When Sarah Mesle peeks through windows looking into classes, she is faced with dozens of laptop screens. Some students are taking notes, while others shop for leggings, watch a show or text on their phone and laptop at the same time. Though sympathetic with students who do this, Mesle hopes her own are present with her.  

Mesle, a professor of writing, said she introduced a no-technology policy two years ago because she wanted to make the writing classroom more intimate and valuable. In her classroom, Mesle restricts the use of computers, phones and other personal devices.

As the University embraces artificial intelligence in its day-to-day operations, Mesle is not the only professor in the Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences who has implemented a no-tech policy in their classroom to navigate an increasingly online age. 

Several professors cited a lack of student engagement and focus as their primary concern and motivator for implementing no-tech policies. Though some professors, such as Mesle, have made it their classroom practice for years, others began imposing limitations on technology use in classes due to the recent rise in AI and a noticeable uptick in student disengagement.

Alongside colleagues in the writing program, Mesle said she is developing a pilot program to gather data on students’ reactions to low-tech environments. Of the responses she received from prior students, she said 86% reported that their concentration levels and overall class experience improved in a limited technology use classroom. 

“Writing classrooms are special at USC because for many people, they are some of the few small classes they take, especially when they’re freshmen and sophomores,” Mesle said. “Many students say they want to make connections and friendships. One way to do that is to make the classroom space into a time that’s about being with the people who are with you in the room.”

David Albertson, a professor of religion and philosophy, said that because his thematic option classes are discussion-based, he wants students to engage with one another and with the physical material in front of them rather than their screens.

“[Technology] just gets in the way. All we need is our pencil and a book, and then we can look at each other’s’ faces and think and talk together,” Albertson said.

However, the enforcement of a no-technology policy in classrooms is not uniform across Dornsife. For example, Thomas Gustafson, an associate professor of English, allows students to check their phones quickly as well as type and submit responses on their computers to end-of-class questions. Even so, questions around academic integrity arise for Gustafson.

“How do I prevent cheating by sharing the question of the day with people outside the classroom? Trying to outwit and circumvent cheating and sharing of information — that’s one of the deep frustrations of how people use laptops in the classroom,” Gustafson said. 

Class size is another consideration for professors seeking to limit the use of technology in the classroom.

“In my big lecture class, I don’t feel like I can take away the computers, even though I would like to,” said Patricia George, an assistant professor in psychology. “But in the smaller classes, they’re discussion-based. I noticed that people don’t participate in discussions if they have their computer in front of them.” 

Alongside improving student engagement with the course content, Mesle said she hoped to increase student-to-student interaction by limiting the use of technology in class.  

“I stand at the door and ask them to put their phone away when they’re coming in the room, so they have to sit around awkwardly before class starts. If you don’t have that awkward time, you never learn how to deal with awkwardness,” Mesle said.  

George said that though advances in technology opened up more diverse means of interacting with people, these changes caused people to lose connection with one another. 

“We can keep in touch with and access people more easily from our phones or our computers,” George said. “But we are in the midst of a loneliness epidemic where people are feeling socially isolated.” 

Albertson and George said they hoped to see greater no-technology enforcement in the future, whether by standardizing the policy for general education seminars and thematic option classes, or George said by expanding its implications beyond the classroom setting to areas such as Tutor Campus Center. 

“Students don’t want to be distracted. They want to concentrate, and they know that that is valuable. It’s part of my job as a professor to help make that space for them,” Mesle said.