Top Banner
The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007
44

The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Jan 11, 2016

Download

Documents

Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and

Higher Education

University of Oregon

Library Faculty Meeting

February 1, 2007

Page 2: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

OUTLINE• Profile of the “Net Generation”• The next cohort: What can we expect in 4-5

years?• Reshaping library services for today’s

students• Implications for redesign of learning spaces• Questions & Discussion

Page 3: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

What is the Net generation, and what are their learning preferences?

Page 4: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Educating the Net Generation

Diana Oblinger

Vice President of EDUCAUSE

Page 5: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

• Born in or after 1982• Gravitate toward group activity• 8 out of 10 say “it’s cool to be smart”• Focused on grades and performance• Busy with extracurricular activities• Fascination with new technologies• Racially and ethnically diverse

Net Generation

Page 6: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

• By 21, average Net-Gen-er– 10,000 hours video games– 200,000 emails– 20,000 hours TV– 10,000 hours cell phone– Under 5,000 hours reading

• That is 1/10 the time reading as other media

Saturated with Media

Page 7: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

• Teams, peer-to-peer• Engagement & experience• Visual & kinesthetic• Demand for immediacy

Net Gen learning styles

Page 8: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Student in-class preferences

0

20

40

10

30

Limited IT

Moderate IT

No IT

Extensive IT

Online

Per

cen

tag

e

―Kvavik, 2004―Kvavik, 2004

Student Preferences for levels of instructional technology

Page 9: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

• Make learning interactive and experiential • Consider peer-to-peer approaches• Utilize real-world applications• Emphasize information literacy in courses• Mix online and face-to-face• Encourage reflection• Create opportunities for synthesis • Use informal learning opportunities

What should Faculty Do

Page 10: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

“Today’s students are no longer the people our educational system was designed to teach.”

- Marc Prensky, 2001

Page 11: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

What can we expect in the next cohort of

students?

Page 12: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Next Generation• Kids approx. 15 years old today• Continuation of the net generation only

with increasing intensity.• Multi-taskers• Hands on, experiential• Prefer media rich content• Gadget and Technology rich• Savvy Consumers• Expect quick results• Think technology is essential to education

Page 13: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Multitasking• Always doing many things

• Short attention spans

• Developed “hypertext minds”

Page 14: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Hands On, Experiential

• Learn better by discovery• Doing things much more interesting than

listening about things• Like working in groups and expect group

work in courses• Like interactive exchange• Never read instructions

Page 15: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Prefer Media Rich Content

• Media saturation results in intuitive visual preference

• High levels of competency in visual / spatial (for example, gaming)

• Focus on visual and media comes at some expense in text literacy

Page 16: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Gadgets and Technology

• Technology is always there and they expect it work

• Ubiquitous access to multiple technologies does NOT translate to being an expert user

• Challenging for IT support organizations – kids have no interest in understanding how things work, they just want them to work

• Can we leverage these gadgets?

Page 17: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Savvy Consumers

• Expect to be able to choose what kind of education they buy as well as what, where and how they learn

• Want choices in most things

• Want to be able to customize everything.

Page 18: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Impatient

• Want what they want right now

• Part of the whole issue of multitasking

• High demands on service and support organizations

Page 19: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Technology is Essential• It is such an important part of our world and

embedded in our society, must know how to use it.

• It is helpful and makes things faster• Helps poor students• Makes learning about anything anytime

easier• To connect with friends

Page 20: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Some Debate• Naomi Baron, linguistics professor at American

University thinks parents and educators have created this monster by pandering to them

“at some point, what we are doing is killing higher education”

• Michael Gorman, Dean of Library services at CSU Fresno and former President of ALA

“this sort of end-of-history approach is dubious to me, this idea that we have reached a watershed and we have to throw everything aside and come in with new approaches”

Page 21: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

More Debate• Robert Johnson, VP for Information Services at

Rhodes College“As huge university libraries push aside their books, they are sending a terrible message to their students”.

• Dale Smith, Director of Network Services at the University of Oregon

“Don’t we have some responsibility to produce literate graduates?”

Page 22: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

How Does Generational Change Shape Library and Information

Services?

Page 23: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Roles of Librarians & Information Professionals

• Observing Changes: Libraries and information services have a front-row seat for seeing students’ learning behaviors

• Faculty Response: “We mold how they learn”• The Problem for Us: How do we balance

expectations of faculty and students?

Richard Sweeney,University LibrarianNew Jersey Institute of Technology

Page 24: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Providing Information Resources

Observations• Students are awash

in information• The library’s

information is harder to get to than the results of a Google search

Solution?• Work with faculty and

through the curriculum to convey to students that there are different kinds of information, some more valuable than others

Page 25: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Organizing Information Resources

Observations• Obstacles to getting

information seem inexplicable to students

• Anything less than full-scale digitization is less than impressive

Solutions?• Use technology to

break down obstacles whenever possible

• Indoctrinate students to the romance of dusty volumes

Page 26: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Teaching about Information Resources

Observations• Role of librarians unclear

to students• Librarians may not be

where the students are, when the students are

• Students may prefer figuring things out themselves, or with peers

Solutions?• Participate in the

curriculum and campus life

• Find ways to be where the students are

• Explore peer-to-peer instructional service models

Page 27: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Enabling Students and Faculty to Use Information Resources

Observations• Students will use

technology for its own sake; not so faculty

• Copying, reusing, and sharing information is easy -- especially if it’s digital. But is it legal?

Solutions?• Technology must

enhance the learning experience

• Students and faculty must have a “safe space” for using information

Page 28: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

How Would We Like for NetGens to Think of the Library?

• As a source of valuable and readily available information

• As a place equipped for learning and study -- both physical and virtual

• As a haven for a community of learners

Page 29: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

How should we redesign learning spaces?

Page 30: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

What are Learning Spaces?

• No longer a traditional classroom or strictly defined environment

• Can be anywhere that people learn – physical or virtual, classroom or chat room, on-campus or off-campus

• Linked to research on “Information Grounds” -- social settings in which people share everyday information while attending to a focal activity. (Karen Fisher, UW iSchool)

Page 31: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Informal Spaces

• Students spend more time out of class than in it

• Learning occurs through conversations, web surfing, social interactions

• Mingle, share, make connections

• Spontaneous interactions

Page 32: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

NetGens

• Used to dealing with simultaneous inputs while working

• Different values when it comes to learning

• “Let’s build it” approach• Collaborative, social creatures• Almost symbiotic relationship with IT

Page 33: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Technology: The Enabler

• Technology is a tool

• Ubiquitous access to technology

• Laptops, tablets, cell phones, iPods, digital cameras, PDAs, etc.- Devices continue to get smaller,

functionality becomes integrated

• Connected any time, any place

Page 34: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Learning Theory and Styles• Shift from memorization to

understanding

• Constructivist theory:– Contextual– Active– Social

• Problem-based

Page 35: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

NetGen Learning Preferences• Teams

• Peer-to-peer

• Engagement and experience

• Visual and kinesthetic

• Service learning

Page 36: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Learning Activities

• Collaborative• Cooperative• Supportive• Active• Multiple learning paths• Multiple learning resources

Page 37: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Software and Tools• IM, chat• Real-time polling devices• Screen sharing software• Online quizzes and tutorials• Media files• Discussion boards• E-portfolios• Web-based file sharing• Productivity, analysis, and presentation

software

Page 38: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Facilities and Equipment• Café and wireless are almost a given• Comfortable, inviting environment• Natural lighting• Flexible seating• Tables with space for all the “stuff”• Accessible, adaptable, integrated facilities

Page 39: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Facilities and Equipment, cont.

• Flexible IT infrastructure and complete IT integration

• Shared screens: smartboards, projectors, LCD panels

• Printing• Digital media workstations• Multiple platforms, devices

Page 40: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Prediction is very difficult,

especially of the future.-Niels Bohr

Page 41: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Ideas for Questions & Discussion

• Where can we find opportunities for collaboration -- between libraries; between libraries & other academic support partners?

•  How do we make sure we support faculty who want to transition their teaching and curriculum?

•Does having an educated populace benefit society or is a college education a private good for the individual?

Page 42: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Questions & Discussion, continued

•We as service and support organizations have built arcane mechanisms that force the student and faculty to understand history and organizational structure to find help.  What can we do about that?

Page 43: The “Net Generation:” Implications for Libraries and Higher Education University of Oregon Library Faculty Meeting February 1, 2007.

Ideas for Questions & Discussion, continued

• The Net and Next Generation kids are used to customization, from cell phone covers, to the look and feel of the PC desktop, to web sites.   What should we do to provide a customizable college experience?