Thanks to HITEN SAMTANI for writing and the NY Times for assigning someone to cover this story. Thank you also for bringing up the important issue of equity and access.

I hosted the panel and have had many conversations on the topic brought up about equity and access. This is an important issue that needs attention.

First, when we allow students to use the technology they own, that enables the students that don't have technology more access to school devices.
Next, it is the moral imperative of schools to provide students who don't have access with the tools and resources they need for success in the world. Just as schools provide a free lunch for those in need, they must provide access to technology for those in need as well. While this is something that schools should provide for students, I've also shared ten ideas for ways I and others have helped students acquire technology here http://theinnovativeeducator....

Regardless of whether students bring their own or the school provides, access to the knowledge tools of our world should be a right, not a privilege, in our schools.

Where in the conversation is how inferior screen reading and keyboard writing are, particularly for students still developing literacy skills? Where is the discussion of how all of the quick format digital "tools" make it difficult to build the strong cognitive structures necessary for in depth critical thinking? Sure, go digital at the expense of cognitive development. Sure, go digital at the expense of marginalized peoples who are already below standard literacy. Digital education is inferior to material tools for building skills. Only 19% of Americans function at "proficiency" level - and the wasted money on smart rooms in high schools over the last ten years has not made it better - literacy is sliding not increasing.

Lola, interesting perspective here, and I'd like to know more. I have to ask: how is screen reading and keyboard writing necessarily inferior to reading a paper-based book or writing with a pen? And how do the former impair one's cognitive development?

I don't think either one's inferior to the other, but that they're just different. For instance, I think that it's important for students to learn to both write clearly and type quickly and with accuracy. Both mediums are important to learn in order to get by in life, because neither are going away entirely any time soon. Furthermore, I think that it's very well possible to engage in in-depth critical thinking, and improve one's literacy, while on the Internet.

So, in my opinion, one's not better than the other, but rather, "both" is better than "just one."

As for the statistic you brought, there I completely agree. No matter which medium students are taught to use, we need to emphasize to teacher and students that at the end of the day, it's a medium, and not a desired end (which, in the context of your post, would be literacy or cognitive development). We need to strengthen the link between our mediums and our educational outcomes.

An interesting discussion point: does the speed of digital media detract from the depth of cognitive development?

On the one hand, we must say that digital speed allows people to proceed quickly through tedious tasks and onto more advanced work.

On the other hand, the speed of thought producing itself does not correspond to the speed ideals of digital media. In thinking of what one is saying as one also considers how one is saying it, we give due consideration to those that we intend to receive the message being communicated.

Might we suspect that an increased frequency of misunderstanding could be an unexpected side effect attending the exclusive use of digital media? Perhaps this might be something which needs to be considered; for, passing over misunderstanding through an attitude of 'whatever' simply leads to a steadily progressing divergence of comprehension and, one must suspect, toward a fragmentation of communication.

It's interesting to see the headline claiming that it's teachers who need to be convinced to use these technologies, given that in NYC there are regulations forbidding the use of cell phones and other electronic devices in schools. These are handed down by the Chancellor, who is neither elected nor representative of the teachers in classrooms. At the end of the most recent school year, new technology regulations were handed down to teachers, forbidding facebook communication between teachers and students, as well as other things (the use of youtube in class is perhaps the most obvious restriction that hampers much more than it helps).

I would suggest that it is the mayor and his policymaker affiliates who need to be convinced to change the current policy, not teachers who are quite aware (often, though not always) of the potential in embracing the late 20th century, let alone the early 21st. Control of our learning process would certainly be better off in the hands of students like these (who clearly have researched and reasoned arguments), along with teachers to guide and facilitate learning. But if we keep phrasing this argument in terms of students vs. teachers, we miss the chance to really affect change.

This is the great digital divide in America that is holding our schools back in the 20th century. Technology can really level the playing field in schools and must be integrated as much as possible. Besides the financial savings, young kids minds work now on the level of the digital screen and computer. If the older generations don't understand that, they need to get out of the way.

This topic is very interesting for me. I am korean and work for an educational office. I think America's situation is very similar to Korea. Many schools in korea also don't let the students use IT devices in schools.

I am against about using IT devices in school.

I know IT devices can be very useful when students are trying to find some information or details about their work. But, it is so harmful for the students because it can keep them from focusing in class.

There are many experiments about readings on IT devices.
According to the experiments, students need more time when they read something on the computers than on the real books. What is worse, they have less understanding when reading something on the computer.
It's because once they find a new word or idea, they try to solve their curiosities by internet. So, they have too much of details after they finished the topic and they fail in understanding contexts.

I think IT devices are very useful methods for teachers not for the students in class.