Articles like this drive me up a wall: Reduce the Technology, Rescue Your Job. He’s got some good points, the best of which was a warning about those using technology in universities:

Too few of them, however, were monitoring costs.

But this point –that it’s easy to embrace technological (and other) tools without factoring in obscure but still relevant costs — as well as some interesting ideas for curriculum reform, are all tied up in a bunch of weird logic and side paths. Like there’s a lot of venom aimed towards the beleaguered Second Life, venom which seems wasted now (I haven’t seen too many people working with it lately at all).

Then poor libraries get nailed for digital content:

Campus libraries jumped on the bandwidth bandwagon, too. Once the body and soul of the university, libraries and their archives divested paper holdings in return for pricey data feeds of digital journals and e-books.

Yes, that’s why libraries going digital. Because we librarians are merely “jumping on the technology bandwagon.” Never mind access issues, ever-changing pricing structures, and the real costs of maintaining a print collection (speaking of real costs).

Then there’s the cliche nostalgia:

In the past, classroom engagement implied deep critical thinking and inspired commitment. Somehow that metamorphosed into convenience, which technology provides, for a fee.

This reads like another claim that “students were so much better in my day.” And yet classroom engagement is always difficult to achieve, no matter what technological tools are available. Technology tools are just that – a selection of ideas and resources faculty can use to work with their students. And when faculty do not attempt to engage their students, too many classes end up like this: