APPENDICES B. Some Facts of Life About Computers.. D. Educating the Faculty in Use of the Computer. E. The Large University Computational Facility. F. What Computer Facilities are Appropriate. G. Estimation of Required Computer Capacity and Cost. H. The Communication Problem.. I. The Growth of the Computer Industry.. PRESIDENT'S SCIENCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE Donald F. Hornig (Chairman), Special Assistant to the President for Science and Technology Herbert F. York, Jr. (Vice Chairman), University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, Calif. Ivan L. Bennett, Jr., Deputy Director, Office of Science and Technology, Washington, D.C. Lewis M. Branscomb, Joint Institute for Laboratory Astrophysics, Boulder, Colo. Melvin Calvin,* University of California, Berkeley, Calif. Sidney D. Drell, Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, Stanford, Calif. Marvin L. Goldberger, Institute for Advanced Studies, Princeton, N.J. Philip Handler, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, N.C. William R. Hewlett, Hewlett-Packard Co. Franklin A. Long, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y. Gordon J. F. MacDonald, Institute for Defense Analyses, Arlington, Va. William D. McElroy,* The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md. George E. Pake, Washington University, St. Louis, Mo. John R. Pierce,* Research, Communications Sciences Division, Bell Telephone Laboratories, Murray Hill, N.J. Kenneth S. Pitzer, Rice University, Houston, Tex. Frederick Seitz, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C. Charles P. Slichter, University of Illinois, Urbana, Ill. Charles H. Townes, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass. David Z. Beckler, Executive Officer *Appointment expired December 31, 1966 MEMBERS OF THE PANEL ON COMPUTERS IN HIGHER EDUCATION John R. Pierce (Chairman), Bell Telephone Laboratories Thomas H. Crowley, Bell Telephone Laboratories Peter Elias, Massachusetts Institute of Technology George Hazzard, Washington University John Kemeny, Dartmouth College Thomas E. Kurtz, Dartmouth College Edward Levi, University of Chicago Gordon J. F. MacDonald, Institute for Defense Analyses Joseph B. Platt, Harvey Mudd College Robert L. Smith, Jr., Texas A. & M. University Clay Sprowls, University of California, Los Angeles David Z. Robinson (Technical Assistant), Office of Science and Technology I. INTRODUCTION, FINDINGS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS After growing wildly for years, the field of computing now appears to be approaching its infancy. Recent revolutionary technological advances will eventually take us far beyond our newest, biggest, and best computers. Yet computers and computing have already fantastically increased our power to know as well as to do. They have made masses of data which were previously completely intractable accessible to analysis and understanding. They have made it possible to trace the consequences of theories and assumptions in a wide diversity of fields. As computers and computing have become more powerful, they have invaded wide areas of industry, government, and the professions. Computers launch and guide missiles and antimissile missiles. Computers aid in engineering design, they control machine tools and chemical processes, they keep books, control inventories, and make out payrolls. In the production of newspapers and books, computers are used in alphabetizing and correcting text, and in justifying and hyphenating lines of type. Computers are used in the retrieval of medical information and in the analysis of voluminous business, social, and historical data. Indeed, it seems that the social and economic gains which can be made through the use of computers and computing may be limited chiefly by the availability of people who are able to apply these tools in new and useful ways. In the field of scholarship and education, there is hardly an area that is not now using digital computing. Appendix J of this report cites examples from instruction in linguistics, business and social sciences, as well as mathematics, physics, engineering, geology, and biology. Use of computing in scholarly research ranges even more broadly, and includes the analysis of literary texts and the analysis, composition, and playing of music. Computing is a new resource in learning. It enables the student or the scholar to deal with realistic problems rather than oversimplified models. By lessening the time spent in the drudgery of problem solving and in the analysis of data, it frees time for thought and insight. Partly, it enables the student to do old things more easily, but more important, it enables him to do things he otherwise could not. Computing increases the quality and scope of education. The widespread use of computing in scholarship as well as industry and government has come about not just because of a general enthusiasm for computers, but because this new tool has found vital and increasing use in each field in which it has been applied. Appendix K presents statements from a variety of experienced people concerning the widespread applicability and value of computing in education and in business. Computers and computing are simultaneously an American resource and a challenge to America. Here indeed we have a lead on the world, a lead which gives us an intellectual as well as an industrial advantage. If we are to exploit our opportunity fully, students in colleges and universities must see for themselves what a powerful tool computing is, and learn to use it. No matter what his specialty, the student must be given the opportunity of using computers in learning and in doing, and the faculty member must be able to use computers in teaching. Both the individual's opportunities and the progress, well-being, and stature of our society can be increased by adequate computing facilities for our colleges and universities. Further, both in providing the necessary facilities and in meeting scientific and industrial requirements, we need more men who are deeply trained in computer science. While computers and computing supply all of scholarship and education with a new resource and a new opportunity, they also tax education and educators with new problems. It has been estimated (see App. I) that in January 1965 $7.2 billion worth of computers had been installed in this country, and the annual growth rate was estimated as 25 percent. About 185,000 college graduates were needed to use the Nation's computers. A projected annual growth of 20 percent in this number roughly equals annual engineering baccalaureates and exceeds those in mathematics or physical sciences. Computing must be available which is adequate for education in computer sciences as well as for education in other fields. Happily, at some fortunate and forward looking colleges and universities the educational use of computers is widespread and effective. But this does not apply to the majority, where computing facilities are often absent or inadequate, or where their use is confined to a few specialties. Can this deficit be remedied, so that no American need have second-rate education in this respect? Because of the extremely rapid rate of change in the computer art, it is impossible to make useful long-range predictions, extending beyond the era of the new generation of powerful computers which are just coming into use. But, it is possible to estimate the cost of providing by means of these efficient new computer systems the high grade of educational use that is now available in some colleges and universities to all of our colleges and universities. One of the chief aims of this report is to estimate the cost of making up the deficit in educational computing and to show how the deficit can be made up while still supporting leadership and innovations in educational computing. The recommendations we make are expensive, but if they are not carried out there will be a different kind of cost. Today, the best and richest in |