Most ground water modeling courses focus on the use of computer models and pay little or no attention to traditional analytic solutions to ground water flow problems. This shift in education seems logical. Why waste time to learn about the method of images, or why study analytic solutions to one-dimensional or radial flow problems? Computer models solve much more realistic problems and offer sophisticated graphical output, such as contour plots of potentiometric levels and ground water path lines. However, analytic solutions to elementary ground water flow problems do have something to offer over computer models: insight. For instance, an analytic one-dimensional or radial flow solution, in terms of a mathematical expression, may reveal which parameters affect the success of calibrating a computer model and what to expect when changing parameter values. Similarly, solutions for periodic forcing of one-dimensional or radial flow systems have resulted in a simple decision criterion to assess whether or not transient flow modeling is needed. Basic water balance calculations may offer a useful check on computer-generated capture zones for wellhead protection or aquifer remediation. An easily calculated "characteristic leakage length" provides critical insight into surface water and ground water interactions and flow in multi-aquifer systems. The list goes on. Familiarity with elementary analytic solutions and the capability of performing some simple hand calculations can promote appropriate (computer) modeling techniques, avoids unnecessary complexity, improves reliability, and is likely to save time and money. Training in basic hand calculations should be an important part of the curriculum of ground water modeling courses.