If you look carefully, the study isn't about the use of technology in the classroom; it's about how students who use technology *in their daily lives* might think learn differently than previous generations.
I agree that technology in the classroom has been over-hyped for many years. The number one force for improving learning is the amount of time students spend in direct interaction with their teachers (or with each other). Multiple studies have shown this effect to be an order of magnitude stronger than other learning effects. Technology in the classroom tends to be useful only as much as it actually motivates interaction between people.
However, it is also true that today's students are using technology to a much greater extent than previously, particularly to communicate with each other (e.g. blogs, IM, cell phones, social networking sites, digital photos, etc.). There is little understanding about how this use of technology is changing their classroom (and life) experience. That's what the study is trying to figure out.
Slashdot Mirror
If you look carefully, the study isn't about the use of technology in the classroom; it's about how students who use technology *in their daily lives* might think learn differently than previous generations.
I agree that technology in the classroom has been over-hyped for many years. The number one force for improving learning is the amount of time students spend in direct interaction with their teachers (or with each other). Multiple studies have shown this effect to be an order of magnitude stronger than other learning effects. Technology in the classroom tends to be useful only as much as it actually motivates interaction between people.
However, it is also true that today's students are using technology to a much greater extent than previously, particularly to communicate with each other (e.g. blogs, IM, cell phones, social networking sites, digital photos, etc.). There is little understanding about how this use of technology is changing their classroom (and life) experience. That's what the study is trying to figure out.
At least one of those "blocked spams" was a message sent to AOL's beta testers from the address WinBeta@aol.com.
Clearly, AOL will stop at nothing to get their blocked spam count up, even at the expense of their own internal mail...