|
University Archives of Virginia Tech |
Virginia Tech
Governance Minutes ArchiveMarch 7, 1990
MINUTES Computer Committee Fourth Floor Burruss Hall Board Room March 7, 1990 3 PM PRESENT: Don Allison, Jeff Birch, John Burton, Bob Heterick, Katherine Johnston, Fred Medley, Harlan Miller, Dennis Catley for Jim Montgomery, Richard Sorensen, Ernest Stout, Jim Thomas, Jeff Wilcke, Mike Williams ABSENT: Jim Baranowski, Darrell Bosch, Jim Hicks, Dennis Jones, Tom McAnge, Joan McClain-Kark, Barbara Young VISITOR(S): Barbara Robinson and Bill Sanders (Computing Center), Jim Gamble AGENDA ITEM 1: MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 7, 1990 MEETING Motion made, seconded and passed to approve the minutes of the February meeting. AGENDA ITEM 2: COMPUTING CENTER ANNOUNCEMENTS (WILLIAMS) There will be an open house at the Information Systems Building on Friday, March 30. Tours of the facility will be conducted all day. AGENDA ITEM 3: REPORTING PROCEDURES (THOMAS) A memo was received from the secretary of University Council de- tailing a clarification of reporting procedures for University Committees. While the Computer Committee is expected to submit its minutes to the University Council, the Council receives them for information only. If the Computer Committee wants to initiate a policy change, it must pass a resolution to that effect and submit it to the Council for consideration. AGENDA ITEM 4: SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS 1. Personal Computer Subcommittee (Sorensen) The Personal Computer subcommittee reported on the results of their survey of academic colleges. Business, Computer Sci- ence, Statistics and Engineering currently require or recom- mend that students purchase a specific microcomputer configuration. No other departments reported seriously con- sidering such a requirement at this time. Departments with a PC requirement have not experienced a decrease in the number of applications for admission (in fact, applications have in- creased) and the requirement does not appear to be a burden on the less affluent students. The subcommittee feels there should not be any university-wide PC requirements. Institu- tional support should be provided, however, to insure that hardware and software are available at the lowest possible price. In selling computers, it is felt that the bookstore should charge a flat fee over its cost, rather than a per- centage, since the service provided by the bookstore is simi- lar for all machines, regardless of price. It is also felt that the colleges requiring purchase of PC's should set an overall limit on the amount a student is required to spend. The committee also examined the computer laboratory space available. Most laboratories are supported by departments or colleges and have been funded through Equipment Trust Funds. The lack of space will probably limit any increase in the number of laboratories, but, as the existing equipment ages, there is an urgent need for continued funding for maintenance and replacement. The Personal Computer subcommittee feels that the Computing Center should take more responsibility for providing support for departmental PC facilities. It was pointed out in the discussion that the Center has ex- pended considerable effort in such areas as communications and file transfer. In addition, it has taken on the respon- sibility of handling University computer purchasing and pro- viding technical help to departments in making their purchases. Supplying additional support would require sub- stantial reduction in other services. Furthermore, given the wide variety of equipment and software required on a programmatic basis and the extremely high rate of change, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to identify a manage- able core of items to support that would satisfy more than a minority of users. Information Systems has vigorously sup- ported decentralization, believing that departments want to make their own decisions about computer acquisitions and are, in fact, more capable than the central facility of judging their own needs. This avenue allows diversity that would have to be limited if central support is required. The subcommittee also recommends investigating the possibil- ity of having a vendor provide microcomputer laser printing in the laboratories, financed by users through a per-sheet charge. Finally, the Personal Computer subcommittee reaffirmed last year's report concerning the need for a committee composed of representatives from each academic college that is involved with computer utilization. The purpose of this committee would be to provide a forum for discussion of departmental computing activities and to act in an advisory capacity to the Computing Center, VPI facilities and academic programs. The subcommittee will place motions before the committee based on this report at the next committee meeting. 2. User Services Subcommittee (Sanders) The User Services subcommittee also explored the question of providing support for PC's and other distributed computing activities. It is recommended that there be an investigation into the possibility of developing a new model of service which might better serve computing on campus as it becomes more distributed. The question of broadening the focus of User Services' activities might then be addressed in the con- text of the new model. AGENDA ITEM 5: ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA Since the reorganization of University Council is still under study, no changes to the Computer Committee for the next academic year are anticipated at this time. The next meeting will be held on April 4 at 3 p.m. in Burruss 400.
VT History | Digital Library and Archives | Special Collections | University Archives
Send questions or comments to:
Tamara Kennelly, University Archivist
University Libraries
Virginia Tech
P.O. Box 90001
Blacksburg, VA, 24062-9001URL: http://spec.lib.vt.edu/minutes/cmc/1990/March+7++1990.html
Last modified on: Tuesday, 25-Sep-2001 13:57:21 EDT