In a discussion of the changing use of technology by today’s college students and student affairs practitioners, Elling and Brown (2001) recommended that student affairs play an active role in setting the technology agenda for colleges and universities.  In particular, these authors noted the importance of connectivity, particularly to the Internet, to student life and student affairs practice. Indeed, Elling and Brown’s argument seems to confirm reports in the popular media, as well as the higher education literature, that have depicted a college student population connected through cell phones, wireless computer networks, and the Internet.  The emerging dominance of connectivity has two important implications for student affairs.  First, the field of student affairs needs to actively apply new technologies and “become a leading voice on the campus for strategic information technology” (Elling & Brown, p. 102).  At the same time that student affairs has a responsibility to advance connectivity and information technology on campus, it must also address concerns regarding the negative impacts of connective technology on students.

 

Recently, some people have questioned whether students today experience college in a qualitatively different manner than past generations, due to their engagement in electronic media (for example, Williams, Kolek, & Kluge, 2002). One popular conception is that students’ engagement with technology like cell phones, laptops, and Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs) limits opportunities for peer interactions at college, for example informal conversations while walking across campus (Barnard, 2003). Furthermore, Barnard noted that technology allows students to maintain connections with high school friends and family, and receive and give support, in a way that may limit the development of college community. Although the Internet has received a great deal of attention as an agent of social disengagement, Putnam, (2000) argued that the advent of the telephone itself has powerfully impacted the social sphere, and noted that it has seemed to simultaneously decrease loneliness, but foster social isolation.  In fact, Putnam cited telecommunication technologies as the most important factor in the increase of social disconnection in American society. 

 

In order for student affairs practitioners to properly address technology on campus, they must understand the role of connectivity in the lives of their students.  Both multi-institution research and individual campus assessments are important tools to understand connective technologies.  Comparisons over time at a single institution, between institutions, and to national level data also help to inform student affairs practice.   In October 2003, Project Pulse of the University of Massachusetts Amherst (UMass) conducted a telephone survey for the UMass Office of Institutional Technology regarding undergraduates’ use of information technology on the campus.  Telephone interviewers attempted to contact a random sample of 629 students and successfully interviewed 408, yielding a response rate of 64.86%.  Sampling error is plus or minus five percentage points.  Students were asked questions regarding their use of cell phones, PDAs, and their behaviors and attitudes regarding wireless Internet capabilities.  Students’ use of the Internet is not reported in these results, both because UMass conducts a separate survey on Internet use (see Malaney, 2004), and because too often discussions of connectivity focus almost exclusively on the use of email, instant messenger and the World Wide Web.  Although, this survey was originally intended as an assessment tool for a campus department, its results also serve to inform a general understanding of college students and connectivity. 

 

Nearly four-fifths (79.6%) of respondents reported owning a cell phone.  In comparison, a recent poll by The Gallup Organization (2003) found that approximately two-thirds of the general population own a cell phone, up from half of the population in 2000.  Similarly, the 2003 finding is a dramatic increase from Fall 2002 (Student Assessment, Research, and Evaluation Office, 2002) at which time approximately three-fifths (63.2%) of the UMass student body reported owning a cell phone.  Interestingly, when this survey was conducted in 2002, women reported owning a cell phone at a higher rate than did men (71.7% vs. 54.5%, χ² = 19.164, p < .001). However, at UMass cell phone ownership no longer differs by sex. This increase in men’s cell phone ownership may be due to an emerging norm of ownership.  Olsen (2002) reported that approximately 85% of college students between 18 and 24 years of age would own a cell phone by 2005.  If the UMass campus is indicative of other institutions, it seems that this projection, may under-estimate cell phone ownership.

 

Students who had both a cell phone and a phone in their residence were asked, “do you spend more time on your cell phone than your residence phone, less time or about the same amount?”  The vast majority (72.9%) of students reported spending more time on their cell phone than residence phone.  This proportion has also increased since the 2002 survey in which 64.2% of students who owned both types of phones reported spending more time on their cell phone than their residence phone. 

 

Additionally, a small percentage of students (6.1%) reported having only a cell phone, with no phone in their residence.  Although this is a small fraction of the UMass undergraduate population, this finding is striking. Students who have only cell phones present a challenge for colleges and universities, particularly if institutions lack systems to ensure that cell phone numbers become part of the school’s database. For example, institutions may be unable to contact these students in an emergency.  Furthermore, emergency 911 calls made from most cell phones are neither linked to a local municipality, nor provide the operator with address information. It is also interesting to note that students who own cell phones but have no phone in their residence undoubtedly are under-sampled in the UMass telephone survey. In all likelihood, more undergraduates have only a cell phone.

 

Computer ownership is nearly universal at UMass Amherst (96.8%). Of computer owners, almost three fifths (59.7%) own only a desktop, approximately one third (34.2%) own a laptop, while a small proportion (6.1%) own both a laptop and a desktop.  However, when students were asked, “If you were going to buy a new computer tomorrow, would you buy a laptop or a desktop?” over three fifths (61.7%) reported that they would buy a laptop.  This response suggests that students perceive a value in the possibility for increased opportunities to access their computers. 

 

While computers and cell phones are ubiquitous on the UMass campus, Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs) have not yet, and may never become, a staple of college life.  Only a small proportion (8.2%) of students reported currently owning a PDA.  A similar proportion of students (8.4%) indicated that they were somewhat or very likely to buy a new PDA in the next 12 months. 

 

Over half of all laptop owners (51.4%) reported that their computer has wireless capabilities, and a similar proportion of PDA owners (46.7%) reported that their digital assistant has this capability.  Students were asked a series of questions about how important they think it is to have wireless access in various areas of the campus.  Over two-thirds (67.9%) of students thought it was very important or somewhat important to have wireless access in classrooms, and a similar proportion (68.4%) thought it was very important or somewhat important to have this access in residence halls. An overwhelming majority of students (84.7%) thought it was important to have wireless access in public areas of campus. Whereas students believe that wireless access is important, only half of all respondents were aware that UMass already had wireless service in several areas of the campus.  Interestingly, a greater proportion of women (90.5%) than men (79.5%) thought that having wireless access in public areas on campus was very important or somewhat important (χ² = 9.554, p = .002).  Similarly, women were more likely than men to indicate that wireless access in the residence halls was very important or somewhat important (77.2% vs. 60.2%, χ² = 13.281, p < .001).

 

Overall, these results depict a student population that values connectivity.  With near universal computer ownership, widespread cell phone ownership and an overall high importance placed on wireless access on campus, these students function in a highly connected world.  These results also suggest that there is a population of students who differ drastically from their “connected” peers.  Whether, this is due to choice, income, age or other factors is unclear, but it is important to for student affairs to also take note of this population.

 

Although these results are limited from the single-institution nature of the study, student behaviors are likely to be similar at comparable institutions. They also reinforce the importance for student affairs practitioners to have comprehensive knowledge of communications technology on their campus.  Understanding the extent to which students own, utilize and value technologies provides a basis from which practitioners can construct policy and assess campus needs.  For example, an assessment of student technology use can provide vital information for customer service, suggest changes in programming needs and give student affairs professionals a contemporary lens on student life. Because of the speed of technological change, frequent and regular assessment of technology is necessary in order to maintain an accurate view of the campus.

 

Recently, Barnard (2003) asked “Does cell phone use…diminish the ‘true’ college experience?” Whereas surveys of connectivity can provide important information for researchers and practitioners, Barnard’s question can only begin to be answered from rigorous empirical studies that examine these technologies like video games, the Internet and cell phones together, and may require longitudinal and comparative methods from qualitative and quantitative perspectives. Moreover, the rapidity of technological growth in this population suggests that researchers must act now to conduct comprehensive study of the impact of electronic technology on college students.

 

References

Barnard, C. A, (2003). The impact of cell phone use on building community. Student Affairs OnLine, 4(4). Retrieved January 5, 2004 from http://studentaffairs.com/ejournal/Fall_2003/CellPhones.htm

 

Elling, T. W. & Brown, S.J. (2001).  Advancing technology and student affairs practice.  In R. B. Winston, Jr., D. G. Creamer, T. K. Miller (Eds.), The professional student affairs administrator: Educator, leader, and manager. New York: Brunner-Routledge.

 

The Gallup Organization. (2003, December 8). Cell phone users have little interest in number  portability: Cell phone usage up substantially since 2000. Retrieved January 9, 2004 from http://www.gallup.com/subscription/?m=f&c_id=14164

 

Malaney, G. D.  (2004).  Student Internet use at UMass Amherst.  StudentAffairs On-Line, 5(1).

 

Olsen, F. (2002, May 24). Wireless network may enable American U. to unplug phones in dorms. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 48, p. A35. Retrieved January 8, 2004 from http://chronicle.com/weekly/v48/i37/a03501.htm

 

Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community.  New York: Simon & Schuster.

 

Student Assessment, Research and Evaluation Office (2002). Item-by-item results Office of Information Technologies survey (F02-C). University of Massachusetts Amherst: SAREO.  Retrieved January 5, 2004 from http://www.umass.edu/sareo/pp_home.html

 

Williams, L., Kolek, E., & Kluge, M. (2002, February 15). Is being “plugged-in” changing campus life? A conversation. StudentAffairs On-line, 3(1). Retrieved, January 5, 2004 from http://studentaffairs.com/ejournal/Winter_2002/debate.html