This book, even though Mr. Stoll asks valid questions, is badly edited. Mr. Stoll does not present evidence of what he says other than the occasional "I ask one student this question" or "I ask one person this question"? His book would have been more valid if he had base it on studies.Mr. Stoll says technology enhanced lessons can be boring. Well obviously whoever made up the lesson does not know how to plan a good lesson. He talks about computer education where students "regurgitate" answers but that goes on in many schools without technology in them. Students have to be taught how to learn. He also seems to have a problem with learning be fun. Why not? He is right some subjects are not going to be pleasant but most subjects can be made to be interesting and yes even fun.He discusses most children can't spell and have poor vocabulary skills or that spelling and grammar gets pushed aside so that word processing can be taught. Well then the teacher needs to be fired for not teaching although I have never seen a school refuse to teach grammar or spelling. Computers are meant to be an aid to education not a substitution. You can't blame computers for poor teaching by a teacher.He says why sink money into soon to be obsolete computers but you do not have to replace computers that often unless they breakdown. Schools do not need the most expensive computers on the market. Schools need computers that do what they need them to do and as long as the computer is doing what they need them to do they don't have to replace them. Many things are expensive in the education field but we can't refuse to spend money just because it's expensive because then you would have no textbooks, desks etc.He discusses allowing the kids to learn about subjects online such as butterflies but you can't always get the students outside. He discusses teaching astronomy as an example but not all parents would be willing to let their children go out with a teacher at night as it would be inconvenient for the parents who work at night so this might be the exact place where an online video would be a good aid until the student knows enough about astronomy to go out on his own to look at the stars in his own backyard. I do agree with him on the fact that high school should not be teaching whole classes on competency in one software as sometimes software becomes obsolete which is why many classes are designed to teach a combination of skills. I also agree with no use of calculators in class until the students have a good foundation in math. Students won't always have a calculator with them so they need to be able to do basic math.Over all I did not care for this book. I would have preferred Mr. Stoll to have come up with some scientific data on whether computers help or hurt classrooms. I must admit I wonder if I would have agreed or disagreed with Mr. Stoll six years ago as I noticed some of what bothered me about this book is because some of his arguments are outdated already which really shows us how important it is that students need to know about computers as it seems they are here to stay and will continue to infiltrate our lives as the years go by. I also wonder, if knowing what Mr. Stoll knows now about computers in the six years that has gone by since he has written this book, would the author still agree with himself?