Astronomy: Submitted by John Hawley and Craig Sarazin

1) What do you see as the clearest gains and losses brought thus far by the use of networked computers at UVa?

The clearest gains lie in the area of research computing and scientific productivity. With the present high speed networks it is possible to make use of remote supercomputing facilities, transport data and images from remote sites to local machines, access data archives, etc. Networks make it easier to maintain close collaborative efforts with remote colleagues. To a lesser degree the ability to access on line papers, preprints, abstract indices, etc., has improved research efficiency. Some of these things are truly new (e.g. remote supercomputing) whereas others are just faster ways of doing traditional work (accessing journal articles on line).

In instruction and student advising, some gain in efficiency is attained by the use of web-based information and electronic mail. Electronic mail has not reduced the amount of direct contact with students, but it has enabled students to have more frequent and less

formal contact with faculty. Students always have appreciated supplemental course materials, lecture notes, practice tests, and the web makes it easier to deliver these. Interactive web tools can be very helpful to the students, but a great deal of thought must be given to these if they are to truly be useful (there are many more examples of lousy, although hyped, web based materials than there are good examples). A great deal of programming effort is also required.

The clearest losses are simply the resources required to keep the infrastructure working, both in terms of human effort and dollars. The demands on the departmental budget to support all departmental computing have increased drastically with no commensurate increase in OTPS budget. More and more personnel time is taken up with computer

support issues. Additional faculty time must be devoted to preparation of new computer-based instructional material.

2) What do you see as the greatest possibilities, limitations, and dangers these machines pose in the future?

The greatest possibilities seem to lie with research applications. In science great strides and great discoveries often come with the development of a new exploratory technology or technique. Computers have already demonstrated this capability. However, in many areas involving three-dimensional simulations of complex systems, computers are just now reaching the point of sufficient power to make truly novel applications possible.

The academic community has only just begun the process of investigating what new and useful educational applications could be offered through computers. Computer-assisted learning has been an important element of science and engineering education for some time. Computers are great for simulation, and basic drill with immediate feedback, although traditional exercises can also provide untiring drill. It is important to assess the added benefit that can be incorporated into computer-based drill, besides its novelty. Web pages are an excellent way to keep class members up to date on course information, and to provide supplemental course material. There isn't anything particularly revolutionary about any of this. There may yet prove to be something that revolutionizes education through information technology. But there is also a clearly identifiable downside: computers make it easy to give the appearance of content, to substitute glitz for understanding, and style for substance. The purpose of education is education, not entertainment.

The later point is probably particularly dangerous for students. They can produce well-formatted papers with images downloaded over the network, and text pasted in from scholarly articles. But they will have achieved only the appearance of learning. Similarly we can use on-line drill and examples to drill them in precisely what we test them on. Everyone is happy, but little is learned.

The greatest immediate danger probably lies with viewing the computer as some sort of panacea, and plunging ahead with implementations of poorly conceived plans.

3) What priority should the university place on information technology?

The administration should view computing facilities and very high speed internet access in just the way the library/book collection is viewed - there is no such thing as a first tier university without excellent support of the library or research computing. If you accept the analogy with the library, then it is clear that the argument is for diversity: of approaches, of techniques, and of technologies. It is fundamental to the nature of the university that it be a forum where ideas compete and where individuals pursue their own lines of inquiry. This implies that in computing the University is essentially a heterogeneous place. Business models of standardization are inherently inappropriate.

The range of faculty needs and potential technology applications seems enormous. To what extent can (should) the university accommodate this range? Wouldn't it be a waste of money to provide people with some specific platform or machine, simply because that was the policy, if those resources were inappropriate for their research and instructional activities? Departments know their own needs best, and the needs vary considerably.

Occasionally, the sentiment is expressed that if computer hardware and software were standardized throughout the university, this would free up time which would allow the computer support personnel at the university to be more creative. While improving their ability to provide fast, reliable support would be applauded, it is not clear that there is any demand for making them "more creative." Efforts in that direction might well result in a shift of support effort from the support staff to the faculty members, i.e., to those people whose job is specifically to be creative. The result is two groups of people who are doing less of what they have been specifically trained to do.

Our feeling is that it is essential that the priorities in computing and any other area essential to scholarship must be set by the faculty. Given the variety of intellectual endeavor which characterize the university, the correct level for the determinination of these needs and priorities are the individual departments. Thus, the priorities should be determined from the bottom up, not the top down. The primary role of the university-side computing support staff should be to maintain the basic infrastructure structure for computers and technology, not set policies which inhibit faculty in their own scholarship.

The proposed benefits of any effort should be clearly identified, not driven by a dream that technology will somehow, by itself, revolutionize education.

4) Please add any additional comments you would like to call to our attention.