As every institution in the world continues to gear up its online capabilities, skilled software developers are in high demand, and are really well paid for their services. There are often days when I regret not studying computer science at university, or teaching myself to program fifteen years ago. I’ve had to morph my Arts-degree-based skills into a Jack-of-all-trades, technically oriented thinking and management career, to the point that, when I couldn’t find a job that matched my interests to my background, I created my own in EBW. I still think the analytical and communication skills that an Arts degree develops are powerful, important ones. But let’s face it, they’re less in demand when the world is focused on making stuff.
As those developers knit our network together in increasing levels of automagical connectedness, new roles emerge to interpret a changed world. There are new communities to study, new ways of communicating to explain and codify, new aesthetics to build upon, and new ways of learning to maximise. I was reminded of this recently by a job posting for Ushahidi, an organisation and open-source project that provides a software platform for mobile, geolocated communication. The posting reads:
Experience Requirements: PHD or PHD-Candidate level with a background in the qualitative study of network dynamics and ethnography of online communities. Position will require deep analysis of dynamics in online communities, and work alongside computer science teams to assist in the development of applications and algorithms based upon their research.
That’s classic anthropology, with some interdisciplinary awareness thrown in. Nothing unusual for any modern Arts faculty. It’s an example of how, once a machine you’ve built starts changing the world, you can’t keep building it without understanding what it’s changing.
We’re in a big build phase, globally. And the developers doing the building will always have lots to do even when and if this big build levels out. But in the meantime, a new range of jobs for Arts-trained analysts is opening up. It’s something we Arts folks dreamed of, but couldn’t quite believe in, when we chose to study the world rather than build it.
But as we study it, we build it too. The social constructs that emerge, the intersubjective and intertextual spaces on the information autobahn that seem to fill up faster than they open suggest, are we leading or following? Can technology keep up with the ideas we want to share? But more importantly, if this is so, why aren’t we rich?
I’ve never thought having an Arts degree was a disadvantage although I concede that I’ve had to persuade skeptics along the way. I agree one has to be more creative and flexible in thinking about jobs and careers.
There’s an interesting debate going on on the NY Times website about the value of liberal arts degrees v workplace-based learning at http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/03/20/career-counselor-bill-gates-or-steve-jobs