|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Editorial
We're beginning to hit our stride. This issue of the Faculty Newsletter exemplifies almost everything we hoped to achieve when we started the Newsletter. We have an interview with an important new member of the administration regarding matters that will affect the Institute (p. 1): an informal, collegial conversation that presents new information and clearly invites further discussion. We have a very thoughtful analysis of the controversial Reengineering Project by someone who had a key overview of the whole project (p. 1). This will probably not be the last word on this topic.
The Faculty Chair (p. 4) has room for a discussion of the impacts of large-scale Partnership arrangements on the mission and culture of the Institute. He bruits a proposal of a new committee to structure and monitor future partnership agreements. The proposal is at an early enough stage that concerned faculty can bring their comments to the Faculty Policy Committee before the committee is charged and staffed. We've got a report by one of our colleagues (Richard Larson, in this case) on something he thinks will be of interest to us (p. 28). We have a student using the FNL as a medium to reach the faculty on an issue of interest to him (p. 32). At last, our Letters section (p. 30) is becoming seen as a useful forum for debate and "correction" on a smaller scale than article length, as well as an easy way to bring matters to broader attention. Where else can you gripe about the photocopiers in our libraries and have a reasonable chance to achieve at least sympathy, and possibly even improvement?
There's more in this issue and more that was squeezed out for lack of room. Teach Talk, a very popular series on the art of teaching, will reappear in the next issue. We can't predict the occasional essay, travel report, poem, or rant. We print them when we get them, and our colleagues are generally very appreciative.
There's also more than meets the eye, at least in hard copy. The FNL now appears on-line simultaneously with hard-copy distribution: http://web.mit.edu/fnl. The on-line issue often has expanded content, via links to original sources and data. We have also archived the FNL, with all issues back to September 1991 on-line. Issues dated May/June 1991 and earlier are available in hard-copy and soon to be on-line as well.
We have unfinished matters. We need to broaden, or at least turn over, membership of our Editorial Board while maintaining the open access voluntary nature of the Board. We have to find a way to attract more unsolicited articles. We'd really like to get a contributing artist or two. All in all, however, we think the work we put into the FNL is well worth the effort, and we think we have shown that our unique form of governance really works. Now we need to know if you agree. We're conducting a survey of the faculty, with responses solicited either by e-mail or on our Website: https://mit.edu/fnl/www/faculty_survey.html. A general e-mail distribution to the faculty will come your way in a few days. Please respond: it may be spam, but at least it's not about money or sex. Both the e-mail and Website will invite detailed comments. We have two goals for the survey. The first is to demonstrate, if we can, that the FNL makes a measurable contribution to the Institute. The second is to tap the faculty for good ideas.
Finally, we can not resist the temptation to remind you that the most certain way to change the Faculty Newsletter is to do it yourself. Contribute an article or join the Board. You'll be among friends.
Editorial Committee
|
|
|
|
|
|
|