to ask this question. Back in 2015, at the Allied Media Conference, not too far from here, in Detroit, the design justice principles were established. At this conference, community organizers, designers, artists, technologists all came together and asked that very same question, leading to the creation of the design justice network. The design justice principles were then inscribed in an online living document under 10 core principles. But for tonight, I want to just specifically focus on three. And so for our first one, we have, we center and prioritize the community who is directly impacted by our design. I want to examine this principle using the New Orleans levees and flood walls that failed during the Hurricane Katrina disaster. New Orleans uses a system of levees and flood walls administered by the US Army Corps of Engineers to protect the city from coastal and riverine floods. During Hurricane Katrina, which had weakened to category three, by the time we made landfall in Louisiana, several levees failed. Some at far below water levels that they had been built to withstand. The US Army Corps of Engineers took some responsibility for the flooding, saying that the reason the levees failed was because they were built in a disjointed fashion and using outdated data. One of the key points mentioned in reports on the aftermath was that engineers did not take into account the soil quality underneath New Orleans on which the levees and flood walls were built. Now, there's not truly a way to say what could have happened if this principle was used. Perhaps if the engineers had involved the community in the design process, the course of the disastrous event may have been different. But what I do know is that people know the land they live on. Some New Orleans residents may have even known the quality of the soil underneath their houses through gardening or other means. If the engineers had simply asked the community to be directly involved, perhaps their use of outdated data in their modeling could have been fixed long before the hurricane struck. And yes, that would have meant that more work needed to be done. Engineers would have needed to put their egos aside, try or it has the community safety, and accept and admit that their designs were simply not perfect. And for our second principle, we have everyone as an expert based on their own lived experiences and can contribute to a design process. For this principle, I want to use my own research as an example. I'm working on creating a completely planable sensor that can interface with hearing aids and cochlear implants to replace their external microphones. There are many benefits to a completely planable auditory prosthesis, some being safety, ease of use, and of course, aesthetics. During my now four-something years working in this project, I've had the opportunity to talk to physicians, scientists, audiologists, and I've also had the chance to meet some current cochlear implant and hearing aid users. With perhaps an audible mention being my own grandpa, who actually refused to accept that he even needed a hearing aid because it would have made him look too old. But apart from all of that, as I was writing the speech, I started reflecting on the fact that I really should do more to include people with these lived experiences in my own research. As of course, who else is better to include than the people who currently rely on hearing aids and cochlear implants, the people who can easily tell me those devices pitfalls and benefits, and the people who would eventually become the target users for my own designs. And for our last one for the night, before designing, we look at what already exists and we honor and uplift traditional indigenous and local knowledge and practices. Basically, there is no need to reinvent the wheel. Sometimes it might be tempting to design something fancy, but if the community we are designing for already has a solution that meets their needs, then it might just be worth going to that community and asking them what works best for them and maybe how we can help uplift their current solution. As I said, we can always design something cool, but if the design is not helpful or useful, then what is really its purpose? Let's take a positive example for this last principle. Let's consider the utensils of people with Parkinson's disease use. Parkinson's disease causes motor symptoms. These can include tremors, stiffness, slowness of movement and poor balance and coordination. These symptoms can make it difficult for people with Parkinson's disease to carry out everyday tasks, such as holding a knife or a fork. The community has found that using weighted utensils help with the tremors and having a handle or a strap helps with a better grip. Some of the newer designs are building on those previous designs. Some are using smart technology in the handle that can distinguish between voluntary movement and hand tremors and can actually help counteract those hand tremors. All these specially designed items may help people with Parkinson's disease maintain their independence and improve their quality of life. Now, all these principles that I've described can actually be used in many other fields beyond just engineering. But as a mechanical engineer myself, I am curious how many engineers in the audience have actually been taught about these principles. Because in my experience, I didn't even get to learn of their existence until I was well into my graduate school education. In my opinion, anyone who is studying to become an engineer should learn of these principles starting from their undergraduate years. Incorporating the design justice principles in those early days fundamental courses would, one, stress their importance in the engineering field and, two, allow students time to learn how to use them effectively because it is much easier said than done, unfortunately. Just of science, mathematics and coding are fundamental pillars taught early in engineering. So, too, should justice, accessibility and community engagement be woven into the fabric of our educational system. Thank you.