What are the things that we learned how to do during the pandemic that faculty and instructors across MIT are now, already, building into their on-campus teaching? The Ad Hoc Committee on Leveraging Best Practices from Remote Teaching for On-Campus Education has asked this question broadly across MIT.
This page includes: (1) reports generated by the Faculty Policy Committee and any subcommittees it charges; (2) reports by groups charged by the Chair of the Faculty (perhaps in collaboration with others); (3) some key reports from Standing Committees of the Faculty – these reports and related links are also found on the web pages of these committees; and (4) reports from Institute-wide initiatives or task forces on topics that are of direct relevance to faculty members – such as community, diversity, education, student life, and more. Please contact us if there is an additional report that you would like to see included here.
Vice Chancellor Ian Waitz convened the MIT Committee on Student Career Exploration and Services to review aspects and activities associated with student career exploration and services, and to identify changes that would enhance exploration of, and access to, a broad range of careers in a manner that best serves student needs.
Over the past two years, the Subcommittee on the HASS Requirement (SHR) conducted the first full review of how the Concentration Component of the HASS Requirement is functioning.
A five-School group of faculty convened by the Chair of the Faculty and the Dean for Undergraduate Education conducted an in-depth study of the meaning of the phrases “algorithmic reasoning” and “computational thinking” in the context of the education of MIT’s undergraduates across the Institute, including whether MIT should expect algorithmic and computational thinking of all of its graduates.
Chancellor Cynthia Barnhart and Medical Director Cecilia Stuopis charged the committee to review MIT's policies on hospitalization and medical leave for both undergraduate as well as graduate students.
This subcommittee examined the emergence of undergraduate and graduate sub-term subjects across the Institute through an understanding of: (1) the overall trends and current situation, (2) the motivating aspirations and goals, and (3) the pedagogical value and the effects on student learning and life of such offerings.
Chancellor Cynthia Barnhart charged the Committee on Academic Performance and the Office of the Dean for Undergraduate Education with reviewing MIT's withdrawal and readmission processes.
In this final report, the Task Force offers a series of recommendations for how MIT can continue to transform education for future generations of learners.
The MITx Subcommittee of the FPC considered how to (a) provide faculty governance and oversight, (b) assign credit for online courses while assuring academic integrity, and (c) preserve the quality of the MIT educational program. Recommendations for managing intersections between MITx and other online coursework and the residential program are summarized and elaborated on in the report.
This is the final report of MIT's Institute-wide Planning Task Force, which was charged with identifying opportunities for efficiency and cost reduction that do not sacrifice MIT's core mission. It represents a concerted, inclusive, sustained effort to strengthen MIT by improving operations; preserve MIT's financial stability; and enhance its global leadership in research and education.
The work of the CUP Subcommittee on the Educational Commons built on the final report of the Task Force on the Undergraduate Educational Commons, taking into account reactions to that report by the wider MIT community following its presentation to the President in October 2006.
MIT President Charles M. Vest charged the Task Force on the Undergraduate Educational Commons to address the goals, content, and structure of MIT’s undergraduate education.
This committee was charged by Chancellor Phillip Clay and Chair of the Faculty Rafael Bras to: assess the Committee on Discipline and the Office of the Dean for Student Life procedures and processes and identify places where changes are needed to make them consistent, transparent, and fair; set standards and outline procedures for specific types of cases; recommend legislative changes to implement their recommendations
The Institute Faculty at its meeting of May 15, 2002 requested that CUP and CSL undertake a joint effort to consider advising and mentoring at MIT and to make recommendations to the faculty.
In the Fall of 1999, the Committee on the Undergraduate Program formed a subcommittee to review MIT’s policies and practices concerning freshman Pass/No Record grading and advanced placement credit. This is the final report that the CUP submitted to the MIT Faculty.
This report, from the CUP Subcommittee on the Communication Requirement (SOCR) and its affiliated Implementation Working Group, describes the progress made in carrying out the charge of the CUP “to oversee and establish policy for the Communication Requirement” and to develop “an implementation plan that outlines the administrative processes for the Communication Requirement.”
In the Fall of 1999 the Committee on the Undergraduate Program formed a subcommittee and charged it with reviewing MIT’s policies concerning freshman Pass/No Record grading and advanced placement examinations.
At its meeting on April 17, 1997, the Faculty directed the Committee on the Undergraduate Program to conduct a series of experiments and pilot programs to help in the design of a new Communication Requirement. These experiments should be evaluated by a subcommittee of the CUP.
MIT's residential system should try to support three separate objectives: provide students with adequate, clean, comfortable housing and dining; create a comfortable, welcoming environment – in other words, a home; and promote community by stimulating interaction among students, faculty, staff, administration, and alumni/ae.
The Residence System Steering Committee was appointed by the Chancellor to consider the MIT Residence System in total, and to describe a residence system for MIT that maximizes the opportunity to contribute to the integrated educational experience of its residents.
The Faculty (through the Committee on the Undergraduate Program) and the administration (through the Office of the Dean of Students and Undergraduate Education) have established a committee of faculty to review the current educational commons, particularly the freshman educational program, and make recommendations about how it might be redesigned to be more effective.
MIT President Charles M. Vest appointed the Presidential Task Force on Student Life and Learning to undertake a comprehensive review of the Institute's educational mission and its implementation.
The Ad Hoc Working Group was asked by the President and the Dean for Undergraduate Education and Student Affairs to review a number of past reports of committees charged with evaluating different aspects of undergraduate life at MIT.
In the spring of 1989 the Faculty passed a motion endorsing the addition of biology to the Science Requirement. The Committee on the Science Requirement was formed to examine how the new biology requirement might be implemented and how the Science Requirement should be modified to accommodate it.
Provost John Deutch established a Faculty Study Group to advise the Institute Administration and Faculty on the general principles that should guide MITs international activities and relationships, and to suggest any revisions in policies and activities that should be considered.
The Ad Hoc Committee to Review the Creative Arts at MIT was created by Provost John Deutch in late September 1986. The Committee was charged to review and assess all of the creative arts activities at MIT and to make recommendations on their role, organization and support.
The Committee on Curriculum Content Planning was formed upon recommendation of the Committee on Educational Policy to make an intensive study of undergraduate education at MIT.
In January 1947, the Faculty appointed the Committee on Educational Survey to review the state of education at the Institute.