Information Jockey: The Dubious Role of the 21st-century Academic

While the university has traditionally been our primary centre for the management of knowledge, a variety of factors are changing the processes associated with this function. This paper discusses the university’s transition from industrial to information society by focusing on the four processes of knowledge advancement, transmission, preservation and diffusion and the way these processes are shaping (and being shaped by) current advancements in information technologies. Particular attention is given to the fact that many trends indicate a shift in the role of the academic towards a stronger focus on the consumption, recombination and dissemination of information rather than the reflection arguably required for the creation of new knowledge. 1 The University in Perpetual Crisis? The ‘network society’ as defined by Manuel Castells (2000) is characterized by the pervasive expansion of the network (as opposed to the hierarchy) as an organisational principle throughout the social structure. Castells argues that this change in organisation has been underway for a while, and that it marks the transition from industrial to informational society. In Castells’ model, a network is a set of ‘nodes’ (anything from government councils and universities to coca fields and mobile communications devices) interconnected via ‘flows’ that can for example be political, financial or knowledge-based in nature. Together, the nodes and flows define a network’s topology. Castells’ networks are highly dynamic and very flexible structures, characterised by their openness and their ability to adapt and expand. When flows change, nodes change roles. Castells also identifies ‘switches’, nodes that connect networks of different types, as having special significance as ‘privileged instruments of power’ (2000, p. 502). The network society is a society in progress. At the moment, it is as yet unclear exactly what kind of society will emerge, although we do have an idea of its general characteristics. It is also unclear when (and to what extent) this society will stabilise, or even what defines stability for a society based on a structure whose hallmark is its ability to change. Many questions remain open, certainly politically and culturally, but most importantly as to the shape of the playing field emerging from the new organisational principles. Castells lists political, financial and knowledge flows as the most important in the current network society. The university has traditionally been our primary centre for the management of knowledge, so it seems the natural choice for a hub (or switch) in the knowledge network. However, the transition may not be quite as straightforward as one could be led to believe.