A Byte of Wellesley

Liberal arts colleges notably prioritize close student-faculty relationships. At Wellesley College, this is reflected in the 7:1 student-to-faculty ratio and the small campus population, a decision that fosters closer connections within the community. It is natural, then, to expect that the digital communication platforms used within the Wellesley community enhances the close-knit community experience. Yet, we are instead met with thousands of unread emails, heated student disagreements on Wellesley’s SideChat, and the fragmented use of multiple applications for each class—none of which fully meet the needs of students and faculty. Digital clutter increases, but genuine communication decreases.

Was Wellesley’s community always like this? As this blog post suggests, there was a time when all-campus forums enabled deeper community engagement, embodying the dynamic community connections Wellesley prides itself on. Overtime, we shifted to platforms such as Sakai, Google Classroom, Email, and SideChat, fragmenting the digital landscape. If such unifying forums existed, then why were they abandoned? Were there flaws within these platforms that prompted our community to abandon them altogether?

We argue that a reassessment of the history of digital communication at Wellesley is imperative to find the best ways that we can use digital tools to enhance meaningful communication with each other. To address this, we ask: To what extent have digital tools helped better Wellesley’s communication?
We explore the changes in the digital landscape overtime at Wellesley, what warranted those changes, and what they mean for our community. By doing so, we hope to suggest ways that digital and analog tools can be used to support meaningful and authentic interactions. As outlined in chapter 6 of Shannon Vallor’s Technology and the Virtues, we emphasize the importance of being intentional and thoughtful in our technosocial practices to strengthen the bonds within our community.