Changing College for Millennials:
A Brief Look at the 21st Century Higher Education System
University of Maryland University College

Changing College for Millennials:
A Brief Look at the 21st Century Higher Education System Campus life has surely changed in the United States. Gone are images of large groups of sweater-vested coeds pouring through books in an open quad, or individuals in a library, hunched over a microfiche machine looking for a key article to support their research. Laptops and iPads have replaced notebooks, three-ringed binders, and miniature tape recorders as the preferred instrument for taking notes in the classroom. Even the very way lectures are delivered has changed; distance education and web-based courses have taken the place of traditional brick and mortar classrooms. The student body has changed too; millennials now represent the largest generational group on campuses, and this number will continue to rise for the next few years. This presents new challenges to educators as this generation is fundamentally different in many ways from its predecessor: they have lived highly structured lives; are comfortable working in social groups; have high expectations; and are savvy in the realm of technology (Stapleton, Wen, Starrett, & Kilburn, 2007, p. 101). The dilemma faced by university faculty and administrators around the country is who should change, the students or the entire adult education system? Many may resist change on the institutional level; this is understandable in some ways: academia has been their life’s work, so why should they change just because of a new breed of student or a fancy new gadget? Still, many agree change is needed, but they argue what is driving this change: the new generation of students; or all the technological improvements coming out of Silicon Valley? Whether driven by generational mindset or advances in technology, it doesn’t really matter; the adult education system IS changing; researches agree that it is incumbent on institutions of higher to recognize this and allow for new approaches if they are to continue delivering quality and meaningful instruction.
The Millennial Generation on Campus
The millennial generation is the portion of the population that was born between 1981 and 2001. One of the most common attributes ascribed to this cohort is their affinity with technology. They are so comfortable using and integrating technology into daily life that Marc Prensky has coined the term “digital natives” to describe the group (as cited by Stapleton et al., 2007, p. 101). Through the advances in network technology, this group has enjoyed on-demand access to a continuous flow of information (Nicholas, 2008, p. 28). The use of the internet is so prevalent and ingrained in millennial students that it is the primary resource for completing assignments: research conducted by Nicholas (2008) shows that Google is overwhelmingly the first choice for research, with 98% of students using this outlet (p. 30).
Millennials are also socially active, and comfortable working in groups; Howe and Strauss have described this generation as diverse, group thinkers, who are heavily active in extracurricular activities (as cited by Stapleton et al., 2007, p. 101). Their lives up until college have been highly structured, and very active; they are accustomed to participating in numerous clubs, sports, and other activities (Wilson, 2004, p. 62). Wilson suggests that this active lifestyle is likely to continue in college (2004, p. 62). This merger of technical competence and socially active upbringing has created a generation of excellent collaborators and team players (as cited by Nicholas, 2008, p. 28).
Another unique aspect of the millennial cohort is the level of involvement that their parents contribute in their daily lives, even after leaving the nest for college. Their parents, mostly baby boomers, not only planned and managed their schedules, but they also sheltered them early in life, and showered them with praise (as cited by Wilson, 2004, p. 66). Wilson (2004) argues that this involvement will continue in college, with parents expecting feedback from the school to monitor performance and conduct just like they had from high school faculty (p. 66). In fact, Jacobson suggested that school administration personnel feel that millennial parents are completing applications for their sons and daughters, and fear potential legal action if they deny admission (as cited by Wilson, 2004, p. 66).
Technology on Campus Online education is taking America by storm; even the most passive viewer of primetime television can recall commercials from University of Phoenix, Kaplan, or Ashford. Stapleton, et al. (2007) state that over 90% of degree-granting institutions in America offer some form of online learning, and they project that non-traditional students will represent over a quarter of the student body (p. 100). Even in a traditional classroom, technology can be found. PowerPoint and YouTube have often taken the place of a stuffy professor at a blackboard with elbow patches on his blazer to deliver course materials. In fact, Nicholas’ (2008) research shows that over 84% of students feel that PowerPoint is an effective tool for information delivery (p. 31). For all its benefits, technology still presents a challenge to universities. One of the most prevalent is the school’s ability to deliver; Stapleton et al., notes a significant gap in a school’s Information Technology department and industry standards, and they note that the online learning platforms are often lagging in quality when compared to familiar websites (2007, p. 104). This gap is likely due to educational institutions not being able offer competitive compensation to IT professionals; they are losing talent to private industry. Technical difficulties, website downtimes, and lack of immediate responsiveness by IT staffs have led to significantly lower satisfaction rates with online courses (Stapleton, et al., 2007, p. 103). In fact, of students who reported being involved in online learning, only a quarter thought that it improved their experience, while 58% felt that no value was added as a result of the online instruction offered (Nicholas, 2008, p. 32). Another problem noted with the amount of available information is academic integrity. Many millennials have been raised in an environment where line between right and wrong with regard to content ownership is somewhat opaque. Several researchers note that far too often, students feel it is permissible to paraphrase others’ ideas without providing credit (as cited by Wilson, 2004, p. 67). Because so much information is freely available on the internet, it is nearly impossible for faculty to police (Wilson, 2014, p. 67).
Delivering Education to the Millennial Student The changes in students and technology described above cannot be ignored; they will not go away. Rather than having an older generation try to guess what needs to change, Nicholas (2008) proposes a very simple solution: “What are Millennials’ preferences of learning methods?” (pp. 28-29). Just because millennials are labeled as “digital natives,” does not mean they prefer a 100% “connected” learning environment; in fact, an overwhelmingly high majority (90%) of millennial students feel that problem-solving exercises and frequent exams are the best approach to learning (Nicholas, 2008, p. 31). Independent research conducted by Wilson, Nicholas, and Stapleton et al. seems to agree that technology is best used as a research aid and not a primary delivery medium. In order to meet this requirement, universities must achieve the right balance; rather than relying on technology to deliver education, the focus should be one that leverages technology in order to enhance education. Wilson (2004) recommends doing this by re-teaching students how to use the internet to their advantage: showing them how to evaluate resources for quality, and use them while avoiding plagiarism (p. 67). In addition to technology, there is a solid argument for understanding and adapting to generational issues that are sure to arrive with millennial students. Wilson’s work provides a roadmap for this; she argues against resisting generational change, and instead favors integrating their unique upbringing with traditional teaching techniques to get the most out of the college experience (2004, p. 59). Active learning is an important approach to dealing with millennial students. This generation has already established itself as participative and willing to work in groups; therefore, classroom activities that are more discussion than lecture focused will be the most effective (Wilson, 2004, p. 61). This characteristic can be further leveraged by faculty members treating classes not as individuals, but rather as groups with similar goals (Wilson, 2004, p. 61). Not only will this connection enhance student learning, it will also encourage accountability and self-governance amongst the cohort, which will better prepare them for life after college. College was once a place where young adults would test boundaries, and learn from their own experiences what they could and couldn’t do now that they were away from their parents’ authority. Millennials are different; as noted earlier, their life was highly structured and supervised. For this reason, it is absolutely critical that faculty and administrators to establish the institution as the new authority (Wilson, 2004, pp. 64-65). Wilson (2004) advises faculty to provide students with continuous, constructive, and supportive feedback on their performance throughout a course of instruction (Wilson, 2004, p. 62), and be prepared to pick them up when they fail to meet high, often unrealistic performance expectations (p. 65).
Conclusion
The face of higher education in America is certainly changing. Technology has provided a host of benefits and challenges, and the youth of today is vastly different than those on campus in previous years. In reality, these changes are nothing new to colleges, or any other organization for that matter: technology always evolves; and understanding millennials is actually no different than understanding any other generation (Stapleton et al., 2007, pp. 107-108). Resisting this change is not an option, and the onus for change rests completely with the schools. Institutions of higher learning absolutely have to accept and understand that they must ALWAYS be seeking to adapt and improve their models if they are to continue delivering high-quality, meaningful adult education and learning experiences (Nicholas, 2008, p. 32). This adaptation cannot simply be accomplished by ramping up technology (Stapleton et al., 2007, p. 108), rather, it must balance technological improvements with a complete understanding of the current student body, and adjust curricula accordingly (Wilson, 2004, p. 69).

References
Nicholas, A.J. (2008). Preferred learning methods of the millennial generation. The International Journal of Learning, 15 (6), 27-34. Retrieved from http://web.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.umuc.edu/
Stapleton, J.L., Wen, H.J., Starrett, D., & Kilburn, M. (2007). Generational differences in using online learning systems. Human Systems Management, 26 (2), 99-109. Retrieved from from http://web.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.umuc.edu/
Wilson, M.E. (2004). Teaching, learning, and millennial students. New Directions for Student Services, 106, 59-71. Retrieved from http://web.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.umuc.edu/