Various Challenges of Science Communication in Teaching Genaration
Z: an Urgent Need for Paradigm Shift and Embracing Digital Learning [1]
„Back in my time!” – Instead of
Introduction
„The children now
love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show
disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise.”
/Socrates, 469-399 BC/
As the intentionally provocative
quote shows, Socrates was dealing with the generational conflicts
already two and a half thousand years ago. although ancient Greece was
featured by cultural productivity and economic prosperity (Hall, 2007)
The period when the philosopher lived can be considered as the dawn of
classical Hellenic civilisation: that time the Athens society was not
suffering of crisis of values, the life of the inhabitants of the
polises was organised along solid moral conventions. Despite of this
Socrates named Greek youngsters as a frivolous gang. The
dissatisfaction of adults towards teenagers – irrespectively to the
socio-cultural environment and ideology – occurs in social history from
time-to-time.
[2]; In this respect humanity seems
to be a homogenous
group, since it can be sensed as a general tendency that the following
generation is held liable for any changes experienced on the field of
human cerebrality. “Back to my time” – say our grandparents; this sigh
shows implicit valuation and accusation: as if everything were better,
more accepted, more „normal” in their youth. And who else could be
liable for cessation of “normality” than the youth breaking up with
morals and traditions?
This study does not intend to deal
with this subjective and hard to evidence scheme of thinking. Rather it
tries to call attention to that the success of handling the problem is
definitely influenced by the knowledge on the factors behind the
phenomenon and the ongoing reinterpretation of the definition of
„normality”. It is not a secondary standpoint at all whether the
changes to the attitude between generations - different
characteristics, skills, competencies – are identified as deviancies,
taken out from their context, or they are considered as borderline
between sections and handled as a possibility offering new perspective.
(Ng et al., 2010)
In my study I am reasoning for that
since adoption of changes, tolerating and teaching each other are key
elements of coexistence of different age-classes (West et al., 2002),
it is reasonable to find the way for bringing the new possibilities of
youngsters to the surface, for teaching them, and use their different
competencies for the benefit of the development of the society. To
achieve this the older generation is required to be open to digital
catch up (Kolin, 2002), while they should not condemn the values of the
youngsters and they should not prevent fulfilment changed of demands
for obtaining knowledge. According to my thesis from the
perspectives of economic, educational, political, labour market and
cultural challenges of our days, recognition and conscious application
of the possibilities hidden in mutual assistance and transfer of
skills, viewpoints and experiences are unavoidable. Therefor in
everyday life – moreover in pedagogical work – it is vital to find
response to the following questions:
- Is the way of thinking and behaviour of the younger generations
form basis for worries indeed?
- What are the main reasons of causing changes between the
generations; who or which processes can be held liable for the
transformation of values and attitude?
- How did we handle these changes, how do we face the challenges
resulting from such changes?
The study analyses these topics,
primarily approaching the characteristics of generation Z deviating
from that of the previous generation from science communication and
educational aspects. Based on international and Hungarian research the
paper gives brief review on the impact of our current time, the
development of information society and technology on the world view and
discrepancy of the different age-classes. I attempt to identify those
characteristics of transferring knowledge, consumption and media usage,
which are definite to development of the relation of persons born after
1995 to science, then I summarise the models of Public Understanding of
Science (hereinafter referred to as PUS)
[3];
relevant to generation
Z. In the second part of this study I reason for paradigm shift in
formal education and I give recommendation on the methodological
framework of a progressive educational system, which is able to
successfully meet the demands of the analysed age-class, and which can
play a definitive role in forming the interest in science and
preparedness of the digital generation.
Coexistence of Generations in the
Information Society [4]
Formation of the information
society has completely rearranged the access to the social
resources and information (Beniger, 1986), what has significant
technological, economic, employment and cultural aspects (Webster,
1997). While in the industrial era the devices and natural
resources were definitive, nowadays knowledge provides the majority of
the produced and consumed goods, the work defined by information
processes become definitive versus the direct physical work. (B. Tier,
2014) The development taken place on the field of information
processing, storage and transmission on one hand led to wide scope of
application of digital technologies, while on the other hand to the
convergence of telecommunication and IT in all segments of the society.
In the 2000s technology forms each
and every segment of our life; accordingly it exercises a formerly
unknown extent of stimulation and information pressure on the society
accompanied with acceleration generational differences. (Rückriem,
2009) The structure of the world has become network-based, where
internet, information technology and telecommunication have turned into
a faith defining experience of the younger generations. (Castells,
2006) This process not only detached the younger generations from the
traditional, direct human communication media, but it has
substantionally changed their relations, cognitive and learning
methods. (Nyíri, 1999) Digital experience, network-based interaction
and unlimited communication have become a basic experience and daily
need of those born on the turn of the millennium. (Castells, 2006) the
value of knowledge and media, and knowledge vital to self-maintenance
in the knowledge society built on lifelong learning intruded into the
expediential values. (Gergátz, 2009) Therefore the borderline between
childhood and adulthood is less sharp: a child browsing the internet
consciously makes his way in the same media as an adult; this results
in interflow of the scope of entertainment and work. (Nyíri, 2004)
It is an elemental principle of
sociology that each and every generation lives history in its own
characteristic way: the events and features of the era get built in its
identity. (Howard, 2000; Urick, 2012) While formerly the generation
forming impacts were nurtured mainly by history, nowadays they rather
start up from the direction of technological development. (Csepeli,
2006) While – on the contrary to the former technologies – the
technology of the information society has deeper and more comprehensive
impact on our life, thus the distance between the approach of younger
and older generations, between the “old” and the “new” is growing.
(Gergátz, 2009) Basically this is the main reason of the generation
gap; and this is what initiates the generations to start conversation
with groups maintaining other identity.
Considering that the newly appearing
mechanisms of obtaining knowledge has totally transformed the relation
of the new generation to the world and the former generations (Combi,
2015), from the 2000s identification of the reasons of the conflicts
between the generations and specification of the general
characteristics of the different age-classes are the most important
tasks of generation research. (Masnick, 2013) in the course of
developing the methodology, in addition to exploring the phenomena,
finding the practical aspects of the generational conflict, and
selection of the methods for problem management successfully serving
social interests are also important viewpoint. (Lengyel, 2003) Yet
before giving exact methodological recommendations on alteration of the
former education system, in the next chapter I define the generation Z
and I will briefly describe its relation to technology.
Media Usage of the Digital Natives,
their Characteristics and the Technology
The basis of generation research is
that the certain generations have different so-called cohors
experiences – characteristics defining the attitudes of the persons
born at the same time and similar needs. (Simon, 2007) Due to the
different socio-cultural background the common experiences and values –
join the members of a given age-class in a loose, but definitive way.
Despite heterogeneity e definitive trend can be observed along the
formation of value preferences; this provides possibility for the
social scientists to connect individual decisions and identify the
differences between youngsters and elder people. (Pilcher, 1994)
Although the literature related to
the field of science is not uniform in respect of the terminology for
different generations and dates of birth, the majority of research
deals with analysing primarily the Baby Boomers born between 1946-1960
(Howe & Strauss, 1991; Landon, 1980; Owram, 1997; etc.), generation
X born between 1960-1980 (Miller, 2012; Markert, 2004; etc.),
generation Y, also called millenary generation, born between 1980-1999
(Horovitz, 2012; Strauss-Howe, 2000; etc.), and generation Z, also
called iGeneration, Pluralist or Digital Generation, bringing up the
most of interdisciplinary problems nowadays, born after 1995 (Horovitz,
2012; Turner, 2015; Dupont, 2015, etc.)
[5]; Since
this study
approaches the impact of information society on the characteristics of
generation Z deviating from those of the former generations from
science communication and educational aspects, I will discuss more
detailed the characteristics and media usage of the ones born at the
end of 1990s.
Generation Z is a new type generation; either in its content
consumption, socialisation or identity the developing
info-communication technology plays a significant role (Ipsos MediaCT,
2013) According to the findings of a Hungarian research
(TÁMOP-4.2.3-12) analysing the costumer behaviour of young people aged
15-25, this age-class spends 5-6 hours daily with use of media;
basically the use of mobile carriers, smart phones and tablets is the
most typical (Ipsos MediaCT, 2013), while in media usage at home the
dominancy of computers can be observed. (Guld & Maksa, 2013)
Popularity of these devices can be related to the Internet: from the
web 2.0 applications available through the network the social sites,
blogs, video sharing sites, chat programmes, news sites and file
sharing sites are the most important. However, classical mass
media were not crowded out from the daily routine of young people, yet
their role was revaluated and their consumption has become more
superficial: radio and television can be related to background media
usage, while the loss of importance of newspapers and magazines is
reportable. (Guld & Maksa, 2013) The members of generation Z set up
the world surrounding them via mutually edited contents, shared info
and comments; they take part in discussions catching their attention
assertively and actively. (Tari, 2011) Of course not only they form the
environment, but also the environment is greatly forming the cognitive,
affective, conative and social senses, daily routines and social
relations of the ones born after 1995. (Tari, 2011) As a consequence,
while in the life of former generations the real offline and online
presence existed marginally separated, for the first global and digital
age-class these two things are harmonically joined: technology
interweaving the entire life and being permanently present has
become one of the most important device of expressing ones identity.
(Ujhelyi, 2013)
The Basic Problem of Educating
Generation Z
From the viewpoint of science
communication the basis of successful education of generation Z lies in
the professional discretion that its members – on the contrary to
generation Y or X – did not start to adjust to the digital word in a
certain section of their life on the effect of professional pressure,
but they were born in a dynamically changing environment, which offers
the most developed hardware and software solutions to resolve everyday
problems. That is why Mac Prensky calls this age-class as “digital
natives”, whose demand on receiving information has changed
pragmatically. (Prensky, 2001:1) The brain of the members of generation
Z has not only developed in a different way than that of their
ancestors (Trunk, 2009), but due to the frequency of their interaction
with the environment they also process the information differently
(Presnky, 2001). While the older ones adjusted to the changing digital
environment through individual learning mechanisms, generation Z has no
learning “accent”, its members speak “digital language as their native
language. According to Prensky the teachers and researcher who are
active in our days can rather be considered “digital immigrants”, since
they are learning the new “language” only now.
[6];
(Presnky, 2001:2).
Thus generation Y or X in a certain extent unavoidably lives in the
past: it will be only an umpteenth idea of its members to refer to the
new technology whenever they need solution and they adapt the phenomena
of the digital world less naturally than the ones born at the end of
‘90s. (Prensky, 2001) For illustration of the conflicts influencing the
education in its entirety I use the below chart of Kristiansen
(Kristiansen, 2011), which schematically compares the different
characteristics, skills and competencies of the digital immigrants and
the digital natives.
Figure 1 – A Thinking map of Digital
Natives
The conflict resulting from the above
chart – supplemented with the paradox situation that as regards to
great basic formulas the society can already be considered as
information society, yet the superstructure of public education still
follows control structures of the industrial era (B. Tier, 2014) –
represents one of the greatest problems of science communication. Since
the digital immigrants – who in their own time learned slowly,
coherently, individually and profoundly – are less rewarding to those
new skills which the natives naturally own resulting from the everyday
interactions. (Prensky, 2001) If we add up this with that the scope of
expertise transformed due to the structure of knowledge society, the
ratio of mental workers grow on the labour market, and the significance
of skills related to information and communication technologies (ICT)
(Hinrichs, 2000), the urging need of reworking the education becomes
evident. In the 21st century emphasis is placed on fast, accurate and
productive work: increasing complexity of the tasks expects creativity,
flexibility and ability for team work from the youngsters becoming
professionals in the 2010s. (Cisco, 2009)
Changing demands for learning
When finding any problem to be
resolved the “dotcom” kids living in virtual community already to not
expect response from pedagogues and schoolbooks which were formerly
considered as primary source of knowledge, but – since they have
natural skills to operating telecom devices, excellently navigate on
the internet and easily establish relations – they get solution from
each other or browse the internet to seek for it. (Duga, 2013:3) This
is also supported by the EU Kids Online I-II research: the time spent
with browsing the internet by the young generation is not spent only
for entertainment, communication and consumption of contents, but,
subject to the type of the tasks their presence on the web promotes the
process of learning as well. (EU Kids Online II., 2012)
Also Dunkels and Zipernovszky discusses the possibilities of learning
via internet in details; their research discovers that social sites,
such as Facebook, Skype, LinkedIn, or Google+ offer new forms of
learning for common work. (Dunkels, 2007; Zipernovszky, 2008) Besides
social sites the microblogs – Twitter, Tumblr –, and also the video,
photo or sound sharing sites , such as Youtube, Picasaweb, Flickr,
Ustream or iTunes are also popular. Generation Z uses presentation
applications, such as Prezi, Slideshare, Googledocs, etc., as well, but
on the contrary to generation X or Y also the use of different
framework systems, online learning communities and virtual environments
are not unknown to them. (Duga, 2013:11) There are several reasons for
what the sites are successful; on one hand the “hyper” mass of text on
the web stimulates the natural, individual learning, the process of
obtaining knowledge resulting from instinctive curiosity and internal
motivation without the control of any professional. On the other hand
it improves both logics and collective informal learning, what is based
on permanent exchange of experiences featuring the virtual communities.
(Duga, 2013:6)
The ones born at the end of 1990s actively create informative contents,
since they prefer multimedia communication to written texts;
accordingly also their processing methods are non-linear. According to
a survey of the Budapesti Üzleti és Kommunikációs Főiskola the members
of generation Z - primarily resulting from the speed of search drives –
prefer the fast obtainable information (HVG, 2014), they like to see
the result of their work immediately and expect instant feedback.
Interaction and empathising experiences are important to them. They are
able to deal with several things simultaneously and they are effective
in organising their work, they get the information what is in their
interest in diversified channels and quickly. (Bessenyei, 2007) At the
same time the survey also highlighted the processing of longer text and
verbal restoring of the knowledge text cause difficulties to them; they
consider the lessons supplemented with spectacular visual elements as
easier to remember. One-direction communication causes problem to them,
therefore they find it difficult to follow theoretical deductions and
tangible, practical examples are important to them. (NOL, 2014)
Thus technical development has greatly changed media usage and
characteristics of the digital natives, what led to a more and more
defined student-attendee requirements and transformation of values on
the labour market, while this has impact on the educational system as
well: members of generation Z require substantially different methods
and curriculum. (Jukes & Dosaj, 2006) Moreover the gap between the
capacity hidden in the digital generation and the available
professional, device and solution environment is growing (Z. Karvalics,
2013), this gap gives new tasks continuously to the ones wishing to
modernise the formal education. Before oi start to discuss the
particular professional aspects of the science communication conducted
with the ones born after 1995 and my methodology developing
recommendations, I summarise the aforementioned based on the table of
Jukes and Dosaj (Jukes & Dosaj, 2003), particularly the major
differences between the digital immigrant teachers and the digital
native learners.
Table 1 – The Differences between
Digital Native Learners and Digital Immigrant Teachers
The gap between the competencies of
students and solution environment of schools
Due to the changing learning demands
of generation Z the importance of the role of internet and digital
technology in education is unquestionable nowadays. Internal learning
motivation features the self-development of the members of this
generation, their interests are diversified, what is reasoned by that
an enormous quantity of impulse influence them since the day they are
born. (Turner, 2015) They are attracted by several scientific – mainly
technological – topics; they seek for them more purposefully than those
borne before the ‘90s. Their approach to learning, getting informed and
to knowledge itself has also radically changed. (Oblinger &
Oblinger, 2005) An increasing ratio of their knowledge results from
other media than schools: beginning with different traditional media,
through museums, scientific festivals to meetups, events popularising
science and other non-traditional science communication sites.
[7];
Although the so-called edutainment, i.e. obtaining knowledge in an
entertaining form is an important demand on their side (Demers,
2005:143), yet they are critical users of media, they avoid
advertisements and are aware of the general hazards of media. In their
knowledge obtaining mechanisms they prefer simultaneous interaction and
relevant, promptly usable knowledge having practical significance.
(Bessenyei, 2007)
These changed generational characteristics result in that an effective
education must revaluate its current situation, it must consider that
from the several learning environments it represents only one – and not
even the best – option, and that science communication must adjust to
the cognitive changes going through in the mind of youngsters and their
consumer demand, also in its methodology. As the today students are not
the same as the ones for whom the current education system was set up
(Prensky, 2001), therefore in the education of generation Z it is vital
to establish an environment and information channels, where development
similar to that unnoticeable learning of their childhood can be
implemented. (Papert, 1996)
As the Netgeneráció 2010 international survey reveals, since the
members of the age-class get to resolution of problems individually,
not on a uniform and previously defined route, the educational
institutes must review the input and output requirements an carrier
milestones set up for the students several decades earlier. (Hartyányi,
2010; Anderson 2011:126) The traditional basic skills – writing,
reading, counting – were added up with several new kinds of skills, the
development of what would be worth to be inserted in the curriculum.
(Z. Karvalics, 2014) The key to generation Z’s understanding of science
is the development of dynamic, colourful, creative projects providing
the joy of success through partial results. I improving the learning
attitude of the age-class – besides visualisation – involving the
students and cooperative methods allowing more effective transfer of
knowledge also have important role. (Fehér & Hornyák, 2010)
What model should be followed to
educate students born after 1995?
It is a fundamental principle of
political economy that scientific and technical knowledge is the main
drive of social development: without up-to-date information the
knowledge of human civilisation could hardly improve. As it is also
shown in this study, accurate definition of knowledge is not easy,
since it units not only epistemological, philosophical, pedagogical,
psychological and economic viewpoints, but the term seems to have
different meaning for the different age-classes. As a general
definition it could be stated that knowledge is the mass of
systematised gnosis created about the world surrounding us, obtained
mainly by experience, accumulated since the dawn of civilisation and
transferred from generation to generation. A kind of product, what has
clear, but not always quantifiable values, and as such it is
marketable, i.e. can be understood along the rules of market demand and
offer. (Palugyai, 2012)
In case the characteristics of generation Z are also taken in
consideration the above definition requires a plastic timely
interpretation: the world surrounding us is continuously changing, and
these changes impact us as well. Due to the use of info-communication
technologies the ones born at the end of 1990s understand knowledge
“obtained by experience” in a different way than generation X or Y,
moreover the labour market, which is getting digitalised considers
expertise on other fields as marketable than before. One of the
characteristics of the knowledge-based society is that in order to
successful self-assertion its members must face the mass of information
surrounding them, and must become able to select and find the
relevant information (Molnár, 2008), than apply the knowledge
obtained this way properly for their purposes.
[8]
The continuously expanding mass of information from the information
boom and appearance of the new type students represent a great
challenge for the existing knowledge systems. Since labour market
integration and everyday decisions of generation Z is significantly
impacted by the quality of education and the channel of scientific
interaction, it is worth that pedagogues, scientists and curriculum
developers to give up on the former teaching methods and work out such
training and information transferring and educational environment,
which are customised to the requirements of this generation. (Oblinger
& Oblinger, 2005) On comparing the differences in methodology
of educating generation Z and the traditional teaching paradigm, it
occurs that the ones born before the 1990s obtained their
qualifications fixed to a place, based on fixed teacher and student
roles. Education of generation X or Y was primarily based on
transferring universal, fact-focused, isolated masses of knowledge and
summative valuation, while the cognitive tools of the students
characteristically included memorising and subsequent recall. (Brown,
2005)
Public Understanding of Science uses the term Deficit model for this
one-direction information transfer, what was formed based on the idea
that the head of everyday people is empty. According to this model
scientists and teachers can be considered as the main source of
knowledge, they are the umpires to decide on what extent it should be
intermediated to the audience, the students. This situation leads them
to a clear action programme: their task is not else than “fill those
heads”, i.e. teach the possible most science to the students, the
laymen in order to improve the social opinion on science. (Gregory
& Miller, 1998:11)
As also the researchers of science communication admitted in the ‘90s
this model failed at three points. Firstly, when the information is
questionable within the science community, thus is in the course of
formation. This is a problem primarily because the knowledge required
by the society – especially by generation Z – less belongs to
theoretical physics, history or biology, but they are rather
conceptualised on the level of everyday practical decisions, e.g. on
the technology being continuously “on the conveyor-belt” or on the
field of medicine what is accompanied by passionate professional
disputes. (Harlick & Halleran, 2015) Secondly, the Deficit-model
discusses the scientific problems without defining the context, what –
as we have formerly seen – is a basic factor of the interest of
generation Z.
[9]; Thirdly, the digital generation rather demands a
custom-made science communication adapting the changes of the world,
offering abundance of possibilities and based on interaction, than an
outdated pressurising education model, which is rigid and independent
of the technological environment. (Brown, 2005)
Instead of isolated facts generation Z requires the joy of discovering,
micro-level understanding and knowledge embedded in context. Since
“information” and “knowledge” do not mean the same: Knowledge is
information understood in its context. (Nyíri, 2004) Therefore this
age-class prefers diversified relations based on mutual cooperation
instead of fixed roles. It takes teachers as experts or mentors; it
seeks flexibility and diversity also in the educational sites, devices
and calling for account. (Brown, 2005) PUS also built this age-class
specific need and the critics raised against the Deficit model in its
methodology; its second model already considers that the meeting of
science an publicity takes place embedded in everyday situations,
socio-cultural and technological environment, thus also the scientific
interest of laymen takes is aligned to the entirety of the problems
related to finding guidance in the world. According to the Context
model the head of people is full of strategies for obtaining knowledge;
primarily they do not seek general education, but need scientific
expertise in exact situations requiring decision. (Gregory &
Miller, 1998:88) According to this approach the aim of education is to
establish common forum for scientific and everyday interests, i.e.
building out high quality and up-to-date relation between the science
being prepared – and not only in terms of schoolbooks – and the
youngsters. (Pintér, 2015) According to Hamza & Wickman the
learning in science need to be approached more as a contingent process
than as something that progresses along one particular dimension. They
show “how students appropriate the sociocultural tools of science and
how how they situate what they learn in both the particular features of
the activity and in the relevant science.” (Hamza & Wickman,
2013:113) The below table shows a summary of the differences between
the traditional learning and teaching paradigm and the two science
communication models. (Brown, 2005: 12.6)
Table 2 - Differences between the
Traditional Learning and Teaching Paradigm
As it is shown in the above table
science communication must be an ongoing reconciliatory process, and
teacher must give up on one-direction information transfer and the idea
that they have no other task than fill empty heads. (Gregory &
Miller, 2006:199) If we also add that through their impact on the life
of publicity the results of science are becoming more and more social,
it becomes understandable that it is vital for the pedagogues to adjust
to the requirements of laymen and they should openly face the
possibilities of science communication and its practical limits.
Accordingly information must be intermediated to generation Z on
routes, which take the social and technological factors and the
knowledge the students originally possess into account.
[10]. (Gregory&
Miller, 2006:203)
According to this study science communication is able to promote the
undertakings of laymen in the disputes in course on the field of
science or in political decision-making related to science, only in
case it is customised to the generation and embedded in context.
[11];
Although generation Z primarily has no demand for engagement in respect
of public life, but in respect of education, raising interest of its
members towards scientific news and disciplinary literature is the most
important task of pedagogy. As science consumption of the
net-generation is more pragmatic than that of the former generation, in
addition the socialisation of the “digital immigrant” teachers and the
“digital native” students resulted in different view of world,
therefore it is reasonable to see education as a mutual recognition
process; as a dynamic exchange-mechanism, in what social groups of
different attitudes and different needs take part. (Gregory &
Miller, 2006:203) In this dialogue confidence and trust are key factors
(Smetana et al., 2016: 89), and in order to this all age-classes must
be open, ready to assist and compromise with the different
generations. Progressive education can hardly be implemented
through authoritarian statements of facts, declarative transfer of
knowledge and punitive call for accounting. (Gregory & Miller,
2006:204)
Tasks to be completed in order to
establish a progressive education system
As the research findings summarised in this study show, the educational
and scientific institutes must examine how they can adjust to the
changing demands of the generation and their customer behaviour. (Duga,
2013) Science communication conducted with the digital generation can
be successful only in case it builds – besides exploiting the
technology – on flexibility in time and space, teamwork, diversity and
the already existing knowledge and activity of students. (Harlick &
Halleran, 2015) In order to make education progressive it is vital that
the teachers and students shall set up partnership, what is based on
respect shown for each other, to facilitate placement of
competency-based approaches in the forefront against the content-based
approaches. (Duga, 2013)
While the traditional model apostrophes learning as a work done with
sweat and along facts and curriculum fixed to rules, obtained according
to strict time-table, the progressive learning environment provides the
experience of integration of knowledge elements gained from diversified
sources. (Harlick, 2015) It presents obtaining information as an
interesting venture; it inspires setting up internal rules instead of
following external ones. (Komenczi, 2009:2) A system successfully
serving the education of generation Z prefers project-based development
gained in free time frame. Instead of conformism it builds on
individual creativity, self-criticism and innovation. Students do not
meet up the requirements of teachers, but standards set up based on
different disciplinary standpoints (Anderson, 2011: 126), while the
work is carried out in smaller groups of heterogeneous composition, in
what the older generation is adult, and successfully motivates the
creation of the ability of lifelong learning.
Response to the question how such learning environment can be
established among the traditional schools is given by the so-called
emphasis-transfer model, which says that the desired learning
environment of information society can also be approached by
contrapositioning the characteristics of traditional environment
organisation, built primarily on instructions and one-direction
knowledge transfer, and the characteristics of the progressive, rather
constructivist one. Naturally, the statements in the below table are
not contrapositions excluding, but supplementing each other, which
serve to show in what direction should the current education system
move on in order to suitably serve the demands of generation Z.
(Komenczi, 2009:2)
Table 3 – The Differences between
Traditional Learning Environment and Progressive Learning Environment
Implementation of the methodology
summarised in the above table requires application of the technology
what is able to fulfil the device requirement of progressive learning
environment. Within this scope several solutions, customised for the
characteristics of generation Z, might get role from the interactive
boards through the so-called Learning Management (LMS) technologies,
through e-Learning framework systems and multi-user educational games
to smart phones (MLearning) (Brown, 2005) In education it is necessary
to provide space in growing proportion for those different web 2.0
applications, which are used by the students already in their free
time: besides multimedia, information and video sharing sites (YouTube,
Flickr, Google), social sites (Facebook, Linkedin, MySpace), virtual
worlds (River City, Atlantis, Whyville, etc.) and multi-player games
(Rich Man Game, ChangeMaster, Quest Ardene, etc.) are vital to be built
in the course of education in the 2010s. Furthermore Olympiou and
Zacharia pointed out that experimenting with blended combinations of
Physical Manipulatives (PM) and Virtual Manipulatives can be able to
enhance students’ conceptual understanding in the domain of various
scientific topics more than the use PM and VM alone. (Olympiou &
Zacharia, 2011:38)
If traditional teaching and curriculum is combined with innovative
teaching methods, multimedia elements and modern devices that
facilitate an interactive, flexible learning process involving several
sensual organs. (Molnár, 2007) Because of experimental lust, target and
success-oriented approach and strong network dependence it is important
that the institutions shall provide rooms suitable for work in
ethnically diversified small teams. Since youngsters are pragmatic and
inductive information processors, it is worth to provide them media
promoting cooperation, where they can gather knowledge from several
sources, by the use of integrated devices and in the course of
training-like situations. This, besides charming and challenging
materials needs analysing, and presentation applications, divided
screens, databases, programs necessary for editing multimedia and
access to online helper. (Brown, 2005) Thus adaption of the everyday
education activity to the technical environment would make the
curriculum not only more interesting and easier to follow up, but it
would enhance the learning lust and success of the students.
Naturally, besides transformation of the environment pedagogues expert
in info-communication technologies are also vital. Since the knowledge,
attitudes and skills of the net-generation is expressly limited by the
current educational system, paradigmatic alterations would be necessary
also in the preparation of the pedagogues.
[12]; Collaborative,
problem- and project-based education (Pease & Kuhn, 2010) requires
new type of teachers, special facilitators, who – in excess of their
disciplinary knowledge – possess high level knowledge on
information-technological knowledge and competency. (Roberts, 2005)
Teachers of 2010s must be able to actively involve and apply in
teaching those modern technologies, what are used by their primary
target group. If implementation of this fails the members of the young
generation shall lose interest in education, and will use the internet
for other activities, what they consider as interesting and what brings
joy to them. (Duga, 2013)
Summary: Are these sociological
problems or pedagogical possibilities?
In this article I attempted to give detailed presentation of those
changes what has taken place in the socialisation, world view, skills
and media usage of generation Z due to the development of
info-communication technologies. I was reasoning on behalf of that this
multi-dimensional transformation raises not only generation gaps,
sociological and pedagogical problems, but at the same time it creates
possibility for an educational reform leading to transfer of knowledge,
what is up-to-date, customised to the demands of the youngest ones and
promotes integration into labour market effectively.
Consequently, renewal of education is
only an umpteenth step: technology and service provision planning
should be preceded by an action- and intervention-focused society and
child-image, what has definite and normative ideas originating from
internal initiations about how and in what direction it wants to form
the conditions defining science society. (Z. Karvalics, 2013) In order
to achieve this it is inevitable to paradigmatically change the
approach related to generational discrepancies. According to Jukes we
are unable to understand and evaluate those stages of development,
which the digital natives took during developing their skills. Instead
of this we are lamenting over what skills they do not possess. Since
digital language is not our native language, and since we appear in
their world as digital immigrants, we unconsciously misesteem those
children who practice different forms of action than we do; and this
negligence prevents exploitation of the social potential hidden in
them. (Jukes & Dosaj, 2006)
However this study did not declared to deal this issue, yet it is
important to emphasize that information environment aware management
must firstly appear on the level of disciplinary policy, what shall -
as a complex “pre-reforming” strategic package - create future
possibility for the members of the generation growing up through
digital culture to become a full value member of the community also in
their person. Consequently a science communication paradigm shift
discussed in this article is a very complex process taking long in time
and space: thus there will be schools shoving information society
features in several elements, while in other countries and schools
industrial era will still rule. (B. Tier, 2014) The education system is
set up from several factors; accordingly considering reform we can only
talk about slow distortion of ratios, what is preceded by experiments.
However, if a kind of structural and methodological change can be
successfully implemented in education, the members of generation Z will
spent a part of their free time after school also for self-development,
moreover they will do that in way unnoticeable for them, since they
will engage themselves in exactly the same activities what they do in
their everyday obligatory activities.
[13]
One of the key factors of a possible structural and methodological
change is to reconsider the current accountability policy. According to
Anderson the actual one does not meet the aims and needs of a reform,
so he strongly suggest that education leaders and policy makers “need
to evaluate whether or not accountability policies inspire teachers and
students in science, foster innovation, and increase teachers’ ability
to use research-based practise.” (Anderson, 2011:125) He points out
that “accountability testing in science should place more emphasis on
skills and scientific reasoning found in instructional methods such as
inquiry and active learning. Furthermore accountability systems should
use “multiple measures of students’ ability, connecting to creativity ,
and students enjoyment of learning.” (Anderson, 2011:125)
Thus, concentrating on media consumption, characteristics and world
view features of the generation, I am also urging the setting-up of a
science communication methodology, which, based on the Context model of
Public Understanding of Science, facilitates cooperation between
digital immigrants and digital natives, what is collaborative,
project-based, customised, adapting to changes of the world and rich in
possibilities and interactions. This requires the establishment of
progressive learning environment, and that pedagogues shall review
their function and preparedness so that they can participate in
information transfer rather as experts or mentors than along fixed
pre-defined roles.
The most significant philosopher of China, Confucius (551-479B.C.) says
“if I hear it, I forget it; if I see it, I remember it; if I do it
myself, I understand it.” Accordingly, the demands and interest
of generation Z can be met only by an educational strategy built on
flexibility in time and space (McWilliam, 2015), teamwork and the
existing knowledge of the age-class, this way it would be worth if
curriculum developers and science managers placed competency-based and
pragmatic approaches in the forefront instead of traditional,
content-based, theoretical approaches. A precondition to this is that
the state shall assure access for each and every member of generation Z
to the necessary information technology, what is a definitive step to
bridge the social gap dividing the younger generation; to provide equal
chances for the richer and less privileged layers.
Although the section did not analyse
the limits of cognitive skills of generation Z, mapping them is also
vital in respect of social problems and conflicts between age-classes.
Recently several – and at first sight frightening – socio-psychological
results were derived from research, which prove the harmful impact of
technology in the human relationships and cognitive skills of the ones
born at the end of 1990s. (Pintér, 2013b) Therefore there will be
plenty of professional challenges in the future, but we cannot delay
too much with modernisation of the science communication process, since
within a couple of years the knowledge of our children – as they will
become future employees, decision-makers, voters, and teachers of the
forthcoming generation Alpha – will be the main drive of the
development of the society.
Bibliography
- Anderson, K. J. B. (2011). Science Education and
Test-BasedAccountability: Reviewing TheirRelationship and
ExploringImplications for Future Policy. Science Education, 96(1),
104-129
- Asheim, G. B. & Tungodden B. (2004). Resolving distributional
conflicts between generations, Economic Theory, 24(1), 221-230.
- B. Tier, Noémi (2014). Tanulás az információs társadalomban
[Learning in the Information Society] In. B.Tier N. & Szegedi E.
(Eds.), Alma a fán – A tanulás jövője. [Apple on the Tree: the Future
of Learning] (pp. 16-23) Tempus Közalapítvány, Budapest, Hungary.
Available from:
https://issuu.com/tka_konyvtar/docs/alma_a_fan_3_web_issuexs [Accessed:
17th May 2016] (in Hungarian)
- Bauer, M. W. (2009). The evolution of public understanding of
science - discourse and comparative evidence. Science, technology and
society. 14(2), 221-240.
- Bell, D. (1974). The Coming of Post-Industrial Society. New York:
Harper Colophon Books.
- Beniger, J. R. (1986). The Control Revolution: Technological and
Economic Origins of the Information Society. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
University Press.
- Bessenyei, I. (2007): Tanulás és tanítás az információs
társadalomban: az E-learning 2.0 és a konnektivizmus. [Learning and
Teaching in the Information Society: E-Learning 2.0 and Connectivism]
Budapest. [Online] Available from:
http://www.ittk.hu/netis/doc/ISCB_hun/12_Bessenyei_eOktatas.pdf
[Accessed: 17th May 2016] (in Hungarian)
- Biggs, S. (2007). Thinking about generations: Conceptual
positions and policy implications. Journal of Social Issues. 63(1),
695–711.
- Billing, D. (2004). Teaching Learners From Varied Generations.
The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 35(4), 104-105.
- Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge
University Press.
- Brown, Malcolm (2005). Learning Spaces. In D. G. : Oblinger @ J.
L. Oblinger (Eds.), Educating the Net Generation. EDUCAUSE.
12.1.-12.22. [Online] Available from:
http://www.educause.edu/research-and-publications/books/educating-net-generation/learning-spaces
[Accessed: 17th May 2016]
- Castells, M. (1996). The Rise of the Network Society. The
Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture. 1. Cambridge, MA;
Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
- Castells, M. (1997). The Power of Identity. The Information Age:
Economy, Society and Culture. 2. Cambridge, MA; Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
- Castells, M. (1998). End of Millennium. The Information Age:
Economy, Society and Culture. 3. Cambridge, MA; Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
- Castells, M. (2006). The Network Society: from Knowledge to
Policy. In: M. Castells & G. Cardoso (Eds.): The Network Society:
From Knowledge to Policy (pp. 3-22) The Johns Hopkins University Press,
Center for Transatlantic Research Relations, Washington, DC
- Cisco – Intel – Microsoft (2009). Transforming Education:
Assessment and Teaching 21st Century Skills. [Online] Available from:
http://atc21s.org [Accessed: 17th May 2016]
- Combi, C. (2015). Generation Z: Their Voices, Their Lives.
London: Hutchinson.
- Csepeli, Gy. (2007). A jövőbe veszett generációk. [Generations
Lost in the Future] In M. Palcsó (Ed.) Mesterkurzus. [Master Course]
Budapest: Saxum. (pp. 87–105). (in Hungarian)
- Demers, D. (2005). Dictionary of Mass Communication and Media
Research: a guide for students, scholars and professionals, Marquette
Books, 143.
- Duga, Zs. (2013): Tudomány és a fiatalok kapcsolata [The
Connection between Youngsters and Science] Pécs
(TÁMOP-4.2.3-12/1/KONV-2012-0016) Tudománykommunikáció a Z
generációnak) [Science Communications to Generation Z] Available from:
http://www.zgeneracio.hu/getDocument/331 [Accessed: 17th May 2016] (in
Hungarian)
- Dunkels, E. (2007). Bridging the Distance – Children’s Strategies
on the Internet. Doktorsavhandlingar i pedagogiskt arbete, Umeå
Universitet. [Online] Available from:
http://www.kulturer.net/documents/bridging_hela.pdf [Accessed: 17th May
2016]
- Dupont,
S. (2015). Move Over Millennials, Here Comes Generation
Z: Understanding the 'New Realists' Who Are Building the Future. Public
Relations Tactics. Public Relations Society of America. [Online]
Available from:
https://www.prsa.org/Intelligence/Tactics/Articles/view/11057/1110/Move_Over_Millennials_Here_Comes_Generation_Z_Unde#.VzrhSfmLTIU
[Accessed: 17th May 2016]
- Esping-Andersen, G. (2002). The generational conflict
reconsidered. Journal of European Social Policy, 12(1). 5-21.
- EU Kids Online II (2011): A magyarországi kutatás eredményei.
[Results of the Hungarian Research] Nemzeti Média és Hírközlési
Hatóság, Budapest (in Hungarian)
- Fehér, P. & Hornyák J. (2010). Netgeneráció 2010: Egy
felmérés tanulságai. [Netgeneration 2010: Consequences of a Survey]
Budapest. [Online] Available from
http://hu.scribd.com/doc/48558319/Feher-Peter-Hornyak-Zsolt-Net-Generation-2010
[Accessed: 17th May 2016]
- Gass, S. & Selinker, L.(2008). Second Language Acquisition:
An Introductory Course. New York, NY: Routledge.
- Gergátz, I. (2009). ICT az 50+ generáció életében. [The Role of
ICT in the Life of 50+ Generation], Ph.D. Thesis, Pécsi Tudományegyetem
Közgazdaságtudományi Kar Gazdálkodástani Doktori Iskola, Pécs.
Available fom:
http://ktk.pte.hu/sites/default/files/mellekletek/2014/07/Gergatz_Ildiko_disszertacio.pdf
[Accessed: 17th May 2016] (in Hungarian)
- Glass, A.. (2007). Understanding generational differences for
competitive success. Industrial and Commercial Training, 39(2), 98-103.
- Gregory, J. & Steve M. (1998). Science in Public:
Communication, Culture, and Credibility. New York: Plenum Trade.
11-17., 88-98.
- Gregory, J. & Steve Miller (2006). Kereszttűzben? A
nyilvánosság szerepe a tudományháborúban. [Caught in the crossfire, the
public's role in the science wars] Replika, 54-55(1), 195-205.
- Guld, Á. & Maksa Gy. (2013): Fiatalok kommunikációjának és
médiahasználatának vizsgálata, [Investigations about the Communication
and Media Use of Youngsters] Pécs (TÁMOP-4.2.3-12/1/KONV-2012-0016)
Tudománykommunikáció a Z generációnak [Science Communications to
Generation Z] Available from: http://www.zgeneracio.hu/getDocument/501
[Accessed: 17th May 2016] (in Hungarian)
- Hall, J. M. (2007). A History of the Archaic Greek World.
Wiley-Blackwell.
- Hamza, K. M. & Wickman, P. (2013). Supporting Students’
Progression in Science: Continuity Between theParticular, the
Contingent, and theGeneral, 97(1), 113-138
- Harlick,
A. M. & Halleran, M. (2015). There Is No App for
That Adjusting University Education to Engage and Motivate Generation
Z. Conference: New Perspectives in Science Education, Italy. [Online]
Available from:
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/273893292_There_Is_No_App_for_That__Adjusting_University_Education_to_Engage_and_Motivate_Generation_Z
[Accessed: 17th May 2016]
- Hartyányi, M. (2010). A Net Generáció kihívása. Tanárok a hálón.
[Challenges of NetGeneration. Teachers on the Web] TeNeGEN. Budapest.
[Online] Available from:
http://www.tenegen.eu/sites/tenegen.eu/files/tenegen/books/R10_Tenegen_Book_HU_CD.pdf
[Accessed: 17th May 2016]
- Hinrichs, R. (2000). A Vision for Life Long Learning – Year 2020.
Introduction by Bill Gates. Learning Science and Technology Microsoft
Research. Microsoft. [Online] Available from:
http://vision.cer.uz/Data/lib/readings/ff_social_development/SOC_Microsoft__A_Vision_for_Life_Long_Learning__2020_EN_2006.pdf
[Accessed: 17th May 2016]
- Horovitz, B. (2012). After Gen X, Millennials, what should next
generation be? USA Today. [Online] Available from:
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/advertising/story/2012-05-03/naming-the-next-generation/54737518/1
[Accessed: 17th May 2016]
- Howard, J. A. (2000). Social Psychology of Identities, Annual
Review of Sociology, 26(1), 367-393.
- Howe, N. - Strauss, W. (1991). Generations: The History of
Americas Future, 1584 to 2069. New York: William Morrow. 299–316.
- HVG (2014): Klasszikus módszerekkel nem lehet a Z-generációt
tanítani. [GenZ Can’t be Taught by Classical Methods] [Online]
Available from
http://hvg.hu/plazs/20140424_Klasszikus_modszerekkel_nem_lehet_a_Zgen
[Accessed: 17th May 2016] (in Hungarian)
- Ipsos Media CT (2013). GenZ: The Limitless Generation – A Survey
of the 13-18 Year-Old Wikia Audience. [Online] Available from:
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/generation-z-a-look-at-the-technology-and-media-habits-of-todays-teens-198958011.html
[Accessed: 17th May 2016]
- Joshi, A. & Dencker, J. C. & Franz, G. & Martocchio,
J. J. (2010). Unpacking Generational Identities in Organizations.
Academy of Management Review,35(3), 392-414.
- Jukes, I. & Dosaj, A (2003). The differences between digital
native learners and digital immigrant teachers. The InfoSavvy Group.
[Online] Available from:
http://edorigami.wikispaces.com/Understanding+Digital+Children+-+Ian+Jukes
[Accessed: 17th May 2016]
- Jukes, I. & Dosaj, A. (2006). Understanding Digital Children
(DKs) Teaching & Learning in the New Digital Landscape, The
InfoSavvy Group. [Online] Available from:
https://web.archive.org/web/20061018134943/http://ianjukes.com/infosavvy/education/handouts/ndl.pdf
[Accessed: 17th May 2016]
- Karp, H. B. & Sirias, D. (2001). Generational Conflict A New
Paradigm for Teams of the 21st Century. Gestalt Review, 5(2), 71–87.
- Kolin, P. (2002). Idősek az információs társadalomban [Elders in
the Information Society], Evilág, Available from:
http://www.pointernet.pds.hu/ujsagok/evilag/2002/07/evilag-06.html
[Accessed: 17th May 2016] (in Hungarian)
- Komenczi, B. (2009). Informatizált iskolai tanulási környezetek
modelljei. [Models of Computerized School Learning Environments]
Oktatáskutató és Fejlesztő Intézet, Budapest. [Online] Available from:
http://regi.ofi.hu/tudastar/iskola-informatika/komenczi-bertalan
[Accessed: 17th May 2016]
- Kristiansen, R. (2011). Digital natives - Thinking map. [Online]
Available from:
http://roarkristiansensblogg.blogspot.hu/2011/03/digital-natives-mindmap.html
[Accessed: 17th May 2016]
- Landon, J. (1980). Great Expectations: America and the Baby Boom
Generation, New York: Coward, McCann and Geoghegan
- Lengyel, Gy. (2003). Az információs technológia terjedésének
társadalmi hatásairól. [The Social Effects of Sprading Information
Technology] In. Információs technológia és életminőség [Information
Technology and the Quality of Life] BKÁE Szociológia és Szociálpolitika
Tanszék, Budapest, pp. 5-10. Available from
http://unipub.lib.uni-corvinus.hu/526/1/ite1_bev.pdf [Accessed: 17th
May 2016] (in Hungarian)
- Lewenstein, B. V. (2003). Models of public communication of
science and technology. [Online] Available from:
http://disciplinas.stoa.usp.br/pluginfile.php/43775/mod_resource/content/1/Texto/Lewenstein%202003.pdf
[Accessed: 17th May 2016]
- Mannheim, K. (1952). The Problem of Generations. In Kecskemeti,
Paul. Essays on the Sociology of Knowledge: Collected Works, Vol. 5.
New York: Routledge. 276-322.
- Markert, J. (2004). Demographics of Age: Generational and Cohort
Confusion. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising. 26,
15.
- Masnick, G. (2013). Defining the Generations. Harvard Joint
Center for Housing Studies. Available from:
http://housingperspectives.blogspot.hu/2012/11/defining-generations.html
[Accessed: 17th May 2016]
- McCrindle, M. (2010). The ABC of XYZ. Australia: University of
New South Wales.
- McWilliam, Er. (2015). Teaching Gen Z. EricaMcWilliam.com.
[Online] Available from:
http://www.ericamcwilliam.com.au/teaching-gen-z/ [Accessed: 17th May
2016]
- Menco Platform (2013). Top 10 Educational Trends by Menco
platform on Flickr. [Online] Available from:
http://pinterest.com/pin/240520436321607462/ [Accessed: 17th May 2016]
- Miller, J. D. (2012). The Generation X Report: Active, Balanced,
and Happy: These young Americans are not bowling alone. University of
Michigan, Longitudinal Study of American Youth, funded by the National
Science Foundation.
- Molnár Gy. (2007). New ICT Tools in Education - Classroom of the
Future Project. In. D. Solesa (Ed.): The fourth international
conference on informatics,Moleducational technology and new media in
education. A. D. Novi Sad. pp.332-339. [Online] Available from:
http://www.staff.u-szeged.hu/~gymolnar/New_ICT_tools_in_Education_paper_pictures.pdf
[Accessed: 17th May 2016]
- Molnár, Gy. (2008). The use of innovative tools in teacher
education: a case study. In: D. Solesa (Ed.): The fifth international
conference on informatics, educational technology and new media in
education. A. D. Novi Sad. pp. 44-49. Available from:
http://www.staff.u-szeged.hu/~gymolnar/sombor_2.pdf [Accessed: 17th May
2016]
- Nahalka, I. (2002). Hogyan alakul ki a tudás a gyerekekben?
Konstruktivizmus és pedagógia. [The Development of Knowledge in
Children: Constructivism and Pedagogy] Budapest, Nemzeti Tankönyvkiadó.
(in Hungarian)
- Ng, E.S.W. & Lyons, S.T. & Schweitzer, L. (2010). New
generation, great expectations: A field study of the millennial
generation. Journal of Business Psychology, 25(1), 281-292.
- NOL (2014): A fiatalok gyors információkra vágynak, nem elmélyült
fejtegetésekre. [Youngsters want fast informations not deep
considerations] [Online] Available from:
http://nol.hu/belfold/a-fiatalok-gyors-informaciokra-vagynak-nem-elmelyult-fejtegetesekre-1458275
[Accessed: 17th May 2016] (in Hungarian)
- Nyíri, K. (1999). Identitáskérdések az elektronikus hálózottság
korában. [Questions about Identities in the Era of Electric Networks]
Magyar Pszichológiai Szemle, 56 (1), 19-21. (in Hungarian)
- Nyíri, K. (2004). Információs társadalom és nemzeti kultúra. .
[Information Society and National Culture], Információs Társadalom,
5(1), 7- 16. (in Hungarian)
- Oblinger,
D. G. & Oblinger, J. L. (2005). Is It Age or IT:
First Steps Toward Understanding Ethe Net Generation. In: Oblinger, D.
G. & Oblinger, J. L. (Eds.): Educating the Net Generation.
EDUCAUSE. 2.1-2.20. [Online] Available from:
http://www.educause.edu/research-and-publications/books/educating-net-generation/it-age-or-it-first-steps-toward-understanding-net-generation
[Accessed: 17th May 2016]
- Olympiou, G. & Zacharia, Z. C. (2011). Blending physical and
virtual manipulatives: An effort to improve students' conceptual
understanding through science laboratory experimentation. Science
Education, 96(1), 21-47.
- Owram, Doug (1997). Born at the Right Time, Toronto: Univ Of
Toronto Press.
- Palugyai, I. & Wormer, H. & Lehmkuhl, M. & Bán, L.
& Neumann, V. (2012). Tudományos újságírás. [Science Journalism]
Budapest: Tudományos Újságírók Klubja.
- Papert, S. (1996). The Connected Family. Longstreet Publishing,
Atlanta.
- Parry, E. & Urwin, P. (2011). Generational Differences in
Work Values: A Review of Theory and Evidence. International Journal of
Management Reviews, (13)1, 79–96.
- Pease, M. A. & Kuhn, D. (2010). Experimental analysis of the
effective components of problem-based learning, 95(1), 57-86.
- Pilcher, J. (1994). Mannheim's Sociology of Generations: An
undervalued legacy. British Journal of Sociology, 45(3), 481–495.
- Pintér, Dániel Gergő (2013a). A tudományos tartalmú
közlésfolyamat a globális médiatérben. [Science Communication in Global
Media] Tudományos Próbapálya Conference Book. PEME. pp. 23. ISBN
979-963-88433-8-8 Available from:
http://www.peme.hu/userfiles/Interdiszciplin%C3%A1lis%20%C3%A9s%20tudom%C3%A1nyfiloz%C3%B3fia.pdf
[Accessed: 17th May 2016] (in Hungarian)
- Pintér, Dániel Gergő (2015). Bruno Latour Cselekvő Hálózat
Elméletének alkalmazása a modern tudománykommunikációban [The
Application of Bruno Latour’s ANT int he field of Science
Communication] In. III. Interdiszciplináris Doktorandusz Konferencia
2014. Conference Book ISBN 978-963-642-741-2. pp. 455-465o. [Online]
Available from: http://phdpecs.hu/idk2014/index.html [Accessed:
17th May 2016]
- Pintér,Dániel Gergő (2013b). Semmivel sem törődik a Z-generáció.
[GenZ doesn’t Care abut Anything] Média 2.0 Blog. [Online] Available
from: http://media20.blog.hu/2013/04/18/a_boseg_zavara_121 [Accessed:
17th May 2016]
- Prensky, M. (2001): Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the
Horizon, 9(5), 1–6.
- Roberts,
G. R. (2005). Technology and Learning Expectations of
the Net Generation. In Oblinger, Diana. G. and Oblinger, James. L.
(Eds.). Educating the Net Generation. EDUCAUSE. 3.13.7. [Online]
Available from:
http://www.educause.edu/research-and-publications/books/educating-net-generation/technology-and-learning-expectations-net-generation
[Accessed: 17th May 2016]
- Rückriem, G. (2009). Digital technology and mediation: A
challenge to activity theory. In A. Sannino & H. Daniels & K.
Gutierrez (Eds.), Learning and expanding with activity theory. pp.
30-38. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Smetana, L. K. & Wenner, J. & Settlage, J. & McCoach,
D. B. (2016). Clarifying and Capturing “Trust” in Relation to Science
Education: Dimensions of Trustworthiness within Schools and
Associations with Equitable Student Achievement. Science Education,
100(1), 78-95.
- Sterbenz, C. (2015). Here's who comes after Generation Z - and
they're going to change the world forever. Business Insider. . [Online]
Available from:
http://www.businessinsider.com/generation-alpha-2014-7-2 [Accessed:
17th May 2016]
- Strauss, W. & Howe, N. (2000). Millennials Rising: The Next
Great Generation. Cartoons by R.J. Matson. New York, NY: Vintage
Original. 370.
- Tari, A. (2011). Z generáció [Generation Z] Budapest: Tericum
Kiadó Kft. (in Hungarian)
- Trunk, P. (2009). What Generation Z will be Like at Work.
[Online] Available from:
http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2009/07/27/what-work-will-be-like-for-generation-z/
- Turner, A. (2015). Generation Z: Technology and Social Interest.
Journal of Individual Psychology. 71(2), 103-113.
- Ujhelyi, A. (2013). Digitális nemzedék – szociálpszichológiai
szempontból [Digital Generation from the Perspective of Social
Psychology] Digitális Nemzedék 2013 Conference Book, Budapest, 9-14.
(in Hungarian)
- Urick, M. J. (2012). Exploring Generational Identity: A
Multiparadigm Approach. Journal of Business Diversity, 12(3), 103-115.
- Vikat, A. & Spéder, Zs. & Beets, G. & Billari, F.
& Bühler, C. & Desesquelles, A. & Fokkema, T. & Hoem,
J. M. & MacDonald, A. & Neyer, G. & Pailhé, A. &
Pinnelli, A. & Solaz, A. (2007): Generations and Gender Survey
(GGS): Towards a Better Understanding of Relationships and Processes in
the Life Course. Demographic Research, 17(14), 389-440. Webster, F.
(1997). Theories of the Information Society. London: Routledge.
Available from:
http://cryptome.org/2013/01/aaron-swartz/Information-Society-Theories.pdf
[Accessed: 17th May 2016]
- West, A. & Pen, I. & Griffin, A. S. (2002).
Cooperation and Competition Between Relatives. Science, 296(5565),
72-75.
- Williams, A. (2015). Meet Alpha: The Next ‘Next Generation. New
York Times. [Online] Available from:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/19/fashion/meet-alpha-the-next-next-generation.html?_r=0
[Accessed: 17th May 2016]
- Yelkikalan, N. & Ayhun, S. E. (2013). Examination of the
Conflicts Between X and Y Generations: Research for Academicians.
European Scientific Journal, 9(19), 19-33.
- Z. Karvalics, L. (2013). From Scientific Literacy to Lifelong
Research: A Social Innovation Approach. Worldwide Commonalities and
Challenges in Information Literacy Research and Practice, 397(1),
126-133
- Z. Karvalics, L. (2013). Mangalány mondja: közeledik a „digitális
beavatottak” ideje. [Manga Girl says: the "Digital Initiates' Time
Approaching] Conference Book: Digitális nemzedék 2013 Konferencia,
Budapest, 19-23. (in Hungarian)
- Z. Karvalics, L. (2014). Digitális kultúra és pedagógia: a
történeti metszéspontoktól az információs írástudások új generációjáig
[Digital Culture and Pedagogy] In. Polgári nevelés – Digitális oktatás.
Nyelv és módszer, Magyar nyelvstratégiai Intézet, 68-84. (in Hungarian)
- Zipernovzky, H. (2008). Felesleges időtöltés? [Useless Pasttime?]
Tanszertár, Budapest. [Online] Available from:
http://www.tanszertar.hu/eken/2008_02/zh_0802.htm [Accessed: 17th May
2016] (in Hungarian)
[1] This work was realized in the frames of OTKA
K-109456 “Integrated reasoning”
[2] During the past decades several researchers
analysed the generation conflicts and the challenges related to
coexistence of the older and younger generations (Esping - Andersen,
2002), its theoretical basis is defined on one hand by the classical
sociological thesis of Mannheim describing the generations as social
phenomena (Mannheim, 1952), and on the other hand by the definition of
individual habitude given by Bourdieu (Bourdieu, 1977). On this field
changes to the attitude is also measured by quantitative sociological
methods.(Andres et al., 2007), but the gap created the deviating
characteristics of generation X and Y (Yelkilalan & Ayhun, 2013),
the distribution problem (Asheim & Tungodden, 2004), challenges
represented by teaching students of different age (Billing,
2004), identity and values of diversified employees (Joshi et al.,
2010; Parry & Urwin, 2011) and the successful economic cooperation
of heterogeneous teams (Karp & Sirias, 2001; Glass, 2007) are also
popular topics.
[3] The field of PUS is in seek of answer to the
question how the population is related to the scientific product, what
image media communicates about science, how and on what channels, with
the help of what devices the relation between the non-professional
publicity and the science community is created. (Bauer, 2009) The
definition includes either the “normative and practical definitions
related to social understanding of science, or the main principles of
this area of science, or the social and educational commotion, which
rose after bringing up the problem; at the same time, the term is a
position profile, and area of research and practise for academics and
communicators.” (Pintér, 2013a:23)
[4] Closely related concepts are the post-industrial
society (Bell, 1974), post-fordism, post-modern society, knowledge
society, telematic society, information revolution, liquid modernity,
and network society. (Castells, 1996; 1997; 1998)
[5] Naturally the analysis of the next, so called
Generation Alpha or Generation Glass also raises several questions from
the aspect of terminology and sociology as well; this means a more and
more definitive focus of research for the sociologists. (McCrindle,
2010; Williams, 2015; Sterbenz, 2015; etc.)
[6] According to the basic principle of
socio-linguistics any language knowledge, which we obtain otherwise
than our native language, i.e. during our life, is stored at other
parts of our brain, and can be recalled in other – sometimes less
successful – ways. (Gass & Selinker, 2008)
[7] Non-traditional scientific sites provide the
experience of active observation and build also on the technical
skills, practical common sense, attention sharing and troubleshooting
skills of those born at the end of 1990s. Until meeting-up of the
pedagogical work going on in schools, the potential hidden in
environmental, informal education provided out of school lessons is
able to compensate – even if only partially and temporarily – this
generation. While the quantity of marketable knowledge obtained in
normal education is decreasing due to the often outdated methods, the
other channels used by the students provide them growing knowledge.
[8] Lewenstein uses the Rational Choice Theory for
this process, what focuses on the problem that from the uncountable
amount of knowledge which are the ones average people should inevitably
know so that they can positively influence the quality of their life in
a world interwoven with science. (Lewenstein, 2003)
[9] According to the basic theory of pedagogical
constructivism students learn that knowledge easier in what they are
directly involved, what is tangible for them, with what they meet in
living situation. (Nahalka, 2002)
[10] The Lay Expertise Model of science communication
is built on this idea; it supposes that the existing practical
knowledge is at least of the same importance as the theoretical
scientific knowledge. (Lewenstein, 2003) According to the scheme there
are experts also in excess of scientists and teachers; e.g. on the
field of info-communication the members of generation Z can rather be
considered experts than the pedagogues belonging to generation X or Y.
[11] This process is described in more details in
Public Engagement of Science model). (Lewenstein, 2003)
[12] In 2013 MENCO Platform carried out a research by
involvement of 100 Western European and American pedagogues, and it
resulted in that also the pedagogues are open to modernisation of
teaching, a significant number of them is interested in application of
online devices for teaching purposes. (Menco Platform, 2013)
[13] Formation of educational models is also
inevitable because the first global digital generation will enter the
labour market in a couple of years. Although in the article I did not
discuss the members of generation Z as employees, decisions on
modernisation of school lessons would be worth to think over by the
methodology developers also in respect of that the presence of the ones
born at the end of 1990s will obviously influence life at workplaces as
well. Since this age-class becoming adult, will cause changes not only
in the company systems, it will be not enough to be prepared to accept
the future “dotcom” adults only on behalf of the organisations, but
also the pedagogues should align the content of the curriculum, the
requirements and forms of call for accounting to the expectations of
the labour market.