Technophobic Professors Make Academia Look Passé
January 24, 2011 
Author 
In There continues to be a slew of those who cling to the past not just in the media and marketing world, but sadly also in academia. And yet, with the spread of any new technology: from the introduction of the telephone to the advent of the car, there have been those who freak out because they misunderstand it.
Typically, they pick out singular negative examples vs. the incredibly greater number of benefits and positive stories. Or they share an elitist, out of touch viewpoint for how “the world should be.” According to who? Stuffy old academics in their ivory towers. Do they seriously not realize a constant in our society is change, and that tomorrow never looks like today?
A recent piece in the Guardian ties together several technophobic professors seemingly upset the world is changing. It’s worth reacting to because the themes presented are just so quaint you have to laugh at them. They are modern day versions of those who were afraid of science during the age of witchcraft. And the crazy part is, they are in education! Although I guess back in the days where the world thought some people were witches, those in academia were teaching it too.
This time, we have MIT professor Sherry Turkle who (of course) has a new book she’s trying to peddle. Predictably, it is yet another anti-technology tirade without much data to back up her points, just conjecture:
Turkle’s thesis is simple: technology is threatening to dominate our lives and make us less human. Under the illusion of allowing us to communicate better, it is actually isolating us from real human interactions in a cyber-reality that is a poor imitation of the real world.
Sherry is of course wrong. Technology allows us to become infinitely more social. Personally, many of my best friends I’ve met due to the web. Professionally, I have had literally every job I’ve held due to connections forged over the web.
Because of the web, not only was I able to self-publish an album and go direct to consumer – but due to social networking I connected with Erik Soderquist, a designer and musician thousands of miles away who created my album art. And another local musician, DJ Stryke, who I also connected with due to the web, mastered it.
The web enables creatives to connect and has been so overwhelmingly positive of a tool for me personally I can’t help but get a little frustrated when anti-technologists bash it. Especially when nearly every one of my peers has similar stories of connection with other creatives, seeing these stories of “the sky is falling” from academics or politicians seems completely absurd, like those afraid of cars when whips and buggies reigned supreme.
More from the article:
But Turkle’s book is far from the only work of its kind. An intellectual backlash in America is calling for a rejection of some of the values and methods of modern communications. “It is a huge backlash. The different kinds of communication that people are using have become something that scares people,” said Professor William Kist, an education expert at Kent State University, Ohio.
A “huge backlash?” Really? According to who? What data points are presented? Exactly. Maybe they should get out there with real people and see how they’re using technology, particularly social communications tools to connect. I’ll argue the other way: those sitting in their ivory towers are viewing the world through a lens that is no longer relevant and I fear their students infected by their backwards viewpoints will be ill prepared for what awaits them.
Also what’s with the “technology scaring people”comments? Please, that’s a joke. If technology scares you, you likely have a deeper rooted neurosis and should seek psychological help, because we are a culture of technology. If you are afraid of technology, you are afraid of our world.
Further, there is another ridiculous layer to this whole premise. Consider nothing is more isolating and intellectual devoid as television. And yet these academics are berating technologies which inspire a generation to take an active role in communications?
As Brian Solis sagely notes:
Evolution is evolution – and it’s happened before us and will continue after we’re gone. But, what’s taking place now is much more than change for the sake of change. The socialization of content creation, consumption and participation, is hastening the metamorphosis that transforms everyday people into participants of a powerful and valuable media literate society.
Digital fluency is the new literacy, whether you want to bury your head in the sand: this is the world we live in. Embrace it or ignore it at your own peril, but society will look back with disdain on those who pessimistically fight the future.
Francois Nel replied | Jan 24, 2011 (1 comment)
One (or even a dozen ) technophobic professors surely doesn’t invalidate the work on countless others. After all, the Web owes its very existence to some very smart “stuffy old academics in their ivory towers”, not least Prof Tim Berners-Lee of MIT. As you know, one swallow doesn’t make a summer – just as one attention-seeking PR with a limited understanding of the history of the evolution of technology couldn’t be seen to represent the good work of many others.
Adam Singer replied | Jan 24, 2011 (597 comments)
Agreed, Francois – but the vocal minority certainly are doing a good job of this. I *frequently* see anti-technology pieces in the media with sensationalist examples of negativity from technology that quote academics who seem to endorse it. Let’s hope the more balanced of the group becomes more vocal. Obviously not all academics are like this – but these stories don’t help the group :)
Rob O. replied | Jan 24, 2011 (15 comments)
Sure, technology allows us to become infinitely more social, but in ironically disconnected ways. For example, younger Gen Y people are often far more comfortable texting than actually speaking to others. They often have very weak interpersonal social skills. And to an even greater degree, they lack written communication skills – composing anything longer than a paragraph (heck, even building formal paragraphs!) is a tremendous struggle.
I’m not opposed to social media literacy and I recognize that a mastery of said will really benefit older students, but first and foremost, we have a responsibility to equip children with real world skills. We need to teach children to think creatively, solve problems, and communicate in the analog world before we let them slip away headlong into the digital abyss.
I’m not saying that kids shouldn’t have the opportunity to acquire computer-use skills in school, but we’ve got to move much more cautiously and mindfully towards that. Our current adoption of computers in education is reckless and haphazard.
And let me be blunt – elementary school-age children don’t need tech.
Kids need time to just be kids – to fingerpaint, play ball, collect a jar of ladybugs, or any of a thousand other childlike activities – before they learn video games and instant messaging. We’re turning little children into technologists and voracious digital consumers before they’ve even learned to ride a bike!
Peter Paluska replied | Jan 24, 2011 (7 comments)
Excellent points, Rob! Yes, get the computers and the Internet out of the classroom K-12! They DO NOT improve the educational process.
April FitzGerald replied | Jan 25, 2011 (1 comment)
Rob O., I wish I knew you personally. We think a great deal alike.
I do believe there are those who are afraid to move with the times; however, I feel this particular issue has been taken out of context — or correct me if I’m wrong. I get the impression it’s not fear of technology itself, but the fear of increasing the physical disconnection that is the result of our dependency on technology, that we are being warned against.
Those of the older generations know of life before Facebook and Twitter. We have the ability to distinguish real friendships/relationships from that of an online presence. Unfortunately, the newer generations do not have that benefit (though there are always exceptions). The online/digital world IS their real world and has been for them since day one — or as soon as they were able to text, instant message, play an online video game, or enter search terms into an Internet browser.
Technology as we have come to know it, is a powerful thing, but also a double-edged sword. Now the question that remains: Will we teach the future to wield the power responsibly, or continue to watch them move down the current path to the possible social detriment of us all?
Kevin Brett replied | Jan 24, 2011 (1 comment)
Couldn’t agree more Adam, particularly your point that digital fluency is the new literacy. Well done. I wrote recently about the “Dinosaurization” of way-too-many Baby Boomer communicators on my blog, http://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com. Alas, many of these very same Baby Boomer dinosaurs are professors as well. They are the digital dead that we just haven’t got around to burying yet.
Peter Paluska replied | Jan 24, 2011 (7 comments)
Adam,
It’s a pleasure to read your article! You make many salient points here: accepting change is without a doubt the way to go, I say.
Do what makes you happy, and if it involves digital media and socializing via the Net (like this, hello!) then, as long as no one else is harmed, all is well. A nice balance is ideal though.
Thanks!
Peter
TheReviewer replied | Jan 24, 2011 (6 comments)
Ever notice how the people that rave against technology are the ones who don’t know jack s**t about it?
Joanne Jacobs replied | Jan 25, 2011 (1 comment)
What’s most irritating is that Turkle was one of the first proponents of emergent tech as a therapeutic means of self-disclosure in her earlier books, The Second Self (1984), and Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet (1995). While she was concerned about possible problems with self-representation online in Life on the Screen, she was not so allergic to the idea of technology being used as an intermediary to human relationships as she has now become. In producing a barrage of computer-human experiences (which she describes in negative terms, despite acknowledging that the human participants didn’t necessarily find them negative), she portrays a dystopian view of short-form communications, without ever balancing these experiences with positive opportunities derived from the same technologies. It’s a classic case of a skewed sample.
Unfortunately, I expect this trend of negative literature to continue while there’s still cash in books. It makes sense to use old media to trash new media, after all. And for a more interesting perspective on technology-mediated human relationships, stick to the blogs.
Jon Buscall replied | Jan 25, 2011 (16 comments)
I worked as a university professor for almost 10 years but jumped ship partly because I found that academia wasn’t doing enough to keep up with technology and communications.
Back in 2002 I had students on writing and communications coures using blogspot but got laughed at by my head of dpt.
In 2004 I jumped ship and started my own company. I don’t regret it for a second! And now when I occasionally go back to give a guest lecture I see they are still years behind. And this is Sweden :(
Katie C. replied | Jan 25, 2011 (1 comment)
Technology is an essential part of almost any professional career. Most academics are willing to admit and embrace this. As a college student, I have found that all of my professors are advocates of the idea that change is a constant and that we will be learning new trades and ideas for the rest of our lives. It is a shame that some academics cannot see that this also applies to technology.
Andy Jones replied | Feb 2, 2011 (1 comment)
I’ve enjoyed reading over your comments about technology and education, especially the responses to the Turkle book. I wonder if one of you would like to appear on my Wednesday afternoon at 5 (Pacific time) radio show to extend this conversation there, and perhaps plug a book or interesting project that you have completed (or are working on). “Dr. Andy’s Poetry and Technology Hour” has been on the air since 2000, and has featured technology discussions with folks such as Steve Westly, Murray Newlands, and Ralph Nader.
I am a technophilic faculty member at UC Davis, where I have taught writing and technoculture classes since the 1990s.
Drop me an email if you are interested, either for my February 2nd show, or for shows that I am currently booking in March.
Andy Jones
Catherine Lockey replied | Feb 11, 2011 (63 comments)
Like everything in life there needs to be balance. Extremist perspectives about technology in the classroom just waste time. Computers don’t hurt elementary school children but lack of teacher student interaction does. Texting and social media don’t hurt college students but allowing them to play with their phones and laptops instead of participating in a group discussion does. Do computers help bad teachers avoid teaching? Sure they do. From what I remember, TVs used to do the same. Before TV it was the stupid holiday crossword puzzle hand-out or the extended group project with no accountability. How about those snow delay days and the resulting day of 20 minute classes devoted to nothing? I could go on.