We’re all familiar with the napping students in the last row, the girls whispering about anything but the course and that guy playing “Snake” on his phone. This classroom apathy is a far cry from the outspoken collegiate activist environment of the sixties. Or is it?

As a graduating senior I know what to expect from the college classroom environment. Typically, a professor lectures at length while we students feverishly take notes. The material is interesting, especially in my sociology classes, but nobody seems to be interested.

The professor props himself up on a table waiting for somebody to answer the question he asked one minute ago. We all know this nervous energy: didn’t anyone actually read? One minute is a long time to sit in silence.

Waiting awkwardly has happened in many a class since my arrival at Sacramento State. At first the lack of student gusto appalled me. My impressions of higher learning were shaped by images of the 1960s imparted on me by my parents and mass media. It was a time when people supposedly went to college to really learn something, not just to get that degree.

I wearily grew accustomed to a sluggish classroom. All the professors I talked to confirmed that the situation had been like this since at least the early nineties. I began to wonder if it had always been so and if there was anything we could do to stop it.

Professor of Astronomy Chris Taylor said smaller classes are better for enlivened discussions and other forms of class participation. This basic tenet was repeated often. When a professor knows my name, I feel more like I am a part of a learning environment.

College is not a spectator sport, so students should not be crammed into stadium seating lecture halls like sedated British soccer fanatics.

Mridula Udayagiri, Professor of Sociology, found that learning students’ names makes us feel more at home in the classroom. Thus, we speak out more and feel badly for failing to read the assignment, as if it were a personal let down of the instructor.

Sac State ought to offer much smaller class sizes to facilitate more personal relationships between students and faculty.

I would like to see this happen in my lifetime but that ongoing battle has been waged for years to no avail. Some might even say such a request is simply frivolous at a time when the state budget is in shambles.

But there is another way to turn seemingly apathetic students passionate.

That inspiration to learn for the sake of learning needs to be sparked again. Recently, numerous acquaintances at Sac State have told me they are finally switching from the major they never liked in the first place, but would be a better return on their money, to something more personally fulfilling. This indicates that some people choose their studies for the money and not for the love of it.

However, there are surely many students who might say it would be a dire mistake not to think of future earnings. I am inclined to agree. But there should also be a healthy dose of genuine interest and inquisitiveness for a subject.

Based on the apathetic atmosphere of the classroom each day, it is hard to see that curiosity for knowledge.

Perhaps Sac State should be more like the philosophical Academy of Plato and Socrates. We’ll hire demolition teams to tear down most buildings and botanists to plant olive trees. This will cut down overhead so the university can hire more teachers who would then be able to teach smaller groups of students as they walk around in large circles on campus. Deeply ingrained in their favorite subject, all of us will have big smiles on our faces.

Do you think class is worth being excited about? Send comments to [email protected]