We Still Need to Change

One point I don't make frequently enough is that I am not anti-technology. My critique of the net gen, digital native discourse is not meant to support the status quo but rather it is motivated by a desire to ensure that our decisions are based on evidence, not hype. We do need to change and adapt to the new technologies but we need to be sure we are making appropriate changes and not changes that are driven by a naïve view of who our learners are and what their needs are.

Anoush and Littlejohn make the case for change:

"As students look to their lecturers for clues as to how to use technology tools for learning, many lecturers are unaware of the potential of these tools, since they themselves are not using emergent technologies for their own learning and work. While some lecturers recognise the educational value of some emergent technologies, others view these as ‘fads’. This situation could become exceedingly problematic as many social technologies such as blogs, wikis, and virtual worlds are progressively adopted by organisations, where employees are required to use them regularly for knowledge sharing and communication. This raises the question as to how well universities are preparing students for employment if they continue to dismiss these tools and more importantly the processes and philosophies of learning and collective knowledge creation underpinning these tools. " (pp. 22-23)

Net Gen Blog Generates Interest

We're now read in 32 countries and the message seems to be striking a chord with people.

Stephen Downes writes, "the title of the blog, Net-gen Nonsense, doesn't exactly endear itself to potential readers expecting a considered view. But the author's promise to 'attempt to place e-learning in a broad educational context [and] establish principle of consistency and contingency in theory' is at least worth a look." Gee, thanks Stephen. A bit confusing since that quote is from Mark Nichols who I quote in the blog... not me.

But Downes does usefully point out that Norm Friesen was taking a critical look at the net gen hype back in 2006: "Given the evidence, the matter of addressing the digital divide within the so-called net gen is at least as important (if not more so) than any imperative to blindly adapt to the technological orientation that is said to define them."

Our critical stance sits well with Janice Clarey who says, "I really do think there are many conversations about innovations in education in the edublogosphere that are not scrutinized to the extent they should be. One case study or interview is not a reliable indicator. Go ahead and challenge when you’re wondering…’oh yeah, who says?’ or ‘got any proof on that?’"

Millenial Mythology

Here's an interesting presentation from the University of Guelph that throws more cold water on the millenial hype:

Millenial Mythology: Putting Suppositions to the Test in the Academic Library

What I like about this is they have actually conducted some research into how learners at the U of Guelph are using information and communication technologies (ICTs).

Contradictions in Oblinger & Oblinger

Chapter 7 of the Educating the Net Generation by Diana C. Oblinger & James. L. Oblinger presents some very interesting results from a major survey of undergrad students in the US (4,374 students from 13 institutions in five states - 2004).

Surprisingly though, the results more or less contradict the major themes of the book: the notion that this generation has "unprecendented levels of skills with information technology; that they take technology for granted, that they want more of it in their classes, that postsecondary institutions aren't responding fast enough to meet their needs.

Well, here's what this survey found:

- these students have basic office suite skills and can use email and surf the Internet with ease but "moving beyond basic activities is problematic. It appears they do not recognize the enhanced functionality of the applications they own and use." (p. 7.7)

- they only have a moderate preference for the use of technology in their classes

- there is a need for "significant further training in the use of information technology in support of learning and problem-solving skills." (p. 7.17)

- "students appear to be slower developing adequate skills in using information technology in support of their academic activities which limits technology's current value to the instititution." (p. 7.17)

The study concludes that the effects of learning technology are "largely in the convenience of postsecondary teaching and learning and do not yet constitute a 'learning revolution'" (p. 7.18)