I was up to my ears in galleys for my book on Hypertalk;
I had barely time to Paradigm and no time left to squawk
(or Flame or rage) on the final page, as it is my wont to do.
So I sent a request
for a Flaming guest
and Erickson came through.
- Michael Swaine
What with enrollments down, costs up, and budgets tight, it comes as no surprise that university-level computer-science programs are facing a multitude of challenges. As a case in point, consider what's currently going on at the University of California's Berkeley campus, a school with a computer-science department that deservedly has the reputation as one of the finest in the country.
Both faculty and students alike agree that the CS building and facilities are overcrowded and, relatively speaking, antiquated. With this in mind, the department began a couple of years ago to lobby for a new building and, after months of stalling, the university agreed in principle that a new building is indeed in order. That's the good news. The bad news is that the university didn't offer to set aside any land on which to construct the building, nor did the university agree to provide money to pay for it. It was only after more intense lobbying on the part of the CS faculty that the university finally allotted some land for construction. (It should be mentioned that suitable building sites are extremely scarce on campus, as they are throughout the City of Berkeley.)
That's the good news. The bad news is that the land for the new CS building just happens to be on top of a nuclear reactor that is in the slow process of being shut down. Still, engineers said that it is possible to put a structure on top of the reactor by erecting the building on stilts around the reactor's perimeter. Not the ideal solution, but certainly better than no chance of a building at all, and the CS faculty was happy to have some commitment.
That's the good news. The bad news is that before construction can begin, the nuclear fuel rods, radioactive shielding, and other associated wastes are still in the reactor and need to be removed. In most instances, there's nothing particularly difficult about dismantling a nuclear reactor; it's been done many times without mishap. The problem in this case, however, is that Berkeley has been declared a nuclear-free zone, meaning it is against the law to transport such materials over the city streets. The only saving grace is that the reactor is licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which operates under federal laws that supercede local statutes, and so the radioactive material can be trucked out over the objections of the City of Berkeley. Protest leaders have already promised to disrupt the process, and there's little doubt that demonstrations will occur.
Keep in mind that all of these problems concern only the building site itself. The other side of the coin involves the money needed for construction. Because the university didn't provide any money for construction, it is up to the CS faculty to raise, from private sources, the $30 million necessary to put up the building. So far, they've managed to scrape up nearly $5 million from private sources that include Lockheed, several Japanese computer firms, and UC Berkeley alumnus Steve Wozniak.
As strange as it may seem, major computer companies in this country have not made any solid commitments even though they will eventually stand to benefit from the rich pool of talent that will graduate from Berkeley. Granted, it is hard to explain to stockholders why paying for someone else's bricks and mortar is necessary, especially when profits may be down. And, although no one will go on record as saying so, the current confusion in the Unix community seems to be playing a role too. One faculty member claimed that IBM and other backers of the Open Systems Foundation don't necessarily want to lend a hand to UC Berkeley, an institution that is perceived to be a supporter of the Unix standard championed by AT&T and Sun Microsystems, and a possible competitor to the proposed IBM backed OSF standard.
Richard Fateman, chairman of UC Berkeley's CS department, says that he is tired of fund-raising and would rather be devoting his time to research and teaching. Other faculty members expressed similar sentiments. It seems to me that the problem with this entire situation, which no doubt is being repeated to some degree in universities across the country, is that teachers are supposed to teach, yet they can't be teaching if they have to go out and find money to build their own buildings. No one wins in a situation like this--the country, the computer industry, and certainly not the students.