THE EFFECT OF EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGIES ON STUDENT ATTENTION SPAN

By Lily Haeberle, Nika Seider, and Madison Waechter

Research Question: How do educational technologies affect attention span?

IntroductionAs technology gains a more prevalent role in the classroom, the influence on students appears to

be ambivalent and complicated, having both positive and negative outcomes. Student’s brains are being rewired to think and learn differently and develop progressive new skills, a positive outcome. On the contrary, the ability to hold attention has diminished to only 8 seconds- shorter than that of a goldfish’s attention span (Microsoft, 2015).

Because of the many technological advances being made in the modern era, the use of technology has rapidly increased. The amount of digital technology, such as computers, interactive whiteboards (such as Promethean boards) and iPads, in the classroom has skyrocketed. Outside of the classroom, many students are used to constant use of their phone and computer in their personal lives, resulting in nonstop screen time for students. New high-tech innovations are seemingly materialized almost every other month, and schools are not hesitating to integrate new technological developments into their classrooms. The rush to incorporate new technology is an attempt to adapt to the current millennials use of technology, as they have become dependent on it in all other aspects of life. Having technology in the classroom that is not only innovative, but also advantageous, it is an essential part of a student’s education; it is unfitting and a waste if the effects of using the technology prove to be negative. One purpose of this study is to understand the positive and negative uses of technology in the classroom to determine if a classroom is more beneficial with or without technological devices.

Technology has shaped the so-called “Net Generation” to learn with a different mental approach, thus another goal of this study is to find out how this heavily relied on technology in the classroom is affecting student’s newfound abilities and learning styles in the classroom. Research has found that student’s decreased attention span has lead to a distinct difference of learning. Students today tend to show the need for more interactivity, exploration, and independence with their assignments. This new learning method has created a need for more comprehensive and dynamic ways of teaching, in order to adapt to student’s needs. Students are not benefitting from traditional methods of teaching, creating a problem for the school system. Teachers are pressed to find new effective teaching styles in response to the needs of students, an ordeal that is not only stressful and complex, but may also be costly, as the price of technology is high. By understanding this change in learning styles, teachers will not only be able to find out how they can effectively teach their students, but also discover what technology is doing to their mental abilities in school (Barnes et al, 2007).

Any student who utilizes technology in their education will be affected by their use, whether negatively or positively, and should be interested in the effects technology has shown to have. Millennials should have a basic understanding on how devices they use everyday can affect their mentality and brain neurons. Having an understanding of these effects is especially important in this study, as students are the subjects. A young student’s mind is not yet fully developed and is easily susceptible to being altered by constant use of technology. Students, as well as their parents, should be aware of the effects of heavy technology integration in education.  

This research can be used to figure out how to manage and respond to the effects technology has on the human brain. Once research can explain what the effects are and the impact they will have on the person, the effects can then be catered to, and an attempt at changing negative effects can be made. As there is no way to stop the accelerating technological advancements of the future, research on technology must consistently be up to date in order to understand the effects of the current technologies. As more information on the effects of technology on the brain is discovered, educators and developers can learn

how to integrate the technologies in the classroom so that the students get the best instruction possible and are aware of the effects technology has on them.

The increasing demand of technology from students will not stop, as they are dependent on technologies in and out of the classroom. The effects of this will only continue to develop and grow bigger as this millennial age progresses, which is why it is so important to understand them.  

The Millennials and TechnologyThe use of technology in everyday life has grown alongside the Millennials. This generation of

young adults are the ones most directly affected by society’s dependence on technology, as they have grown up with digital resources becoming more and more prevalent and are susceptible to the effects of a diminishing attention span. Richard Sweeney, University Librarian at the New Jersey Institute of Technology, reflects upon this generation in his study “Millennial Behaviors and Demographics.” This Net Generation is comprised of the individuals born between 1979 and 1994, (the exact years of birth of Millennials differs slightly depending upon the the demographers, some use 1982 as the start of this generation). Sweeney explains that Millennial students are a group of exploratory learners, meaning they benefit most from doing things for themselves. These students have been found to be more engaged through active learning and effective experimental processes, such as games, case studies, hands-on experiences and simulations that can hold and maintain their interest over a period of time. Another point that Sweeney makes in his study is that as a whole, the Millennial generation is increasingly tech-savvy and they expect that digital resources will always be readily available to them. As explained by Sweeney, “Millennials clearly adapt faster to computer and internet services because they have always had them. While they still clearly want and expect teachers in a face-to-face environment, they expect the speed, convenience, flexibility and power provided by digitally provided services and resources,” (Sweeney, 2006). Millennials’ access to technology, as found in Kassandra Barnes, Raymond Marateo and S. Pixy Ferris’ study “Teaching and Learning with the Net Generation,” has played a large role in the development of Millennial student’s specific learning styles, which has led them to bore easily with more traditional methods of learning, like lectures. Matt Richtel, author of “Growing Up Digital, Wired for Distraction,” came to the conclusion in his research that students of the Millennial generation are more interested in classes that use technology which apply to real world scenarios (Richtel, 2010). In order to meet these needs and expectations, educators have started incorporating technology more and more into the classroom in a variety of ways.

Millennials are utilizing technologies, such as the Internet, leading to changes in their process of completing schoolwork. The way in which Millennials use technology for school is reflected upon in the piece of literature, “How Teens do Research in the Digital World” by Kristen Purcell and Lee Rainee. This source is an analysis of research conducted by the Pew Research Center in which more than 2,000 middle and high school teachers from the Advanced Placement and National Writing communities participate in a survey. The study analyzed the manner in which technology shapes the research habits of students. The results found that students of the Millennial generation have become overly reliable on Internet search engines in obtaining information. One of the teachers in this study said that, for the students, “research = Googling,” (Purcell and Rainee, 2012). As a result of new technologies, research has become a short, fast-paced activity in order to complete the bare minimum.

To see the impact of this increasing reliability and use of technology on Millennials, researchers Janna Anderson and Lee Rainie conducted a survey in their 2012 research entitled “Millennials Will Benefit and Suffer Due to Their Hyperconnected Lives.” In this study, they asked both technology stakeholders and critics to state whether they agree or disagree with quotes about the use of technology. Their research revealed that by the year 2020, the effects of hyperconnectivity and the “always-on” lifestyles of young people will be mostly positive, like that of easy access to people and information. However, experts also predict that this generation will exhibit a thirst for instant gratification and quick fixes, a lack in the ability to think critically, and a loss in patience. Another point made in Anderson and Rainie’s research is that the short attention spans resulting from constant quick interactions will be detrimental for Millennials to focus on more complex problems, and that there may be a trend of

unproductivity among those affected in areas such as technology and literature. These impacts, like that of a diminishing attention span, must be understood in order to shape the process of learning and education for future generations to come.

Technology can be a learning tool, but it can also be a distraction. Constant use of technology impacts the brain and makes concentrating and focusing on one task difficult, and this epidemic is not slowing down. According to a San Diego Supercomputer Center researcher, Jan Zverina, the U.S.’s media consumption will be at 15.5 hours per person, per media day by 2015. A media day is defined as the total hours of media consumed, both directly and indirectly through background streaming, thus it can exceed 24 hours.  This trend will not cease either, Zverina said, “As we increase the number of simultaneous media streams going into the home, and we increase our multi-tasking behaviors, a lot of content assumes the role of background or secondary content stream… we have to expect that total hours will grow,” (Zverina, 2013). In Richtel’s “Growing Up Digital, Wired for Distraction” the student in which he shadowed, Vishal Singh, said, “If it weren’t for the Internet, I’d focus more on school, and be doing better academically,” (Richtel, 2010). Growing up with this easy access to information via the internet has shaped this generation to expect immediate answers which ultimately has lead to an overall decreased patience level, as found in Barnes, Marateo and Ferris’ study. It is imperative that Millennial’s technological needs and dependencies are understood and beneficially incorporated into classrooms so that they can succeed academically and pave the way for the future Net generations.

Technology’s Effects on Attention SpanDirect Effects on the Brain

The majority of the problems that stem from increased use of technology can be linked to a direct neurological effect on the brain. Andi Horvath, a PhD in Medical Biology, reported on technology’s effect on attention span in, “How Does Technology Affect Our Brains?” and delved into how exactly technology is playing a role in the brain’s development. Higher activity in the prefrontal cortex proves that the brain is affected by frequent use of technology (Horvath, 2015). Nova University’s psychology Professor Jim Taylor reported on similar research to Horvath’s. He found that constant technology use is changing the way brains are wired. It can cause the brain to lose the ability to be imaginative, retain information, and pay attention for long periods of time. As children are increasingly spending more time watching television than they are reading, they are being exposed to constant distractions and fast moving images that make it nearly impossible for them to hold their attention for long periods of time (Taylor, 2012). This early exposure to television directly links to risks of attentional problems in the future. Professor Elizabeth Vandewater at the University of Texas-Austin and researcher Marie Evans Schmidt from Children’s Hospital in Boston conducted a review named “Media and Attention, Cognition, and School Achievement,” on studies that examined the effects of long hours of television viewing on a child’s attention span. The Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) is a method used to identify problem areas in a child’s behavior. It was used on second and third grade children to see if their hours spent watching television had an effect on their performance on attention problems (problems used to test a child’s attention span). It was found that children who watched less than two hours per day scored lower on the attention problem subscale of the CBCL than the children who watched two or more hours a day (Schmidt and Vandewater, 2008). This correlation between television viewing and attention span relates to what Horvath found, the direct impact of technology on the brain. As a child, the brain is only just beginning to develop and it is extremely susceptible to being influenced by a multitude of factors. If television or other electronic mediums are a constant in the child’s life, they will experience the effects of a decreased attention span and weak memory because their brains have been wired differently from the start--as opposed to the brains of their parents or grandparents whose prefrontal cortex were not molded by advanced technology.

Another form of electronic media that shapes the Millennials brains is the Internet. Now that there is constant and immediate access to the world wide web of information, the newest generations are becoming more skilled at knowing where to find information rather than knowing how to retain information (Taylor, 2012). Purcell and Rainee touch upon this subject as well, finding that with the

Internet comes a new definition of the word ‘research’. They found that for students, “doing research has shifted from a relatively slow process of intellectual curiosity and discovery to a fast-paced, short-term exercise aimed at locating just enough information to complete an assignment” (Purcell and Rainee, 2012). And while knowing how to quickly access information is helpful, there may not always be a Google search available, like when taking a test.

Another negative effect that technology has on the brain is its decreased ability to conserve energy. Researcher Michael Rich, M.D. of Harvard Medical School, conducted an experiment that measured the amount of energy the brain used while performing a task and how much was used at rest. The study shows that the brain uses the same about of energy while performing a task as it does while at rest. These findings reveal that an adolescent’s brain is so heavily wired by technology that it is constantly active and will not properly shut down while at rest in order to conserve energy like it should. Dr. Rich found that, “downtime is to the brain what sleep is to the body” and that students’ brains are in a constant mode of stimulation (Richtel, 2010). Journalist Cara Feinberg states in the piece “The Mediatrician,” that always being active is detrimental to proper brain development as resting periods are important for learning how to create new connections, synthesize information, and forge a sense of self (Feinberg, 2011).

Although technology has proven to have negative effects on the brain, it also has the ability to strengthen useful and positive skills. Such abilities include decision making and the ability to skim information rapidly but effectively. Developing these skills supports students in school as well as later on in life, but it does not make up for the loss that occurs when children’s brains are wired differently than normal by constant use of technology. However, the brain never stops developing, even into adulthood. The brain is trained to rewire itself depending on the environment in which it is surrounded (Horvath, 2015). Therefore, it is possible for a technology user to re-wire their brain away from technology as they grow older and then regain certain skills that they may have lost.

Effects on Academic AchievementThe neurological effects of outside technology (technology not used in school) on the brain have

translated into the classroom. Studies have shown both positive and negatives outcomes from electronic media use among children and their academic accomplishments. Some video games have proven to improve visual attention skills, teach quicker attention deployment and faster processing. These video games create a challenge that requires players to develop and use certain skills in order to master the game. Video games can also improve problem solving skills. This is learned through interactive situations, which are experienced in video games. A child is confronted with a problem on how to defeat the game and they must use their decision making skills and quick attention deployment skills to succeed. Whether this benefit of electronic media will stay with the child long term is all dependant on whether or not they have the ability to apply these problem solving skills in new and more complex situations (Schmidt and Vandewater, 2008). Children would have an opportunity to apply these skills to everyday challenges in the classroom and outside of it, therefore building upon their skills and developing them further so that they can benefit from them in the long run. There is however, a limit to how much video games can benefit one’s academic performance. In “Growing Up Digital, Wired for Distraction,” Richtel interviewed Silicon Valley student Sean McMullen whose favorite pastime is playing video games. Richtel found that McMullen played an average of 36 hours of video games per week. McMullen found his gaming habit to be pulling his GPA down to below a 3.2, strong evidence that excessive media usage hurts academic performance. Richtel also found that playing video games hurt students’ memory more than watching television does. In one study discussed by Richtel, researchers observed brainwave patterns while subjects were asleep and found that the students had a harder time remembering vocabulary words when they played video games all night than when they had watched television (Richtel, 2010). Though technologies are being used outside of the classroom, they show negative effects in the classroom, whether or not the media had a correlation with the classroom material.

When children view and absorb media, it is the content that matters most when measuring academic achievement. Empirical evidence has shown that educational programs on television or the

Internet have “positive benefits for children’s academic skills, academic engagement, and attitudes towards learning” (Schmidt and Vandewater, 2008). So if a program’s content is informative and engaging, students are more likely to succeed educationally and be willing to participate in lessons that apply to what they have learned from the program. Professors Frederick Zimmerman at the UCLA Fielding School of Public Health and Professor Dimitri Christakis at the University of Washington School of Medicine in Seattle, conducted a study and found that high doses of entertainment television led to attention problems in the future, while educational television was not associated with subsequent attention problems (Schmidt and Vandewater, 2008). If the content is understandable and educational while being engaging, the viewer will pay attention and retain the information so that they can then use it in the classroom and later on in life. If the content is solely meant for entertainment purposes, the viewer could get bored and lose interest, therefore moving their attention onto something else which can also lead to attention problems.

ADHD, or Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, is diagnosed with the symptoms of “inattention, hyperactivity or impulsivity that significantly impairs social or academic functioning” (Schmidt and Vandewater, 2008). 11% of people aged 4-17 have been diagnosed with ADHD at some point in their life (Key Findings, 2011). These issues inhibit the ability of a student to perform well in school as it is hard for them to pay attention and listen to instruction when a variety of other things could be happening at the same time as the classroom is a complex and diverse environment. One of those inhibitors could very well be the technology that is provided in the classroom or technology that belongs to the student themselves. Technology use has shown to have a direct correlation with increased risk of ADHD. The chances of developing ADHD rise with the age of a child who is exposed to television from an early age. Psychologist Aric Sigman wrote a review of research called, “The Biological Impact of Watching TV” in which he found that for every hour of television watched per day, there is a 9% increase of attentional problems (Sigman, 2007). A connection between technology and ADHD also includes the fact that children with ADHD are two times more likely to have a television in their room, granting them greater access to television which hinders their attention span even more. (Schmidt and Vandewater, 2008).

Technology that is used at home is also a large factor that plays a negative role in student’s academic achievement. In “Growing Up Digital, Wired for Distraction,” Richtel speaks about Jacob L. Vigdor, a professor at Duke University who led research on students use of technology at home. He found that when adults were not supervising computer use, children would easily get distracted and not dedicate all of their time to homework. Students are not able to absorb the information as well as they could if they were focusing on one task at a time. One student named Allison Miller, who lives in Silicon Valley, says that she can get so caught up texting and surfing the web while attempting to do homework that she will forget to complete her work (Richtel, 2010). The Kaiser Family Foundation found that students aged 8 to 18 use the Internet or watch television 31% of the time that they are doing their homework (Richtel, 2010). This is a form of multitasking that greatly impacts student performance in school, because if they are not completing their homework then they will not be fully prepared for tests and other material that they need to learn in order to achieve.

The Effects of Technology Use in the ClassroomIn the world of technology, multitasking has developed as a skill that some pride themselves on.

In the classroom however, multitasking with technology is damaging to academic success.  Multiple experiments have proven that the use of digital technologies in a classroom, when used for non-educational purposes, can be harmful to classroom performance. Researchers Eileen Wood, Lucia Zivcakova, Petrice Gentile, Karin Archer, Domenica De Pasquale and Amanda Nosko conducted an extensive article, “Examining the impact of off-task multi-tasking with technology on real-time classroom learning,” on how digital technology use in the classroom is detrimental to educational performance. Digital technologies consist of laptops, cell phones, tablets and most other technologies that have access to the Internet. The Cognitive Bottleneck Theory states that when two cognitive tasks are being performed at the same time, there are decrements in at least one of the tasks (Wood et al., 2012). When a

student uses their phone or their laptop during class, they automatically disconnect from the lesson because naturally, following the Cognitive Bottleneck Theory, the task that suffered from a decrement in performance was the task of listening to the lesson. It can be inferred that paying attention to the lesson was the task that suffered, because if the student’s top priority was to listen to the lesson, they would not have picked up their phone or laptop. These results support Schmidt and Vandewater’s research that content must be engaging and stimulating in order to teach new material to students in this digital age. If the content of a lesson is dull and uninteresting, it is the natural reaction for students to turn to their technology to engage in something more appealing. Purcell and Rainee also found that there is a rising concern among teachers about students distracted use of digital technologies. When in class and conducting research online, many distractions are presented, which can prevent students from fully focusing on the task at hand. Teachers have met in focus groups to discuss their concerns that students are involving themselves in other activities along with their assigned class work, such as social networking sites, watching online videos, and playing online games (Purcell and Rainee, 2012). These multitasking activities performed during class time can be so distracting that student’s lose the time set aside for the assigned activity, therefore diminishing their academic success. Relating to Taylor’s research on students who now know where to find information rather than know how to remember information is Purcell and Rainee’s research saying that students have been found to set an insufficient amount of time aside for doing research because they believe that the Internet will supply them with the information quickly (Purcell and Rainee, 2012).

When a single digital technology is used to do off task work in the classroom, a slippery slope follows. With one technology, the student will be inclined to use another, therefore going even more off task and becoming even more distracted and less engaged in the lesson (Wood et al., 2012). Trying to find a balance between using technology and listening to a lesson does not allow the students to fully engage with what is being taught and therefore they can’t understand the material well enough to apply it to real situations. Researcher Eileen Wood and her coworkers from Wilfrid Laurier University conducted an experiment with 145 college students. This experiment was done to test the effects on off task technology use during a college lecture. The students were broken up into groups that were assigned a different technology, ie; Facebook, texting, Word Processing, email,  and finally paper and pencil. These groups then had to sit in a lecture room where they had take notes for a quiz afterwards. The students could do whatever they wanted with the technology they were assigned. The researchers found that the students who chose to not use their technologies scored higher on the quiz than the students who did use their technologies. Also, students in the Facebook group scored lower than students in the paper and pencil group (Wood et al., 2012). This is quantitative evidence that multitasking with digital technologies in the classroom has a negative effect on student performance and that it is something that should not be occurring in an environment that is meant for learning. In order for students to prosper academically, teachers must incorporate technology into lessons to captivate and engage the tech-savvy Millennials as they will continue to rely on and multitask with technology.

Moving Forward with TechnologyAs technology becomes more prevalent in everyday life for millions of people, avoiding constant

use is nearly impossible to do. While people are beginning to realize the impact technology has or will have on our brain, the effects have already taken place. Society as a whole cannot return to a life without technology, and because of this, people will be forced to adapt to the hazards of technology, and learn to take precautions when dealing with technology.  According to the research found, there are a variety of ways to deal and adapt to change without falling to adversity.

Technology integration in school is inevitable, and many schools have already incorporated technology such as Promethean Boards, computers, Wifi, iPads, and more, into every classroom.  Even as teachers and parents express their uncertainty about students’ “digital diets”, they are still increasing efforts to use technology in the classroom, to connect students and give them essential skills (Richtel, 2010).  This leads educators who use these technologies in a state of perplexity, how does the classroom continue to integrate technology to keep up with a fast paced and technical world, yet at the same time

avoid the negative consequences technology may have on the students work ethics, attention span, etc.? Educators are encouraged to find a happy medium, yet solutions to find this balance are often not recognized or implemented.

As psychology and technology professors Randall Davies and Richard West describe in their book, “Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology”, in order for technology integration to have a positive outcome, schools must require teachers to have a full and detailed understanding of the technology that they are letting their students use. Skill-development and practicing in a collaborative environment is essential to a complete understanding. Practices modeled by blogs and other forms of Internet communication such as video-based self-assessment, electronic portfolios, and individual response systems, can be used to help educators practice and develop these skills. Another solution may be the possibility of more interaction among teachers, to improve professional developmental outcomes, such as discussions and social networking that can provide reflection and improve self-efficacy (Davies and West, 2013).  

Teachers must be committed and willing to integrate technology in the classroom, without this aspect of integration, there is a lack of enthusiasm on behalf of students that can lead to misuse of the technology due to the absence of care and concern.  Changing a teacher’s ideas and attitudes on educational technology not only educates the teacher on why they should use technology, but also engages them and further encourages use of technology. Having positive teacher attitudes not only increases technology use but is an important and necessary step towards increasing effective technology integration (Davies and West, 2013).

Marc Prensky, an internationally acclaimed speaker and writer, wrote in, “How to Teach with Technology: Both Teachers and Students Comfortable in an Era of Exponential Change” that as technology is integrated into the classroom, benefits can only arise when teachers and students work together and mutually decide on how to incorporate their technology into their education. When teachers have a complex understanding of the technologies they use, they can relay their knowledge to their students to explain what the technology does, how to use it, and how it can be productive for using on assignments. Working together can also provide an evaluation criteria and a deeper understanding of what the student needs to improve on based off of the teacher’s assessment (Prensky, 2007).

At one high school in Silicon Valley in California, the principal, David Reilly, is determined to engage students with familiarity through social media. He asked his teachers to build websites to communicate with students, as well as introduced classes based around using digital tools to record music, secured funding for iPads to teach Mandarin, and acquired $3 million in grants for a new multimedia center (Richtel, 2010). Reilly is an example of an educator that has taken a strong initiative to improve class relations between teachers and students while integrating the right tools and technologies to execute and engage these positive relations.

As time progresses, student’s needs will change based on the generation they grew up in. First-generation tech usually causes what is known as “net negative” social effects, second-generation “net neutral”, and third generation is “net positive.” The first generation of students may find technology in the classroom a foreign idea, the second generation may be impartial on the matter, while the third generation will be so accustomed to technology that its effects will be mostly all positive. By the third generation, the technology is expected to have such an advanced interface that it begins to reinforce good behaviors and effects of technology will be positive (Anderson and Rainie, 2012). Teachers must adapt to these changes by updating their own skills according to how advanced their technology is and who they are teaching.

Technology has the potential to be a key aspect of a student’s everyday scholarly life, and has been on an upward trend in the classroom. Students and teachers need to work together to reap the full benefits technology has to offer, as well as share the same enthusiasm for technology.

Process The thought of starting this three-month project was daunting for a number of students, including

our group. Writing a literature review can be a confusing process, especially in the beginning, and for

many the only way to get better is to practice. As a whole, our group progressively got better at writing literature reviews, and eventually understood how to review an article efficiently and properly. Finding sources for literature reviews was not as hard as we initially anticipated. Our topic, as it turns out, is a subject matter that many people are concerned about. Decreases in attention span relating to technology is a relatively new idea, and there are many current studies trying to decipher their connection while analyzing what it means for the future. When we began researching our topic, we were not sure if our research question would remain the same, or take another route. To determine the path of our project, we continued research and eventually chose to direct the question to a theme that was more relatable to us as students; technology in school and its effect on attention span.

A critical flaw in our project was not changing our question soon enough. We decided to edit our question by the 4th literature review, so this change in direction impacted the amount of information we were able to complete literature reviews on. Because our question shifted, we also had to make connections based on our literature reviews from the original question to literature reviews on the new question. Although both focused on attention span and technology, the original question pertained to a more general overview, while the revised question was more narrowed and specific to Millennial students and school. Luckily, our group had already found research that pertained to Millennials and students, but it was still a setback information wise. Making connections between topics, such as how technology in school directly relates to attention span, was a progression that required detailed analyzing of each source. We had to use our own evaluations to determine how the article related to what we wanted to find out, if it was not explicit or obvious. An example of using our own analytical skills rather than explicit connections was in Madison’s mini Literature review #3, “In Search of an Attention Span,” by Harlan Loeb, the article did not mention the effect pertaining to students and education, but instead he wrote about the global effect as a whole. In order to relate this article back to our research question, we had to use this article as an overview of our topic, and related it to what we had learned from other literature reviews that were more specific. Most of the other literature reviews had direct connections to all aspects of our question, and we had no problems analyzing them, so for us this was a challenge. Another small flaw that we had room to improve in was the scientific aspect of our research. We had the opportunity to research more on what activity goes on in our brain and how attention span works, but we only managed to cover part of this aspect. However, although it is interesting information, we are unsure if more information would have been useful to our project.

We feel that our group as a whole developed important skills during this project. The ability to extensively research a topic and make connections will be extremely beneficial in both our academic and personal lives.

Works Cited

Anderson, Janna, and Lee Rainie. "Millennials Will Benefit and Suffer Due to Their Hyperconnected Lives." Pew Research Center Internet Science Tech RSS. Pew Research Center, 28 Feb. 2012. Web. 25 Nov. 2015.

Barnes, Kassandra, Raymond Marateo, and S. Pixy Ferris. “Teaching and Learning with the Net Generation” April/May 2007. Innovate: Journal of Online Education. Volume 3, Issue 4, pp. 1-8.

Davies, Randall and Richard E. West. “Technology Integration in Schools” January 2013. Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology. 4th Edition, pp. 1-37.

Feinberg, Cara. "The Mediatrician." Harvard Magazine. Harvard Magazine Inc., 18 Oct. 2011.Horvath, Andi. "How Does Technology Affect Our Brains?" June 2015. The Age. Fairfax Media. Web.

"Key Findings: Trends in the Parent-Report of Health Care Provider-Diagnosis and Medication Treatment for ADHD: United States, 2003—2011." Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 10 Dec. 2014. Web. 10 Jan. 2016.

Loeb, Harlan. "In Search of an Attention Span." Editorial. The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 7 Oct. 2015. Web. 12 Nov. 2015.

Prensky, Marc. "How to Teach with Technology: Keeping Both Teachers and Students Comfortable in an Era of Exponential Change." Becta, 2007. Web. 4 Nov. 2015.

Purcell, Kristen and Lee Rainee. "How Teens Do Research in the Digital World." Pew Research Center Internet Science Tech RSS. Pew Research Center, 31 Oct. 2012. Web. 23 Nov. 2015.

Richtel, Matt. "Growing Up Digital, Wired for Distraction." New York Times. 21 Nov. 2010: 1-9 pag.               Print.Schmidt, Marie Evans and Elizabeth A. Vandewater. “Media and Attention, Cognition, and School

Achievement” Spring 2008. The Future of Children. Volume 8, Number 1, pp. 63-85.Sigman, Aric. "Visual Voodoo: The Biological Impact of Watching TV." 54.1 (2007): 12-16.            AricSigman.com. 2007. Web. 12 Nov. 2015.Sweeney, Richard T. “Millennial Behaviors & Demographics.” (n.d.):n. pag. 22 Dec. 2006. Web. 24. Oct. 2015.   Taylor, Jim. "How Technology Is Changing the Way Children Think and Focus." Psychology Today.            Sussex, 04 December 2012. Web.Wood et al. “Examining the impact of off-task multi-tasking with technology on real-time          classroom learning” January 2012. Computers and Education. Volume 58, Issue 1, pp. 365-374.

Zverina, Jan. "U.S. Media Consumption to Rise to 15.5 Hours a Day- Per Person- by 2015." UC            San Diego News Center. UC San Diego, 6 Nov. 2013. Web. 13 Nov. 2015.