I wonder how this will affect ADD rates. And then Adult ADD rates.
I totally agree. There are two purposes to school, especially at the middle-school level. One is to learn content: reading, writing, literature, mathematics, basic history, etc.
But the other and perhaps more important thing is to learn how to learn. Part of learning how to learn is to gain the ability to read and interpret dense text. Software programs like these sometimes aid in teaching particular concepts to learners, but they weaken their ability to learn, because they train the user to only learn when the content is entertaining, interactive, etc. That's not necessarily a good thing.
And so we have a generation of people for who email has become too unwieldy -- they now communicate in 140-byte collections of abbreviated words without much syntax.
----------
Let's focus on accurate textbooks (e.g. some states have tried to skew history via new textbook "revisions") and make kids study and learn. Eye candy and technology won't help.
It's not the states themselves, but the state adoption committees that force changes in textbook content to skew to their own political perceptions. These adoption committees exist in about half the states, mostly in the south and west, including Texas, Florida and California, who are the three largest buyers of textbooks.
One question is whether these iTextbooks are considered core curriculum or ancillary materials. If they are ancillary, they could fall outside the province of the adoption committees and theoretically, would not have to respond to their edicts. However, if all a publisher does is repurpose a textbook without changing its content, the book might already incorporate these biases.