Gen Y, those in their twenties now, and all those who follow are born of bits and bytes. They hardly read. They watch lots of television, watch movies on the Internet, have made YouTube their favorite destination, and probably play some sort of video game.
This generation is the one that will redefine learning. As I travel around the world I see cheap cyber cafés where everyone is on the Internet and all the backpacker hotels offer free or very cheap Internet access. But my four or five star business hotel rarely has wireless Internet and always charges way too much. I wrote this in a fancy New Zealand hotel room where they advertise typing and fax services available in the business center, but require a special phone call to activate the Internet service in the room.
Only Baby Boomers and Gen X would tolerate that. Gen Y does everything virtually and has no idea where to buy a postage stamp. They communicate in real time, send out instant messages to ask for help, learn from each other informally over the Internet and, in this behavior, they are defining what learning will look like.
I doubt it will ultimately look the way we think learning will – as something packaged and sold over the Internet. Today’s e-learning is little more than repackaged classroom. Classroom in a box, as one of these youngsters told me. The idea of a structure, a formal design to learning is increasingly foreign. Many of them ask me: “How does anyone know what I want or need to know or how I want to learn something?” They say, “Why should I follow your logic in acquiring this bit of knowledge?” And, I really haven’t got a good answer for them.
I doubt future learning, at least the stuff that will be successful, will even come in packages. Learners will assemble courses on the fly as the software interprets and suggests alternatives. And, the learning experiences will be much more video-based and game-associated than we can even imagine. Children will learn by experimenting and by being challenged to achieve a level of proficiency. The ability to perform will be the basis of further challenges and growth. Games probably have the right idea and teach more than we think. Steven Johnson in his book “Everything Bad is Good For You” provides evidence that IQs have risen as a result of games and online activities and that even watching television today is more complex and multi layered than ever. This requires greater attention spans, better concentration and the ability to hold several plot elements in your mind at the same time.
If you have watched a teenager play a video game you will see this in an embryonic form. When they sit down to play for the first time they do not read the instruction booklet. In fact, few games even have them. Instead they start to play, interacting almost immediately with the characters and identifying with certain ones. Enough standards already exist that knowing basic key clicks and mouse movements is second nature or a quick pop-up guide provides the necessary and only the essential moves.
Most of these games require the player to master an increasingly difficult series of challenges. They have to move with speed and agility and they have to be very clever. Each level of mastery is more and more difficult and you cannot move on until you have completely mastered the lesser level.
This, to me, defines the way learning will move. The learner is in the center of the action and is completely responsible for the outcomes, not a teacher or counselor. There are many branches that can be explored, and many of these games have multiple possible endings. These also combine a challenge with fun.
Many games can be played against another player as well. The network capabilities of games are just starting to be explored, but they will push the envelope and make location unimportant. Players on different continents can play simultaneously and the video/action nature of these games make language irrelevant.
What lessons may this hold for the world of formal learning? What will be the future direction of a failing public education system and universities that cannot change fast enough?
Jay Cross, writer and educator, of Internettime.com and Clark Quinn, game designer, simulation expert, and cyber learning guru at Learnlets.com offer many insights into this emerging world.
{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }
I think you’re on to something, Kevin. I just have to contrast myself (57) with my son (27). I always look for the manual first, while he tends to plunge in and learns by doing. His lifelong involvement with computer games was, at times, an irritant to his parents, but programming is how he makes his living now. He does like to read books, though.
[Reply]
@Dave Ferguson
I agree that Gen Y is a gross generality. But as a concept it captures the essence of what is changing – the move away from classrooms and books to a much more virtual space. For sure, older Gen Y members are less likley to embrace virtual, just as the youngest of the group are already learning virtually everyday at school and at home.
And no one is being equipped to learn well -virtually or in any other way. I am convinced that our traditional educational system no longer works and we are in the beginning of discovery as to how to change it. The smartest have already seen that self-learning, the Internet, discovery and travel will be the platforms of whatever emerges.
Boys are shunning higher education in record numbers and 2 out 3 college degrees are going to women. Many guys, perhaps being more entrepreneurial or just “stupidly brave,” are trying other ways to learn and make a living. Time will provide the verdict.
[Reply]
I don’t dispute the notion that many people in their 20s connect and interact online almost reflexively, the way most experienced drivers maneuver from Point A to Points B, C, K, and Q without having to concentrate on how to steer, how to brake, how to interpret road signs.
I do think, though, that to put all people in their 20s in this category–even just those in first-world countries–is a wild oversimplification. It’s like saying “men prefer steak” or “baby boomers treasure Woodstock.”
I don’t know the situation in Australia. I do know that the U.S. Census Bureau in 2008 counted some 49.4 million Americans aged 18 through 29 (out of a total population of 303 million). If you accept 18 – 29 as close enough to your Gen Y bracket, here’s a little more detail about their level of formal education:
Of Americans aged 18 – 24, 49% had a high school education or less.
For ages 25 – 29, 40% had a high school education or less.
That’s more than 22,000,000 people — close to 44% of the U.S. Gen Y population. Mmany of them probably aren’t at cyber cafes or backpacker hotels.
Certainly many of them have mobile phones; they text and play video games.
I can’t help feeling, though, that when people toss around generalities about Gen Y, they’re ignoring nearly half the people in that group.
I do agree that the world of formal learning hasn’t served many of these people well. But this chunk of the U.S. population will likely be around for the next 50 years. I’m not sure they’re well equipped to informally learn their way out of their current situations.
[Reply]
Kevin, thanks for the mention. I think games are the model for future learning not because the kids expect it, but because it’s better learning design. That is: problem-based, exploratory, and carefully graduated (they can play without reading manuals because game designers spend a lot of effort building in the learning, cf characters that ‘mentor’ you or tutorials built in.
All the generational stuff is, I think, misleading, because it focuses on age differences, not on what unites us in making the best learning. But, like learning styles, it helps us if we use it to open our eyes to possibilities we might miss otherwise.
I think it might be packaged and sold over the internet (or, more accurately, ubiquitously across mobile devices, laptops, etc), but definitely a challenging, meaningful, engaging experience, NOT a knowledge dump.
[Reply]