Karen McGavock



Yüklə 62,5 Kb.
tarix02.10.2018
ölçüsü62,5 Kb.
#71637

Karen McGavock, Institute for Education, University of Dundee, Scotland.

Email: k.l.mcgavock@dundee.ac.uk

Risking Disconnection?: Mobility, Place and Education today.


Paper presented at the European Conference on Educational Research, Edinburgh, 20-23 September 2000
INTRODUCTION

This paper will consider communication technology, its use in school and its impact on people’s values in the community and in education. In an age where all we have to do is flick a switch to connect globally through technology, I will consider whether socially we are actually risking disconnection - becoming isolated as we spend more time face-to-monitor rather than face-to-face in our interaction with others. Just who this ‘we’ is is problematic as I will reveal later on. Connections can be made with ease using the internet with the reassurance that users are only a click away from their next hit. Extending the metaphor of addiction, modern communication technology may give ‘users’ feelings of security, but this may also result in a culture of dependence. Technological superstructures connect us instantly to others across the world and much of communications advertising focuses on social promotion using slogans such as, ‘It’s good to talk’, and ‘Phone a friend’. To fail to submit to market and media pressures can lead to disconnection. The technological race mentality is one of keep up or fall behind, with Tony Blair being one of those people leading the race.




WHAT DO WE MEAN BY COMMUNITY? - IS IT AN IMAGINARY CONCEPT?:
This trend towards increasing connection through communication, exacerbates the gap for those who have neither the means, nor the skill to use the technology and so become disconnected or technologically-ostracised. We do not live in one unified ‘global community’ (McLuhan, 1964), but are part of several communities as we perform our different roles in society. Therefore we can inhabit many communities simultaneously, so reference to one over-arching community is false. The issue of community is not clear cut. One such community is the technologically connected group who increasingly log on to world wide networks. A feeling of belonging to a community is a four-fold phenomenon; it is physical, emotional, historical and imaginative. Imagination is an important part of our conception of community, and we also need to use our imaginations more when using technology to visualise connections and the people at the receiving end. It is something which Salman Rushdie identifies as central to being part of a community in his book entitled Imaginary Homelands, reinforced by Paxman’s “country of the mind” and Derek Walcott’s idea of there being, “no nation, but imagination”. The physical and the imaginative fuse to create a sense of belonging to people and places. Anthony Giddens believes that in order to function effectively in a modern community, “ ... a cosmopolitan person is one precisely who draws strength from being at home in a variety of contexts.” (Giddens, 1994, p190). Levering is very aware that the “ ... benefits of mobility ... can undermine the locatedness that is richly significant for our intellectual lives.” (Levering, 2000 in Lankshear et al (Eds.), 2000, p304). In this mobile society, we spend too much time on the move, never settling, or staying in the one place for any length of time detrimentally affecting our development. This situation resembles a package tour where visitors never get a flavour of the place they are visiting, only leaving with a stereotype, or hollow image of towns and the people who live there. Equally, to put our lives on hold, to become developmentally static or immobile results in stagnation, shutting ourselves off in an unhealthy and spatially claustrophobic way from the world.1

In order to consider the current situation, I will consider key issues identified by several experts in the field and will relate this to governmental policy which connects new technology in education with the combating of social exclusion. There is concern that some policies such as the National Grid for Learning may actually be excluding people who are just ‘out of range’ in terms of physical or technological mobility, particularly those in rural or impoverished areas. This exacerbates feelings of exclusion for those who are already marginalised or disadvantaged in society. There are therefore huge implications for failing to connect all. Indeed, those in the Third World where technology is limited will be disconnected from our global networks and will be excluded because they do not have resources to connect and become included in modern global communications.

In the Consumer Age in which we live, the commodification of knowledge is having a huge effect on learners with its emphasis on skills-based learning. The increasing impetus is towards rhetoric and image being favoured over substance. There are many repercussions attributable to the marginalisation of the individual who is subsumed by the collective, resulting in creativity actually being squeezed out of staff and students due to the pressures of a crammed curriculum with constraints which have been imposed by policy developers. As a consequence, there is little space or time to reflect or to consider any subject area deeply. The trend is towards being an individualistic and private society over a collective and public one so that disconnection is actually affecting the moral, social and cultural areas of our society.
THE TORTOISE AND THE HARE - QUICK FIX OR LONG-TERM SOLUTION?:
In popular culture, we see the issue of immediacy as being a useful line in which to pursue the current trend. To hesitate or think as in quiz shows, is a mistake in the current educational climate. Instant response is required and favoured, much like children’s rapid response in their interaction with computers. Accuracy as well as speed is needed. In television advertising, we find that the focus is on the rapidly changing bombardment of images. We incline towards fast food which contains few nutrients, and like education, if the process is quick, few benefits are gained. Indeed, something vital to learning is being missed out; the evaluation needed to consolidate knowledge takes place at a slower rate to information transfer and so little time is devoted to it. Kolb also believes that, “The technological challenge would be to create an environment with tools for interaction that encouraged a slowed-down contemplative encounter.” (Kolb, 2000 in Blake & Standish (Eds.) (2000), p199). I believe we should strive towards making space and time within the curriculum an integral part of learning which adds strength to the overall structure of the system. Little curricular time or space has been devoted to reflection or to deep consideration of subject areas, leading Kolb to believe that:

Part of the answer to increasing the critical and evaluative component of online education has to involve slowing down the inhabitation of the Net to provide time for thought and evaluation.

(Kolb, 2000 in Blake & Standish (Eds.) (2000), p183).
Too often we find that there is not enough curricular space in schools. Only in higher and further education can we enjoy space to reflect and consider. This is regarded as a luxury rather than a necessity, and participation in these institutions is seen as more of a privilege than a right since students have to earn the right to have space there both physically and intellectually. Students are given valuable space in which they can think deeply, can question rather than accept traditional views, and at the same time learn to respect the opinions of others as valid on an intellectual level. Too often we find that acquisition of space is equated with power or money, so that many of us cannot afford the luxury of making space in our lives. I would argue instead that space to think and act for ourselves is much more than a luxury, it is necessary to personal development.


FROM EDUCATIONAL DEMANDS TO SOCIAL IMPOVERISHMENT - NO OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE TIME OUT?:
People appear to be spending more time in their homes than ever before with children spending less time in groups, typified by declining involvement in voluntary organisations. They spend more time indoors watching television and playing computer games in a more sheltered environment than in the club setting. This also reflects a trend towards less commitment, passivity and fewer shared experiences. Young people today seem to have less free time than their counterparts of a generation ago with an increase in homework demands. Time is therefore never ‘free’ or spare. Jane Gordon expanded on this point, believing that she is one of:
... a generation of parents whose fear for their children’s safety has become such a major preoccupation that every moment that their offspring do not spend in full-time education is taken up in carefully supervised extra-curricular activities.” (Gordon, 2000, p7).
Indeed, the assertion could be made that free-time is not actually free in the eyes of the policy-makers, it is bought at the cost of acquiring other ‘essential’ educational skills. Paul Standish believes that the emphasis towards essentialising skills has, “ ... the potential ... to reduce knowledge to information to displace the immediacy of classroom interaction, or to fragment and depersonalise learning ...” (Standish in Blake & Standish (Eds.) (2000), p153). This is evocative of an Orwellian initiative driven to extremes as a form of control by authority where the range of thought is gradually narrowed. The parallel could be drawn between this state of affairs and current governmental education policies which head towards a reduction rather than an expansion of knowledge.

Kolb cites Cline who conjures up an image of situations which, “ ... encapsulated the rich opportunity for moments of engagement ...” (Cline, ???? cited in Kolb, 2000 in Blake & Standish (Eds.) (2000), p199). However he believes that in terms of the internet this opportunity is denied of users, “ ... because the online world epitomises that bustle and hurry and meaning that we need to escape.” (ibid, p199). Instead, technology may provide the scope to help resolve existential dilemmas if opportunities are provided to confront problems online, and if users are given the space needed to evaluate information and to be creative. There is greater scope in which to interpret and in which to personally develop through identifying clearings, through occupying imaginative, emotional and conceptual space when engaging with a text. In this respect it is more important for openings to be occupied, so that closure does not inhibit development. Closure in developmental terms does not allow opportunities to have impact, learning is therefore reduced to the finite, which is educationally restrictive. Kolb endorses this claim, believing that, “Online places of learning need to provide openings ... ” (Kolb, 2000 in Blake & Standish (Eds.) (2000), p192). Perhaps the Internet presents more opportunities to users than closures however there are too many openings, the range of possibility is never-ending. Users need to inhabit this space in a meaningful and engaging way.



HUMAN LIMITATIONS - BETTER THAN COMPUTER ERROR / MALFUNCTION?:
In collective organisations like schools, originality and creativity are being diminished because of an over-crowded curriculum simply because of time constraints and emphasis on absorbing information for exams. Standardisation is rife in compulsory education where teachers as well as pupils are being reduced to the level of skill-automatons. Head-teachers are seen as managers now, distant and removed from the children. People are seen not as individuals but as a human resource - a number rather than a name. At the personal level, the place of the individual in society is also being reduced, so that he/she is de-centred, de-valued, and greater prominence is given towards worshipping the secular computer god. Indeed, it could be said that we risk disconnection through ex-communication from the technological deity. Knowledge is reduced to tick boxes, particularly at the interviewing stage for recruiting teachers. Also, teachers do not have the space to be creative, with any deviation from the curriculum opening them to criticism. This situation can only harm teaching professionals. The teachers who I valued at school were characters, people who identified strengths within each pupil, who inspired confidence and encouraged pupils to follow their ambitions by supporting and making time and space for them. Thus mutual respect was generated between pupil and teacher at an individual or personal level. Teaching ‘creatively’, and teaching ‘creativity’ as Robert Frotz observed have brought about, “The most important developments in civilisation ... but ironically, most people have not been taught to create.” (The Path of Least Resistance in Angus Council, 2000, p1). Intellectual laziness prevails in our society today. We only have to look towards our increasing dependence on computer spell checks and grammar checks. We find in our supermarkets that bar-code scanners calculate costs so that cashiers no longer need to possess numeracy skills. Thus, ultimately computers potentially inhibit the development of numerical skills as well as social skills. We are dumbing-down rather than re-skilling.

We have lost a sense of community, of something intrinsically valuable and shared in our ‘anything goes’ disposable culture.2 News reports frequently inform us of disasters and of violence in a way that de-sensitises us, distancing us from involvement and fictionalising reality. The human element is lost in the way that television distances us from the action, removing personal touch. We have lost the impulse to ‘act’ outright, and even to ‘react’ to these situations (Banks, 1992) and are passive as a consequence. Many more people commute to work than ever before, or work on-line from home. The ability to travel, or use technology means that people do not have to connect with their local communities or colleagues. They can seek entertainment and employment outside the immediate surroundings of their home which has significant consequences for small rural communities.




GREED - THE EFFECT ON COMMUNITIES:
My generation has grown up in the shadow of the Thatcherite regime, which as Deveney writes upheld the doctrine of “a society that promoted greed above responsibility to others” (Deveney, 2000, p19). Margaret Thatcher appeared to deny the value of the community in her comment that, “There is no such thing as society, only individuals and families” (Thatcher, 1987). Values sharply shifted in the 1980s towards individualism and materialism. The situation today remains somewhat unchanged despite the election of a Labour Government which traditionally favours social collectivism, partly because of Conservative domination spanning over a decade. We are becoming greed-orientated as we can see in television programmes such as the National Lottery3 and Channel 4’s Big Brother where hunger for money, and instant fame are brought about through media promotion and manipulation. However greed is an anti-social mechanism which must have a negative bearing on morality. Marshall McLuhan’s vision of technology generating ‘interdependence’ which “ ... render[s] individualism obsolete and ... corporate interdependence mandatory ...” (McLuhan, 1962, p1) seems to have failed at the first hurdle. Either that, or we have not yet reached a situation of the advanced benefits of being members of the Utopian ‘Global Village’.

ISOLATION - A YEARNING FOR SPACE?:
One current trend in television programming centres around people who volunteer to become isolated on remote islands. ‘Castaway 2000’ and ‘Shipwrecked’ may encapsulate many of society’s wider desires to leave connection behind in favour of isolation or escape. A commentator from the island of Taransay (where Castaway 2000 is filmed) commented that, “You didn’t think about community, you thought about what you wanted as individuals.”. It seems that their artificial community with no sense of history, no shared commitment or emotional bond and a lack of trust, set individuals apart instead of bringing them together. We find that this scenario is reflected in expressions, we talk of ‘needing our own personal space’, and of ‘needing space to think things through’ in both a physical and a psychological way. We feel with the increasing pressure of life and work, that our space is being invaded by others.
TECHNOLOGY, TRUST & COMMUNITIES:
We are a paranoid culture, where protecting has taken over from preparing people to cope with the mounting pressures of life and work. The demands of the populace, for things to be instantly available, results in feelings of frustration, and submission to failure at the first attempt. Indeed, we may question whether ‘matter’ has actually overtaken ‘mind’, contributing to the brain-drain and affecting the place of the individual in the economy. We have lost the ability to value the simple over the complex. Some would argue that computer faults, particularly those we have seen in the recent Scottish exam results fiasco4, can affect people’s lives in a huge way. Technological and communication breakdown therefore leads to mistrust. Indeed trust is one important element on which communities are based; if this is lost, communities can be destroyed. I would argue that on-line email chat groups do not possess qualities identifiable in communities since there is no commitment, little sense of continuity, consequently generating a lack of trust. This situation sets individuals apart instead of bringing them together. These groups of artificial or ‘virtual’ communities are short-lived unless people have physically met, or have actively shared experiences.
SKILLS VERSUS IDEALS:
It could also be said that skills are changing and that ideals are rarely mentioned now. Tony Blair has admitted that many schools cannot keep up with the technological demands being imposed on them (http://www.dfee.gov.uk/grid/consult/foreword.htm, 03.07.00). I would argue however that technological skills are of limited use since they become outmoded as computer technology changes. The transfer of this kind of skill is low therefore. It seems rather worrying that the government is encouraging

“ ... Internet Service Providers to add value ...” (Blair, http:// www.dfee.gov.uk/grid/consult/link.htm, my emphasis) since value has to be added to these initiatives, suggesting that before this there was nothing of intrinsic value in the idea. As Blair admits himself, “Children cannot be effective in tomorrow’s world if they are trained in yesterday’s skills.” (ibid). However attention paid to ideals and character formation is marginal, as technology fails to develop children in these ways. Few today think of the long-term effects of Information Technology on personhood because I.T. is more concerned with the immediate and present situation, in neglect of future consequences. Hence the impact on morality and values is not being considered. Lankshear, Peters & Knobel also believe with Lyotard, that, “Under postmodern conditions, ... these ... skills displace the old educational concern for ideals.” (Lankshear, Peters & Knobel in Blake & Standish (Eds.) (2000), p24). Perhaps ideals are disliked by the government because they are fixed and unchanging whereas skills are mobile, always changing, fluid ... and fashionable! They are however forgetting something which is vital to the human and social condition, neglecting to consider that which we share and that which connects us all, the world over; that is, we are connected by being human, having desires, fears etcetera. Human values generally remain unchanged; skills, on the other hand, are constantly changing according to the specific requirement and situation that they are needed and used for.


FREEDOM & RISK IN EDUCATION AND COMMUNITIES:
In education we find that learning situations are orchestrated so that conditions are controlled. Our society fails to realise the benefits of losing control in a way that frees us to explore the possibilities of our human condition. We are reluctant, even occasionally, to live life ‘off the rails’ in the way that Stephen Fry once described freedom (Fry, 1997). Going off the rails may not be such a negative act since this involves freeing ourselves to try out other aspects of life experience, to choose another course, or to free wheel into the infinite possibilities open to us. Again, however, we fear the consequences of moving ‘off-line’ in case we are considered to be ‘out-of-line’. We are led to believe through technology that if we live off the rails or move out of line that the system breaks down or fails to the detriment of all within that system or community. Teachers, perhaps because of accountability and attainment targets, cannot risk allowing children the freedom to make mistakes and so to learn, since they cannot control the consequences that freedom provides. They cannot therefore benefit from thinking beyond the parameters set. Thus it is difficult for them to apply their experiences in a transferable way to other situations which they may encounter throughout life. Many obsessively fear the future consequences of our immediate mistakes, to the detriment of our present lives, and fear risk which Giddens feels is ‘manufactured’ by modern societies. It would be a mistake however to take the current situation to extremes; to withdraw freedom and to neglect values in our education system. We do not want to be indoctrinated to believe that, “Freedom is Slavery, [and] Ignorance is Strength.” (Orwell, 1949, pt 1, Chpt 1). By this method, disempowerment and powerlessness might lead to social disintegration. Empowering individuals should take place by instilling them with values as well as skills. Once again however, we must be aware of the situation where freedom is only granted by the authorities as Orwell prophesied. The government has to go beyond its current frontiers, and beyond the bias towards obtaining skills alone. Freedom implies risk, of entering uncharted space in the form of the internet. Without control, we become cynical and mistrust technology as we surf and catch the wave of a current trend.
TECHNOLOGY - EXACERBATING, RATHER THAN RESOLVING EXISTENTIAL DILEMMAS?:
Technology can pose existential dilemmas. Films like, The Matrix illustrate the dangers of identity being erased using new technologies. Indeed, I remember as a primary school pupil, watching a television drama programme in which a child had the ability to fast-forward through her life. Impatient to escape the boredom of being a child, she held her finger on the advance button until it stuck and her life ended. The dangers of never being satisfied with one’s present life, hastened by the pressures of fast technology, provided me with a warning from an early age. However, I also appreciate that technology allows users to reach towards another level of understanding, reflecting a striving towards, “ ...some feeling of unity.” (Symes, 1995, p2), typifying a human longing for fulfilment and connection.
IMAGE VERSUS SUBSTANCE?:
Our sense of communities has been externalised, from inner belonging to outer communication by network which is conducted impersonally rather than personally. Spin doctors with their use of sound-bites control the language of politicians so that they lose freedom and autonomy thus removing individual responsibility for mistakes that are made as is the case for those who hide behind technology, rather than facing up to human error. Appearance and superficiality have replaced substance as a flimsy substitute (like the fashionable use of Medium-Density Fibre on home improvement programmes!) for the depth of knowledge that can be obtained through education. Instead of attaching importance to things which cannot be replaced, temporary disposable things have been over-valued. Today, image and rhetoric are everything - things which are long-lasting become outmoded, lose value and are replaced by new theories.
INSTANT GRATIFICATION OVER LONG-TERM GAIN?:
For society as a whole, the rigidity of a formally controlled structure in all aspects of life can, and has, resulted in apathy, inflexibility, mechanistic repetition and a constant yearning for excitement, the ‘quick fix’, or the ready solution which we increasingly value, over the benefits of developments which take place at a slower rate, and have longer-lasting effects. Indeed Greg Dyke, controller of the BBC stated during an interview that “ ... today’s television viewers couldn’t care less about the quality of programming. They are apathetic and just switch over since there’s always another alternative”. We are too concerned with collecting skills, as we collect medals in a Muttley-like way5 for everything we do, adding to a fuller tick-list of attainments, and fail to realise that not all of our talents can neatly fit competency boxes, often those things of intrinsic value cannot be measured. Greater emphasis is placed on skills-based learning, with little curricular time or space being devoted to reflection, evaluation, or to deep consideration of subject areas.

RISKING AN INACTIVE / UNDER-ACTIVE CITIZENSHIP?:
Slevin expresses well the condition of our age. He believes that, “Risk today has become more risky and therefore demands our active engagement in dealing with it.” (Slevin, 2000, p19). He also argues that technology does not foster a sense of responsibility and creates an inactive citizenship. Slevin writes that, “ [The internet] ... further[s] human disengagement and commitment-avoidance and necessarily render[s] [the] community fragmentary.” (Slevin, 2000, p168) . The problem with virtual communities is that there is no commitment; and no shared history. Users just come upon webpages which are here today, and gone tomorrow and as such, they epitomise the essence of impermanence. Slevin believes now, more than ever, that we suffer from feelings of:
... incurable uncertainty as to the choices made and still to be made ... This is why we all feel time and again an overwhelming ‘need of belonging’ - a need to identify ourselves not just as individual human beings, but as members of a larger entity.” (Slevin, 2000, p99)
So technology can provide us with too many choices and too much information resulting in uncertainty and disconnection. Indeed Slevin believes that the “... misuse of technology ... encourages passive rather than active participation” (Slevin, 2000, p2) which runs counter to governmental goals for ‘active citizenship’. However, what the government proposes is pulling in different directions. The Scottish Consultative Committee on the Curriculum document on culture stated that:
... young people ... require ... a sense of citizenship, a sense of belonging to a wider community or society which can be influenced individually or collectively, and which can be shaped for better or worse.” (SCCC, 1999, p3, my emphasis.)
It can be observed from this quotation that something of a contradiction exists in current educational theory, alongside two paradoxical methodologies which indicate that the government is sitting on the fence of two opposing fields. The government appears to be advocating collaboration at the same time as advocating competition. A paradoxical relationship can also be seen in the existence of two opposing forces in our society; since we exist in a sessile society where individuals remain fixed to computer terminals and where we are also part of the mobile society, preoccupied with always being on the move and never far away from mobile telephones or portable laptops. There is indeed a paradox of motion and stasis in modern Western society.6 Touraine reinforces this point in his belief that:
One part of the world is preoccupied with a defensive quest for its collective or personal identity, whilst the other part believes in nothing, but permanent change, and sees the world as a supermarket which always has new products on display. (Touraine, 1995, p217)

Kolb identifies and explains why the two elements co-exist, “Things and places are not fixed beings but ongoing events in which each of the dimensions comes into its own by being brought together with others ...” (Kolb, 2000 in Blake & Standish (Eds.), 2000, p187). In education many of us find that we are participating metaphorically in a Mad Hatter’s tea party where everyone is constantly changing places and where nobody knows why the change of place was necessary in the first place. However greater support mechanisms need to be introduced so that individuals within a society can cope with the conflicting pressures of this Age. There is also the paradox of diversification being the key and specialisation being the goal. Returning to the paradox of competition versus collaboration, it could be said that the government is advocating collectivism in schools, and yet competition between schools. However collectivism results in individuality being quashed in favour of control resulting in homogenisation, a process which results in products rather than people. This system produces conformity, but also creates blandness as individuals are assimilated in a way which reduces persons to robots. This is a point shared by Levering who believes that:



Globalisation [with its] ... media-driven desires lead[s] to a bland sameness of style and values, and where appreciation of difference reduces to a kind of cultural window-shopping.” (Levering, 2000 in Crawley, Smeyers & Standish (Eds.), 2000, p304).
I hope with this increasing drive towards standardisation that the human race, in our technological world certainly does not become full of ‘standard’ humans who cannot connect with others, and who have their personalities either erased, or trained for them. We already see this worrying trend in lexicographical definitions. Take the word ‘normal’ as an example. It is defined as ‘not-unique’7. Toya Wilcox asks whether this means that all individuals in our modern societies are not unique? In order to assert our individuality in a world dominated by technology, we customise and personalise screen-savers which David Kolb (Kolb, 2000 in Blake & Standish (Eds.), 2000) has indicated, is the modern equivalent of tree-carving, of making one’s mark on something available to all.8 However, technology much of the time gives us few opportunities to create something which will endure. Web-pages appear and disappear, they are soon replaced, are short-lived, and can rarely be revisited. As Benjamin Symes warns, “If the ‘global village’ is run with a certain set of values then it would not be so much an integrated community as an assimilated one, and this carries with it a reflection of the ‘Big Brother’ society.” (Symes, 1995, p2). We are all affected by computers nowadays whether we want to be or not. It is almost impossible to opt out technologically and even if people do manage to opt out, the consequences can be severe and expensive. This huge technological wave has a ripple effect which reaches and affects every one of us either directly or indirectly. I would suggest that technological change in education is better found in Keynesian conditions of evolution, rather than through revolution. Evolutionary change allows developments to take place at a more gradual rate so that users can engage, reflect and consolidate knowledge, developing them in an enriching way as people.
CONCLUSION - A NEW ‘AGORA’ FOR THE 21ST CENTURY? - HOPES FOR HOW TECHNOLOGY MIGHT CONNECT US IN FEELINGS AS WELL AS IN THOUGHTS:
Perhaps what is actually happening is that we are occupying space in a different way to the manner in which we once did. Changes to the way in which children learn are also taking place as computer games generate quick reflexes and automatic responses, and where thinking has taken second place to the unquestioning attitude of many who desire instant gratification in order to be entertained, or in order to learn. We are connected in hyperspace by email, and create our own circle of friends in the address lists of our mobiles. New technologies would appear to have created new narrative spaces and therefore new public forums for discussion. It could be that we are occupying in our daily lives new meeting places, a new kind of ‘agora’ for the Twenty First century. Educators can therefore make greater use of technology in this way to create an informed and socially aware citizenship. Instead of being diametrically opposed to all forms of technology, I would like to encourage greater debate concerning the scope it offers to develop citizenship and a greater sense of community. Instead of creating tensions within communities, where people gossip in a negatively divisive way, I would advocate the creation of a community which pulls together, shares resources and pools talents in a wholly positive way. We are a culture where the prefix ‘dis’ forms a common part of our everyday speech. In America, slang vocabulary has resulted in the expression, “Don’t ‘dis’ me!”9 which encapsulates all negativity labelling groups or individuals as being ‘dis’-integrated or ‘dis’-connected.

In conclusion, if we look retrospectively at McLuhan’s hopes for achieving a unified global village, Symes believes that, “ ... we perhaps risk losing a sense of our physical humanity and our identity and thus forget why we are communicating at all. I do not believe that we are anywhere near a global village in the sense of an integrated community and I’m not certain that as humans we could ever reach it.” (Symes, 1995, p4). Too many messages are being lost in the medium, they never reach their destination and are often meaningless, with negative consequences for the development of citizenship. McLuhan wrote in the 1960s that, “The aspiration of our time for wholeness, empathy and depth of awareness is a natural adjunct of electric technology ... There is a deep faith to be found in this attitude - a faith that concerns the ultimate harmony of beings.” (McLuhan, 1964, p5). The dilemma, identified by David Hartley is that, “ ... in order to be effective we must cease to be affective.” (Hartley, 1997, p64) in our modern society. Therefore we need, perhaps more than ever, to foster consideration, empathy and make space for people within communities in the world so that we can connect in an engaging way with others. Educators can therefore make greater use of technology in this way to create an informed and socially aware citizenship. As yet, artificial systems seem to set apart rather than include, and disconnect, rather than connect us to others.


REFERENCES:
Angus Council (2000), “So You Want to Raise Standards: The Arts in Education” in Quality Improvement Education, Volume 1, Issue 3, p 1.
Banks, I (1992), The Crow Road, London: Abacus Publishing.
Blair, T (1997), ‘Connecting the Learning Society’, www.dfee.gov.uk/grid/consult/foreword.htm (site visited on 3.7.00).
Blake, N & Standish, P (Eds.) (2000), Enquiries at the Interface: Philosophical Problems of Online Education, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Cline, A (1998), cited by Kolb, D (2000), ‘Learning Places: Building Dwelling Thinking On-line’ in Blake, N & Standish, P (Eds.) (2000), Enquiries at the Interface: Philosophical Problems of Online Education, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, pp121-134.
Crawley, F, Smeyers, P & Standish, P (Eds.) (2000), Universities Remembering Europe, Oxford: Berghahn Publishing.
Deveney, C (2000), ‘Iain Banks: underachiever, and proud of it’ in Scotland on Sunday, Spectrum supplement, pp 16-19.
Fry, S (1997), ‘Playing Oscar’ in Rolfe, A (Ed.) (1997), Nothing Except My Genius: A celebration of Oscar Wilde’s Wit and Wisdom, London: Penguin Publishing.
Giddens, A (1991), Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age, Oxford: Polity Publishing.
Gordon, J (2000), ‘Why a Bit of Fear Does You Good’ in The Times: Times 2 Supplement, 17 May, p7.
Hartley, D (1997), Re-schooling Society, London: The Falmer Press Publishing.
Kolb, D (2000), ‘Learning Places: Building Dwelling Thinking On-line’ in Blake, N &

Standish, P (Eds.) (2000), Enquiries at the Interface: Philosophical Problems of Online Education, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, pp121-134.


Lankshear, Peters & Knobel (2000), in Crawley, Smeyers & Standish (Eds.) (2000), Universities Remembering Europe, Oxford: Berghahn Publishing, pp 17-40.
Levering, B (2000), ‘Leaving Home for Higher Education’: “How much Heimat does a human being need?”, in Crawley, Smeyers & Standish (Eds.) (2000), Universities Remembering Europe, Oxford: Berghahn Publishing, pp 203-216.
Marr, A (2000), The Day Britain Died, London: Profile Publishing.
Matheson, J & Summerfield, C (Eds.) (2000), Social Trends 30, London: Office for National Statistics Publishing.
McLuhan, M (1964), Understanding Media, New York: Mentor Publishing.
McLuhan, M (1962), The Gutenberg Galaxy, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Publishing.
Orwell, G (1949), Nineteen Eighty-Four, London: Penguin Publishing.
Paxman, J (1998), The English: A Portrait of a People, London: Michael Joseph Publishing.
Rolfe, A (Ed.) (1997), Nothing Except My Genius: A celebration of Oscar Wilde’s Wit and Wisdom, London: Penguin Publishing.
Rushdie, S (1982) “Imaginary Homelands”, in Rushdie (Ed.) (1992), pp 9-21.
Rushdie, S (Ed.) (1992), Imaginary Homelands: Essays and Criticism 1981-1991, London: Granta Books Publishing.
SCCC (1999), The School Curriculum and the Culture of Scotland: A Paper for Discussion and Consultation, Edinburgh: Scottish Office Publishing.
Slevin, J (2000), The Internet & Society, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Standish, P (2000), ‘Fetish for Effect’ in Blake, N & Standish, P (Eds.) (2000), Enquiries at the Interface: Philosophical Problems of Online Education, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, pp 1??-1??.
Symes, B (1995), ‘Marshall McLuhan’s ‘Global Village’, http:www.aber.ac.uk/~ednwww/Undgrad/ED10510/benmcl.html (Site visited on 8.9.00, and was created on 26.05.00), pp 1- 4.
Thatcher, M (1987), part of a published interview in Woman’s Own, 31 October.
Touraine, A (1995), Critique of Modernity, translated by Macey, D, Oxford: Basil Blackwell Publishing.
Walcott, D (????), poem referred to by Bigsby, C in a discussion with Parkes, T & Jaberdine, M in Ginn, P (Ed.) (2000), ‘Off the Page’, BBC Radio 4, 20 August.

1 I refer here to the character of Miss Havisham in Charles Dickens’ Great Expectations who withdrew and retreated from the world rendering herself immobile in an unhealthy way.

2 Our lives are lived as a series of snap-shot moments, lived in a repetitive way satisfying us in the short-term. Indeed in this leisure age, many people are living for the short-term and for holidays and incur debt readily, neglecting to consider the long-term consequences of financial decisions.

3 “The Lottery, with its weekly pay-out of enormous prizes, was the one public event to which the proles paid serious attention ... It was their delight, their folly, their anodyne, their intellectual stimulant ... the prizes were largely imaginary. Only small sums were actually paid out, the winners of the big prizes being non-existent persons.” (Orwell, 1949, pt 2, Ch 3).

4 The Scottish exam results fiasco refers to technological and human error which lead to many secondary school pupils receiving the wrong exam results on certificates.

5 I refer here to the cartoon characters of Dastardly and Muttley. The partners in crime were infamous in Hanna-Barbera cartoons such as ‘Wacky Races’ and ‘Stop that Pigeon’. Mutley constantly seeks rewards in the form of medals for the work he has done for his partner in crime Dastardly.

6 Over the past week, effects of material and consumer capitalism utilise this paradox of metaphors. The petrol crisis meant that vehicular mobile units were rendered static due to protests. People were then forced back to using other non-material resources, e.g. walking.

7 Marks & Spenser have just launched a bigger range of non-standard sizes, working under the slogan, “If you’re not average, you’re normal” which reiterates Wilcox’s sentiment.

8 We like to personalise objects now; perhaps this goes along with an increasing sense of ownership.

9 The term ‘dis-’, used in this context refers to the word ‘respect’. Therefore, “Don’t dis’ me” = “Don’t disrespect me”.




Yüklə 62,5 Kb.

Dostları ilə paylaş:




Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©genderi.org 2024
rəhbərliyinə müraciət

    Ana səhifə