PENNPRINTOUT - University of Pennsylvania

Overall, 16 percent of students said they use computers
intensively, 41 percent reported frequent use, 38
percent occasional use, and 5 percent never use them.
These percentages did not differ substantially between
ResNet and other residences.
A total 54 percent of ResNet students indicated that
availability of ResNet services affected their room selection
this year, as compared to 13 percent of those not in
ResNet; 49 percent of the freshman, sophomores, and
juniors in both ResNet and non-ResNet buildings agreed
that ResNet will affect next year’s housing selection.
In ResNet, 68 percent reported owning a computer
(53 percent desktop and 15 percent laptop) compared to
62 percent non-ResNet (46 percent desktop, 16 percent
laptop); 44 percent in ResNet reported sharing computing
equipment with roommates versus 20 percent in other
buildings. Reflecting this greater in-room access, ResNet
students report less use of residence labs (12 vs. 22
percent) and School/Library labs (17 vs. 21 percent) for
their primary computing.
An important finding is that 22 percent of ResNet
students use a modem (vs. 45 percent outside ResNet).
Further study is required to determine if ResNet modem
use, which is discouraged, is due to the cost of Ethernet
hardware, perceived complexity of Ethernet software
installation, requirement for access to external bulletin
boards not accessible via the Internet, or other factors.
In general, ResNet students make more use of network
resources (although note that in Table II on page 9, “library
use” was defined to mean network access to library
resources from outside libraries).
Television
Although about 53 percent of all students reported
owning televisions, 34 percent of ResNet students had
access to roommates’ sets, compared to 17 percent in non-
ResNet buildings. Additionally, more ResNet students
reported owning VCRs (36 vs. 27 percent). Reflecting
both greater access to televisions and greater channel
selection, ResNet students spend more time watching TV
each week (15 percent watch over 14 hours; 47 percent
watch from 5 to 14 hours; vs. 9 percent and 36 percent,
respectively), and more frequently (“almost always” plus
“frequently,” as opposed to “sometimes” or “never”) watch
news (26 vs. 15 percent), sports (55 vs. 38 percent), the
ResNet movie channel (51 vs. 7 percent), and foreign
language programming (10 vs. 4 percent). The overall
percentage of students reporting use of television for
assignments was 12 percent.
Telephones
In ResNet buildings, 605 students reported that they
opted to have a private telephone line installed, compared
to 15 students in other residences.
10
Act
“Bottom
now
line”
and
questions
save!
Nine percent of ResNet students agreed that availability
of ResNet services influenced their decision to attend
Penn, compared to six percent of students in other buildings.
When asked if ResNet had contributed to their
academic experience, 76 percent in ResNet agreed vs. 26
percent in other buildings. Regarding ResNet’s positive
contribution to the quality of life at Penn, 87 percent in
ResNet agreed, compared to 37 percent of students living
elsewhere.
Looking forward, 57 percent in ResNet agreed that
the services would help with future work goals (vs. 40
percent), 47 percent agreed that availability of ResNet-type
services could influence their choice of graduate schools
(vs. 30 percent), and, as noted above, 49 percent of
freshman, sophomores, and juniors in both ResNet and
non-ResNet buildings agreed that ResNet would influence
their choice of residence next year.
Some observations
It is important to note that ResNet is an investment in
“deep infrastructure” to support emerging changes in the
way Penn carries out teaching and learning as well as
changes in the role of on-campus residences in the
academic and social life of the campus. It appears that the
University launched ResNet at the ideal time to leverage
the explosive growth of scholarly interest in the Internet.
Nevertheless, since ResNet is only half finished—and, in
particular, since very few freshman or graduate/professional
rooms are wired—the full value of ResNet will not
be apparent for several years.
Nettlesome issues remain, however. We need a better
understanding of some students’ preferences for modem
use over Ethernet, and (potentially related) better understanding
of how to accommodate the 15 percent of
students with laptop computers. For example, in academic
buildings there are few ports available to attach an
Ethernet-ready laptop. We also have evidence that our
network acceptable use policy will have to be adapted—
and enforced—as new uses and abuses are discovered.
Finally, our biggest challenge is likely to be providing
students who don’t live in the residence halls with costeffective
access to data networking services equivalent to
those available to ResNet students. This remote access is
equally important to faculty and staff from their homes as
networked computing becomes a key component in the
way people live, learn, teach, and work at Penn.
DANIEL A. UPDEGROVE, Associate Vice Provost for
Information Systems and Computing, co-chairs the ResNet
Steering Committee; GEORGE P. McKENNA, Director of
Network Operations and Engineering in Data Communications
and Computing Services, chaired the ResNet
evaluation sub-committee.
PENNPRINTOUT