Posts Tagged ‘Millennials’

millennials employees

Want to Keep Your Millennial Employees? You Have To Be Willing to Offer Them This 1 Thing

Pretty soon, this will be the standard.
https://www.inc.com/nicolas-cole/want-to-keep-your-millennial-employees-you-have-to-be-willing-to-offer-them-this.html

library user

The Library in the Life of the User. Engaging with People Where They Live and Learn

http://www.oclc.org/content/dam/research/publications/2015/oclcresearch-library-in-life-of-user.pdf
p. 18
Library staff
The roles of librarians change with changes in user needs and demands and the technology employed. A survey conducted for Research Libraries UK found skill gaps in nine key areas in which subject librarians could be supporting researchers’ needs. Even though many librarians may want to hire new staff with these skills, a survey found that the reality for most will be training existing staff.
Definitions of library services will change. We need to grow the ways users can engage with whatever they value from libraries, whether papyrus rolls, maker spaces or data management instruction.
p. 19
What is the Unique Selling Point (USP) of libraries vis-à-vis other information service providers?
p. 21
Librarians should measure the effectiveness of services based on the users’ perceptions of success. Librarians also should move beyond surveys of how library space is being used and should conduct structured observations and interviews with the people using the space. It is not enough to know that the various spaces, whether physical or virtual, are busy. Librarians need to understand when and how the spaces are being used.

p. 33 What is Enough? Satisficing Information Needs

Role theory explains that: “When people occupy social positions their behavior is determined mainly by what is expected of that position rather than by their own individual characteristics” (Abercrombie et al., 1994, p. 360).
Rational choice theory is based on the premise that complex social behavior can be understood in terms of elementary individual actions because individual action is the elementary unit of social life. Rational choice theory posits that individuals choose or prefer what is best to achieve their objectives or pursue their interests, acting in their self-interest (Green, 2002). Stated another way, “When faced with several courses of action, people usually do what they believe is likely to have the best overall outcome” (Scott, 2000).
When individuals satisfice, they compare the benefits of obtaining “more information” against the additional cost and effort of continuing to search (Schmid, 2004)
p. 38
This paper examines the theoretical concepts—role theory, rational choice, and satisficing—by attempting to explain the parameters within which users navigate the complex information-rich environment and determine what and how much information will meet their needs.
p. 39
The information-seeking and -searching research that explicitly addresses the topic of “what is good enough” is scant, though several studies make oblique references to the stopping stage, or to the shifting of directions for want of adequate information. Kraft and Lee (1979, p. 50) propose three stopping rules:
1. The satiation rule, “where the scan is terminated only when the user becomes satiated by finding all the desired number of relevant documents”;
2. The disgust rule, which “allows the scan to be terminated only when the user becomes disgusted by having to examine too many irrelevant documents”; and
3. The combination rule, “which allows the user to be seen as stopping the scan if he/she is satiated by finding the desired number of relevant documents or disgusted by having to examine too many irrelevant documents, whichever comes first.”
p. 42
Ellis characterizes six different types of information activities: starting, chaining, browsing, differentiating, monitoring and extracting. He emphasizes the information- seeking activities, rather than the nature of the problems or criteria used for determining when to stop the information search process. In a subsequent article, Ellis (1997) observes that even in the final stages of writing, individuals may continue the search for information in an attempt to answer unresolved questions or to look for new literature.
p. 43
Undergraduate and graduate students
Situations creating the need to look for information (meeting assignment requirements):
• Writing research reports; and
• Preparing presentations.
Criteria used for stopping the information search (fulfilling assignment requirements):
1. Quantitative criteria:
— Required number of citations was gathered;
— Required number of pages was reached;
— All the research questions were answered; and
— Time available for preparing.
2. Qualitative criteria:
— Accuracy of information;
— Same information repeated in several sources;
— Sufficient information was gathered; and
— Concept understood.
Criteria used for stopping the information search (fulfilling assignment requirements):
1. Quantitative criteria:
— Required number of citations was gathered;
— Required number of pages was reached;
— All the research questions were answered; and
— Time available for preparing.
2. Qualitative criteria:
— Accuracy of information;
— Same information repeated in several sources;
— Sufficient information was gathered; and
— Concept understood.
p. 44
Faculty
Situations creating the need to look for information (meeting teaching needs):
• Preparing lectures and presentations;
• Delivering lectures and presentations;
• Designing and conducting workshops;
• Meeting scholarly and research needs; and
• Writing journal articles, books and grant proposals.
Criteria used for stopping the information search (fulfilling teaching needs):
1. Quantitative criteria:
— Time available for: preparing lectures and presentations; delivering lectures
— And presentations; and designing and conducting workshops; and
— Fulfilling scholarly and research needs.
2. Qualitative criteria:
— Every possible synonym and every combination were searched;
— Representative sample of research was identified;
— Current or cutting-edge research was found;
— Same information was repeated;
— Exhaustive collection of information sources was discovered;
— Colleagues’ feedback was addressed;
— Journal reviewers’ comments were addressed; and
— Publisher’s requirements were met.
1. Quantitative criteria for stopping:
— Requirements are met;
— Time constraints are limited; and
— Coverage of material for publication is verified by colleagues or reviewers.
2. Qualitative criteria for stopping:
— Trustworthy information was located;
— A representative sample of sources was gathered;
— Current information was located;
— Cutting-edge material was located;
— Exhaustive search was performed; and
— Exhaustive collection of information sources was discovered.
p. 53

“Screenagers” and Live Chat Reference: Living Up to the Promise

p. 81

Sense-Making and Synchronicity: Information-Seeking Behaviors of Millennials and Baby Boomers

p. 84 Millennials specific generational features pertinent to libraries and information-seeking include the following:

Immediacy. Collaboration. Experiential learning. Visual orientation. Results orientation.  Confidence.
Rushkoff (1996) described the non-linearity of the thinking patterns of those he terms “children of chaos,” coining the term “screenagers” to describe those who grew up surrounded by television and computers (p. 3).
p. 85
Rational choice theory describes a purposive action whereby individuals judge the costs and benefits of achieving a desired goal (Allingham 1999; Cook and Levi 1990; Coleman and Fararo 1992). Humans, as rational actors, are capable of recognizing and desiring a certain outcome, and of taking action to achieve it. This suggests that information seekers rationally evaluate the benefits of information’s usefulness and credibility, versus the costs in time and effort to find and access it.
Role theory offers a person-in-context framework within the information-seeking situation which situates behaviors in the context of a social system (Mead 1934; Marks 1996). Abercrombie, et al. (1994, p. 360) state, “When people occupy social positions their behavior is determined mainly by what is expected of that position rather than by their own individual characteristics.” Thus the roles of information-seekers in the academic environment influence the expectations for performance and outcomes. For example, faculty would be expected to look for information differently than undergraduate students. Faculty members are considered researchers and experts in their disciplines, while undergraduate students are novices and protégés, roles that place them differently within the organizational structure of the academy (Blumer, 2004; Biddle, 1979; Mead, 1934; Marks, 1996; Marks, 1977).

+++++++++++++++++
more on research in this IMS blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=research

social media millennials

By January 31, 2017 http://www.socialmediaexaminer.com/reaching-millennials-with-social-media-new-research

#1: Millennials Are Digital Shoppers

#2: New Platform Features Spur Millennial Adoption

Facebook –  An RBC Capital Markets social media survey showed that in the last year, an average of 33% of Millennials who took the survey increased the time they spent on Facebook, whereas an average of 23.5% decreased their time on Facebook.

Instagram –
instagram users

Twitter – twitter users

Snapchat – snapchat users

#3: Millennials Prefer Indirect Sales Messages

youtube adds users

These days, the preferred formats are content marketing and influencer marketing.

the old “sell without selling” idea.

In your content marketing, give Millennials something for their time, attention, and (hopefully) loyalty. They’re more likely to trust your brand if you show a genuine interest in educating them with a how-to, for example.

++++++++++++++
more on social media in this blog:
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=social+media

more on Millennials in this blog
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=millennials

gen z coming to campus

Survey: What Gen Z Thinks About Ed Tech in College

A report on digital natives sheds light on their learning preferences.
Like the millennials before them, Generation Z grew up as digital natives, with devices a fixture in the learning experience. According to the survey results, these students want “engaging, interactive learning experiences” and want to be “empowered to make their own decisions.” In addition, the students “expect technology to play an instrumental role in their educational experience.”
to cater to the digital appetites of tomorrow’s higher education learners, technology in education will need to play a bit of catch-up, states the New Media Consortium’s 2015 Course Apps report. According to NMC’s analysts, digital-textbook adoption was one of the leading trends helping to reinvent how higher education students learn. But publishers have not captured the innovations happening elsewhere in the digital marketplace.

The Generation Z report ranked the effectiveness of 11 education technology tools:

  1. Smartboards
  2. Do-It-Yourself Learning
  3. Digital Textbooks
  4. Websites with Study Materials
  5. Online Videos
  6. Game-Based Learning Systems
  7. Textbook
  8. Social Media
  9. Skype
  10. Podcasts
  11. DVD/Movies
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

more on Gen Z in this blog:

Generation Z bibliography

 

Generation Z bibliography

Levine, A. (2012). Generation on a Tightrope: A Portrait of Today’s College Student (1 edition). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. as reported in the IMS blog of:
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2014/01/08/visit-to-mankato-cetl/

Additional bibliography:

http://generationz.com.au/education/

Rosenfeld, E., & Loertscher, D. V. (2007). Toward a 21st-Century School Library Media Program. Scarecrow Press.

https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=brLbpR6dI8sC&oi=fnd&pg=PA235&dq=generation+z&ots=9CSv7vT6Bn&sig=RAKh-H98EVQ8x61YbnExS02ZlV8#v=onepage&q=generation%20z&f=false

Jeff Feiertag, & Zane L. Berge. (2008). Training Generation N: how educators should approach the Net Generation. Education + Training, 50(6), 457–464. http://doi.org/10.1108/00400910810901782 http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/00400910810901782
Malone, K. (2007). The bubble‐wrap generation: children growing up in walled gardens. Environmental Education Research, 13(4), 513–527. http://doi.org/10.1080/13504620701581612 http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13504620701581612
some of the changes in childhood environmental behaviours I explore children and parent relationships, in particular, the phenomena of ‘bubble‐wrapping’ children to appease the anxieties of some middle class parents.
Ivanova, A., & Ivanova, G. (2009). Net-generation Learning Style: A Challenge for Higher Education. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Systems and Technologies and Workshop for PhD Students in Computing (pp. 72:1–72:6). New York, NY, USA: ACM. http://doi.org/10.1145/1731740.1731818 http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1731818
Ivanova, A., & Smirkarov, A. (2009). The New Generations of Students  and the Future of e – Learning in Higher Education. Presented at the International Conference on e – Learni ng and the Knowledge Society  –  e – Learning’09. Retrieved from http://www.iit.bas.bg/esf/docs/2009/thenewgenerationsstudentsfuturee-learninghigheredu.pdf
Montana, P., & Petit, F. (2008). MOTIVATING GENERATION X AND Y ON THE JOB  AND PREPARING Z. GLOBAL JOURNAL OF BUSINESS RESEARCH, 2(2), 1–30. http://www.theibfr.com/ARCHIVE/GJBR-V2-N2-2008.pdf
McCrindle, M. (n.d.). Understanding Generation Y . The Australian Leadership Foundation. Retrieved from http://emoneco.net/info_docs/UnderstandingGenY.pdf
Igel, C., & Urquhort, V. (2012). Generation Z, meet cooperative learning. Middle School Journal, 43(4), 16–21. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41432109?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
Levickaite, R. (2010). Generations X, Y, Z: how social networks form the concept of the world without borders (the case of Lithuania)/Y, X, Z kartos: pasaulio be sienu idejos formavimas naudojantis socialiniais tinklais (Lietuvos Atvejis). LIMES, 3(2), 170. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA250135086&v=2.1&u=stcloud_main&it=r&p=EAIM&sw=w&asid=934b505505fbc57b849a3fb9eefe7871
Lynch, K., & Hogan, J. (2012). How Irish Political Parties are Using Social Networking Sites to Reach Generation Z: an Insight into a New Online Social Network in a Small Democracy. Irish Communication Review, 13. Retrieved from http://arrow.dit.ie/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1124&context=buschmarart
Benckendorff, P., Moscardo, G., & Pendergast, D. (2010). Tourism and Generation Y. CABI. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=vNsJazDA74UC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=%22generation+z%22+and+education&ots=g9e1CaCH6x&sig=OBkL2OFoxd-EBc6EHW3WJEe2tr8#v=onepage&q&f=false
Parker, K., Czech, D., Burdette, T., Stewart, J., Biber, D., Easton, L., … McDaniel, T. (2012). The Preferred Coaching Styles of Generation Z Athletes:  A Qualitative Study. Journal of Coaching Education, 5(2), 5–97.
Greydanus, D. E., & Greydanus, M. M. (2012). Internet use, misuse, and addiction in adolescents: current issues and challenges. International Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 24(4), 283–289. http://doi.org/10.1515/ijamh.2012.041

——————–

more on Generation Z in this IMS blog

http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/?s=generation+z&submit=Search
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2015/09/19/gen-z/
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2014/03/27/who-is-coming-to-college-after-the-millennials/

Recommendations for games and gaming at LRS

Gaming and Gamification in academic and library settings (paper)
Short URL: http://scsu.mn/1F008Re 

Based on the literature regarding games, gaming, gamification, game-based learning, and serious games, several clear trends emerge:

  1. Gaming and gamification in the sense of game-based learning is about using games and game-like tactics in the education process, for greater engagement and better learning outcomes. However, this is only the first level of such initiative. The second and higher level is about involving students in the game-building and gamification of the learning process (as per Vygotsky’s Zone of…) thus achieving student-centered and experiential learning.
  2. When hosting games and gaming in any library, “in-person” or electronic/online games are welcome but not sufficient to fulfill their promise, especially in an academic library. Per (1), an academic library has the responsibility to involve students and guide them in learning how to engage in the building process required in true game-based learning.
  3. Game-based learning, gaming and gamification in particular, in educational (academic library) settings must consider mobile devices and the BYOD movement in particular as intrinsic parts of the entire process. Approaching the initiative primarily by acquiring online “in-person” games, or game consoles has the same limited educational potential as only hosting games, rather than elevating the students to full guided engagement with game-based learning. If public relations and raised profile are the main goals for the academic library, such an approach is justified. If the academic library seeks to maximize the value of game-based learning, then the library must consider: a. gaming consoles, b. mobile devices as part of a BYOD initiative and c. cloud-based / social games, such as MineCraft, SimCity etc.
  4. Design for game-based learning, gaming and gamification in educational (academic library) settings must include multiple forms of assessment and reward, e.g. badges, leaderboards and/or certificates as an intrinsic part of the entire process. Merely hosting games in the academic library cannot guarantee true game-based learning. The academic library, as the forefront of a game-based learning initiative on campus, must work with faculty on understanding and fine tuning badges and similar new forms of assessment and reward, as they effectively implement large scale game-based learning, focused on the students’ learning gains.

Recommendations for LRS

  1. In regard to LRS, the gaming and gamification process must be organized and led by faculty, including housing and distributing the hardware, software and applications, when needed.
  2. The attached paper and the respective conclusions summarized in four points demand educational and experiential background, which is above the limits of the LRS staff. In addition, the LRS staff has clearly admitted that the pedagogical value of gaming and gamification is beyond their interest. This recommendation is not contradicting to the fact and opportunity for LRS staff to participate in the process and contribute to the process; it just negates the possibility of staff mandating and leading the process, since it will keep the gaming and gamification process on a very rudimentary level.
  3. The process must be further led by faculty with a terminal degree in education (Ph.D.) and experience in the educational field, since, as proved by the attached paper and 4 point conclusion, the goal is not a public-library type of hosting activities, but rather involving students in a pedagogically-sound creative process, with the respective opportunity for assessment and future collaboration with instructors across campus. This recommendation is not contradicting the fact and opportunity for LRS library faculty to participate actively in the process and contribute to the process. It just safeguards from restricting the process to the realm of “public-library” type of hosting activities, but failing to elevate them to the needs of an academic campus and connecting with instructors across campus.
  4. This conclusions adhere to and are derived from the document recommended by the LRS dean, discussed and accepted by LRS faculty in 2013 about new trends and directions in academic libraries, namely diversification of LRS faculty; breaking from the traditional library mold of including faculty from different disciplines with different opinions and ideas.

Our future students: Augmented Reality in the Classroom (+ info about wearable tech)

Putting the World In Their Hands: Augmented Reality in the Classroom

The wink of an eye, the simple one-finger tactile swipe down — these are the sights, sounds, and kinesthetic gestures that are changing the context of modern learning.

http://blogs.kqed.org/mindshift/2014/07/putting-the-world-in-their-hands-augmented-reality-in-the-classroom

Wearable technology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wearable_technology
http://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/wearable-technology-ces-2014/10/
http://www.wired.com/2013/12/wearable-computers/http://www.forbes.com/sites/connieguglielmo/2014/02/12/the-case-against-wearables/ (Google Glass)

Generation Z – the time of emojis approaching

Millennials Are Old News — Here’s Everything You Should Know About Generation Z

http://www.businessinsider.com/generation-z-spending-habits-2014-6#ixzz35n9ubTYy

GenZ

GenZ

http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2014/09/19/the-distracted-generation/

Generation on a Tightrope

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/review_of_higher_education/v037/37.2.miller.html

Generations X,Y, Z and the Others – Cont’d 
http://www.socialmarketing.org/newsletter/features/generation3.htm

Beyond Millennials: How to Reach Generation Z

http://mashable.com/2014/08/20/generation-z-marketing/

52% use youtube or social media for typical research assignments

generation z

Infographic from:

http://www.adweek.com/news/advertising-branding/gen-z-infographic-can-help-marketers-get-wise-future-159642

http://www.brucemayhewconsulting.com/index.cfm?id=20209

http://rainmakerthinking.com/assets/uploads/2013/10/Gen-Z-Whitepaper.pdf

http://casefoundation.org/resource/millennial-impact-report/?gclid=CjwKEAiAgranBRDitfSQk_P7vnMSJAAhx5G5yH0Qf8TIHUzwYj_0sVDSRz1GIANFzY8c_z5wMCidaRoCG2vw_wcB

 

engaging Web 2.0 skills to bridge cultures and classrooms

Stephen Noonoo in his THE JOURNAL article:
Global Collaboration Projects that Go Way Beyond Skype
http://thejournal.com/Articles/2014/03/26/Global-Collaboration-Projects-that-Go-Way-Beyond-Skype.aspx?Page=1#QtGjrl5J4swVCRoI.99

describes the “flattening” of the high school classroom, where students use communication technologies well beyond Skype (Edmodo) to works with peers in real time around the world. The idea of flattening involves peer-to-peer mentoring (Vygotsky’s “zone”) besides high school students growing with the consciousness of growing in a global world.

Those will be the students, who in several years will be entering our (higher ed) environment. Are we ready for them?

Per our older blog entry:
http://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2014/03/27/who-is-coming-to-college-after-the-millennials/
do we know and understand the students who are coming soon to our classroom?

1 2