… responds to a student who complained in the campus newspaper about his banning laptops from his discussion sections.
… The embarrassing sight of members of Congress texting their way through the State of the Union address shows us that not even the rich, powerful and old are immune to [the always-online] compulsion. At the same time, the phenomenon of texting while driving offers clear proof that people will stay online even when doing so endangers their very lives.
These extreme examples demonstrate why a ban on laptops in the classroom is sometimes necessary. For whatever reason, we – not just college students, but all of us – are unable to resist the lure of constant online access. Yet certain activities require the sustained attention that the Internet impedes. Driving a car is one such activity. Discussing complex ideas is another. Everyone knows that students with laptops in class frequently use them for non-class activities such as Facebook and e-mail. At this time, the only answer I can see is to remove the temptation.
… [My student writes that] “it is a student’s individual choice to pay attention – or not – in class.” She is right to point out that students ought to be responsible for their own learning, but wrong to suggest that this responsibility is merely individual. Quality education results from the collaborative interaction of engaged thinkers, not from professors imparting content to passive individuals. Distracted students hurt not only themselves, but the rest of the class as well.
… [W]e must try to reap the benefits of the online world without subordinating every aspect of learning, and life, to its subtle coercions.
March 11th, 2010 at 1:38PM
Very interesting…The article’s author was one of my students in the Spring of 2008. She was pretty bright and motivated…and laptop-free.
I couldn’t agree more, though, when Kosek wrote, “Quality education results from the collaborative interaction of engaged thinkers, not from professors imparting content to passive individuals.”
March 11th, 2010 at 3:06PM
To follow-up on Joe…
“Quality education results from the collaborative interaction of engaged thinkers, not from professors imparting content to passive individuals. Distracted students hurt not only themselves, but the rest of the class as well.”
Those 2 sentences are the crux of the matter. Many -students and instructors alike- fail to grasp that it’s EVERYONE’S job to make sure the class goes properly.
It’s impossible to teach someone unwilling or unable to learn. Laptops are just one barrier, but many of these critics fail to see that a newspaper, a cell phone, or even a window open to the quad are as well.
March 11th, 2010 at 3:10PM
Hmmm . . . I’m going to say that students should be instructed in how to use laptops more effectively, actually.
A quick search on the little known search engine Google gave me this blog entry on Woodstock ’99. Mass rioting, raging bonfires, untold damage to the concert grounds, numerous bottles of water consumed, etc. Not things normally associated with The Green Revolution. (And seriously, Fred Durst is no Joe Cocker.) The student’s angle on green initiatives at GWU is valid, but the execution of the argument could warrant a little self-reflexivity.
March 11th, 2010 at 4:01PM
Hmm…
Zips liquor store near my home in Minneapolis has a sign in all the lines to the effect: Please don’t use your cell phone while waiting in line.
No one does. And it doesn’t seem to have hurt attendance.
If a faculty member really feels that laptops – or whatever – are detrimental to classroom atmosphere, then he or she should be allowed to prohibit them. And I say this as a laptop enthusiast.
There was a great article in last Sunday’s NYT about improving teaching. A focused atmosphere is very important.
March 11th, 2010 at 4:23PM
J.: Yes. The student could start reading here.