Some children may indicate a passive attitude toward study. 'They get easily distracted!' goes the cry.
There are as many perspectives on the efficacy of 'study' as there are brains on this planet. Many who criticise students are ill-equipped themselves in the notions of cognitive developmental theory.
Objective analysis of inputs and outcomes as determining factors in study efficacy is crucial to understanding process versus outcomes at the macro level; yet subjective factors are the most significant on a micro-personal scale.
It's a truism that efficient study requires focus on the content being studied, but what about poorly presented or otherwise substandard materials, etc? Let's address the bigger picture.
We need to help students understand the nature of distraction: Smart phones, ipads or other devices' perceived negativity is about 'clashpoints'.
Modern education (and I use the term loosely - as it was designed in the mid 1850's, when the world was a VERY different place than it is today and even then was just a copy of the burgeoning factory system of economies of scale...) is actually VERY artificial, VERY counter-productive for many and in most instances COMPLETELY pointless and about as counter-intuitive as is p - in relation to how the human brain can and does map knowledge and experiences.
Delineating focussed study into a series of specific areas of content seems, to many, sensible. Yet, whilst a curriculum taught then examined is easy for teachers to assess, it narrows the perspective of the unknown, knowable and not yet known, in a way that the real world does not.
Study methods which embrace open exploration are more natural - but parents and many teachers don't like them because they can' t easily be assessed and so those groups feel disenfranchised by the lack of direct oversight and control.
Most education systems throw out the baby with the bath water to set up and churn out closed, utilitarian machines. Discuss.