STUDENTS OF NET GENERATION: LATERAL PROFILES AND DIGITAL SKILLS
https://doi.org/10.32517/0234-0453-2019-34-2-34-41
Abstract
The aim of the research is to study the lateral organization of the brain of modern students, which we position as the Generation Y+ and determine their level of knowledge of modern computer technologies. The authors examined the following research questions: whether the Generation Y+ is different from previous generations in terms of neuropsychology; as far as Generation Y+ has developed skills in using the capabilities of the digital environment.
To study the profile of the lateral organization of the brain, we used the method of E. D. Khomskaya to determine the leading arm and the leading eye (motor and sensory systems). This technique allows a person to be attributed to one of the 16 profiles of the lateral organization of the brain. We assumed that the new “digital generation” would have a more pronounced hemispheric lateral organization of the brain than in people who participated in the studies of the 1960s–1980s.
The object of the study were first-year undergraduate students of two leading economic universities in Moscow and Prague, studying in different fields (psychology, information technologies, management).
The study demonstrates the emerging generational changes in the lateral profile and computer skills of the younger generation, which for these reasons can be attributed to the Generation Y+. The main conclusion can be considered that the computer literacy of the younger generation is a confirmed fact, but the final transition to “digital reality” has not yet taken place, and the possible qualitative changes of the next generation require scientific confirmation based on comprehensive studies.
About the Authors
I. V. DenisovRussian Federation
Igor V. Denisov, Doctor of Sciences (Economics), Professor at the Department of Theory of Management and Business Technologies
117997, Russia, Moscow, Stremyanny per., 36
I. A. Koretskaya
Russian Federation
Irina A. Koretskaya, Candidate of Sciences (History), Docent, Associate Professor at the Department of Psychology
117997, Russia, Moscow, Stremyanny per., 36
References
1. Castells M., Flecha R., Freire P., Giroux H. A., Macedo D., Willis P., McLaren P. Critical education in the new information age. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 1999. 184 p.
2. Fluck A., Webb M., Cox M., Angeli C., Malyn-Smith J., Voogt J., Zagami J. Arguing for computer science in the school curriculum. Educational Technology & Society, 2016, vol. 19, no. 3, p. 38–46. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.19.3.38
3. Griffin P., Care E. Assessment and Teaching of 21st century skills. Methods and approach. Springer Netherlands, 2015. 310 p. DOI: 10.1007/978-94-017-9395-7
4. Grover S., Pea R., Cooper S. Factors influencing computer science learning in middle school. Proc. 47th ACM Technical Symposium on Computing Science Education, ACM, 2016, p. 552–557. Available at: https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2844564
5. Athreya B. H., Mouza C. Thinking skills for the Digital Generation. The development of thinking and learning in the age of information. Springer International Publishing, 2017. 179 p. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-12364-6
6. Pritvorova T., Tasbulatova B., Petrenko E. Possibilities of Blitz-Psychograms as a tool for human resource management in the supporting system of hardiness of company. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 2018, vol. 6, no. 2, p. 840–853. DOI: 10.9770/jesi.2018.6.2(25)
7. Velinov E., Vassilev V., Denisov I. Holacracy and obliquity: contingency management approaches in organizing companies. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 2018, vol. 16, is. 1, p. 330–335. Available at: https://businessperspectives.org/images/pdf/applications/publishing/templates/article/assets/10132/PPM_2018_01_Velinov.pdf
8. Barr N., Pennycook G., Stolz J. A., Fugelsang J. A. The brain in your pocket: Evidence that Smartphones are used to supplant thinking. Computers in Human Behavior, 2015, vol. 48, p. 473–480. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.02.029
9. de León M. S. P., Bienvenu T., Akazawa T., Zollikofer C. P. E. Brain development is similar in Neanderthals and modern humans. Current Biology, 2016, vol. 26, is. 14, p. R665–R666. DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2016.06.022
10. Sousa D. A. How the brain learns. Corwin, 2017. 400 p. Available at: https://us.corwin.com/en-us/nam/howthe-brain-learns/book252012
11. Allen I. E., Seaman J. Grade level: Tracking online education in the United States. Available at: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED572778.pdf
12. Kentnor H. E. Distance education and the evolution of online learning in the United States. Curriculum and Teaching Dialogue, 2015, vol. 17, no. 1 & 2, p. 21–34. Available at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1026&context=law_facpub
13. Neumann Y., Neumann E. F., Lewis S. Quality of faculty feedback and its effects on learning and educational effectiveness of online master degree programs. International Journal of Instructional Technology & Distance Learning, 2017, vol. 14, no. 3, p. 105–115. Available at: https://touroscholar.touro.edu/tuw_pubs/9/
14. Levine A. How the academic profession is changing. The American Academic Profession, 2001, p. 1–20. DOI: 10.4324/9781351305808
15. Akçayır M., Dündar H., Akçayır G. What makes you a digital native? Is it enough to be born after 1980? Computers in Human Behavior, 2016, vol. 60, p. 435–440. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.089
16. Gallardo-Echenique E., Marqués-Molías L., Bullen M., Strijbos J.-W. Let’s talk about digital learners in the digital era. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 2015, vol. 16, no. 3, p. 156–187. DOI: 10.19173/irrodl.v16i3.2196
17. Langset I. D., Jacobsen D. Y., Haugsbakken H. Digital professional development: towards a collaborative learning approach for taking higher education into the digitalized age. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 2018, vol. 13, no. 1, p. 24–39. Available at: https://www.idunn.no/file/pdf/67049731/digital_professional_development_towards_a_collaborative_l.pdf
18. Mitin S. N., Shukshina L. V., Bazhdanova Y. V., Koretskaya I. A., Vasyakin B. S. Value and meaning attitudes as a factor of forming tolerant ethnic consciousness in the multicultural milieu of a higher education institution. Eurasian Journal of Analytical Chemistry, 2017, vol. 12, no. 7b, p. 1193–1200. DOI: 10.12973/ejac.2017.00244a
19. Berkup S. B. Working with Generations X and Y in Generation Z period: Management of different generations in business life. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 2014, vol. 5, no. 19, p. 218–229. DOI: 10.5901/mjss.2014.v5n19p218
20. Acar A. B. Do intrinsic and extrinsic motivation factors differ for Generation X and Generation Y? International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2014, vol. 5, no. 5. Available at: http://www.ijbssnet.com/journals/Vol_5_NO_5_April_2014/3.pdf
21. Lissitsa S., Kol O. Generation X vs. Generation Y — A decade of online shopping. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 2016, vol. 31, p. 304–312. DOI: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.04.015
22. Lunceford B., Rockwell S. C. Reconsidering the Net Generation: Putting the focus back on the technological landscape. Explorations in Media Ecology, 2017, vol. 16, no. 1, p. 91–100. Available at: http://brettlunceford.com/ReconsideringTheNetGeneration.pdf
23. Sheppard M., Vibert C. Cases for the Net Generation: An empirical examination of students’ attitude toward multimedia case studies. Journal of Education for Business, 2016, vol. 91, is. 2, p. 101–107. DOI: 10.1080/08832323.2015.1128382
24. Watkins M. Fostering deep learning and critical thinking amongst Net Generation learners. Contemporary Research in Technology Education,Springer Singapore, 2017, p. 23–37. DOI: 10.1007/978-981-10-2819-9
25. Shulman E. Sovremennaya molodezh’ — samoe pravil’noe iz vsekh pokolenij, kakie tol’ko mozhno sebe predstavit’ [Modern youth — the most correct of all generations that you can imagine]. (In Russian.) Available at: https://www.pravmir.ru/ekaterina-shulman-sovremennayamolodezh-samoe-pravilnoe-iz-vseh-pokoleniy-kakie-tolkomozhno-sebe-predstavit
26. Van Deursen A. J. A. M., Helsper E. J., Eynon R. Measuring digital skills. Digital skills to Tangible Outcomes project report, 2014. Available at: http://www.lse.ac.uk/media-and-communications/assets/documents/research/projects/disto/Measuring-Digital-Skills.pdf
27. Alkalai Y. E., Amichai-Hamburger Y. Experiments in digital literacy, CyberPsychology & Behavior, 2004, vol. 7, no. 4. DOI: 10.1089/cpb.2004.7.421
28. Hargittai E. Second-level digital divide: Differences in people’s online skills. First Monday, 2002, vol. 7, no. 4. Available at: https://firstmonday.org/article/view/942/864
29. Hargittai E. Beyond logs and surveys: In-depth measures of people’s web use skills. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2002, vol. 53, is. 14. DOI: 10.1002/asi.10166
30. Merritt K., Smith K. D., Di Renzo J. C. Jr. An investigation of self-reported computer literacy: Is it reliable? Issues in Information Systems, 2005, vol 6, no. 1, p. 289–295. Available at: http://iacis.org/iis/2005/Merritt_Smith_DiRenzo.pdf
31. Talja S. The social and discursive construction of computing skills. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2005, vol. 56, is. 1, p. 13–22. Available at: https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1059569
32. De Haan J., Huysmans F. Van Huis uit Digitaal (‘Raised Digital’). The Hague: Social ad Cultural Planning Agency (contains a summary in English). 2002. https://www.scp.nl/dsresource?objectid=d0f066d8-7d9b-4c59-ad2c-4cea989e9442&type=org
33. Steyaert J. Digitale vaardigheden: Geletterdheid in de informatiesamenleving’, Rathenau Instituut. 2000. Available at: https://repository.uantwerpen.be/desktop/irua
34. Steyaert J. Inequality and the digital divide: myths and realities. Advocacy, activism and the internet. Chicago, Lyceum Press, 2002, p. 199–211. Available at: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.457.5829&rep=rep1&type=pdf
35. van Dijk J., Hacker K. The digital divide as a complex and dynamic phenomenon. The Information Society,2003, vol. 19, p. 315–326. DOI: 10.1080/01972240309487
36. van Dijk J. A framework for digital divide research. Electronic Journal of Communication, 2002, vol. 12, no. 1 & 2. Available at: https://ris.utwente.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/6849188/Volume+12+Numbers+1.pdf
37. Moskvin V. A., Moskvina N. V. Mezhpolusharnye asimmetrii i individual’nye razlichiya cheloveka [Hemispheric asymmetries and individual differences of a person]. Moscow, Smysl, 2011. 130 p. (In Russian.) Available at: http://lib100.com/human/hemispheric_asymmetry/pdf/
38. Moskvin V. A., Moskvina N. V. Mezhpolusharnye asimmetrii i osobennosti kommunikativnykh protsessov v sportivnoj psikhologii [Hemispheric asymmetry and features communication processes in sport psychology]. European Journal of Education and Applied Psychology, 2015, no. 3, p. 59–62. (In Russian.) Available at: https://ppublishing.org/upload/iblock/d07/Psychology_3-2015.pdf
39. Khomskaya E. D. Nejropsikhologiya [Neuropsychology]. Saint Petersburg, Piter, 2011. 496 p. (In Russian.)
40. Berntson G. G., Cacioppo J. T. Handbook of Neuroscience for the Behavioral Sciences. Vol. 1. Wiley, 2009. 1000 p. Available at: https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Handbook+of+Neuroscience+for+the+Behavioral+Sciences%2C+Volume+1-p-9780470083567
41. Cowin S. C., Doty S. B. Tissue mechanics. New York, Springer, 2017. 682 p. DOI: 10.1007/978-0-387-49985-7
42. Jiang H., White M. P., Greicius M. D., Waelde L. C., Spiegel D. Brain activity and functional connectivity associated with hypnosis. Cerebral Cortex, 2017, vol. 27, is. 8, p. 4083–4093. DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhw220
43. Coiro J., Knobel M., Lankshear C., Leu D. J. Handbook of research on new literacies. Routledge, 2008. 1386 p. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228682372_Handbook_of_Research_on_New_Literacies
44. Hendrik R., Kegel P., Barth S., Klaassen R., Wieringa R. J. Computer literacy systematic literature review method. Available at: https://ris.utwente.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/13069580/Computer_Literacy_Systematic_Literature_Review_Method.pdf
Review
For citations:
Denisov I.V., Koretskaya I.A. STUDENTS OF NET GENERATION: LATERAL PROFILES AND DIGITAL SKILLS. Informatics and education. 2019;(2):34-41. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32517/0234-0453-2019-34-2-34-41