10 December 2008
Report on the Proposed Changes to the GIRs
Student Committee on Educational Policy
Undergraduate Association
1 Abstract
We present the findings of a week-long survey of the undergraduate population on the
proposed changes to the GIRs. Students were presented with information on the proposed
changes and then asked a series of questions designed to provide insight into student
reaction to the proposals as well as the rationale behind the proposed changes. We
gained responses from 24% of upperclassmen and 33% of freshmen students at MIT.
Our findings show overall support for the implementation of flavors in the SME core,
SME foundations, and the changes to HASS-Ds; weak support for the implementation of
the Elements of Design GIR with accompanying concerns; and opposition to the
implementation of the First-Year Focus subjects, primarily due to their perceived
negative impact on freshmen-upperclassmen relations. The opinions of the two
populations were aligned on every proposal save for the First-Year Focus, where
freshmen weakly supported it while upperclassmen generally opposed it.
2 Introduction
In 2006, an Institute task force engaged in a comprehensive review of the undergraduate
educational experience at MIT. Their recommendations were extended and refined by the
Educational Commons Subcommittee (ECS), and the final form of the proposed changes
to the GIRs was presented before the faculty for a vote in December. If adopted, these
changes will take effect for all undergraduate students starting with the class of 2014. An
electronic version of the ECS report can be found here. Coverage of the report can be
found in this article in the Tech, dated October 24, 2008, and also in this article in the
faculty newsletter.
To gather student opinion on these proposed changes, the UA Student Committee on
Educational Policy (UA SCEP) designed and implemented a survey for the
undergraduate population of MIT. We ran the survey from November 9 to November 16,
2008, and the following summarizes our findings. We hope these results can be used to
inform further discussion on the proposed GIRs changes.
UA Student Committee on Education Policy
1
10 December 2008
3 Survey Design and Implementation
The survey comprised of three sections, each of which began with a description of
explained the proposed changes and their underlying motivations followed by a series of
questions related to each proposed change. Most of the questions were phrased in
"Agree/Disagree" format and sought to test the proposals' underlying assumptions about
student learning preferences and experiences at MIT. A free response option at the end
of each proposal captured additional student concerns and feedback. All participating
students were entered in a lottery to win one of twenty $20 prizes in TechCash. Links to
the ECS final report and articles on the change in the Tech and faculty newsletter were
also provided.
Two similar versions of the survey were developed and distributed, one of which was
geared towards freshmen and the other towards upperclassmen. The content in each
version was essentially the same, but the upperclassmen survey asked some additional
questions that drew upon the wider experiences of undergraduates who have spent more
time at the Institute and within their selected major. Additionally, the questions in each
version were worded differently to encourage students to give their evaluation of their
experiences at the time. For example, upperclassmen were asked "Thinking back to my
freshman experience, I feel like that taking First-Year Focus classes would have built a
more cohesive class community," whereas freshmen were asked "I feel that taking a
First-Year Focus class would lead to a more cohesive and interactive freshmen
community."
4 Results
In all, 753 upperclassmen and 345 freshmen students responded to the survey,
representing 24% and 33% of the respective populations at MIT.
A. Flavors in the Science-Math-Engineering (SME) Core
Overall, students supported the introduction of flavors into the SME Core (with 71% of
upperclassmen and 78% of freshmen agreeing or strongly agreeing with the previous
statement). Over 70% of students agreed or strongly agreed (henceforth, we will simply
say "agreed" to mean "agreed or strongly agreed") that they valued the flexibility
afforded by having more options for the SME core classes above and beyond what is
currently being offered. 68% of upperclassmen and 78% of freshmen agreed that having
flavors in the SME core would help them better explore potential majors in their first
years at MIT, while 78% of upperclassmen and freshmen alike agreed that their intended
major would significantly influence their choice of which flavor to take for certain
requirements. Many students felt that this would encourage specialization at an earlier
point in their undergraduate career, with divided opinions on whether this would be a
positive or negative development. While many liked having the flexibility to specialize
and explore, others felt that their choice of major would be influenced by the flavors they
chose in their freshmen year and worried about being "pigeonholed".
UA Student Committee on Education Policy
2
10 December 2008
Another major concern expressed by students was whether or not classes would be truly
equivalent in their ability to prepare students for all majors. Many pointed to the
chemistry GIR and pointed out that 3.091 is generally considered inadequate preparation
for majors in the life sciences; similar concerns were expressed with other classes.
Students also expressed concern at the reception of flavors by professional programs
(especially medical school). Many expressed concern about the loss of what they
considered a great unifying experience for freshmen, while others preferred the smaller
classes that would result from the proposed system.
Flavors of SME Core
I value the flexibility afforded by
having more options for the SME
Core classes (beyond what is
currently being offered)
I value faculty innovation in
teaching of the SME core classes.
More flexibility in the SME core
would allow me to better take
charge of my education and
explore my interests
Having flavors in the SME core
would help me better explore
potential majors.
My intended major would
significantly influence my choice
of which flavor to take for certain
requirements.
Overall, I support the introduction
of flavors into the SME core.
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
Freshmen
UA Student Committee on Education Policy
0.5
1
1.5
2
Upperclassmen
3
10 December 2008
Flavors of SME Core (Freshmen)
I value the flexibility afforded by
having more options for the SME
Core classes (beyond what is
currently being offered)
I value faculty innovation in
teaching of the SME core classes.
More flexibility in the SME core
would allow me to better take
charge of my education and
explore my interests
Having flavors in the SME core
would help me better explore
potential majors.
My intended major would
significantly influence my choice
of which flavor to take for certain
requirements.
Overall, I support the introduction
of flavors into the SME core.
0%
10%
20%
30%
Strongly Agree
40%
Agree
50%
Neutral
60%
Disagree
70%
80%
90%
100%
90%
100%
Strongly Disagree
Flavors of SME Core (Upperclassmen)
I value the flexibility afforded by
having more options for the SME
Core classes (beyond what is
currently being offered)
I value faculty innovation in
teaching of the SME core classes.
More flexibility in the SME core
would allow me to better take
charge of my education and
explore my interests
Having flavors in the SME core
would help me better explore
potential majors.
My intended major would
significantly influence my choice
of which flavor to take for certain
requirements.
Overall, I support the introduction
of flavors into the SME core.
0%
10%
20%
30%
Strongly Agree
UA Student Committee on Education Policy
40%
Agree
50%
Neutral
60%
Disagree
70%
80%
Strongly Disagree
4
10 December 2008
B. Science-Math-Engineering (SME) Foundations
The majority of students surveyed said they were neutral on the proposed implementation
of SME Foundations in place of the REST electives, with a little over 30% of students
supporting the measure and about 20% against it. Many students either didn't know or
didn't care about the different between the two systems, believing that their major
programs would satisfy the requirement either way. Over 70% of upperclassmen felt
that, if differential equations, linear algebra, probability, statistics, and computations were
included as SME Foundations, then this proposal would not significantly change the
classes that they would be required to take in their current major program. Some students
were concerned about the loss of flexibility under the proposed changes, while others
agreed with the "essential" nature of the suggested classes.
With regards to 6-unit SME Foundations classes, 39% of upperclassmen and 54% of
freshmen agreed that they would value the flexibility afforded by taking two 6-unit SME
Foundation classes instead of a single 12-unit class.
SME Foundations
Thinking back on when I first
entered MIT, I would have found
the SME Foundation
requirements clearer than the
current REST requirement.
I would value the flexibility
afforded by taking two 6-unit SME
Foundation classes instead of a
single 12-unit class.
I think that a 6 unit SME
Foundation class would be more
effectively taught in half a
semester (rather than a full
semester).
Overall, I support the proposed
implementation of SME
Foundations to replace the REST
electives.
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
Freshmen
UA Student Committee on Education Policy
0.5
1
1.5
2
Upperclassmen
5
10 December 2008
SME Foundations (Freshmen)
I find it more helpful to have a list
of 6-10 SME foundations classes
instead of a list of ~45 REST
electives.
I would value the flexibility
afforded by taking two 6-unit SME
Foundation classes instead of a
single 12-unit class.
I think that a 6 unit SME
Foundation class would be more
effectively taught in half a
semester (rather than a full
semester).
Overall, I support the proposed
implementation of SME
Foundations to replace the REST
electives.
0%
10%
20%
30%
Strongly Agree
40%
Agree
50%
Neutral
60%
Disagree
70%
80%
90%
100%
Strongly Disagree
SME Foundations (Upperclassmen)
Thinking back on when I first entered MIT, I would have found the SME
Foundation requirements clearer than the current REST requirement.
If this requirement included Differential Equations, Linear Algebra, Probability,
Statistics, and Computations as suitable courses, then this proposal would NOT
significantly change the classes that I am required to take in my current major
program.
I would value the flexibility afforded by taking two 6-unit SME Foundation
classes instead of a single 12-unit class.
I think that a 6 unit SME Foundation class would be more effectively taught in
half a semester (rather than a full semester).
Overall, I support the proposed implementation of SME Foundations to replace
the REST electives.
0%
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
UA Student Committee on Education Policy
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
6
10 December 2008
C. Elements of Design
Overall, students weakly agreed with the statement that they support the proposed
introduction of Elements of Design subjects. 50% of upperclassmen and 58% of
freshmen indicated that they agreed or strongly agreed with the previous statement.
While a great majority of the students (70% of upperclassmen and 76% of freshmen)
agreed that it would benefit their educational experience to learn about modes of
reasoning relevant to design (such as hierarchical reasoning, reasoning with constraints,
and scaling and approximation), some students thought that such a course should not be
made into a General Institute Requirement. Most students approved of offering such a
class but some students commented that such design learning was already being achieved
through UROPs, internships, and existing classes, and it would be more attractive as an
option but not as a requirement.
61% of upperclassmen and 58% of freshmen agree that requiring a design course would
have a significant effect on their overall courseload. 47% of upperclassmen agreed that
such a design class would complement existing requirements in their department. The
comments made by the students suggested that this design class was perceived as
appropriate for engineering majors, but that the existing lab requirement would be more
appropriate for sciences and humanities. Many expressed a strong desire to have the
requirement to be department-specific, to maintain relevance. 58% of upperclassmen and
63% of freshmen agreed that they would be interested in pursuing a collaborative projectbased design class, though some expressed concern that the quality of such classes might
be adversely affected if students are forced to take them, since collaborative projects are
highly dependent on student enthusiasm and participation. There is a general agreement
that the Elements of Design requirement, if adopted, should be made relevant and tested
rigorously before made into a permanent GIR.
Elements of Design
It would benefit my educational experience to learn about modes of reasoning
relevant to design (Examples include hierarchical reasoning, reasoning with
constraints, and scaling and approximation.)
I would be interested in pursuing a collaborative project-based design class.
Requiring a design course would have a significant effect on my overall
courseload.
This class would complement existing requirements in my department.
Overall, I support the introduction of Elements of Design subjects.
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
Freshmen
UA Student Committee on Education Policy
0.5
1
1.5
2
Upperclassmen
7
10 December 2008
Elements of Design (Freshmen)
It would benefit my educational experience to learn about modes of reasoning
relevant to design (Examples include hierarchical reasoning, reasoning with
constraints, and scaling and approximation.)
I would be interested in pursuing a collaborative project-based design class.
Requiring a design course would have a significant effect on my overall
courseload.
Overall, I support the proposed introduction of Elements of Design subjects.
0%
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Elements of Design (Upperclassmen)
It would benefit my educational experience to learn about modes of reasoning
relevant to design (Examples include hierarchical reasoning, reasoning with
constraints, and scaling and approximation.)
I would be interested in pursuing a collaborative project-based design class.
Requiring a design course would have a significant effect on my overall
courseload.
This class would complement existing requirements in my department.
Overall, I support the introduction of Elements of Design subjects.
0%
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
UA Student Committee on Education Policy
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
8
10 December 2008
D. Elimination of the HASS-D designation system
Both upperclassmen and freshmen student overwhelmingly preferred the new proposed
distribution system in the HASS's to the current HASS-D system. Only 29% of
upperclassmen and 31% of freshmen agreed with the statement that the current HASS-D
system is clear and understandable, while 61% of upperclassmen and 62% of freshmen
disagreed or strongly disagreed. In contrast, 79% of the upperclassmen and 74% of the
freshmen agreed that the proposed new distribution system is clear and understandable.
71% of upperclassmen and 66% of freshmen agreed that the new system would increase
their flexibility in taking HASS classes.
In general, students concur that the proposed system is clearer and promotes more
flexibility than the current one, though some students mentioned that the new system
might make it harder to avoid certain fields. Many students also liked the option of
taking higher level classes to fulfill their distribution requirement, though a very limited
number were concerned that this might pressure students into taking more higher-level
classes. With regards to the question of whether interdisciplinary HASS subjects should
be given designations in multiple categories (e.g. History Through Film as HASS-Arts
and HASS-Social Sciences), 50% of both upperclassmen and freshmen agreed that such a
system would significantly affect complexity and clarity. There was also significant
feeling that new system should maintain (or even expand) the current role of foreign
language in fulfilling HASS distribution requirements.
UA Student Committee on Education Policy
9
10 December 2008
First-Year Focus and Elimination of HASS-D Designation
When I first learned about the
current HASS-D system,
I found it clear and easy to
understand.
The proposed new distribution
system is clear and understandable.
One proposal is to give interdisciplinary
subjects multiple categories. This system
would significantly affect complexity and
clarity.
This change would increase my flexibility
in taking HASS classes.
I feel that upperclassmen have an
advantage in HASS classes that are
freshmen oriented.
I would rather take this class in my
first year rather than delaying to
sophomore year or later.
I feel that taking First-Year Focus
classes would build a more
cohesive class community.
I value the freshmen-upperclassmen
interactions that I currently experience
in my HASS-D courses.
Overall, I support the proposed new
distribution system and First-Year Focus
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
Freshmen
Upperclassmen
UA Student Committee on Education Policy
0.5
1
1.5
2
10
10 December 2008
Elimination of HASS-D Designation (Freshmen)
When I first learned about the
current HASS-D system, I found it
clear and understandable.
The proposed new distribution
system is clear and
understandable.
One proposal is to give
interdisciplinary subjects multiple
categories (e.g. History through
Film as HASS-Arts and HASSSocial Sciences). This system
would significantly affect
complexity and clarity.
This change would increase my
flexibility in taking HASS classes.
0%
10%
20%
30%
Strongly Agree
40%
Agree
50%
Neutral
60%
Disagree
70%
80%
90%
100%
90%
100%
Strongly Disagree
Elimination of HASS-D Designation (Upperclassmen)
When I first learned about the
current HASS-D system, I found it
clear and understandable.
The proposed new distribution
system is clear and
understandable.
One proposal is to give
interdisciplinary subjects multiple
categories (e.g. History through
Film as HASS-Arts and HASSSocial Sciences). This system
would significantly affect
complexity and clarity.
This change would increase my
flexibility in taking HASS classes.
0%
10%
20%
30%
Strongly Agree
UA Student Committee on Education Policy
40%
Agree
50%
Neutral
60%
Disagree
70%
80%
Strongly Disagree
11
10 December 2008
E. First-year Focus
One of the purposes of the proposed First-Year Focus subjects is to provide introductorylevel subjects (in the absence of the HASS-D system) that would expose freshmen
students to questions of enduring human concern (e.g. Revolutions, Culture, Justice) and
give them a broad introduction to interdisciplinary scholarship in these areas. Another
goal is to foster freshman community by creating avenues for pursuit of shared academic
interests. The questions in the GIRs survey aimed at uncovering how well these aims
could be accomplished through the proposed First-Year Focus subjects, and what are
student opinions on the consequent changes to their HASS curriculum.
56% of freshmen disagreed that taking a First-Year Focus class would lead to a more
cohesive and interactive class community. Upperclassmen were even more skeptical
(61% disagreed with the previous statement). On average, upperclassmen and freshmen
both weakly disagreed with the statement that upperclassmen have an advantage in
freshmen-oriented HASS classes. At the same time, students strongly stressed the
importance of freshmen-upperclassmen interactions in their current HASS classes (57%
of upperclassmen and 53% of freshmen agreed with the statement that they valued these
interactions, and this sentiment was strongly reinforced in the comments). There was
general opposition to any class that overly concentrated freshmen to the exclusion of
upperclassmen. Some felt that class community-building was already amply encouraged
through the common GIR core, freshman seminars, and alternative learning communities
like ESG.
If given the freedom to choose what year to take the First-Year Focus requirement, 43%
of upperclassmen said that they would rather take it in their first year rather than delaying
it to the sophomore year or later. Some students felt that the degree of flexibility in the
freshmen year was already constrained, and that having a small pool of First-Year Focus
classes would further limit student flexibility. While many responded positively to the
idea of multidisciplinary classes focused on “big ideas,” there are strong objections to
making it mandatory for the freshmen year.
Upperclassmen who supported the First-Year Focus proposal commented that they
valued the “big ideas” flavors and the interdisciplinary nature that the classes would have.
But many others emphasized that they valued the interactions they had with freshmen in
the current HASS-D classes, including the opportunities to form mentoring relationships,
etc. Some raised strong objections to the faculty and/or administration imposing a sense
of class community from the outside, particularly when it would encourage divisions by
year.
UA Student Committee on Education Policy
12
10 December 2008
First-Year Focus (Freshmen)
As a freshman, I feel that the
upperclassmen have an
advantage in my HASS classes
that are freshmen oriented.
I feel that taking a First-Year
Focus class would lead to a more
cohesive and interactive freshmen
community.
I value the freshmenupperclassmen interactions that I
currently experience in my HASSD courses.
0%
10%
20%
30%
Strongly Agree
40%
Agree
50%
Neutral
60%
Disagree
70%
80%
90%
100%
90%
100%
Strongly Disagree
First-Year Focus (Upperclassmen)
As an upperclassman, I feel that I
have an advantage in HASS
classes that are freshmen
oriented.
Thinking back to when I was a
freshman, I would rather have
taken this class in my first year
rather than delaying to
sophomore year or later.
Thinking back to my freshman
experience, I feel like that taking
First-Year Focus classes would
have built a more cohesive class
community.
I value the freshmenupperclassmen interactions that I
currently experience in my HASSD courses.
0%
10%
20%
30%
Strongly Agree
UA Student Committee on Education Policy
40%
Agree
50%
Neutral
60%
Disagree
70%
80%
Strongly Disagree
13
10 December 2008
Overall, freshmen were weakly for and upperclassmen weakly against the proposed
changes to the HASS GIRs, which includes both the proposed distribution system and the
First-Year Focus subject. Many upperclassmen indicated in the comments that they
denied the overall proposal their support based on the First-Year Focus proposal, even
though they were strongly in favor of the HASS-D proposal.
HASS GIRs
Overall, I support the proposed
new distribution system and FirstYear Focus subject (Freshmen)
Overall, I support the proposed
new distribution system and FirstYear Focus subject
(Upperclassmen)
0%
10%
20%
30%
Strongly Agree
40%
Agree
50%
Neutral
60%
Disagree
70%
80%
90%
100%
Strongly Disagree
5 Conclusions & Recommendations
Overall, we find that students support the implementation of flavors in the SME core,
with the caveat that all flavors should provide adequate preparation for all majors. We
recommend that advisors should emphasize to first-year students that taking one flavor
does not necessarily constrain them to one degree path and that they should explore
different options before declaring a major.
Students generally support the implementation of the SME core and removal of the REST
requirement, but most were indifferent to this change.
While we find weak overall support for the implementation of Elements of Design, there
are many students who express a strong opposition to the proposal. If Elements of Design
is to be implemented, careful planning should to be made to make the subjects accessible
UA Student Committee on Education Policy
14
10 December 2008
and relevant to all undergraduates regardless of their majors. Particular attention should
be paid to fostering interest and enthusiasm, and project work should be designed so that
unenthusiastic students would be prevented from impeding the learning of the rest of the
class. Alternative options for fulfilling this requirement should be explored, such as
internships or UROPs.
There exists strong support for the implementation of the changes to the HASSDistribution system, with particular enthusiasm for the opportunity to fulfill their
requirement with more advanced classes. The language classes should continue to play a
major role in the new distribution system. In contrast, there exists significant opposition
to the implementation of First-Year Focus classes. While students like the idea of "big
ideas" subjects, students are very worried that academic opportunities for freshmenupperclassmen interactions will be reduced, leading to stronger divisions between the
classes. The perceived reduction of flexibility during the freshman year is also a matter of
significant concern, as well as resistance to what is viewed as efforts to impose a sense of
community from without.
GIR Subcommittee
SCEP Members
Sukrit Ranjan+
Yi Cai+
Richard Dahan
Andy Wu
Ambar Mehta
Eleni Orphanides
Allen Lin
David Chang
Yi Cai+
Sukrit Ranjan+
Allen Lin
David Chang
Radhika Malik
Ankit Gordhandas
Arti Virkud
Richard Dahan
Andy Wu
Genevieve Conley
Minghui (Helen) Ren
Ambar Mehta
Eleni Orphanides
+ Committee Co-chairs
UA Student Committee on Education Policy
+ Committee Co-chairs
15