The Evolution of the Information and Educational Environment in the

Context of the Theory of Generational Development

Aleksander V. Spivakovsky

1 a

, Lyubov Ye. Petukhova

1 b

, Serhii A. Omelchuk

1 c

Yevheniia A. Spivakovska

1 d

, Vira V. Kotkova

1 e

and Yuriy Yu. Yurchuk

1 f

Kherson State University, 27 Uninersytetska Str., Kherson, 73000, Ukraine

Keywords:

Learning Environment, E-Learning, Blended Learning, Baby Boomers, Generations X, Millennials, Genera-

tion Y, Generation Z.

Abstract:

The article is devoted to reviewing system-organizing and personalized approaches to the modern learning

environment. It is explored following modern society’s requirements and technology. We suggested 6 stages

in the development of the learning environment, stages of e-learning development, visualized the interdisci-

plinary approach to EdTech and comparative characteristics of traditional and e-learning. E-learning is under-

stood as an umbrella term that covers web-based instruction, online learning, networked learning, computer-

assisted learning and computer-mediated learning. We consider a model of the modern learning environment

taking into account the characteristics of its subjects belonging to different generations. Generation theory is

reviewed providing recommendations for the best possible educational content for Baby Boomers, Generations

X, Millennials or Generation Y and Generation Z suitable to their adaptive style and values.

1 INTRODUCTION

The educational process is changing due to the evolu-

tion of society all the time. Now we are witnesses

of higher education transformation and adaption of

student’s workplace for various forms of using tradi-

tional and ICT learning tools. The advances of digi-

tal multitools provide wide access to various kinds of

information sources, widening the walls of the educa-

tional institution.

According to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable

Development announced in 2015 Sustainable Devel-

opment Goal 4, known as Education 2030, is a sin-

gle global goal for quality education, which aims

to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education

and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.

Technology is a fundamental driver of that vision to

create equitable, dynamic, accountable and sustain-

able learner-centred digital learning ecosystems that

are relevant for the XXI. Rapid advances in technol-

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7574-4133

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0814-2807

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0323-7922

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7974-4736

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1537-0923

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1022-7079

ogy are revolutionizing how teaching and learning are

conceptualized, designed, and implemented in higher

education. These developments play a key role in de-

livering quality education for all (Ping and Libing,

2017).

In today’s world of dynamic society development,

scientiﬁc and technological progress, approaches to

the learning environment are changing. This is due

to many factors, including the change of generations

that respond differently to information appeals and

the technology of their delivery.

In 1991 Strauss and Howe (Strauss and Howe,

1991) presented the theory of generations. According

to it, people of the same age group are united by com-

mon features formed by their live conditions. As a re-

sult, Strauss and Howe (Strauss and Howe, 1991) had

6 generations in the XX and XXI centuries. The last

four generations of the XX century, and those which

make up most of the current learners’ population, can

be seen (in bold) in table 1. Some slight variation ex-

ists in the span of years used for each group (Jones

et al., 2007).

Focusing on generation theory can help to develop

more robust theories of ﬂexibility in the contempo-

rary learning environment, as well as to provide the

best possible educational content for Baby Boomers,

Generations X, Millennials or Generation Y and Gen-

Spivakovsky, A., Petukhova, L., Omelchuk, S., Spivakovska, Y., Kotkova, V. and Yurchuk, Y.

The Evolution of the Information and Educational Environment in the Context of the Theory of Generational Development.

DOI: 10.5220/0010923800003364

In Proceedings of the 1st Symposium on Advances in Educational Technology (AET 2020) - Volume 1, pages 287-299

ISBN: 978-989-758-558-6

287

Table 1: Demographics by generation.

Cohort Year of Birth

G.I Generation 1900 to 1921/1924

The Silent Generation 1922/1925 to 1943/1946

The Baby Boomers 1944/1947 to 1960/1963

Generation-X 1961/1964 to 1978/1980

Millennial / Generation-Y 1980/1982 to 2000/present day

New Silent Generation / Generation Z 2000/2003 to 2020 /?

eration Z suitable to their adaptive style and values.

The majority of today’s students fall into the gen-

erational group, Millennials. However, modern edu-

cational environment participants are mixed of 4 gen-

erations. To provide the best possible educational en-

vironment for Baby Boomers, generations X, Y and

Z we should be implementing appropriate educational

technology.

EdTech or EduTech, being a shortened form for

Educational technology, is a wide ﬁeld. Therefore,

one can ﬁnd many deﬁnitions, some of which are con-

ﬂicting. We consider EdTech as the practice of in-

troducing technologies and non-standard solutions to

education for better learning. In 2017, investments in

the EdTech market in the world grew to a record $ 9.5

billion. And it is forecasted that by 2020 this mark

will cross $ 252 billion (Himyak, 2018).

What started as an experiment in education de-

livery is now being transformed by a new breed of

technology entrepreneurs. Moreover, EdTech is about

applying digital technology to deliver a new form of

learning architecture. An architecture that harnesses

the social reach of the internet delivers personalized

learning and training that can automatically adjust to

an individual’s learning competence and that uses big

data analysis to understand the most effective ways

for learners to progress. In changing the traditional

architecture of education, EdTech has the power to

create efﬁciencies, cut costs and enable new levels of

standardization and democratized access. It is set to

transform the future of how education is resourced,

taught, consumed and, ultimately, the results that it

can then yield – both for the individual and for soci-

ety as a whole as we continue to build the knowledge

economy (Vedrenne-Cloquet, 2018).

That’s why today teachers are allowed to create an

interactive learning environment. Attention should be

paid to modelling systems in education following ICT

evolution from a learning tool to educational technol-

ogy. Such development can be easily explained within

the triangle Student – Teacher – Learning Environ-

ment.

The teachers and students can be the same or dif-

ferent generations. From the point of view of mod-

ern education and its promotion through EdTech, the

greatest interest is made of four numerical and ac-

tive generations: Baby Boomers (BB), Generation-

X (Gen-X), Millennials / Generation-Y (Gen-Y) and

Generation-Z (Gen-Z) who are the main consumers

today. Understanding the generational differences in

education, their behaviour features and basic values,

educators change approaches to educational technol-

ogy.

2 DEVELOPMENT OF

LEARNING ENVIRONMENT

The informational and educational environment

is a systemically organized set of data trans-

mission means, information resources, interaction

protocols, hardware-software and organizational-

methodical support, focused on meeting the needs

of users for information services and educational re-

sources.

Developing a total learning environment for stu-

dents in a particular course or program is probably the

most creative part of teaching. While there is a ten-

dency to focus on either physical institutional learn-

ing environments (such as classrooms, lecture the-

atres and labs), or on the technologies used to create

online personal learning environments (PLEs), learn-

ing environments are broader than just these physical

components. It also includes:

• the characteristics of the learners;

• the goals for teaching and learning;

• the activities that will best support learning;

• the assessment strategies that will best measure

and drive learning;

• the culture that infuses the learning environment.

Individual learning styles are inﬂuenced by gener-

ational differences in a learning environment. There

is no one-size-ﬁts-all solution to accommodate the

learning preferences of all generations. Thus, some

approaches work well for learners from one genera-

tion but aren’t well received by those from other gen-

AET 2020 - Symposium on Advances in Educational Technology

288

erations. The key is to include a diversity of methods,

modalities, and techniques to address a diversity of

preferences (see table 2) (Levonius, 2015).

As we can see modern learning environment is

more generationally diverse than ever before, and

each generation has its unique perspectives and pref-

erences regarding learning. To accommodate all of

those preferences can be possible by employing sound

instructional methodologies, a variety of modalities,

and solid facilitation techniques thus overcoming

fundamental generational differences and providing

learning experiences that engage and beneﬁt everyone

(Levonius, 2015).

The learning environment is used to be concerned

with information technology, as the technology for

people to work with information. According to this

approach, there are 6 stages of learning environment

development.

It can be noticed the correspondence of 6 stages

of information technology development to a certain

generation of its users (table 3).

Thus, pedagogical technology reﬂects the tactics

of the implementation of educational technologies

and is based on the knowledge of the regularities of

the functioning of the system ‘Teacher – Environ-

ment – Student’ in certain study conditions (individ-

ual, group, collective, mass, etc.), it shares the com-

mon features and regularities of the educational pro-

cess independently from a particular educational sub-

ject.

D. Charrisony and S. Nipper ﬁrst used the term

‘generation’ to refer to three stages of e-learning de-

velopment, “historically related to the development of

production, transport and communication technolo-

gies” (Nipper, 1989). Table 4 presents a brief descrip-

tion of three generations of e-learning.

According to table 4, each direction of pedagogy

of distance education is characterized by certain fea-

tures of the social, cognitive component in the process

of distance learning.

The ﬁrst generation – ‘cognitive behaviourism’ –

emphasizes the need to use the model of distance

learning, the goals of which are clearly deﬁned, for-

mulated and exist separately from the students and

the content of learning. The training material should

be constructed in such a way as to maximize the ef-

fectiveness of the mental activity. This generation

is characterized by the absence of a ‘social’ in the

process of learning. The study is considered an in-

dividual process. A similar emphasis on individual-

ized learning improves students’ autonomy. Prefer-

ably such technologies as radio, television, postal cor-

respondence [periods] are used. The presence of a

teacher in the learning process is extremely limited.

The role of the teacher is mainly in the preparation of

printed material. Later, students could see and hear

the teacher through audio, video, multimedia technol-

ogy.

Instead, ‘constructivism’ as the next generation

comes, the main principles of which are the follow-

ing features:

• new knowledge is built based on prior knowledge;

• distance learning is considered as an active rather

than a passive process;

• language and other social tools play a role in

building knowledge;

• the purpose of cognition and evaluation is a means

of developing students’ abilities to self-assess

knowledge;

• the student is the core of the learning environ-

ment;

• the knowledge acquired in the process of dis-

tance learning must be subjected to discussion by

the community, veriﬁcation and real use (Nipper,

1989).

The teacher in this case is a mentor, assistant and

partner, and the content of the teaching material be-

comes secondary to the learning process. The teacher

and his experience are still the main sources of knowl-

edge.

The next generation of pedagogy of distance ed-

ucation – ‘connectivism’ – involves unlimited access

to network technologies. According to this approach,

the role of the student is not to remember all the in-

formation, but to be able to ﬁnd information and ap-

ply knowledge where necessary. For training with the

use of distance learning technologies, students need to

have a high level of information and communication

competence, therefore, the primary task is to prepare

students for learning with the use of special learn-

ing technologies. Teachers and students can collab-

orate in content development, offer ideas for improv-

ing teaching technology. The entire distance learning

process is carried out based on cooperation. However,

this direction is characterized by the lack of pedagog-

ical control, the structuring of educational content.

Anderson and Dron (Anderson and Dron, 2011)

believe that each of the generations has its advantages

and disadvantages. The future generation of distance

learning, according to scientists, will be more subject-

oriented, characterized by an increase in student ac-

tivity in the learning process, learning virtualization.

Generally, e-learning has been used to describe

learning that is supported by technologies through

various types of delivery modes.

The Evolution of the Information and Educational Environment in the Context of the Theory of Generational Development

289

Table 2: Generational differences in the classroom (Levonius, 2015).

Generation Learning characteristics What to provide for the

group

The Silent Gener-

ation

They prefer to work in the background, synthesize the ideas

of others, and build consensus rather than speaking up, ad-

vancing their agendas, or engaging in debates. They respect

authority, do what is asked of them, and remain on task until

the job is done.

instructor-directed lec-

tures, structure and

predict-ability (no sur-

prises), independent

skill practice time

Baby Boomers They are internally focused yet extrinsically motivated. With

a strong self-efﬁcacy, they expect themselves to easily

achieve mastery. They prefer democratically run classrooms

and enjoy working collectively, provided their group has an

achievable mission and a spirit of cooperation. Although

they enjoy interacting with others, they prefer to experiment

with new skills independently and can be very sensitive to

criticism.

inclusive decision-

making, group interac-

tions and discussions,

chances to try new skills

independently

Generation X Gen Xers are intrinsic learners who view learning as an inde-

pendent, self-directed activity. They are the only generation

in which fewer of them went to college than their parents.

In the classroom, they are self-motivated, provided they see

the learning as relevant and place greater value on work-life

balance and fun than did their workaholic parents. They can

be somewhat impulsive and impatient in group learning en-

vironments and prefer to be given lots of discretion, yet they

often crave lots of individual attention and feedback.

fun activities, relevance,

and understanding of

WIIFM (what’s in it

for me?), discretion to

complete tasks their way

Millennials They prefer participatory, activity-based group work, al-

though they are accustomed to being evaluated and graded

on an individual level. They will strive to earn high marks

for themselves and their teams and may even bend the rules

when necessary to do so. They are the ﬁrst generation to

have used technology their entire lives, so they expect to use

it everywhere they go, including the classroom

lots of activity-based

group work, individ-

ualized feedback and

mentoring, technology-

enabled learning and

use of their own devices

during class

Since 2002, e-learning has become an umbrella

term that covers web-based instruction, online learn-

ing, networked learning, computer-assisted learning

and computer-mediated learning (Littlejohn and Pe-

gler, 2007). All of these terms refer to the use of in-

formation and communications technologies in learn-

ing. The relationship between e-learning, Informa-

tion Technology (IT) and Information and Communi-

cation Technologies (ICT) is identiﬁed in the eclipse

diagram (ﬁgure 1 shows that e-learning is based on

Information Communications Technologies, which is

derived from Information Technologies, to offer to

learn).

E-learning often refers to technology or designs

used in distance teaching, but it also is used to de-

scribe any sort of technology use in education. As

of 2019, e-learning has been replaced by the word

‘digital learning’ or sometimes EdTech (edutech-

wiki.unige.ch, 2021). We prefer to continue using

‘educational technology’, although the term ‘digital

learning’ is more open to the idea that technology has

become a general omnipresent tool, i.e. encompasses

any sort of technology use in education.

To understand how corporate web-based learning

can be optimized to address the learning style pref-

erences of today’s generationally diverse workforce,

it is important to understand the existing literature,

which falls into three categories. Figure 2 depicts the

conceptual framework (Kriegel, 2013).

There is a logical progression to the three streams.

First, it is important to understand what the empiri-

cal research reveals about generational differences in

learning preferences as it pertains to learning styles

and also learning activities. Second, what the cur-

rent and emerging practices in web-based learning

are. Third, in what manner the resultant data can

be used to inform instructional design best practices.

That is, speciﬁc recommendations can be made to op-

timize the instructional design for web-based learning

delivered to the 21st century, generationally diverse

AET 2020 - Symposium on Advances in Educational Technology

290

Table 3: Correspondence of 6 stages of information technology development to a generation of users.

Generation Stage of information technology development

G.I Generation The 1st stage (up to the second half of the XIX century) was ‘Hand’ information tech-

nology, its tools were pen, inkpot, book. Communications were carried out handily by

sending information with mailing lists, packages, dispatches. The main aim of informa-

tion technology was to provide information in the necessary form.

The Silent Gener-

ation

The 2nd stage (since the end of the XIX century) was ‘Mechanical’ technology; its tools

for delivering information were typewriters, telephone, and voice recorder. The main

aim of information technology was to provide information in a necessary form in the

most convenient way.

Baby Boomers The 3rd stage (40–60s of XX century) was ‘Electric’ technology; its tools were devel-

oped to electric typewriters, Xeroxes, portable Dictaphones. The emphasis of informa-

tion technology started to move from the form of information presentation to making its

content.

Generation X The 4th stage (since the beginning of the 1970s) was ‘Electronic’ technology, its tools

were ECM and created on their basis automated control systems (ACS) and informa-

tion retrieval systems, equipped with a wide range of basic and specialized software

complexes.

Millennials /

Generation y

The 5th stage (from the middle of the 1980s) was ‘Computer’ (New) technology, the

main tool of which is a personal computer with a wide range of standard software prod-

ucts for various purposes. At this stage, there was the process of personalization of

the ACS, which manifests itself in the creation of decision support systems by certain

specialists.

New Silent Gen-

eration / Genera-

tion Z

The 6th stage (now developing) is ‘Network’ technology (sometimes it is considered as

a part of computer technology). Global and local computer networks are beginning to

be widely used in various industries.

workforce (Kriegel, 2013).

Educational technology can be considered as a

design science and as such, it has developed some

speciﬁc research methodology like ‘Design-based re-

search’. However, since it addresses also all fun-

damental issues of learning, teaching and social or-

ganization, educational technology makes use of the

full range of modern social science and life sciences

methodology.

3 THE REFERENCES FOR

LEARNING TECHNOLOGIES

AND LEARNING ACTIVITIES

BY DIFFERENT

GENERATIONS

It is known that within the ICPS during the prepara-

tion and implementation of training each student has

the opportunity to choose the goals, content, method,

place and time of training, and in educational orga-

nizations – the opportunity to go in different ways in

the provision of educational services that meet the re-

quirements of the labour market and social needs. Ta-

ble 5 shows the comparative characteristics of tradi-

tional and e-learning (Spivakovsky et al., 2019).

Kriegel (Kriegel, 2013) found little variance in

learning activity preferences across the generational

cohorts. To a surprising degree, each generation liked

and disliked the same learning activities presented in

the survey. Table 6 presents a summary of the top

ﬁve, most frequently selected learning activities and

the bottom ﬁve, least selected learning activities for

all participants, organized by generation.

The most frequently selected favourite learning

activities were selected with the same frequency re-

gardless of generation. These included reviewing in-

formation in graphic format, using search engines for

online research, using various online simulations, and

reviewing FAQs. Likewise, the least favourite learn-

ing activities were also selected with the same fre-

quency, regardless of generation. These were using

Twitter communities, desktop sharing, online discus-

sion boards, completing surveys, and online brain-

storming canters (Kriegel, 2013).

It is expected that the type of technologies for

learning and the way they will be used will change

the future of education. Nowadays, the common on-

line tool used in blended learning is called Web 1.0.

In Web 1.0, information is delivered to users while in

Web 2.0 information is created and edited by users.

The Evolution of the Information and Educational Environment in the Context of the Theory of Generational Development

291

Table 4: Generations (stages) of e-learning development.

Learning theory Generation Student’s ac-

tivities

Learning

mode

Training

content

Teacher’s

role

Cognitive be-

haviourism

Television,

radio, print,

face-to-face

communica-

tions

Reading and

reviewing

materials

Individual

training

Developed

‘from scratch’

Creator of the

content

Constructivism Audio, video

and web con-

ferencing

Discussion,

development,

design

Learning in

groups

Constructed

and devel-

oped by a

teacher

Head of the

discussion

Connectivism Web 2.0: so-

cial network-

ing, an associ-

ation of users

Research,

connection,

creation,

evaluation

Network

learning

Autonomic A friend that

critically

evaluates

Web 1.0 is a read-only environment, while Web 2.0 is

a read and write environment which facilitates social

activities. Blogs, Wikis, Twitter, YouTube, Facebook,

and Flicker are examples of the most common Web

2.0 tools. Globally, the number of users of Web 2.0

has increased dramatically (Alebaikan and Troudi, 1).

At the same time, e-learning 2.0 promotes collab-

oration in knowledge construction. The rapid inno-

vations in e-learning urge for research about the im-

pact of these innovations on blended learning. Re-

cently, research has started to explore the effective-

ness of using Web 2.0 in blended learning. With the

continuous development of the use of web-based ap-

plications and 3D virtual worlds like Second Life,

which can be called e-learning 3.0 (ﬁgure 3), there are

even more opportunities to create a better engagement

blend. The future development of technology will

change the delivery modes used, the costeffectiveness

and the acceptance and recognition of the new educa-

tional environment (Alebaikan and Troudi, 1).

Web 1.0 is a linear model ‘site to user’, one-

dimensional interaction. The owner of a site is the

source of information; the readers are its users. There

is no feedback between the site and the users as if you

can write a letter to the editor or call (like the readers

of a newspaper).

Web 2.0 is a social web of two-dimensional in-

teraction. The owner of a site manages the in-

formation provided by users following their own

rules. Users themselves make publications, write

comments, and communicate with each other (social

networks). Feedback between the site and users is

also absent because users do not formulate rules. Un-

like Web 1.0 the owners do not have to ﬁll the site

with information as the users do it.

Web 3.0 is a social space, three-dimensional self-

organization. The higher level of the Web is a con-

dition where the users of a site are its owners and

themselves ﬁll in their information according to their

own rules. To manage this information resource they

knowingly and voluntarily choose the authorities and,

if necessary, update them promptly. The deﬁning fea-

tures of Web 3.0 are self-ﬁnancing, self-organization

and self-control. Additional features of the third Web

are mobility (can be used with Smartphone), scala-

bility (easy expansion) and gamiﬁcation (elements of

gaming competition). Social 3D networks, formed on

the model Web 3.0, acquire features of the collective

mind, so they are also called social neural networks,

or ecological networks. As users can communicate

with each other, they have an illusion that these con-

versations have an impact on the website.

Table 7 deﬁnes each learning activity in Kriegel

(Kriegel, 2013) study as Web 1.0, Web 2.0, or Web 3.0

technology. Some learning activities can be classiﬁed

into all three categories. For example, practising real-

world interactions in online simulations can be a Web

1.0 technology if the program is fairly simple and the

individual is interacting with a computer. If the sim-

ulation involves multiple users, an element of social

collaboration may deﬁne the simulation as a Web 2.0

technology. If the simulation is highly advanced and

creates a virtual reality, this is an immersive technol-

ogy and would be considered Web 3.0. As such, some

learning activities fall into more than one category.

The most popular Web 2.0 (or collaborative)

learning activity was “interacting with peers in a so-

cial media forum” and appeared 14th on the list of

22 among all generations. No social media learn-

ing activities appeared in any generation’s top 10 list.

Therefore, all generational groups expressed the same

disinterest in this type of learning. This may be since

the group is not currently engaged in social media

learning in the workplace, or if they are, perhaps the

AET 2020 - Symposium on Advances in Educational Technology

292

IT Information Tech-

nology

The computer infrastructure, hardware and software used to process data

and deliver information.

ICT Information and

communication

technologies

The combination of computing and communication technologies (including

computer networks and telephone systems) that connect and enable some of

today’s most exciting systems, e.g. the Internet.

E-learning Electronic learning E-learning is learning supported or enhanced through the application of in-

formation and communications technology.

ILT

∗

Information

and learning

technologies

∗

This was used in further education colleges, to refer to the use of informa-

tion and communication technologies to support the core business of col-

leges: the delivery and management of learning.

Figure 1: The eclipse diagram and the deﬁnitions used in the (dera.ioe.ac.uk, 2004, p. 8).

Figure 2: Conceptual framework (Kriegel, 2013).

experience has been poor (Kriegel, 2013).

Besides, the learning activity preferences among

generations were also strikingly similar. This partic-

ular group was not fond of Web 2.0 activities, such

as collaboration and social media in learning. Nor

were they interested in using mobile applications or

Twitter-like environments to learn. Also, the stereo-

type of the technologically advanced Millennial gen-

eration was not supported in this research. Millen-

nials selected computer simulations less often than

Figure 3: The development of e-learning.

Generation X and Baby Boomers. They also selected

designing and drawing more than any other genera-

tion. However, these differences were minor. Overall,

the three generations enjoy the same learning activi-

ties and dislike the same learning activities with lit-

tle variation. This homogeneity could be because all

employees work in the same corporate environment.

Therefore, the results, while relevant and useful for

the participating company, cannot be generalized to

the generational cohorts across all industries and pro-

fessions. Replicating this study at other organizations

and in different corporate settings will be important

to understand if generational differences exist in other

contexts (Kriegel, 2013).

The research study showed insigniﬁcant differ-

The Evolution of the Information and Educational Environment in the Context of the Theory of Generational Development

293

Table 5: Comparative characteristics of traditional and e-

learning.

Traditional learning E-learning

Training begins and ends

on established dates

The student decides

when to begin and

complete the study

program

The student faces a re-

striction on the freedom

of access to the learning

and teaching process

The student has greater

access to programming

The student must attend

classes at school or in the

workplace

The student decides for

himself where to study

The objectives and con-

tent of the programs are

determined by the insti-

tution

The student, after con-

sulting with the tutors

(teacher-consultant), de-

termines the goals and

content of training per

his needs and interests

The sequence of train-

ing is determined by

the program or teacher-

consultant (tutor)

The student, together

with the tutors develops

a work plan and schedule

of classes

The speed of learning

is dictated by the pro-

gram, teacher and group

of studies

The student, together

with the tutor, agrees at

his own pace

The teacher provides

support mainly through

lectures

The tutors and the

learner agree on a form

of support that can be

provided in the form

of fulltime study or

remotely

The student learns by

attending lectures and

seminars or studying the

scientiﬁc and method-

ological literature

Training is carried

out with the help of

educational materials,

which necessarily in-

clude: goals, the actual

content, methods of

self-assessment and

other information for

independent work

ences in learning style preferences of the different

generations. Besides, there were insigniﬁcant differ-

ences in learning activity preferences. The results

also showed learning styles corresponded closely with

learning activity preferences. Surprisingly, there was

a lack of interest in learning with Web 2.0 technolo-

gies, such as social media forums or Twitter-like en-

vironments. This was particularly unexpected as it

pertains to Millennials, who are typically known as

the techno-generation (Kriegel, 2013).

4 OPTIMIZATION OF

WEB-BASED LEARNING TO

ADDRESS THE LEARNING

STYLE PREFERENCES OF

FOUR GENERATIONS

Developing a learning environment also means tak-

ing into consideration the differences between gener-

ations and ﬁnd ways to turn generational differences

into opportunities. The main goal is to learn, recog-

nize, and understand the differences, then to ﬁnd ways

to recruiting, retaining the students of different gener-

ations and supervise the teaching staff generations to

make a more productive learning environment.

Thus, we research the ratio of four generations to

Kherson State University teaching staff (ﬁgure 4). It

should be mentioned that Kherson State University is

a classical university that is a middle ranged (62th) in

Ukraine University rating Top 200. Thus, we consider

it can be representative of a common ratio of teaching

staff generations with some slight variation exists in

the span of percentage used for each group.

According to the results, the main part of the

teaching staff is Gen-X (48%), compared with 28%

of Baby Boomers, 21% Millennials/Gen-Y and 3%

of the Silent Generation. So, the main part of the

teaching staff is made of Gen-X, who were born be-

tween 1965 and 1980. They are described as ﬂexi-

ble, adaptive, techno literate, information savvy, inde-

pendent, entrepreneurial, self-conﬁdent and in perfect

sync with the new just-in-time workplace. They also

depend on themselves for security and success. Gen-

eration X, as employees, are looking for employers

that offer:

• ﬂexible schedule;

• performance-based compensation;

• ﬂexible location;

• marketable skills;

• access to decision-makers;

• credit for results achieved;

• a clear area or responsibilities;

• a chance for creative expression.

Modern students are Gen-Z and late Millennials

who can be thought to be the main users of digital

technology as well as social media. However, accord-

ing to a new analysis of a Pew Research Center survey

of U.S. adults conducted in early 2019 (ﬁgure 5) more

than nine in ten Millennials (93% of those who turn

ages 23 to 38 this year) own smartphones, compared

with 90% of Gen Xers (those ages 39 to 54 this year),

AET 2020 - Symposium on Advances in Educational Technology

294

Table 6: Summary of the most and the least selected learning activity preferences for all generations.

Learning activity

Baby Boomers Gen-X Millenials All generations

% n % n % n % n

Most selected

Reviewing information in graphic format (ta-

bles, charts, graphs)

52.4 11 54.2 65 68.8 57 58.1 133

Using search engines for online research 47.6 10 45.8 55 44.3 39 45.2 104

Interacting with computer simulations 61.9 13 49.2 59 34.1 30 44.3 102

Practising real-world interactions in online

simulations

45.0 54 37.5 33 40.6 93

Reviewing quick reference guides such as

FAQs

42.9 9 30.8 37 32.6 75

Reading text (theories, concepts, non-ﬁction) 47.6 10 36.4 32

Least selected

Engaging in live short (one-hour) webinars 11.4 10

Using mobile apps to engage in learning via

smartphone devices

4.8 1

Playing multiplayer online games within vir-

tual worlds

4.8 1

Participating in multiuser online brainstorm-

ing centres

4.8 1 8.3 10 9.1 21

Completing questionnaires and/or surveys 10.0 12 6.8 6 9.1 21

Participating in online discussion boards 8.3 10 8.0 7 8.3 19

Observing people online (desktop-sharing) 4.8 1 8.3 10 5.7 5 7.0 16

Sharing snippets of info online in Twitter-like

communities

0.0 0 1.7 2 3.4 3 2.2 5

68% of Baby Boomers (ages 55 to 73) and 40% of the

Silent Generation (74 to 91) (Vogels, 2019).

Similarly, the vast majority of Millennials (86%)

say they use social media, compared with smaller

shares among older generations. While the share of

Millennials who say they use social media has re-

mained largely unchanged since 2012, the shares of

Gen Xers, Boomers and Silents who use social me-

dia all have increased by at least 10% points during

this period. Unlike smartphones and social media,

tablet ownership is now comparable across most gen-

erations. Today, 55% of Gen Xers, 53% of Millen-

nials and 52% of Boomers say they own tablets. A

smaller share of Silents (33%) reports owning tablets

(Vogels, 2019).

According to Cox (Cox, 2019), social media was

once associated with only the younger generations,

but now, more than 80% of four generations use social

media at least once per day for various reasons such

as:

• staying in touch with friends and family;

• ﬁnding a sense of community;

• searching for solutions to problems or informa-

tion;

• looking for ideas or inspiration;

• entertainment;

• promoting professional endeavours;

• expanding professional network (Cox, 2019).

As can be noticed all four generations can use

social media for education either searching for solu-

tions to problems and information or promoting pro-

fessional endeavours. That’s why understanding the

generations’ behaviour as the users of learning con-

tent allows providing the adequate attraction of learn-

ing content for each age group of learners.

If we consider Baby Boomers as a group of learn-

ers, they are characterized by the following deep val-

ues. This is a generation of experts who need proves

and detailed examples. They like to be informed.

The purpose of the learning process for them is the

knowledge itself and skills. Accordingly, the learning

content should be informative in terms of the knowl-

edge, its practical usage, and form in learners’ minds

a high status as the knowledge itself, its practice, and

increase a person’s self-esteem from managing the

skills. One of the most effective attractive messages

for them is the problem and its solution by knowledge

and skills. This generation reads the press, watches

TV, listens to the radio, so educational content in the

media such as newspapers, magazines, television, ra-

The Evolution of the Information and Educational Environment in the Context of the Theory of Generational Development

295

Figure 4: The ratio of four generations to Kherson State University teaching staff.

Figure 5: Millennials lead on some technology adoption measures, but Boomers and Gen Xers are also heavy adopters

(Vogels, 2019).

dio is the most effective. The Baby Boomer gener-

ation is less likely to study online, due to the small

proportion of Internet users. Thus, according to the

InMind agency, in Ukraine, 10.7% of Internet users

are in the age category of 50-59 years, 2.6% – 60–

69 years. Therefore, for generation, online learning

technologies are less effective, but they should not be

underestimated.

Users of this age are often ignored, although they

have time on social media and a fairly stable ﬁnancial

resource in the form of pensions and beneﬁts from

children and grandchildren. These users want to feel

important and monitor the activity of their younger

family members. That’s why they come to social net-

works. Family is the main value for Baby Boomers.

Their success is directly correlated with the successful

marriage and well-being of children and grandchil-

dren. They also value youth, because, at the age of

their adulthood, young people were associated with

progress, a happy future, and strong opportunities.

Baby Boomers subscribe to learning content, includ-

ing favourites, less than other generations. However,

these people are the most loyal learners. If they have

already appreciated the learning content, they will al-

ways use it.

For Generation X, the convenience of learning,

which saves time, as well as the ability to study many

different ﬁelds of knowledge in one place are impor-

tant. Individual learning is also important for this gen-

eration, they do not tolerate imposition and pressure,

and they make their own learning decisions. They

look for something unique in the learning content and

decide according to the slogan “surprise me and I’ll

learn it”. Accordingly, for this generation, the learn-

ing technology should be based on the uniqueness of

its presentation. Generation X is an active Internet

user. The convenience of online learning is impor-

tant for them; they are active users of social media, so

learning content in them is very effective. Also, they

are active television viewers, radio listeners, and read-

ers of the press, so learning content in these media is

relevant to them.

Today, generation X tries to make up for lost

money by getting competencies that help emphasize

AET 2020 - Symposium on Advances in Educational Technology

296

Table 7: Deﬁning learning activities as Web 1.0, Web 2.0,

or Web 3.0 technologies.

Activity WebTech

Reviewing information in graphic

format

Web 1.0

Using search engines for online re-

Web 1.0

Interacting with peers in social media

forums

Web 2.0

Practising real-world interactions in

online simulations

Web 1.0,

2.0, or 3.0

Reviewing quick reference guides

such as FAQs

Web 1.0

Reading text (theories, concepts, non-

ﬁction)

Web 1.0

Engaging in live short (one-hour) we-

binars

Web 2.0

Using mobile apps to engage in learn-

ing via smartphone

Web 3.0

Playing multiplayer online games

within virtual worlds

Web 3.0

Participating in multiuser online

brainstorming centres

Web 2.0

or 3.0

Completing questionnaires and/or

surveys

Web 1.0

Participating in online discussion

boards

Web 2.0

Observing people online (desktop-

sharing)

Web 2.0

Sharing snippets of info online in

Twitter-like communities

Web 2.0

their uniqueness. At the same time, it is very impor-

tant for them to feel the possibility of choice. Such

people are actively interested in politics, does not like

too far-fetched content with a lot of slang, primi-

tive humour irritates them. Clarity, conciseness, de-

tailed instruction are very important for this gener-

ation. Therefore, they enjoy popular ‘how-to’ con-

tent, concise informative posts, life hacks and recipes.

They also like to be nostalgic. Content that makes

them nostalgic is popular. But before chose learn-

ing content they watch video reviews, read reviews,

and research the site or web pages for a long time. It

is important to note that such people are very loyal

learners.

For Millennials / Generation Y, a learning envi-

ronment is becoming a place not only for studying

but also for entertainment. They value inner comfort,

so do not make quick decisions. They like the variety

of choices, the opportunity to try. This is the genera-

tion that watches little TV; reads books electronically.

Generation Y today shapes social development trends

and inﬂuences learning needs. They pay attention to

learning content as a means of information, as well as

emphasizes the value of communication. They live in

a race mode – the success of their peers forces them

to constantly learn something new.

Millennials value every minute of life. They of-

ten ﬂip through the news feed on social networks,

looking at friends’ photo reports, interested in busi-

ness content. For content to interest a millennial, it

must be concise or at least give an idea of how long

it will take to process it. Often the determining fac-

tor is the picture: the image of a special algorithm is

likely to lead to a conversion than a few paragraphs

of profession-al and literate text. Millennials are af-

fected by content that contains real user reviews, pre-

views, tips from friends, etc. But if the learning con-

tent is already liked by the millennial, he will sub-

scribe to his page. Of all generations, millennials are

the most ‘digitized’: in addition to smartphones, they

actively use tablets and laptops. This generation is

most often demanding service. If something doesn’t

work out, the millennial will share a sad experience on

social media, tarnishing the learning technology repu-

tation. It’s the same if one of the friends of Generation

Y told him about the bad service: a typical representa-

tive of the generation will abandon the learning tech-

nology, not going into who is right and who is not.

Generation Z spends a lot of time on the Internet

and social media, and 27% say they feel uncomfort-

able if they do not have access to the Internet for more

than an hour (the InMind agency in Ukraine). But

they are interested in the Internet as entertainment –

60% go online for fun, and the focus is about 8 sec-

onds (the InMind agency in Ukraine). Gen-Z prefers

Instagram and YouTube – in other words, visual con-

tent is everything to them. The coolness of learning

content or technology is a signiﬁcant factor. They pay

attention to what allows them to be stylish, fashion-

able, popular. Research shows that Generation Z re-

sponds well to pages that their friends already like, as

well as to content that is tailored to their unique needs.

Authority for this generation is given by bloggers and

inﬂuencers. They teach Gen-Z about innovations in

the ﬁeld in which they are interested. The younger

generation is not interested in politics. The only way

to convey something serious to them is memes, info-

graphics, illustrations and other content in the form of

game entertainment.

Summarising the above generational differences

in education, there are recommendations on how to at-

tract the attention of each age group on learning con-

tent (table 8).

Understanding the particular needs of the learner

at any given organization will help curriculum de-

signers optimize web-based learning for the genera-

The Evolution of the Information and Educational Environment in the Context of the Theory of Generational Development

297

Table 8: The recommendations on how to attract the attention of each age group on learning content.

Generation Recommendations on how to attract the attention on learning content

Baby boomers hold interesting actions;

simplify the content as much as possible, keeping it informative;

there is no need to treat them as weak and helpless;

let them feel their signiﬁcance;

appeal to family traditions.

Generation X create the most informative content;

make a how-to video and offer a list of life hacks;

play on nostalgia, for instance, turn on the background music of the 70-80-s,

depict popular stars of the time, use their quotes;

allow feeling their uniqueness and superiority.

Generation Y use quality photos and video content;

add real feedback;

think about personal time, note how long it takes to read content, how long the

event will last;

provide these people with impeccable service 24/7.

Generation Z create up-to-date memes, infographics, images and other gamiﬁed content;

seek and meet leaders of local Gen-Z people;

take care of the environment and promote this idea in content strategy.

tionally diverse workforce, requiring ﬂexibility and

adaptability to create effective learning. The responsi-

bility falls on the purveyors of information to be ﬂexi-

ble. We no longer live in a top-down education system

but must respond to student’s needs and preferences

with a variety of skills and a repertoire of learning

strategies (Kriegel, 2013).

Thus, today it is no longer enough to use classic

educational technologies. Achieving a signiﬁcant ef-

fect requires a personalized approach that takes into

account the values of different generations of learn-

ers.

5 CONCLUSIONS

We try to discuss the problem of learning environment

development in the context of its technological evo-

lution and educational inﬂuence. The principal dif-

ference between today learning environment and the

previous one is its ability to react to student’s learn-

ing activities and needs providing a personalized lo-

cal learning environment. The proliferation of virtual

forms for education is a natural stage in education

evolution. It covers the whole system from the chalk-

board to smartboard, from a usual library to an elec-

tronic one, from small training groups to virtual class-

rooms of any scale, etc. Virtual and traditional forms

of education should not be perceived as mutually ex-

clusive. A good education today is a synthesis of var-

ious forms of acquiring knowledge and modern tech-

nologies, the optimal combination of which only the

student himself can determine for himself. The hybrid

learning environment entered the XXI century as the

most promising, synthetic and integral part of educa-

tion. But the precise issue that the article addresses is

a personalized approach to better understand the char-

acteristics of users belonging to different generations.

Using statistical analysis, we identify that there are

users of four generations in the modern learning envi-

ronment of an average university. Thus, the main part

of university teaching staff can be made of Gen-X,

Baby Boomers, Millennials/Gen-X and Silent Gener-

ation. Researches prove that Millennials stand out for

their technology use, but older generations also em-

brace digital life. That’s why understanding the gen-

erations’ behaviour as the users of learning content

allows providing the adequate attraction of EduTech

for each age group of learners. The recommendations

on how to attract the attention of each of the four gen-

erations (Baby Boomers, Gen- X, Gen-Y, Gen-Z) on

learning content are made under the generational dif-

ferences in education analysis.

REFERENCES

Alebaikan, R. and Troudi, S. (1). Blended learning

in Saudi universities: challenges and perspec-

tives. Research in Learning Technology, 18(1).

https://journal.alt.ac.uk/index.php/rlt/article/view/874.

Anderson, T. and Dron, J. (2011). Three generations of

distance education pedagogy. The International Re-

view of Research in Open and Distributed Learning,

12(3):80–97.

AET 2020 - Symposium on Advances in Educational Technology

298

Cox, T. A. (2019). How different generations use social

media. https://themanifest.com/social-media/how-

different-generations-use-social-media.

dera.ioe.ac.uk (2004). Towards a uniﬁed e-learning strat-

egy. https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/3985/1/LSDA responds e

learning.pdf.

edutechwiki.unige.ch (2021). Educational technology. http:

//edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Educational technology.

Himyak, O. (2018). What is EdTech. 10 most high-proﬁle

Ukrainian projects in the ﬁeld of technology educa-

tion. https://tinyurl.com/prfusw7d.

Jones, V., Jo, J. H., and Martin, P. A. (2007). Fu-

ture schools and how technology can be used

to support millennial and generation-z students.

In ICUT 2007 (Proceedings B), 1st Interna-

tional Conference of Ubiquitous Information

Technology, pages 886–891. https://research-

repository.grifﬁth.edu.au/handle/10072/19022.

Kriegel, J. P. (2013). Differences in Learning Pref-

erences by Generational Cohort: Implications

for Instructional Design in Corporate Web-

Based Learning. Ed.D. Thesis in Educational

Leadership and Management, Drexel University.

https://idea.library.drexel.edu/islandora/object/idea

Levonius, D. (2015). Generational differences in

the classroom. https://www.td.org/newsletters/atd-

links/generational-differences-in-the-classroom.

Littlejohn, A. and Pegler, C. (2007). Preparing for Blended

e-Learning. Routledge, London.

Nipper, S. (1989). Third generation distance learning and

computer conferencing. In Mason, R. and Kaye, A.,

editors, Mindweave: Communication, Computers and

Distance Education. Permagon Press, Oxford.

Ping, L. C. and Libing, W., editors (2017). Blended

Learning for Quality Higher Education: Se-

lected Case Studies on Implementation from

Asia-Paciﬁc. UNESCO Bangkok, Bangkok.

https://bangkok.unesco.org/content/blended-learning-

quality-higher-education-selected-case-studies-

implementation-asia-paciﬁc.

Spivakovsky, A., Petukhova, L., Kotkova, V., and Yurchuk,

Y. (2019). Historical approach to modern learn-

ing environment. CEUR Workshop Proceedings,

2393:1011–1024.

Strauss, W. and Howe, N. (1991). Generations: The History

of America’s Future, 1584 to 2069. William Morrow

and Company Inc., New York.

Vedrenne-Cloquet, B. (2018). What is EdTech and why is

it such a big opportunity? https://www.hottopics.ht/

14731/what-is-edtech-and-why-is-it-important.

Vogels, E. A. (2019). Millennials stand out for their

technology use, but older generations also em-

brace digital life. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-

tank/2019/09/09/us-generations-technology-use/.

The Evolution of the Information and Educational Environment in the Context of the Theory of Generational Development

299