COMPUTING

Purposes

Computing at Michigan Tech is decentralized. Information Technology, the Computer Advisory Committee (CAC), and individual units all have significant responsibilities for managing computing on campus. Information Technology's goals to provide information and information technology tools and to develop information technology solutions which enable the campus community to communicate and work effectively, and to integrate information and educational technologies, are necessary and appropriate for a technological university with a mission to educate students to meet the changing needs of a technological society. Providing access to information lays the groundwork for freedom of inquiry for faculty and students.

Resources

Through a decade of dynamic change in computing, the University has managed the human, financial, and physical resources dedicated to computing to accomplish its goal of delivering comprehensive information technology services.

Administrative Structure

The University supports computing both centrally through the Information Technology organization and staff and locally through academic and administrative departments. The campus maintains four distinct types of computing:

1. University-wide technology services, managed by Information Technology, which includes campus-wide services such as e-mail, distance learning technologies, and the university data network;
2. administrative computing, managed in part by Information Technology and in part by administrative departments;
3. academic faculty and staff computing, managed by academic departments; and
4. student computing, managed by academic departments and Information Technology (Pace Lab).

Information Technology has reorganized several times since 1988 and now has an efficient structure of seven subunits (see Figure 20) appropriately organized to deliver central computing services.

FIGURE 20. Organization Chart for Information Technology.

Vice Provost-Information Technology

Distributed Computing Services

Messaging and Mail-enabled Applications

Campus-wide Information Services

Software Services

Distributed Systems Coordination

Graduate Student Internship Program and ADDOC Team

Future Products and Services Research

Administrative Computing

BANNER® System Support

JRVP Library Project

Electronic Factbook

University Data Administration

Telcom Customer Service

Telephone Service

CATV—MTU Movie Channel

Ameritech Contract Administration

AT&T Contract Administration

ACUS Contract Administration

Voice-mail Service

Work Order

Finance and Billing

Equipment Maintenance

System Administration Services

System Administration Services for Administrative Depts.

Pace Labs

Educational Technology Services (ETS)

Audio/Visual Support

Satellite Services

Electronic Display System

Network Operations Center (NOC)

Media Production

Technical Support for:

Board of Control

Commencement

Cultural Enrichment

Convocation

Telcom Engineering

Cable Physical Plant

Data System

Voice System

Video System

Network Security

Performance Management

Residence Life Network

System Administration

Command and Control Systems

Distributed Computing Services (formerly Academic Computing Services) specializes in electronic information services such as e-mail, WWW, and USENET News. Telecommunications services were added in 1990 to reflect the convergence of voice, data, and video technologies. In response to downsizing in 1991, Information Technology shed most of its systems administration responsibilities (discussed below) and outsourced training. Information Technology has experienced, technically qualified personnel. A new director was hired in 1994 through a national search process, and in 1997 this position was elevated to Vice Provost for Information Technology to reflect the importance of information technology to MTU's mission. Information Technology employs 55 full-time staff and 50 students. One measure of staff competence is the receipt of three university distinguished service awards since 1993.

Decentralization led to some initial problems with coordination. Hardware was sometimes purchased without consideration for networking requirements or technical support. To address the coordination issues, in 1989 the CAC was established to provide oversight in decision-making regarding university computing. The CAC works with the Vice Provost for Information Technology and has five standing sub-committees.

1. The Computing Strategy Subcommittee coordinates drafting of departmental computing strategies to develop the University’s Computing Strategy.
2. TheSystems Administration Council provides a forum for local systems administrators.
3. The Campus Computing Standards Subcommittee provides a forum for discussion of campus-wide computing standards.
4. The Acquisitions Subcommittee reviews large computing expenditures.
5. The Subcommittee on Fees approves changes in student fees and recommends policy for their expenditure.

CAC recommendations go to the Computer Executive Committee (CEX—the Provost, Deans, and other key administrators) for approval. This structure has been effective in addressing problems and setting direction for computing on campus.

Managing local systems administration support is perhaps the most difficult aspect of administering a distributed computing system. Until 1994, Information Technology provided systems administration for most of the campus. Now all academic and administrative departments are responsible for their own local hardware, software, and support. Most have responded by hiring their own local systems administrators and support staff who are responsible for the machines in their departments and local network access. These local systems administrators have no direct line of responsibility to Information Technology. For most units, this is a successful organizational strategy for distributing computing services. However, low salaries, external demand, and internal competition for systems administrators contributes to disruptive turnover. Because most administrative departments were too small to justify individual systems administrators, Information Technology created Systems Administration Services (SAS) in 1995 in response to users requests. SAS services the needs of all administrative departments and charges a monthly fee per machine for this service. Small academic units such as Metallurgical and Materials Engineering and Mining Engineering have decided to share a systems administrator.

Coordination of local systems administration occurs through advisory committees, administrative channels, and informal means. Although a Systems Administration Council was organized in 1995 as a CAC subcommittee to provide a forum for systems administrators to share ideas, systems administrators remain somewhat isolated, and the University provides no career path and only limited training. Another problem is the absence of formal mechanisms to identify qualified substitutes if a systems administrator is absent. In Spring 1997, Information Technology began coordinating discussions to enable systems administrators within the colleges and across campus to cooperate and provide back-up for each other. Information Technology will provide emergency back-up and assistance to units with technology-related needs.

Information Technology is also working to enhance student life and learning through its Inter-Residence Hall Technology Advisory Council.

The decentralized structure provides departmental flexibility and autonomy at a time when technology changes rapidly and needs vary dramatically. However, the University has yet to reach the balance between decentralization and centralization which would optimally utilize increasingly expensive technology and provide uniform availability across departments.

Physical Resources

Michigan Tech responded to the computing industry’s shift from mainframes to personal computers by implementing a distributed computing system which connects nearly 3,000 campus computers and utilizes three platforms: IBM-compatible, Macintosh, and UNIX-based. This includes 1,025 student stations and 29 networked student computer labs. We decommissioned our mainframe in 1996, when the transition to the Voyager system for the Library was complete. The structure to administer this system has evolved to respond to campus needs. For a detailed discussion of this transition, see the Information Technology Self-Study [2.6H9].

Access to on-campus computing is good. Students have access to the campus network and local area networks through student computing labs in their home department, or through the Pace labs administered by Information Technology, which supports 450 students in Biological Sciences, Physics, Social Sciences, and Sciences and Arts Undeclared. A goal of 10 students/computer in student computer labs has been reached in most labs. Virtually all full-time faculty and professional staff have computers and all are networked. Although access to computing is generally good, the limited life span of hardware and software creates an ongoing challenge to maintain and replace computer equipment. Also, the use of three platforms—IBM-compatible, Macintosh, and UNIX-based—can make translation across platforms difficult.

In 1994/95 MTU discussed establishing a supercomputing center on campus for research, but for cost/benefit reasons opted instead to rely on external computers for high performance needs. Matching funds are available for researchers who need to use these external facilities.

The campus network is rarely down. To ensure the quality of the network, a program of infrastructure improvements is ongoing. These will be discussed below, under accomplishments.

Financial Resources

Rapid changes in computing and telecommunications technology require continual upgrading of equipment and infusions of staff time. This puts a strain on the University’s budget at a time when State support for higher education rarely outpaces inflation. Fortunately, in 1996/97, MTU received a $927,000 supplemental appropriation from the State for technology, which has been expended for information technology. Even so, all faculty and staff needs are not met.

Academic departments fund student computing through student computing fees. Each academic department sets its own basic computing access fee for its students. These fees have grown substantially as computing needs and costs grow; total revenues from student basic access fees increased by 56% in just two years, from $900,000 in 1994 to $1.4 million in 1996. Departments can also charge additional fees for courses designated "computer-intensive." Students are dissatisfied with the magnitude of these fees; however, students work with faculty and staff on the CAC to ensure that all fee increases are justified. All changes to student computing fees (or new fees) must be approved annually by the Subcommittee on Fees of the CAC.

Faculty and staff computing were funded until 1995 entirely at the department level through budgeted SS&E funds or discretionary funds. Departments are not permitted to use student lab fee income for faculty and staff computing. Information Technology subsidizes network connections but charges student labs ($10/connection/month) and faculty and staff ($13/connection/month) to connect to the network. Budget cuts and reallocations (discussed in Chapter 1 under Concern 3) led many units to reduce SS&E budgets, which in turn led to shortfalls in faculty and staff computing.

In 1993 the CAC recommended that $1,000/year/faculty be allotted to academic departments from the General Fund to support computing. The central administration responded by gradually dedicating general funds to faculty computing; in 1995/96, approximately $400 per faculty member was provided and in 1996/97, the amount increased to $800. Some departments continue to use discretionary funds and some individual faculty use research funding to upgrade computers. Matching funds for administrative- staff desktop computing are also now available annually on a competitive basis. In 1996/97, $100,000 was allocated for replacement costs.

Distributed computing works best for units which generate sufficient funds at the department level through student enrollments and research funding to cover their computing costs. When the size of an academic program fluctuates, however, sustaining faculty and student computing is a challenge. Decentralization also makes savings from shared software, group purchases, and other cooperative arrangements difficult to realize. There is some concern that a widening gap is forming between technology "haves" and "have nots" on campus.

NEXT