This article was a very interesting read for me. I am part
of the 'Net Gen' and found much of what Tapscott said to be true on a personal
level, especially concerning customization, scrutiny, speed, innovation and entertainment.
I did have some questions about what was posted however,
especially considering that this book was inspired by a large research project
that was privately funded. The article is definitely written to be used by
corporations as opposed to learners (though much is applicable). While we are
in the business of education, characteristics of students should not only
dictate how we teach them. While it may be useful to engage our students, they
still need to learn the basics, before we ask them to collaborate, for example.
I think we also must remember these are trends seen in
groups of people and not how all people in the Net Gen operate. For example, I
have been teaching for 5 years (I am 27) and this has been my only career. Most
of my friends have only worked at one other job. When discussing freedom, Tapscott
says "high performers are on their fifth job by the time they are 27"
(page 74). While I agree that many of my friends were not as committed to their
first job, I think many people are just happy to be employed. This could be a
result of the current economy, but this point seems a bit exaggerated (or
perhaps we are not considered 'high performers').
While on a personal level, I would like to think the Net Gen
is more tolerant and wise (has more integrity) than previous generations, I am
not sure that they statistics Tapscott uses on page 85 displaying 'Youth Risk
Behaviours' is adequate evidence of being wiser. I think this can be attributed
to more knowledge yes, but also better parenting and perhaps social
acceptances. I think that the Mothers against Drunk Driving (MADD) commercials
and all those sex education classes that we participated in lead to some of
those statistics. Were the Baby Boomers considered more tolerant and wiser than
their parents? Perhaps this is just a reality of each new generation.
I liked what Tapscott said about collaboration. On page 91,
Tapscott said, "The new collaboration is not traditional teamwork at all.
The difference today is that individual efforts can be harnessed on a large
scale to achieve collective outcomes". As teachers, we have been told that
we cannot evaluate group work, there has to be an individual component to evaluate. Often,
in my classrooms, maturity is an issue with students. If not all students are
equally invested or can see that their lack of effort creates more work for
their peers, then group work can really flop. Perhaps, as educators, we need to
rethink how we approach group work? I would like to think we collaborate with
our colleagues on a daily basis, so why can't our students? Perhaps we need to
shift our focus from the assignments where students can copy each other and
move towards authentic problem solving?
Tapscott, Donald. (2009). Characteristics of Generation: The
Eight Net Gen Norms. In Grown Up Digital
(pages 73 – 96). New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Kelsey,
ReplyDeleteThe more I reflect on and research this topic, the more complicated it becomes, and the more convinced I become that it is not something that can be adequately or fairly addressed through a series of blog posts; however, I will do my best to respond appropriately.
For the benefit of anyone reading this who may not be aware, you and I come from different generations. Because of that, it is natural that we will have different perspectives and responses to Tapscott's reading.
With respect to your post, your point that "While we are in the business of education, characteristics of students should not only dictate how we teach them." is supported by academics with an interest in the Net Gen, including Naomi Baron (http://www.american.edu/cas/faculty/nbaron.cfm).
I found it interesting that you suggest your lack of job-hopping might be that "perhaps we are not considered high performers." If you, as a university-educated Net Gener with a B.Ed. degree is not a high-performer, then who is? Perhaps it is not so much high-performers who job-hop, but those with cushy safety-nets? I think your comment about the effect of the economic downturn of 2008 on Net Gens job-hopping is likely very true, and would also partly explain why previous generations, who were only one or two generations removed from The Great Depression and WWII, were less likely to job-hop. (Although the reasons for employees' job choices over the past several decades are more complicated than simple economic forces.)
One comment with which I am struggling is your desire "to think that the Net Gen is more tolerant and wise (has more integrity) than previous generations." It sounds like you see wisdom and integrity as synonymous. Is that the case? I would argue that the Net Gen is very knowledgeable, but that is not the same as wise, and, in my understanding, is unrelated to integrity.
Related to the (lack of) integrity issue and the Net Gen, I really like your suggestion in the last sentence that "Perhaps we need to shift our focus from the assignments where students can copy each other and move towards authentic problem solving." As the old idiom says, that would "kill two birds with one stone."
Thanks for an interesting read. :-)
Enjoyed reading your response to the article Kelsey,
ReplyDeleteI find myself at the fringe of the Net Gen (I'm 30) and like you did see a great deal of myself in Tapscott's description.
In regards to his thoughts of Freedom and you, you just may be the exception to the generalization. I do not believe that Tapscott believes these characteristics of the Net Gen are strict rules...they apply to some and not others and to varying degrees. We may be a Net Gener that loves collaboration and customization and shuns at the Freedom (can be viewed as 'flakey").
These are traits outlined by Tapscott are of a unique generation (which we happen to belong to) that has been raised by technology. I suspect we are examining them a little too closely.