The New Director of Computing, Tom Holub, Discusses Current Issues in L&S Computing

August 6, 2001

The College of Letters and Science is lucky to have Tom Holub as its new Director of Computing. In less than a year, Tom has become invaluable: his abilities to disentangle complex issues and communicate them clearly are treasured by the L&S Deans and Chairs dealing with the often labyrinthine area of computing in higher education. Tom touched upon a number of key College computing issues in interview by Genevieve Shiffrar earlier this year.

Genevieve and Tom met in his office in Campbell Hall, decorated with his digital photographs of campus scenes and Cal basketball games. Photographs of rural landscapes taken on cycling trips also compete for space. His touring bike leans against a wall. One wouldn't know that this is the office of a self-described geek, if not for the unicycle hanging from the wall and a large flat-panel computer monitor with at least ten UNIX windows open.

GS: Wow, do you really ride that thing [pointing to the unicycle]?
TH: Yeah, I love it. A unicycle is a surprisingly effective mode of transportation, especially for this campus. It doesn't take long to get anywhere and it is easy to park. I picked up on the idea as an undergrad at Harvey Mudd [in Claremont, California]. It's a small school with strong programs in the physical sciences, so there's a lot of geeks there. About a quarter of the student body unicycle instead of walk around campus.

GS: Have you always unicycled at Cal?
TH: No, I didn't unicycle in earnest until I started this job, first as Acting Director of Computing for six months and now Director. Unicycling is a bit whimsical; it is a nice contrast to this position.

GS: What other jobs have you had on campus?
TH: I was a UNIX systems administrator for some departments in the College; I wrote a number of perl scripts along the way, and still do. I worked on the Berkeley Millennium Project which supports advanced applications in scientific computing. And before that, I provided desktop support for campus staff. For the last six years, I've worked for LSCR.

GS: Part of your responsibility now includes directing this unit, Letters & Science Computing Resources. Could you talk a little about what LSCR does?
TH: We're a group of diverse and dynamic geeks providing desktop computer support as well as UNIX, web, and database development. LSCR's most used service is the administrative support program. For a yearly fee, we ensure that a staff person's workstation runs smoothly on an ongoing basis. LSCR's Faculty Block plan is gaining in popularity, too. Department managers purchase 10-hour blocks of time to cover faculty desktop computer installation, troubleshooting, the removal of viruses and the like. We run UNIX networks for a handful of departments in the physical sciences; we're developing websites and databases for a few other units. I'm proud of the work we do in LSCR; the consultants do a great job in helping College faculty, staff, and students work more efficiently.

GS: You also advise Deans, Chairs, managers, and other leaders on campus in regards to computing, right?
TH: Yes. Outside of the College, I serve on a number of committees which oversee development of campus-wide initiatives such as e-Berkeley. My job there is to advocate for the needs of L&S faculty, students, and staff. Within the College, I help Deans and Chairs with all kinds of computing decisions. Often this involves making clear the total costs of computing. Computers are often more costly than people imagine. There's software, maintenance, back-ups, connections; even cables add to the cost. It is especially important that Chairs consider me a resource. I am in the process of meeting all the Chairs in the College to understand better their computing issues and help wherever possible. Recently, I connected two department chairs who were dealing with the same problem. Together, they were able to pool resources to implement a shared solution.

GS: You offer much to Deans and Chairs; are there ways in which you assist staff persons as well?
TH: Yes. For instance, I'm compiling a set of best practices—suggestions on how anyone can make better use of the computing resources available. For example, many people send information to one another in email attachments. This method is often problematic. An attachment may have platform or software incompatibilities with recipients' machines or it may carry a virus. Large file attachments can clog the network and fill others' hard drives. There are often better solutions, such as sending emails with text only. Creating webpages on departmental sites or putting the information on a shared departmental server are also good solutions. A team, rather than an individual, can work on a single document so there is no confusion whose version is current. Additionally, the document can be modified after its initial release so that it is always up to date.

GS: Great! I see there are a lot of issues to consider before hitting the "Attach" button. Have you any advice specifically for faculty?
TH: Faculty are an interesting population; they have the widest spread of familiarity with computers. Some simply do not use computers; I'd like to help them get started when they are ready. Other faculty members base their careers on pushing the envelope; most often these professors do not need my assistance. I'm most interested in helping those in between the two ends of the spectrum. These faculty may be interested in exploring instructional technology but may be hesitant. The key may be in making the learning management systems easier to use. [Learning management systems help teach classes with on-line tools such as web pages, discussion groups, grading, and calendaring.] Currently, Blackboard 5.0 (formerly known as CourseInfo) seems to be better able to bring in the typical faculty member than WebCT. Both products are offered to faculty through CyberCentral [the Center for Faculty Educational Development and Technology]. IST [Information Systems and Technology] also provides resources for faculty seeking to integrate technology into the classroom.

GS: Are you involved with student computing issues as well?
TH: Historically, my position has not addressed students' needs directly. I'm very interested in finding ways to help undergraduates, though. Here the issue is computer use in the classroom varying significantly by discipline. Some examples of specialized classroom computing include students gathering data in scientific laboratory courses or solving multivariable equations in mathematics courses. In general, departments offering more technology in the classroom have had to hire specialists in their areas. I am learning about the specific issues associated with each L&S Division's computing needs for both teaching and learning.

GS: What do you think is the biggest challenge for the College?
TH: The big challenge is how to modernize the computing infrastructure given the high degree of self-governance the faculty, and by extension the departments, enjoy. Professorial autonomy is a central tenet of University governance but it has made for messy networks. By contrast, many private corporations are more centralized. They increase efficiency by mandating that employees use a central, single-platform, networked system, and the same hardware and software. Such a paradigm is inappropriate here not simply due to the historical autonomy within Cal but because people are using computers for very diverse tasks.

GS: Sounds tricky. Do you have any ideas as to how to do this, how to make L&S computing more centralized while respecting users' needs?
TH: One possible solution is to provide an incentive to faculty and staff to join voluntarily a centralized network. The incentive? A more affordable support program. You see, the LSCR administrative support package is very well received, but at approximately $1,000 a year, it is also expensive. And the Faculty Block Plan does not provide regular maintenance nor does it coordinate regular backup of data. But given sufficient participation, LSCR could provide a more affordable and more comprehensive program that could include hardware, software, backup, filesharing, and maintenance. Economies of scale would ensure lower costs, but users would have less flexibility in choosing software and hardware. Of course I can't make people do this, but I may be able to put a carrot out there for them.

GS: You are not imagining a single-platform network in this model, are you?
TH: No, I believe the College will always be a multi-platform environment because we use computers for so many different tasks. It makes sense to take advantage of the strengths of the various platforms. For instance, CNMAT [Center for New Music and Audio Technologies] and the Department of Theater, Dance, and Performance Studies rely heavily on Macintoshes. Macs' ability to process lots of data quickly is ideal for audio streaming of concerts and controlling lighting during performances. On the other hand, L&S is very much like a business; financial transactions make up the bulk of many staff persons' workloads. In this realm, users of Windows machines benefit from enterprise business software designed specifically with their platform in mind. While some units might save money with a homogenous network, others will likely incur additional costs. There is probably not a single solution that will work for all L&S departments. I sees great potential in Apple's newest operating system, Mac OS X. It promises to continue the Macintosh trademark of making everyday tasks simple. But based in UNIX, it should also deliver the ability to accomplish almost anything—a classic UNIX strength. Mac OS X should prove itself a powerful network server; the same should also be true of Windows XP.

GS: You clearly have a lot on your plate. You seem interested in improving L&S computing in ways both big and small. As we were talking, I noticed a common thread running throughout your thoughts: Efficiency. The efficiency of the unicycle on the Berkeley campus; the efficiency of web pages in distributing information rather than email attachments; the efficiency of centralized multi-platform networks. A focus on efficiency seems to be a large part of Tom Holub, Director of Computing.
TH: True.