A news alert published on www.yuobserver.com on January 3 informed students of a new English Department policy change: technology will be banned in the classroom. On Monday December 17, at a regular department meeting, English Department full-time faculty voted 6-0 on a new policy as follows: “No laptops, cell phones, or mobile devices may be turned on during class except at the instructor’s discretion.” Every professor has the discretion to overturn this new rule for specific instances throughout the semester, and students with documented disabilities, in accordance with the American Disabilities Act, are permitted to uses laptops or other devices in the classroom. However, besides for these special circumstances, the entire English department arrived at this decision for the same reason.
This ban comes in response to professors’ frustrations with students who are too absorbed in their laptops to engage in class discussion. According to Dr Linda Shires, chair of the English Department, “We have seen a rise in texting, surfing, shopping, Facebook checking, writing papers for other classes, and other forms of multitasking in English Department classes in the last few years. This activity has occurred in most classes, no matter the size, seating arrangement, or teacher.”
Quill and parchment? Pen and paper? Have we made no progress since the days of stone steles and the clay tablets of ancient education? Well, we’ve added Gutenberg’s revolutionary invention to academic standards and expectations, but in some classes, that’s the only technology allowed. Who decides where to draw the line? Professors, naturally.
Students in the twenty first century have access to more distractions than ever before: Facebook, G-chat, the News, Twitter, online shopping, and work for other courses. Students have unbelievable means to multitask—even when a student is taking notes and following along with class readings from their laptops, she can still be G-chatting several other people simultaneously. Computers and other “smart” devices provide endless means for distractions. Arguably, in a Literature class, there is no fact based testing as the class is mostly discussion based and, as such, there doesn’t seem to be much of a need for technology in the classroom.
While technology can serve as a readily accessible distraction, students should be responsible for browsing responsibly. Many Stern College Women have shifted to buying E-books for courses for both practical and financial reasons. In those instances, it only makes sense—especially in a lit course—to take notes beside the text and annotate books. As a lit major myself, I believe this is the most effective way to take notes on a passage, line, or chapter of a novel or short story. To tell these students that’s they will now be at a disadvantage because they cannot bring their texts to class seems counterproductive.
And then there is the ‘distractions’ argument. Laptops are distractions. We get it. What about the ever entertaining and yet forgotten world of daydreaming and doodling? Remember the days when we used to channel Van Gogh in the margins of our notebooks and bring comics to life a-top a college ruled notebook? As NYU student and journalist Ben Zweig notes in jest, “when you look back at your notes from freshman year and see triangles, spirals and missing blocks of text between the transition from dinosaurs to homo-sapiens, surely you’ll think to yourself, ‘Gee, am I glad I didn’t have the opportunity to use a laptop, or I wouldn’t have produced all of these helpful pictograms!’”
Why the crusade against iPads but not note pads?As Zweig’s editorial put it, “Quite simply, because professors are afraid of it: afraid of its potential, frightened it will eclipse academia….Like a good jealous boyfriend, educators are always afraid that their lessons will be overshadowed by the outside world.”
If a student does not want to pay attention in class, she will find any means not to participate. . many students will space out regardless of whether
If a lesson isn’t intellectually engaging, students will find any other means to occupy their attention. This has always been the case, no matter what level of technology happened to be widely available. Education is a two way street the classroom the meeting point. Professors and students must meet each other half way.
According to the Monique C. Katz Dean of Stern College, Karen Bacon, this policy is currently an English Department policy and has not expanded to any other departments. To this, I say while literature may be about books and texts, it’s also about thoughts that have evolved alongside technology for centuries. Technology can contribute fresh, engaging, and immersive experiences to the classroom. “It’s a new, engaging voice in a tired conversation,” explains Zweig.
The most effective teacher meets the students where they are; speak the language of your students and they will respond. Instead of banning laptops, professors, should try new strategies to engage students. Instead of teaching the same syllabus or readings they’ve used for years, perhaps professors should try something more exciting so they are equally as passionate and excited as the students, and less robotic even if this is their fifteenth time teaching the course.
Instead of banning technology and resisting progress, YU should work to become a technologically pioneering university—one of which students can be proud. As a university, we value technological progress: our transcripts, registration, and applications are all digitalized. Professors communicate with their students outside of class via email. Why can’t professors similarly incorporate technology into their lessons? One example: professors could use a similar strategy to the one employed by Florida Atlantic University: students register an iClicker in their course and then professors can project a few multiple choice questions to which the students must “click” A, B, C, D, E. These responses will accumulate points for the students and serve as a major aspect of students’ participation grades. There are many innovative ways technology can be used to enhance the classroom experience—banning technology is not the answer.
For Yeshiva University, a university that prides itself on being record breaking, record making, and an academic pioneer, this shift in English Department policy creates the framework for a larger discussion about the place of technology in the classroom at all. What if this technology ban trend expands? Should it spread? Had an individual professor banned technology in his or her classroom, as several have, the issue would not be as pressing; however, once a department unanimously implements a policy, it should be questioned why that ban is not relevant to other departments as well. Why is there more need for a laptop in a political science classroom? In a Bible classroom? In a chemistry lecture—yes, even in the science department students have access to G-mail and Facebook.
We invest in our education and should be able to use any mode of transcription we wish—especially since, when we register for YU and for courses, there is no academic warning or legal clause informing us of this technology ban. As a lit major, this is definitely not what I signed up for.