Ruth Starkmam, author of cyberslacking in Shanghai: What My Students Taught Me weighs the pros and cons in a very well thought out and experience oriented essay. Starkman starts out by introducing the term cyber-slacking. ‘Cyberslacking’, “the act of avoiding work and/or other responsibilities by scouring the internet in search of games or other non-work related amusements. ” (“Cyberslacking Definition I Investopedia 2015. ) While establishing credibility as a college professor and has taught in a classroom in Shanghai.
The basis of the article is to identify both sides of the argument, and aims to bring across the point that, the electronics industry is booming and seems to blaze a trail that never ends. Constantly the devices are getting faster easier, more productive, and helpful, slowly taking away our ability to think freely as some might say; or in the opinion of others, improving the lives of millions including their education every day. The tone of the article; being that she aimed to explore both sides, is confusing at times.
Firstly Starkman analyzes the benefits of technology. “I also struggle with their distraction. But I continue to allow devices for numerous reasons: Conscious of college costs, trying to conserve paper, and teaching older texts, I use exclusively pdfs and links. deploy a lot of social media and google. docs in class. Most importantly, my students, especially the international ones, benefit from the ability to search words in the texts and compare with translations in their own language. (Huffington Post, Starkman 2015)
In this she uses the device FOIL, though she admits to the distraction an electronic can cause, Starkman weighs the pros in this quote in a way that diminishes the effect almost completely of having any negative influence. This turns out to be common in her article because what she is aiming to accomplish is giving a voice to either side. Not only does Starkman rely heavily on tone to push her point across the board she also relies on the rhetorical device logos.
She takes each situation and finds the logic that it presents in order to justify each side. For the side of pro she presents the argument that technology is a wonderful asset for her students in order to keep up with their work. However, within the same paragraph she initiates thoughts about the opposite; con, and what that represents. When the students give every ounce of attention to the device’s capabilities they no longer realize the educational use of them.
Furthermore, devices become an immediate parasite to the learning environment, due to the distraction they can easily via the capability of games, texting, social media, and many other outlets of entertainment aside from educational purposes. The irony of her paper is that there is no clear “winner”; each side has benefits and losses. On one hand she says, “When I permitted devices I also noticed that students felt less inclined to physical activity and social interaction,”(Huffington Post, Starkman 2015) however, in another statement she adds how the students feel it benefits their education more than hurts it. Sometimes I missed something in the discussion, and I didn’t want to disrupt the class or get in trouble for whispering to a friend, so I looked it up on my phone and then sometimes the answers I found helped me ask my question in a better way that helped me more and the other students too. “(Huffington Post 2015)
Overall the theme of her analysis of the technology era in the classroom is that what we are trying to stop is inevitable, “when instructors’ policies keep laptops closed, tablets and phones turned off, we are closing the door on what is real and relevant in student lives. (Huffington Post, Morris 2015) Starkman struggles to pick a side and appears to understand both, elevating the reader’s sense of her own inner turmoil when it comes to the situation. She seems to realize that she, along with her colleagues, are fighting a plague that can never be cured. It is a situation that can only be made better by adapting to the new reality and aiming to use it to benefit the classes in any way possible, rather than desperately clinging to the old ways of education.
Should they allow technology into their lessons it becomes engaging and individualized, it gives a purpose to the electronic other than avoiding class work. The only way to alleviate the stress of the technological mess that is a classroom is to open the gates to new ideas concepts and abilities. By adapting you tailor the situation to your needs rather than allow yourself to be pulled apart by the power you enable it to have over you. In the end education must hop on the train and go with the flow because at this point there is no turning back it can either be e or fought but only one can truly better the overall outcome.
Starkman ends by admitting she is indifferent, technology is not just one sided when it comes to the classroom. However, shunning it completely is not a beneficial act for educational environments such as her own, so in her article’s conclusion she states “It seems to me that if the teacher can find some collectively positive method of maintaining the classroom social contract, monitoring technology usage while using the Internet and student devices to disseminate new materials and expand discussion, class time will become both more enjoyable and valuable. (Huffington Post, Starkman 2015) Meaning, as long as the use is responsible and kept to educational purposes in the classroom it is something that can be wildly beneficial, and should not be overlooked solely based on a few problems electronics potentially pose. Each teacher must evaluate their own environment and decide whether or not technology is an enhancer or a nuisance.
