Last month, The National Literacy Trust released the results of a survey of over 3000 children. They observed a correlation between children's engagement with social media and their literacy.
Findings from the First Student Cohort found that technology didn't significantly influence student performance.
Despite the lack of data showing that technology has a tremendous effect in the classroom, teachers have found that using technology may help address students' specific learning needs.
Egli notes that using technology alone is not the answer to improving literacy, but the tools help teachers move students toward their individual learning goals.
From team A's diigo not quite sure if it in fact hurts their case rather than help it. The article discusses how because... wait for it.... "Despite the lack of data showing that technology has tremendous effect in the classroom..." it's a great tool. Not exactly a ringing endorsement of the point I think team A is trying to make. Really good article and I believe a lot of whats in it but the credibility of the article is lacking.
This article is explaining that people believe that sites like Google dumbs us down because we use it as a crutch for information. The article offers a rebuttal and says that instead of people using these sites to lean on, the sites are actually being used as a resource to back up facts. For example: I think a movie was released in 1999, I check Google to back up my statement and find that it was actually released in 2000.
Team A's discussion about the internet (through television, texting, social network posting and the internet) essentially making digital natives smarter instead of dumber.
