WALSH, K. (2012, June 20). Pros and cons of digital devices in the hands of young students. Retrieved from EmergingEd Tech: http://www.emergingedtech.com/2012/06/pros-and-cons-of-digital-devices-in-the-hands-of-young-students/
In her article, “Pros and cons of digital devices in the hands of young students” Walsh, (2012) evaluates the various advantages as well as disadvantages that accrue from students’ use of technology devices. Walsh expresses her worry concerning the extent to which students are using computers tablets among other devices. Even though she agrees that the devices have their advantages, wash still maintains that the devices, have numerous distractors and they may also expose the students to inappropriate content. Moreover, she argues that the digital technology also exposes the students to some health issues.
Mateo, S. (2911, June 1). Digital Dependence of Today's College Students Revealed in New Study from CourseSmart. Retrieved from PR Newswire: http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/digital-dependence-of-todays-college-students-revealed-in-new-study-from-coursesmart-122935548.html
Mateo, (2011) compiled the research findings of research concerning the dependence of college students on digital devices. The research had been carried out by Coursemart. The findings reveal that students are wholly dependent on digital devices these days. In fact, 98% of the students that participated in the survey had digital devices (Mateo, 2011).
Straumsheim, C. (2016, January 26). Digital Distractions. Retrieved from Inside Higher Ed: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/01/26/study-use-devices-class-nonclass-purposes-rise
The article, “digital distraction” by Straumsheim, (2016) discusses the consequences of the overdependence of students on digital devices. Straumsheim, (2016) reports that the average student uses the digital devices for non-educational purposes. Moreover, the students sometimes use the devices, during class. Such behavior derails their concentration and in fact, harms their grades. As such, Straumsheim, (2016) report’s that the students, end up not paying attention in class, losing grade points, missing instructions, destructing others and also getting called out by their instructor.
Hatch, K. E. (2011). Determining the Effects of Technology on Children. Retrieved from DigitalCommons@URI:http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1212&context=srhonorsprog
Hatch, (2011) analyses the negative as well as the positive sides of technology to children. She argues that even though digital media has its advantages to children, it also has numerous cons.as such, the research reports that the dependence on digital media has health adversities, on the students and it also changes their social behaviors.
Cuban, L. (2010, June 17). High Tech Gadgets: Addiction, Dependency, or Hype? Retrieved from Larry Cuban On School Reform And Classroom Practice: https://larrycuban.wordpress.com/2010/06/17/high-tech-gadgets-addiction-dependency-or-hype/
Larry analyses the after effects of over-dependence on technology. He argues that the use of technology devices re-wires the functioning of the brain and alters the users’ cognitive abilities (Cuban, 2010). Larry Reports that a recent survey indicated that students spend about 8 hours on the digital devices daily. He maintains, that the communications mechanisms of students have changed and that their cognitive abilities have been rewired such that they are “addicted” to the digital devices like Kindle, notebooks among others.
Kirschnera, P. A., & Karpinskib, A. C. (2010). Facebook® and academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6):1237–1245.
The journal article by Kirschnera & Karpinskib, (2010) analyses how student’s use of Facebook affects their performance.As such, the main argument in the article is that the student dependence on technology denies them multitasking skills. As such. They may not be able to process various information streams at a go. The article summarizes the preliminary results of a study concerning the use of Facebook about academic performance. As such, the results of the study reveal that Facebook users had lower grades as compared to the non- users (Kirschnera & Karpinskib, 2010). Moreover, the Facebook users spend lesser hours on books as compared to the non-users.
References
Cuban, L. (2010, June 17). High Tech Gadgets: Addiction, Dependency, or Hype? Retrieved from Larry Cuban On School Reform And Classroom Practice: https://larrycuban.wordpress.com/2010/06/17/high-tech-gadgets-addiction-dependency-or-hype/
Hatch, K. E. (2011). Determining the Effects of Technology on Children. Retrieved from DigitalCommons@URI:http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1212&context=srhonorsprog
Kirschnera, P. A., & Karpinskib, A. C. (2010). Facebook® and academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6):1237–1245.
Mateo, S. (2011, June 1). Digital Dependence of Today's College Students Revealed in New Study from CourseSmart. Retrieved from PR Newswire: http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/digital-dependence-of-todays-college-students-revealed-in-new-study-from-coursesmart-122935548.html
Straumsheim, C. (2016, January 26). Digital Distractions. Retrieved from Inside Higher Ed: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/01/26/study-use-devices-class-nonclass-purposes-rise
WALSH, K. (2012, June 20). Pros and cons of digital devices in the hands of young students. Retrieved from EmergingEd Tech: http://www.emergingedtech.com/2012/06/pros-and-cons-of-digital-devices-in-the-hands-of-young-students/
Tootie
students_harm_2_1000.docx
0
