The resolution, which would endorse a requirement that all students have access to, and preferably to own, a personal computer by the Fall 1999 semester, was introduced to the senate at its March 4 meeting.

Issues that raised the most concerns at a second reading of the resolution at the Faculty Senate's April 8 meeting included costs both to students and the university, faculty support of the measure and whether sufficient technical support would be provided.

"The committee has spent considerable time contemplating this (proposal) and worrying about this," Joseph Tufariello, chair of the Student Access Subcommittee of UB's Information Technology Committee, told senators.

While the committee has wrestled with concerns over the impact that universal access to computing resources will have on faculty members, the "single most important issue" the university faces in implementing such a measure is the cost to students, and "it has worried us from the beginning," Tufariello said.

"No student will be required to purchase" a computer, he emphasized.

Instead, the university is asking that students have access to a computer, whether they purchase their own, share equipment with a roommate or classmate, or use the university's public labs.

Although UB's public computer labs will be upgraded by the Fall 1998 semester, Tufariello said that use of the labs would not be the best solution to access. Ownership, he said, would be the best alternative, but "there will be no 'computer police' on campus" to compel students to have computers.

"We're going to recommend that people try to get hold of a computer," Tufariello emphasized.

The university, he said, is working on programs to help students acquire a computer. Among the plans being considered are a program that would allow students to arrange a long-term, low-rate financial loan to enable them to purchase a computer; programs that would allow students to borrow computers from the university; a financial-aid package that would allow students, if they quality, to use those funds to purchase a computer, and a work-study program so students could work off the cost of their computer.

"I don't think we should take too seriously the idea that we're requiring access, not ownership," commented Samuel Schack, professor of mathematics. "If computers become part of courses, students will have to own them, no matter the financial ability."

While proponents of the measure have emphasized the public-relations benefits and positive impact on retention, Schack said, "No one has yet said we have a specific academic demand for introducing this." Colleagues at other schools whom he has queried, he continued, have indicated that valuable classroom instruction time is spent teaching students how to use their computers.

UB also will need to provide computer access and support to faculty, said James Lawler, associate professor of philosophy. "In the fall of 1998 (faculty) are going to have to have access....The resolution says nothing about support for faculty and funding for upgrading (their equipment and software)."

Judith Adams, director of Lockwood Library, called language that would require students to have access to computers, but not require ownership, "troubling." She noted that although computer labs are being expanded, even measures requiring students to own computers will increase use of public-access computers, and not requiring students to own computers could "flood" the labs.

Tufariello responded that while an increased demand at public sites is anticipated, "if the experience at other universities is sound, most students will buy a computer. If they don't bring one with them, they will take advantage of other programs" that will provide computer access.

"We're going to help students get hold of a computer to level the playing field...," he stressed. "There always will be students who can't afford one and we're going to help."

Faculty training is another area the university will focus on, he noted. Programs will be put in place to help faculty, and Tufariello said he will propose that faculty teaching freshman courses be provided with a computer.

Hardware is only part of faculty members' concerns, noted Simon Singer, associate professor of sociology. Access to software and problems with compatibility also are an issue.

Tufariello responded that a subcommittee has been set up to address potential software problems.

"Up until now, we've been asking if we should do this at all. Now we're asking how," he said. It is, he continued, an "extremely complicated thing to do. It's a major, major undertaking, but it's something that I think we have to do."

William George, professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering, commented that faculty members have a professional obligation to keep themselves current, not only academically, but technologically.

"As a profession, we're fairly well paid. There is a cost of professionalism," and keeping one's computer equipment and software current is part of that cost.

A number of students also attended the meeting to voice their concerns about the proposed computer-access requirement, as well as their disappointment at not having been part of the process to date.

"I'm pretty upset that this has advanced so far and there has been no solicitation from students," said Ariel Shea.

Students so far have received no information regarding universal access to computers, she said, but "students are the ones affected. We have to purchase the computers and we have to work with the computers."

Are computers really going to improve the students' college experience, she asked. "What about the alienation students already feel? No one's talking about that."

The move toward universal access to computing resources "has moved faster than we thought originally and we haven't brought students in the way we'd have liked to," acknowledged Tufariello. "Student involvement is absolutely critical. I think this is the right thing to do, but if I can't convince (the students), we're in trouble."