|
HomePage |
|
|
|
|
From The Faculty Chair
September 11th has changed our world in ways that are continuing to unfold. In the days to come at MIT, we will face a number of pressing challenges due to the events of September 11th. These challenges will test some of the core principles and values that we hold dear. In some instances we’ll find that key principles are in conflict. As a faculty we need to work with the administration and student body to decide how to address these issues and how to find the right balance between conflicting viewpoints. In the following I’d like to outline a few of these issues that threaten our commitment to openness within our environment. I invite your input and advice.
Open Expression: We cherish the principle of free speech. We also have an extremely diverse campus community and a strong commitment to creating and maintaining an inclusive environment, free of hostility in any shape or form. One’s right to free speech can lead to tremendous discomfort for others in our community. Where do we draw the line?
This is an age-old question, but one that is likely to become increasingly relevant in the days ahead. As the war against terrorism proceeds, many in our community will have a need and desire to express their views and emotions. Much like the Vietnam War, we might expect some level of divisiveness on campus, as the war escalates and various interest groups stake out their positions. How do we provide forums, and other outlets, for members of our community to express and demonstrate their views in peaceful, non-destructive ways? How do we do this in a way that preserves each individual’s right to free speech? And how do we assure tolerance for differing viewpoints, and prevent any hint of hateful speech, targeted at individuals or ethnic groups?
Open Access: We live and work in a remarkably open campus, in which one is free to come and go with minimal restrictions and limitations. There is free access to most academic and administrative buildings, many of which are open 24 hours a day. For some facilities and events, there are nominal restrictions limiting access to the MIT community; yet, the enforcement of these restrictions is often not very apparent nor visible. Delivery trucks have relatively free run of the campus. Where we do have a need for increased security, we tend to make it not very visible, by design, so as to maintain the illusion of an open campus.
Similarly, there is fairly open access to a wealth of information available at MIT. Our libraries are generally open to the public, many seminars and colloquia are open to the community, and there are minimal restrictions on access to much of the information available from our Websites, posted both by the Institute and by individuals.
In light of the recent events, might MIT be a possible target for a terrorist attack? Might we be an unwitting source for material or information that could be used by terrorists? Certainly the level of fear and concern about our safety has risen to a point where some action is needed. But what amount of heightened security will the MIT community tolerate in exchange for increased safety? Should we lock up the buildings? Should we restrict delivery trucks? Should we require identification cards for access to buildings and events? Should we put protective restrictions on our Web pages?
Open Research: As do most research universities, MIT is committed to conducting open research, and its dissemination through the appropriate scholarly channels. Indeed, the MIT Policies and Procedures, section 14.2, states, "Openness requires that as a general policy MIT not undertake, on the campus, classified research or research whose results may not be published without prior permission…." The MIT Policies and Procedures (section 14.2) goes on to say, "Openness also requires that, once they are at MIT, foreign faculty, students, and scholars not be singled out for restriction in their access to MIT’s educational and research activities."
Yet MIT also has a strong commitment to national service. There undoubtedly will be calls from our government to our faculty and our research labs to help discover, develop and deploy technology to help combat various forms of terrorism. Some of these requests may entail classified research and/or impose other restrictions on the conduct of the research. The MIT Policies and Procedures (section 14.2) provides some leeway for exceptions to the restriction on classified research when judged to be in the national interest, e.g., " …where the immediate distribution of research results would not be in the best interests of society." How do we as an institution decide what types of "closed" research to conduct on campus, if any? How do we segregate this research, both physically and intellectually, from our normal fare? How do we trade off the needs of our nation with our commitment to open research and the free dissemination of knowledge? What principles or guidelines should we apply to make these judgments?
I have laid out a series of questions that I expect we will see as we move forward in this difficult and uncertain time. All of these questions focus around the current way we conduct our business at MIT, namely in an environment that is open, inclusive, and transparent. For sure I don’t have the answers. In my role as faculty chair, I’ll work to assure that the faculty has a strong voice in addressing these questions in whatever form they might arise. Indeed, the answers to these questions must come from the faculty, who need to work with the administration and the student body to find the right path forward for MIT.
|
HomePage |
|
|
|
|