|
HomePage |
|
|
|
|
Committee on Student Life
There is remarkable consensus, both inside and outside the Institute, that informal, outside-the-classroom contact between faculty and students enriches the education and personal growth of our students. Despite this consensus, there is evidence from across our campus that faculty are spending limited time in such interactions that often also lead to a sense of community. It is further noted that the Task Force on Student Life and Learning found that there are weaknesses in our common "MIT/campus-wide" community and that these present an obstacle to the overall educational process. With these items as background, the Committee on Student Life (CSL) began a process of consultation and dialogue to explore reasons for the weakness of the common community, for the limited participation of faculty in community activities particularly as related to student life, and to explore the relations thereof. In undertaking this effort, the CSL was mindful of the finding of the Task Force that promoting student and faculty participation in community activities is probably the most difficult of the many design problems that MIT faces.
The work included considerable internal dialogue, meeting with leaders from the undergraduate and graduate student communities, the faculty, the administration, and the staff, as well as consideration of current student life activities at the Institute, particularly as affiliated with the Office of the Dean for Student Life. Further consideration of this information resulted in identification of "community-building" activities in which faculty could and do participate. A compilation of suggestions from committee members led to a rich dialogue around the thoughts and issues embedded within these suggestions.
This overall process led to the identification of four key findings with regard to the issue of community at the Institute:
1. There is a lack of shared understanding of the meaning of "community" across the Institute;2. Differences in the models that individuals have of "community" lead to very different and potentially counter-constructive actions in acting as and in building our community;
3. There is wide disagreement as to whether contributing to the Institute community via participation in issues related to student life is an inherent part of being an MIT faculty member; and
4. There continues to be a distinct lack of career rewards for faculty contributions to the Institute community via participation in issues related to student life.
The Committee recommends that the first step in addressing these issues is to create a campus-wide forum through which all members of the Institute can engage in open dialogue to determine what it means to be part of a common MIT community and to develop ways to build that community with full faculty participation. The success of such a forum requires participation from all parts of the Institute – administration, faculty, staff, graduate students, and undergraduate students. Of particular note to faculty is working with students to define joint expectations in working towards and as community, and working with the administration to define expectations of the level of faculty involvement in community-building activities and associated rewards.
To help seed our Institute-wide dialogue, initial thoughts on these overall issues, including potential attributes of the Institute community, potential qualities of "Institute community-building" activities, and some possible activities of this nature, are conveyed in a white paper entitled "Community" written by the Committee on Student Life. This can be found at the faculty Website http://web.mit.edu/faculty/reports/csl.pdf. These thoughts are not meant to be definitive answers to the issues related to community-building and student life within our Institute, but are provided as stimuli to heighten awareness and to form the foundation for a rejuvenated dialogue across the entire Institute around these issues.
We hope that you as faculty at MIT will take ownership of these key items and engage in open dialogue with colleagues, students, and all members of our broad Institute community.
For the Committee on Student Life.
|
HomePage |
|
|
|
|