by Aaron Butts
Generation Y gets a bad reputation for being the generation completely reliant on technology. Specifically, our generation has revolutionized how to communicate. Today kids have texting, Facebook, Twitter, Skype, FaceTime, and numerous other forms of communicating which make technology such as the telephone and email seem outdated.
It’s no secret that students and faculty spar constantly over technology. Any student could recall a story where they were disadvantaged in a class because of a professor’s inability to communicate through and properly utilize technology; however, some students may be able to name a time when they used technology as an excuse as to why they didn’t turn in a certain assignment.
Dr. Suzanne Marilley, a professor within the Political Science department, says that a problem in communication via technology with students is not always because of the technology.
“For those whom it matters, they definitely send me emails,” Marilley said. “I have to say, I think students let me know when they are sick. They definitely email me. What matters is clarity on the expectations. They know I take attendance every day.”
Junior Jeremy Young agrees. Any failure to properly communicate with professors stems from the fact that “We just don’t want to,” Young said. “It’s not that big of a deal to just send an email.”
Marilley explained that when students are worst at responding to emails or communicating back to the professor, there is something else going on.
“When they don’t communicate there is sometimes a larger issue behind it,” Marilley said.
For Young, still the best method of communication is the one that has best stood the test of time.
“I prefer to either email my professors or talk to them face-to-to-face,” Young said. “But if I had to pick one I would pick going in to talk to them during office hours. I can ask more questions and be more honest when talking in person. It’s easier communication.”
The use of the supplemental education tool, iLearn, is also a point of tension for professors and students who either don’t understand it, or don’t fully utilize it.
“[iLearn] can be beneficial to the learning process but it hasn’t been used to its full potential,” Young said.
“We had hoped that this whole electronic method of communication would work,” Marilley said, explaining that sites such as Blackboard, iLearn, or WebAdvisor are meant to be more useful for students but don’t always have the intended effect.
“Not all students have an eagerness to go to those sites and participate in that technology.”
Marilley suggests that students would never really have the same involvement in iLearn as they do in Facebook or Twitter, but that movement to one of the more popular social networking sites might be a bit too invasive for some students who might prefer to keep separate their social and academic lives.
According to Young, however, students are already using Facebook to communicate for group projects.
“I prefer a Facebook group,” Young said. “That’s what we do in my consumer behavior class. I use Facebook a lot more actively than my email. I can send out an email and two or three days will pass before I get a response.”
Young explained that rather than going to problematic sites such as iLearn, the class could be more pervasive if it connected to students via their main outlets such as Facebook.
“Facebook would be awesome for me. It would be really helpful,” Young said.
The real heart of the problem is not necessarily the faculty’s inability to properly use technology, or the student’s inability to communicate via outdated technology such as email. The problem stems from apathy. Just as with any generation before, those that want to succeed, will, and those who don’t want to, won’t. Although the technology changes, there will always be those students that “do,” and those that “don’t.”
abutts@capital.edu
