Missing from the Institute-Wide Planning Task Force Report: Cuts to the Administration
On Sept. 21, I attended the second forum for the Planning Task Force. While I am not against everything in the Task Force Report, it is appalling that the report has sections on cutting down the very nature and purpose of the Institute — academics and research — without any clear and specific attempt at cutting down the costs of having a workforce larger than the student body. At the forum, I mentioned that the Task Force report did not include a section specifically reducing the administration and its overhead. However, it does have a section on reducing academic costs and another section on reducing research costs. In the research section, it even goes so far as to suggest cutting the graduate student population (in other words, the main researchers) by up to 1,000 students. I received no answer to my comments from any Task Force member or any other administrator at the Forum; only repeated information or attempts to “correct” my statement.
Public Education Reforms: What America Needs to Do
Summer vacation. Lectures. Math, Science, English, and History as discrete subjects. All things of the past. Today, more and more schools are shifting into the realm of project-based learning, interdisciplinary instruction, and, to the sound of millions of children wailing, longer school days and years. Let’s look at the facts: According to the OECD’s (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) Program for International Student Assessment in 2003, American “15 year olds ranked 24th of 38 in mathematics, 19th of 38 in science, 12th of 38 in reading, and 26th of 38 in problem solving. In the 2006 assessment, the U.S. ranked 35th out of 57 in mathematics and 29th out of 57 in science.”
Corrections
An article printed on Friday, September 25 incorrectly reported the number of pistol team members: The team has 34 members, including 12 new recruits and 22 returning members, not 22 members total.
Letters to the Editor
The article “Proposed Minor Asks: How Does Technology Alter the Environment?” (September 29, 2009 of The Tech) leaves readers with the impression that the new undergraduate Energy Studies Minor emphasizes traditional forms of energy supply and treats renewable energy, energy efficiency, and environmental impact as marginal concerns. This portrayal is not accurate.
MIT Alum Clears the Air about High Frequency Trading
While the national media has focused much attention on the field of high-frequency trading (HFT), there continues to be a great amount of confusion surrounding the practice. Indeed <i>The Tech</i> recently ran a <i>New York Times</i> article erroneously headlined “SEC Seeks To Ban High-Frequency Trading,” which was quickly corrected to “SEC Seeks To Ban Flash Orders.” As a recent MIT graduate working for Jump Trading, a major player in the HFT world, I wish to share my first-hand exposure to the industry and clear the air surrounding some of the claims the media has brought up. In this article I discuss what high frequency trading is, the role of flash orders, and the false perception that HFT firms have an unfair advantage over the rest of the market.
Letters to the Editor
I appreciate the interest and the concern expressed recently regarding the Admissions Office’s decision to change our freshman application essay requirements by replacing one 500 word essay with three 200–250 word short answer questions. I thought it might be helpful to offer our thinking in making this change.
‘Boston Globe’ Discovers 2007 MIT Project
When science reporters write about technology that isn’t really new, they should say so up front.
In Defense of the Art of the Pen
Both articles I’ve read about the change to the admissions essays have been so wishy-washy I find myself wondering if John Kerry is a ghost writer for <i>The Tech</i>. In an age where e-mails are being replaced by texts, magazines are being replaced by blogs, and blogs are being replaced by Twitter, MIT seems to have hopped on the shortening bandwagon with their recent decision to eliminate the long admission essay — and the biography-loving, multisyllabic-word-using, still-writes-with-pen-and-paper writer in me screams in indignation.
To Bomb Or Not To Bomb
Once again, tensions in the Middle East are running high. Many of the controversies swirl around Iran, which has made headlines recently for a variety of reasons — none of them positive.
UA Update
The voting period for the UA Senate, 2013 Class Council, 2011 Class Council Treasurer Elections has changed. Electronic voting at <i>vote.mit.edu</i> now begins tomorrow at 12:01 a.m. and ends on Thursday, October 1 at 11:59 p.m. Paper ballots will still be available in Lobby 10 on Friday, October 2 from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. The results will be posted on Saturday, October 3. Any questions should be directed to <i>ua-elect@mit.edu</i>.
Corrections
A front page “In Short” item in Tuesday’s <i>Tech</i> about a talk to be given by Noam Chomsky gave the wrong date for the event. The talk will happen on Tuesday, September 29, not Tuesday, September 22.
Dropping the Long Essay: Change for the Better?
MIT Admissions’s recent decision to drop the long essay in favor of three short ones on the 2009–2010 application is something of a mixed bag. Like Admissions says, it could give MIT a more multifaceted and genuine picture of potential students. But at the same time, it may deny students the opportunity to write beyond a short-essay prompt and beyond a 200 word limit. Both options have their merits, and clearly, it remains to be seen how effective the new application will be.
Letters to the Editor
As a campus group that spends a great deal of time and energy considering the challenges of how we eat (as a global population, as a city, and as a campus), we were struck by the stark juxtaposition in Tuesday, September 15th’s paper between an article about the Clover food truck and a McDonald’s advertisement. Beyond the deep irony of placing an article about a food truck that provides our campus with fresh and healthy lunches next to an advertisement for the very symbol of the food system that we are working to improve, we see a host of challenges.
Corrections
Because of an erroneous headline provided by the New York Times News Service, a headline in the World and Nation section of Friday’s <i>Tech</i> incorrectly summarized the article that accompanied it. The article was about the Securities and Exchange Commission seeking to ban flash orders, a practice often associated with high-frequency trading, not high-frequency trading in general.
The Good, the Bad, and the Clever of The MIT Budget Task Force Report
As many are aware, MIT commissioned a task force to investigate how spending can be cut in response to last year’s global economic meltdown. In addition to the cuts already made, the Task Force has looked at a wide variety of ways for saving MIT even more money. Some of these ideas are common sense, some are quite clever, but there are one or two that are just plain bad. Not even moderately bad. Awful bad. Dining-system-reform-from-bad-to-worse bad.
Corrections
An article on Friday, Sept. 4 about MIT professors working in Washington provided incorrect information about Professor Deborah J. Lucas and her work, and omitted a word from a quotation. Lucas is a full tenured professor of finance at MIT in Sloan School of Management, she is not a visiting professor. Lucas’s work at the Congressional Budget Office does not involve providing budget estimates, but rather refining the methodologies used to produce those estimates. Lucas said she had noted in 2001 insufficient attention to “federal financial obligations,” not to “federal obligations.”
UA Update
The first Undergraduate Association Executive Meeting for the 2009–2010 academic year was held on Wednesday, September 9. Key issues that the UA will be tackling this fall were outlined. These issues included the Institute-wide Planning Task Force recommendations; communication with students, faculty, administrators, and alumni; and possible dining changes. The Institute-wide Planning Task Force’s preliminary report can be found at <i>http://ideabank.mit.edu</i>, and the UA welcomes your feedback (e-mail <i>ua@mit.edu</i>). Full minutes are available at <i>http://ua.mit.edu/exec</i>.
Daily Confusion: The Central Issues
The striking thing about the letters to the editor regarding vulgar items published by <i>The Tech</i> in the Daily Confusion (Aug. 31) is that nearly all evince fundamental misunderstandings of, variously, newspapers, editorial content, advertising content, editorial discretion, censorship, free speech, and harassment. <i>The Tech</i> should not have published the vulgar items because as the Editors’ Note (Sept. 11) declares, they violated <i>The Tech</i>’s internal standards for appropriate content. But <i>The Tech</i>’s policies are the only legitimate issue here. Much of what the letters raise, on both sides of the debate, is mistaken and obfuscatory.