1. Once Upon a Furl … Web 2.0 in LIS Education Kathleen Burnett, Ph.D. Florida State University College of Information

2. Overview  Why? From Digital Immigrants to Digital Natives  How? Some examples  Who? Omnivores and Connectors

3. Baker, Debra. “Move Over Baby Boomers.” ABA Journal, 85 (1999): 22 GenerationsBirth YearsAges in 2006 GI Generation1901 - 192481 - Silent Generation1925 - 194561 - 80 Baby Boomers1946 - 196442 – 60 Generation X1965 - 1978*28 - 42 Millennials 1979*- 1994 12 - 27 Generational Dynamics: Digital Immigrant or Digital Native

4. Because Library Users are Changing … Digital Natives Digital Immigrants ??.. Millennials Generation X Baby Boomers Silent Generation GI Generation

5. Because LIS Students are Changing … Millennials Generation X Baby Boomers Digital Natives Digital Immigrants

6. Because LIS Professionals Will Change … Generation X Baby Boomers Silent Generation Now … Digital Immigrants

7. Because LIS Professionals Will Change … 10 Years from now … Digital Natives Generation X Baby Boomers Millennials

8. Prensky, Mark. “Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants”. On the Horizon, 9:5 (October 2001). “Our students have changed radically. Today’s students are no longer the people our educational system was designed to teach.”

9. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Digital Natives are better at: Taking in information Making decisions quickly MultitaskingMultitasking Parallel processingParallel processing Thinking graphicallyThinking graphically (rather than textually) Digital Natives assume connectivity & see the world through the lens of games and play Prensky, Marc. “Use Their Tools! Speak Their Language!” Marc Prensky. March 2004. http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky- Use_Their_Tools_Speak_Their_Language.pdf Gamers Characteristics of Digital Natives

10. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX “Over the past 20 years, young adults (18- 34) have declined from being those most likely to read literature to those least likely (with the exception of those 65 and older). The rate of decline for the youngest adults, aged 18 to 24 was 55 percent greater than the total adult population.” Foreman, Joel. “Next-Generation Educational Technology Versus the Lecture.” Hill, Kelly. “Reading at Risk; A Survey of Literary Reading in America” National Endowment for the Arts Research Division Report, 46 (June 2004) Reading Less

11. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Perceptions of Libraries By Age of U.S. Respondent U.S. U.S. 18-2425-64 Information 49% 56% Books 32% 26% Research 20% 15% Foreman, Joel. “Next-Generation Educational Technology Versus the Lecture.” De Rosa, Cathy et. al. Perceptions Of Libraries and Information Resources; A report to the OCLC membership. Dublin, OH OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Inc. 2005 Library 2.0 DigitalNatives Digital Immigrants

12. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX “ p.X Educause Review. 38.4 (2003) 12-22 Foreman, Joel. “Next-Generation Educational Technology Versus the Lecture.” Educause Review. 38.4 (2003) 12-22 lecture is impossible “Even if the lecturer is charismatic, holding the attention of students for an entire lecture of fifty minutes or longer is impossible.” p.15 Experiential

13. O’Reilly, Brian. “Meet the Future.” Fortune 142.3 (2000): 144-157. “It is clear from talking with them that they already know they don’t want to live and work the way we do.” p. 144 Generational Clash Digital Native Students

14. Learning Preferences of Digital Natives Teamwork ExperientialExperiential activities Use of technology MultitaskingMultitasking Goal orientationGoal orientation CollaborativeCollaborative Oblinger, Diana. “Understanding the New Student.” Educause Review, 38.3 (2003): 36-42. Collaborative; Achievement Oriented

15. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX producer-push approach the ‘sage on the stage’ lecture model demand pull “… it is hard to imagine a more producer-push approach than the ‘sage on the stage’ lecture model that dominates undergraduate education. Can higher education move the curriculum in ways that take advantage of demand pull, and will colleges and universities design their infrastructures to support that approach?” p. 60 Foreman, Joel. “Next-Generation Educational Technology Versus the Lecture.” Hilton, James. “The Future for Higher Education: Sunrise or Perfect Storm?” Educause Review 41.2 March/April 2006 59-71 Experiential; Pull

16. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Educause Review. 38.4 (2003) 12-22 Foreman, Joel. “Next-Generation Educational Technology Versus the Lecture.” Educause Review. 38.4 (2003) 12-22 The ideal learning situation 1.customized to very specific individual needs. 2.provides students with immediate feedback. 3.is constructive to explore learning environments (preferably multi sensorial) 4.motivates students to persist in excess of any externally imposed requirements. 5.builds enduring conceptual structures. p.14 Experiential

17. 1.Increase teacher-student interaction & feedback 2.Engage students (motivation; involvement) 3.Accelerate student learning 4.Increase experiential learning (gaming; simulations, role playing) 5.Increase learning options 6.Increase peer-to-peer (collaborative) learning 7.Offer more “pull” web-based learning options 8.Offer more interactive multimedia learning. Learning Strategies for Digital Natives

18. How?  Podcasts and Vodcasts To bring other voices & faces into the discussion Student created oral presentations

19. How?  Blogs & Social Networks To support class & small group discussion To extend the bounds of the classroom To encourage individual responsibility for information

20. How?  Wikis To support collaborative development of information resources & dissemination of information To teach consensus-building & teamwork

21. How?  Games & Simulations To explore the relationship between physical and virtual To teach the concepts of programming To engage kinetic & spatial learners

22. Male Lackluster Veteran Indifferent Female Connector Connected but hassled Inexperienced experimenter Light but satisfied Omnivore Productivity enhancer Mobile centric Off the network Pew Internet & American Life Project Typology of ICT Users (May 2007) Web 2.0 Users

23. Thank You Kathleen Burnett, Ph.D. Florida State University College of Information kburnett@mailer.fsu.edu