~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ BRITISH HCI GROUP ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~         http://www.bcs.org.uk/hci/          ~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ NEWS SERVICE ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ All news to:[log in to unmask]  ~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ NOTE: Please reply to article's originator, ~~
~~ not the News Service                        ~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>From 1989 until 1995/96, three of the UK research councils -- the ESRC
(Economic and Social Research Council), the MRC (Medical Research Council),
and the SERC (later renamed EPSRC: Engineering and Physical Sciences
Research Council) -- ran a special Joint Council Initiative (JCI) in
Cognitive Science and Human-Computer Interaction with a budget of 12m
pounds.

As part of the JCI, the research councils commissioned an evaluation of the
Initiative.  The Final Report of that evaluation is available, entitled
"The Evaluation of the Joint Council Initiative (JCI) in Cognitive Science
and Human-Computer Interaction".

A number of the appendices are also available, including a report from an
international Peer Review Panel (David Rumelhart, John Carroll, Clayton
Lewis, William Newman, Mark Steedman).

You can obtain copies of the Final Report by requesting them from
Technopolis Ltd:

   Director                   [log in to unmask]
   Technopolis Ltd
   3 Pavilion Buildings       Tel: +44 (0)1273 204 320
   Brighton BN1 1EE           Fax: +44 (0)1273 747299
   U.K.

The reports are also available on-line, in PDF format: both the final
report itself
(http://www.psy.herts.ac.uk/pub/R.M.Young/jci-evaluation/JCIrep.pdf ), and
the Appendices
(http://www.psy.herts.ac.uk/pub/R.M.Young/jci-evaluation/appendices.pdf ).


KEEPING ONE'S DISTANCE . . .

If you request the final report from Technopolis, you will receive with it
a letter from the research councils, distancing themselves from certain
aspects of the report.

If you wish to see it, that letter too is available on-line (in either HTML
format (http://www.psy.herts.ac.uk/pub/R.M.Young/jci-evaluation/Jci96.html
) or RTF format
(http://www.psy.herts.ac.uk/pub/R.M.Young/jci-evaluation/Jci96.rtf ).

Interestingly, the final report in turn, but rather more politely,
disclaims responsibility for the Peer Review Panel's report.


A PERSONAL OPINION

If I may add a few personal views:  Normally, one might expect this kind of
management-oriented evaluation, with its emphasis on spend profiles and
attainment of objectives, to be about as dull as an accountant's report on
the corner grocery store.

Such is not the case, however, for this report.  Indeed, parts of it can
only be described as "red hot", with phrases being thrown around such as
"missed opportunity", "grossly deficient financial information and support
functions", "erroneous information", "dubious calculations", and "flawed
programme management, administation and support".

I found particularly interesting:

  * Section 5.2 on "Effectiveness", especially Sec 5.2.3 which
    analyses the failure of the Initiative to bring together
    Cognitive Science and HCI to any significant degree.

  * Section 5.4.3, especially pp.100-107, which describes the
    shortcomings in central support, and its long-term consequences.

  * Section 5.5.3 and elsewhere, laying out what is required in terms
    of timetabling and financial management to meet the constraints of
    a programme such as the JCI.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ To receive HCI news, send the message:      ~~
~~ "JOIN BCS-HCI your_firstname your_lastname" ~~
~~ to [log in to unmask]                ~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
~~ Newsarchives:                               ~~
~~ http://www.mailbase.ac.uk/lists/bcs-hci/    ~~
~~ archive.html                                ~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ To join the British HCI Group, contact      ~~
~~ [log in to unmask]                              ~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%