Group items tagged

Web 2.0 may look set to conquer the world, but it has yet to win over the 69 percent of Americans who failed to qualify as "elite tech users." That's the message from a Pew Internet & American Life report that came out today and provides a glimpse at how people in the US—not just techies—use and feel about the technology in their lives. The report, titled "A Typology of Information and Communication Technology Users" (PDF), breaks Americans into three general categories: elite tech users (31 percent of adults), middle-of-the-road tech users (20 percent of adults), and those with few tech assets (49 percent of adults). Pay particular attention to that last number; though technology marches on, half of all Americans use it only lightly or not at all. When the numbers are broken down further, a full 15 percent of all US adults have neither cell phones nor Internet connectivity.

Those with "few tech assets" make up 49 percent of the US adult population. Many of them have some form of access to the Internet, and most have cell phones, but technology "does not play a central role in their daily lives." Instead of being liberating, constant connectivity is "annoying," and many older users have trouble even navigating the Internet. The 15 percent of Americans who don't use cell phones or the Internet tend to be in their mid-60s with lower levels of income and education, according to the report.

But there is a fundamental problem here that needs to be addressed. Look at this issue from the other side. A significant number of articles, including many published in small circulation periodicals, are never cited by anyone. Think, too, of the conferences papers that fail to attract meaningful audiences, the journals that have tiny circulations and very small readerships, and the fact that most academic books are published in press runs of under 1,000 copies, despite the growth in the number of academics and university and college libraries. Put bluntly, we are researching without having an impact, speaking without being heard and writing without being read. Furthermore, our tenure and promotion procedures reward publication more than they do awareness of the field, thus pushing up conference attendance, and journal and book submissions.

We have collectively created the equivalent of an academic monsoon over the past three decades, with no change in the forecast for the coming years. Without a major reconsideration of how we share and use information, how we keep up with the field, and how we recognize academic accomplishment, we will continue to add to the floodwaters, all the while spending less attention on whether or not anyone reads our work, listens to our presentations, or appreciates our professional contributions. Academe 2.0 offers tools to build more effective dikes and even to regulate the flow. But we need to realize that the lakes at the end of the bloated academic rivers – our faculty, researchers and students – have finite capacity, in terms of time and ability to assimilate information. Controlling the scholarly input is crucial to ensuring that we actually learn from and about each other, and ensuring that our academic work truly makes a difference.