College of Information ScienceComputing Resources Working Group · Point people: Barney Maccabe and Greg Chism
Recommendations for review¶
Supplemental reference · Browse supplements · Current report
Draft action framework — priorities and endorsement pending. The working group should refine these using the inventory and faculty/student needs, rather than assume a single platform solves the problem.
Actions the college can pursue¶
- Maintain a concise resource inventory. Identify an owner role for each entry and a review process. Publish access routes and limitations that resource owners confirm.
- Document needs across research and instruction. Use consistent briefs and an agreed university channel; include faculty, students, RSEs and technical staff. Summarize participation and unknowns.
- Improve discoverability and reuse. Test clear onboarding, reusable environments, shared documentation and relevant training before expanding infrastructure.
- Scope bounded pilots. Match a small activity to a confirmed route and support window. Measure benefit, access, effort and recovery before making it required.
Opportunities for university participation¶
| Shared question | College contribution | What needs university participation |
|---|---|---|
| Campus compute and hosted AI access | Concrete research/classroom scenarios and measured demand | Capacity, course access, account structure and service commitments |
| Software, APIs and data agreements | Priority tools, datasets, rights and renewal needs | Institutional agreements, permitted use and sustainable funding |
| RSE and technical support models | Skill/task estimates and existing college commitments | Shared staffing, escalation, training and long-term operations |
| Data governance and shared infrastructure | Workflow, preservation and collaboration requirements | Appropriate review, interoperability and institutional services |
Before prioritizing an action¶
Attach the problem and evidence, users served, owner role, dependencies, effort, funding status, success measure and a review date. Explicitly distinguish an application, exploratory partnership or proposed role from a confirmed commitment.
The existing pilot’s $0 cash and Greg’s 10 total hours/week apply to that pilot. They are not a measured college budget or staffing ceiling. Do not assume funding or available staff for these broader recommendations.