Staff Writer |Ryan Ziwa
The perks of online and in-person course modalities have been tainted, so much so that class selection can no longer rely on them. Instead, course modality should be considered only through the extent of control it allows.
During class registration season, students take on an additional role: detective. Required credits to graduate, fickle Rate My Professor reviews, peer advice, and other commitments are assembled into mental “evidence boards” to design an ideal schedule.
A core consideration for the “ideal” schedule, subjective though it is, is the course modality.
In-person classes offer an accountability system through deadlines and peer influence. They also facilitate socialisation, which is regarded as a pillar of education. This is one of the strongest appeals of in-person learning, especially in the context of the loneliness epidemic, where unmediated social relationships have diminished.
Yet, my classes this semester have closely resembled a post-apocalyptic society in their scarcity and inhabitation.
Attendance has constantly dwindled, at times low enough for me to count the students present in one breath. Even when the students are present, they seem to be repulsed by the class, unwilling to stay a minute past the end time. I’m often left wondering whether the socialization benefits are in the room.
Online classes provide efficiency and accessibility–all pertinent for students juggling multiple responsibilities. These advantages are relevant considerations for the commuter community, who make up 92% of FIU undergraduates.
In reality, the flexibility provided by online classes can, in part, be experienced in face-to-face classes through virtual self-check-in technologies that can be manipulated.
Course modalities have been tainted by convenience, leaving us hammer and anvil options: would I rather respond to discussions written by AI, or sit in a class that could have been a discussion post? Would I rather leave this lecture playing in the background and do something else, or go to class and do something else?
The socialization advantage of in-person classes and the accessibility of online classes are at threat of total nullification by the preference of convenience–less time, less effort. This mentality is warranted by the different facets that emerging adults (18–29) have to balance: relationships, work, and academics.
As appealing as convenience is, it becomes illusionary when the “freed” time and effort are redirected into habits that enable withdrawal and disengagement.
I remember my utter shock when a friend admitted they had spent their entire day without classes doomscrolling (they found my shock pretentious because they’d been sending me videos throughout the day). I just couldn’t imagine how anyone could find themselves in that position, until I was.
Doomscrolling, brain rot, and screen induced sleep deprivation are often signals of a lack of control of our time, schedules, and lives. This loss of control tends to grow into learned helplessness that keeps these habits acceptable.
Convenience, then, is a secondary desire for the underlying need for control.
A more reliable deciding factor when choosing between course modalities is the sense of control over the dimensions of emerging adulthood.
You should feel able to influence your identity formation, social relationships, academic achievement, and mental health. A course modality that’d make you feel otherwise is not to be settled for.
The discourse around course modalities should no longer revolve around their theoretical benefits or convenience. Students should consider how much control they retain or gain when deciding between course modalities.
DISCLAIMER:The opinions presented on this page do not represent the views of the PantherNOW Editorial Board. These views are separate from editorials and reflect the perspectives of contributing writers and/or university community members.
About Post Author
