Skip to main content
Registrieren
Springer Professional
SUCHE
MENÜ 1 2 3 4
nach oben

Tipp

Weitere Kapitel dieses Buchs durch Wischen aufrufen

Erschienen in:
Digital Transformation and Human Behavior: An Introduction Kapitel lesen Erstes Kapitel lesen

2021 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

The Preferred Learning Styles of Generation Z: Do They Differ from the Ones of Previous Generations?

verfasst von : Beatrice Manzoni, Leonardo Caporarello, Federica Cirulli, Federico Magni

Erschienen in: Digital Transformation and Human Behavior

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten
share
TEILEN

Abstract

A new generation, named Generation Z (born after 1996), is currently in education and it will soon approach the job market. Knowing how they engage in learning is critical to design effective learning experiences both in academia and at work. However, being the newest generation, it is also the least studied one, especially in academic research. With this paper we aim to explore Gen Zers’ preferred learning styles and to compare them with the ones of previous generations. We collected data from 870 Italian MSc students and Executive Education participants to assess their learning styles using Kolb’s learning style inventory. We found that Gen Zers have higher preferences towards the assimilating learning style (combining abstract conceptualization and reflective observation), while Baby Boomers and Gen X prefer the accommodating style (combining active experimentation and concrete experience). There results conflict with the common stereotypes—mainly based on qualitative evidence—about the youngest generation, which see them as a generation that needs to engage in a highly informal, interactive and experience-based learning. Implications for theory and practice follow.

Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 69.000 Bücher
  • über 500 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt 90 Tage mit der neuen Mini-Lizenz testen!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 50.000 Bücher
  • über 380 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe



 


Jetzt 90 Tage mit der neuen Mini-Lizenz testen!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 58.000 Bücher
  • über 300 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko





Jetzt 90 Tage mit der neuen Mini-Lizenz testen!

Jetzt informieren
Vorheriges Kapitel Socio-Technical Interplay in a Two-Sided Market: The Case of Learning Platforms
Nächstes Kapitel Is This What You Want? Looking for the Appropriate Digital Skills Set
Literatur
1.
Twenge, J. M. (2017). iGen: Why today’s super-connected kids are growing up less rebellious, more tolerant, less happy—and completely unprepared for adulthood (and what this means for the rest of us). New York: Unabridged.
2.
Carstens, A., & Beck, J. (2005). Get ready for the gamer generation. TechTrends, 49(3), 22–25. CrossRef
3.
Thompson, P. (2013). The digital natives as learners: Technology use patterns and approaches to learning. Computers & Education, 65, 12–33. CrossRef
4.
Seemiller, C., & Grace, M. (2017). Generation Z: Educating and engaging the next generation of students. About Campus Enriching the Student Learning, 22(3), 21–26. CrossRef
5.
Jones, V., Jo, J., & Martin, P. (2007). Future schools and how technology can be used to support millennial and generation-Z students. In C. H. Kim (eds.), Proceedings of 1st International Conference of Ubiquitous Information Technology, Dubai.
6.
Caporarello, L., Giovanazzi, A., & Manzoni, B. (2019). (E)Learning and what else? Looking back to move forwards. In: A. Lazazzara, R. Nacamulli, C. Rossignoli, & S. Za (eds.), Organizing for digital innovation. Lecture Notes in information systems and organisation (Vol. 27). Springer, Cham.
7.
Spires, H.A. (2008). 21st century skills and serious games: Preparing the N generation. In L. A. Annetta (eds.), Serious educational games (pp. 13–23). Sense Publishing, Rotterdam.
8.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
9.
Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2013). The Kolb Learning Style Inventory 4.0: A comprehensive guide to the theory, psychometrics, research on validity and educational applications. Hay Resources Direct, Boston.
10.
Oblinger, D., & Oblinger, J. (2004). The next generation of educational engagement. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 8, 1–18.
11.
Lyons, S., & Kuron, L. (2014). Generational differences in the workplace: A review of the evidence and directions for future research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(S1), 139-S157. CrossRef
12.
Magni, F., & Manzoni, B. (2019). L’enfasi sui Millennial ci fa trascurare gli altri. Harvard Business Review Italia, April, pp. 8–11 (2019).
13.
Lai, K. W., & Hong, K. S. (2015). Technology use and learning characteristics of students in higher education: Do generational differences exist? British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(4), 725–738.
14.
Kupperschmidt, B. R. (2000). Multigenerational employees: Strategies for effective management. The Health Care Manager, 19, 65–76. CrossRef
15.
16.
Gerber, S., & Scott, L. (2011). Gamers and gaming context: Relationships to critical thinking. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(5), 842–849. CrossRef
17.
18.
Gerber, S., Scott, L., Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2005). Instructor influence on reasoned argument in discussion boards. Educational Technology Research & Development, 53(2), 25–39. CrossRef
19.
Beck, C. J., & Wade, M. (2004). Got game: How the gamer generation is reshaping business forever. Boston MA: Harvard Business School Press.
20.
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. CrossRef
21.
Palmer, E. (2011). Visual learning styles among digital natives, Department of Computer Graphics Technology Degree Theses. Paper 2.
22.
Colbert, A., Yee, N., & George, G. (2016). The digital workforce and the workplace of the future. Academy of Management Journal, 59(3), 731–739. CrossRef
23.
Annetta, L. A., Minogue, J., Holmes, S. Y., & Cheng, M. T. (2009). Investigating the impact of video games on high school students’ engagement and learning about genetics. Computers & Education, 53, 74–85. CrossRef
24.
Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave/Macmillan. CrossRef
25.
26.
Igel, C., & Urquhart, V. (2012). Generation Z meet cooperative learning. Middle School Journal, 43(4), 16–21. CrossRef
27.
Hendel-Giller, R., Hollenbach, C., Marshall, D., Oughton, K., Pickthorn, T., Schilling, M., & Versiglia, G. (2010). The neuroscience of learning: A new paradigm for corporate education. The Martiz Institute White Paper (pp. 1–19).
28.
Karl, M. (2007). Gadgets, games, and gizmos for learning: Tools and techniques for transferring know how from boomers to gamers. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.
29.
Levine, J. (2006). Gaming and libraries: Intersection of services. Library Technology Reports, 42(5), 10–17.
30.
Corti, K. (2006). Games-based Learning; a serious business application. Informe De Pixel Learning, 36(4), 1–20.
31.
Peciuliauskiene, P. (2014). E-learning and motivation for learning physics at school: the case of generations Y and Z. In DIVAI 2014: 10th International Scientific Conference on Distance Learning in Applied Informatics (pp. 441–451). Štúrovo, Slovakia
32.
Barnes, K., Marateo, R. C., & Ferris, S. P.(2007). Teaching and learning with the net generation. Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 3(4).
33.
Williams, J., & Chinn, S. J. (2009). Using web 2.0 to support the active learning experience. Journal of Information Systems Education, 20(2), 165–174.
34.
Sarkar, N., Ford. W., & Manzo, C. (2017). Engaging digital natives through social learning. Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, 15(2).
35.
Bencsik, A., Horváth-Csikós, G., & Juhász, T. (2016). Y and Z generations at workplaces. Journal of Competitiveness, 8(3), 90–106. CrossRef
36.
Wolfson, N. E., Cavanagh, T. M., & Kraiger, K. (2014). Older adults and technology based instruction: Optimizing learning outcomes and transfer. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 13, 26–44. CrossRef
37.
38.
Koh, C. (2015). Understanding and facilitating learning for the net generation and twenty-first-century learners through motivation, leadership and curriculum design. In C. Koh (ed.), Motivation, Leadership and Curriculum Design: Engaging The Net Generation and 21st Century Learners (pp. 1–10). Springer Science+Business Media, Singapore.
39.
Csobanka, Z. E. (2016). The Z Generation. Acta Technologica Dubnicae, 6(2), 63–76. CrossRef
40.
Cilliers, E. J. (2017). The challenge of teaching Generation Z. People: International Journal of Social Sciences, 3(1), 188–198.
41.
42.
Logan, K., &Thomas, P. (2002). Learning styles in distance education students learning to program. In Proceedings of 14th Workshop of the Psychology of Programming Interest Group, Brunel University, pp. 29–44.
43.
Curry, L. (1983). An organization of learning styles theory and constructs. Montreal, Canada: Paper presented at The American Educational Research Association.
44.
Passarelli, A. M., & Kolb, D. A. (2012). Using experiential learning theory to promote student learning and development in programs of education abroad. In M. Vande Berg, R. M. Paige, & K. Hemming Lou (eds.), Student learning abroad: What our students are learning, what they are not, and what we can do about it (pp. 137–161). Stylus Publishing, Sterling, VA.
45.
Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2009). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9, 105–119. CrossRef
46.
Brown, J. (2000). Growing up digital: How the web changes work. Education, and the Ways People Learn, Change, 52(2), 11–20.
47.
Felder, R. M. (1996). Matters of style. ASEE Prism, 6, 18–23.
48.
Twenge, J. M. (2010). A review of the empirical evidence on generational differences in work attitudes. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25(2), 201–210. CrossRef
49.
Keyes, K. M., Utz, R. L., Robinson, W., & Li, G. (2010). What is a cohort effect? Comparison of three statistical methods for modeling cohort effects in obesity prevalence in the United States, 1971–2006. Social Science & Medicine, 70(7), 1100–1108. CrossRef
50.
Keller, T., & Tergan, S. O. (2005). Visualizing knowledge and information: An introduction. In S. O. Tergan, T. Keller, (eds.), Knowledge and information visualization—searching for synergies , LNCS (Vol. 3426). Springer, Berlin.
51.
Metadaten
Titel
The Preferred Learning Styles of Generation Z: Do They Differ from the Ones of Previous Generations?
verfasst von
Beatrice Manzoni
Leonardo Caporarello
Federica Cirulli
Federico Magni
Copyright-Jahr
2021
Buch
Digital Transformation and Human Behavior

Print ISBN: 978-3-030-47538-3

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-030-47539-0

Copyright-Jahr: 2021

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47539-0_5

Premium Partner