The Millennial Student:
A slightly different take.
Michael J. Rosenberg, MA
Director of Student Affairs & Academic Advising
College of Allied Health Sciences
University of Cincinnati
UCUAADA
January 20, 2010
“The older generation thought
nothing of getting up at five every
morning - and the younger
generation doesn't think much of it
either.”
-John J. Welsh
“It's hard for me to get used to these
changing times. I can remember when
the air was clean and sex was dirty.”
-George Burns
What do you remember?
No “These kids today...”
The “slightly different take…”
•
•
Two views of this generation’s
students and our roles in working
with them.
“Who are they?” vs.
“Who can they be?”
The Millennials – Who are they?
Sometimes called:
• “Generation Next”
• “Generation Tweet”
• “Echo Boomers”
• “Reagan Babies”
The Millennials – Who are they?
Various timeframes:
• Begins:
1976-1982
• Ends:
1994-2001
Howe & Strauss definition
Born 1982-2000
Howe & Strauss – Who are they?
Strauss, W. & Howe, N. (2000). Millennials Rising: The Next Great
Generation. New York: Vintage Books.
Howe & Strauss – Who are they?
•
•
•
Backgrounds in history,
economics, law, and comedy.
(Strauss founded the Capital Steps)
Credited with coining the term
“Millennial Generation.”
Writings focus on “generational
cycles” in Western (largely Anglo)
history over the past 500 years.
Howe & Strauss – What did they do?
•
•
•
Four generational archetypes:
 Hero (Greatest Generation: 1901-1924)
 Artist (Silent Generation: 1925-1942)
 Prophet (Boomers: 1943-1960)
 Nomad (Gen X: 1961-1981)
Described current generation as the next
“Greatest Generation” (back to “Hero”) if
the predicted patterns hold.
Millennials, as a generation, display
“Seven Core Traits.”
Howe & Strauss’ “Seven Core Traits”
•
•
•
•
Special – Convinced their future is the nation’s
future. Problems are with the individual, not the
system. (VT, NIU, for instance.) Have been
taught that they deserve praise.
Sheltered – Children of Boomers, most
childproofed, scheduled generation ever, but
they’re largely appreciative of the “extra
protection.”
Confident – 80% they’ll be better off (not
necessarily just financially) than their parents
[95% Latino, 97% AfrAm].
Team-Oriented – aversion to disorder,
individualism can be a problem, like to be part of
a group w/in a structure.
Howe & Strauss' “Seven Core Traits”
•
•
•
Conventional – return to respect for elders, share
easily with parents, believe “values and manners”
should be taught.
Pressured – “What you do this week will affect
you 5-10 years from now.” Resume building is an
“arms race.”
Achieving – Students identify goals early and
pursue them. Do not want extraneous
information. Balance what they want to do and
need to do, instead of compartmentalizing (X) or
merging (Boomers) the two.
OK…So What?
“Wherever you are in
University life, you face a
choice. You can ignore this
breaking Millennial wave,
by treating today’s
collegians as you did the
last generation. You can
resist it by pursuing
decades-old agendas. You
can ride it, by adapting as
fast as you can to new
needs as they arise. Or
you can lead this new
youth wave, by embracing
Millennials as they arrive in
full force.” (p.5)
Strauss, W. & Howe, N. (2003, 2007). Millennials Go
to College: Strategies for a New Generation on
Campus. New York: Life Course Associates.
Howe & Strauss
•
•
•
Howe & Strauss made suggestions for
institutional practices based upon their Seven
Core Traits.
Was a “popular” look at this new bunch of
students – easy reading, easy to draw from, easy
to implement (in theory).
Became widely used by institutions to set
institutional priorities.
Howe & Strauss’ Suggestions:
“Special”
“Copurchase” students & parents, so pitch
“life plans,” constant feedback, 24/7
resources, and close supervision.
• Large projects & major exams “trigger
anxiety and resistance,” so consider
changing pedagogy accordingly.
•
Howe & Strauss’ Suggestions:
“Sheltered”
Give students “security” by stressing the
“safe environment” of campus.
• Expect scrutiny and complaints from
parents about everything from class
content to grading fairness to advisors’
personal values. Help parents understand
(and get around) FERPA.
•
Howe & Strauss’ Suggestions:
“Confident”
•
Celebrate students, and no need to
remind them college is hard (they expect
it to be). Play up college traditions and
rituals so they feel a part of something
larger that will help them succeed after
college.
• Students are used to getting A’s. Some
students want it known they’ve achieved
more. Add A+’s or other distinctions.
Howe & Strauss’ Suggestions:
“Team-Oriented”
•
Recruit groups of students from the same
place (ready-made peer groups) and
provide many opportunities for volunteer
and extracurricular activities.
• Students expect team teaching/flexible
grading. Short attention spans – avoid
ongoing major projects.
Howe & Strauss’ Suggestions:
“Conventional”
Like “big brands” (Pink, iPhone, American
Eagle) because of what the brands say
about them – stress institution’s “brand”
and live up to it.
• They respect authority (but should be able
to negotiate).
• Be ready for them to talk a lot about sex
and drugs, but know they don’t do it as
much as previous generations – so there
may be confusion as to what “normal” is.
•
Howe & Strauss’ Suggestions:
“Pressured”
•
•
•
Show them how institution fits “life plans” and
will help them be more balanced than their
overly-focused parents.
Since students expect to succeed, provide
opportunity. For example, “team-oriented
athletic pursuits for students who aren’t good
at sports.”
Be flexible on the definition of cheating and
plagiarism, because the students have been
taught to get things done well at all costs.
Howe & Strauss’ Suggestions:
“Achieving”
•
Extracurriculars more important than
academic achievement (resumé wars).
• Provide them the latest technology so
they feel they’re on the cutting edge.
Keep resources available 24/7, since
they’re used to constant activity and lots
of work, but they work on their own
schedules.
Howe & Strauss’ Suggestions:
Overall Themes (Paraphrased)
•
These students are different from any
students before. (Post WWII – boom in
enrollment)
• College is largely a stop on the “life path.”
• Give them what they want, because that’s
what they expect.
• Consider changing institutional practices
to better serve student needs.
This relates to us…how?
•
•
•
Consider the parallel: Academic Advising &
Student Affairs in general = Social Work in the
80’s?
Are our practices evidence-based vs. “doing what
feels right?” Are there required competencies to
do what we do?
Are we “touchy-feely helping folks” providing
support or are we practitioners who can predict
the outcomes based on research and inquiry?
Social Service or Social Science?
What does the research tell us?
•
•
•
Several decades of research on student
development has informed how we’ve created
advising programs and other services for
students.
To this point, however, this research is largely
read and used in academic and practitioner
circles, not among the general public – it’s not
“sexy.”
Student development theory tells a different story
about this generation.
Student Development Theory
Chickering – “Seven Vectors” of college student
development and the environmental effects on
psychological development.
• Perry – Cognitive development. Change comes through
negotiating and managing conflict. Progress is more
effective when appropriate support exists.
• Kohlberg – Stages of moral development.
• Gilligan – Ethic of care. Female vs. Male development.
• Pascarella & Terenzini – Impact of the college environment
on students and their development.
• King & Kitchener – Reflective judgment – using reason to
manage issues. Environment can promote use of increased
critical thinking.
• Astin, Kuh, Gardner, Tinto, etc. etc.
•
Paraphrased from Evans, N. et al. (1998). Student Development in
College: Theory, Research, and Practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Student Development Theory
Overall Themes -- paraphrased
•
•
•
Students and their developmental
challenges have remained fairly constant
over the last 60 years or so (post WWII).
Educational institutions and practitioners
have strong, enhancing effects on the
development of students.
Institutions and practitioners have a
responsibility to provide a balance of
“challenge and support” (Perry) for
students.
So, what do you think?
Consider the implications for…
•
Orientation/Initial Advising
• Ongoing Academic Advising
• Warning/Probation/Suspension
…with each model
Which do you prefer?
Final Thoughts…
Are students really that different…or are
they reacting in predictable ways to the
world created for them?
• What’s best? Do we continue to follow the
research on our campuses over the last
several decades – or are the students so
different that we need a new way of
looking at things?
• Do we as practitioners need to champion
one over the other at our various
institutions to benefit both ourselves and
our students?
•
“We need to remember across
generations that there is as much
to learn as there is to teach.”
- Gloria Steinem
The Millennial Student:
A slightly different take.
Michael J. Rosenberg, MA
michael.rosenberg@uc.edu
“The Naked Vine: Wine Advice for the Rest of Us”
http://www.thenakedvine.net
Thanks for attending!