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 Ocohorts 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., emojis), and wireless access on a global of this group will not share identical scale. This increased use of mobile characteristics, but there are some general technologies will likely proliferate the characteristics, as aforementioned, that networking capabilities of this generation would be useful to consider during their across previously impassable global preparation as future educators. In boundaries (e.g., GSMA Intelligence, 2017). conjunction with founding educator practice Generation Z uses such tools while securely within educational theory, continuing to use text messaging extensively generational research can provide a useful with the added and extended graphic supplement in understanding and more elements. In fact, whole conversations can effectively preparing future teachers from the now occur via emojis in social interactive Generation Z cohort entering the colleges of platforms. This current generation is capable education across the United States. of communicating even more rapidly with Contingent upon this premise, proposed are their peers than previous generations with four initial considerations that may be of these new developments in technology. particular benefit when teaching this group.

SRATE Journal Winter 2018/Volume 27(1) 3 With the continuing upward trend of Use of Mobile Technologies mobile computing purchases in the United States’ public school classroom; particularly As noted previously, the use of involving Google Chromebooks, colleges of mobile and tablet formats has become a education must consider how we are common experience of Generation Z preparing our future teachers for this students. They have used these tools as the environment. Is the use of mobile devices world has moved from a majority usage of being employed to model and facilitate wired desktop Internet access to wireless planning, instruction, and assessment mobile Internet access. They have lived practices? Do preservice teachers receive within this change, and they have helped ample opportunity to learn to use these precipitate it. Public schools have identified mobile technologies in their preparation? Is these trends and have responded accordingly. there access to more than “plugged” devices? For example, Future Source Consulting Are these future teachers being adequately (2017) reports that sales of mobile devices to prepared for a mobile computing educational school districts have continued trending environment using 1:1 learning programs, upward with a growth of 18% in 2016. and does this preparation occur beyond the According to this consulting firm, as districts educational/instructional media course that continue to expand their 1:1 programs, these many education programs require? sales will likely continue to trend in the Continuing the constructivist learning positive direction. approaches that colleges of education attempt Within these educational purchases of to model to their students with the addition of mobile and tablet technologies in K-12 the application of mobile technologies will education, the Google Chromebook has likely become even more vital in the coming outpaced all other tools purchased within the years. United States. Based on annual shipments, Future Source Consulting notes that in 2016 Blended Learning Environments Google Chromebooks accounted for a 58% share of sales with Windows at 22% and iOS The concept of blending learning at 14% respectively. In fact, Google environments is not new to education. Chromebooks have grown rapidly in Researchers and learning community experts popularity within the last three years gaining such as DuFour and Eaker (1998), Piaget a greater market share as Windows and iOS (1995), Senge, Cambron-McCabe, Lucas, have both declined. This is reflected in local Smith, Dutton, and Kleiner (2000), and studies conducted in Arkansas which found Vygotsky (1978) proposed theories that the Google Platform and Google supporting these sorts of approaches a Chromebooks were the most popular with number of years ago. It has been noted by teachers among mobile devices (Carter, such theorists and researchers that learners do Gunter, Bean, & Reeves, 2016). In better when operating in an environment international shipment records outside the designed with a community of learners in United States for mobile computing devices, mind. In this type of environment, learners Windows owns the largest share at 65% engage at various levels with various followed by Android with 17% and Google resources (digital, print, peers, teacher, etc.) Chromebooks with 6% (an actual increase to learn in a deeper fashion. Organizations over the last three years) (Future Source such as the Alliance for Excellent Education Consulting, 2017). (2017) have used this perspective to

SRATE Journal Winter 2018/Volume 27(1) 4 encourage blended learning environments. classroom setting. However, initial This group compares productive learning indications are that Generation Z will prefer environments to the work that occurs in the an environment where both independent and job setting where people work both social elements are present. In this context, individually and in team to accomplish the blended learning environments where both objectives that have been established. individual and social learning processes are For Generation Z, this blended used should prove to be highly beneficial to learning approach is likely to be beneficial Generation Z. since this group’s characteristics have included a desire for face-to-face interaction, Real-world Problem Solving pragmatic approaches to problems, a self- reliant attitude, desires to work As noted previously, Generation Z independently and in team settings, and the has so far indicated a desire to be involved ability to quickly access multiple resources to with transformational rather than simply accomplish goals and objectives (Howe, transactional activities in which roots of 2014; Seemiller & Grace, 2015). With such problems rather than solely the symptoms are characteristics, blended learning addressed. Such a perspective lends itself to environments would seem to provide ample problem-solving and project-based learning opportunity for learning to occur effectively approaches. In addition, these characteristics with this cohort. would seem to particularly value these For example, a classroom might learning approaches when paired with real- involve students working independently life issues instead of projects designed for along the perimeters with their mobile 1:1 learning decontextualized information or device. They could then move into small skills. group settings to share what was gained With the growth of initiatives such as independently and to discuss various factors Project Lead the Way and the development of that might benefit the group and identify standards such as the Next Generation shortfalls of information or skills. The Science Standards (Achieve, 2017) and the teacher may have an area available where Principles for Learning (Association for s/he can meet with students individually or in Career and Technical Education, et al., small groups to discuss the information and 2010), project-based learning in dealing with to query students concerning their real-world problems is becoming a greater understanding or ability pertaining to the point of emphasis. Learned societies deem knowledge or skill being developed. This these approaches to be essential in helping environment would involve interaction with students learn to interact within a global multiple resources independently and context where social and pragmatic socially. Such approaches mirror the approaches are used to address a host of thoughts of both Piaget (1995) and Vygotsky issues within and across discipline fields. (1978) and draw theoretical support from Generation Z teachers will be the their works. ones who will have experienced these points Following a simpler model of doing of emphasis to some degree, and the earliest collaborative work without the opportunity members of this cohort will be the teachers for individual work may very well frustrate who will be teaching the mid and latter these learners. The Millennial Generation members of this same cohort. To do this seemed to thrive on using multiple resources effectively, they will likely need to and group think exercises within the experience specific training in project and

SRATE Journal Winter 2018/Volume 27(1) 5 problem-based learning methodologies in a This desire coupled with a need to be variety of subject areas. Additionally, they involved in something transformational need to have an ability to use the rather than solely transactional in their aforementioned technologies as supporting occupational pursuits would seem to make tools in this development. the teaching profession a very viable It appears that colleges of education alternative. With reported teacher shortages will need to be actively involved in helping across the country (e.g., Carver-Thomas & these future teachers develop the teaching Darling-Hammond, 2017) and with a desire skills to make effective use of these to be involved with a career that can be generational tendencies in line with the transformational, perhaps colleges of learning expectations of today’s learned education can use these desires to attract societies. Once again, this emphasis fits well students to a profession where they can have within the tenets of constructivist learning a transformative impact on society with some theory. To accomplish this in greater promise of job security. measure, increased partnerships with Additionally, as noted above, university STEM Centers, with local schools entrepreneurship seems to be an attractive who are implementing these approaches, and concept to this particular cohort. Are there with other educational shareholders will be ways in which colleges of education can essential in better preparing these future leverage this aspiration? In the past twenty teachers for this type of learning years, entrepreneurial efforts in the teacher environment. preparation field have continued to increase to the point that the Council for the Transformation and Entrepreneurship Accreditation of Educator Preparation (2015) has noted the following concerning Having been primarily parented Education Program Providers (EPPs) “an through a pragmatic rather than idealistic inclusive term referring to the sponsoring approach by parents who tended to be organization for preparation, whether it is… financially cautious due to events in their or an alternative pathway organization” (p. own formative and young adult years 3). Entrepreneurial efforts such as those (Strauss & Howe, 1991), it is not surprising observed in alternative pathway that Generation Z members tend to be organizations seem to be expressed primarily financially conservative. Generation Z’s outside the traditional preparation route. parents lived through troubling financial Perhaps, it would be wise for colleges of times during their formative years where they education to determine ways in which harkened back in their financial beliefs to the entrepreneurial efforts could occur and be Wisdom Generation who held to “a penny encouraged within traditional pathways. Are saved is a penny earned” philosophy. Many there ways to leverage these entrepreneurial young people of this generation, who have desires of Generation Z to benefit the also been observers of the Millennial individuals in this group, the teaching Generation’s financial debts, have decided profession, and traditional program that finding ways to earn additional income providers? Although this pursuit would through private pursuits is needed in their increase the complexity of teacher generation. Therefore, it is not surprising that preparation at the university level, it might be they desire to find streams of income from something worth considering. entrepreneurial efforts (Seemiller & Grace Transformational definitions and 2016). entrepreneurial pursuits may be key to

SRATE Journal Winter 2018/Volume 27(1) 6 attracting and preparing this generation into Council of Teachers of Mathematics, the field of teacher education. National Middle School Association, & National Science Teachers Summary and Conclusions Association. (2010). Principles for learning: A foundation for Generation Z is just beginning to transforming K-12 education. enter the world of the university. They carry Retrieved from with them a host of characteristics and https://www.socialstudies.org/sites/d preferences that have been shaped just as efault/files/images/documents/Princi previous generations have been shaped ples_for_Learning.pdf before them. They seem to exhibit some of Carter, T. (2008). Millennial expectations their parents’ characteristics while and constructivist methodologies: expressing them in unique ways in the culture Their corresponding characteristics in which they are developing. and alignment. Action in Teacher Although the suggestions noted Education, 30(3), 3-10. within this paper are based on initial Carter, T., Gunter, M., Bean, L., & Reeves, examinations of this group, there will likely A. (2016). Technology expectations be more extensive information available as for teachers. ArATE EJ, 7(2). this large generational cohort continues to Retrieved from develop. Therefore, what has been suggested http://www.arkansasate.org/documen here are initial recommendations that may ts/Volume%207,%20Number%202 assist colleges of education in their attempts %20Sept%202016.pdf toward developing these future teachers. Carver-Thomas, D., & Darling-Hammond, L. However, as with any generation, time will (2017). Teacher turnover: Why it tell as to whether or not other factors may matters and what we can do about it. need to be considered as colleges of Retrieved from education look to prepare members of https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/pro Generation Z as strong and capable duct/teacher-turnover-report professionals. Chronicle of Higher Education. (2007). The almanac 2007-2008. The Chronicle of References Higher Education, 44(1). Council for the Accreditation of Educator Achieve. (2017). Next generation science Preparation. (2015). CAEP standards. Retrieved from accreditation standards. Retrieved http://www.achieve.org/next- from generation-science-standards http://caepnet.org/~/media/Files/caep Alliance for Excellent Education. (2017). /standards/caep-2013-accreditation- New deeper learning infographics to standards.pdf share! Retrieved from Danielson, C. (2007). Enhancing http://deeperlearning4all.org/new- professional practice: A framework deeper-learning-infographics-share/ for teaching (2nd ed.). Alexandria, Association for Career and Technical VA: Association for Supervision and Education, Consortium for School Curriculum Development. Networking, National Council for the DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (1998). Professional Social Studies, National Council of learning communities: Best practices the Teachers of English, National for enhancing student achievement.

SRATE Journal Winter 2018/Volume 27(1) 7 Reston, VA: Association of Project Lead the Way. (2017). Our K-12 Supervision and Curriculum pathways: Cohesive, hands-on Development. learning experiences. Retrieved from Eggen, P., & Kauchak, D. (2015). https://www.pltw.org/our-programs Educational psychology: Windows on Raines, C. (2002). Connecting generations: classrooms (10th ed.). New York: The sourcebook for a new workplace. Pearson. Wichita Falls, TX: Crisp. Elmore, T. (2017). How the last five Seemiller, C., & Grace, M. (2016). generations have changed us. Generation Z goes to college. San Retrieved from Francisco: Jossey-Bass. https://growingleaders.com/blog/last- Senge, P., Cambron-McCabe, N., Lucas, T., five-generations-changed-us/ Smith, B., Dutton, J., & Kleiner, A. Future Source Consulting. (2017). Sales of (2000). Schools that learn. New mobile PCs into the U.S. K-12 York: Doubleday. education market continue to grow, Statcounter. (2017). Social media stats as OS battle heats up. Retrieved from worldwide: September 2016 – https://www.futuresource- September 2017. Retrieved from consulting.com/Press-K-12- http://gs.statcounter.com/social- Education-Market-Qtr4-0317.html media-stats GSMA Intelligence. (2017). The mobile Statcounter. (2016). Mobile and tablet economy: Sub-Saharan Africa 2017. internet usage exceeds desktop for the Retrieved from first time worldwide. Retrieved from https://www.gsmaintelligence.com/re http://gs.statcounter.com/press/mobil search/?file=7bf3592e6d750144e58d e-and-tablet-internet-usage-exceeds- 9dcfac6adfab&download desktop-for-first-time-worldwide Howe, N. (2014, October). Introducing the Strauss, W., & Howe, N. (1997). The fourth Homeland Generation. Retrieved turning: An American prophecy. New from York: Broadway. https://www.forbes.com/sites/neilho Strauss, W., & Howe, N. (1991). we/2014/10/27/introducing-the- Generations: The history of homeland-generation-part-1-of- America’s future, 1584 to 2069. New 2/#356f31b62bd6 York: William Morrow and Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (2000). Millennials Company. rising. New York: Vintage Books. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The Lancaster, L. C., & Stillman, D. (2002). development of higher psychological When generations collide: Who they processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard are. Why they clash. How to solve the University Press. generational puzzle at work. New York: Harper Business. Tim Carter is the Department Head and a Oblinger, D. (2003). Boomers, Gen-Xers, Professor of Curriculum and Instruction at and Millennials: Understanding the Arkansas Tech University. His research new students. Educause, 38(4), 37- interests include examining constructivist- 46. based learning environments that consider Piaget, J. (1995). Sociological studies. New generational characteristics. York: Routledge.

SRATE Journal Winter 2018/Volume 27(1) 8