Over the course of my class Climate Change Science, Politics, and Policy, I did a lot of work with and became increasing better at integrative thinking. I became adept at taking what Professor MacAvoy taught us about the causes behind and progressions of climate change and applying them to what policy needed to be made in order to combat it, using the political structures and processes taught by Professors Jinnah and Eisenstadt. I also became aware of how current policy regarding climate change is severely insufficient compared to the real, scientific analysis that exists of how climate change has already affected the planet and how it will continue to do so. This was especially important knowledge during our mock UN climate summit debate, wherein we had to formulate policy that would be both effective in tackling the problem and agreeable to all parties involved. I used what I knew about how severe climate change has already progressed to create baselines for the policy I was hoping to pass during our debate: I knew about where the minimum carbon reduction pledge should be, and how much work had to be distributed among the nations involved. I drew this information from my new-found knowledge on climate change science, and wrangled it into political arrangements that I hoped would be suitable. This transfer of straight science into political action was an important usage of integrative learning that helped our debate move forward, and although we didn’t achieve as much in the mock negotiation as I’d hoped, we did make some headway on a policy that began to satisfy the scientific requirements of mitigating climate change.