Concluding Remarks
.....Concluding Remarks
.....Some years ago when I was a full time academic I became somewhat agitated every month when I received a printout from the latest Medlars search of publications in my areas of research interest. Each month the list was getting longer and longer. Being by nature somewhat neurotic I would immediately feel stressed and would try to cope with the exponential expansion by trying to read it all. This in turn would place stress on the inter-library loan officer who would try to track down obscure publications for me.
Then while at an international meeting I broached the subject of the burden created by the increasing literature with a colleague whom I had not seen for some years. His response was delightfully simple. He told me: 'Oh I don't bother to read it all. If an article is important somebody will tell me I ought to read it, otherwise it really all is noise that gets in the way of understanding what is really important.'
This was a rather liberating approach, which used to be only sensible pre-email days if you were a frequent conference goer. His relaxed attitude reflects an important fact about scholarly communication: much is repetitive and redundant. It is important to be selective. As more information becomes available we need better search and retrieval tools. Clearly contemporary digital technology provides for more sophisticated and faster literature searches than was possible in traditional publication. Nevertheless the question of how to filter out noise and highlight significant advances in knowledge remains problematic.
There is a paradox about technological change which becomes clear when one reflects on this symposium. It has to do with perception, with how we view the change from our own perspective. Have you noticed that when you are inside an elevator the doors close much slower than when you are rushing towards them from the outside?
With respect to technological change, it always appears to occur much more slowly than anticipated. Each time I attend a discussion in relation to technological change and the academy I am reminded of my own experience and expectation of change. Many things that I experienced in my academic career led me to believe that change would be faster than it turned out to be.
In 1965 as an Assistant Professor at Indiana University I taught an introductory class of some 200 students. Once every two weeks during semester I gave a multiple choice and short answer test at 11am and at 2pm I posted the results, the tests having been computer scored. At 4pm the same day I had a 'remedial' session for those who had failed. In 1972 while at UCSD I 'taught' a sophomore class using a computer program and supplementary materials, accessed when students wanted. When they were confident of mastery of the material they could sit for a final exam. It was an early example of student paced, competency based learning.
Why has adoption of such practices been so slow? The new convergent technologies offer interactivity and multimedia integration which is far less cumbersome and inadequate than was the case in my earlier experiences. The pace of change means that implementation is getting easier and much less expensive. Moreover more and more faculty have gained experience and competence in the new technologies, even if they are still often behind their students in the ease with which they can use them.
Simulation, student paced learning and the converging technologies offer significant opportunities for changes in pedagogy and assessment and have profound effects on scholarly communication. Things that were impossible without being there are now achievable by a virtual presence. Clearly it takes time to adjust to and to fully profit from these new technologies. It is essential that they are supported and that there is a concerted effort to keep them as open technologies.
Easy access to scholarly communication has been at the heart of modern democratic societies. It is important to resist restrictive commercial processes and to ensure that by international cooperation between universities the free flow of scholarly information can continue and be available through the converging technologies. In Australia we need to follow the example of our UK colleagues and develop a national strategy and take up the opportunities to fund it as rapidly as we can.
This symposium has focussed on technological change and its impact on scholarly communication. It has involved a healthy mix of what is currently achievable with glimpses into future possibilities. In thinking about the future it is wise to consider that when the future arrives it will not be exactly as we imagined it to be.
Email: Gordon.Stanley@nbeet.deetya.gov.au
Send comments/suggestions/requests about this site ....
Updated 4 November, 1996