scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal Article

Boomers, Gen-Xers, and Millennials: Understanding the "New Students.".

01 Jan 2003-Educational Review-Vol. 38, Iss: 4
TL;DR: For instance, this paper found that the learning styles, attitudes, and approaches of high school students differ from those of twenty-twenty-year-old college students, and that the styles and attitudes of adult learners differ yet again.
Abstract: STUDENTS n essential component of facilitating learning is understanding learners. The learning styles, attitudes, and approaches of high school students differ from those of eighteento twenty-twoyear-old college students. The styles, attitudes, and approaches of adult learners differ yet again. How well do college and university faculty, administrators, and staff understand these differences? How often do they take the differences into account when designing programs or courses? Boomers Gen-Xers Millennials

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

A
37
July/August 2003
EDUCAUSE review
By Diana Oblinger
Diana Oblinger is the Executive Director of Higher Education for
Microsoft Corporation. She has served as a Senior Fellow for the
EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research (ECAR) as well as Vice-
President and Chief Information Officer for the University of North
Carolina.
NEW
&
UNDERSTANDING THE
STUDENTS
n essential component of facilitating
learning is understanding learners.
The learning styles, attitudes, and ap-
proaches of high school students differ
from those of eighteen- to twenty-two-
year-old college students. The styles, atti-
tudes, and approaches of adult learners
differ yet again. How well do college and
university faculty, administrators, and staff
understand these differences? How often
do they take the differences into account
when designing programs or courses?
Boomers
Gen-Xers
Millennials
EDUCAUSE review
July/August 2003
36
© 2003 Diana Oblinger
Wendy Ashton/Getty
David Lees/Getty
Marc Romanelli/Getty

What do we know about todays “new
students”? Perhaps most obviously, we
know that these students have been
heavily influenced by information tech-
nology. The “new” student may be a
seventeen-year-old high school student
(a “Millennial”) who uses instant mes-
saging to contact peers and teachers. The
“new” student may be a twenty-six-year-
old college student (a “Gen-X”) whose
expectations of customer service are
radically different from those of previ-
ous generations. Or the “new” student
may be a forty-year-old working mother
(a “Baby Boomer”) who is completing a
degree via e-learning so that she can
balance work and family responsibili-
ties. One of the greatest challenges fac-
ing American higher education is how
to deal with such a variety of “new”
students.
Changes in the Student Population
Current higher education administrators,
as well as many faculty and staff, represent
a different generation from the majority of
the student population. With an average
faculty age of over fifty, many decision-
makers in higher education graduated in
the 1970s.
1
The experiences of a 1970s
generation of students are likely to be
quite different from those of the current
student body. A comparison of student
data from 1970 and 1999 illustrates some
of these differences (see Table 1).
2
It is no surprise that enrollment has
increased in the last thirty years. The
data illustrate that enrollment growth in
two-year institutions has exceeded the
pace of growth in four-year colleges and
universities. There are other trends
worth noting: more students attend col-
lege part-time than in previous years; a
higher proportion of students are
women; and more students are over age
twenty-five.
The National Center for Education
Statistics (NCES) has reported that three-
quarters of all undergraduates are “non-
traditional.
3
Nontraditional students are
defined as having one or more of the fol-
lowing characteristics:
Delayed enrollment, and did not enter
postsecondary education in the same
year that he or she graduated from
high school
Attend part-time, for all or part of the
academic year
Work full-time, thirty-five hours or
more, while enrolled
Are financially independent, as defined by
financial aid
Have dependents, other than a spouse,
including children or others
Are single parents, having one or more
dependent children
Lack a high school diploma
Many of these characteristics were not
measured in earlier studies, presumably
because they were relatively rare. The im-
plication is that campus populations
today are quite different from those in the
days when college and university
decision-makers were students.
Not only is the profile of todays stu-
dent body different, but the life experi-
ences that shaped todays students are
quite different from those of previous eras.
Each generation is defined by its life expe-
riences, giving rise to different attitudes,
beliefs, and sensitivities. The “Depression
generation” experienced World War II and
the Cold War. “Baby Boomers” grew up
with the space race, the civil rights move-
ment, Vietnam, and Watergate. “Genera-
tion X” saw the fall of the Berlin Wall and
the emergence of AIDS and the Web. Con-
sider some of the other defining experi-
ences of Generation X students:
The Chinese government killed pro-
testers in Tiananmen Square.
The U.S. stock market crashed.
The Chernobyl nuclear accident
occurred.
The Exxon Valdez caused an oil spill.
The Challenger space shuttle exploded.
The first computer disk was sold.
4
But Gen-Xers do not necessarily rep-
resent current college and university stu-
dents. A new group is entering higher
education—a group called the “Millennial
generation.” The Millennials were born in
or after the year 1982. Millennials exhibit
different characteristics from those of sib-
lings just a few years older. Millennials
gravitate toward group activity;
identify with their parents’ values and
feel close to their parents;
spend more time doing homework and
housework and less time watching TV;
believe “it’s cool to be smart”;
are fascinated by new technologies;
are racially and ethnically diverse; and
often (one in five) have at least one im-
migrant parent.
When asked about problems facing their
generation, many Millennials respond
that the biggest one is the poor example
that adults set for kids.
5
Along with differences in attitudes,
Millennials exhibit distinct learning
styles. For example, their learning prefer-
ences tend toward teamwork, experien-
tial activities, structure, and the use of
technology. Their strengths include
multitasking, goal orientation, positive at-
titudes, and a collaborative style.
6
View of Technology
Some general trends are emerging about
how learners view technology. Not sur-
prisingly, technology is assumed to be a
natural part of the environment. The
younger the age group, the higher is the
percentage who use the Internet for
school, work, and leisure. This comfort
with technology often leads to a percep-
tion that the use of technology in schools
is inadequate.
38
EDUCAUSE review
July/August 2003
Table 1. Student Data in 1970 and 1999
1970 19 9 9
Enrollment 7.4 12.7
million million
Two-year enrollment 31% 44%
Attend part-time 28% 39%
Women 42% 56%
Older than age
twenty-five 28% 39%
Nontraditional N/A 73%
Have dependents N/A 27%
Employed N/A 80%
Source: National Center for Education Statistics,
“The Condition of Education 2002”
More students attend college part-time than
in previous years; a higher proportion of
students are women; and more students are
over age twenty-five.

In a study of how those age twelve to
seventeen use the Web, researchers
found that 94 percent use the Internet for
school research and that 78 percent be-
lieve the Internet helps them with
schoolwork. Among teens, instant mes-
saging and e-mail seem to be natural
communication and socialization mech-
anisms: 70 percent use instant messaging
to keep in touch; 41 percent use e-mail
and instant messaging to contact teachers
or schoolmates about classwork. An even
higher percentage (81 percent) use e-mail
to stay in touch with friends and relatives.
In fact, a slight majority (56 percent) pre-
fer the Internet to the telephone.
7
Perhaps because of the contrast be-
tween their comfort with technology and
the technology comfort level of teachers,
many students find the use of technology
in schools to be disappointing. Students
consider themselves more Internet-savvy
than their teachers. They indicate that
their teachers’ use of technology is unin-
spiring. Students report seeing better
ways to use technology than do their
teachers. They also state that administra-
tive restrictions, older equipment, and/or
filtering software inhibit their in-school
use of technology. Their greatest use of
technology is outside of school.
8
A few years their senior, today’s col-
lege and university students were born in
the years immediately following the in-
troduction of the PC. Among this group,
20 percent began using computers be-
tween the ages of five and eight. Virtually
all students were using computers by the
time they were sixteen to eighteen years
of age.
9
Another measure of the ubiquity
of technology to current college and uni-
versity students is the percentage who
own computers. In a recent survey, 84
percent reported owning their own com-
puter, with 25 percent owning more than
one computer. Twenty-eight percent
own a notebook computer. And in 2003,
more students plan to buy a notebook (47
percent) than a desktop (43 percent). Stu-
dents spend an average of eleven hours
per week online. Other indicators of
their comfort with technology include
the percentage who make online pur-
chases (54 percent, with $1.6 billion in
sales) and the percentage who bank on-
line (43 percent).
10
When asked about the impact of the
Internet on their college experience, 79
percent said the Internet has had a posi-
tive influence: 60 percent believe the In-
ternet has improved their relationships
with classmates; 56 percent believe it has
improved their relationships with profes-
sors. Contrary to fears expressed by some
in academia, students are not using e-
mail as their sole mode of communica-
tion. Only 19 percent communicate with
professors more by e-mail than face-to-
face. However, 55 percent use e-mail to
arrange face-to-face meetings. They also
tend to use e-mail to clarify information:
75 percent use e-mail for explanation of
assignments. Even more (89 percent)
have received class announcements via e-
mail. In addition, students report that the
Internet allows them to express ideas that
they would not have voiced in class. Fi-
nally, 73 percent of students say they are
more likely to conduct research by using
the Internet than by going to the library.
11
When students were asked, two-thirds
39
July/August 2003
EDUCAUSE review

indicated that they know how to find valid
information from the Web. However, they
added that they realize the Web does not
meet all their information needs.
12
One way to describe these trends is the
emergence of an “information-age mind-
set.” The attitudes—and aptitudesof stu-
dents who have grown up with technol-
ogy (or who have spent significant
amounts of time with it) appear to differ
from those of students who rarely use
technology. Jason Frand has described
ten attributes of an information-age
mindset:
Computers aren’t technology. Students
have never known life without com-
puters and the Internet. To them the
computer is not a technology—it is an
assumed part of life.
The Internet is better than TV. In recent
years, the number of hours spent
watching TV has declined, being sup-
planted by time online. Reasons for
the change include interactivity and
the increased use of the Internet for
socializing.
Reality is no longer real. Those things that
appear real over the Internet may not
be. Digital images may have been al-
tered. E-mail sent from someone’s ad-
dress may not have come from that
person. And the content may or may
not be accurate.
Doing is more important than knowing.
Knowledge is no longer perceived to
be the ultimate goal, particularly in
light of the fact that the half-life of in-
formation is so short. Results and ac-
tions are considered more important
than the accumulation of facts.
Learning more closely resembles Nintendo
than logic. Nintendo symbolizes a trial-
and-error approach to solving prob-
lems; losing is the fastest way to master-
ing a game because losing represents
learning. This contrasts with previous
generations’ more logical, rule-based
approach to solving problems.
Multitasking is a way of life. Students
appear to be quite comfortable when
engaged in multiple activities simulta-
neously, such as listening to music,
sending instant messages, doing home-
work, and chatting on the phone. Multi-
tasking may also be a response to infor-
mation overload.
Typing is preferred to handwriting. Stu-
dents prefer typing to handwriting.
Many admit their handwriting is atro-
cious. Penmanship has been super-
seded by keyboarding skills.
Staying connected is essential. Students stay
in touch, via multiple devices, as they
move throughout the day. Cell phones,
PDAs, and computers ensure they re-
main connected anyplace and anytime.
As the network becomes more ubiqui-
tous, increasing numbers of students
participate in real-time dialogues from
anywhere using a variety of devices.
There is zero tolerance for delays. Having
grown up in a customer-service cul-
ture, todays students have a strong de-
mand for immediacy and little toler-
ance for delays. They expect that
services will be available 24x7 in a va-
riety of modes (Web, phone, in per-
son) and that responses will be quick.
Consumer and creator are blurring. In a
file-sharing, cut-and-paste world, the
40
EDUCAUSE review
July/August 2003

distinctions between creator, owner,
and consumer of information are fad-
ing. The operative assumption is often
that if something is digital, it is every-
one’s property.
13
Implications
What do the differing learning prefer-
ences and views of technology of the “new
students” mean for colleges and universi-
ties? There might be few implications if
students were passive consumers and did
not use their “purchasing power.” How-
ever, there are many indications that
students actively compare programs,
evaluate institutions based on the charac-
teristics they consider to be important,
and make choices. Beyond the tuition
provided by students, many institutions
actively seek out the “right” individuals to
be part of their student body in the belief
that the caliber of the student body in part
determines the quality of the institution.
As a result, colleges and universities may
find that understanding—and meeting the
expectations of—the “new students” is im-
portant to their competitiveness.
A number of current programs exem-
plify a good match between expectations
and services. A few examples will illus-
trate some of the options available to
those institutions that seek to modify
their programs to address the needs of the
“new students.
Elimination of Delays
In a 24x7, customer-service culture, de-
lays cause dissatisfaction and disengage-
ment. Institutions are finding ways to
eliminate delays in processes that range
from admission to academic support.
The University of North Carolina at
Greensboro utilizes online personal as-
sistants, automated e-mail responses, dy-
namically created Web portals, and cus-
tomized Web-mail to provide instant
responses to students. Through their
Virtual Information Station (http://
infostation.uncg.edu/), students can get an-
swers to a range of questions that often
begin with “How do I . . . ?” “Where do I . . . ?”
or “When do I . . . ?” The Web site covers
topics from admission to graduation. For
example, an online chat tool allows staff
to respond to Web-based queries in real
time. Prompt responses make a differ-
ence in the decision-making process of
prospective students.
14
At many institutions, financial aid is a
chronic source of dissatisfaction for stu-
dents. Confusion over the process, com-
plicated paperwork, and data-entry er-
rors cause delays and even rejections.
Compliance with federal guidelines fur-
ther complicates the situation. To provide
better service, the University of Phoenix,
with 152,000 students and more than 120
campuses, created the Financial Aid Pa-
perless Project (FAPP). Prospective stu-
dents can complete an online applica-
tion, then link to the Free Application for
Federal Student Aid Web site to obtain a
federal financial aid application, includ-
ing a master promissory note. A student
may then file the application online with
the lender of his or her choice. If the
lender participates in the universitys
FAPP project, the lenders system com-
municates with the FAPP computers at
the university and pulls data from the stu-
dent’s application for enrollment. The
lender uses the information to complete
the student’s master promissory note,
eliminating the need to rekey data and
ensuring that data is consistent across the
two applications. The university then re-
trieves the completed master promissory
note, enabling the university to validate
the information and process the applica-
tion. The student is informed almost im-
mediately that his or her application is
complete and has been received for pro-
cessing. The time to fill in and process an
application has also been cut by several
days, so students get faster responses to
their applications.
15
Customer Service
For today’s learners, customer service is
an expectation, not an exception. Yet it is
rare that students and institutions have
the same expectations for service.
At Athabasca University, service ex-
pectations are clearly spelled out on a
Web site (http://www.athabascau.ca/
misc/expect/) as well as in print material
provided to entering students. Whether
provided by the registrar, counseling ser-
vice, academic support, or library, each
service is accompanied by a standard as
well as a contact persons e-mail address
and phone number. This practice helps
set expectations for students as well as for
staff. How well units meet service expec-
tations is measured, as is also the level of
student satisfaction.
16
Adult learners bring customer-service
expectations to the institutions they at-
tend. In many cases, customer service is
more than a preference—it is a prerequi-
site to retention and effective learning.
One reason often cited by adult learners
for abandoning their studies is the lack of
timely support. As an institution focused
on serving adult learners, Rio Salado Col-
lege has adapted its approach to ensure
that learners have the services they need.
A “beep-a-tutor” program, available seven
days a week, guarantees students that tu-
tors will respond to their question within
one hour. With beepers, the tutors receive
questions no matter where they are.
Tw o other Rio Salado programs focus
on being sure the right person responds to
queries. Online students often seek help
from instructors when they encounter
problems, whether these are related to
technical issues or to the subject matter. To
ensure that instructors are not deluged
with technical questions—and to ensure
that students get the best responses—Rio
Salado created a technical help desk.
Staffed by noninstructional personnel, the
help desk is specifically tasked to help stu-
dents resolve technical issues.
Also, because instructors cannot be
online at all times, Rio Salado has an in-
structional help desk staffed by generalist
faculty who answer questions about the
logistics of a course at times when the
class instructor is not available. The in-
structional help desk personnel, avail-
able seven days a week, also provide e-
learning orientations to students and
serve as a liaison between the instructor
and the student. By reducing the number
of non-learning-related inquiries, this
service assists students who need imme-
diate answers and also maximizes the
amount of time an instructor can spend
on activities directly related to learning.
17
42
EDUCAUSE review
July/August 2003
For today’s learners, customer service is an
expectation, not an exception. Yet it is rare
that students and institutions have the same
expectations for service.

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is proposed that a more measured and disinterested approach is now required to investigate ‘digital natives’ and their implications for education and it is argued that rather than being empirical and theoretically informed, the debate can be likened to an academic form of a ‘moral panic’.
Abstract: The idea that a new generation of students is entering the education system has excited recent attention among educators and education commentators. Termed ‘digital natives’ or the ‘Net generation’, these young people are said to have been immersed in technology all their lives, imbuing them with sophisticated technical skills and learning preferences for which traditional education is unprepared. Grand claims are being made about the nature of this generational change and about the urgent necessity for educational reform in response. A sense of impending crisis pervades this debate. However, the actual situation is far from clear. In this paper, the authors draw on the fields of education and sociology to analyse the digital natives debate. The paper presents and questions the main claims made about digital natives and analyses the nature of the debate itself. We argue that rather than being empirically and theoretically informed, the debate can be likened to an academic form of a ‘moral panic’. We propose that a more measured and disinterested approach is now required to investigate ‘digital natives’ and their implications for education.

2,711 citations


Cites background from "Boomers, Gen-Xers, and Millennials:..."

  • ...Current students have been variously described as disappointed (Oblinger, 2003), dissatisfied (Levin & Arafeh, 2002), and disengaged (Prensky, 2005a)....

    [...]

Book
23 Jun 2005
TL;DR: This reading book is your chosen book to accompany you when in your free time, in your lonely, this kind of book can help to heal the lonely and get or add the inspirations to be more inoperative.
Abstract: The educating the net generation that we provide for you will be ultimate to give preference. This reading book is your chosen book to accompany you when in your free time, in your lonely. This kind of book can help you to heal the lonely and get or add the inspirations to be more inoperative. Yeah, book as the widow of the world can be very inspiring manners. As here, this book is also created by an inspiring author that can make influences of you to do more.

2,170 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors conducted a study with more than 2,000 incoming first-year Australian university students and found that many first year students are highly tech-savvy, however, when one moves beyond entrenched technologies and tools (e.g. computers, mobile phones, email), the patterns of access and use of a range of other technologies show considerable variation.
Abstract: This paper reports on a study conducted in 2006 with more than 2,000 incoming first-year Australian university students. Students were asked about their access to, use of and preferences for an array of established and emerging technologies and technology based tools. The results show that many first year students are highly tech-savvy. However, when one moves beyond entrenched technologies and tools (e.g. computers, mobile phones, email), the patterns of access and use of a range of other technologies show considerable variation. The findings are discussed in light of Prensky's (2001a) notions of the 'Digital Natives' and the implications for using technology to support teaching and learning in higher education.

1,175 citations


Cites background from "Boomers, Gen-Xers, and Millennials:..."

  • ...Prensky and other commentators (Oblinger, 2003; Frand, 2000) suggest that because of this disparity educators need to adjust their pedagogical models to suit the new kind of learner they are encountering in this new generation of students....

    [...]

  • ...The argument has changed little from that originally posed by Prensky: the digital culture in which the Digital Natives have grown up has influenced their preferences and skills in a number of key areas related to education (see Oblinger, 2003, 2006; Gros, 2003; Gibbons, 2007)....

    [...]

  • ...…access to information; have a low tolerance for lectures; prefer active rather than passive learning, and rely heavily on communications technologies to access information and to carry out social and professional interactions (Prensky 2001a, 2001b; Oblinger, 2003; Gros, 2003; Frand, 2000)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is found that the generation is not homogenous in its use and appreciation of new technologies and that there are significant variations amongst students that lie within the Net generation age band.
Abstract: This article reports key findings from the first phase of a research project investigating Net generation age students as they encounter e-learning at five universities in England. We take a critical view of the idea of a distinct generation which has been described using various terms including Net generation and Digital Natives and explore age related differences amongst first year university students. The article draws on evidence from a survey of first year undergraduates studying a range of pure and applied subjects. Overall we found a complex picture amongst first-year students with the sample population appearing to be a collection of minorities. These included a small minority that made little use of some technologies and larger minorities that made extensive use of new technologies. Often the use of new technology was in ways that did not fully correspond with the expectations that arise from the Net generation and Digital Natives theses. The article concludes that whilst there are strong age related variations amongst the sample it is far to simplistic to describe young first-year students born after 1983 as a single generation. The authors find that the generation is not homogenous in its use and appreciation of new technologies and that there are significant variations amongst students that lie within the Net generation age band.

840 citations


Cites background from "Boomers, Gen-Xers, and Millennials:..."

  • ...Oblinger & Oblinger put a precise date on the Millenials suggesting that they were born ‘in or after 1982’ (Oblinger 2003 p38) and that this generation ends in 1991 (Oblinger & Oblinger 2005 2.9)....

    [...]

References
More filters
01 Jan 2007
TL;DR: The first volume of the National Center for Education Statistics' annual statistical report on the condition of education in the United States for 1990 was published in 1990 as discussed by the authors, which includes text, tables, and charts/graphs for each CEI plus technical supporting data, supplemental information, data sources, and glossaries.
Abstract: This is the first of two volumes of the National Center for Education Statistics' annual statistical report on the condition of education in the United States for 1990. This volume addresses elementary and secondary education, while the second volume covers postsecondary education (PE). Condition of education indicators (CEIs)--key data that measure the health of education, monitor important developments, and show trends between 1970 and 1989 in education--are provided. This volume includes the text, tables, and charts/graphs for each CEI plus technical supporting data, supplemental information, data sources, and glossaries. Most CEIs examine relationships; show changes over time; compare subpopulations, regions, or states; or study traits of students from different backgrounds. For student progression and outcomes, context, and resources, 29 CEIs are provided. New CEIs in 1990 include hie . school (HS) drop-out rates, HS students' course-taking patterns, proportion of HS students who work while attending school, and eighth graders' attitudes about school climate. The document also provides disparate data on preprimary education, drop-outs and completions, achievement, students in the schools, and minorities. (RLC) *********************************************************************** * Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made * * from the original document. * ***********************************************************************

3,697 citations

15 Sep 2002
TL;DR: Use of the Internet is a part of college students’ daily routine, in part because they have grown up with computers, and has become a technology as ordinary as the telephone or television.
Abstract: Summary of Findings College students are early adopters and heavy users of the Internet College students are heavy users of the Internet compared to the general population. Use of the Internet is a part of college students’ daily routine, in part because they have grown up with computers. It is integrated into their daily communication habits and has become a technology as ordinary as the telephone or television. One-fifth (20%) of today’s college students began using computers between the ages of 5 and 8. By the time they were 16 to 18 years old all of today’s current college students had begun using computers – and the Internet was a commonplace in the world in which they lived. Eighty-six percent of college students have gone online, compared with 59% of the general population. College students are frequently looking for email, with 72% checking email at least once a day. About half (49%) first began using the Internet in college; half (47%) first began using it at home before they arrived at college. The great majority (85%) of college students own their own computer, and two-thirds (66%) use at least two email addresses. Seventy-eight percent of college Internet users say that at one time or another they have gone online just to browse for fun, compared to 64% of all Internet users. College Internet users are twice as likely to have ever downloaded music files when compared to all Internet users: 60% of college Internet users have done so compared to 28% of the overall population. College Internet users are twice as likely to use instant messaging on any given day compared to the average Internet user. On a typical day, 26% of college students use IM; 12% of other Internet users are using IM on an average day.

782 citations

01 Jan 2000
TL;DR: Jason L. Frand is Assistant Dean and Director, Computing and Information Services, and Adjunct Professor of Information Systems, Anderson School of Management, UCLA.
Abstract: 15 September/October 2000 M EDUCAUSE r e v i e w 14 EDUCAUSE r e v i e w M September/October 2000 Jason L Frand is Assistant Dean and Director, Computing and Information Services, and Adjunct Professor of Information Systems, Anderson School of Management, UCLA A Web discussion board to explore additional attributes of the information-age mindset has been set up at I N F O R M AT I O N A G E Mindset T h e

454 citations

Trending Questions (1)
How do boomers and gen z interact with each other in the home?

The paper does not provide information on how boomers and gen z interact with each other in the home.