A comment on the comments about MIT's role as a school, government "subsidies" etc: Don't think of MIT as a school, think of it as a very large research lab with a small school attached.
There are about 10K students, but about 20K staff, a surprising number of which don't even interact with grad students much less undergrads (and undergrads are often found in research labs to a much greater degree than other schools).
So if you quote the stats, consider that tuition (and residence fees etc) is only about 14% of revenue. Does that mean the education is subsidized by the other 86%? No, education (which includes operating the dorms etc) is only about 16% of expenses (this has fluctuated but hasn't changed hugely over the 30 years since I graduated, not that I monitor the budget every year!).
So there's a reason why you feel like students aren't appreciated t MIT -- by many people they aren't. OCW is not just a great resource, but a way of making the educational mission more visible (and to the administration visibility is primarily how much money you bring in -- which I consider reasonable, as long as it's not the only metric).
I get several hardcopy pieces of MIT propaganda per month; less than half of it mentions students, almost none of whom are undergrads. And this is despite the fact that my donations and participation are almost all in support of undergraduate education.
I don't necessarily disagree with some of your points. But MIT has about 12K staff (of which about 2K are faculty or teaching staff). And I believe that the remaining 10K includes Lincoln Labs which has about 4K employees.
FWIW there's Lincoln Labs, MITRE, Draper and other such fig leaf spinouts designed to get paper over MIT's Vietnam-war-era restrictions on classified research.
There are about 10K students, but about 20K staff, a surprising number of which don't even interact with grad students much less undergrads (and undergrads are often found in research labs to a much greater degree than other schools).
So if you quote the stats, consider that tuition (and residence fees etc) is only about 14% of revenue. Does that mean the education is subsidized by the other 86%? No, education (which includes operating the dorms etc) is only about 16% of expenses (this has fluctuated but hasn't changed hugely over the 30 years since I graduated, not that I monitor the budget every year!).
So there's a reason why you feel like students aren't appreciated t MIT -- by many people they aren't. OCW is not just a great resource, but a way of making the educational mission more visible (and to the administration visibility is primarily how much money you bring in -- which I consider reasonable, as long as it's not the only metric).
I get several hardcopy pieces of MIT propaganda per month; less than half of it mentions students, almost none of whom are undergrads. And this is despite the fact that my donations and participation are almost all in support of undergraduate education.