e-University

Do you have any idea what is the room which is most used in almost any decent University? The computer lab.

University has taken a new form. Although the chalk and blackboard still prevails in the classrooms, a rising portion of classes no longer use this tool as the primary instrument to convey the graphical elements needed for a proper learning. LCD displays, touch screens, projectors and laser beams are now the primary tools used by professors. These allow for a better preparation of the session and a higher degree of interaction with students. Some companies have been taking advantage of this, and when you take the Apple example you can clearly see that a big element of its success lies on the University customers (students and teachers): it develops its products so that it becomes attractive to these students (with a high component of design and interactivity, such as the capability of controlling your presentation with your iPhone).

Although personally I’m all in  favour of implementing new technologies in the University arena, and pushing students to adopt these technologies that can help their lives, the truth is that an underlying issue seems to be forgotten when implementing these strategies: we now have a shift in competitiveness. This shift in competitiveness is given at an internal level on two approaches: the teachers and the students.

As to what the teachers are concerned, we have the issue of proper use of the technology. Let’s face it, as good a researcher as a teacher may be, he can have absolutely no skills in presenting this material to pupils. When implementing these technologies, many teachers hide behind them to mask their lack of aptitude towards the science of teaching. And as much as this camouflage may help them feel better, the reality is that these technologies are information systems that should be there to enhance a presentation and allow for more interaction with the students: the idea is not for teachers to be able to hide behind video effects and shift the attention towards the media element. The focus should always be on the teacher and on the discussion of what is being said. As much information as a PowerPoint presentation may give us, it cannot replace the art of transmitting knowledge: it cannot teach you, and you cannot discuss with a PowerPoint slide a divergence of opinion. A presentation, like a textbook, imposes information and requires you to comply with it even without understanding it and the logic behind it. Some teachers have understood this concept of supported teaching, other haven’t. If Darwin theory could be applied to Universities, the latter would soon be eliminated.

Students face a very different dilemma: the knowledge of these technologies and the maximum use of their capabilities allows for better presentations to be made and for a better processing of all the information and content provided by the teachers. Thus, the deeper are the knowledge of these technologies by the students the better are the chances he has to excel in his academic performance: for instance, a management student who is able to create a highly interactive presentation platform will certainly be able to present a much more interesting case study than a student that has basic PowerPoint capabilities. Since the evaluation of students is done with a high degree of importance given to the projects developed throughout the academic year, the final grades of the students who have a better understanding of these technologies will probabilistically be higher then the ones who lack this higher understanding, even if the latter has a better understanding of the content of the course content. College students in current times are required to be authentic system information engineers and produce innovative content. Many companies have also grasped this element and created platforms in order to help students develop their skills in this matter and create stunning presentations and report, capitalising on this through advertisement or through small charges for “premium” services. To what extent should then students be prepared before entering these institutions to use these technologies and what secondary effects could surface from such education?

Portugal has adopted a highly publicised campaign with the intent to introduce students to these technologies from a very young age, providing students with the possibility of having a personal portable computer and installing digital blackboards in the classrooms. This could bring a high competitive advantage to these students were it not for the fact that most of the teachers in these schools have obsolete knowledge of these technologies and high lack of update, not being able to properly tutor these young minds to properly use these technologies. The result is obvious: pupils will use these technologies to engage in gaming activities, illegal downloads, and will bring this ideas into their adulthood as if it were taught on them by what used to be called “the wise minds” of the society. Technology is not the most important factor in these programs: the way the technology is used is what can make the difference. Technology is only the base of support that can provide the competitive advantage to these students: the competitive advantage is the knowledge itself (and taught on the proper and ethically correct way).