|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When the editors of the Faculty Newsletter asked me if I wanted to write an article for the Newsletter as my first year as Dean for Undergraduate Education was nearing its end, I was first of all struck by the fact that indeed a year has passed since I agreed to take on this responsibility, and almost a year has passed since I started the job officially. So much has happened in my own education during that time, but of course it also seems to have passed so quickly!
Being Dean for Undergraduate Education at MIT would be a wonderful opportunity in any circumstance, but when I was considering the possibility last year it seemed to me that the next few years would be an especially important and exciting time in undergraduate education at this institution. With the guidance of the 1998 Report of the Task Force on Student Life and Learning and with important new resources (such as the d'Arbeloff Fund for Educational Innovation) to help make possible many of the changes described by the Task Force, we were already launched on an effort that many of us believe will allow us to offer an even better overall educational experience for our students. The Task Force report is the result of the hard work of a number of people around the Institute, but I believe it also represents a strong consensus in our community that we really do need to do a better job of improving and integrating student life and learning and of using new financial, technical, and human resources to accomplish these goals. It is this strong consensus that I sensed last year and which I believe has grown stronger as we see real progress in reaching the goals. There is every indication that the Task Force report will not suffer the same fate that some other insightful reports over the years have suffered, that of being relegated effectively to the shelf.
I had the major advantage in beginning this job that we were already heading in the right direction. Under the leadership of Roz Williams, previous Dean of Students and Undergraduate Education, and of several key faculty committees, many important changes were already underway. With the split of Roz's office into separate but coordinated Dean for Undergraduate Education and Dean for Student Life offices, the new Dean for Student Life, Larry Benedict, and I could concentrate on making the administrative aspects of our offices run as smoothly as possible while working together on new initiatives in student life and learning. Larry and I have certainly been kept busy (!), but we have also enjoyed working together and with many others around the Institute on some of these exciting projects. The support of the top administration at MIT for our efforts has been clear and unequivocal. Such support will in the end be critical to our success in reaching important goals.
As I indicated above, important initiatives in undergraduate education are already underway, some as Institute-wide efforts and some Department specific. These include implementation of the new Communications Requirement, which will go into effect with the Class of 2005; preparation for the changes in P/NR and the new exploratory subject option, which were voted in by the faculty in April and which are expected to go into effect with the Class of 2006; and the variety of exciting experiments and projects which are being made possible by the d'Arbeloff and iCampus funds and by alumni class funds. These experiments and projects currently run the range from those which promise to change the way we teach introductory science courses, to those which explore project-based learning as an important aspect of an undergraduate education, to exploration of how we may be able to improve our advising and mentoring of undergraduates. Important themes in these experiments include the role of active engagement of the students in the learning process and the importance of serious assessment and evaluation of educational changes. Those of us who have been involved in these initiatives find them very exciting, as they offer real promise for important and far-reaching improvements in the education we offer our students. Another very welcome new development is the opportunity for undergraduate exchanges with Cambridge University, as part of the CMI (Cambridge-MIT Institute) agreement. Next year we expect to have about 30 students each from Cambridge and MIT spending a year at the other institution. This number will likely continue to go up for the next several years as we find ways to reconcile curricular issues at both institutions. Many of us are excited by the prospect that study at Cambridge will be an important part of the undergraduate experience for many of our students.
While at first glance they may not seem directly related to undergraduate education, the recent changes in our student financial aid policies which were approved by the Corporation will in fact have important positive effects in this area. In particular the reduction in the required self-help level will not only keep us competitive in attracting the most qualified students, but will also significantly reduce the academic year pressure for many of our students.
As we all know, MIT can be a bewildering place for anyone who looks for clean organizational charts and clear areas of responsibility. The area of undergraduate education is certainly an example! Many people and offices around the Institute have important roles in this area, and we succeed only when we have good communication and shared goals. I have very much enjoyed working with the Schools and Departments, with the faculty officers and committees, and with individual faculty, staff, and students. The Committee on the Undergraduate Program in particular plays a key leadership role in shaping changes in this area. I believe that the Committee has done a wonderful job this year in leading some of the changes referred to previously and in working with my office to shape and implement future initiatives. We really are very fortunate to have the dedication of the faculty and others who serve on these committees.
What more do I see happening in the area of undergraduate education in the next several years, and what do I expect my office to spend resources and time on making happen? This is a question which I am asked in one form or another quite often these days; I suspect it was really the question in the minds of the editors of the Newsletter when they asked me to write this contribution. I would present the answer as three not-really-independent aspects:
Project-Based Learning
The experiment led this year by Kip Hodges (Mission 2004) was an extraordinary success, with enthusiastic and engaged students, faculty, and alumni mentors. It confirmed the opinions of many faculty that we would do well to try to include a significant project-based experience in the education of most if not all of our students, especially early in their time at MIT. This experience would be complementary to the introduction to science that we provide to students in their first year at MIT. I expect the next several years will see much experimenting with, and discussion of, this exciting possibility.
Improved Teaching and Learning Facilities
It is no secret that space is one of the most constraining features of many activities at MIT these days. That includes especially teaching and learning space. In many cases the Registrar's Office, which controls the classroom inventory, has difficulty renovating classrooms simply because it is difficult to take a classroom off line long enough to accomplish the needed renovations. When the Stata Center is complete the situation will improve significantly, but we will still have important needs for more such space, especially flexible space which can be used for studio-based courses, student design projects, etc. I expect to continue to work with many of you to bring about the needed enhancements in our teaching and learning facilities.
Faculty Involvement with Students Outside the Classroom
Many people over the years have recognized that improvements in student life and learning at MIT would be much easier to achieve if faculty had more time and opportunity to interact with undergraduates outside the traditional classroom. We do a considerable amount of this already, of course, especially in the UROP program. However, most of us have little involvement with the student life side, and our advising system has many flaws, as indicated by a recent student-led survey. Part of the difficulty is just available faculty time, as documented so well in the recent Task Force report. The opportunity for faculty involvement can be made easier by helping faculty to live closer to campus. A step in this direction will be the five faculty apartments in the new Simmons Hall, in addition to the usual Housemaster's apartment; other ways to encourage faculty to live near campus are under consideration by my office and others. It is clear that the incentives for faculty rewards must be consistent with what we expect from our faculty in terms of contributions to teaching, research, and community. I believe we have seen a significant change in the past two decades in the direction of placing more weight on teaching and community service. In any event we must be sure we give a consistent message, especially to our junior faculty colleagues, about our expectations and rewards.
Finally, I want to comment on one aspect of the relationship between faculty and students. One important lesson for me in the past year has been the simultaneous importance and difficulty of involving students in discussions of changes in student life and learning. The importance is clear; there are many examples of critical contributions by students to discussions of important changes. However, we can no more expect any student or group of students to fully represent the views of all students than we can expect a group of faculty to represent the views of all faculty members. While it is sometimes difficult to know the opinions of many of our students, we must have a variety of ways for students to be involved in designing and implementing changes, and we must involve them as early as possible. We will all benefit in the long run.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|