SUPPORTING INFRASTRUCTURE

Objective

Background

Issues

1.  Function/Purpose

Beyond these considerations, innovations in technology and teaching methodology may call for radical shifts in the design and further development of the infrastructure. The implementation of distance learning which relies heavily on remote access and individual student (versus institutional ownership) of the technology represents one such change underway. The pace of change requires forward thinking on these issues, if the infrastructure is to maintain its relevance and effectiveness. 

2.  Technological Resources

• Design and Maintenance: In the initial phase of infrastructure creation, the stated purpose of the facility should drive the design. Who are the users and what are their needs? Will a facility be used by faculty, students, and or organized classes? Will it be open or restricted to particular users or set times? Is the facility to be stand alone or part of a network of facilities? Such considerations are fundamental to the determination of hardware, software, data, and personnel needs in the facility. The relative availability of each of these components will dictate how well objectives are fulfilled. For example, availability of personnel to manage and maintain a laboratory may determine how much access is allowed and to whom. These elements also may be substitutable. For example, an investment in hardware security may enable more access when staffing resources are limited. Planning for all these components should be part of the initial proposal, as decisions made in establishing the facility will impact its future utility and management.

• Materials: Beyond the physical facilities, instructional materials must be procured. The world wide web has broadened access to software, data, exercise and curricular materials. In addition, online tutorials and demonstrations may be used to stretch limited resources. Where facilities are limited, internships and cooperative work with local agencies or companies may augment resources and provide more broad reaching benefits.

• Safety and security: Relatively inexpensive hardware security devices have been available for some time. Operating system security functions, virus checkers and network control programs offer protection on the software side, but only if installed and maintained correctly. None of these measures are foolproof. Need for access versus security control will continue to be an issue. Policies for access and backup are necessary complements to physical security measures.

3.  Human Resources

• Facility administration: Management issues are vital to the successful operation of the infrastructure. While the planning and acquisition phases are key to the future success of the facility, if a management plan does not exist, the facility may not fulfill its potential. Setting policies on resource utilization is also essential to the smooth running of the facility. When a facility is shared between departments and/or subjects, the chain of administrative control and responsibility is particularly important. To a large extent, the functional orientation for classes, practical sessions, and/or research work will determine who has access and how that access is managed. However, personnel responsibilities and authority need to be established and publicized, especially in a multifunctional facility.

• Staffing: Personnel is generally the last budget item considered. The type of support (full or part-time, shared or not) and the expertise level of the individuals may determine how well the facilities meets users' needs. Alternative strategies abound. Graduate assistants, university computing services, departmental staff and faculty may be in the mix. Where several individuals are involved, policies on the chain of command and the duties and responsibilities of each person (for example, teaching versus maintenance role) should be set out. Informal networks for support in the vendor or private sector should also be cultivated.

4.  Financial and Administrative Resources

• Funding: Given the growing need and tightening funds, all sources should be explored. Internal funding may be available in the form of grants, laboratory fees or capital expenditure funds. External mechanisms include grants, contracts, and donations. Matching programs should be explored as they can often provide much needed leverage.

• Administrative issues: Direct administrative issues involving the enunciation of policies on responsibility and authority of personnel are generally easily handled under existing structures. However, the time cost of establishing and maintaining a facility are often overlooked. In addition, time spent in building private and agency partnerships may not show immediate tangible results. In particular, untenured faculty burdened with such responsibilities may be at risk when promotion, and tenure or job retention decisions arise. Thus the traditional reward structure which rarely counts service equal to research and teaching may need to be adjusted to fully acknowledge time spent in laboratory building and administration. A separate issue arises when the laboratory fills the dual role of teaching and contract facility. Clear definition of responsibilities and priorities are needed.

5.  Future Proofing

As well as funding, time requirements for installing software upgrades, data management and general maintenance need to be examined. The issue of whether funds are available for staff or whether the burden is to be carried by faculty or student assistants needs consideration. In some instances, vendor support services may be available or a vendor maintenance contract may be required as part of the purchase agreement. In each case, funding mechanisms need to be explored both internally (for example, through lab fees) and externally (for example, through cooperative agreements with private sources). 

With the rapid changes occurring in the technology components, for example, new versions of operating systems and software packages, hard questions have to be asked about how to support these continuing demands both in financial and personnel terms. Is it important to support a variety of hardware/software options, or only one or two? Should multiple formats be supported or one standard adopted? Do all innovations have to be adopted? 

The inevitable developments in hardware, software, data standards and various other technology components will have ripple effects within the infrastructure, potentially necessitating accommodations and changes in other components. Therefore, change management is vital to prevent dislocation. 

Benefits And Importance To National Needs

The UCGIS has the opportunity to play a leadership role in examining these little studied issues. By exploring options to improve and strengthen the geographic information science education supporting infrastructure, a contribution will be made both in member institutions and the broader community. 

On the practical level, the examination of issues involved in the establishment, management and maintenance of the supporting infrastructure should prove of benefit to the novice starting the process as well as those with established facilities. The novice may not be aware of the pitfalls noted above, while the current manager may benefit from the acknowledgment of the importance of such issues when seeking internal or external support for the facility's operation or growth.

Recommendations and Action Items

1. Information Dissemination: With the continual changes occurring in the support infrastructure, it is difficult for any one individual or department to keep up with the state-of-the-art in this field. It is undesirable for time and resources to be unnecessarily diverted from conceptual and instructional development to management and maintenance. Yet it is vital that the practical component of instruction remain up to date. Therefore, the following actions are suggested:
• "How to" guide: As a starting point, a guide which sets out the basic steps, as well as scenarios for the development or management of facilities under different resource conditions would be helpful. Such a guide may include a series of laboratory facility models, broken down by type, scale and budget. Action Item: explore options for producing a "how to" guide.
• Case Study Models of Facilities: Rather than repeat the same errors or reinvent the wheel, the UCGIS membership holds a wealth of knowledge on what works and what does not work in terms of support infrastructure development and maintenance. No single model will fit all needs or environments. Policies, pitfalls, "tricks" and lessons learned can be shared to the advantage of all.

Action Item: solicit case study information from the UCGIS members, and possibly other exemplar institutions, and compile for distribution through the World Wide Web.
Action Item: solicit volunteers to create a Web based FAQ on support infrastructure issues and maintain a section for discussion. 
• Web Clearinghouse: A wealth of information and materials already exist on the Web, and elsewhere. Specialized software, data and instructional materials already exist and the amount of material is growing daily. While such material can be found through searches and browsing, room exists for streamlining and improving access to this information.

Action Item: create a UCGIS Clearinghouse Page for links to instruction related materials and resources including software, data, and exercise materials.
 
2. Funding/Financing: More information on funding sources, both traditional and nontraditional, and opportunities to support and expand facilities would be beneficial. Additionally, institutional recognition of the need for ongoing funding for maintenance, replacements and upgrades is not always present. Those seeking support often have little "ammunition" with which to convince administrators of this need.

Action Item: add a section to the Clearinghouse Page on funding sources, opportunities, and alternative support avenues. Items might include a list of funding sources, contact information for successful grant writers who are prepared to be mentors, special offers from vendors, government agencies, and other institutions. 
Action Item: include funding as one of the FAQ topic areas.
Action Item: solicit information from members on infrastructure costs an creative funding arrangements. Provide a summary of this information on the Clearinghouse Page.
 
3. Partnerships: Vendors, government agencies at all levels, and private interests are both providers of materials and benefactors of instructional improvements. Therefore they may be enrolled as partners in the process of improving the support infrastructure for geographic information science education.

Action Item: actively pursue opportunities for dialog with vendors, government agencies and private companies with a view to developing areas of mutual support.
Action Item: designate UCGIS contact person(s) to serve as conduit(s) for information to be disseminated to the membership. 
 
4. Support Infrastructure Related Policy: Compatibility and lack of standardization remain stumbling blocks to easy sharing of materials (especially data), and efforts to provide students with at least an overview of the breadth of technologies they may face when they graduate.

Action Item: initiate discussion of standards and compatibility issues among the membership through the Clearinghouse Page or the FAQ. 
Action Item: open discussion with key figures in government agencies and other organizations working on standards and related issues.

References

Brimicombe, A. J. 1993. GIS laboratories: Perpetual motion, perpetual money. Geo Info Systems, 3, 4: 53-56.

Groop, R., S. L. Dodge, and G. Manson. 1985. Microcomputer modules for undergraduate geography. Journal of Geography, 84, 4: 161-164.

Hepner, G. F. 1985. Considerations in the development of a computer mapping laboratory. Journal of Geography, 84, 2: 64-67. 

King, G.O. 1991. Geography and GIS technology. Journal of Geography, 90, 1: 66-72. 

Nellis, D. 1994. Technology in geographic education: Reflections and future directions. Journal of Geography, 93, 1: 36-39.

Palladino, S. D. and Kemp, K. K. (eds.) 1991. GIS Teaching Facilities: Six Case Studies on the Acquisition and Management of Laboratories. National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis Technical Paper 91-21.

Walsh, S. 1992. Spatial education and integrated hands-on training Essential foundations of GIS instruction. Journal of Geography, 91, 2: 54-61.