Academia online: The impact of the Internet on academic research practices

Developments in computing technology are increasingly calling into question a number of the traditions of academic practice. This paper discusses aspects of the use of the Internet which have the capacity to impact significantly upon research practices within universities. These include changing patterns of collaboration, challenges to accepted notions of intellectual property and copyright, concerns regarding the validation of electronically based information, and the respective roles of electronic and hard copy publishing.

Academia online: The impact of the Internet on academic research practices

This paper describes and discusses some aspects of Internet use which relate in particular to research practices within universities. These include the potential disruption of time frames customarily associated with the completion of research degrees and projects, changing patterns of collaboration, challenges to accepted notions of intellectual property and copyright, concerns regarding the validation of electronically based information, and the respective roles of electronic and hard copy publishing. Each of these areas is significant in terms of the ongoing credibility and authority of universities in relation to the creation, representation and transmission of knowledge, with concomitant implications for the maintenance of the structures which currently support those activities.

Across the tertiary sector it is well recognised that the time frames associated with the completion of many post-graduate qualifications involving research are diminishing. While in part this can be attributed to changes in the nature of the clientele and in the demands of the market place, there is also a strong sense in which it is a foreseeable consequence of some of the effects of computer technology upon the research process. In addition to the new possibilities for efficient access to a vastly increased range of information sources, the almost universal adoption of word processing has simultaneously greatly facilitated the writing up of findings.

However, while acknowledging these undoubted benefits, there are a number of significant concerns relating both to the sheer quantity and to the quality of information available, particularly through the largely unregulated medium of the Internet, and also to possible deleterious effects of the acceleration of the research process on outcomes. Barry & Squires (1995), for instance allude to the need for training in the effective use of database and other software, including the development of appropriate techniques and strategies for undertaking searches in order to cope with the sheer volume of available information. In the same paper they also note the complaints of some academics that in some disciplines the whole process is now moving so rapidly that there is a danger that insufficient research time will be devoted to 'thinking'.

Debates centred around the challenges mounted by the Internet to existing copyright laws and notions of intellectual property are of obvious interest to researchers, both as seekers and disseminators of information. Current understandings of the legitimacy of academic knowledge depend heavily on processes of validation through which sources of information may be established and their 'legitimacy' assessed. In the realm of traditional publishing, methods of ascertaining and evaluating the source of textual material included the reputation of the publishing body, particularly in regard to the processes by which a manuscript was accepted for publication, a clear understanding of the extent to which the purported author was in fact responsible for both the content and the presentation of the text and so on. In the case of electronic publishing, the 'provenance' of information is less apparent, putting far more of the onus of evaluation on the individual reader. While this is very much more in keeping with the processes which apply outside academia, it lies at a considerable remove from the well established scaffolding of citation and counter citation which has traditionally supported the structures of 'legitimate' academic knowledge.

The extent to which this is perceived as a problem is in part a function of our philosophical beliefs concerning the nature of 'knowledge', in particular the extent to which we are comfortable with the notion of a degree of 'social' construction which includes participants who may be situated well outside the boundaries delineating those traditionally accepted as 'knowledgeable'.

Within academic contexts, the contrast between the potential for rapid electronic dissemination and the painstaking but often frustratingly slow process of publishing in refereed academic journals has led in many disciplines to a mixture of publishing media becoming legitimised by default, for different purposes. Where speed of dissemination of research findings is seen as important, particularly in the more 'practically' oriented disciplines such many of the Sciences, it is now widely accepted that the 'real' exchanges of ideas and results takes place through electronic media, with publication in traditional paper-based journals increasingly becoming a retrospective event, having more to do with the formal recognition of achievements and credentials associated with funding and promotion processes than with the actual process of the creation and dissemination of knowledge. It is interesting to note in this regard the recent burgeoning of electronic 'journals' subject to refereeing processes which compare favourably with those associated with traditional paper based journals endorsed by the academic hierarchies. In some instances both hard copy and electronic versions of the same publication complement one another while fulfilling different needs.

Understandably, much of the academic hierarchy, including funding bodies, approaches the issue of non-traditional forms of publication with considerably caution. There is certainly wide variation in the processes which govern electronic publication, ranging from the totally unregulated output of an individual to stringent systems of quality control which equate quite reasonably with traditional practice. With time, the differences between these should become more widely understood. However while in some fields there is an obvious need for some means of attesting to the accuracy of published material, in other areas it might be suspected that the anxieties have more to do with such issues as the establishment of status both within and between disciplines, or with the maintenance of existing systems of promotion than with concerns about 'knowledge' per se.

Of obvious interest to many academics and to their institutions are issues related to the ownership of the products of research activity. While patent law is clearly of great importance, the potential for change wrought by computing technology pertains most commonly and strongly to questions of copyright. Much of the discussion concerning the legal aspects of ownership of computer based material centres around the abstract or ephemeral form of the electronically stored product as compared with the fixed and tangible nature of a paper based document. As a consequence of such qualities, identification of 'original' text or of subsequent alterations may not be possible. Further, the new ease of distribution through computer networks, allied with ideological positions supporting so-called 'free' access to computer based information, introduces complexities which may not be adequately addressed through piecemeal modifications to existing law. It is undeniable that the supreme ease with which electronically based material may be copied, modified and disseminated without the consent of the original author creates significant challenges to existing copyright regulations, a number of which are currently under debate both in Australia and around the world. We have traditionally understood that, as Fraser puts it:

It is copyright law which creates the economic value of a book or journal. The purpose of copyright is to make a market for works of the mind. Granting a valuable limited monopoly right to copy their works to the creators and producers of intellectual property, encourages production of original work by providing economic reward. The result promotes the conditions for the widest possible dissemination or works, in the public interest. (Fraser 1993, p. 214).

The very definition of the library user as a 'reader' may be inappropriate; it is far more likely that the user of a printed text is a reader, while the user of a digital text is likely to act more like an author. Here again, copyright doctrine suggests that authors retain 'moral rights' that guarantee the integrity of their work and correct attribution of it to them; this doctrine reflects the values of a traditional print culture and property system, and is in fundamental tension with the values emerging from electronic media and mass culture. (Lyman 1993, p. 21).

A complicating factor in these considerations is the extent to which many users of the Internet strongly espouse a belief that information should be freely available to all. This point of view contrasts interestingly with the extent to which the concept of the computer based 'information society' has undoubtedly strengthened public acceptance of the notion of intangible products such as 'information' as tradeable commodities, and therefore by implication as 'property'.

Bearing considerable relation to these issues is the extent to which computer networks encourage and facilitate collaborative research and writing. The value of email, listservs, discussion groups, MUDs and MOOs in multiplying the possibilities for communication with colleagues can hardly be denied, although the degree to which this does or should replace other forms of academic interaction is an issue too complex to address here. Of relevance in this regard are writings and research addressing broader aspects of computer mediated interpersonal relationships (Rheingold 1994, Spender 1995, Turkle 1995). Similarly undeniable is the enormously enhanced potential for collaborative writing, which contributes to a possible need to rethink for the future the whole issue of ownership of textual material. As Theisen suggests,

The tools and materials of writing have always shaped the process itself. The cave wall, papyrus, quill, the printing press and the ballpoint each in its own way defined new parameters and enabled writers to break out of old limitations. Today's electronic networking technologies inspire powerful new ways of composing, communicating, and publishing. The ease and speed of sharing texts, whether on LANs, bulletin boards, or in real time, inspire new methods of collaboration and even new forms of writing. (Theisen 1992, p. 33)

Communication within the University is of particular interest in that the institution comprises eight campuses, several quite small in size, distributed across three states and one territory of Australia. While the number of staff associated with any one discipline area on a single campus may be extremely small, in some extreme cases consisting of a single individual, these groups are actively encouraged to perceive themselves as colleagues within a single institution, with joint responsibility for the content and in some cases for the teaching of units and courses. Collaboration in research activities is an obvious component of this type of cooperation.

The resource implications alone, but also, very importantly, the potential for changes to established practice, suggests the importance of, at the very least, monitoring the extent to which the expectations associated with the implementation of this technology are in fact being met.

The project is conceived as the preliminary stage of a longitudinal study which will monitor trends and developments in this area over a period of several years. In its present form the emphasis will be on the initial impact of Internet access on two aspects of staff research practices, namely communication and collaboration with colleagues and the use of the Internet as a research tool for accessing information. It is intended that a survey directed to all permanent members of the academic staff of the University will be used to identify those who have made use of the Internet over the previous 12 months, and who are willing to complete a questionnaire of approximately 20 minutes duration and possibly attend a follow up interview.

Of particular influence in developing a rationale and methodology for this project has been a longitudinal investigation undertaken by researchers from the School of Education, Kings College London. This research, funded by the British Library Research and Development Department, has been in progress since 1992. Associated publications to date include Squires (1993), Squires, Barry & Funston (1994), Barry (1995) and Barry & Squires (1995).

The Australian Catholic University project will provide a valuable counterpoint to this research in a number of respects, perhaps most obviously in that the technology which has been made available to staff is significantly more sophisticated and 'user friendly' than that which was initially available to participants in the British study.

References

Barry, C. & Squires, D. (1995). 'Why the move from traditional information-seeking to the electronic library is not straightforward for academic users: some surprising findings', Online Information 95, London: Meckler Press, pp. 177-187.

Fraser, M. (1993). 'Intellectual Property in Australia: Libraries and Copyright', in Mulvaney, J. & Steele, C (eds) (1993), Changes in Scholarly Communication Patterns, Canberra: Australian Academy of the Humanities, Occasional Paper No. 15.

Lyman, P. (1993). 'Libraries, Publishing and Higher Education', in Mulvaney, J. & Steele, C (eds) (1993), Changes in Scholarly Communication Patterns, Canberra: Australian Academy of the Humanities, Occasional Paper No. 15.

Mulvaney, J. & Steele, C. (eds) (1993). Changes in Scholarly Communication Patterns, Canberra: Australian Academy of the Humanities, Occasional Paper No. 15.

Negroponte, N. (1995). Being Digital, Sydney: Hodder Headline.

Rheingold, H. (1994). The Virtual Community, London: Secker & Warburg.

Shiels, M. (ed) (1995). Work and Technology in Higher Education: The Social Construction of Academic Computing, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Spender, D. (1995). Nattering on the Net: Women, Power and Cyberspace, North Melbourne: Spinifex Press.

Squires, D. (1993). 'The Use of Information Technology to Support Information Access in Research', in D. Johnson & B. Samways (eds), Informatics and Changes in Learning, Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., pp. 183-185.

Squires, D., Barry, C. & Funston, T. (1994). The Use of IT-Assisted Information Systems in Academic Research, London: British Library Research and Devlopment Department Report No. 6215.

Star, S.L. (ed) (1995). The Cultures of Computing, Sociological Review Monograph, Oxford: Blackwell.

Theisen, E. (1992). 'Writing in concert: a new generation of networked software', The Writing Notebook, vol. 9. no. 4 , April/May 1992.

Turkle, S. (1995). Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet, New York: Simon & Schuster.

Author: Associate Professor Carolyn Dowling Department of Mathematics, Science and Information Technology School of Arts and Sciences, Australian Catholic University Email: c.dowling@mercy.acu.edu.au Fax: (03) 9373 3405 Please cite as: Dowling, C. (1996). Academia online: The impact of the Internet on academic research practices. Different Approaches: Theory and Practice in Higher Education. Proceedings HERDSA Conference 1996. Perth, Western Australia, 8-12 July. http://www.herdsa.org.au/confs/1996/dowling.html