At first I was excited about the “Most Wired” survey, but the more I reflect on it, the more think we should not participate.

Of course I have the same reservations that apply to other surveys (e.g. U.S. News).  The questions and methodology seem arbitrary, and may not apply to our specific situation; there is an over-emphasis on (measurable) inputs to the education process and less emphasis on the (less measurable) outputs. 

A more fundamental objection is the motivation of the organization doing the survey.  Yahoo is a high-tech Internet company, with a clear stake in hyping the use of technology.  Its wagon is clearly hitched to the high-tech, NASDAQ star (stock price from next-to-nothing five years ago, to $210 in January 2000, to $15 today [late March, 2001]).  The survey’s main purpose is to fuel a technology arms race in higher education, boost technology sales and stocks, and by participating, we buy in to the mistaken message that more technology implies better education.  (If we participate in the survey, we would rather be high on the list than low; we would hype our rating if we were high, but not if we were low.)

I believe in the value of technology and will continue to make the case to support it: for communication, for access to information, for analysis.  It has become a necessary tool that at once both creates, and helps us manage the sea of information in which we live.  But quantity of technology does not measure quality of education, nor should we pretend that it does.  Too much technology (when it replaces human interaction), or technology in the wrong hands (absent critical thinking skills or without adequate support) is antithetical to education.

Links:

The Yahoo survey site.

The University of Chicago participant clearinghouse site.