Tweeting, blogging and using PowerPoint slides have redefined the university classroom across the country and at Syracuse University. But as this technology continues to develop and infiltrate deeper into the collegiate learning environment, many researchers have rightfully begun calling into question its effectiveness.

Instead of raising our hands to participate in class discussion, we are often encouraged to tweet at the class-designated hashtag to share our thoughts with our peers. Instead of bringing written reflections and essays to class, we are instructed to post our ideas in a class blog.

Michael Wesch, an associate professor at Kansas State University, has been praised for his technology-focused classes, which rely heavily on Twitter. In a Feb. 12 article from The Chronicle of Higher Education, Wesch reported that despite his success with technological teaching, many other professors see the downsides of technology in the classroom. They argue it is a distraction, and fear a reliance on Twitter and blogs is “missing a sense of purpose.”

After comparing his methods to classes free of technology, he decided the most important factor is not whether a class is high-tech, but rather “the bond between professor and student.”

This bond is an extremely important factor in comprehensive learning. But how an instructor uses technology also matters, as it should be an additional component to further advance collegiate study. Technological methods should not replace face-to-face classroom interactions and discussions, or replace traditional teaching methods.

Using Twitter during, not instead of, in-class discussion to generate more content and conversation, as well as allow more voices to be heard, is a positive use of technology. Blogs can work in a similar way if students are encouraged to read and comment on their peers’ posts to produce extended dialogue.

Beyond social media and blogging, other classroom technologies like PowerPoint have reconstructed the traditional university classroom experience.

The use of these digital slides can be an effective guide for student note-taking. But arguably, PowerPoint may not be the most beneficial teaching tool. Some instructors compose their slides with content directly from class textbooks and read the typed text on each slide to their class.

Using PowerPoint this way does not generate the most productive learning, as receiving the same information from assigned reading and class lectures is not only redundant, but not engaging.

A study titled “Classroom Technology Faces Skeptics at Research Universities,” contains more than 40 interviews with professors concerning their opinions of technologies like PowerPoint in the classroom.

Many argued this presentation style “… can give students less incentive to attend class or pay close attention to the material as it’s being taught,” according to a Jan. 28 article from The Chronicle of Higher Education.

This is especially true when the issues above are coupled with slides being posted online. But posting slides online for students to consult regarding material clarification and study purposes is not the root of possible inefficiency.

The key is not reproducing learned material on this platform, but instead using the slides to bring extended, previously unlearned information to students. When the content on the slides goes beyond the book and is used as an additional component for class discussion and learning, this teaching tool is ultimately successful.

Technology in the classroom must be met with a purpose for its use. As more technology requirements appear in class syllabi, it must be remembered these modern methods cannot fully replace the traditional aspects of university classrooms.

Rachael Barillari is the editorial editor and a junior political science and Middle Eastern studies major. Her column appears weekly. She can be reached at rebarill@syr.edu and followed on Twitter at @R_Barillari.

Published on February 25, 2013 at 1:34 am