Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watmath.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!wjafyfe
From: wjafyfe@watmath.UUCP (Andy Fyfe)
Newsgroups: net.micro,net.college
Subject: Re: Free and undirected campus computing facilities
Message-ID: <10468@watmath.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 20-Dec-84 20:44:49 EST
Article-I.D.: watmath.10468
Posted: Thu Dec 20 20:44:49 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 21-Dec-84 02:20:33 EST
References: <773@amdahl.UUCP>
Reply-To: wjafyfe@watmath.UUCP (Andy Fyfe)
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 129
Xref: watmath net.micro:8946 net.college:557
Summary: 

There are two issues involved.  One is whether the university
provide unrestricted access to its computer facilities.  The
other is whether or not the university can even provide for
its own needs, and is the more important issue.  While "free"
access is a great thing to have, it can't be provided without
first having a surplus.  And if we have a surplus at Waterloo,
someone must be hiding it.

>That valuable resource, the human brain, can be rented for about minimum
>wage on most college campuses.  A VAX cannot.  By the rather rude and
>unfair laws of ecomomics the brain sits 'idle' while the machine is
>used as a scarce resource.  If your brain isn't being fully utilized
>go to the library and get a good book *for free*.  It will do more
>for you in the long run...  Them's the facts.  Can't change 'em, may
>as well deal with 'em.

There is no problem keeping my brain fully utilized.  One instance
when my brain is clearly underutilized is during those times when
courses require that I work with the computer, and the computer
is so overloaded as to waste a great deal of my time.  (Ever typed
80 characters, stopped, and watched all 80 of them appear on the
screen, one at a time?)  To this I object strongly, and it has the
side effect of turning a potentially useful exercise into something
to get quickly out of the way.

>When something is FREE, you take what you can get and are thankful.  That
>is the way a capitalist society works.  If you want more, buy it.  If you
>don't have the money, work for it.  If you have to chose between work or
>school, then chose.  Don't gripe about it after.  It was your choice.  The
>world is not 'fair', it just is.

I'm not necessarily looking for something for free.  The computer
science part of my degree requires that I interact with the computers.
And I pay money for this, in the form of tuition fees.  And as for
access to other systems like watmath, I gained this access in exchange
for "volunteer work".  It isn't for "free".  And if I do have access
to something "free", and I can exploit it to my advantage, so much
the better.

>No.  The best way to learn is to read.  Nothing has come close to the
>*WELL STUDIED* text book for imparting maximum information in minimum
>time.  It is not as much fun as 'hands on'.  It takes effort to read.
>It is enhanced by a good instructor and well planned exercises.  These
>may be computer based exercises or 'hand graded'.  Doesn't make a bit of
>difference if your syntax error was found by the instructor, a computer,
>or the student in the next seat.

The best way is to read?  I'm not sure.  Certainly there is a great deal
of information to be gained from reading books, but that alone is not
enough.  You state that learning is enhanced by "well planned exercises".
These are "do it" sort of things, not read about it.  

In this, my final year, the "exercises" that we are given are not
Mickey Mouse.  The real-time course requires that a pair of students
write a real-time kernel, and then an application program to run a
model train set.  The compiler course requires that a pair of students
write a compiler that generates code that will run on a VAX.  (These
are both 4-month courses.)  It would be absurd to think that any
instructor, or "student in the next seat" could hand-grade either
of these projects without a computer to actually run them on.  The
marker wants to see a running train, or a compiled program running
on the vax, not a lot of code.  And I'll never believe that I could
have learned more about kernels, real-time, or compilers by reading
a book rather than doing the assignment.  In fact, I will learn more
from a book now than I ever would have before.

>The best instructors teach more with the least equipment.  You can learn
>more about biology with the equipment in your own kitchen and a good
>instructor than in the best lab with poor instruction.

My first year calculus professor realized that the best learning
environment came from a bunch of students getting together to
solve problems, because you only learned from doing problems, and
there was so much to be learned from students exchanging ideas.
I view the instructor as a person who tries to increase my interest
in a subject so that *I* will go out and learn about it, not someone
who simply teaches.  Put the best instructor in the best lab and there
is no limit to what I can learn.  Can the same be said for my kitchen?

>However, if you expect to spend your work life being limited only
>by the creativity of your brain you are mistaken.  You will be limited
>by budgets, social presures, time available, market forcasts, company
>policy, product line definitions, available lab space, etc...
>
>Work/study shows you what you *WILL* be dealing with in the work world.
>Now, if you have the money to own your own company and buy your own lab
>and do your own research, then you may spend your money as you see fit
>and may chose to ignore those limitations.  And if you are so equiped with
>money, you can buy your own PC or VAXen and avoid learning to live with
>limited resource on campus.  You may then play to your hearts content.
>Again, this is a capitalist society.  School is a non-capitalist model
>(somewhat reminisent of a Lange type socialism in many ways) trying to
>teach the skills needed to live in the greater society.

I'm in a co-op program so I've seen the "real world", and I've seen enough
of it to know that some of the things we are required to deal with would
not be tolerated in the workforce.  Certainly the company directs the way
I spend my time, but they recognize that if I'm to do useful work for them
they have to provide me with the facilities that I require.  And so far
they've always had the foresight to realize that people require time to
go off and do their own thing once in a while, and have encouraged it
(within reason, of course!).

>Do you want to learn these lessons now, or when your income (read dinner,
>rent, car, tv, PC, medical expenses) depends on doing it right without
>free run of the facilities?

"Doing it right" requires knowing exactly what "right" and "wrong" are.
This alone is a good argument for giving students as much possible
opportunity to experiment, before it really matters.

>No one would dare claim these opinions.

Indeed.

>E. Michael Smith  ...!{hplabs,ihnp4,amd,nsc}!amdahl!ems

The loss of unrestricted access to me is a bad first sign.  Around here
it suggests the absense of surplus cpu resources.  Since things are
never balanced, this means that the resources are inadequate.  This
is usually addressed by forcing students to work with overloaded systems
(which often means working through the night) or reducing the load by
removing some of the work that would normally have been done.  I've
had to deal with both.  The result can easily be a large number of
irritated students, or a potentially compromised education.  In either
case, it's not in anyone's best long term interest.

Andy Fyfe		...!{decvax, allegra, ihnp4, et. al}!watmath!wjafyfe
			wjafyfe@waterloo.csnet