Preparing Generation Z for the Teaching Profession
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Preparing Generation Z for the Teaching Profession Tim Carter Arkansas Tech University Generation Z, also known as the Homeland Generation, is the most recent generational cohort to enter the university setting. As with other generational cohorts, various shaping factors have impacted this group contributing to its unique and defining characteristics. When carefully considered, these characteristics may provide insight into how to meet the learning expectations of this generational cohort. Therefore, the purpose of the present paper is to examine the unique shaping factors, characteristics, and learning expectations of Generation Z and to provide recommendations concerning how colleges of education can leverage these aspects to better prepare these future education professionals. ver the past thirty years, the 1. Builder/Traditionalist/Wisdom emphasis upon generational Generation – mid to late-1920’s to O cohorts and their unique early to mid-1940’s characteristics has continued to expand. In 2. Baby Boomers/Boomer Generation – their seminal 1990’s work, Generations, early to mid-1940’s to early 1960’s William Strauss and Neil Howe proposed 3. Generation X – early to mid-1960’s that generational cohorts have each been to early 1980’s impacted by various shaping factors that 4. Millennial Generation – early 1980’s congeal a generation around common shared to late 1990’s experiences and themes. Based upon these 5. Generation Z – late 1990’s to mid- shaping factors, each generational cohort 2010’s (Elmore, 2017; Howe, 2014; enters the education environment, the work Howe & Strauss, 2000). force, and the business marketing According to Strauss and Howe environment with diverse and unique (1997), generational cohorts are fairly perspectives. In their efforts to describe predictable in how they progress within the different generations in their seminal work, culture. These researchers suggest that Strauss and Howe conducted extensive self- groups do not simply “add-on” the report survey and historical research in an characteristics of the generation before it. attempt to determine these primary Instead, various shaping factors impact characteristics for each generational cohort, groups so that generational changes ebb and the values shared, and the experiences that flow based on what is occurring within a were most influential to particular groups. particular culture. In fact, if particular aspects Although not in exact agreement on are missing in one generation (e.g., lack of the bracket dates of respective generations, parenting, lack of structure, lack of financial most generational researchers view a security, etc.), this missing element may be generation as lasting for a period of one of strong points of emphasis within the approximately 15-20 years. Generational next generation. This is particularly true researchers typically suggest the following when these aspects have been lacking in the dates for the last five generational cohorts. generation’s formative years and into young adulthood. Although it is never advisable to SRATE Journal Winter 2018/Volume 27(1) 1 create “cookie cutter” stereotypes of value of a college education is strong among generational cohorts, examining general this group as is the belief that a college trends can prove to be beneficial. education is very cost prohibitive. Many of Therefore, a number of researchers, these members suggest they value education marketers, and educators have sought to but also note a caution to the degree to which consider these different generational cohort they may be able to afford this pursuit. characteristics in order to better understand In addition, Generation X members and/or educate respective generations. Of the are the ones who have primarily parented the different generational cohorts, the most members of Generation Z. As such, studied has been the Millennial Generation. Generation Z tends to be more financially With the advent of the digital age and conservative, pragmatic, and would prefer to increased Internet access in the early 1990’s, deal with root causes rather than symptoms attempts to conceptualize this generation of issues, which mirrors characteristics of accelerated rapidly with much detailed Generation X. Along with these features, information supplied (e.g., Carter, 2008; Generation Z has indicated a desire to be Chronicle of Higher Education, 2007; Howe involved with transformational rather than & Strauss, 2000, Lancaster & Stillman, 2002; transactional activities in their world. In other Oblinger, 2003; Raines, 2002). words, they would rather have a career than The recent generational emphasis has engenders transformation in the culture than now begun to shift to what generational a career that simply provides them with researchers have termed Generation Z or the financial prosperity. Likewise, Generation Z Homeland Generation. Here, the term has received realistic rather than idealistic Generation Z will be used since it appears to parenting in a post- 9/11 world. They have be the most popular moniker of this group. learned that collective security at times is The earliest members of this cohort are now more pressing than individual rights and in their latter years of secondary school and privileges, and they have learned that in their initial years of college. Colleges of terrorism and volatility are ever present education have recently begun to encounter (Elmore, 2017; Howe, 2014). Such this new generation. Therefore, it is experiences have further demonstrated the important to understand their characteristics need for addressing root causes of issues and sooner than later as colleges of education will a need for transformational impact. be attempting to prepare these students for Further and not surprisingly, as the teaching profession in which they will children of Generation X primarily, initially be teaching others of their same Generation Z is more financially generational cohort. conservative than their Millennial Generation Based upon the initial findings related counterparts. According to Seemiller and to this very large cohort (one of the largest if Grace (2016) and Howe (2014), these not the largest cohort in history), several students have a penchant for entrepreneurial characteristics have been observed. Such activity particularly as they have seen a characteristics include an unfavorable view number of individuals in the latter part of the of risk-taking behavior, a family composition Millennial Generation and within Generation that is the most ethnically-diverse in the Z do well in finding ways to make money history of the United States, and a greater turn through YouTube, mobile app creations, and towards tradition (both towards religion and other technological and practical efforts. education) (Seemiller & Grace, 2016). This group also tends to have a self- Seemiller and Grace note that a belief in the reliant attitude and values personal face-to- SRATE Journal Winter 2018/Volume 27(1) 2 face interactions. They are more cautious Within social media applications, with their use of social media after watching Facebook remains the first choice in digital the previous generation endanger themselves interactions (Statcounter, 2017). However, and their future prospects through publishing according to various researchers, Generation sometimes inappropriate or questionable Z seems to be moving away from Facebook content on social media. They are apt to use and similar digital recording tools and further media tools in which information can be into social media tools that allow greater quickly deleted, and they are much more interaction privacy, non-permanent storage likely than the Millennial Generation of images and information, and where members to create “fake” identities when personal information can be guarded more using certain social media tools that are then carefully (Elmore, 2017; Seemiller & Grace subsequently shared solely with close peers 2016). They have seen the previous (Seemiller & Grace, 2016). generation harmed by the open sharing of Not surprisingly, in the digital age, personal information on social media the use of mobile technologies is of particular platforms, and they have responded emphasis among Generation Z members. For accordingly. This fits well with their reported example, Statcounter (2016) notes that adverse reaction to risk-taking behavior. mobile and tablet formats outpaced desktop Due to societal events, parental formats in worldwide usage of the Internet approaches experienced, changes in for the first time in 2016. From a practical communication formats, and observations of perspective, this means the Generation Z the current global environment, the members cohort is accustomed to using mobile and of Generation Z have been at least somewhat tablet formats as the primary tools to access “shaped” as a cohort by these factors. As and interact with information provided noted by educational experts such as through the Internet. Moreover, just as the Danielson (2007), Eggen and Kauchak Millennial Generation used the cell phone as (2015), Vygotsky (1978), and others, it is a text messaging tool as its primary purpose essential that educators understand this during their formative years (Carter, 2008), cohort’s background experiences, shared Generation Z has been engaged in extensive understandings, and previous learning in use of wireless technology applications order to educate them more effectively. In the (apps), non-verbal symbolic communication case of the Generation Z cohort, all members (e.g.,