Lately, I have felt that the discussions have ended and I am no longer a part of a community online. With the advent of tools like twitter and even the changes to facebook, I feel that we have reverted back to "I'm going to give you sound bites and it is up to you to listen or not. I'm not really interested in your opinion."
I felt that when the new web tools first were established (blogs, myspace, etc...) that there was a renewed engagement between people in cyberspace. Suddenly those that never had a voice were given a voice to craft their message and engage in dialogue. Time was not as much of a factor. A deeper level of understanding between writers and readers was established.
However, I currently have three facebook accounts. One is actually my daughter's, the other is just for family and friends, and the last is for students and colleagues. I post, but there is always a resounding silence after. I am sure for many of my students, I my comments are hidden. With so many comments coming in, many of them just have very superficial conversations.
Now don't get me wrong. I see a valuable service in facebook and twitter, especially when you want to communicate information to a large group of people quickly. But there is no two way communication the way a blog or a ning or even the original design of facebook allowed. And what two way communication there is usually private, so there is not the same level of community. I also feel that the people that originally embraced the Web 2.0 to give themselves a voice they never had have been pushed aside for commercial and mainstream opinion leader's use. It is a bit like starting a conversation with someone in the popular group when you were in high school and having the rest of the popular group join in and push you out to the side because you aren't part of their group.
I hope we go back to the idea of community on the web and the feeling of belonging in an online community. But I'm not sure that can happen in today's battlefield over users (how many friends can YOU collect?). What do you think? (I have a feeling without tweeting this, there will just be a big resounding "silence." Oh, well).
Friday, March 26, 2010
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
The Dissertation Process: Envy and motivation
First, I'd like to congratulate Karyn Romeis for getting her Masters. This week another classmate successfully defended her dissertation and 4 of my classmates that started the program after me also will be defending their dissertations within the month. It is a bit depressing as I finish up the analyzing the final data on the first few questions of my dissertation. Speaking to my dissertation chair, it looks like it will be another year before I can hope to complete my degree.
On the one hand, I get such a sinking feeling each time someone I know finishes their degree. It is a feeling of disappointment that after almost 8 years, I'm still not finished. On the other hand, it motivates me to keep working, even if I only have about half an hour a day of free time to do so, between raising 2 teenagers, teaching 3 university classes, and helping to take care of 3 elderly ailing relatives. I am lucky I have a husband who can help with the daily activities (he's currently at my son's Lacrosse game about 20 miles away).
But I know the feeling of achievement will be overwhelming when I do complete my dissertation. My last Masters degree only took 10 years to complete (between working overseas, moving back to the US, working two jobs..one full-time, one part-time and having a baby). So I know I can complete it. So this post is for all of you working on completing that Bachelor's, Masters, or PhD. Let the envy motivate you, rather than depress you that you haven't finished yet.
On the one hand, I get such a sinking feeling each time someone I know finishes their degree. It is a feeling of disappointment that after almost 8 years, I'm still not finished. On the other hand, it motivates me to keep working, even if I only have about half an hour a day of free time to do so, between raising 2 teenagers, teaching 3 university classes, and helping to take care of 3 elderly ailing relatives. I am lucky I have a husband who can help with the daily activities (he's currently at my son's Lacrosse game about 20 miles away).
But I know the feeling of achievement will be overwhelming when I do complete my dissertation. My last Masters degree only took 10 years to complete (between working overseas, moving back to the US, working two jobs..one full-time, one part-time and having a baby). So I know I can complete it. So this post is for all of you working on completing that Bachelor's, Masters, or PhD. Let the envy motivate you, rather than depress you that you haven't finished yet.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Student run online conference in International Business Education
As I mentioned in my last post, my students are running an online conference in International Business Education. Here is what they wrote for me to post:
On March 24, the Siena College Marketing class will host an online conference on International Business Education. It will link the study of business and working in the business world, differences in educational systems and goals that impact business education, international programs and exchange programs in business. To register click here.
On March 24, the Siena College Marketing class will host an online conference on International Business Education. It will link the study of business and working in the business world, differences in educational systems and goals that impact business education, international programs and exchange programs in business. To register click here.
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Using online conferences in student learning
This semester, my students in my international marketing class are putting together an online conference in International Business Education.
It has been a long road to 1) get students to understand what an online conference would look like, 2) get student groups to work together, 3) get students to think off campus (many have only been using the resources of the college, not even looking to local resources).
However, I think finally there is a light at the end of the tunnel, albeit a bit late. Time is a factor my students always have trouble with. Surprisingly, they also are very myopic when it comes to the tools they know. For example, none of them were even considering using their networks on facebook, even though a number of them have friends studying abroad. In addition, trying to get them to use new technology such as delicious or a wiki has been a struggle.
I use these projects, however, as a learning tool for my students. In the end, the conference might not be that successful (I'm still holding out hope though). But learning things such as the amount of time something like this might take and how to use your network to market and gain access to information is more important. In a month, after the conference, students will be presenting in groups what they learned from the process of putting together and running the conference. This is when I will know if I have been successful or not.
Anyone interested in participating in the conference, I will be posting information as soon as my students email me what they have developed! Keep posted.
It has been a long road to 1) get students to understand what an online conference would look like, 2) get student groups to work together, 3) get students to think off campus (many have only been using the resources of the college, not even looking to local resources).
However, I think finally there is a light at the end of the tunnel, albeit a bit late. Time is a factor my students always have trouble with. Surprisingly, they also are very myopic when it comes to the tools they know. For example, none of them were even considering using their networks on facebook, even though a number of them have friends studying abroad. In addition, trying to get them to use new technology such as delicious or a wiki has been a struggle.
I use these projects, however, as a learning tool for my students. In the end, the conference might not be that successful (I'm still holding out hope though). But learning things such as the amount of time something like this might take and how to use your network to market and gain access to information is more important. In a month, after the conference, students will be presenting in groups what they learned from the process of putting together and running the conference. This is when I will know if I have been successful or not.
Anyone interested in participating in the conference, I will be posting information as soon as my students email me what they have developed! Keep posted.
Sunday, March 7, 2010
Defining culture
Perhaps one of the most difficult things in speaking of culture is determining what we mean by "culture." Depending on the discipline, culture can be a tool, a level of cognition that contains values, language, methods of communication, shared processes and understanding, and "world view" based on history, shared experience, and the environment, or a perception of the social structures within which people function (Anthrobase, Culture)
However, anyone who has crossed culture boundaries or lived within multi-tiered cultures, realize that "culture" is very difficult to put into words. Sometimes, it is easier to look at ways in which culture can be described, rather than describing what culture is.
The Problem of Sterotyping
One of the problems in using different ways to describe a culture is that people will rigidly categorize a person as belonging to a certain "culture" having predefined values. As humans, we have developed a natural instinct to interpret data about other people based on our experience. When we meet a person for the first time, instinctively we look for certain traits to identify if a person is a threat, a friend, or someone we can't define. This is natural survival instinct.
However, an individual may or may not fit the pattern of our experience, knowledge about other cultures, or our schema based on appearances. Therefore, it is important that we look at any stereotype or ways of categorizing culture as a tool to understanding an individual's action, trying to determine if actions can be explained because of an individual's culture, personal or group experience, education, or other reasons. I often tell my students that stereotypes in and of themselves are not bad, but rather the use of them, especially to pigeon hole or limit another's opportunities can be wrong.
In addition, many of the categories for a specific culture might become outdated as cultures are visceral and ever changing. Technology, changes in population and demographics, environmental changes, and even the interaction between specific cultures may change the nature of how a culture might be categorized.
There are three models of categorizing cultures that are commonly used in multiple disciplines: Florence Kluckholm's five orientations (Time, activity-free will, relations: individual vs. collective vs. communal, relationship between person and nature, and human nature: good, evil, mixed), Hall's high context/low context cultures, and Hofstedes cultural dimensions (Power Distance, Individualism/collectivism, masculinity/femininity, tolerance of ambiguity, time orientation).
Kluckholm's Five Dimensions
Gallagher has a good comprehensive description of Kuckholm's orientations. Her work was based on an analysis of 5 different native American tribes in the 1950's. They include:
These dimensions are often used to understand how different societies place different values on environmental and societal factors. Often these dimensions are used to describe values for cultures and subcultures. For example, while mainstream US values are described as having a "doing" orientation, the hispanic subculture is identified as having a "being" orientation. This means that the majority of Americans would be expected to "do" things to be accepted as a viable member of society. This means active problem solving, constantly working (even if unemployed, a member of society would be expected to "do" something such as look for a job or volunteer as this is a value in our culture). However, in the hispanic culture, it is better just to accept the limitations of the situation as just "living" is an activity in and of itself. These differences in orientations would explain why one culture interprets (or misinterprets) the actions of another culture based on the dimensions of their personal culture. A "doing" culture might interpret lack of "doing" as laziness or other negative interpretations. A "being" culture might interpret constant activity as domineering or empty gestures. Thus, there would be a tension due to a lack of understanding between the two cultures.
Hall's Dimension
Edward T. Hall, in Beyond Culture, presented a continuum of high context and low context cultures. This was based on the methods of communication within a certain cultural environment. A high context culture requires a high level of contextual understanding of the situation and environment within which a message is delivered. There are many rules and multiple ways in which a message can be interpreted based on the context of the interaction.
For example, the Japanese culture is considered a High Context culture. There are subtle messages in a welcoming bow between two Japanese that someone who was not raised in the culture would be able to discern. The parameters of meaning with the bow is learned through experience as a Japanese child is raised and acculturated. A "foreigner" would not be expected to understand the subtle differences and a "native" would never be able to explain what the differences are.
On the other hand, a low context culture is one in which there are a few explicit rules to the culture which can never be broken. These are clearly articulated. However, outside of those rules, there is a lot of room for maneuvering. There is often the impression that those from a low context culture are rude and domineering, because they are used to being explicit. New Yorkers, for example, are low context and are perceived as lacking subtlety. There is also a greater level of explicit negotiation of meaning within low context cultures. However, if a rule of communication is broken, there is outward hostility.
High context and low context can also be applied to values and not just communication. High context cultures would assume a shared level of values that are not articulated, whereas low context cultures would have a few "core values" outside of which there is a great level of diversity. As a result, cultures with a high level of diversity tend to be Low Context, whereas homogeneous cultures tend to be high context. This makes it difficult for outsiders to be accepted into a High Context culture, even those born outside of the culture to parents who had been born and raised into that culture. For example, children of Asian parents raised in the US have difficulty connecting to their parents' culture in Asia.
Hofstede
Probably one of the most popular and misunderstood/misused model is Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions. Hofstede collected data on employee values in 70 countries. From the data, he established 4 categories, which was then extended to 5 recently. One of the short comings of the study was that the company he initially looked at was a multinational company, meaning that the study was biased towards people who might have had an international bias.
Because of this weakness in the study, there has been a good body of research over the last 40 years since the original study. As a result, there has also been a reinterpretation of many of Hofstede's dimensions that have deviated from his original intent. Rather that add to that confusion, I would suggest that you read his work directly.
The one area that Hofstede addresses that the other don't is the location of power within a culture and the impact that has on interpersonal relations, society, and roles. It also helps to explain the forces that allow a culture to develop and the direction of those cultural changes.
Over the next few months, I would like to look at the following issues:
Culture and Technology
Levels of Culture
Culture and Education
Cultural Change
Culture and Knowledge
Cross-cultural communication
However, anyone who has crossed culture boundaries or lived within multi-tiered cultures, realize that "culture" is very difficult to put into words. Sometimes, it is easier to look at ways in which culture can be described, rather than describing what culture is.
The Problem of Sterotyping
One of the problems in using different ways to describe a culture is that people will rigidly categorize a person as belonging to a certain "culture" having predefined values. As humans, we have developed a natural instinct to interpret data about other people based on our experience. When we meet a person for the first time, instinctively we look for certain traits to identify if a person is a threat, a friend, or someone we can't define. This is natural survival instinct.
However, an individual may or may not fit the pattern of our experience, knowledge about other cultures, or our schema based on appearances. Therefore, it is important that we look at any stereotype or ways of categorizing culture as a tool to understanding an individual's action, trying to determine if actions can be explained because of an individual's culture, personal or group experience, education, or other reasons. I often tell my students that stereotypes in and of themselves are not bad, but rather the use of them, especially to pigeon hole or limit another's opportunities can be wrong.
In addition, many of the categories for a specific culture might become outdated as cultures are visceral and ever changing. Technology, changes in population and demographics, environmental changes, and even the interaction between specific cultures may change the nature of how a culture might be categorized.
There are three models of categorizing cultures that are commonly used in multiple disciplines: Florence Kluckholm's five orientations (Time, activity-free will, relations: individual vs. collective vs. communal, relationship between person and nature, and human nature: good, evil, mixed), Hall's high context/low context cultures, and Hofstedes cultural dimensions (Power Distance, Individualism/collectivism, masculinity/femininity, tolerance of ambiguity, time orientation).
Kluckholm's Five Dimensions
Gallagher has a good comprehensive description of Kuckholm's orientations. Her work was based on an analysis of 5 different native American tribes in the 1950's. They include:
- Time (Past, Present, Future orientations)
- Activity (doing, being, becoming)
- Relations (Individual, Hierarchical, community)
- Person-Nature (Humans dominant over nature, humans in harmony with nature, Nature dominant over humans)
- Human nature (basically good, basically evil, mixed or free will)
These dimensions are often used to understand how different societies place different values on environmental and societal factors. Often these dimensions are used to describe values for cultures and subcultures. For example, while mainstream US values are described as having a "doing" orientation, the hispanic subculture is identified as having a "being" orientation. This means that the majority of Americans would be expected to "do" things to be accepted as a viable member of society. This means active problem solving, constantly working (even if unemployed, a member of society would be expected to "do" something such as look for a job or volunteer as this is a value in our culture). However, in the hispanic culture, it is better just to accept the limitations of the situation as just "living" is an activity in and of itself. These differences in orientations would explain why one culture interprets (or misinterprets) the actions of another culture based on the dimensions of their personal culture. A "doing" culture might interpret lack of "doing" as laziness or other negative interpretations. A "being" culture might interpret constant activity as domineering or empty gestures. Thus, there would be a tension due to a lack of understanding between the two cultures.
Hall's Dimension
Edward T. Hall, in Beyond Culture, presented a continuum of high context and low context cultures. This was based on the methods of communication within a certain cultural environment. A high context culture requires a high level of contextual understanding of the situation and environment within which a message is delivered. There are many rules and multiple ways in which a message can be interpreted based on the context of the interaction.
For example, the Japanese culture is considered a High Context culture. There are subtle messages in a welcoming bow between two Japanese that someone who was not raised in the culture would be able to discern. The parameters of meaning with the bow is learned through experience as a Japanese child is raised and acculturated. A "foreigner" would not be expected to understand the subtle differences and a "native" would never be able to explain what the differences are.
On the other hand, a low context culture is one in which there are a few explicit rules to the culture which can never be broken. These are clearly articulated. However, outside of those rules, there is a lot of room for maneuvering. There is often the impression that those from a low context culture are rude and domineering, because they are used to being explicit. New Yorkers, for example, are low context and are perceived as lacking subtlety. There is also a greater level of explicit negotiation of meaning within low context cultures. However, if a rule of communication is broken, there is outward hostility.
High context and low context can also be applied to values and not just communication. High context cultures would assume a shared level of values that are not articulated, whereas low context cultures would have a few "core values" outside of which there is a great level of diversity. As a result, cultures with a high level of diversity tend to be Low Context, whereas homogeneous cultures tend to be high context. This makes it difficult for outsiders to be accepted into a High Context culture, even those born outside of the culture to parents who had been born and raised into that culture. For example, children of Asian parents raised in the US have difficulty connecting to their parents' culture in Asia.
Hofstede
Probably one of the most popular and misunderstood/misused model is Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions. Hofstede collected data on employee values in 70 countries. From the data, he established 4 categories, which was then extended to 5 recently. One of the short comings of the study was that the company he initially looked at was a multinational company, meaning that the study was biased towards people who might have had an international bias.
Because of this weakness in the study, there has been a good body of research over the last 40 years since the original study. As a result, there has also been a reinterpretation of many of Hofstede's dimensions that have deviated from his original intent. Rather that add to that confusion, I would suggest that you read his work directly.
The one area that Hofstede addresses that the other don't is the location of power within a culture and the impact that has on interpersonal relations, society, and roles. It also helps to explain the forces that allow a culture to develop and the direction of those cultural changes.
Over the next few months, I would like to look at the following issues:
Culture and Technology
Levels of Culture
Culture and Education
Cultural Change
Culture and Knowledge
Cross-cultural communication
Monday, March 1, 2010
A series on culture
This semester I'm teaching one of my favorite courses: international marketing. The one area that my students are really having a problem with is culture. As I began to gather new and updated materials on this topic, I began to have a new understanding of what culture is and how it impacts everything in our life.
With this in mind, I have decided to write a series of posts on culture, some of the theories, the impact on things such as learning, technology, and communication, and areas needed for future research.
With this in mind, I have decided to write a series of posts on culture, some of the theories, the impact on things such as learning, technology, and communication, and areas needed for future research.
Sunday, February 21, 2010
The reason for not blogging lately: the olympics
Okay, so I admit it. I am a winter Olympics junkie. Having grown up doing all the winter sports (skiing, skating, tobogganing, and even having tried curling and bobsledding) not far from the 1932 and 1980 Olympics in Lake Placid, I always was engrossed in the Winter Olympics for as long as I can remember.
The first Olympics I remember watching as a child was the one with Peggy Flemming, I think in Grenoble. Later in college, I visited the Olympic sites in Grenoble, Oslo, and Innsbruck. I remember watching the Olympics live for the first time from Sapporo, Japan. As a child, it was strange to realize that we were able to see what was going on half way around the world, AS IT WAS HAPPENING. Occasionally the satellite would cut out and we would loose the picture, but it was amazing to have.
So for the last week, I have been watching the Olympics from Vancouver. My only complaint in the coverage came today. Rather than showing the US-Canada hockey game live on network TV, it was shown on cable. In addition, while I was able to access live streaming via internet from Beijing, I now am not allowed to do so as I do not subscribe to cable. This means I miss out on a number of events, including curling. I find this disturbing and misguided on the part of NBC. I would be more than willing to sit through a number of internet ads in order to have seen the US-Canada game or curling. I wanted to see the entire ski-cross...not just highlights and would have watched the advertising if I could have accessed it on the internet.
In fact, tonight was the first night I watched something else or clicked through the ads shown on the Olympics. Someone wasn't thinking, because I am sure there were a number of others that would have watched the US Canada game. NBC lost a lot of revenue tonight. I hope they will reconsider their media mix and offer better coverage through the internet.
In the meantime, I'll post again when the Olympics are done!
The first Olympics I remember watching as a child was the one with Peggy Flemming, I think in Grenoble. Later in college, I visited the Olympic sites in Grenoble, Oslo, and Innsbruck. I remember watching the Olympics live for the first time from Sapporo, Japan. As a child, it was strange to realize that we were able to see what was going on half way around the world, AS IT WAS HAPPENING. Occasionally the satellite would cut out and we would loose the picture, but it was amazing to have.
So for the last week, I have been watching the Olympics from Vancouver. My only complaint in the coverage came today. Rather than showing the US-Canada hockey game live on network TV, it was shown on cable. In addition, while I was able to access live streaming via internet from Beijing, I now am not allowed to do so as I do not subscribe to cable. This means I miss out on a number of events, including curling. I find this disturbing and misguided on the part of NBC. I would be more than willing to sit through a number of internet ads in order to have seen the US-Canada game or curling. I wanted to see the entire ski-cross...not just highlights and would have watched the advertising if I could have accessed it on the internet.
In fact, tonight was the first night I watched something else or clicked through the ads shown on the Olympics. Someone wasn't thinking, because I am sure there were a number of others that would have watched the US Canada game. NBC lost a lot of revenue tonight. I hope they will reconsider their media mix and offer better coverage through the internet.
In the meantime, I'll post again when the Olympics are done!
Friday, February 12, 2010
A disturbing trend: access to information
As I've mentioned before, I am teaching international marketing, one of my favorite courses to teach. Since the first time I have taught this course, in 1990, the way I teach it has changed extensively. By the turn of the millennium, my focus on this course went from finding information about international markets and making decisions with limited information, to learning how to filter and pour through the amount of information found on the internet about any given international market.
However, this year (it has been 3 years since I taught the course), I have discovered yet another trend that will impact how I teach this course. As part of the course, I require my students to write a feasibility study on an assigned country. Using all of the countries of the world, excluding those that an American company would be allowed to trade with (i.e. Burma, North Korea, Cuba, etc...), my students are randomly assigned a country to research (they pick it out of an envelope). This year, as my students began to investigate their countries, I noticed:
The last trend is part of a growing trend which I find especially disturbing. 4-5 years ago I could access information for free. The major barrier was knowing how to find the information. However, once found, it was fairly easy to access it.
Now, I am limited even in the information that I can access through our library and databases. Older material is available, but updated material is not. In addition, there are restrictions on what I can pass on to my students due to copyright laws. Some websites require that information that they have posted cannot be duplicated (copyright laws) OR LINKED to other websites without permission. This linking to other websites limits access to information. But I can understand how an owner of a website might not want to be associated with other websites due to possible misunderstanding as to the relationships between the two.
However, Harvard Business Review has the following restrictions:
In other words, I cannot require the article (even if I don't upload a copy, but make the students access the reading). I was shocked when I read this. That an academic institution would restrict access to academic information is disturbing. I find that the current climate of "intellectual property" laws will decrease the potential for the world economy, the US economy, and innovation. The countries that have survived the global recession are those that had open access to information. It is surprising that a country that has prided itself on its "democracy" and "innovation" through a free market economy, allows for the individual hoarding of information. We might find this can lead to our down fall unless we open up access to information.
However, this year (it has been 3 years since I taught the course), I have discovered yet another trend that will impact how I teach this course. As part of the course, I require my students to write a feasibility study on an assigned country. Using all of the countries of the world, excluding those that an American company would be allowed to trade with (i.e. Burma, North Korea, Cuba, etc...), my students are randomly assigned a country to research (they pick it out of an envelope). This year, as my students began to investigate their countries, I noticed:
- there are more resources from within countries about their markets, even those that have traditionally been difficult to find out about (e.g. south Pacific Island nations, Indian Ocean island nations, East Timor, Viet Nam, etc...)
- Most English language resources can be traced back to one or two of the same sources (CIA handbook or BBC country profiles)
- There are more diverse non-English resources
- Most English resources outside of the two free ones I mentioned require payment to access the information
The last trend is part of a growing trend which I find especially disturbing. 4-5 years ago I could access information for free. The major barrier was knowing how to find the information. However, once found, it was fairly easy to access it.
Now, I am limited even in the information that I can access through our library and databases. Older material is available, but updated material is not. In addition, there are restrictions on what I can pass on to my students due to copyright laws. Some websites require that information that they have posted cannot be duplicated (copyright laws) OR LINKED to other websites without permission. This linking to other websites limits access to information. But I can understand how an owner of a website might not want to be associated with other websites due to possible misunderstanding as to the relationships between the two.
However, Harvard Business Review has the following restrictions:
It is not intended for use as assigned course material in academic institutions nor as corporate learning or training materials in businesses. Academic licensees may not use this content in electronic reserves, electronic course packs, persistent linking from syllabi or by any other means of incorporating the content into course resources. Business licensees may not host this content on learning management systems or use persistent linking or other means to incorporate the content into learning management systems. Harvard Business Publishing will be pleased to grant permission to make this content available through such means. For rates and permission, contact permissions@harvardbusiness.org.
In other words, I cannot require the article (even if I don't upload a copy, but make the students access the reading). I was shocked when I read this. That an academic institution would restrict access to academic information is disturbing. I find that the current climate of "intellectual property" laws will decrease the potential for the world economy, the US economy, and innovation. The countries that have survived the global recession are those that had open access to information. It is surprising that a country that has prided itself on its "democracy" and "innovation" through a free market economy, allows for the individual hoarding of information. We might find this can lead to our down fall unless we open up access to information.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Have there been waves of immigration to the internet?
Gina Minks had an interesting post using a time line to identify what generation might be considered digital natives.
I'm with Karyn Romeis about using the imagery of digital natives or immigrants: I'm on the fence with it. That said, I wonder if, like waves of immigration to the US and Britain, if there have been waves of immigration to the digital environment that then impacts technology and programs.
The first wave might be at the advent of the PC and Mac in which the computer was now in the home, which led to word processing and financial software. The next wave was the development of the internet which led to such programs as email ( remember when it was all done in code) and the world wide web. As more people bought PC's and Mac's to access information through the web, more web based programs were developed, leading to another wave of immigration to access information, communicate, and conduct commerce on the web. High speed web integrated with phone and tv service meant that another wave of immigrants entered the digital landscape to access entertainment, videos, tv, music (ipods, mpg players).
Many divide baby-boomers between "early" (the ones who get all the glory) and "late" (in fact, the largest population born in the US until the 1990's). I was a late baby-boomer, who grew up as technology was being developed. As technology is always changing, the question is (as you so aptly put it) when would there be a generation of "natives"? While the technology might be different, those of us in the late boomers grew up in the age of computation (electronic calculators, mainframe computers, the logic of electronic computation, flow charts). As we have grown, so has the digital landscape. But is there a parallel time line for those that were not part of the electronic age (i.e. the loss of technology which forces people to move to other tools, such as the end the lazer disc, the floppy disc, the manual type writer, the console, the mainframe computer)? This would allow you to see the gap between digital natives and digital immigrants (i.e. the waves of immigration).
I'm with Karyn Romeis about using the imagery of digital natives or immigrants: I'm on the fence with it. That said, I wonder if, like waves of immigration to the US and Britain, if there have been waves of immigration to the digital environment that then impacts technology and programs.
The first wave might be at the advent of the PC and Mac in which the computer was now in the home, which led to word processing and financial software. The next wave was the development of the internet which led to such programs as email ( remember when it was all done in code) and the world wide web. As more people bought PC's and Mac's to access information through the web, more web based programs were developed, leading to another wave of immigration to access information, communicate, and conduct commerce on the web. High speed web integrated with phone and tv service meant that another wave of immigrants entered the digital landscape to access entertainment, videos, tv, music (ipods, mpg players).
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
A peak into the future: Just in time learning
Tony Karrer and Harold Jarche have written a lot lately on the process of finding information for a knowledge worker's needs. This semester, I am fortunate to have two classrooms which have allowed me to observe how upper-class (the 3rd and 4th year) university students access information that they need.
Last week, I had students in my group communication class work at tables to do some problem solving. They were given an fact sheet about a country (including population, capital, official and second languages spoken, currency name, etc...) and they had to figure out the name of the country, the continent, and the surrounding countries. They then were given another country with the same data, but they had to accomplish the task while sitting with their backs to the other group members.
What I found interesting was when they were face to face, some students pulled out their cell phones and searched for the country, first by the name of the capital, then locating it on google maps. By the second task, all groups were doing this, even if someone knew the answer. The "expert" in the group's answer was verified on line. What is interesting is that I have done this exercise for the same class twice before and this was the first time students were able to complete the task.
I also teach international marketing at a private university. I was lucky enough to get the market research lab for this class, so my students each have their own computer. During one of my "lectures", I asked students the difference between code law and common law countries, based on an online module they were supposed to have watched. Well, needless to say, the majority of them had not done their homework and when I called on specific students to question them about the two different legal systems, the first few were like deer in a head light. However, I also noticed that many of the students were busy on the internet. I thought that maybe they were looking at the module (although I don't think they'd be able to access it and get the information in the amount of time that I could call on them). As I started to walk through the class, still asking questions, I noticed a number of them had the wikipedia post on Code and Common law on their computers.
My conclusion is that:
Last week, I had students in my group communication class work at tables to do some problem solving. They were given an fact sheet about a country (including population, capital, official and second languages spoken, currency name, etc...) and they had to figure out the name of the country, the continent, and the surrounding countries. They then were given another country with the same data, but they had to accomplish the task while sitting with their backs to the other group members.
What I found interesting was when they were face to face, some students pulled out their cell phones and searched for the country, first by the name of the capital, then locating it on google maps. By the second task, all groups were doing this, even if someone knew the answer. The "expert" in the group's answer was verified on line. What is interesting is that I have done this exercise for the same class twice before and this was the first time students were able to complete the task.
I also teach international marketing at a private university. I was lucky enough to get the market research lab for this class, so my students each have their own computer. During one of my "lectures", I asked students the difference between code law and common law countries, based on an online module they were supposed to have watched. Well, needless to say, the majority of them had not done their homework and when I called on specific students to question them about the two different legal systems, the first few were like deer in a head light. However, I also noticed that many of the students were busy on the internet. I thought that maybe they were looking at the module (although I don't think they'd be able to access it and get the information in the amount of time that I could call on them). As I started to walk through the class, still asking questions, I noticed a number of them had the wikipedia post on Code and Common law on their computers.
My conclusion is that:
- students will not spend time doing the home work if they feel they can access the information when they need it.
- These same students will not learn anything work related until they need it (just in time learning)
- students are very good at finding information using technology and "experts"
- Experts will always need to be verified by the internet, but internet sources will not have to be verified by experts
- These students are very good at looking to others for the processes they use in problem solving and replicating those processes if they think it will give them results
- Students are very good at "shallow" learning, not necessarily understanding an answer they have received as long as it fits the need
- Many students don't understand the information they collect, nor are they interested in doing so as long as it doesn't hurt their work
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)