Characterizing a Generation

 

"The Eight Net Gen Norms" 

 

 

      Chapter 3 from Donald Tapscott’s (2009) Grown up Digital discusses the eight norms that characterize the Net Generation. As a member of the Net Generation, I found this chapter interesting as I related to many of the outlined characteristics. The norms discussed were:

 

Freedom

Customization

Scrutiny

Integrity

Collaboration

Entertainment

Speed

Innovation

 

PROS:

     

     I appreciated most of the norms as they were relatable to me as a member of the Net Gen demographic. Norms like collaboration and speed were familiar to my personal experiences as well as my experiences teaching Net Gen learners. Collaboration emphasizes that “Net Geners are natural collaborators” (Tapscott, 2009, p. 89). The formulation of Wikipedia is used as an inspiring example of how the use of technology has enhanced worldwide collaboration and ultimately, functioned to transform modern society. The proof is in the development of a number of collaborative tools like Web 2.0, Knowledge Forums, and Blogging sites. Tapscott (2009) recognizes the reciprocal impact of the individual (using their collaborative skills) on the environment (by creating a worldwide Wiki) as well as the environments influence on the individual Net Geners. In other words, “new collaboration […] would have been impossible to achieve without a new generation of collaboration tools” (Tapscott, 2009, p. 91). Tapscott (2009) takes a holistic view at the impact of these norms on professional, personal, and social practices, which makes this paper hard to refute.

 

CHALLENGES:

 

      Where I found myself disagreeing was regarding the norm titled, “Scrutiny”, which suggests that “today’s youth have the ability to distinguish between fact and fiction” (Tapscott, 2009). With Critical Media Literacy being one of my passions, I have read a lot of research that suggests otherwise; Net Geners are actually influenced tremendously by what they see and hear and must be taught the skills to think critically or scrutinize their surroundings.  Tapscott (2009) suggests, “The Net Generation knows to be skeptical whenever they’re online”. Kellner and Share (2005), on the other hand, stress that “Computer and multimedia technologies demand novel skills and competencies” and therefore, require “new curricula and pedagogies” (p. 370-371). From the research I have read, Net Geners require the ability to distinguish between fact and fiction but have not effectively acquired those skills. From my personal experiences, I did not acquire critical media literacy skills until my Undergraduate degree.

 

      Tapscott (2009) uses the “Evolution” Dove campaign as an example of the scrutiny of Net Geners. However, he notes that the video was “a big hit” (p. 80) but I wonder if this was due to Net Geners disbelief when they saw that video. I was personally shocked and could not believe that pictures and videos were edited to that extreme. In other words, as a Net Gener I was not critical enough of the media that surrounded me. I pride myself in being a critical thinker and yet, I am first to recognize that I had to develop these skills. Kellner and Share (2005) recognize that our North American education does not support the efficient development of critical media literacy skills despite Tapscott's (2009) recognition of their scrutiny.

QUESTIONS:

1. How will these norms affect the future and the norms of the next generation?
2. Are these norms too generalized to include an entire generation?
3. What about those that do not conform to these norms, where do they fit in?
4. Is the Net Generation a worldwide phenomenon? Or are they mainly North American?

*In the following video, Tapscott addresses the division of the generation (top 1/3 vs. bottom 1/3):

 

 





Kellner, D., & Share, J. (2005). Toward critical media literacy: Core concepts, debates, organizations, and policy. Discourse: studies in the culture politics of education, 26(3), 369-386.

Tapscott, D. (2009). “Characteristics of a Generation: The Eight Net Gen Norms”. In Growing up digital. (pp. 73-96). New York: McGraw-Hill. Retrieved from

http://faculty.uoit.ca/kay/courses/educ5303g/lessons/lesson4/Tapscott_GUD_2009_Chapter3.pdf

Critical Thinking: Skill or Process?

After scanning the definitions we developed surrounding “critical thinking”, I do believe that I possess the skills involved in being a critical thinker. I believe these skills lead to me to my graduate studies and allow me to continue to learn and develop in this higher educational setting. I have always felt as though critical thinking is one of my strengths. As I continue in my M.Ed., I am learning that critical thinking can be judged based on a continuum.  Yes, I am a critical thinker, probably more so than the average person. Can I always reflect, evaluate, and synthesize more? Of course.

       This new understanding of the levels of critical thinking has developed into a new personal strength. By evaluating my own level of critical thinking, I am recognizing that I can continue to develop these skills in various areas with focused reflection and analysis. Another strength I have is that I learn from the critical perspectives of others by reflecting on those ideas to reevaluate my own.  However, an area I would like to improve is challenging those perspectives from various angles in order to enhance my own learning as well as my peers. It is easy to accept a well-developed statement as an idea or perspective that was not considered by yourself; it is much more difficult, and purposeful, to reexamine that statement as well as the subject being discussed. Critical thinking is not only a skill to develop; it is a process in which I continue to work at in order to strengthen my intellect.