Is Google meet, zoom, or video calling a positive influence in the world of education?

     In the world of education, there is talk of ways to interpret and adjust to the new wave of technology that has plowed its way into our culture. Cell phones, computers, video games, video calls, zoom, google meet, these are all applications that have changed the dynamic of our social system as well as how we communicate both in school and at home. While it's assumed that technology has a strictly positive influence, we often overlook the ways that technology inhibits our youth's ability to communicate. 

    The main obstacle within education in my opinion has always been whether or not there is collaboration and interaction within the virtual world. Since technology is a tool most teachers and even parents want to utilize, virtual learning and conferencing is unavoidable, but can the students experience the same level of interaction through a screen? A video or face time call is assumed to be effective because you can see the other person/ persons face while you speak, but this is a very imperfect science. When Covid-19 hit, we used zoom in place of in person learning after all students were sent home. During these zoom sessions, many students often turned off their cameras and/or muted themselves during the lectures, and participating was difficult as there wasn't as much order in the class. Because we were not in person, the teacher could not control students talking or contributing because you never knew when another student wanted to speak up. There were applications designed to help teachers call on students but often times no student wanted to participate due to the strange nature of the zoom call. In addition, most students would turn off their cameras and although I understand the privacy issue, when we were in person the students obviously had to arrive in person and interact, but this was all lost during the "zoom era" as we called it. 

    Overcoming the challenges of virtual learning was not easy. Unfortunately for me, one of my favorite classes during my undergrad was canceled right in the middle of the semester. I had taken philosophy with a very perspective changing professor, and I loved everything about the class and the journey we took moving from theory to theory. Philosophy was an interactive class that allowed students to speak up, interact, and express their views in relation to the class and theories that we discussed. When we went virtual, I imagined that virtual learning would be much of the same since we could still talk and communicate as well as see the faces of our peers and professor. I was very mistaken. The class was stale and dull, and not at the fault of the professor. I tried to engage and do my best, even tutoring some of my friends in the class, but my theory about virtual learning was confirmed when I observed first hand the difference a screen can make. The progression of learning was lost, and the Socratic style classroom where you can raise questions and go back and forth was also lost. You could not bounce questions off your professor or classmates as quickly, and you could not read the body language or precise facial expressions. This isn't to say that virtual learning isn't beneficial, because without it we wouldn't have been able to learn at all. Zoom at least allowed those few students who really loved the content to be able to see their professor and hear what they had to say. 

    My final point I want to make is that, virtual learning or not, if a student is dedicated to what they are learning, it doesn't matter what platform is being used. Even though I did not get the full experience I wanted when our philosophy class went virtual, because I loved the content, I still got a lot out of the class. while I think research can prove the differences between virtual and in-person learning, I believe that most of the responsibility lies on the student. If the student wants to engage, they will, regardless of the platform.