Postcard from America
By Shashidhar Nanjundaiah
My big takeaway from 2022 is that social media and pandemic have launched a joint and effective assault on classroom learning.
When I look at some social media content from younger folks, I see so much creativity and social awareness, sensitivity and inclusion. The ability to connect dots is better than ever before, thanks to the enabling technology. So why do I see a tendency of disinterest in learning in the so-called new-normal environment?
It’s nearly three years since the pandemic struck and lockdowns were clamped, and well over two since online-everything was presented as a quick fix. The quick fix may be exactly what the doctor ordered for the social media generation, born after 1995. Many people in this generation seem to be much more comfortable interacting with their smartphones than interacting with real people. In general, I have observed a decline in voluntary classroom participation.
A second observation is a high level of comfort with not meeting face-to-face. I have observed this trend among the general public over the past couple of years, where clinical caution appeared to morph into a general lack of enthusiasm in meeting people face-to-face. A big litmus-test revelation came through pizza. I invited the class to the college for a pizza lunch, just so that everybody gets to know one another, mingles in a “f2f” environment, and in general, have some fun. The office manager organized the pizza delivery, the space, the napkins, all the paraphernalia was set. As it turned out, we received exactly two RSVPs out of a class of 27.
My experience teaching an online asynchronous course—where students access assigned reading and videos at their own time over the week, rather than assemble in a class at the same time—revealed sometimes confusing, sometimes surprising, sometimes disappointing outcomes. The alarm bells, however, didn’t start ringing until assignments are missed, chapters remain unread, quiz output is only average. It eventually dawns on us that the learning has been anything but exemplary—raising many questions about the efficacy of our methodology. A seemingly low level of comprehension coupled with lack of the initiative to ask questions. Of course, I, self-critically, only refer to the majority. There were, of course, several sparkling exceptions, most of whom had joined college before the pandemic struck.
So I repeatedly ask myself why youngsters don’t find it interesting enough to sit through classes, complete assignments, and harness their faculties in an academic environment. Is it because a class is not the real challenge and social media offers more real-life learning? Is it because they have grown skeptical of what we teach because they are learning from alternative channels that truth lies elsewhere—channels that have found enough legitimacy to be politically mainstreamed? Is it possible students are surrounded by online webinars that are more interesting than classes that seem to simulate the technology but not the interesting-ness?
Or is it because the same technology is making them less fascinated by information and insight, since they have all the ready answers online, literally at their fingertips? Whether that is information or not, true or not, seems irrelevant. What seems more important is, they have answers. The challenge is not information. The challenge is to get new answers.
One hypothesis I offer is that the social media accommodates the semblance of thought-provoking dialogue, debate and dialectic to younger folks who did not feel earlier that they participated enough in the society. When all the conversations are happening outside classrooms, they take away the fascination of intellectual discourse in classrooms. I’ve noticed a dramatic difference among students not just in the US, but in India, too, before and after the arrival of social media.
It is hardly surprising that the quick fix is quickly becoming the new normal even after the health threat dissipates. It seems convenient for teachers, extremely comfortable for students, and of course a continued bonanza for ed-technocrats. The boxes are checked. What slips through the liminal spaces between seems to go unnoticed—for now. What began as an innovative solution in a crisis has become a continued exercise of lowered outcome expectations, and a flatter learning curve. And eventually, this crop of graduates will join the economy and the marketplace where the expectations haven’t changed.
In late 2020, in a newspaper column, I had expressed scepticism about the idea. As Facebook, Twitter, Google, Salesforce, and Microsoft brought in an extended work-from-home policy that year, I had flagged the trend, pointed to the “human challenges,” and in general, was uneasy—even in the face of what was reported at that time to be an uptick in work productivity.
While I hope that trend has continued, our experience with college students—before they become the workforce, that is—has been that the social media and the pandemic have worked in tandem. Finally, the younger generation understands something more than their teachers, outside the classroom environment. We need to ensure that this doesn’t lead to a widening trust deficit in academic learning. And that’s yet another reason higher education needs to see whether a new methodology of academic learning is needed.
Happy New Year 2023!
The first serious attempt at embedding media literacy in academic curricula in the United States was in 1992. The purpose of the National Leadership Conference on Media Literacy, as it was called, was to shape a national framework for media literacy to achieve common objectives. The 25-member expert committee, comprised of educationists, professors, communication practitioners, researchers, and public media debated to arrive at why, how, and in what form media literacy should be framed.
