Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
vehemently that the ACM had no such crisis. In doing so, he reaffi rmed
the association's commitment to a theoretical approach to computing:
“Our science must, indeed, 'maintain as its sole abstract purpose of
advancing truth and knowledge.'”
40
This commitment to abstract science was further reinforced the fol-
lowing year when the ACM's C
3
S announced its Curriculum '68 guide-
lines for university computer science programs. Curriculum '68 advocated
a rigorously theoretically approach to computer science that included
little of interest to business practitioners.
41
Even when the ACM did
recognize the growing importance of business data processing to the
future of its discipline, the emphasis was always placed on research and
education:
All of us, I am sure, have read non-ACM articles on business data processing
and found them lacking. They suffer, I believe, from one basic fault: They fail
to report fundamental research in the data processing fi eld. The question of
'fundamentalness' is all-important. . . . In summary, this letter is intended to urge
new emphasis on FUNDAMENTALISM in business data processing. This objec-
tive seems not only feasible but essential to me. It provides not only a technique
for getting ACM into the business data processing business, but a technique (the
same one) for getting the fi eld of business data processing on a fi rm theoretical
footing.
42
There is little question that throughout the 1960s, the ACM pursued
a professionalization strategy that was heavily dependent on the author-
ity and legitimacy of its academic accomplishments.
It was not until the 1970s that the ACM began to seriously reconsider
its policy toward business-oriented practitioners. In 1974 the ACM
Executive Council commissioned a series of studies on business program-
ming as part of its long-range planning report. In doing so, the ACM
was responding both to long-standing criticism and a recent spate of
anti-ACM editorials that had appeared in the industry newsletter
Computerworld
. “ACM had become not so much an industry profes-
sional group,” declared one of these editorials, “as it was a home for
members of educational institutions around the country to overwhelm
us with their erudition on topics of vaguely moderate interest.”
43
The
author noted that while most business data processing installations had
standardized on the COBOL and FORTRAN programming languages,
the ACM still supported ALGOL. He quoted ACM president Anthony
Ralston to the effect that although only 25 percent of the ACM member-
ship were academics, ten out of twenty-fi ve council members were
academics.
44
