Not to make any blanket statements — but students rely heavily on technology, and all the perks that come with it.And who can blame them? In this modern age, technology like laptops, functions as tools for storing and discovering knowledge, though its heavy use can bleed into reliance, which begs the question...Are laptops blocking students' ability learn and think critically?.The University of Toronto's (U of T) Henry NR Jackman Faculty of Law has come out with an answer — maybe so.The faculty issued an email to its students, announcing some classes will only allow hand-written notes, as Associate Dean Richard Stacey claims many of his colleagues are concerned typing on a laptop impinges on core teaching principles of their school — critical thinking.In the email written by Stacey, he explains critical thinking is essential to "rigorous thinking about the law."This statement has backbone — according to one 2025 study from the Agostino Gemelli University in Rome, although typing enables faster production, focused attention and longer processing time — all essential activities of handwriting notes — improve the retention of what is being written.."Handwriting activates a broader network of brain regions involved in motor, sensory, and cognitive processing, contributing to deeper learning, enhanced memory retention, and more effective engagement with written material," the study found.With this in mind, the question then becomes — should students prioritize efficiency over deep learning?At least at U of T law, this is up to professors, though Stacey says "many" of the law classrooms will be laptop-free as of the beginning of September."Our primary concern here is not that students are distracted by technology, but rather that the very act of type-writing comprehensive notes during class does not allow students to think deeply about the class material or to engage in discussion and argument," wrote Stacey in the email.."...research shows that students who take notes by hand, with pen and paper or tablet and stylus must, because hand-writing is slower than type-writing, process information critically in real time and make higher-order analytical choices about what to write down," Stacey later continued.Stacey added many of the faculty are specifically concerned over the effect typing notes has on processing information."Our aim is laptop-free environments, rather than device-free environments," he added.Though, in a statement to CP24, Stacey does add the use of "sophisticated AI tools" also has the same effect on students inhibiting deep thinking on its own account. Now we've got the one school covered, are there other Canadian law schools, or universities in general doing something similar?.From the Western Standard's research, the answer is a bit of a nothing-burger, with no other schools announcing anything similar.However, U of T did adopt their laptop-free idea from other universities — though they are located on the other side of the border, in the US, with each school having a slightly different policy.At the University of California, Berkeley law school, laptops are not banned, but the use of one particular, err... intelligence is. AI has been prohibited among students when submitting all their work including "conceptualizing, outlining, drafting, revising, translating, or editing any work submitted for credit,” as reported by Inside Higher Ed..Similar to U of T's reasoning, Berkeley wishes to ensure students are "not distracted by (let alone relying upon) whatever might be taking place on their screen at that time.”It also wishes to "make extensive use of classroom time to engage students in sustained and rigorous dialogue,” helping to prepare students for practicing law. Don't count out the University of Chicago Law School, as it too announced it will ban laptops, tablets and phones in classrooms, beginning this fall. Though this policy will only apply to its first-year law students..The university reasons this would cease any undermining of the Socratic method, creating dialogue and analytical thinking.This allows professors to, instead of lecturing, probe students with questions on legal knowledge."There were already arguments about whether or not laptops made sense in classrooms, because they can both distract the student using them and the students around them, but those concerns are only amplified in the era of AI," stated the University of Chicago to Inside Higher Ed. "You don’t want students simply putting in the case name into Claude or ChatGPT, asking it for a summary and the questions their professor is likely to ask, and then just reading those answers when you call on them.".They believe the most AI-proof skill lawyers can develop is the ability to engage in on-the-fly discourse, making them stand out, especially in an age where more and more law firms are using AI instead of early-career lawyers to review and summarize legal documents.“It’s exactly the kind of skill [lawyers] need in a high-pressure meeting with a client, a negotiation, a hearing or a trial," the school stated.The University of Chicago is not just banning technology from classrooms — it is also adding an in-person oral exam all students are required to complete.This begs the question — how do students feel about policies like these?.Well, at U of T, students seem less than satisfied with the ban, according to a survey completed by 240 of the 640 students at the law school: 76% said they were not happy with it.Reported by Law.com, most of students claimed this would not be beneficial to their legal education, explained Ishaan McLachlan, president of the Students’ Law Society."A number of students indicated concerns about removing technology from the classroom when the use of technology is becoming increasingly important in the legal field,” stated McLachlan.
