Category: Announcements
The International Society for Transgenic Technologies recognized Whitehead Institute Founding Member Rudolf Jaenisch for his exceptional contribution to the field of animal transgenesis over the past five decades.
Merrill Meadow | Whitehead Institute
June 11, 2024
Whitehead Institute Director and President Ruth Lehmann has been named a Foreign Member of the Royal Society. The election recognizes her “pioneering studies of the mechanisms underlying the embryonic development and reproduction of the fruit fly Drosophila.” It honors her work establishing the role of messenger RNA localization in specifying the antero-posterior body axis and germ line development and additionally notes her discoveries that revealed the role of lipid-based signaling pathways in the migration of germ cells to the developing gonads.
Lisa Girard | Whitehead Institute
May 22, 2024
The Whitehead Innovation Initiative launched in April 2024 and, under the expert guidance of President and Director Ruth Lehmannn, will pioneer the melding of AI and biology. The initiative was made possible by a $10 million gift from Michael and Victoria Chambers.
Merrill Meadow | Whitehead Institute
April 8, 2024
Professors Adam Martin and Joel Volman explain the genesis, scope, and objectives of the recently launched Task Force on the MIT Undergraduate Academic Program.
Office of the Vice Chancellor
March 19, 2024
In late February, Vice Chancellor for Undergraduate and Graduate Education Ian A. Waitz and Faculty Chair Mary Fuller announced the formation and launch of the Task Force on the MIT Undergraduate Academic Program (TFUAP). The effort fulfills a critical recommendation of the Task Force 2021 and Beyond RIC1 (Undergraduate Program) and draws upon several, prior foundational working groups — some focused on the current General Institute Requirements (GIRs) and others on updating recent studies for the purposes of this review.
In this interview, task force co-chairs Adam Martin, professor of biology, and Joel Voldman, the William R. Brody Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science describe the TFUAP’s goals, approach, and next steps.
Q: The charge of the task force is quite ambitious, including “reviewing the current undergraduate academic program and considering improvements with a focus on both the curriculum and pedagogy.” Can you explain your approach?
Martin: For context, it’s important to know that the undergraduate program is multifaceted and consists of many components, including majors, electives, experiential learning, and of course the GIRs — arguably one of the best-known acronyms at MIT! Moreover, the GIRs include science core classes; humanities, arts, and social sciences classes; certain electives in science and engineering; and a lab requirement, each of which serves a slightly different purpose and dovetails with majors and minors in unique ways.
Some aspects of the academic program are determined by the faculty, either MIT-wide or within a particular department. Others can be customized by students, in consultation with faculty and staff advisors, from the broad array of curricular and co-curricular offerings at MIT. The task force will look holistically at all of these aspects, considering both what MIT requires of all students, and the options we make available as students chart their own paths.
As part of this holistic approach, the TFUAP will zero in on both content and pedagogy. Obviously, the content we cover is important; our goal must remain to provide undergraduates with the world-class education they expect. But how we teach is of fundamental importance, as well. The pedagogy we adopt should be inclusive, supported by research, and designed to help students not only understand what they are learning, but why they are learning it — how it relates to their majors, potential careers, and their lives.
Voldman: I think your question’s description of our charge as “ambitious” is noteworthy. We feel that the task force is ambitious, too, but perhaps in a different sense from the question. That is, we believe our job is to not only think about nuts-and-bolts issues of the academic program requirements but also to consider the big picture. What are the most expansive possibilities? How can we push the envelope? That’s the MIT way, after all.
Q: The task force is building upon quite a bit of past work and benefits from some major accomplishments recommended by Task Force 2021 (TF2021). For example, how does the creation of the Undergraduate Advising Center, and in general, the desire to provide more personal and professional support to all students, fit in with the potential updates to the undergraduate curriculum?
Martin: You’re absolutely right — our work benefits greatly from years of conversations focused on the undergraduate academic program, particularly in the last decade or so. These include the 2014 Task Force on the Future of Education; the 2018 Designing the First-Year Experience Class; Task Force 2021 and Beyond (TF2021); the Foundational Working Groups (part of the RIC 1 implementation) that have studied the existing MIT undergraduate program; and the Committee on the Undergraduate Program. The valuable work of these past committees and their findings will certainly inform our thought process.
In the past, groups that evaluated the undergraduate curriculum were also charged with tackling related topics, such as undergraduate advising or revamping classrooms. Taking on any one of these three issues is ambitious by any measure! What’s changed in the past decade is that advances have been made in these other critical areas, so the TFUAP can focus solely on curriculum and pedagogy. For example, thanks to recent accomplishments by TF2021 and others, we have implemented a new advising system for all undergraduates in the form of the Undergraduate Advising Center.
We envision the TFUAP being a highly collaborative process, bringing in voices across the entire Institute and beyond. We welcome input from members of the community via email at tfuap@mit.edu. We will also be reaching out to student groups, alumni, individual faculty, faculty groups, and administrative staff across the Institute to hear their perspectives.
Q: Part of what TFUAP will have to confront, no doubt, are some of the most pressing issues of our time, like the rise of computing and AI, climate change (what President Kornbluth calls an existential threat to our way of life), and the changing nature of learning (online, hybrid, etc.). How are you thinking about all of these factors?
Voldman: That is a good question! It’s early days, and our work is just beginning, but we know that these and other issues loom over all of us. For example, we are keenly aware of the influx of students into computing-related majors and classes, and we need to think deeply about the implications. Furthermore, we want a curriculum that prepares students for current and upcoming global challenges as well as changes in the technology and tools available to address those challenges. However, we can expect that our students will need to be agile and curious, lifelong learners, collaborative and compassionate teammates, and creative and thoughtful problem-solvers.
As we work with the community to design the next version of an MIT undergraduate education, it will be important to build a structure that can incorporate the biggest challenges and opportunities of the day, while staying flexible and responsive to an ever-evolving world.
Joining three teams backed by a total of $75 million, MIT researchers will tackle some of cancer’s toughest challenges.
Bendta Schroeder | Koch Institute
March 18, 2024
Cancer Grand Challenges recently announced five winning teams for 2024, which included five researchers from MIT: Michael Birnbaum, Regina Barzilay, Brandon DeKosky, Seychelle Vos, and Ömer Yilmaz. Each team is made up of interdisciplinary cancer researchers from across the globe and will be awarded $25 million over five years.
Birnbaum, an associate professor in the Department of Biological Engineering, leads Team MATCHMAKERS and is joined by co-investigators Barzilay, the School of Engineering Distinguished Professor for AI and Health in the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science and the AI faculty lead at the MIT Abdul Latif Jameel Clinic for Machine Learning in Health; and DeKosky, Phillip and Susan Ragon Career Development Professor of Chemical Engineering. All three are also affiliates of the Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research At MIT.
Team MATCHMAKERS will take advantage of recent advances in artificial intelligence to develop tools for personalized immunotherapies for cancer patients. Cancer immunotherapies, which recruit the patient’s own immune system against the disease, have transformed treatment for some cancers, but not for all types and not for all patients.
T cells are one target for immunotherapies because of their central role in the immune response. These immune cells use receptors on their surface to recognize protein fragments called antigens on cancer cells. Once T cells attach to cancer antigens, they mark them for destruction by the immune system. However, T cell receptors are exceptionally diverse within one person’s immune system and from person to person, making it difficult to predict how any one cancer patient will respond to an immunotherapy.
Team MATCHMAKERS will collect data on T cell receptors and the different antigens they target and build computer models to predict antigen recognition by different T cell receptors. The team’s overarching goal is to develop tools for predicting T cell recognition with simple clinical lab tests and designing antigen-specific immunotherapies. “If successful, what we learn on our team could help transform prediction of T cell receptor recognition from something that is only possible in a few sophisticated laboratories in the world, for a few people at a time, into a routine process,” says Birnbaum.
“The MATCHMAKERS project draws on MIT’s long tradition of developing cutting-edge artificial intelligence tools for the benefit of society,” comments Ryan Schoenfeld, CEO of The Mark Foundation for Cancer Research. “Their approach to optimizing immunotherapy for cancer and many other diseases is exemplary of the type of interdisciplinary research The Mark Foundation prioritizes supporting.” In addition to The Mark Foundation, the MATCHMAKERS team is funded by Cancer Research UK and the U.S. National Cancer Institute.
Vos, the Robert A. Swanson (1969) Career Development Professor of Life Sciences and HHMI Freeman Hrabowksi Scholar in the Department of Biology, will be a co-investigator on Team KOODAC. The KOODAC team will develop new treatments for solid tumors in children, using protein degradation strategies to target previously “undruggable” drivers of cancers. KOODAC is funded by Cancer Research UK, France’s Institut National Du Cancer, and KiKa (Children Cancer Free Foundation) through Cancer Grand Challenges.
As a co-investigator on team PROSPECT, Yilmaz, who is also a Koch Institute affiliate, will help address early-onset colorectal cancers, an emerging global problem among individuals younger than 50 years. The team seeks to elucidate pathways, risk factors, and molecules involved in the disease’s development. Team PROSPECT is supported by Cancer Research UK, the U.S. National Cancer Institute, the Bowelbabe Fund for Cancer Research UK, and France’s Institut National Du Cancer through Cancer Grand Challenges.
Nine postdocs and research scientists honored for contributions to the Institute.
School of Science
March 3, 2024
The MIT School of Science has announced nine postdocs and research scientists as recipients of the 2024 Infinite Expansion Award, which highlights extraordinary members of the MIT community.
The following are the 2024 School of Science Infinite Expansion winners:
- Sarthak Chandra, a research scientist in the Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, was nominated by Professor Ila Fiete, who wrote, “He has expanded the research abilities of my group by being a versatile and brilliant scientist, by drawing connections with a different area that he was an expert in from his PhD training, and by being a highly involved and caring mentor.”
- Michal Fux, a research scientist in the Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, was nominated by Professor Pawan Sinha, who wrote, “She is one of those figurative beams of light that not only brilliantly illuminate scientific questions, but also enliven a research team.”
- Andrew Savinov, a postdoc in the Department of Biology, was nominated by Associate Professor Gene-Wei Li, who wrote, “Andrew is an extraordinarily creative and accomplished biophysicist, as well as an outstanding contributor to the broader MIT community.”
- Ho Fung Cheng, a postdoc in the Department of Chemistry, was nominated by Professor Jeremiah Johnson, who wrote, “His impact on research and our departmental community during his time at MIT has been outstanding, and I believe that he will be a worldclass teacher and research group leader in his independent career next year.”
- Gabi Wenzel, a postdoc in the Department of Chemistry, was nominated by Assistant Professor Brett McGuire, who wrote, “In the one year since Gabi joined our team, she has become an indispensable leader, demonstrating exceptional skill, innovation, and dedication in our challenging research environment.”
- Yu-An Zhang, a postdoc in the Department of Chemistry, was nominated by Professor Alison Wendlandt, who wrote, “He is a creative, deep-thinking scientist and a superb organic chemist. But above all, he is an off-scale mentor and a cherished coworker.”
- Wouter Van de Pontseele, a senior postdoc in the Laboratory for Nuclear Science, was nominated by Professor Joseph Formaggio, who wrote, “He is a talented scientist with an intense creativity, scholarship, and student mentorship record. In the time he has been with my group, he has led multiple facets of my experimental program and has been a wonderful citizen of the MIT community.”
- Alexander Shvonski, a lecturer in the Department of Physics, was nominated by Assistant Professor Andrew Vanderburg, who wrote, “… I have been blown away by Alex’s knowledge of education research and best practices, his skills as a teacher and course content designer, and I have been extremely grateful for his assistance.”
- David Stoppel, a research scientist in The Picower Institute for Learning and Memory, was nominated by Professor Mark Bear and his research group, who wrote, “As impressive as his research achievements might be, David’s most genuine qualification for this award is his incredible commitment to mentorship and the dissemination of knowledge.”
Winners are honored with a monetary award and will be celebrated with family, friends, and nominators at a later date, along with recipients of the Infinite Mile Award.
The MIT professor emerita and influential molecular biologist is being honored for her advocacy for women in science.
Bendta Schroeder | Koch Institute
January 30, 2024
The National Academy of Sciences has awarded MIT biologist Nancy Hopkins, the Amgen Professor of Biology Emerita, with the 2024 Public Welfare Medal in recognition of “her courageous leadership over three decades to create and ensure equal opportunity for women in science.”
The award recognizes Hopkins’s role in catalyzing and leading MIT’s “A Study on the Status of Women Faculty in Science,” made public in 1999. The landmark report, the result of the efforts of numerous members of the MIT faculty and administration, revealed inequities in the treatment and resources available to women versus men on the faculty at the Institute, helped drive significant changes to MIT policies and practices, and sparked a national conversation about the unequal treatment of women in science, engineering, and beyond.
Since the medal was established in 1914 to honor extraordinary use of science for the public good, it has been awarded to several MIT-affiliated scientists, including Karl Compton, James R. Killian Jr., and Jerome B. Wiesner, as well as Vannevar Bush, Isidor I. Rabi, and Victor Weiskopf.
“The Public Welfare Medal has been awarded to MIT faculty who have helped define our Institute and scientists who have shaped modern science on the national stage,” says Susan Hockfield, MIT president emerita. “It is more than fitting for Nancy to join their ranks, and — importantly — celebrates her critical role in increasing the participation of women in science and engineering as a significant national achievement.”
When Hopkins joined the faculty of the MIT Center for Cancer Research (CCR) in 1973, she did not set out to become an advocate for equality for women in science. For the first 15 years, she distinguished herself in pioneering studies linking genes of RNA tumor viruses to their roles in causing some forms of cancer. But in 1989, Hopkins changed course: She began developing molecular technologies for the study of zebrafish that would help establish it as an important model for vertebrate development and cancer biology.
To make the pivot, Hopkins needed more space to accommodate fish tanks and new equipment. Although Hopkins strongly suspected that she had been assigned less lab space than her male peers in the building, her hypothesis carried little weight and her request was denied. Ever the scientist, Hopkins believed the path to more lab space was to collect data. One night in 1993, with a measuring tape in hand, she visited each lab to quantify the distribution of space in her building. Her hypothesis appeared correct.
Hopkins shared her initial findings — and her growing sense that there was bias against women scientists — with one female colleague, and then others, many of whom reported similar experiences. The senior women faculty in MIT’s School of Science began meeting to discuss their concerns, ultimately documenting them in a letter to Dean of Science Robert Birgeneau. The letter was signed by professors Susan Carey, Sylvia Ceyer, Sallie “Penny” Chisholm, Suzanne Corkin, Mildred Dresselhaus, Ann Graybiel, Ruth Lehmann, Marcia McNutt, Terry Orr-Weaver, Mary-Lou Pardue, Molly Potter, Paula Malanotte-Rizzoli, Leigh Royden, Lisa Steiner, and Joanne Stubbe. Also important were Hopkins’s discussions with Lorna Gibson, a professor in the Department of Materials Science and Engineering, since Gibson had made similar observations with her female colleagues in the School of Engineering. Despite the biases against these women, they were highly accomplished scientists. Four of them were eventually awarded the U.S. National Medal of Science, and 11 were, or became, members of the National Academy of Sciences.
In response to the women in the School of Science, Birgeneau established the Committee on the Status of Women Faculty in 1995, which included both female faculty and three male faculty who had been department chairs: Jerome Friedman, Dan Kleitman, and Robert Silbey. In addition to interviewing essentially all the female faculty members in the school, they collected data on salaries, space, and other resources. The committee found that of 209 tenured professors in the School of Science only 15 were women, and they often had smaller wages and labs, and were raising more of their salaries from grants than equivalent male faculty.
At the urging of Lotte Bailyn, a professor at the MIT Sloan School of Management and chair of the faculty, Hopkins and the committee summarized their findings to be presented to MIT’s faculty. Struck by the pervasive and well-documented pattern of bias against women across the School of Science, both Birgeneau and MIT President Charles Vest added prefaces to the report before it was published in the faculty newsletter. Vest commented, “I have always believed that contemporary gender discrimination within universities is part reality and part perception. True, but I now understand that reality is by far the greater part of the balance.”
Vest took an “engineers’ approach” to addressing the report’s findings, remarking “anything I can measure, I can fix.” He tasked Provost Robert Brown with establishing committees to produce reports on the status of women faculty for all five of MIT’s schools. The reports were published in 2002 and drew attention to the small number of women faculty in some schools, as well as discrepancies similar to those first documented in the School of Science.
In response, MIT implemented changes in hiring practices, updated pay equity reviews, and worked to improve the working environment for women faculty. On-campus day care facilities were built and leave policies were expanded for the benefit of all faculty members with families. To address underrepresentation of individuals of color, as well as the unique biases against women of color, Brown established the Council on Faculty Diversity with Hopkins and Philip Clay, then MIT’s chancellor and a professor in the Department of Urban Studies and Planning. Meanwhile, Vest spearheaded a collaboration with presidents of other leading universities to increase representation of women faculty.
MIT increased the numbers of women faculty by altering hiring procedures — particularly in the School of Engineering under Dean Thomas Magnanti and in the School of Science under Birgeneau, and later Associate Dean Hazel Sive. MIT did not need to alter its standards for hiring to increase the number of women on its faculty: Women hired with revised policies at the Institute have been equally successful and have gone on to important leadership roles at MIT and other institutions.
In the wake of the 1999 report the press thrust MIT — and Hopkins — into the national spotlight. The careful documentation in the report and first Birgeneau’s and then Vest’s endorsement of and proactive response to its findings were persuasive to many reporters and their readers. The reports and media coverage resonated with women across academia, resulting in a flood of mail to Hopkins’s inbox, as well as many requests for speaking engagements. Hopkins would eventually undertake hundreds of talks across the United States and many other countries about advocating for the equitable treatment of women in science.
Her advocacy work continued after her retirement. In 2019, Hopkins, along with Hockfield and Sangeeta Bhatia, the John J. and Dorothy Wilson Professor of Health Sciences and Technology and of the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, founded the Boston Biotech Working Group — which later evolved into the Faculty Founder Initiative — to increase women’s representation as founders and board members of biotech companies in Massachusetts.
Hopkins, however, believes she became “this very visible person by chance.”
“An almost uncountable number of people made this happen,” she continues. “Moreover, I know how much work went on before I even set foot on campus, such as by Emily Wick, Shirley Ann Jackson, Sheila Widnall, and Mildred Dresselhaus. I stood on the shoulders of a great institution and the long, hard work of many people that belong to it.”
The National Academy of Sciences will present the 2024 Public Welfare Medal to Hopkins in April at its 161st annual meeting. Hopkins is the recipient of many other awards and honors, both for her scientific achievements and her advocacy for women in science. She is a member of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Medicine, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and the AACR Academy. Other awards include the Centennial Medal from Harvard University, the MIT Gordon Y. Billard Award for “special service” to MIT, the MIT Laya Wiesner Community Award, the Maria Mitchell Women in Science Award, and the STAT Biomedical Innovation Award. In addition, she has received eight honorary doctorates, most recently from Rockefeller University, the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, and the Weizmann Institute.
Roger Levy, Pulin Li, and David McGee were nominated by peers and students for their exceptional instruction.
School of Science
January 10, 2024
The MIT School of Science has announced the winners of its 2023 Teaching Prizes for Graduate and Undergraduate Education. The prizes are awarded to School of Science faculty members who demonstrate excellence in teaching. Winners are chosen from nominations by their students or colleagues.
Roger Levy, a professor in the Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, was awarded a prize for developing and teaching class 9.19 (Computational Psycholinguistics). Levy’s nominators highlighted his success in adapting courses to synchronous and asynchronous instruction during the first year of the Covid-19 pandemic and in leading an engaging and challenging course for students across disciplines.
Pulin Li, the Eugene Bell Career Development Professor of Tissue Engineering in the Department of Biology and a member of the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research, was awarded the prize for teaching classes 7.06 (Cell Biology) and 7.46/7.86: (Building with Cells). Nominators praised Li’s talent for teaching complex topics effectively and her exceptional accomplishments as a teaching partner.
David McGee, associate professor and associate department head for diversity, equity, and inclusion in the Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, was awarded the prize for achieving an outstanding level of community learning in class 12.000 (Solving Complex Problems), also known as “Terrascope.” Nominators noted McGee’s extraordinary investment in both the class material and his students’ learning experiences.
The School of Science welcomes nominations for the teaching prize at the end of each semester. Nominations can be submitted at the school’s website.
MIT researchers will partner on interdisciplinary research in human biology and disease.
School of Science
November 14, 2023
MIT professors Gene-Wei Li and Michael Birnbaum are among the 12 researchers named 2023 Innovation Fund investigators by The Pew Charitable Trusts.
Six pairs of scientists — alumni or advisors of Pew’s biomedical programs in the United States and Latin America — will partner on interdisciplinary research in human biology and disease.
A biophysicist, Gene-Wei Li, an associate professor in MIT’s Department of Biology, studies how bacteria optimize the levels of proteins they produce at both mechanistic and systems levels. His lab focuses on design principles of transcription, translation, and RNA maturation. Li and his collaborator Katsuhiko Murakami, a professor of biochemistry and molecular biology at the Pennsylvania State University, will explore the complex genetics of cyanobacteria.
The pair will look at transcription termination, a key step in cyanobacteria gene regulation that tells the cell when to stop converting genetic information from DNA to RNA. While the mechanisms behind transcription termination are well known in other organisms, the inner workings of this process in cyanobacteria are still largely unknown. Drawing on Murakami’s expertise in structural biology and Li’s knowledge of transcription regulation, the two investigators will establish a model for microbial transcriptional termination in cyanobacteria. This work could unveil new scientific approaches used to study cyanobacteria, photosynthesis-promoting plant cells, and other bacterial groups.
Birnbaum, Class of 1956 Career Development Professor, associate professor of biological engineering, and faculty member at the Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research at MIT, works on understanding and manipulating immune recognition in cancer and infections. By using a variety of techniques to study the antigen recognition of T cells, he and his team aim to develop the next generation of immunotherapies.
In the case of people with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), a bacterium alerts the body’s disease-fighting T cells and triggers an inflammatory response characterized by abdominal pain and persistent diarrhea. IBD affects millions of people in the United States, and cases are on the rise in older adults, yet the cause of this autoimmune disorder is largely unknown.
Dan Littman, a professor of molecular immunology at New York University, and Birnbaum are looking for IBD’s root cause. The pair will merge Littman’s work exploring how and why specific bacteria affect T cell development with Birnbaum’s expertise in T cell receptor-antigen binding in an effort to characterize the specific microbes and antigens that drive these harmful responses in the gut. Together, their work could offer new treatment avenues for IBD, such as novel therapies targeting pathogenic microbes or T cells.
In 2018, Birnbaum was also named a Pew-Steward Scholar for Cancer Research.
“An interdisciplinary approach to research is critical to uncovering scientific breakthroughs and making lasting change,” says Donna Frisby-Greenwood, senior vice president for Philadelphia and scientific advancement at The Pew Charitable Trusts. “Pew is thrilled to support this exceptional group of investigators, whose collective efforts will help move the needle in important areas of health and medicine.”
The Pew Charitable Trusts has supported more than 1,000 early-career scientists spearheading high-risk, high-reward research across a variety of disciplines. In 2017, Pew launched the Innovation Fund to spark scientific collaboration among alumni of its biomedical programs in the United States and Latin America.