in this issue we offer information about and a variety of the Institute’sresponses to the Covid-19 pandemic (see below, and page 15); we also submit“Notes from the MIT Faculty Town Hall,” (page 11) and “Introducing an Institute-Wide Referendum at MIT,” (page 12).

MITFacultyNewsletter

Vol. XXXII No. 4March/April 2020

http://web.mit.edu/fnl

MassachusettsInstitute ofTechnology

continued on page 8

From The Faculty ChairEducation in theTime of Covid-19

CoronavirusStructure, Vaccineand TherapyDevelopment

continued on page 6

Jonathan King, Melissa Kosinski-Collins,Eric Sundberg

A S W E G O TO P R E S S , more than95% of the U.S. population has been toldto stay home. Over 22 million people havefiled for unemployment and, as of today,April 19, 2020, more than 40,000 peoplehave died. Globally over two millionpeople have been infected, and tens ofthousands have lost their lives to Covid-19. We do not know how and when thispandemic will end. What we do know isthat things will get substantially worsebefore they get better. We also know thatthose who are most vulnerable in ourworld will bear the highest cost of thispandemic for years to come. In response, MIT – like many leadinghigher education institutions – hasfocused its attention on the safety andwell-being of its community, on acceler-ated research and innovation to fight thespread and impact of Covid-19, and on

EditorialI. Responding to the CoronavirusOutbreak; II. Lemonade from Lemons:Making the Most out of our CurrentCrisis; III. Publication Policies ofthe FNL; IV. Professor RajagopalJoins UN Human Rights Council

continued on page 3

Enhanced Electron Micrograph of Coronavirus

Rick L. Danheiser

Structure and Organization ofCoronavirusesM A N Y C O N C E R N E D OV E R T H E

coronavirus outbreak may find it usefulto understand more about coronavirusesthan is currently being communicated bymedia sources. As long-time structuralbiologists we offer below basic informa-tion on coronavirus, that may be of assis-tance to those who have not studiedvirology. All viruses are parasites which canonly reproduce within cells. Thus, theyare very different from bacteria and fungi,which are self-reproducing, often in soil,water, organic wastes, sewage, or withinorganisms. Animal and plant viruses fall into twogeneral classes, those in which the geneticmaterial is long DNA molecules, and

T H E C R I S I S B R O U G H T O N by theCovid-19 global pandemic has turned allof our worlds upside down. For me, abright spot has been seeing how theInstitute and the MIT community hasresponded to this unprecedented emer-gency. There are many unsung heroesamong our staff, administration, faculty,and students, and I hope that their contri-butions will receive the recognition theydeserve when we return to some sem-blance of normalcy. I regret that I cannotspare the time to celebrate them here, aslike many colleagues I have been workingovertime seven days a week and partici-pating in up to eight Zoom conferencesin a single day. Instead, in this column Iexpand on some of what was a majorfocus of Faculty Governance during thefirst weeks of the crisis – adjusting ouracademic policies to accommodate the

2

Vol. XXXII No. 4 March/April 2020

*Robert Berwick (Vice-Chair)Electrical Engineering & Computer Science

Manduhai BuyandelgerAnthropology

Nazli ChoucriPolitical Science

Christopher CumminsChemistry

*Sally HaslangerLinguistics and Philosophy

*Jonathan King (Chair) Biology

Helen Elaine LeeWriting and Humanistic Studies

*Ceasar McDowell (Secretary)Urban Studies and Planning

Fred MoavenzadehCivil & Environmental Engineering/Engineering Systems

Ruth PerryLiterature Section

Nasser RabbatArchitecture

*Balakrishnan RajagopalUrban Studies and Planning

*Robert RedwinePhysics

Warren SeeringMechanical Engineering

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 Coronavirus Structure, Vaccine and Therapy Development Jonathan King, Melissa Kosinski-Collins, Eric Sundberg From The 01 Education in the Time of Covid-19Faculty Chair Rick L. Danheiser

Editorial 01 I. Responding to the Coronavirus Outbreak; II. Lemonade from Lemons: Making the Most out of our Current Crisis; III. Publication Policies of the FNL; IV. Professor Rajagopal Joins UN Human Rights Council

Letters 05 Questioning Structure of the Faculty Newsletter Robert A. Weinberg

11 Notes from the MIT Faculty Town Hall Bevin P. Engelward

12 Introducing an Institute-Wide Referendum at MIT Olivier L. de Weck

15 PKG Center Connects MIT Students with Broader Community Needs

Alison Hynd

M.I.T. Numbers 17 Women at MIT 1962-2020

contentsThe MIT FacultyNewsletterEditorial Board

MIT Faculty NewsletterMarch/April 2020

3

MIT Faculty NewsletterMarch/April 2020MIT Faculty NewsletterMarch/April 2020MIT Faculty NewsletterMarch/April 2020

support for shifting all teaching, opera-tions, and scholarly activities online.MIT’s response so far has taken extremededication and endless hours of workfrom people across the Institute. Over the past three weeks MIT hasundergone unprecedented changes.Twelve hundred courses have movedonline, with grades changed to pass/fail.Thousands of undergraduate studentswere sent home, and many graduate stu-dents were asked to leave campushousing. All non-essential employees areworking from home. These are but someof the many changes that have sweptthrough MIT. Yet, amid these changes, faculty, staff,and students have stepped up to contributeto the fight against Covid-19. A group ofour colleagues at the Sloan School hasformed a Covid-19 Policy Alliance(https://www.covidalliance.com/). At theMedia Lab, researchers are developingSafe Paths, a privacy-focused app forcontact tracing and a #BeatTheViruscampaign to counter misinformation onCovid-19. Colleagues at the Ragon andthe Broad Institutes are working directlyon the development of improved devices,tests, vaccines, and therapies. Othersamong us are working with colleagues tofocus attention on emerging needs. Theseare just a few of the efforts happening atMIT. As people have said, responding tothis kind of world crisis is what MIT isgood at. As we acknowledge the responsiveefforts of so many at MIT, we must also bemindful that decisions made in responseto Covid-19 can place an excessive burdenon the more vulnerable members of ourcommunity. The abrupt removal of mostundergraduate and many graduate stu-dents from campus was needed to slowthe spread, but it also created anxiety andstress for students. For some students,returning home meant putting theirfamily at risk, and for some, home is not asafe place. We understand that academicadvisors and mentors have been asked to

stay in touch with their student adviseesand to be available to offer support andadvice, and we believe this is indeed veryimportant. Recently the Provost announced aone-year tenure-clock extension foruntenured faculty due to the disruptionof life during Covid-19. This is an impor-

tant acknowledgment of the burdens –academic, personal, and familial –imposed by the crisis. Of course, the dis-ruption will impact faculty in very differ-ent ways: those with extra familialresponsibilities that cannot be handled bypartners or paid caregivers will be espe-cially affected. One effect of the extensionwill be that faculty who opt for the extrayear will delay the salary bump thattenure brings, and this will have a cumu-lative impact on lifetime income. The dif-ference is not trivial. We hear that thereare ongoing discussions about such con-cerns and we hope that they yield effec-tive solutions. Similar considerations need to be pro-vided for graduate students and researchstaff/postdocs who are vulnerable to thesame distractions that faculty are facing.The case is even worse for adjunct facultywho are often here on a temporary con-tract but who are also vital members ofour community. It is very important to include the staffmembers of our community when con-sidering the negative effects of the currentsituation. Our staff are dedicatedmembers of the MIT community andcritical to the success of our efforts. Weexpect that the Administration will con-tinue to pay close attention to the needs ofthese community members as well.

Looking forward, enormous chal-lenges lie ahead from the economic andsocial repercussions unleashed by thepandemic, including the deep globalrecession, job losses, and their impact onthe well-being of our students and theirfamilies, on research and administrativestaff, and on faculty.

This academic year, the leadership atMIT has faced extreme challenges. TheEpstein case called into question the judg-ment of members and former members ofthe Institute’s senior leadership team. Italso highlighted systemic/structural prob-lems with democratic representation atMIT and the disenfranchisement ofseveral communities within the Institute. Covid-19 asks that same leadershipstep up with a moral clarity that willensure the care and support of our entirecommunity. Despite problematic com-munication with our undergraduatesearly in the process, the leadership hasrisen to this task. As we move into anuncertain future and face new challengeswith diverse repercussions, let us alldemonstrate our capacity to maintainthat moral clarity.

Editorial BoardMIT Faculty Newsletter

Lemonade from Lemons: Making theMost out of our Current CrisisThe Covid-19 outbreak has compelledMIT faculty meetings to now be held vir-tually (see March 17, 2020 email fromFaculty Chair Rick Danheiser, “March 18Faculty Meeting: Zoom Meeting Info and

continued on next page

It is very important to include the staff members of ourcommunity when considering the negative effects of thecurrent situation. Our staff are dedicated members of theMIT community and critical to the success of our efforts.We expect that the Administration will continue to payclose attention to the needs of these communitymembers as well.

Responding to the Coronavirus Outbreakcontinued from page 1

MIT Faculty NewsletterVol. XXXII No. 4

4

Request for Questions”). When the needfor faculty voting arises in this new virtualcontext, as it invariably must, then thiswill of necessity require some form ofelectronic voting. This would be awelcome step forward for MIT. E-voting istechnologically and operationally feasible,and is likely to be more secret and univer-sal. E-voting may also increase facultyattendance. There’s plenty of evidence forthis: Participation in the FNL faculty-wideEditorial Board election is much higherthan votes at the faculty meeting forfaculty committees; states that haveadopted mail-in ballots as a default, likeWashington, have seen the voter turnoutincrease by more than 10% above thenational average. There is strong reason tobelieve that e-voting can similarly boostfaculty participation. E-voting can also ensure the secrecy ofvoting, one hallmark of a genuinely demo-cratic process. Open voting by a show ofhands at faculty meetings always has thepotential to subject faculty members tounwarranted peer pressure and, foruntenured faculty, fear of retaliation. E-voting avoids this defect as well as otherssuch as miscounting, and so may well leadto a more genuine and honest expressionof views by faculty members, especiallywhen voting on controversial issues. It turns out that there is nothing in theRules and Regulations of the Faculty thatexplicitly prevents virtual meetings fromtaking place – and now, such meetingswill take place. Similarly, nothing in thefaculty regulations prevents e-voting,which of necessity will now also take itsplace for the time being at faculty meet-ings. We have no doubt that both willwork, providing empirical evidence ofimprovement. The only remaining ques-tion: Once the current crisis passes, whyroll back this better engineering to themore imperfect past? That would be veryunlike MIT. Rather, it seems to us that thesuccessful use of both e-meeting and e-voting for faculty meetings points the wayahead to a permanent move for a better

MIT during the remainder of the twenty-first century – squeezing at least a little bitof lemonade from the terrible times wenow navigate.

Publication Policies of the FNLThe Faculty Newsletter periodicallyreceives criticism of its content. Anexample is Professor Weinberg’s pointedletter in the current issue (see next page),where he inquires about the multiplicityof voices in the FNL, and which deservesresponse.

The pages of the Faculty Newsletterexist to enable the faculty to share ideas,perspectives, opinions – and, in so doing,to make our work environment morevibrant and our actions more informed,responsive, and responsible. The articlesexpress the views of those members of thefaculty who choose to take the time toexpress them. The FNL Editorial Boardwelcomes and encourages contributionsfrom any and all faculty members, partic-ularly those who feel that important per-spectives are not being included.Submissions should not be libelous, andshould bear some connection to issuesand concerns of the MIT faculty. Otherthan those general filters, the EditorialBoard does not exercise limitations onarticles submitted for publication byfaculty members. The Editorials are the views of eitherthe Editorial Subcommittee responsiblefor that issue, or the entire EditorialBoard. These pieces are not intended torepresent average, median, or popularrepresentation of faculty views. Ratherthey represent the views of the EditorialBoard members, who have been electedby the faculty at large in an electronic elec-

tion. Many more faculty vote in the elec-tion of FNL Board members than vote forthe Standing Committees of the Faculty.The FNL Editorial Board is also the onlycommittee of the Institute for which onlyfaculty, and all faculty, can vote. (The pre-ceding editorial calls for changing thecurrent situation, and having the fullfaculty vote electronically for all facultymembership on all committees.) Articles submitted to the FacultyNewsletter by faculty are not vetted or sentout for review beforehand. We publish

opposing views, refutations, or correc-tions, typically in the subsequent issue.(Though given some uncertainty duringthis Coronavirus emergency of when thenext issue of the FNL will be published,we are responding to Professor Weinberg’sletter in this issue.) Editorial Board members receive littleacademic or professional credit for theirservice. In general, they are colleagueswho strongly believe that the faculty forman absolutely essential constituency atMIT (as opposed, for example, to themodel of the faculty as simply individualemployees of the Corporation), deservingand requiring an independent and activevoice. Given the absence of an electedFaculty Senate or Council, the FNL role inproviding independent faculty expressionis particularly valuable. This imperative iswhat launched the Faculty Newsletter [see:http://web.mit.edu/fnl/vol/archives/fnl00.pdf] and this ethos is deeply engrained inFNL function. Some of these beliefs stemfrom a conservative viewpoint withrespect to the privileges of academia,stemming from the medieval tradition ofthe autonomous university. Others comefrom a more progressive view that faculty

Responding to the Coronavirus Outbreakcontinued from preceding page

The pages of the Faculty Newsletter exist to enable thefaculty to share ideas, perspectives, opinions – and, in sodoing, to make our work environment more vibrant andour actions more informed, responsive, and responsible.The articles express the views of those members of thefaculty who choose to take the time to express them.

MIT Faculty NewsletterMarch/April 2020

5

have special responsibilities in society intheir role as teachers of the next genera-tion. Periodically we also publish submis-sions from postdocs, graduate students,research staff, administrators, and otherswhen in our assessment the expressedviews need to be heard by our colleagues. We urge you – members of ouresteemed faculty – to share your views,concerns, and proposals with your col-leagues through the pages of this FacultyNewsletter.

Professor Rajagopal Joins UN HumanRights CouncilWe also acknowledge some good news: amember of the Editorial Board of theFaculty Newsletter, and a faculty colleaguefrom the Department of Urban Studiesand Planning, Balakrishnan Rajagopal,has recently been voted by the UNHuman Rights Council as the next UNSpecial Rapporteur on the Right toAdequate Housing. No MIT facultymember has ever been elected to thisimportant position in the human rightsfield, as far as we know.

The human rights work of the UN isled by the UN Human Rights Council (47States elected by the UN GeneralAssembly yearly), representing memberStates from around the world. The SpecialRapporteurs are independent experts whoare selected for their expertise, independ-ence, impartiality, and objectivity to be incharge of specific issues areas. Those areasinclude a range of human rights matterssuch as freedom of expression, torture,racism, housing, health, food, water andsanitation, etc. Major investigative andlegal work on the topics which the FNLhas covered recently, such as the Saudi-ledwar in Yemen, or the killing of JamalKhashoggi by Prince Salman’s coterie,have been led by Special Rapporteurs ontorture, illegal executions, etc. The SpecialRapporteurs are appointed in their per-sonal capacity by the UN Human RightsCouncil for three years initially, and thepositions are honorary. The Rapporteurs have three main kindsof duties: first, they submit thematic reportson major issues of concern, to the UNGeneral Assembly and the UN Human

Rights Council. Second, the Rapporteursdeal with urgent calls/complaints abouthuman rights violations within their man-dates. Those are received on a daily basis andrequire public and private interventionswith countries and other parties. Third, theRapporteurs conduct selected country visitsand then file reports based on their detailedfield investigations on the status of humanrights adherence in those countries. In addi-tion, the Rapporteurs are also often calledupon to speak at various forums at the UN,engage in public communication and advo-cacy, and function as the global voice on theissues within their mandates. For a generaldescription of Special Rapporteurs, see:https://www.ohchr.org/ EN/HRBodies/SP/Pages/Introduction.aspx.

Editorial Subcommittee

lettersQuestioning Structure of the Faculty Newsletter

To The Faculty Newsletter:

I WON D E R SOM ETI M E S WH ETH E R

there is any pretense that the FacultyNewsletter attempts to represent thegeneral sentiments of our faculty or,instead, the crusading and tendentiousspirit of a couple of its Editorial Board

members? Maybe even one of them? Who chose the membership of thisEditorial Board, and why/how can theyhave the pretense of representing senti-ments that are widely spread among thefaculty?

Robert A. Weinberg, Ph.D.Member Whitehead Institute forBiomedical ResearchProfessor of Biology, MITDirector, MIT Ludwig Center forMolecular Oncology

MIT Faculty NewsletterVol. XXXII No. 4

6

profound impact of Covid-19 on oureducational enterprise. A principal consequence of therequirement to “de-densify” the MITcampus was the need to develop online,“remote” versions of our subjects.Designing and implementing remoteequivalents for our courses in less thantwo weeks was no easy task, but by andlarge our faculty, instructors, and teachingassistants rose to the challenge. In the caseof some subjects that already incorpo-rated significant online components, thisdid not require major changes, but formost subjects a daunting amount of workwas necessary. As we have worked oncrafting remote versions of our subjects, akey guiding principle has been to focus onidentifying the essential learning goals ofour courses. Our overriding aim has beenfor students to emerge from this noveland difficult semester equipped with theessential knowledge and tools they wouldhave acquired in a normal spring term. Ihave to say that I have been veryimpressed by the creativity and rigor ofmany of the offerings that instructorshave developed to meet this extraordinarychallenge. While our faculty and instructors wereworking to design remote versions of theirsubjects, the Faculty Officers were consid-ering what changes in our normal aca-demic procedures would be required. Itturns out that in the event of a “SignificantDisruption” of academic activities, Section2.102 of the Rules and Regulations of theFaculty permits the Chair of the Faculty todeclare that “emergency academic proce-dures” are in effect and to impose tempo-rary changes in the regulations regardingthe academic calendar, registration,assignments and examinations, grades, theprocedures for accepting theses, and theawarding of degrees. It appears that thisaddition to Rules and Regulations wasmade after the disruptions in 1970 duringthe time of the Vietnam War, and it isinteresting that the regulation specificallydefines “significant disruptions” as includ-

ing “natural disaster, civil unrest, or pan-demic illness.” Perhaps a ProfessorNostradamus played a role in the develop-ment of this amendment to Rules andRegulations 50 years ago. The Emergency Academic Regulations(“EARs”) were developed by a team that Iled and which included my fellow FacultyOfficers Professors Duane Boning andDavid Singer, Tami Kaplan (FacultyGovernance Administrator), and (alpha-betically) Professor Arthur Bahr (Chair ofCUP), Chris Bourg, Registrar MaryCallahan, Professor Dan Frey (Chair of

CGP), Professor Anne McCants, ProfessorKris Prather (Chair of CAP), ProfessorKrishna Rajagopal (Dean of DigitalLearning), Professor Larry Vale (AssociateDean, SA+P), and Professor and ViceChancellor Ian Waitz. We also consultedwith the officers of the UndergraduateAssociation and the Graduate StudentCouncil, and they provided valuable inputduring our deliberations. Developing emergency regulationsthat take into consideration the diversityof our educational offerings, that antici-pate exceptional situations, and which aresensitive to the difficult and unusual cir-cumstances confronting our students, ourfaculty, and all members of the MIT com-munity who support our educational pro-grams, was no easy task. Some decisionswere especially difficult and in these caseswe made a particular effort to consultwidely and to carefully consider diverseviews. To enable and support our focus onlearning goals and innovative pedagogy,we announced on March 12 that the

“alternate” grading system provided for inthe Institute’s Rules and Regulations fortimes of emergency would be mandatedfor all subjects this semester. This decisionwas not made lightly, and was made onlyafter extensive deliberation and consulta-tion with other faculty, mental health andwellness professionals, and studentleaders. Appreciating the importance ofgrades to MIT students, the team spent anenormous amount of time consideringwhen “alternate grades” should beemployed during this period of significantdisruption. Four scenarios were discussed

extensively: (a) Individual Instructorscould choose whether to use normal lettergrades or alternate grades on a subject-by-subject basis; (b) Alternate grades wouldbe mandated for all subjects; (c) Alternategrades would be the default gradingsystem but individual students wouldhave an opportunity to “opt in” for lettergrades in a subject; (d) Letter gradeswould be the default grading system butindividual students would have an oppor-tunity to “opt in” for alternate grades in asubject. After extensive deliberation,which included important input fromStudent Support and Wellbeing, the Teamunanimously decided to mandate alter-nate grades for all subjects, i.e., Scenario(b). As explained below, the Team con-cluded that this is most consistent withthe intent of Rules and Regulations, wouldbest mitigate current and future stress andanxiety of students, and most impor-tantly, it is the grading system that recog-nizes and responds to the significantdisruption that impacts all students andour entire shared academic endeavor.

Education in the Time of Covid-19Danheiser, from page 1

It turns out that in the event of a “Significant Disruption”of academic activities, Section 2.102 of the Rules andRegulations of the Faculty permits the Chair of theFaculty to declare that “emergency academicprocedures” are in effect and to impose temporarychanges in the regulations regarding the academiccalendar, registration, assignments and examinations,grades, the procedures for accepting theses, and theawarding of degrees.

MIT Faculty NewsletterMarch/April 2020

7

While many students expressed grati-tude and applauded our decision tomandate “universal” pass/no recordgrading, other students were dismayedand appealed to us to reconsider. Studentsexpressed the concern that not havingletter grades this semester might adverselyimpact their applications for graduateschool, medical school, internships, andother positions outside MIT. TheEmergency Academic Regulations Teamtook this concern most seriously but con-cluded that having alternate grades thissemester will not negatively affect applica-tions for jobs and admission to programsoutside MIT. The current global pan-demic affects everyone and the unusualcircumstances of this semester will cer-tainly be taken into account in the futureas professional schools and companiesevaluate applications. It is likely that othermeasures of performance will have greaterthan usual importance, including, forexample, letters of recommendationwhich provide Instructors with an oppor-tunity to elaborate in detail on a student’sperformance. In fact, as we expected, oneby one graduate and professional schoolshave published assurances that they willevaluate students holistically and thatapplicants will not be at a disadvantage ifthey were graded P/NR this semester. In summary, the Emergency AcademicRegulations Team concluded that adopt-ing alternate grades this semester will nothave a detrimental effect on the competi-tiveness of MIT students seeking positionsoutside the Institute. A number of consid-erations then led the Team to decide thatmandating alternate grades was the bestgrading scheme for the Institute to adoptduring this period of disruption.

• The original intent of Rules andRegulations 2.64 is that alternate gradeswould be employed in the event of anatural disaster or pandemic illness as aresult of which Instructors would beunable to make the usual distinctionbetween (for example) A-level, B-level,and C-level work due to the disruption.The Team decided that to think thatInstructors would be able to assign a letter

grade for some students in a class and notfor other students is not consistent withSection 2.64 of Rules and Regulations. • The Team concluded after extensiveconsultation and discussion that thenature and magnitude of the disruptioncaused by Covid-19 is such that assigningaccurate letter grades will not be possiblein essentially all full-term (and H4) sub-jects this semester. There are severalreasons for this. Few if any Instructorshave experience with the evaluation of astudent’s mastery of material via remotemeans. In fact, many faculty have no expe-rience whatsoever in delivering classmaterial via online vehicles and the timeavailable for Instructors to get up to speedis limited. The Team expects that therewill have to be quite a lot of experimenta-tion this spring with Instructors tryingout alternative ways to evaluate progressand performance. • It is also worth bearing in mind thatthese are also difficult times for ourInstructors and for all of the members ofour Teaching Staffs as well. The lives ofeveryone are being disrupted and teachingfrom home is not easy for manyInstructors, some of whom have to dealwith having young children at home dueto the closing of schools and daycare facil-ities. In summary, the Team concludedthat the accurate determination of gradeswill be especially challenging this semesterand it is not reasonable to expectInstructors to be able to make the usualdistinctions required in a letter gradesystem. • Students are accustomed to studyingtogether and benefiting from supportgroups of classmates and it is very uncer-tain to what extent this can be reproducedremotely in the coming months. Theimpact of this on different students islikely to vary considerably and Instructorswill not be in a position to take this accu-rately into account in assigning grades.

• The Team was also concerned thatdifferent students will be experiencing dif-

ferent situations at home, and for somestudents it may be very challenging tofocus on studying. This is in addition tothe general stress and anxiety that theCovid-19 crisis is causing in everyone,students, their families, and the membersof our teaching staff.

• The Team was advised that giving stu-dents a letter grade “opt in” choice wouldin fact lead to increased stress and anxietyfor many students. For example, somestudents would feel pressured to choose toopt in for a letter grade because not doingso would be interpreted to mean that theirperformance was not strong.

• The Team discussed a number ofother considerations. One was associatedwith the question of final exams. Some ofour peer schools require that remote finalexams be “open book.” A number offaculty instructors here at MIT have sug-gested that “open book” exams necessarilyhave to be different and perhaps more dif-ficult as compared to exams conducted inperson in past years. Mandating that alter-nate grades are in effect relieves the con-cerns of Instructors in this regard,allowing them to be comfortable design-ing exams to be conducted remotely thatare similar to exams of past years.

The decision to mandate alternategrades for all subjects was announced onMarch 12. MIT was one of the very firstschools to adopt what some have referredto as “universal pass/no record grading,”and it has been gratifying to see that anumber of our peers such as Columbiaand Harvard have followed our lead, insome cases even reversing their initialdecisions. The Faculty Officers believethat the Institute has taken the correctcourse with the emergency academic reg-ulations that have been promulgated thusfar, and we hope to continue to make theright decisions as we help steer our aca-demic program through the rough watersahead.

Rick L. Danheiser is the Arthur C. CopeProfessor of Chemistry and Chair of the Faculty(danheisr@mit.edu).

MIT Faculty NewsletterVol. XXXII No. 4

8

those in which the genetic material isRNA molecules. Among the DNA virusesare Herpes, Adenoviruses, and wartviruses. Coronaviruses, named for their“sun-like” shape observed in the electronmicroscope, use RNA molecules toencode their genes, as do influenzaviruses, HIV, and rhinoviruses (commoncold). SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causesCovid-19, infects mammals and birds. It isclosely related to the viruses causing theearlier SARS (Severe Acute RespiratorySyndrome) and MERS (Middle EastRespiratory Syndrome) outbreaks. The coronavirus particles are organ-ized with long RNA polymers tightlypacked into the center of the particle, andsurrounded by a protective capsid, whichis a lattice of repeated protein moleculesreferred to as coat or capsid proteins. Incoronavirus, these proteins are callednucleocapsid (N). The coronavirus coreparticle is further surrounded by an outermembrane envelope made of lipids (fats)with proteins inserted. These membranesderive from the cells in which the viruswas last assembled but are modified tocontain specific viral proteins, includingthe spike (S), membrane (M), and enve-lope (E) proteins. A key set of the proteins in the outermembrane project out from the particleand are known as spike proteins (S). It isthese proteins which are recognized byreceptor proteins on the host cells whichwill be infected. Coronavirus particles are rapidly inac-tivated – killed – by exposure to 70%ethanol or 90% isopropanol (rubbingalcohol), hydrogen peroxide solutions,hypochlorite bleach, soaps and detergents,as well as by UV light and the high tem-peratures of cooking. Coronaviruses primarily infect humanlung cells through a receptor for anenzyme called Angiotensin ConvertingEnzyme 2 (ACE2). ACE2 is a member ofthe family of angiotensin convertingenzymes that includes ACE, for whichmany Americans take blood pressure

medicines composed of chemicals that actby inhibiting ACE. As the first step leadingto viral infection, the virus spike proteinrecognizes and binds to the ACE2 recep-tor. The virus is then incorporated intothe lung cells and the viral RNA is releasedinto the cytoplasm. The viral RNA mole-

cules recruit the cellular apparatus tomake thousands of copies of the viralRNA and also instruct the cells to synthe-size hundreds of thousands of nucleocap-sid, membrane, envelope, and spikeproteins. These assemble into new virusparticles which bud out of the cell surfacemembrane. The cells release the newlyformed viral particles propagating theinfection and eventually die. Testing for the VirusThe nucleotide sequence of the viral RNAmolecules is not found in human DNA orRNA sequences. The test for the presenceof the virus, thus, tests for the presence ofthe viral RNA sequences in tissue samples.The current assay technology is called“RT-PCR”. RT stands for ReverseTranscriptase, an enzyme which copiesRNA sequences into DNA sequences.PCR stands for Polymerase ChainReaction, which reproduces and amplifiesthe DNA sequences for subsequent break-down for determining the order of theindividual nucleotides strung together inthe original RNA polymer. The kits alsorequire short DNA sequences called

primers, which are synthesized in the lab-oratory. The existence of these assays is testi-mony to the value of prior investment offederal National Institutes of Health,National Science Foundation, andDepartment of Energy funds into

genomics and sequencing technology.The test requires adequate supplies of twoenzymes and the primers, specializedinstruments for running the reaction atelevated temperatures, and trained per-sonnel. Hundreds of colleges and univer-sities across the nation provide thetraining needed, but not the actualemployees conducting the tests. Rampingup capacity to be able to perform millionsof tests requires billions of dollars inimmediate investment. A more traditional test for virus infec-tion is the presence of antibodies (morebelow) that bind to the virus. Such testsidentify individuals who are now healthybut have previously been infected.Antibody tests require a small drop ofblood and are much more rapid than thecurrent nucleotide sequencing tests. Theabsence and/or poor implementation ofboth RT-PCR and antibody-based testsearly in the outbreak represents one of thefailures of our healthcare/public healthsystem to properly prepare for viral out-break, particularly after the experiences ofthe SARS and MERS viruses.

Coronavirus StructureKing et al., from page 1

MIT Faculty NewsletterMarch/April 2020

9

The Immune System and VaccineDevelopmentOur blood, lymph, and organs are host tothe white cells of the immune system,which are continually checking for thepresence of foreign elements such asviruses, bacteria, fungi, parasites, tumorcells, and toxins. These white cells aremade in the bone marrow. One type of white cell is called a B-cell.B-cells are specific to a particular pathogenand secrete antibodies that detect thatpathogen. Antibodies are proteins thatbind to a foreign antigen, inactivate it,and/or target it for destruction by otherwhite cells. When a person is infected by aforeign substance, B-cells will beginmaking and excreting antibodies into thebloodstream that recognize the outersurface of the pathogen. For viruses, it isoften the spike proteins that are recog-

nized. Some antibodies that bind to theviral spike proteins can prevent the viralparticles from infecting the cells. Otherwhite cells (macrophages) can engulf thesecompromised particles, removing themfrom circulation. B-cells can also keep a“memory” of the antibody that recognizeda past pathogen and, in the case of anotherexposure, mount a response that is quickerand more efficient. A second class of white cells are knownas “killer” cells. Some of these white cellscan recognize a cell that is infected by thevirus and kill those cells. The phlegm thatyou cough up in a respiratory infection isfull of debris from infected cells lysed bykiller white cells. One of the best ways to protect againstinfection is to stimulate the immunesystem with a vaccine. For example, thepolio vaccine consists of inactivated viral

particles. These are unable to initiate aninfection but are recognized by the whitecells of the immune system. Over a periodof weeks, the white cells that recognize thevirus reproduce in the body. These whitecells synthesize and secrete antibodies thatcan bind to the virus in the vaccine. If theindividual is then exposed to infectiouspoliovirus, the circulating antibodies arealready present and are able to inactivatethe infecting particles. This immunitymay last for decades, though that differsdepending on the antigen. Developing a vaccine requires growinglarge amounts of virus, often in animals,or in tissue culture at large scale. Theviruses are inactivated by radiation, heat,or chemicals, or are derived from geneti-cally weakened strains. Another alterna-

Coronavirus Binding and Assembly

continued on next page

MIT Faculty NewsletterVol. XXXII No. 4

10

tive is to purify not the complete virus, butisolated viral proteins like spike. This issafer and easier to scale up, but theimmune system response to the isolatedprotein is often not as robust as it is to theorganized lattice of the intact virus parti-cle. A more recent strategy involves inject-ing individuals with RNA or DNAencoding for viral proteins. These nucleicacids can be administered alone orthrough man-made vectors that helpdeliver material into the body. In anystrategy, however, enough material isneeded to inject reasonable doses intomillions of people. But before doing this one has to knowthat the vaccine works to stimulate a pro-tective immune response. This requiresrecruiting human volunteers to be vacci-nated and then be challenged with theinfectious virus. All of this takes time andskilled personnel and money. However,with sufficient investment, success ishighly likely in most cases. Note that vac-cination is typically preventive – mostvaccines do not provide relief forsomeone already infected.

Antiviral Therapies for InfectedIndividuals Addressing the health hazards of coron-avirus infections would benefit greatly byantiviral drugs that act to block the attach-ment and internalization process or thereplication of the virus within infectedcells. Antivirals that interfere with the virallifecycle without significantly impactingnormal cellular function are critical tocombating viral infections. Such therapiesare in use for other RNA viruses, likeinfluenza, and are administered generallyas small molecules, taken in pill form.These antivirals act by binding to andinterfering with viral proteins needed toreplicate the viral RNA or facilitatebinding and entry of the virus into the cell.Another class of antiviral drugs, which areeffective with HIV, act by interfering withthe synthesis and assembly of the coat pro-teins into the viral capsid. The U.S. phar-

maceutical industry already has the capac-ity to produce millions of doses of smallmolecules, so the rate limiting step in thiscase is more likely to be at the laboratoryresearch and development stage.

Needed Public InvestmentsThe initial Congressional vote for $8.3billion to speed up the response to thecoronavirus was a step in the right direc-tion. The March 27 CARES Act stimulusvote went further on the biomedicalresearch front, providing $1 billion to theNIH, $4.5 billion to the CDC, and $27billion to the Biomedical AdvancedResearch Projects Authority. This is stillfar from what is needed to address thepublic health need. Covid-19 and other emerging infec-tious diseases represent global threats toour national security. They require a sub-stantial increased investment in funda-mental biomedical science, if we are todevelop the tests, vaccines, and remediesrequired to protect those at risk in a rea-sonable timeframe. Just as we havemassive and sustained funding for themilitary and other efforts to fight moretraditional and visible threats to ournational security, the “invisible” killersrequire a similar budgetary effort. The system already lacked sufficientfunds to continue with vaccine develop-

ment for the SARS-CoV virus after thatthreat subsided. We need a scientific andbiomedical research infrastructure thatcan respond to the next threats, and ofcourse a healthcare system and healthcarefinancing that can ensure high qualitytreatment for all.

ResourcesCoronavirus StructureAmerican Public Health AssociationInactivationVaccine DevelopmentReview of Treatments and Vaccines

Jonathan King and Eric Sundberg havedirected biomedical research projects onviruses and viral proteins supported by theNational Institutes of Health and NationalScience Foundation. They are bothmembers of the Public Affairs Committee ofthe Biophysical Society. Melissa Kosinski-Collins has led HHMI and AAU-fundedresearch programs in Biology Education. This article also appeared at:https://www.biophysics.org/.

Coronavirus StructureKing et al., from preceding page

Jonathan King is a Professor of MolecularBiology (jaking@mit.edu);Melissa Kosinski-Collins is a Professor ofBiology, Brandeis University (kosinski@brandeis.edu);Eric Sundberg is a Professor of Biochemistry,Emory University School of Medicine (eric.sundberg@emory.edu).

MIT Faculty NewsletterMarch/April 2020

11

Bevin P. EngelwardNotes from the MIT Faculty Town Hall

B E LOW I S A LI ST of what I heard to besome of the main points of faculty whoshared their thoughts at the Faculty TownHall on Wednesday, February 5, 2020. Iam sharing this list to update those whoweren’t able to attend to know some ofwhat had been discussed, but this is notmeant to be an official record of themeeting. Note that I have attempted anon-biased recording, and that I do notnecessarily share these views. The purpose of the meeting was todiscuss the opportunity to change thestructure of governance to ensure that thefaculty have a stronger voice in leadershipof MIT. Three working groups were pro-posed with the following themes: 1) assessment of governance, 2) ways toensure faculty views are consistently rep-resented, and 3) how to enhance MITculture to ensure that everyone feels thatthey are being treated with respect. Views from various faculty includedthe following: • It was noted that while many arehappy at MIT, there are also a lot of peoplewho don’t feel supported. • It was noted that we are not function-ing well as a team, and part of the reasonis because the Administration has notensured that everyone feels valued andappreciated. • Many faculty members simply do notparticipate in governance at all. Only~20% of the faculty attended the TownHall Meeting and many fewer attendInstitute faculty meetings. The suggestionwas made that we leverage new ways ofcommunicating. • Several stated that MIT would benefitfrom enhanced cohesiveness, and thatfaculty need more opportunities to inter-

act. Currently effort is being made tocreate Random Faculty Lunches. There isdiscussion of creation of a faculty clubthat works to bring faculty together. • There was a big emphasis on loss oftrust in the Administration. It was pointedout that trust depends on accountability,and on knowing someone. The view wasshared that there are not enough interac-tions between the Administration and thegreater MIT community. • There was the opinion that it is timefor a change in leadership. • There were also several people whowere outspoken regarding their apprecia-tion of Rafael Reif. They noted that hecares deeply, that he has compassion, andthat he has been a strong leader. • Concern was raised that we mightlose Rafael Reif, and if so, it could be diffi-cult to find a strong replacement. • The Administration acknowledgesthat mistakes in judgement were made. Itis poignant that none of the members ofthe Administration who participated inthe bad decisions benefited directly fromthose decisions. • It was pointed out that Rafael Reifimmediately accepted responsibility, tookaction to seek truth, and shared reportspromptly. It was stated that this spirit ofopenness enables MIT to continue toimprove. • It was noted that we are constantlyracing to stay competitive, and that racingcomes with risk, and so mistakes areinevitable. • It was emphasized that it should notbe about “us” vs. “them”, and that manypeople playing leadership roles in theAdministration are themselves facultymembers.

• One person emphasized that while itis always good to consider weaknesses andopportunities for improvement, weshould not lose sight of our strengths andmany successes. MIT’s rank has improvedunder Presidents Hockfield and Reif. • It was noted that there have beenmany statements about what the facultywant, but we don’t really know what thefaculty want, because we don’t have mech-anisms in place to gather opinions. Inaddition, there are a range of views. • While there is a call for an MIT valuesstatement, it was emphasized that there isno one value system. We are a compositeof many different value structures, and sowe run the risk of people feeling that theirviews are not represented. • There is concern about the makeup ofthe Corporation, and in particular, thelack of faculty representation. It wasemphasized that the faculty define MIT,and that it is important that we not letmoney and finances dominate over thevalues that we embrace. There is also aconcern that the length of service on theCorporation is very long. The suggestionwas made that shorter term limits mighthelp to create a more dynamic leadership. • One person emphasized that many ofthe problems that we face are not uniqueto MIT, that it is important to considerwhat is happening at a national level, andthat there are clear trends across thenation that impact our community. • In terms of next steps related to gov-ernance, concern was raised that the pro-posed working groups be sufficientlyempowered so that recommendations canbe implemented. Bevin P. Engelward is a Professor in theDepartment of Biological Engineering(bevin@mit.edu).

MIT Faculty NewsletterVol. XXXII No. 4

12

Olivier L. de WeckIntroducing an Institute-Wide Referendum at MITCan and should MIT selectively adopt the tools of direct democracy?

I ATTE N D E D TH E M IT Faculty Forumon February 5, 2020 in 10-250 as I wantedto hear what is on the minds of my col-leagues on the current state of affairs atMIT in terms of governance and thegeneral climate. This was especiallyimportant to me as I recently returnedfrom a two-year leave of absence fromMIT in France and had felt a bit out oftouch. I did not speak during the meetingbut listened carefully to my colleagues andtook mental notes. At the core the issue seems to be thatlarge portions of the MIT community (notonly the faculty) feel disempowered andhave the impression that their views andopinions cannot currently influence theway in which the Institute is managedand how it is evolving in the future.Specific contentious issues that haveaffected the MIT-wide community inrecent years are: • Accepting major financial gifts anddonations from individuals who havebeen convicted of criminal acts and/orwhose actions are demonstrably in con-flict with MIT’s mission and values (evenif some of those individuals are MITalumni/ae);

• Major changes to MIT’s campus andphysical plant such as the demolition ofbeloved but unsafe or outdated dormito-ries or the leasing of land for 99 years, orthe building of lucrative commercial realestate on land owned or controlled by MIT;

• The creation of major new initiativesand organizational structures that touchmore than one School and the disman-

tling of programs that may be perceivedby the Administration as non-competitiveor obsolete. On any of these issues we find and willcontinue to find a wide range of opinionsamongst faculty, students, staff, and theAdministration. Some pro, some contra,and many ambivalent somewhere in themiddle. I am personally in favor of a strongAdministration with a clear vision andability to execute this vision to help main-tain MIT at the forefront of universitiesand progressive academic institutions inthe world1. For example, I do not favor theestablishment of a “faculty senate” whichmight act as a separate check and balanceagainst the Administration, but not auto-matically include the voice of other stake-holders on campus such as the studentsand the staff. It seems that there is a dis-tinct impression that has formed oncampus that the Executive Committee ofthe MIT Corporation effectively runsMIT with no direct accountability to orability by the MIT community to influ-ence or override decisions made by theSenior Administration and ExecutiveCommittee of the Corporation and thatseveral recent decisions run counter to thebeliefs and opinions of a majority of theMIT community. However, this is reallyunsubstantiated speculation on my part

from reading the MIT Faculty Newsletter2

(FNL) and The Tech and participating infaculty meetings, the Random (formerlyKeyser) Faculty Dinners and listening tostudents, staff, and colleagues sharingtheir impressions. Without explicitly asking and “voting”on specific issues it is impossible to knowwhat the will or preference of the MITcommunity really is. Formation of opin-ions through mechanisms such as discus-sion panels, community forums, and soon will only give a partial view and reflectonly the opinion of a small and oftenvocal subset of MIT. An answer or partial answer may befound in the principles and instruments ofdirect democracy as I experienced them asa child and young adult growing up inSwitzerland. I remember the tradition,every three to four months, of going to thelocal polling place with my parents andmy brother and dropping off the papervoting slips in a sealed gray envelope onspecific issues that affected us all. This actof direct voting was and is deeplyingrained in the culture of what has oftenbeen described as one of the most success-ful pluralistic societies and countries onEarth3. Some of the more memorable votesthat I can recall were:

1 It is difficult to argue that MIT is not anddoes not continue to be one of the, if not thetop university in the world with a focus on the“arts and sciences” as reflected by manyinternational rankings such as the QS Ratingof World Universities where MIT has beenrated #1 for many years. Side note: My almamater ETH Zurich in Switzerland is rated 6th.

2 I served on the Editorial Board of the FNLfrom 2004 to 2013.3 Switzerland is ranked first or at least in thetop 10 globally in a number of categories suchas Global Competitiveness (WEF), GlobalInnovation Index (WIPO), Prosperity Index(Legatum Institute), Happiness (Gallup), Incomeper Capita in PPP (IMF), and HumanDevelopment Index (UN). It is difficult to arguethat direct democracy does not work or has notworked for Switzerland based on the merits.

MIT Faculty NewsletterMarch/April 2020

13

• Lowering the retirement age (1978,20.6% For, 79.4% Against)

• Abolition of the Swiss Army (1989,35.6% For, 64.4% Against)

• Lowering the voting age to 18 (1991,72.7% For, 27.3% Against)

• Joining the European Economic Area(1992, 49.7% For, 50.3% Against)

• Sunday shopping in Transit Hubs(2005, 50.6% For, 49.4% Against)

• Building of the new Gotthard Trans-Alpine Tunnel (2016, 57% For, 43%Against)

The outcomes of some of these voteswere clear, while others were a very closecall. Most of them ended up with what inretrospect I would personally qualify asthe “right decision”, a form of collectiveintelligence4. Even the fact that a popula-tion would voluntarily raise its own taxrates is possible as long as it is clear whatthe money will be used for. It has to beacknowledged, however, that some votesled to results that I personally found to bewrong, even shameful:

• Prohibition regarding the building ofminarets (2009, 57.5% For, 42.5%Against)

• Imposition of immigration quotas bycountry (2014, 50.3% For, 49.7% Against)

I am not arguing that direct democ-racy is perfect, but that it is a powerfulform of governance that gives the popu-lation the distinct feeling and real possi-bility of being able to influence thecourse of history, even if not all decisionsturn out “perfectly”. One of the beneficialside effects of direct democracy is thatboth the executive branch and the legis-lature have to explain their positions indetail even as the government has theright to offer up counterproposals. Each

cycle of referenda voting is accompaniednot only by the ballot itself, but also by acarefully prepared booklet presenting thearguments “pro” and “contra” with data,facts, and interpretations in a balancedfashion. An external neutral watchdogorganization ensures the fairness of theway the information is presented tovoters.

With this article I want to raise the pos-sibility that two specific instruments ofdirect democracy, the initiative and thereferendum, may become new tools ofMIT governance that would give thelarger community a voice, while preserv-ing in parallel the hierarchical manage-ment structure (corporation-senioradministration-school / college-depart-ment) that is needed to run a complexenterprise such as MIT with an annualbudget on the order of $4 billion (includ-ing Lincoln Laboratory) and over 14,000faculty and staff and 7,000 students. What exactly are we talking abouthere? MIT Initiative5: A vote by the MIT

community on a particular issue of inter-est could be forced by the collection of asufficient number of validated physical orelectronic signatures. MIT Referendum: A major announce-ment or decision by the MITAdministration and/or CorporationExecutive Committee could be challengedor overturned by the MIT community.

What might MIT’s version of an initia-tive or referendum look like? The referendum and initiative asinstruments of direct democracy are notset in stone or a one-size-fits-all solution.There are many ways in which these toolscan be designed to have more or less teethand be more or less easy to initiate. The keyis to hear from the community directly onspecific issues using either an open orsecret ballot. The table above shows arange of potential implementations ofdirect democratic principles and tools atMIT. By selecting one alternative fromeach row a particular “MIT version” of areferendum or initiative could be created.

4 For MIT research on collective intelligence,see: https://cci.mit.edu/.

5 The word “referendum” was first used in theSwiss canton of Graubünden in the 16thCentury. In Switzerland a referendum requires50,000 validated signatures and an initiative100,000. Unfortunately these numbers arefixed constants in the constitution and notexpressed as a percentage of the population.

As a result, now that Switzerland’s populationhas grown to nearly 10 million, it has becomeeasier and easier to launch a referendum,leading to an overload of issues to be votedon.

Anchored inMIT’s Bylawsand Regulations

Yes No

Who gets tovote

Faculty onlyFaculty andStudents

Faculty, Students,and full-time Staff

Impact of voteConsultation only(non-binding)

Mixed (binding onlyfor some issues)

Binding (effectivelya veto right)

Issues subject toReferendum andInitiative

Academic only(Curriculum)

Academic andOperations (includ-ing Infrastructure)

All

Instrument Referendum only Initiative only Both

Minimum numberof signaturesrequired

Fixed number (e.g., 1000)

Relative number(e.g., 5% or 10%)

Frequency Annually Twice per year Quarterly

continued on next page

MIT Faculty NewsletterVol. XXXII No. 4

14

Arguments in favor of introducingsuch instruments of governance at MITare that they would empower themembers of the MIT community to voicetheir opinions – through an official vote –on issues of common interest. It mightlead to higher levels of engagement, andpotentially less conflict between theAdministration/Corporation and faculty,students, and staff. It would also force theAdministration to better explain itsrationale for major decisions. Arguments against direct democracyat MIT that I have heard are that it maylead to a de facto shackling of theAdministration in launching major newinitiatives and moving the Instituteforward in important ways that may beunpopular but necessary. Other argu-ments are that major strategic issues andsmaller tactical and operational issueswould become co-mingled leading to aconfusing thicket of new regulations,rules, and contradictory directives. I am not yet convinced that an MITinitiative and/or referendum is the rightway forward but I am hoping we can havean active discussion and perhaps imple-ment an MIT-wide initiative and referen-dum on a trial basis as an experiment for aperiod of one or two years. This wouldprobably be an initiative or referendum ofthe non-binding kind and would allow usto gather some experience with directdemocracy at MIT. What would this look like in practice? Imagine receiving a future email suchas this one:

27 March 2023

MIT is considering the elimination of all carparking (except for electric vehicles andvisitor parking) on campus and converting

existing parking lots and garages to otheruses such as student and faculty housingand research laboratories. Current car com-muters will receive free passes for publictransportation on the T and MBTAnetwork and subsidized parking at officialpark-and-ride facilities in Massachusetts,New Hampshire, and Rhode Island. Are youin favor of this proposal?

Yes No Abstain

Please submit your kerberos certified vote athttps://voting.mit.edu/2023/parking by 1 May 2023.

Would you like to participate in MITgovernance in this way? Or do you trust the Administration tomake the right decision on behalf of all ofus? We have a history of experimentationat MIT, for example we have made signif-icant changes to our first-year curriculumsuch as PNR. Why not experiment withdirect democracy in this way? Here aresome topics that might be potential sub-jects of upcoming MIT-wide interest thatcould yield a meaningful community-wide referendum:

• Future campus development beyondthe current MIT 2030 framework;

• Overhaul of the current GeneralInstitute Requirements (GIRs), impactingparticularly the first-year experience forundergraduates;

• Policies for how MIT defends notonly itself as an institution but alsomembers of the community, includingfaculty, staff, and students who areaccused by the federal government and itsagencies of having broken the law;

• Major structural changes at MIT suchas the creation of a new School or College.

I look forward to your feedback andcomments on whether you think someinstruments of direct democracy such as areferendum and/or initiative should havea place at MIT. Should the Institute launchan experiment with an MIT-wide referen-dum in the future?

An Institute-Wide Referendumde Weck, from preceding page

Arguments in favor of introducing such instruments ofgovernance at MIT are that they would empower themembers of the MIT community to voice their opinions –through an official vote – on issues of common interest.. . . Arguments against direct democracy at MIT that Ihave heard are that it may lead to a de facto shacklingof the Administration in launching major new initiativesand moving the Institute forward in important ways thatmay be unpopular but necessary.

Olivier L. de Weck is Professor of Aeronauticsand Astronautics and Engineering Systems, andFaculty Director MIT-Switzerland Program /MISTI (deweck@mit.edu).

Author's Note: This article was submitted before

the current Covid-19 crisis and is not meant as a

criticism of the current Administration, who has

handled the situation very well, but as a contri-

bution to discuss longer term governance issues

at MIT.

MIT Faculty NewsletterMarch/April 2020

15

Alison HyndPKG Center Connects MIT Students with Broader Community Needs

AS TH E NOW FR EQU E NT MIT Alertemails demonstrate, staff and faculty haveworked from their home offices andkitchen tables to help thousands of stu-dents to move off campus at short notice,quickly translate curriculum to virtualformats, provide essential medical serv-ices while protecting patients and practi-tioners, and a thousand other challengesthat we hadn’t anticipated at the start ofthe semester. While we settle into our new normal,the MIT community is also thinkingabout how to support our broader com-munities as businesses are shuttered andincome streams suddenly disappear.Social media feeds are full of ideas forquick actions that we can take to helpsupport employees of local businesses:

• Buy restaurant gift certificates andorder curbside pickup from those thathave transitioned to takeout (leaving a tipif you are able);

• Continue paying gym membershipswhile you run around the park and docrunches in your living room;

• Make kid-friendly virtual lessonsabout your academic area for those whoare homeschooling and working fromhome.

All good ideas, but this is also a criticaltime to support and learn more about thenonprofit and government agencies whowork with vulnerable populations year-round and are rising to the current chal-

lenges. At the Priscilla King Gray Centerfor Public Service (PKG Center), we’reputting together resources for helpingothers during a public health crisis andconnecting students to summer workwith social impact agencies. We’ll besharing these with the MIT community,but also ask for your connections and sug-gestions to help us develop the resources.

First a quick introduction for thosewho don’t know us: The PKG Centerbuilds on MIT students’ unique skills andinterests and prepares them to addresscomplex social and environmental chal-lenges. We educate students to collaborateethically and effectively with communitypartners in order to engage in meaningfulpublic service, today and in their livesbeyond MIT. We help students connectwith a wide variety of public service proj-ects in local, national, and global commu-nities. We also provide guidance – andoften funding – for their projects. To do this, we collaborate with adiverse set of community agencies (non-profits, public agencies, social enterprises,corporate social responsibility divisions,and others) whose missions and valuesalign with our own and who see mutual

value in working with MIT students toaddress community challenges andopportunities. Many agencies are flippingtheir usual work modes to support theirclients while following social distance reg-ulations and are devising creative waysthat the public can volunteer remotely.We’ll be adding these to an onlineresource library of practical opportunities

to support the work of local agencies aswell as articles on best practices and self-care for volunteers. Here are some ideas for starters:

Connect • Connect students to paid socialimpact work. Many of our students weredepending on MIT programs or corpo-rate internships for summer income andare now facing significant financial hard-ship as a result of program cancellationsand office closures. At the PKG Center, we are connecting

students with social impact agencies forpaid remote internships over the summerwith up to 75% of the student wages

[At the PKG Center] we educate students to collaborateethically and effectively with community partners in orderto engage in meaningful public service, today and intheir lives beyond MIT. We help students connect with awide variety of public service projects in local, national,and global communities.

continued on next page

MIT Faculty NewsletterVol. XXXII No. 4

16

coming from Federal Work-Study or PKGCenter funds. If you collaborate with agreat social impact agency in your work orpersonal life and you think they wouldvalue the input of an MIT student (ortwo!) over the summer, please let us know.We are particularly interested in opportu-nities related to computational tech for thesocial good, health, and climate change,but all ideas are welcomed. For the timebeing, we are focusing on work that can bedone remotely, but also appreciate con-tacts for in-person opportunities for thefuture. You can learn more here and usethis form to share contacts and ideas. If you know students whose summerplans have fallen through and who wouldbe interested in a paid social impactinternship, please ask them to completethis form and direct them to the guide tohelping students find summer opportuni-ties produced by our colleagues at CAPD.

• Connect your team and stay fit.Work groups from across MIT are gettingcreative about how to stay connected andkeep positive team dynamics whileworking from home and many aresharing their tips and resources for stayingfit while gyms and fitness studios areclosed. Consider contracting KendallSquare favorite InnerCity Weightlifting tohelp you do both at once! InnerCityWeightlifting reduces community vio-lence by connecting victims of traumaand racial segregation to new opportuni-ties, including meaningful career tracks inand beyond personal training. Althoughtheir gym is closed, you can hire trainersfor virtual group workouts or purchaseworkout videos of routines that can bedone at home without equipment. Emailiank@innercityweightlifting.org.

Engage • PKG webinar. Many of us are askinghow we can use our skills to help others inthese new circumstances. We want to

support those around us, respond tourgent community needs, and connectwith others. You may have joined us for awebinar recently where we shared ideasand resources to support our local com-munities and to aid in combatting theimpacts of Covid-19. We will have aclosed-captioned recording available soonat pkgcenter.mit.edu and may offer newwebinar dates as more opportunities tohelp emerge. Together, with community-informed perspectives, we can support ourneighbors and each other.

• Resource Library. We are collaboratingwith colleagues at other higher educationsocial impact centers to produce a resourcelibrary of practical opportunities and bestpractices for local community engagement.Access the work in progress library here:

• 1 Page Overview of Webinar Contents• Community Engagement Self-Checklist• Stay Informed – Covid-19• Volunteering Locally & Remotely• Cambridge + Boston Opportunities• Civic Participation & Advocacy• Philanthropy

We welcome suggestions for engagingwith organizations that you support andare in your communities.

Donate • Donate money. As job losses hit ourcommunities, the non-profits tacklingfood insecurity, homelessness, and othercritical issues will need donations morethan ever. In Cambridge, the Mayor’sDisaster Relief Fund for Covid-19 hasbeen created to provide emergency assis-tance in partnership with non-profitorganizations to individuals and familiesin Cambridge who are experiencingextreme financial hardship caused by thecurrent Covid-19 crisis. Look for similarinitiatives in your hometown or con-tribute directly to agencies with which youare familiar.

• Donate lab supplies. Boston areahospitals need donations of personal pro-tective equipment to keep front-linehealth workers safe. MIT encourages labsto donate supplies, and has a team tocoordinate donations and funnel them tolocal health care facilities.

PKG Center Connects MIT StudentsHynd, from preceding page

As job losses hit our communities, the non-profitstackling food insecurity, homelessness, and other criticalissues will need donations more than ever. In Cambridge,the Mayor’s Disaster Relief Fund for Covid-19 has beencreated to provide emergency assistance in partnershipwith non-profit organizations to individuals and familiesin Cambridge who are experiencing extreme financialhardship caused by the current Covid-19 crisis.

Alison Hynd is Assistant Dean of the PriscillaKing Gray Center at MIT (hynd@mit.edu).

MIT Faculty NewsletterVol. XXXII No. 4

M.I.T. NumbersWomen at MIT 1962-2020

!"

#"

$!"

$#"

%!"

%#"

&!"

&#"

'!"

'#"

#!"

!"#$

!"%$

!"&$

!""$

$''$

$'!$

()*+,-,.*/.0+1

2,.*/.0+1

34456.7/408

97:+)7+5.)*5;)-:)++,:)-56.7/408

Source: Office of the Provost/Institutional Research

2020