"Working together on these initiatives will strengthen the Institute’s approach to preventing sexual harassment in any MIT learning or working environment."
The changes reflect a misdiagnosis of the issues that affect food affordability and accessibility on campus. Rather than assessing students’ eating habits directly, DSL administrators are using meal swipes as a proxy for meal consumption on campus.
To ensure MIT's efforts are effective at preventing gender-based violence on postdocs, we need to both regularly assess the experiences of postdocs through surveys and publicly disclose the prevalence of reported incidents and the outcomes of investigations, both of which MIT already does for students.
It has been five years since MIT first conducted a campus-wide survey on attitudes towards sexual assault and misconduct, so some students may not know or remember how MIT responded to its past findings. The 2014 Campus Attitudes on Sexual Assault Survey (CASA) results offered a great starting point for making data-driven decisions about policies, education, and outreach efforts on campus, including increased transparency and support for students.
Nineteen democrats are running for president in 2020, and more could still enter the race. This presents a wonderful tradeoff. We need options if we’re going to elect the best person. However, too many options causes choice paralysis. As a consequence, most of us will neglect to choose who we vote for until there are fewer options.
We agree that the foundation for good relations is hearing each other out, understanding others’ perspectives, and trusting that we all want what is best for our community. We know that reaching consensus isn’t easy, and that top-down, one-size-fits-all solutions don’t work well. The DSL keeps these realities in mind when we work with students on projects like designing the New Vassar Street residence hall or improving the room-assignment and move-in processes. Every project is different, but our approach is to listen to students’ ideas and concerns, and we ask that they listen to ours.
A look into how the DSL failed to uphold its promises on the New Vassar dorm.
What the MIT administration, faculty, and students can do to address the ethical concerns of the College of Computing.
Amidst the growing number of housing controversies that seem to jeopardize student culture without regard for student opinion, some students have been trying to take matters into their own hands to get the administration’s attention. Among these plans was a boycott of CPW to protest the new “design exercise,” which imposes restrictions on mutual selection and allows squatting for freshmen during the rooming process. While it is frustrating that the administration seems to hold little regard for student input, the CPW boycott and the narrative around housing changes have been binary and ineffective for all parties. To shed some light on the issue, I’ll share some of my experiences with REX, thoughts on the process, and suggestions for the administration and ourselves to sow a better conversation around housing changes.
Newly appointed College of Computing dean, Dan Huttenlocher, is on Amazon's board. Will this conflict with the CoC's goal of teaching its students "ethics" in computing?
It disturbs me that the strong language of announcements about the College of Computing, like “the need for bold action, at scale and with speed,” appears to contradict what I hear from graduate students in EECS whose department and/or advisors assure them nothing will change.
These are challenging and difficult issues but MIT's decision — in the ultimate analysis — will serve us all well. MIT will and should remain an inclusive place.
Our goal is to discover the bad ideas and replace them with better ones. You want this to happen in yourself and in other people, which can only occur when those different ideas meet.
The recommendations made by Congress are not ultimately out of place. Their premise is to limit the devastation occurring in Yemen and to rebuke the actions of the Saudi Arabian crown prince; however, they will soon find that these goals may unfortunately act in opposition to one another.
MIT India Conference faculty advisor S.P. Kothari responds to a guest column, "Shunned by Harvard, feted by MIT." He explains the reasoning behind allowing Dr. Swamy to speak.
Chancellor Barnhart and Provost Schmidt respond to a guest column, "Shunned by Harvard, feted by MIT." They argue that freedom of expression is one of the institute's central values.