in this issue we offer “A Letter to the Class of 2016” and an editorialaddressing several issues of concern (below); “What I Learned as a DepartmentHead,” (page 4); Chair of the Faculty Krishna Rajagopal on “Innovations in theEducational Opportunities for MIT Students,” (page 8); and some results from the2016 Senior Survey (back page).

MITFacultyNewsletter

Vol. XXVIII No. 5May/June 2016

http://web.mit.edu/fnl

MassachusettsInstitute ofTechnology

continued on page 11

Interview with NewMIT Medical DirectorDr. Cecilia Stuopis

MIT’s EnvironmentalSolutions InitiativeSeeks DiversePerspectives for theNear and Long Term

continued on page 13

Greetings to you the graduates – andto your families!

WE JOI N WITH TH E THOUSAN D S offamily members and friends gathered forCommencement, in sharing the excite-ment of your graduation. MIT’s facultyboth respect and take pride in youraccomplishments as MIT’s new class of2016. Teaching and mentoring you hasbeen a source of deep satisfaction for us,and we have also learned and grown andreceived new insights in the process. Asyou take the next steps along career paths,your contributions to your communitiesand to humanity will be among the mostgratifying outcomes of our academiclabors.

We hope you will look back on youryears at the Institute with a positivefeeling, and sense that your presence con-tributed to enhancing the MIT environ-

EditorialA Letter to the Classof 2016; Diversity;Campus Planning;Thanks

continued on page 3

Dr. Cecilia Stuopis

John E. Fernández

T H E F O L LOW I N G I N T E R V I E W BY

the Faculty Newsletter (FNL) with MITMedical Director Dr. Cecilia Stuopis (CS)was held on April 11 of this year.

FNL: What do you see as the major chal-lenges at MIT Medical over the next fiveyears in your role as the new director?

CS: What I understand to be the challengesfor MIT Medical are the same challengesthat face health care organizations any-where. They’re around making sure that ourdepartment can provide the highest qualitycare, with the best patient experience, at thelowest possible cost, so we can provide high-value health care to our community. Healthcare ceases to be of high value when it’seither of low quality or of high cost. There’s asweet spot, somewhere in the middle, whereyou can get to both of those places.

I N MARCH 2014, PR E S I D E NT R E I F

announced the launch of theEnvironmental Solutions Initiative (ESI)with Prof. Susan Solomon as its foundingDirector. In little more than a year and ahalf Prof. Solomon set in motion the firstround of research seed grants and thestructure for an Environment andSustainability minor. On October 19,2015, Provost Marty Schmidt and VicePresident for Research Maria Zuberjointly announced my appointment tosucceed Prof. Solomon as Director of theESI. I am charged with the expansion ofthe ESI as a central element of MIT’sengagement in the environment.

Within a few days of my appointment,Executive Director Dr. Amanda Grahamand I embarked on a wide ranging listen-ing and learning tour and I read through400+ pages of white papers, proposals,

2

Vol. XXVIII No. 5 May/June 2016

Aron BernsteinPhysics

Robert BerwickElectrical Engineering & Computer Science

*Manduhai BuyandelgerAnthropology

Nazli ChoucriPolitical Science

*Christopher CumminsChemistry

*Woodie FlowersMechanical Engineering

Ernst G. FrankelMechanical Engineering

*Jonathan King (Chair) Biology

Helen Elaine LeeWriting and Humanistic Studies

*Stephen J. Lippard (Treasurer)Chemistry

Seth LloydMechanical Engineering

Fred MoavenzadehCivil & Environmental Engineering/Engineering Systems

Ruth Perry (Vice Chair)Literature Section

Nasser RabbatArchitecture

Patrick Henry WinstonElectrical Engineering & Computer Science

David LewisManaging Editor

*Editorial Subcommittee for this issue

AddressMIT Faculty NewsletterBldg. 10-335Cambridge, MA 02139

Websitehttp://web.mit.edu/fnl

Telephone 617-253-7303Fax 617-253-0458E-mail fnl@mit.edu

Subscriptions$15/year on campus$25/year off campus

01 MIT’s Environmental Solutions Initiative SeeksDiverse Perspectives for the Near and Long TermJohn E. Fernández

01 Interview with New MIT Medical DirectorDr. Cecilia Stuopis

Editorial 01 A Letter to the Class of 2016; Diversity; Campus Planning; Thanks

04 What I Learned as a Department HeadEdmund Bertschinger

From The 08 Innovations in the Educational Opportunities Faculty Chair for MIT Students

Krishna Rajagopal

M.I.T. Numbers 20 from the 2016 Senior Survey

contentsThe MIT FacultyNewsletterEditorial Board

Photo credits: Page1: Christopher Harting

MIT Faculty NewsletterMay/June 2016

3

ment and experience for the comingclasses. Note that by remaining active asalumni you can continue to influence theMIT environment. As you move on toother opportunities and challenges, MITand other universities are in the midst of avigorous and healthy reexamination ofhow and what and when we teach.

You will be entering a world where newforms of social communication, newneeds for research and scholarship, andglobal interconnectedness and interac-tions are the norm. Issues such as climatechange, nuclear disarmament, and reduc-ing global poverty, once in the distance,have now established themselves asrequiring the urgent attention of us all.Instabilities in nations that may have onceseemed very far away now emerge asproblems that the world – and this nation– cannot ignore.

During your years with us, we on thefaculty have watched the unfolding ofyour many talents and ambitions, yourresilience in the face of setbacks, yourthoughtful and quirky self-expression,your creative and entrepreneurial energy,and your myriad achievements. We hopethat as your various individual pathsunfold, you will put your powers to workon solving some of the problems that con-front us, and on making our society moreresponsibly productive and more sup-portive to those in need. On behalf of theentire faculty, we wish you vision,strength, commitment, success and muchhappiness in addressing these challenges.

The Editorial Board of the MIT Faculty Newsletter

Campus DiversityThe diversity of our community contin-ues to be a matter of great importance. Ithas been 12 years since the passing of aresolution that called for doubling thepercentage of URM (UnderrepresentedMinority) faculty and tripling the per-centage of URM graduate students. Weapplaud the members of our community

as well as the leaders for their persistenthard work in reaching MIT’s diversitygoals. The report delivered at theNovember Institute faculty meeting“Update on Faculty Diversity” by ProvostMartin Schmidt notes that MIT hasreached its initial goal in doubling the per-centage of URM faculty. However, this hasnot been uniform across departments andsome have a ways to go. Women andunderrepresented minorities remainunderrepresented on our faculty, and wesupport the call from, for example, MIT’sblack student groups [from “Report onthe Initiative for Faculty Race and Diversity”;web.mit.edu/provost/raceinitiative/report.pdf],to continue to press forward on thesefronts. The detailed proposals of the ICEOreport [“Advancing a Respectful andCaring Community”; iceoreport.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/ARCC_Feb13.pdf]provide a template for action.

The effort to triple the percentage ofURM graduate students still remains anissue. Why is the recruitment of URMgraduate students more challenging thanthe recruitment and retention of URMfaculty? One answer may derive from themanner in which the definition of URMexcludes non-U.S. citizens. Internationalstudents usually do not have U.S. citizen-ship and do not fall into a category ofURM, whereas faculty often gain citizen-ship upon becoming employed and auto-matically gain the status of URM. Hencethere is a disconnect in defining andmeasuring URM. MIT might be doingmore successfully in practice than itreports by using official (U.S. census)measurements. Furthermore, the categoryof “whites” and “Asians” includes morediversity than at any time since the end ofthe Cold War and collapse of socialism.There are the “other” “whites” fromUkraine and Siberia, and “other” Asiansfrom Cambodian refugee camps, whowould not fall into typical “whites” andAsians. In this context, the U.S. census’definitions are outdated, whereas in prac-tice, MIT’s inclusion of people of variousbackgrounds may make it more diversethan is evident from the numbers.

Faculty Committee on CampusPlanningWe were encouraged to receive the firstreport from the new Faculty Committeeon Campus Planning. Both the Principlesand Goals articulated in the report[web.mit.edu/fnl/volume/285/planning_report.pdf] appear sound and compre-hensive. As the Committee continues itswork, we trust that the other entitiesdriving campus development will becomeattentive to their work and priorities.

We remain anxious that plans, initiallydeveloped by MITIMCo, with inadequatefaculty input, are proceeding in rollercoaster fashion, without coming to theCommittee on Campus Planning for theiradvice and consent. We note that amongthe most consistent concerns of graduatestudents, postdoctoral fellows, and juniorfaculty during the past decade, has beenan acute shortage of affordable housing.The proposed lead use of the irreplaceableEast Campus site for commercial officebuildings fails to respond to these con-cerns. The latest plan builds even lessgraduate student housing than was calledfor by the Clay Committee report.Hopefully it is not too late to request thatthe administration hearken to the call tofocus the East Campus on strengtheningthe educational and research missions ofthe Institute, rather than on MITIMCo’sreturn on real estate investments.

Thanks to Mail ServicesThe sorting, labeling, and mailing of theFaculty Newsletter can often be a compli-cated and cumbersome job, replete withrequests for unrealistic turnaround time.We would like to take this opportunity tooffer our sincere thanks to MIT MailServices, and in particular to MailSpecialist Debbie Puleo, for the outstand-ing service and assistance they give us eachand every issue. Thanks for all your help,always.

Editorial Subcommittee

A Letter to the Class of 2016continued from page 1

MIT Faculty NewsletterVol. XXVIII No. 5

4

Edmund BertschingerWhat I Learned as a Department Head

D U R I NG 2007–2013 I WAS Head ofthe Physics Department at MIT. What Ilearned can be summarized by a quotefrom the 2015 Commencement address ofMegan Smith ’86 ’88 SM: “Kindness is asimportant as knowledge.” Knowledge isimportant because understanding thework of my colleagues gives me theirrespect. Kindness, and its origin in caring,is necessary to give them – the depart-ment’s faculty, staff, postdocs, and students,as well as alumni, donors, and visitors – therespect they deserve. Respect and caringare, in my view, the two most importantattributes a department head brings toleadership. But how does one go beyondplatitudes? What does it mean for a depart-ment head to advance respect and caring?

Some background is needed beforethese questions can be answered. At MIT,academic departments and programs arethe fundamental organizational unit fornearly all faculty and graduate students.When we say that MIT is decentralized,what we really mean is that academicdepartments and other work units arelargely independent and have their owndistinct cultures and climates.

I inherited the leadership of an excel-lent department. We were tied for thenumber one ranking in the US News andWorld Report Graduate School Rankingswith a 4.9/5 rating. Faculty morale wasgenerally good, especially among thesenior male faculty. The department hadinitiated a highly effective fundraisingeffort and had just completed a majorbuilding project. Interactions were largelycollegial and effective management struc-tures were in place. Faculty valued educa-tion and educational innovation, the

department regularly graduated thelargest numbers of Bachelors andDoctoral degrees in physics of any U.S.institution, and we had a good trackrecord mentoring junior faculty to

success. When I took the job, some peopletold me it could only go downhill!

I took the job because I cared deeplyabout the success of my colleagues and sawways that it might be improved. In partic-ular, our department had long struggledwith efforts to increase the diversity of itsstudents and faculty. Before assuming theleadership I met with a group that set mycourse in the role and beyond: femalegraduate students. They were recruitedmore effectively by our competitors, theirmorale was lower than that of othergroups, and they were leaving the programat higher rates than men, despite beingequally prepared on entry. The GraduateWomen in Physics group gave me a focuson solving these problems by advising me,“You have to create a culture of caring inthe department.”

Faculty are recruited and promoted onthe basis of research accomplishments,and there is little direct reward forempathy. Faculty are generally solicitousof undergraduates but sometimes treat

graduate students as if they are theiremployees. The distinction is strikingwhen senior undergraduates and equallymature and prepared first-year graduatestudents are working in the same research

group. The women were telling me whatresearch confirms: graduate studentssucceed better when they are mentoredwith empathy.

Changing a department culture is noteasy. The graduate women providedencouragement and help. Their determi-nation showed me that I would be heldaccountable. I believe the combination ofencouragement, help, and accountabilityare necessary for leaders to shift a depart-mental culture.

I will describe some of our efforts andthe impact on the Physics Departmentshortly. First, this is why it matters today:all MIT departments are now being askedto make similar efforts. In December2015, the Black Students’ Union askedevery department head to make a state-ment valuing students’ well-being, and tocommit to improvements in graduatestudent and faculty diversity. Since then,other groups have assembled recommen-dations, and Academic Council appointeda working group to make progress on

Faculty are generally solicitous of undergraduates butsometimes treat graduate students as if they are theiremployees. The distinction is striking when seniorundergraduates and equally mature and prepared first-year graduate students are working in the sameresearch group. The women were telling me whatresearch confirms: graduate students succeed betterwhen they are mentored with empathy.

MIT Faculty NewsletterMay/June 2016

5

them. MIT’s five School Deans requesteda one-page set of best practices for depart-ment heads around diversity and inclu-sion. Here is my contribution:

Recommendations for DepartmentHeadsDeveloping/supporting colleagues in yourdepartment may be one of your highest pri-orities: 3 Rs

• Recruitment• Retention• Respectful Work Environment

1. Recruitment – Build a strong,diverse organization.

Prepare: Join search/admissions chairsin at least one diversity/inclusionevent/year, including an unconscious biasworkshop, an ICEO event, the MITDiversity Forum/Summit, or an event atyour professional society. Become familiarwith the terminology and issues. Allsearch committee members (not justchairs) and all faculty involved in graduatestudent and postdoc selection should par-ticipate in an unconscious bias workshop.

Execute: Appoint a faculty or staffmember, reporting to you, to advancediversity and inclusion within the depart-ment at all levels. Share expectations withuntenured faculty (e.g., web.mit.edu/physics/policies/dept/AdviceForNewFaculty.pdf).Undertake at least one departmental ini-tiative to increase underrepresentedgroups entering the profession (e.g., par-ticipation in the MIT Summer ResearchProgram, MSRP). Request facultymembers to include their efforts in theirElectronic Professional Record (ePR).Include them in your annual reviewprocess.

2. Retention – Continue your successin recruitment by furthering a positivework environment.

Prepare: Develop informal and formallistening opportunities (meetings,lunches, walk the hallways). Meet individ-ually with every faculty member initially,and with groups at least annually (juniorfaculty, senior faculty, undergraduates,

graduate students, postdocs, women stu-dents, minority students, administrativeand support staff, research staff, lecturers).Ask the groups what they need.

Execute: Deliver on requests as best youcan and/or be transparent with yourplans. Accountability is essential. Meetwith mentors of junior faculty to supporttheir work; credit their work as depart-mental service; list a junior faculty’smentors in your promotion/tenure cases;add mentors/mentees to the ePR.

3. Respectful work environment –Help your people thrive.

Prepare: Join other leaders in yourdepartment (associate head, graduate and

undergraduate officers, division heads,etc.) in relevant workshops. Suggestions:MIT Conflict Management series, CrucialConversations two-day workshop, and adepartment chair workshop offered byyour professional society. Support gradu-ate student REFS. Read the ICEO Report,the Women Faculty report for yourschool, and the Report on the Initiativefor Faculty Race and Diversity (see:web.mit.edu/Faculty/reports).

Execute: Implement recommendationsfrom a brochure available from the ICEO,Enhancing Department Climate: A Guidefor Department Chairs. Cultivate respect

Undergraduate (blue, upper pair) and PhD (red, lower) physics degree statis-tics from MIT (solid, computed with a three-year boxcar average) and U.S.national averages (dotted). URM = U.S. citizens or permanent residents whoare not White or Asian-American. The denominator is all students, includinginternational. Data from the American Physical Society, IPEDS CompletionSurvey, and MIT Office of the Provost/Institutional Research.

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001 2006 2011

Perc

enta

ge

Year

Fraction of Physics Degrees Awarded to Women SB, MIT

U.S.

U.S.PhD,MIT

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Perc

enta

ge

Fraction of Physics Degrees Awarded to URM

SB, MIT

U.S.

U.S. PhD,MIT

Year

continued on next page

MIT Faculty NewsletterVol. XXVIII No. 5

6

and caring. State your department’s visionand values at your Website and in yourtalks to faculty, staff, and students. Thismay include a diversity statement similarto the one adopted by History,history.mit.edu/about/statement-diversity.Consistently communicate respect forothers, even when it is difficult to do so.Praise others.

Assistance: Bring in MIT resources tohelp when needed – you can’t do it all.Become familiar with, and recommend asneeded, MyLife Services (a network ofexperts to help with life concerns), theODGE/GSC Best Practices in Advisingguide, and https://myconcierge.mit.edu.

Assessment: Request from InstitutionalResearch data similar to what is assembledon these pages. Share it with your VisitingCommittee.

These recommendations are only a fewof the things I did or would do now as aDepartment Head. One may choose to gobeyond them, for example, by creating aDiversity and Inclusion Strategic Plan, bytraining and assessing mentors, by organ-izing community events, etc. Much morehas been elsewhere about outreach andmentoring efforts. In Physics, it washelpful for all junior faculty to take MIT’stwo-day workshop in Leadership Skills forScience and Engineering Faculty. Oncethe basics of empathy, community, andculture are in place, MIT faculty will comeup with endless good ideas to advancerespect and caring.

Do these efforts work? Do they addvalue? The set of physics departmentsnationwide provides evidence that theydo.

First, our US News and World Reportranking improved: in 2014, MIT Physicstook sole possession of the #1 position,with a 5/5 reputational ranking. No otherdepartment in the country has this distinc-tion, in any area of Engineering, Health,Science, or Social Science. (MIT Chemistry,

Computer Science, Economics, andMathematics are tied with others for #1with 5/5 rankings.) Conversations withcolleagues across the discipline suggest thatour reputation improved because of ourefforts to advance a respectful and caringcommunity.

Second, the ability to recruit, retain,and graduate or promote talent canreadily be measured. Indeed, the Provostannually reports to the faculty on thesematters, as called for by a 2004 faculty res-olution. However, MIT-wide data do nothelp departments to assess themselves.Each department can and should assem-ble data similar to what is shown in thetwo figures on the preceding page.

When I became Department Head, Ilearned that we were doing poorly gradu-

ating Black and Hispanic PhD students.We had declined following a long historyof success; deceased astronaut RonaldMcNair, RPI President Shirley AnnJackson, and National Medal of Sciencewinner S. James Gates are among themany black scientists who received their

physics PhDs from MIT. The concernsraised by graduate women were urgent forminority women and men. Response totheir concerns reversed the trends so thatthe Physics Department met the goals ofthe 2004 faculty resolution to triple thenumber of underrepresented minoritygraduate students in fewer than 10 years.

Similar data for faculty show a longertimescale for change. When I began,Physics had the smallest percentage ofwomen faculty of any department. Nine

What I Learned as a Department HeadBertschinger, from preceding page

Physics Department % Women Physics Department % URM

Yale 31.8% MIT 12.8%

MIT 30.5% UCSB 12.2%

Cornell 25.8% UC Berkeley 8.1%

Harvard 23.6% Princeton 6.7%

UPenn 23.5% Harvard 6.7%

UMichigan 22.5% Caltech 6.4%

UC Berkeley 21.9% Stanford 6.3%

U Chicago 20.2% UPenn 5.9%

UIUC 19.1% U Chicago 4.7%

Stanford 19.0% Yale 4.5%

Caltech 18.5% UMichigan 4.5%

Princeton 16.0% UIUC 3.3%

UCSB 9.0% Cornell 1.6%

Peer Comparison of Physics Bachelors Degrees 2007-2011 (IPEDS data)

Efforts to improve the climate for one group helpsothers. In the Physics Department, although the relativegains were most dramatic for graduate students, ourundergraduate student diversity increased as well.

MIT Faculty NewsletterMay/June 2016

7

years later, the number and percentage offemale physics faculty have doubled.

Efforts to improve the climate for onegroup help others. In the PhysicsDepartment, although the relative gainswere most dramatic for graduate students,our undergraduate student diversityincreased as well. The best way to interpretthe numbers is to compare with peerdepartments. The table (preceding page)shows Bachelors degree data for the topphysics departments, averaged over a five-year period.

Such a comparison avoids the“pipeline” problem: all physics depart-ments are recruiting from the same pool.The large variation across departmentsnationally is surprising and reinforces theperspective that academic departmentshave distinctive cultures that affectstudent outcomes. Is there a similar varia-tion across MIT departments? I believe so,but until we have tabulations like these,we will not be sure.

We do have some data concerningdepartmental climate at MIT. The figuresabove are from the ICEO Report. After

poring over data from the 2012 and 2013Quality of Life surveys, I constructedmeasures of collegiality (community)and fairness (equity) that correlated withwhat I had learned speaking with com-munity members during 2013 and 2014,

and which were significant in that thedifferences between departments werelarger than could be accounted for byrandom sampling from a single popula-tion. In short, some departments havewelcoming climates, many are tough butfair, while some are regarded by staff,postdocs, or faculty themselves as beingrather chilly.

MIT staff, postdocs, and faculty haverecently completed a new Quality of Lifesurvey. Next year our students will take a

similarly detailed survey. Efforts havebeen underway in many work units,including academic departments, toimprove the climate so that more peoplethrive. New data will provide feedback tothese efforts.

What did I learn as a DepartmentHead? I learned that being #1 in the rank-ings is not enough; that it is possible for aDepartment Head to advance a respectfuland caring community; and that doing soyields benefits for everyone. If we learnedthat caring is as important as knowledge,so will our competitors. Will MITDepartment Heads be ahead of them?

MIT staff, postdocs, and faculty have recently completeda new Quality of Life survey. Next year our students willtake a similarly detailed survey. Efforts have beenunderway in many work units, including academicdepartments, to improve the climate so that more peoplethrive. New data will provide feedback to these efforts.

Edmund Bertschinger is Institute Communityand Equity Officer (edbert@mit.edu).

MIT Faculty NewsletterVol. XXVIII No. 5

8

Krishna RajagopalFrom The Faculty ChairInnovations in the EducationalOpportunities for MIT Students

IN THIS LAST FACULTY NEWSLETTER

of the academic year, I will take the oppor-tunity to update you about recent andongoing developments on three fronts –fronts that are distinct but that all relate toinnovation in the educational opportuni-ties that we offer to MIT students.

Curricular InnovationThe MIT Faculty are in the midst of anextraordinary wave of curricular innova-tion. This academic year has seen the cre-ation of one new PhD program, one newMasters degree, four new SBs, and sevennew undergraduate minors, offering ourstudents many new educational pathwaysthrough MIT. By a large factor, this ismore new programs than in any previousyear in memory. In addition, there are anumber of departments making substan-tial changes to their curricula. Forexample, this fall Course 6 (ElectricalEngineering and Computer Science) willbe rolling out new versions of their 6-1, 6-2, and 6-3 majors, redesigned to offerstudents greater flexibility.

Looking at the varied new offeringsacross MIT, there is no single driver forthis wave of innovation. Many respond tostudent interests and demand. Some havegrown from departmental processes ofassessment and improvement. Some arenew products created by faculty who arelaunching new MIT initiatives. Some areinterdisciplinary in new ways, offeringstudents new paths through MIT that cutacross departments. But, although givingstudents the flexibility and opportunitiesto adapt their degrees to their interestsand anticipated careers are commonthemes, many of the new offerings fit

squarely within a discipline while reflect-ing the evolution and diversity of theirdepartments. All have in common thateach represents a substantial effort by alarge group of faculty members, both inthe planning and in the execution tocome. I thought it appropriate to con-clude the academic year by celebratingthese innovations from so many MITfaculty in sum by enumerating the newprograms.

PhD Program in Social and EngineeringSystemsThis new Doctoral program, launched byMIT’s Institute for Data, Systems, andSociety, focuses on addressing concreteand societally significant problems bycombining methods from engineeringand the social sciences.

Master of Business AnalyticsMIT Sloan, with the Operations ResearchCenter, introduced a new one-year Mastersprogram tailored for recent college gradu-ates who will pursue a career in the datascience industry, applying data science tosolve business analytics challenges.

15-1: SB in Management15-2: SB in Business Analytics15-3: SB in FinanceThe new Course 15 curriculum providesmore choice, flexibility, and the opportu-nity for greater breadth or greater depth ofstudy in business and management topicsincluding, in particular, preparation forcareers in data analytics or finance.

14-2: SB in Mathematical EconomicsThis new major is designed for students

interested in mastering technically andtheoretically oriented topics in econom-ics, including game theory, microeco-nomic theory, and formal econometrics.14-2 majors will gain the mathematicaland theoretical preparation needed forsubsequent graduate study in economics.

Minor in Computer Science, offered byCourse 6The computer science minor provides astrong background in the fundamentals ofprogramming, algorithms, and dis-crete mathematics, giving students theknowledge and skills needed to makeeffective use of computer science conceptsand computing technology in their futurecareers.

Minor in Design, offered by Course 4The design minor provides a hub at MITwhere students who see the value ofdesign as an approach to problems withintheir major can learn the conceptualfoundations, core principles, and skills ofdesign in dynamic studio settings, developa sensibility for visual and physical form,and contribute to new ways of designingthat are applicable across a spectrum ofareas.

Minor in Entrepreneurship andInnovation, jointly offered by the Schoolof Engineering and MIT Sloan School ofManagementThe E&I minor will prepare students toserve as leaders in the innovationeconomy, providing them with the knowl-edge, skills, and confidence to develop,scale, and deliver breakthrough solutionsto real-world problems.

MIT Faculty NewsletterMay/June 2016

9

Minor in Statistics and Data Science,offered by the Institute for Data, Systems,and SocietyThe minor in statistics and data sciencefocuses on providing students with aworking knowledge base in statistics,probability, and computation, along withan ability to perform data analysis.

Minors in Management, BusinessAnalytics, and Finance, offered by Course 15These new minors correspond to the newCourse 15 majors above.

Sub-Term SubjectsOver the past academic year, a subcom-mittee of the Faculty Policy Committee(FPC) chaired by Prof. John Fernándezhas been analyzing the emergence ofundergraduate and graduate sub-term-length subjects across the Institute,looking at overall trends and understand-ing the motivating aspirations and goalsas well as the pedagogical value of suchofferings and their effects on studentlearning and student life.

I am very grateful to the members of thesubcommittee, listed below, for the consid-erable effort they have put into collectingdata: conducting surveys, focus groups andinterviews; and distilling, analyzing, andsynthesizing their findings. They have pro-duced a draft report describing what theyhave learned about the current scope of sub-term curricular offerings and the motiva-tions behind them, as well as overall trendsregarding sub-term subjects, their intendedand potential growth, and their impacts onstudents, faculty, and the curriculum.

The draft report is available here:web.mit.edu/faculty/reports/FPC_SBTSSubComm_FINAL_Report_20APR2016.pdf.

I urge all of you to have a look. If youhave comments, please send them to:subterm-subjects-reply@mit.edu. If youwish to help the subcommittee in shapingthe final version of its report, please emailthem by mid-June.

The subcommittee has heard fromboth faculty and students that sub-termsubjects enable students to take more sub-jects, including subjects with specialized

or focused content and electives that wereseen as well-suited to a sub-term length,with consequent flexibility and opportu-nities for adaptation as students find theirpathways through MIT. Sub-term subjectsare largely neither notably more nor lessstressful for students than full-term sub-jects, but there is less time to learn the

content and it is more difficult to recoverfrom a poor test or problem set result.There is also less time for students to getto know faculty and TAs, and vice versa.

The subcommittee report is only thebeginning.

The subcommittee has provided uswith a list of best practices and a list ofrecommendations. Best practices includeclear communication between instructorsand students on the rules governing sub-term subjects, especially Add and Dropdates, department vigilance in providingthe necessary resources for successfulteaching and learning through sub-termsubjects, and novel ways via which to offersome flexibility to students in the weight-ing of grades between assignments andexams so as to mitigate the “less time torecover” downside of subjects of shortduration. Recommendations includegiving students a clear understanding ofthe grading policy for the class and ensur-ing that at least 30% of a student’s grade isrecorded and communicated to thestudent by Drop Date.

After hearing feedback, the membersof the subcommittee will finalize theirrecommendations and suggested bestpractices. I hope that as faculty anddepartments consider teaching and intro-ducing sub-term subjects, in their plan-ning over the coming summer and then in

the coming years, we will all consult thesesections of the report.

The subcommittee found that mostsub-term subjects are essentially half aterm in length. So, for the specific case ofhalf-term subjects, the subcommittee alsoincludes an initial proposal for new rulesconcerning start and end dates, Add and

Drop dates, and final exam periods. Thesubcommittee has concluded that rules ofthis nature are needed for half-term sub-jects, so that all of us – faculty and stu-dents teaching/taking full-term subjectsand half-term subjects – have a commonand clear set of expectations regardingthese matters.

The goal of the subcommittee inmaking proposals for new rules is toprovide an initial template for discussionand refinement, which will happen in thefall. Rules of this nature intersect thedomains of five faculty committees: theCommittee on Academic Performance,Committee on the UndergraduateProgram, Committee on Curricula,Committee on Graduate Programs, andFaculty Policy Committee. Consequently,the subcommittee membership includesat least one member from each of thesecommittees. It will be these committees infull that will formulate any proposed newrules, likely in the fall, before bringingthem to an Institute Faculty meeting iftheir discussions converge. These com-mittees will see the subcommittee propos-als, once finalized after the commentperiod between now and mid-June, as astarting point. They and I look forward toyour input as this process begins.

continued on next page

The subcommittee found that most sub-term subjectsare essentially half a term in length. So, for the specificcase of half-term subjects, the subcommittee alsoincludes an initial proposal for new rules concerningstart and end dates, Add and Drop dates, and final exam periods.

MIT Faculty NewsletterVol. XXVIII No. 5

10

After you read the report, I believe thatyou will join me in thanking the subcom-mittee for going the extra mile to gathermany and varied data, both quantitativeand qualitative, to formulate a comprehen-sive analysis. All the while, the subcommit-tee has kept a clear-eyed focus on thepedagogical value of sub-term subjects atMIT and on efforts to enhance andsupport the emergence of sub-term sub-jects in ways that maximize the benefits toundergraduate and graduate students,faculty, and teaching assistants.

Subcommittee membership: John E.Fernández, FPC Member, Course 4,Chair; George Barbastathis, FPC Member,Course 2; Zoya Bylinskii, CGP Member,Graduate Student, Course 6; BrianCanavan, Office of the Registrar; ScottHughes, CAP Member, Course 8; JoseffKolman, FPC Member, Class of 2017,Course 17; Anne McCants, CUP Chair,Course 21H; Roy Welsch, CoC Member,Course 15. Tami Kaplan, FacultyGovernance Administrator, Staff to theSubcommittee; Jagruti Patel, Director,Special Projects, Office of the Chancellor;Kate Doria, Research Analyst, Office of theProvost.

Study Group on AlgorithmicReasoning and ComputationalThinking for MIT UndergraduatesFor many years, at least since the 2004-2006 Task Force on the UndergraduateEducational Commons chaired by Prof.Robert Silbey, various MIT facultymembers have asked whether – and if so,how – MIT should ensure that all itsundergraduates learn algorithmic reason-ing and computational thinking. Dean forUndergraduate Education Prof. DennyFreeman and I have charged a small groupof faculty members to conduct an in-depth study of this topic, beginning byasking what the phrases “algorithmic rea-soning” and “computational thinking”mean in the context of the education ofMIT’s undergraduates across all five

Schools, including how they encompassan intellectual framework in addition toskills. We have asked them what, if any, isthe common framework that peopleacross MIT mean when they speak ofcomputational thinking and algorithmicreasoning, as well as in what ways thediversity among the meanings of suchphrases in different disciplinary contextsis important. We have asked them todetermine the extent to which algorithmicreasoning and computational thinking arealready being taught, and whether theysee a rationale for making this an explicitexpectation of all our graduates – and, ifso, with what learning objectives andmeasurable outcomes.

The members of the study group areProfs. Eric Grimson (EECS; Chair of thestudy group), Deepto Chakrabarty(Physics), Michael Cuthbert (Music andTheater Arts), Peko Hosoi (MechanicalEngineering), Caitlin Mueller(Architecture), Jim Orlin (Sloan), andTroy van Voorhis (Chemistry). The chargecan be found here: due.mit.edu/sites/default/files/AlgorithmicComputationalCharge-rev2.pdf.

As you will see from the charge, this isa study group, not an implementationgroup. Nevertheless, depending on whatthis group finds, their analysis mayprovide the foundation for subsequentadvances in how MIT students are edu-cated. The charge provides examples ofseveral kinds of potentially actionablenext steps in curriculum developmentthat the work of the study group couldprompt, after they have done the analysisrequested by the questions in the charge.Examples of options they may considerinclude modules that could be incorpo-rated in existing GIR subjects, new sub-jects or modules intended to be accessibleto any MIT undergraduate, and a modelin which departments make discipline-specific choices for how to achieve overar-ching MIT-wide goals via more advancedsubjects or modules designed for studentsin a particular major. Dean Freeman and Ihope that the answers provided by this in-depth study, together with any subsequent

curriculum development that it prompts,will serve as valuable input to any futurediscussions of our GIRs.

Dean Freeman and I have set up anemail address, computation-study-group@mit.edu, via which you can sendyour thoughts and advice to the studygroup. We invite you to read their chargeand share your input by mid-June. Pleasefocus your feedback on the specific ques-tions that the study group will be consid-ering. If their work prompts furtherdiscussion by faculty committees and/orby an implementation group of someform, there will be further opportunitiesfor broader input.

Dean Freeman and I are pleased thatall of the members of the study groupeither volunteered or responded withenthusiasm when contacted. This leads usto think that there may be other topicsrelated to undergraduate education wherean in-depth study by a five-School groupcould provide valuable input to futureadvances in the education of MIT under-graduates – topics that are focused inscope but at the same time cut across allfive Schools. As we see the work of thisstudy group unfold, we are open to dis-cussions of charges for other potentialstudy groups with potential volunteers.

I am very grateful to the members ofthis study group for committing theirtime and energy to this work. I lookforward to learning from their collabora-tive efforts.

* * * * *

� ��As this academic year rich with newbeginnings reaches its conclusion, I wishall of you a happy, invigorating, and pro-ductive summer. Looking ahead to nextyear, we can all anticipate seeing MIT’snewest educational initiatives takingflight, and to continuing our discussion ofthese innovations and more, as MITfaculty continue to explore and developnew pathways for MIT students.

Innovations in the Educational OpportunitiesRajagopal, from preceding page

Krishna Rajagopal is a Professor of Physics,a MacVicar Faculty Fellow, and Chair of theFaculty (krishna@mit.edu).

MIT Faculty NewsletterMay/June 2016

11

memos, and other material producedduring the long discourse to launch anInstitute-wide environmental initiative atMIT. Both the listening and learning tourand the archive review confirmed myearly intuition about the essential attrib-utes of an environmental initiative at MIT.These attributes are embodied in itsname.

Environmental encompasses under-standing of atmosphere, ocean, ice, andbiosphere as well as land use and humansettlements, material and energyresources, and social, political, and eco-nomic systems and structures. Our scopecaptures the human-nature interface, theinterplay between society and natural geo-physical dynamics, biogeochemical cycles,and ecological systems. This understand-ing will provide guidance for improvingthe possibility of creating a sustainablefuture for us and other species.

Environmental understanding is onepart of the ESI’s whole, solutions theother. Science and engineering are funda-mental contributors to solutions, yet I havebeen struck by the sustained call by facultyand students alike for deeply multidisci-plinary perspectives. I could not agreemore with Kerry Emanuel and his co-authors in a March/April 2016 FacultyNewsletter article that we should supporta multifaceted approach of technology intandem with “. . . policy steps, the societaldimension . . . .” Our agenda, describedbelow, takes this approach.

For example, the ESI is committed tofinding ways to support and enlist theenormous expertise in philosophy, cul-tural studies, literature, music, linguistics,anthropology, and other fields in theSchool of Humanities, Arts and SocialSciences. Disciplined thought in thehumanities offers critical pathways towardagency and action in the environment justas it does in the sciences and engineering,though in a very different way.

MIT’s aspiration to lead toward ahealthier human-environment futurefaces sobering challenges. Yet we are fortu-

nate to be living through what I believe tobe an historic cultural, political, and insti-tutional inflection point.

With the U.S.-China JointAnnouncement on Climate Change ofNovember 12, 2014, the recent agreementin Paris at COP21, the announcement ofthe Mission Innovation Initiative, the vastincrease in the deployment of renewableenergy, and the adoption of the UNSustainable Development Goals, we are

witnessing an international commitmentto addressing the complex developmentand environmental challenges that defineour reality and our new future.

In addition, I believe that we, as aninstitution, are also at an inflection pointthat defines a new future for MIT. TheInstitute has committed to ESI, as it has toMITEI and more recently to the Office ofSustainability, J-WAFS, and the ClimateAction Plan. The Chair of theCorporation, Bob Millard, told me that hebelieves MIT has a special role in helpingto “. . . steward the Earth.” The upcominglaunch of MIT’s Campaign for a BetterWorld features Environment prominently.Just as importantly, our community hasconverged on the need for actions evenwhile we may not all agree on the bestpathway forward.

My own efforts, in partnership withDr. Graham, are focused on acting as thesteward of the ESI and we have begunwith the development of an agenda thatincludes three elements: research, educa-tion, and convening.

ResearchAs an initiative bridging across the entireInstitute, ESI envisions a research agendathat is inclusive of MIT’s enormous anddiverse expertise and capacity. The three

domain areas below map out disciplinaryand intellectual territories that are crucialif we are to understand how our speciesinteracts with the environment, ameliorat-ing and adapting to climate change as wellas many other environmental challenges.

• Climate science and earth systems• Cities and infrastructure• Sustainable society and economy

Science is the basis for understandingthe environment and climate science andearth systems are at the center. Today,there is an unfortunate sense in somequarters nationally and internationallythat we know enough to act effectively tomitigate carbon emissions and adapt toclimate change. In fact, there is still signif-icant fundamental work to accomplish.Effective engineering solutions and policyrecommendations – there is great needfor both – demand basic science toinform us about, for example, themechanics of ice shelf calving, the role ofaerosols and clouds in the atmosphere,and the rates at which the ocean takes upheat and carbon. Models of climate con-sequences are only as good as the under-lying science, and we would be wise toinvest heavily in supporting the uniquecapacity in science of the climate andearth systems here at MIT.

However, studies of past and present-day climate and earth and planetarysystems generally, should not be relegatedsolely to inquiry in the service of practicalsolutions. A motivation behind everykind of scientific pursuit is the search fortruth, pure and simple, and discoveryitself is a triumph of the human spirit.

MIT’s Environmental Solutions InitiativeFernández, from page 1

Science is the basis for understanding the environmentand climate science and earth systems are at the center.Today, there is an unfortunate sense in some quartersnationally and internationally that we know enough toact effectively to mitigate carbon emissions and adapt toclimate change. In fact, there is still significantfundamental work to accomplish.

continued on next page

The recent grand scientific detection ofgravitational waves resulted from inquiryabout nature independent of the need forpractical justification.

The same holds for Earth and plane-tary sciences, paleoclimatology, the searchfor life on habitable planets, and explo-ration of other worlds. And yes, as welearn more, science will increasingly con-tribute to our ability to act effectively toaddress our critical needs. MIT has aspecial role in these endeavors, embracingengineering ingenuity alongside the desirefor holistic knowledge of how to manageour engagement in the world borne out ofunderstanding and a moral code.

A major human-nature interface is thatbetween human settlements and naturalsystems. Cities and the water, power, trans-portation, building, and food systems thatsupport them are particularly vulnerableto changing climate, rising seas, and theincreasing frequency of severe storms.Architectural, urban and planning per-spectives on the future of a resilient andadaptive built environment are critical.And of course, any kind of action mustconsider the changing business condi-tions, pressures on investment decisions,and emerging corporate and industrialcommitments to a decarbonized world.The central role of economic and politicalscience expertise in these researchdomains cannot be overstated.

Finally, any hope for a sustainablesociety and economy includes the funda-mental need to investigate the culturaland historic contexts within which weseek change. Our natural capital forms thephysical basis of our society and culture;our social capital provides leverage tochange the trajectory of our environmen-tal impacts. Decarbonization and demate-rialization are important pathways towarda sustainable society but need to be con-sidered within the historic breadth of ourrelation to nature and our emergingnotions of a just and equitable society.

EducationOur aspirations in education align withBarton Rogers’ belief that educationshould be, “. . . both broad and useful,enabling students to participate in ‘thehumane culture of the community’ and todiscover and apply knowledge for thebenefit of society.” (Mission of theMassachusetts Institute of Technology;web.mit.edu/mission.html, accessed April15, 2016.) This belief is coupled to a com-mitment to explore the multidimensionaland complex relations between humanand natural systems.

Chief among our current educationalactivities is the development of an under-graduate Environment and Sustainabilityminor structured into four pillars; EarthSystems and Environmental Science,Environmental History and Culture,Environmental Governance, andEngineering for Sustainability. These fourare linked through integrative knowledgebuilding intended to bring togetherdiverse disciplines in addressing the mul-tifaceted complexity of real-world envi-ronmental challenges. Profs. SusanSolomon, Amy Glasmeier, and ExecutiveDirector Amanda Graham are leading thiseffort. Our current target date to have thisminor available is the fall of 2017.

In addition, the ESI and a group ofGIR instructors were just awarded a2016 Alumni Class Funds grant todevelop problem sets, lecture material,and other course content that can beincorporated into a number of existingGIRs. I was happy to read Alex Slocum’sletter in the recent March/April FacultyNewsletter suggesting more or less thesame idea. The development of problemsets and other material will begin soonand the first batch of ESI-sponsoredmaterial will be introduced this comingfall term.

These projects and more will serve tobuild a community of environmentallyinterested, informed, and passionate stu-dents, faculty, staff, and others. Conveningthis community is the third major priorityof the ESI.

ConveningDuring IAP 2016 the ESI and the ClimateCoLab co-sponsored the Hackathon forClimate. Students, alumni, and staff,alongside faculty representing all fiveSchools, attended the one-day event andengaged in creating and quickly develop-ing inventions for contributing toprogress in the environment.

This past Earth Day, the ESI held acommunity gathering that included pre-sentations on each of our nine inauguralResearch Seed Grants, an overview of ouractivities in research and education, anupdate on the Plan for Action on ClimateChange from Tom Kiley, Senior Advisorto the Vice President for Research, and awell-attended poster session of our part-ners across the Institute.

This coming year we are planningseveral regular and special events; includ-ing an ESI lecture series, student lunchtalks, a large-scale Earth Day celebrationand symposium, an expanded IAPHackathon, and an Environmental WarGames event. More on these in thecoming weeks and months.

The full agenda can be found on the ESIWebsite (environmentalsolutions.mit.edu).

Finally, imagine a near future at MIT;we exceed our current carbon emissionsreduction goals and add several net zeroenergy buildings to our campus; researchbreakthroughs proliferate in low carbontechnologies and, just as importantly, incarbon capture and storage; studentgroups regularly brief Congress and rou-tinely participate in international climateconferences; and MIT becomes an impor-tant partner in supporting industries andnations in achieving national carbonreduction commitments around theworld. This is not only a wonderfulpicture of the future but also a necessaryone – and one we can create.

MIT Faculty NewsletterVol. XXVIII No. 5

12

John E. Fernández is a Professor in theDepartment of Architecture, and Director,Environmental Solutions Initiative(fernande@mit.edu).

MIT’s Environmental Solutions InitiativeFernández, from preceding page

MIT Faculty NewsletterMay/June 2016

13

FNL: I know you attended MIT as anundergraduate. Do you see significantchanges since you were last here?

CS: I was in the class of 1990, and I didn’treally have much of an interaction withMIT Medical. I was maybe in here once ortwice during my entire four years at MIT.I did, however, get my pre-professionaladvising through MIT Medical, and thatwas very helpful in launching me on mycurrent path.

FNL: Back to our first question: So gettinggreat medical care at low cost is the chal-lenge. Getting great medical care, we canunderstand where that comes from. What’sthe pressure on you to keep the cost down?

CS: There isn’t actual external pressure, interms of somebody saying you have tokeep the cost below a certain level. It’sreally more around a stewardship ques-tion. There are a lot of resources that MITinvests in health care provided here, thehealth plans in general and the optionsthey provide to us for benefits. All medicalproviders are facing all kinds of pressureto keep their costs down because the costsof health care are just growing astronomi-cally and we know it’s unsustainable. Sothis is sustainability and a stewardshipquestion for me more than anything else;it’s more about being a good steward ofthe resources that we’ve been given.

FNL: Anybody who has looked objectivelyat MIT Medical over a long period of timehas said that we don’t live in the real world;that we’re getting an extremely good dealhere for our money. Still we’ve had cutbacksover the years in certain areas that can beseen as problematic. We were without aDermatologist for a long time and Women’sHealth Care was without services. TheUrgent Care Facility has been cut back andwe lost our infirmary, which was a mostimportant and appreciated facility by manyfaculty. So there’s the question of that pres-sure and how you can meet it, and how we,

as the faculty, can help you meet it, in thesense of keeping the quality high, which ofcourse takes money. So are you saying thatthere’s no administrative concern about theMIT Medical budget?

CS: Oh, I’m certain there’s administrativeconcern because there’s no employer inAmerica of any sort that is not concernedabout their health care costs.

FNL: Has the administration had that dis-cussion with you?

CS: We have, at a more general sort ofconcept, I would say. Not down to thelevel of specific targets or things like that.

FNL: Have you had to have a budgetapproved yet?

CS: We did just have a budget approved,but I was not really involved in the devel-opment, as it was submitted pretty muchjust as I was getting started.

FNL: Who are the people in the administra-tion that have direct oversight over MITMedical and to whom you would ultimatelyneed to go to get the budget approved?

CS: Our budgetary reporting line is upthrough the Executive Vice President andTreasurer, Israel Ruiz.

FNL: And isn’t there also a committee or aboard that oversees all of MIT Medical?

CS: Yes, it’s the Medical ManagementBoard, which statutorily we are requiredto have, but they do not have financialoversight over the Medical Department.It’s really more on the administrative sideof the Medical Department, things likebeing the ultimate authority on final cre-dentialing of providers, other policyissues, but not on the financial manage-ment side of it. A traditional hospital orclinic board would have both administra-tive and financial oversight. We also havethe Medical Consumers Advisory Council(MCAC), comprised of a number of stu-dents, faculty, staff, and retirees. They

advise us, share feedback from the com-munity, and help keep the MIT commu-nity informed about our services. TheMCAC reports annually to the MedicalManagement Board.

FNL: Is the financial reporting unusual,that you report to a Vice President, asopposed to a board?

CS: I think it’s kind of an apple andorange comparison. MIT Medical has avery unique structure because here wehave a good-sized health care organiza-tion within a non-health care organiza-tion. By that initial construct, it’s not easyto compare. Most health care organiza-tions have full governance structures withcomplete oversight. My prior organiza-tion [Dartmouth-Hitchcock, in NewHampshire] was only a health care organ-ization. Dartmouth-Hitchcock wasn’teven under Dartmouth College. It’s sort ofa sideline, kind of affiliated withDartmouth College in terms of educatingstudents and residents, but not under-neath the larger governing body of theCollege. Dartmouth-Hitchcock had itsown Board of Trustees.

FNL: In terms of the faculty we’ve talked to,some of whom serve on the MedicalManagement Board, that’s what we wouldlike to avoid at all costs; to become managedby something like MIT-Hitchcock, a sepa-rate outsourced operation which is notresponsible to the MIT Corporation. Thereis significant concern among the faculty thatthis might be where we’re heading.

CS: I guess I’m too new here to knowwhether that’s ever been on the table oreven how they would do that. But to getback to the original question, I thinkdemonstrating value is the best thing thatwe can do to preserve the current organi-zational structure that we now have.

FNL: So this whole thing is fairly uniquewithin academia.

Interview with Dr. Cecilia Stuopiscontinued from page 1

continued on next page

CS: Yes it is. I think when you look at ourpeer academic institutions, most all ofthem have a medical school, which thenputs a whole other layer of organizationalstructure in place. So I think we can’treally compare. We are, I believe, virtuallythe only one that does not have thatmedical school piece.

FNL: Princeton, however, does have asimilar structure to ours.

CS: Yes. But most of the others havemedical schools, and that drives whattheir organizational structure is and howthey deliver clinical services. They alsohave the need to deliver medical educa-tion that way, but we are really a freestand-ing unit.

FNL: On a somewhat more mundane issue,we recently went from Crosby Benefits toWageWorks, and there was a big issue formany months about WageWorks notaccepting MIT as a medical facility andindividuals having to get reimbursed ratherthan directly using the WageWorks creditcard. My understanding was that it wascomplicated for WageWorks because wearen’t a hospital or specifically a medicalfacility. Do you see any other issues, eitherpositive or negative, because of our uniquekind of structure?

CS: Well, because of our unique structure,we have issues around our technologicalinfrastructure – our IT systems. That playsinto the Crosby/WageWorks question. Wehave to be different with our IT in someways because of HIPAA, the privacy rulesthat we have to live under, because we area medical facility. But, when it comesdown to the nuts and bolts of it, at the endof the day our Tax ID number is not thatof a medical facility, it’s that of a researchuniversity, so that does complicate thingsto a degree. And my sense is that ourstructure does lead to a way things aredone that you would not necessarilyproceed with if you were in a free-stand-

ing medical group or medical practicesomewhere else.

FNL: So maybe to tie this area up:FollowMyHealth® is a piece of software thatthe Institute now uses to contact your doctorand theoretically to make appointments –and I really mean theoretically – and to geteverything electronically online. And is ittrue that we have no control over the soft-ware because it is not ours? It’s similar todownloading an app from Google, forexample, if you don’t like the app, well youdeal with Google. You can’t change it, andMIT can’t change FollowMyHealth. Andthere are significant problems with it. It’sreally embarrassing compared to those usedby other medical organizations.

CS: Could you give me an example?

FNL: I use a AliveCor to monitor arrhyth-mia. Last week, I sent my contact informa-tion from my Website to my cardiologist atMGH. Overnight, he responded with a longemail. His staff contacted me while I was onthe road, and this morning I got a monitorinstalled. I tried to set up this appointmentthrough FollowMyHealth last fall. Overthree months after I sent that in, I got anemail saying can we talk about this. Andthere are more general issues in addition toFollowMyHealth.

CS: Will you share some of them?

FNL: We’ve gotten feedback from manyfaculty regarding difficulty in setting upappointments; rude and abusive behaviorby the outer office staff; being bouncedaround from one physician to another; andthings like that. And it just seems that thequality of human interaction has gonedownhill over the years. And it’s alsoamazing to me that MIT has conferences ondigital medical record technology andpeople come and pay big fees to attend thoseconferences and we have FollowMyHealth,where you can’t even do an email enclosure.

CS: Because I am new, I haven’t had a lotof direct interaction with Follow-MyHealth, but if you were my patient I

would want FollowMyHealth to be func-tional for you to interact with me clini-cally. But from the Medical Director sideof my job, FollowMyHealth is not reallydesigned to be part of the administrativepiece of what I do. That part would haveto come through email or a phone call. Ido have a background in medical infor-matics and EMR [Electronic MedicalRecords] implementations, and so that isan area of focus for me. And over the nextcouple of years, the electronic medicalrecord, which we call TouchWorks, and itscompanion piece FollowMyHealth as thepatient portal side of things, is an area thatwe need to focus on. But as I’m sure youare aware, EMR initiatives come with a bigprice tag. It’s going to be a matter ofunderstanding and analyzing the systemthat we have versus what’s available, andasking does it make sense to make a switchto something different or do we invest ourresources in trying to optimize these twoproducts that we already have. I don’tthink we’re in a position to go into abuild-our-own homegrown system. Thatis not our area of expertise, nor would Iwant to manage that. And when you lookat the fact that our patients, faculty, staff,students, all get hospitalized at or getsome care at non-MIT facilities, we reallyhave to look with an eye on the interoper-ability, which is a challenge just in generalfor medicine and for EMRs in particular.Having the ability to more directly inter-face with some of these other organiza-tions that we interact with is going to beone of our challenges.

FNL: It seems like you are suggesting that itcould very well be a financial question, andif it is a financial question does that just goright to the VP of Finance to make thatdecision?

CS: I think the first question is a clinicalquestion. The clinical question is, doesour current set of systems meet the clini-cal needs of our patients and of ourproviders to do excellent medical care? Ifthe answer is no, then we have to ask whatis our next step, and with whatever thenext step is there is definitely a substantial

MIT Faculty NewsletterVol. XXVIII No. 5

14

Interview with Dr. Cecilia Stuopiscontinued from preceding page

MIT Faculty NewsletterMay/June 2016

15

price tag that comes along with it. It can’ttruly be just one or the other though.You’d need to have a compelling clinicalreason to make a change in the first place,and then in the second place you’d have tofigure out the financing of that change. Sopart of what I have to do in this next yearwith my team is to figure out if there arecompelling clinical reasons to make achange. I have already identified what Ithink are quite a few reasons and part ofmy ability to do that is that I have the per-spective of coming from a place with acompletely different set of clinical recordsthat were much more functional thanwhat I’ve observed here. One of the issueshere – and at the same time it’s a wonder-ful thing – is that most of the people inour group have been here a long time andthey haven’t really had exposure to what’sout there now in the world of record-keeping and portals. We have to get expo-sure and insight into what other productsare available that might actually lendthemselves to providing better care here.

FNL: So could we include that as part of youranswer to the major challenges question?

CS: Oh yes. I think it’s hard to move theclinical systems along without the rightkind of recordkeeping and the ability tocollect data that comes with a really highlyfunctional system, and that includespatient-entered data. Patients want to beable to enter data at home and have it landin their medical record. Or as they aresitting in the waiting room, a providermay want to hand them a tablet so thatthey can fill out a questionnaire at thetime of the visit and then it goes to theirmedical record automatically.

FNL: I’d like to return for a minute to the 18-bed infirmary that used to be upstairs. Tomany faculty the loss of that wonderful benefitseemed to be strictly a financial decision.

CS: My understanding is that it waslargely a financial decision, but it couldprobably be supported as well on the clin-ical side. It’s not like we’re some college inthe boondocks where there is no other

hospital. We have world-class medicalfacilities in the area that you can literallysee out of numerous windows. And thereis good literature that says when you lookat low-volume hospitals their outcomesaren’t as good. Now, we had good out-comes for the kinds of things that we weredoing here, but we want to provide thehighest level of care that the patient needs,which might have been limited by the sizeof our facility.

FNL: Still there are many instances of excel-lent care here because of the small popula-tion and thus the ability of the medical staffto offer more personalized care.

CS: I’m sure that’s true. And I would liketo talk about the customer service aspectsthat you’ve mentioned. There is definitelywork that goes on within the MedicalDepartment to improve customer serviceand there are some good initiatives thatare under way. I expect the highest level ofcustomer service and caring towardspatients that walk in the door, or call, orsend a message, for whatever reason theyare engaging us. I think outside of thisenvironment, a medical group couldnever afford not to have their best footforward, because patients vote with theirfeet. But MIT Medical has essentially beena closed model HMO for many years,until quite recently when other options orchoice of health plan have become avail-able through the Benefits Office. Sopatients didn’t really have the opportunityto vote with their feet, as they do now.Providing excellent patient servicethroughout MIT Medical is extremelyimportant, and will be an area where wefocus our efforts in the upcoming year.

FNL: So is there now a feedback mechanism?

CS: There is, and I’ve gotten some feed-back from faculty through the Press-Ganey survey that we administer, which isone that 40% of health care facilities inAmerica use, and it allows us to compareourselves to other organizations. That isone mechanism. Within the survey thereis a very generous comment box where

you can put in any kind of level of detailor comment – and we look at those com-ments, both good and bad. In all honesty,we have received negative feedback aboutthe survey itself in terms of the languageand questions that are asked. But becauseit’s a nationally administered survey, it’sgeared to patients that are at the fifth orsixth grade reading level. We have to bemindful that not every patient we care forat MIT Medical has extremely high liter-acy levels.

FNL: It’s also sent through the mail,through the snail mail.

CS: Now it’s electronically available.Patients get an email with a link to thesurvey. Of course, completing the surveyis always optional. The other feedbackwe’ve had is around the length of thesurvey. So we’re working to shorten thatup, trying to figure out what do we reallywant to get at, as well as maintaining thecomment box.

FNL: What are some of the other areas thatyou’d like to focus on – again given thatyou’ve only been here half a year, roughly.

CS: Three months.

FNL: Oh! Still are there other areas, such asconcerns about outsourcing, temporaryphysicians, etcetera?

CS: Let’s start with the concept of out-sourcing. We have to always look at theservices we provide within the buildingand decide if we can provide them at ahigh level of quality and good access. Oneplace this comes into play is every time werenew contracts with whatever specialistswith whom we interact. We must ask, doesthis make sense? One issue is that there issome difficulty finding doctors who wantto practice here if we only need them, forexample, for half a day, every other week.So there’s that practical consideration inthe sub-specialty areas, when you’rethinking about G.I. or Cardiology or what

continued on next page

have you. We have to understand if wewant and need that service, but also canwe find somebody who could fill thelimited slots that we need, because we donot have the patient volume to supportfull-time specialists. And I’d prefer not touse the word outsourcing, but I wouldrather think about it in terms of findingappropriate clinical partners who we cancollaborate with to provide the care thatour patients need, either in our buildingor outside of our building. So, it’s reallymore of a collaborative effort to developrelationships with particular specialiststhat we need to provide care to ourpatients in a way that has great communi-cation, great quality care, and great out-comes for patients.

FNL: Would you say that it’s unlikely thatUrgent Care or the infirmary would go backto what they were before? Do you think anyof what’s been cut over the last decade ormore are likely to return?

CS: I would say it’s pretty unlikely. Let metalk about Urgent Care for a minute sincewe haven’t talked too much about that.Urgent Care is one of those things that weare looking at closely because it appearsthat there’s a lot of waiting going on downthere that I’m not sure is the best thing forpeople who want to use an urgent service.So we are trying to understand what isdriving those wait times. I walk down thestairs and I see people waiting there – andI don’t like seeing patients waiting.

FNL: Part of it, a good part of it, is themoving from the hand-written recordkeep-ing to the computer.

CS: That’s an example of where I think theway our EMR system is set up might notbe the most efficient for patient care.When we look at the staffing in UrgentCare, it has increased in terms of nursesand nurse practitioners. We have theEmergency Attending, the EA, who is oneof our primary care doctors who is the

backup care doctor during the week. Ithink parts of that system work prettywell, but I also think that we have doctorsand nurse practitioners doing things theyneedn’t be doing if you really want toprovide good urgent care. They shouldn’tbe calling in prescriptions themselves ordoing a prior authorization themselves,because they should be spending theirtime in a room with a patient. Right? Wewant them in front of patients, attendingto the needs of patients. We shouldexpand the role of the medical assistant,who can do a lot of those intermediarytasks on behalf of the provider. I think ifwe staffed Urgent Care with the rightteam of caregivers, we could actuallydecrease wait times and provide a higherlevel of service.

FNL: And part of that will be a financialdecision?

CS: Yes, any changes of these types have tobe informed by clinical, operational, andfinancial data. We always have to makesure any changes that are made are clini-cally appropriate. Another issue aroundUrgent Care is thinking about whether weare open at the right times. When we areopen do we have the right amount ofpeople there to provide for the demandthat we have? We know that we have peakdemand in the afternoon. How do we stafffor that? I know that students don’t wantto come here when we open at seveno’clock in the morning, but I do know thata Facilities employee getting off the nightshift may want to come at seven o’clock inthe morning. So we have to figure outthose needs. I know that somebody whoworks in an office on campus probablyisn’t going to come to Urgent Care at teno’clock at night here in downtownCambridge if they live in the suburbs.

FNL: Right.

CS: So, it’s trying to figure out the patternsof demand, and staffing to meet thedemand. That should elevate the level ofservice.

FNL: So to broaden the question: Thereappears to be great trepidation amongmany of the faculty, especially people whohave been here for quite a while and haveseen the cut in medical services, that theInstitute seems to be heading toward decid-ing that the whole thing is unaffordable andthat down the road it will all be outsourced.That if you get below a certain critical size itall goes away.

CS: So, I will tell you, I just left a perfectlygood job that I didn’t have to leave, at aperfectly wonderful organization where Icould have continued my career. But I leftthat job to come here, and I certainly don’twant this place to go away either. I amcommitted to making MIT Medical ofsuch great value to the community and toMIT that it couldn’t possibly be closed oroutsourced.

FNL: Great. So, you took this job becauseyou saw a future here.

CS: Yes. But I think the future is an actual-ity. We have what every health care organ-ization wants. All health care organi-zations out there want to control as muchof the delivery system as they can. Theonly part of the delivery system that wedon’t really have is a hospital, and I’mactually quite good with that. I think thehospital is the Wild West of health carecost. What we want to do is make sure thatthe hospitals we use have our same aspira-tions towards providing high quality, lowcost care; high value health care. I’m con-fident that the hospitals that we partnermost with, which are Mt. Auburn andMass. General, are on that path.

FNL: And Martha’s Vineyard Hospital.

CS: Right. The only critical access hospitalin Massachusetts, I believe.

FNL: Right.

CS: So it’s all about finding the balance.We have this health care delivery system.We have a health plan. We have patients.We have doctors. We have enough ancil-

MIT Faculty NewsletterVol. XXVIII No. 5

16

Interview with Dr. Cecilia Stuopiscontinued from preceding page

MIT Faculty NewsletterMay/June 2016

17

lary services to do most of everythingyou’d need for excellent primary care. So,we actually do have the ability to providethat high value care from soup to nuts,right?

FNL: Do we still do infusions here?

CS: Yes we do, and that’s a perfect exampleof keeping a service in-house. We want todo that. In fact, we want to drive morebusiness in-house. And the other thing is,in terms of sustainability of this facility,we want to grow patient volumes. If wecan show that we are a high valueprovider, not just to MIT, but to thepatients who have the opportunity to pickus for their primary care, that’s what wewant to do. We want people to pick usbecause we’re a great place to get care, andthat’s going to become more evident astime goes on. For example, I believe thatMIT is considering adding a highdeductible health plan.

FNL: So that would bring in non-MITpeople?

CS: No. It would be offered as a thirdoption, along with the Traditional andChoice plans. It’s great for healthy people,younger people, people who don’t use alot of health care services. But when theydo use it, it’s coming out of their pocket,until they meet the high deductible. Andthe Choice plan has given people theopportunity to go to some place maybecloser to home, but it has pulled them outof our facility. If we are a high quality, lowcost provider, my hope is that more MITemployees will choose MIT Medical fortheir primary care.

FNL: As opposed to choosing doctors inBoston. If they live in Cambridge, they’drather be with a doctor in Boston thansomebody here.

CS: Perhaps. But at the end of the day wewant to be the primary care provider ofchoice. I do not want to have a buildingfull of primary care doctors who don’thave patients to see.

FNL: Access to primary care doctors is anissue. Long wait times and other thingswe’ve discussed.

CS: Yes. So the direction I’d like to go hereI experienced when I practiced atDartmouth-Hitchcock. They have a longhistory of many physician assistants andnurse practitioners as part of the team. Ithink this is one area where we have tostart evolving the model of care to more ofa team approach, because we have alooming physician shortage, and in par-ticular it shows up in primary care.

FNL: I can see that.

CS: It’s becoming increasingly hard toreplace them. I spoke with our HR profes-sional here in the department and it tookover a year to fill our last two primary careopenings. It’s very difficult to find primarycare physicians and it’s even hard to fill onthe nurse practitioner side, and I think atthe end of the day we are going to haveaccess to fewer primary care physiciansthan we have had previously.

FNL: So back to the question of wait timesto see primary care physicians. It’s hard tocut into that unless you cut the amount oftime the primary care physician sees thepatient, which you don’t want to do.

CS: Correct. There are ways you candecrease wait times. One is to make surethat people are seeking primary care serv-ices for things they need. I think you men-tioned regular checkups. A lot of the

medical literature says that for mostpeople the regular checkup is not reallyuseful. So, for instance, a healthy 30-year-old does not necessarily need to have anannual primary care checkup or a physi-cal, because they’re healthy. They mayhowever need pregnancy care, or care forthings like strep throat. We want to useevidence-based practices, so that we’reproviding services for people who needthose services, but not providingunneeded services to healthy people whodon’t need them. That’s part of it. Whatthat does is align your resources withwhere your needs are.

FNL: That’s it. My experience has becomethat you get what you ask for after a while,but there’s no proactive part of the MITMedical system that helps take care of you,and it used to be more proactive.

CS: So again, this gets back to the teamconcept. Nationwide there’s somethingcalled the patient-centered medical homeconcept that’s been put into place. That isusing the team, which is made up ofdoctors and nurse practitioners or physi-cian assistants, so you have severalproviders. You also have RNs and medicalassistants on the team. You might have anon-clinical person whose entire job is tojust look at the panel of patients that areassigned to that team and figure out whoneeds what and facilitate getting that done.

FNL: Access to primary care doctors is an issue. Longwait times and other things we’ve discussed.

CS: Yes. So the direction I’d like to go here Iexperienced when I practiced at Dartmouth-Hitchcock.They have a long history of many physician assistantsand nurse practitioners as part of the team. I think this isone area where we have to start evolving the model ofcare to more of a team approach, because we have alooming physician shortage, and in particular it shows upin primary care.

continued on next page

FNL: There’s also the issue of a negativeexperience inhibiting someone from seekingcare when they need it.

CS: There is so much literature on thatparticular issue. We know that if we don’tcommunicate well, if we don’t provideadequate access, if we make you feeluncomfortable or unwelcome, that it canlead to poorer health outcomes.

FNL: That you know that is helpful.Whether you can do something about it isanother issue.

CS: We can and will do something aboutit, but it’s going to be hard and it will taketime. We have to do a full assessment ofthe situation. Then we have to decidewhat are our customer service standards.We have to make sure everyone whoworks at MIT Medical knows what thestandards are, and that they are actingprofessionally. This is your job. Your job isto be kind to patients, and to make themfeel welcome and cared for. That’s the jobof everyone here. It’s not just the job of thesecretary or the physician or nurse practi-tioner. It could be the lab tech, it could bethe X-ray technician, it could be thebilling office. Our job is to care forpatients in a caring manner.

FNL: Have you addressed the entiremedical community yourself along theselines?

CS: Not yet. I’ve been doing a lot of obser-vation and listening. We’re going to have agroup meeting of all the provider staffsometime probably in early June, andongoing meetings with the rest of the staffthereafter. It’s a busy time right now to dothat, to pull everyone out and to sit downand talk about that. Our demanddecreases in the summer, and I think thatwill be a great time for us to start layingthis groundwork.

FNL: It’s nothing but the sum of the indi-vidual operations that happen every day byindividuals. So, making that happen,getting people to follow true north, at leastfor a significant part of the day, is the bigchallenge for you. It has almost nothing todo with medicine.

CS: But it does. It has everything to dowith medicine. One of the wonderfulthings that I am very fortunate to have inmy new role here is that I have gooddoctors and nurse practitioners. They aredoing the right thing for the patientswhen the patient is in front of them. Someplaces have doctors who are getting mal-practice suits all the time and they’re notpracticing evidence-based high qualitymedicine. That’s another whole set ofissues that thankfully we do not have toworry about here. But what I do have toworry about is getting everyone to under-stand the expectations of our three corevalues: Patients First; Working Together;and Striving to Be Our Best.

FNL: So all this stuff we’ve talked about interms of the electronics and the kinds ofdoctors or quality of the personnel – all ofthis is going to cost money.

CS: Yes.

FNL: So you anticipate, I hope and assume,that that money will be available, given thatyou will make cogent arguments for the need.

CS: What we have to do is assess our situa-tion and come up with a plan for how wewant to get to where we want to get on aroad map and then start figuring out howand when we can ask for needed resources.But, you know, it’s going to be a process. It’snot going to be any kind of an overnightthing. And the priorities for the MedicalDepartment are going to be in a list of otherpriorities for the Institute – maintaining theInstitute’s educational mission andresearch, and there are infrastructure issues.

FNL: How about fundraising. Do you havea fundraising arm?

CS: I’d love to have a fundraising arm.

FNL: One of the reasons medical schools areindependent of the universities that theytypically associate with is because of thefundraising. Have you been part of the nextcampaign discussion?CS: Not as of yet, but I’m talking to some-body from the Development Office.

FNL: Any other changes you’re anticipating?

CS: I think we need some infrastructurechanges to our building. It’s not set up todo team-based care. There’s no place for ateam to sit. Another resource we have isthe Community Wellness Department,and they’re doing a lot of great work. We’dlike to expand the scope of services theyprovide, to a broader range of communitymembers.

FNL: Any other things?

CS: Well this Saturday, for instance, isNational Advanced Care Planning Day.Have you had any education aroundAdvanced Directives and planning foryour future health care needs if you areunable to speak for yourself? That is aservice that we, as the MedicalDepartment, should be working ontogether with all the members of ourcommunity, be they old or be they young.It’s not just an issue for geriatric folks. It’san issue for 50-year-olds who have a brainaneurysm or a bike accident, to have theirwishes for their healthcare choices docu-mented so that if they are not able tospeak for themselves, they can have theirwishes followed. That’s a huge one on mymind. There are people that have workedat MIT their entire career and maybe theirwife has passed away, or their husband.Maybe they never married at all. Maybethey were an only child. They don’t have abrother or a sister or nieces or nephews.How do we make sure that thosemembers of our community, if somethinghappens, have somebody or something(like an Advanced Directive) that canspeak for them? End of life decisions are

MIT Faculty NewsletterVol. XXVIII No. 5

18

Interview with Dr. Cecilia Stuopiscontinued from preceding page

MIT Faculty NewsletterMay/June 2016

19

very personal and sensitive, and I think wecan do a much better job of helping ourpatients have these conversations withtheir loved ones and getting their wishesdocumented.

FNL: And even if they retire, they oftenremain with the medical program.

CS: And they’re at the polar end oppositeof the spectrum from students. We needto have some core capabilities of how tocare for elderly folks who maybe arehaving more medical problems than theyhad when they were younger and aregoing in and out of the hospital, or anursing home, or a rehab facility.

FNL: So, this is another area you’ve got toexpand and develop resources within MITMedical.

CS: Yes, and we’re actively working on itright now.

FNL: Let’s address the whole mental healthissue. MIT Medical has expanded thoseresources over the last few years. Are thereplans to continue that?

CS: I think we have a very strong MentalHealth and Counseling Service here andthey do an excellent job with the patientsthat they see. But we have increaseddemand and the increased demand iscoming through, I think, because of MIT’sexcellent efforts to publicize the availabil-ity of Mental Health and Counseling, andto de-stigmatize those issues that membersof our community face. So our studentsare seeking the services. Then we have the

behavioral health needs of the rest of ourcommunity, our faculty, staff, dependents,and retirees. How do we address thoseneeds? The Mental Health and CounselingService is really oriented towards caringfor all of our students. We have to under-stand what is the best way to care for therest of the group, and to provide opportu-nity for some care within our facility. Itmay not happen in a freestanding mentalhealth center. Again, in the medical hometeam concept that most organizationshave put into place, many have put behav-ioral health clinicians right there in theprimary care team, to work together withthe primary care doctor. A lot of depres-sion, a lot of anxiety – a lot of it is aprimary care problem, but those primarycare doctors need support and assistancewith managing that, and how can we bestdo that? We’re not talking about compli-cated schizophrenia or complicatedbipolar disorder. Those patients clearly arebest served at other places where that’stheir specialty. Just as your primary caredoctor would send you to a specialist ifyou needed one for a complex cardiologyproblem, the same thing goes for behav-ioral health. Part of it is connecting thehead to the body. You can’t look at just thehead, and you can’t look at just the body.You have to look at the whole person, andI think we have to move towards a moreintegrated model that way.

FNL: Speaking about integrating the wholebody, what about dental care?

CS: We have a dental clinic here, and wejust did some major renovations. But it’skind of a little known fact. I got here and I

didn’t even know there were dentists thatwere in the Department. But it’s just whatwe were talking about earlier. We have thisservice that we provide. We want peopleto use it because it’s a fixed cost. We wantpeople to use the things that we have here.That’s one of the things that I would say -if you have a choice, we’d like you tochoose us. I want you to choose usbecause you want to, not because you haveto! But also, when you get here, I want youto have an excellent experience, like youwould have at any other place that youmight choose. I want you to choose us forour quality, our caring, our convenience.

FNL: When you start recruiting for posi-tions to join this group, does the fact thatthey could potentially get involved with therest of MIT and the MIT faculty, and genet-ics research, etcetera, attract people or dothey not have time to do that?

CS: My understanding from my group isthat they just did a new brochure forrecruiting physicians before I came andone of the things they highlight is the con-nection with MIT and the things thathappen on campus. I think one of thethings I’d like to see is for MIT Medical tobe more engaged in the educational andresearch enterprise of the Institute, inwhatever ways we can be helpful, withoutbeing disruptive to patients.

FNL: Dr. Stuopis, thank you very much formeeting with us. You have shared manyimportant ideas with the MIT community.

CS: Thank you very much. It was reallymy pleasure.

MIT Faculty NewsletterVol. XXVIII No. 5

M.I.T. Numbersfrom the 2016 Senior Survey

Source: Office of the Provost/Institutional Research

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Being well off financially

Contributing to science and innovation

Raising a family

Traveling abroad

Being a leader in my field

Getting to know people from diverse backgrounds

Doing creative and expressive work

Learning about other cultures and nations

Having managerial responsibility

Being a leader in my community

Doing work in accordance with my philosophy/religion

Volunteering

Working for social and political change

Expressing myself artistically

Being successful in a business of my own

Living or working abroad

Participating in politics or community affairs

Participating in religious activities

Essential Very important Somewhat important Not important at all

As you think about your future, how important is each of the following to you?