Explain the discourses on web-based knowledge dispersal.

 There are different discourses that relate knowledge and power in a knowledgebased society. Foucault (1977), who demonstrated how knowledge and power are related, argues whenever someone transmits knowledge it involves power. Whenever power is exerted, knowledge is involved. The four discourses related to Internet based knowledge transmission, which forms significant basis of knowledge-based society are techno-utopianism, techno-cynicism, technozealotry and technostructuralism (http://cade.icaap.org). In this section let us look briefly the counters of these theoretical discourses. The concentration or dispersal of knowledge power through the medium of Internet and World Wide Web is the main question in all these four discourses.

Techno-Utopianism

Techno-utopians are optimists who believe the Web leads to greater access to education and there by greater dispersal of knowledge. This facilitates the universal accessibility of knowledge and this may lead to empowerment of larger section of the population because in knowledge-based society the acquisition of knowledge empowers the individuals. In this discourse, they argue, the Web i) lowers barriers that impede access to education in face-toface settings, ii) will eventually result in equity, iii) reaches the hard-to-reach iv) straddles cultural boundaries v) constitutes a “paradigm shift” in learning and education vi) fosters high degrees of interaction vii) leads to a reinstallation of fading local democracies viii) invites learner participation ix) encourages a desirable level of collaborative (rather than individual) learning, teamwork and cooperation.

Techno-Cynicism

Techno-cynics have a critical view about the role of Internet and Web in the dispersal of knowledge. They do not believe that the Web is a wired utopia for learning and education. Instead, they argue, it will lead to a concentration of power. Techno-cynics are realists, distrust corporatism and the commodification of education and regard globalisation as a code for Americanisation. They argue the Web i) will not significantly enhance access to education, ii) will not yield equity iii) will aggravate the gap between the ‘have’s’ and ‘have-nots’, iv) will converge around the orthodoxy of Americana (Boshier, Wilson and Qayyum 1999), v) will help foist free-trade on the world and thus lower occupational, health and environmental regulations, vi) enable global enterprises to monitor markets and make instantaneous adjustments with the click of a mouse and thus reinstall exploitative colonialism.

Techno-Zealotry

For Techno-zealots power relations of technology and knowledge are irrelevant because technology has inherent value irrespective of how it used. In significant ways, technology is neutral. Techno-zealots are typically consultants or academics with few theoretical pretensions and a vested interest in cultivating corporate interests or others who control research and development grants. Techno-zealots typically use a PowerPoint presentation (which greatly minimises the likelihood of critique) to enthuse about “convergences,” “paradigm shifts” and the galaxy of wonders lying at the intersection of telecommunications and computers (http://cade.icaap.org).

Techno-Structuralism

Techno-structuralists are not interested in whether technology is good, bad or neutral. They are mostly interested in institutional forces or the social context wherein the Web is used. In the techno-structuralism discourse there are questions about: i) who is using the Web, who is doing what to whom and for what reason? ii) the extent to which the Web is “World Wide” or largely carrying an American message iii) the extent the Web will invigorate or enfeeble democratic structures and processes iv) will it reinforce or challenge the interests of corporate, political and military elites? v) will it lead to a celebration of “information highway” (an utopian concept) vi) the nature of power relations nested in Web learning and education? vii) how the Web suits the modus operandi or learning proclivities of different groups (such as indigenous people, women, rural folk).

The centrepiece of this discourse is the way technology is used. As Galtung (1979) noted “A naive view of technology sees it merely as a question of tools – hardware - skills and knowledge and software. These components are certainly important, but they are the surface of technology, like the visible tip of the iceberg. Technology also includes an associated structure, even a deep structure, a mental framework, a social cosmology, serving as the fertile soil in which the seeds of a certain type of knowledge may be planted and grow and generate new knowledge … Tools do not operate in a vacuum; they are man-made and man-used and require certain social arrangements”.

According to the techno structuralists although the Web can facilitate vertical and horizontal communication, more information does not, by itself, lead to desired action. It’s a question of who is doing what to whom and why? Other questions informed by a techno-structuralist discourse concern who uses the Web.

For PDF copy of Solved Assignment

Any University Assignment Solution

WhatsApp - 8409930081 (Paid)