Monday, April 03, 2006

Do we need any more proof of how much smarter our kids are, compared to their teachers and parents, at IT?


Donald H Taylor said...

Great blog, Donald, but sometimes you’re just way off beam!

An advert is proof? Come on, you might as well say that Marlboro proved that real men smoke!

No, this idea that IT ability is inversely proportionate to age is a handy way to shift kit by maintaining the illusion that it's cool, rather than just functional. It's also ageist nonsense. I suspect that IT ability is more likely to be linked to household income than to age – but nobody’s going to run an advert saying: “Rich enough? Then you’ll be able to check in online!”

Donald Clark said...

This was meant to be a light hearted post. However, this advert would not exist if their wasn't a debate to be had around this subject. This ad is different from the Malboro ad in that it is a serious suggestion. There are millions who seek advice from their kids on IT, including teachers. I doubt if there's a school in the land where this doesn't happen.

The book 'Everything That's Bad is Good for You' is a good starting point. The Flynn effect along with other similar studies (Rochester on eye-hand co-ordination) show significant gaps between the IT abilities of young people and their elders.

It is not ageist to claim that the IT skillset of 12 year olds is quantifiably and qualitatively better than those of their teachers. This is entirely predictable as they have grown up with this medium.

Clive Shepherd said...

In my opinion, it's important to differentiate between the under 20s and the 21-35s. On the whole, the latter seem to be as completely out of touch with what's going on technologically as those of my (and your) generation. I do a lot of sessions with trainers in their 20s and 30s who have never heard of blogs, podcasts, etc.