There are two routes to improvement in this essay, I think. The existing draft is too diffuse.: It says less using more words than it should, and its commentary is uninformed by study of any kind. The only factual statement is one about the number of science-fiction television shows listed in a Wikipedia article, which is (to be generous) peripheral . No studies of "multitasking" from any disciplinary perspective are discussed, no facts are presented to support any argument. Nor is the argument clear. "Learning to love the chaos of the expanding world is the key to achieving a balance," is the closest you come to a conclusion, which does not afford the reader much insight from the effort.

What, put in a sentence, is the idea this essay wishes to convey? That sentence should begin the next draft, so that the reader knows what she is offered from the first moment. The roots of that idea—emerging not merely from opinionated introspection but from some learning—should then be shown, in a series of sentences that teach the reader something, whether he ultimately embraces your idea or views the material you have taught differently. Some attention to counter-arguments makes your essay useful for those who do not find themselves immediately in agreement. The number of books available to read before the current generation was not smaller in practice than it is now, for example, and the generations preceding yours who had your privileges of time and education had read far more of them than you have. If someone believes that the phenomena you describe are the result of a collapse of educational discipline rather than "the chaos of the expanding world," how would you explain why your contrary view leads to more insight and stronger conclusions?