I've pointed out in a couple places, I don't buy the "instant feedback" solution. If I write some maths on paper, my teacher can see where I went wrong. If I ch

I've pointed out in a couple places, I don't buy the "instant feedback" solution. If I write some maths on paper, my teacher can see where I went wrong. If I check a box on a tablet, it's a boolean. Was I right, or wrong? The teacher saves some time in marking, but now I'll have to go and show them my work (on the forbidden paper!) to see where I went wrong. As far as searching, the index at the back of a book is likely more useful than full-text search. Usually I'm not interested in a particular term, but 'that thing that we covered last week, with the Fourier Transform', or something like that. There aren't any keywords, regexes won't help - you need a well-organized textbook where the headings and sub-headings facilitate this kind of searching. Curriculum changes seem like the wrong way to go as well - if a tablet isn't good for teaching a subject, don't jam the subject into a format the tablet can understand. This is clearest in the testing case, but it's generally applicable: the tablet, as a device, exposes an interface. Paper exposes the ultimate interface: it accepts any free-form input. At best tablets can work in a similar way, but we have a hard time doing anything useful with this input. As we normalize the input to make it easier to process, we move away from a general purpose input device, and we force students to think and express themselves in the specific way we designed the interface to work.