|Submission Date||Oct. 23, 2018|
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
PA-5: Assessing Diversity and Equity
|1.00 / 1.00||
Office of Sustainability
Office of Sustainability
Has the institution engaged in a structured assessment process during the previous three years to improve diversity, equity and inclusion on campus?:
A brief description of the assessment process and the framework, scorecard(s) and/or tool(s) used:
In 2014, the Institute Community and Equity Officer conducted a year-long study that investigated MIT community and culture: what makes MIT special, which elements of the culture support the MIT mission, and what factors limit our success. It is not a traditional plan for diversity and inclusion. The scope is broader because MIT’s interests are broader. Yet the bottom line is the same: for an institution to achieve its best, its members must be empowered and supported to do their best work. This means not only giving them excellent tools and fostering their success as individuals, but maybe even more importantly, helping them to work together most effectively. This report has three specific goals. The first is to develop a plan for the MIT community to deepen the sense of inclusion based on shared values and to help community members benefit from diversity. The second is to present specific achievable goals for advancing community and equity along with means for assessing progress toward these goals. The third is to define the role of the ICEO.
See blog post from Ed Bertschinger for more information:
Does the assessment process address campus climate by engaging stakeholders to assess the attitudes, perceptions and behaviors of faculty, staff, administrators and students, including the experiences of underrepresented groups?:
Does the assessment process address student outcomes related to diversity, equity and success (e.g. graduation/success and retention rates for underrepresented groups)?:
Does the assessment process address employee outcomes related to diversity and equity (e.g. pay and retention rates for underrepresented groups)?:
A brief description of the most recent assessment findings and how the results are used in shaping policy, programs and initiatives:
In response to the recommendations made by black students in December 2015, the Academic Council working group, a subgroup of Academic Council plus black student representatives, was tasked to implement and monitor the progress of the recommendations which include new student orientation and sharing of survey data.
Additionally, in November 2016, the Provost and Vice President asked the academic deans to work with department heads to develop statements in response to BSU Recommendation 10. By the end of the 2016-17 academic year, all departments had complied their departmental statements. (See BSU #10 http://recommendations.mit.edu/)
Are the results of the most recent structured diversity and equity assessment shared with the campus community?:
A brief description of how the assessment results are shared with the campus community:
Are the results (or a summary of the results) of the most recent structured diversity and equity assessment publicly posted?:
The diversity and equity assessment report or summary:
The website URL where the report or summary is publicly posted:
The website URL where information about the programs or initiatives is available:
Additional documentation to support the submission:
The information presented here is self-reported. While AASHE staff review portions of all STARS reports and institutions are welcome to seek additional forms of review, the data in STARS reports are not verified by AASHE. If you believe any of this information is erroneous or inconsistent with credit criteria, please review the process for inquiring about the information reported by an institution and complete the Data Inquiry Form.