This article considers the extent to which
“plugged-in-ness” characterizes contemporary college life,
and considers whether social capital is diminishing within our
student communities as a result of technology-induced isolation. In
recent years, colleagues have expressed concerns about the increasing
amount of time students spend “plugged in” rather than
engaged in communal activities. Residence life staff perceived that
getting students out of their rooms had become more challenging.
Folks wondered whether decreased attendance at educational programs
and social events, and diminished civility in residence hall
communities, were attributable to students spending too much time
“plugged-in.”
We began to contemplate the potential implications
of “plugged-in-ness” with regard to the formation of social
capital among our students. The following point/counterpoint- style
conversation incorporates many of the ideas we have been
considering.
MEG:
It seems to me that
“plugged-in” is indeed an apt descriptor of our
students. Survey data from UMass show that over 80% have TVs in
their rooms, over half have cell phones, over 90% own computers,
and over 70% access the Internet daily. Now, I’m not a
Luddite - there is nothing inherently wrong with cell phones,
computers, headphones, personal stereos, computer games and the
like. But, I have some real problems with the roles they are
taking in our society - both civic and campus.
Let me try to
illustrate. On campus the other day, I watched two students
walking together. Faces turned in opposite directions, each
talking on a cell phone, they were physically together but
were not interacting. In many ways, this image provides a telling
analogy for the negative side of plugged-in-ness…together yet
elsewhere. There are other examples… Think about students in
their rooms, watching TV or in front of the computer screen, head
sets on, or on the phone. Now consider the social message implied
by the headset or the phone… how even if you are physically
with the student, s/he doesn’t have your whole attention. All
of these scenarios suggest a society in which it is more important
to be in constant communication than it is to connect with others
on a multidimensional, truly human level. We see an illusion of
togetherness, not a reality of substantial interaction.
ETHAN: I agree that
today’s students spend a lot of time “plugged-in,”
but I don’t think that “plugged-in-ness “
necessarily breeds isolation. Although critics allege that
students are less engaged in their campus communities today than
in the past, the connections enabled by the World Wide Web, email,
chat rooms, and instant messaging allow students to interact with
a new, larger community. In the past, the close-knit associations
formed through participation in extracurricular activities and
institution-sponsored events tended to cocoon students on campus,
isolating them from the world. Now, technologies enable students
to engage to a greater extent with the world beyond
campus.
Also, whereas data
documenting the pervasiveness of plugged-in behaviors provide
insight, it is important to research whether and how the type and
quality of relationships conducted primarily over the phone or
Internet are qualitatively different from those conducted
“in-the-flesh.” I don’t buy the notion that
students who are talking to friends on the phone or over Instant
Messenger are more “alone” than not.
MEG:
That depends on how we define both
“friends” and “alone.” What kind of personal
relationships is plugged-in-ness encouraging? Those that are one
-dimensional, and perhaps not very honest. Relationships mediated
by technology don’t allow us to engage with a whole person
&endash; only what they write or what they say. About one-third of
UMass students surveyed reported having lied about themselves to
someone on line. It seems to me that the “role-playing”
that is so common and so accepted on-line encourages a habit of
developing inauthentic relationships &endash; relationships based
on false perceptions.
ETHAN:
The fact that a third of our students
have lied to someone on-line is relatively meaningless without
knowing how many of them have lied about themselves to someone
they met in person. Shallow people are likely to have shallow
relationships whether they are developed on-line or in person.
MEG:
The one-dimensional relationship is
showing up on other places too. As Putnam points out, the nature
of organizational membership seems to be changing. Nationally,
membership is up in organizations where you send in a check and
get a magazine. What’s down is organizations where you attend
a regular meeting, do tasks or projects or activities with others,
get to know those others as multidimensional people, rather than
their one-dimensional, on-paper representatives. On campus,
membership in student organizations has dropped from 32 to 18 % in
the last two decades.
It
is through everyday, face-to-face interaction that people learn
how to navigate the social world. College should be providing
practice in these skills that can then be applied to larger
projects beyond the campus. Instead, we’re seeing a
destructive kind of individualism which offers no training in
sharing.
ETHAN:
Internet activity in the wake of
September 11th illustrates how a strong, new
technological culture can manifest itself positively. Many
colleges created web pages where students and alumni/ae could
check-in with classmates and post messages expressing their hopes,
fears and prayers. Students across the country downloaded and
shared not only images of the tragedy but human responses from
around the world.
MEG:
Downloading images is fine - in
itself. But if that’s all that happens then people have the
illusion of involvement without being real actors in the world. It
seems to me that students might be so technologically connected to
the world that they don’t feel the need to go out into it.
They can talk to friends on the phone or by instant messenger;
play games, read, gamble, shop or do research on the web; download
music or a movie. Even low-level practice at personal interaction
&endash; negotiating the TV channel in the dorm lounge &endash;
are unneeded and unpracticed. It is no wonder colleges have to
offer students courses in leadership!
Also, it seems to me
that “plugged-in-ness” may be generating apathy. We are
less likely to care about others when we know them only on one
level. Social capital, that powerful net of cooperative
relationships, is being replaced by thinner, one directional
strands which fail to hold a community together.
ETHAN:
But it seems to me that new types of
civic engagement are made possible through the use of technology -
from the ability of groups to disseminate national petitions over
short periods of time to organizing activists for rallies. Also,
email makes it easier now than in the past for students to stay
connected to family members and friends from high school.
It’s easy for
college personnel to view technology as problematic if they
interpret some students’ isolation as
technologically-induced. It doesn’t have to be that way.
Residence hall staff could harness “plugged-in-ness” to
their own ends by using email and the Web to promote their
programs. For example, listservs could inform students of programs
on particular topics of interest.
Although some lament
diminished student engagement on campus and believe that
plugged-in-ness portends a future in which students will be
incapable of relating to each other without an electronic
intermediary, such a view overlooks new forms of engagement.
Students do spend time forming and maintaining relationships via
technology; they also spend time preserving connections that
predate college. However, students still interact extensively
face-to-face. Anyone who works on campus knows that our students
still date, still play intramural sports, still party
together….
MEG:
I’m not suggesting that we
should dispose of electronics or refuse to take advantage of the
many possibilities they offer. Rather, I’m suggesting that we
need to be extremely intentional and thoughtful in how we
incorporate them into our lives, how we model their use, and how
we build them into our institutions.
