By Marina Cameron
Many an internet enthusiast will rave about the joys of "surfing" and the liberating nature of new communications technology. Some post-modernists even argue that expanding technology is breaking down traditional social divides and could be the key to new strategies for liberation.
The reality is that, despite its usefulness in increasing communication and information exchange between those seeking to change society, this new technology cannot escape the bounds of capitalism. Technology (its development, uses and impact) is constantly conditioned by capitalism's search for profit.
A recent example was the announcement by seven major universities that they intend to use internet services to get students to do some of their own data entry — processing enrolments, examinations, results and graduations.
This would save the university 86% of the costs of administrative services, namely the wages of administrative staff. Other services such as course advice would be squeezed out of general staff, continuing students and academics.
The announcement followed the release of a report written by the director of student services at Monash University, Bob Burnet, and carried out in conjunction with private consultants Ernst and Young.
Burnet commented on January 22 in the Australian that the adoption of "best practice" could mean loss of quality, but dismissed this as insignificant. Also ignored by the report is equality of access to such technology. Not everyone can afford a PC, and computer services at university are often overcrowded and inadequate.
The idea that new multimedia and interactive technology could take over some teaching tasks is also beginning to take hold. Universities are considering using the internet, videotapes, video-conferencing and CD-ROMs to replace lectures and tutorials.
Under the guise of making learning fun, this technology is the centrepiece of plans to merge universities (allowing faculties at different universities to share courses) and provide fast-track degrees where students get extra tuition over the summer period (and pay full fees for the privilege).
New guidelines on ancillary fees released in December make it easier for universities to charge students for such services. Although the guidelines state that universities can't charge for "compulsory" aspects of courses, this is a flexible concept.
Studies indicate that these learning methods are not as effective as face-to-face tutoring, and students rejected the new methods in trials in language tuition last year at the University of Melbourne. The result could be universities which simply function as the log-in point for individual, alienated students sitting at home in front of their PC and modem.
These proposed changes are about cutting staff, getting those left to work harder and getting students to pay more. There are real opportunities to put the new technology to good use in education, but we should see these moves by university administrations for what they are.