In his article When Computers Leave Classrooms, So Does Boredom, Jeffrey R. Young states that José A. Bowen, dean of the Meadows School of the Arts at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Texas, is removing computers from lecture halls. Bowen has challenged his colleagues to “teach naked” – sans machines.

According to Young, Bowen wants to discourage professors from using PowerPoint, as he claims “they often lean on the slide-display program as a crutch rather using it as a creative tool.” The dean maintains that class time should be used for discussion, especially now that students can download lectures and find an abundance of information online.

Bowen’s philosophy is that information should be recorded and delivered to students as podcasts or online videos before class. I believe this is an excellent way to introduce material to students, prepare them to learn, and engage them to participate in class discussions.

I agree with Bowen that “lively interactions” go a long way in terms of allowing students to apply what they have learned. I believe real-life discussion gives students an opportunity to engage with others and form opinions based on new knowledge. Bowen states this exchange of ideas through discourse is currently discouraged by PowerPoint, which has left many students bored and disengaged.

In my opinion, PowerPoint is an excellent tool for presenting one’s ideas and a wonderful means for visual demonstration, especially in the case of presenting statistical data. Although, in the case of the Meadows School of the Arts at Southern Methodist University, where the programs range from theatre, to dance, to cinema-television – there isn’t much need for presenting statistical or quantitative data.

Based on my educational experience in sociology and public relations, where I have needed to present statistics and quantitative findings on many occasions, I feel that PowerPoint, just like all other software that I have used in school, should not be regarded as anything more than it is: a tool for students to efficiently accomplish tasks.

Young refers to a study published in the April 2009 issue of British Educational Research Journal, which reveals that “59 percent of students [at a university in England] reported that at least half of their lectures were boring, and that PowerPoint was one of the dullest methods they saw.”

I was intrigued to learn these same students gave low marks not only to PowerPoint, but also to many other computer-based classroom activities. The report states “the least boring teaching methods were found to be seminars, practical sessions, and group discussions.” This is a finding I never thought I would witness in current times, considering how much we now rely on technology. I find it jaw-dropping that students admit they think technology-free classrooms are most engaging!

To me this finding is absolutely fascinating, considering how much emphasis has been placed on learning computer skills over the past 15 years. I learned how to type on the keyboard at a young age and over 15 years I feel that I have mastered my computer knowledge (these skills are all greatly attributed to my education). I can’t remember the last time I handed in an assignment that was written by hand – everything I’ve submitted since grade school has been prepared by computer. To think that the Meadows School of the Arts at Southern Methodist University is stepping away from the computer for lectures is refreshing, but at the same time arguably challenges the new wave of teaching structure in North America.

Although Young acknowledges that computers have led to some improvement in teaching, he declares that “technology has hardly revolutionized the classroom experience for most college students, despite… early predictions that going digital would force professors to rethink their lectures and would herald a pedagogical renaissance.”

It’s interesting to me that at one point in time, technological inventions spearheaded a renaissance (to use Young’s term) in teaching structure. Presently, the new renaissance that is taking place in Bowen’s school seems more like a revolution to go back in time to traditional teaching methods of practical application and group discussions. What’s even more interesting is that Bowen’s students have complained about needing to be more active in discussion during class periods!

Young refers to Glenn Platt, a professor of marketing at Miami University, in Ohio, where Bowen worked before coming to Southern Methodist. Platt states “The first response from students [to Bowen’s teaching philosophy] is typically, ‘I paid for a college education and you’re not going to lecture?’”

Could it be that students have become too comfortable with the common lecture model despite technological advancements? Have students indeed been socialized to regard the educational process as passive?

I’m inspired and in support of Bowen’s philosophy that students should be engaged in class discussions. I find this example that he gives in Young’s article intriguing:

“If you say to a student, we have this problem in Mayan archaeology: we don’t know if the answer is A or B. We used to all think it was A, now we think it’s B. If the lecture is ‘Here’s the answer, it’s B,’ that’s not very interesting. But if the student believes they can contribute, they’re a whole lot more motivated to enter the discourse, and to enter the discipline.”

I strongly agree with Bowen that students are likely to remember live discussions, based on my own educational experience. I will never forget the day my teacher Stephen Heckbert in the public relations program at Algonquin College walked into class one morning and asked us all to turn off our computers and group in the middle of the room. He asked each of us what our future career plans were and encouraged us to start thinking about where we want to be so we can start working towards our goals. And this all took place in a computer lab!

An interesting last point made in Young’s article is that students who claim to be frequently bored are more likely to score lower on tests, based on Sandi Mann’s studies of student attitudes towards teaching. I feel that Bowen’s teaching model might be the tipping point for students to regain their desire for learning and to feel passionately about the material.

Young concludes his article by stating that now with a solid infrastructure of online delivery, the challenge will be what takes place in the classroom.

To me, one important question remains: are computers disengaging us from learning?