Digital Natives’ Behaviours and Preferences: Pre-Service Teachers Studying Accounting

Binti Muchsini, Siswandari Siswandari

Abstract

Digital natives are a new cultural generation born of aggressive digital technology penetration. The rapid development of technology is influencing their learning habits and behaviours, and consequently this generation has a unique way of thinking and learning. The purpose of this research is to analyse the behaviours and preferences of digital natives through understanding their preferences in the use of technology and their cultural values, as a basic strategy for selecting learning methods. This research uses a survey method to explore the use of technology and the cultural values of digital natives on accounting courses. The cultural values referred to in this paper are Hofstede's cultural dimensions, namely power distance, individualism, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance and long-term orientation. The research results reveal two main findings: 1) the level of use of technology for non-academic purposes tended to be high, and the preference of the students was to use smartphones rather than fixed PCs or laptops. This suggests that lecturers must actively use technology in the classroom, thus ensuring that pre-service accountancy teaching students are themselves ready to use technology in their teaching practice; 2) analysis results of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions indicate that the students prefer learning in technological environments, informal learning structures, unlimited space and time, that they expect quick feedback, prefer teamworking, and prefer active learning rather than reading and listening. These results can be used as the basis for designing quality learning methods.

Full Text:

PDF

References

Armia. C. (2002). Pengaruh Budaya terhadap Aktivitas Organisasi: Dimensi Budaya Hofstede. JAAI 6(1). 103–117

Barnes. K.. Marateo. R. C.. & Ferris. S. P. (2007). Teaching and learning with the net generation. Innovate: Journal of Online Education. 3(4). 1–8.

Corrin. L.. Bennett. S.. & Lockyer. L. (2010). Digital natives: Everyday life versus academic study. The Seventh International Conference on Networked Learning. Lancaster: Lancaster University

Donthu. N.. & Yoo. B. (1998). Cultural influences on service quality expectations. Journal of Service Research 1(2).

Feiertag. J.. & Berge. Z. L. (2008). Training Generation N: how educators should approach the net generation. Education & Training 50(6).

Gay. L. R. . and Diehl. P. L. (1992). Research methods for business and management. New York: Macmillan Publishers.

Helsper. E.. & Eynon. R. (2009). Digital natives: where is the evidence? British Educational Research Journal. 1–18.

Hidayat. Z.. Saefudin. A.. & Sumartono. (2016). Motivasi. Kebiasaan. dan Keamanan Penggunaan Internet. Jurnal Ilmu Komunikasi. 13(2). 129–150.

Hofstede. G.. & Bond. M. H. (1984). Hofstede’s culture dimensions: An independent validation using Rokeach’s value survey. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 15(4). 417–433.

Hofstede. G.. Hofstede. G. J.. & Minkov. M. (2010) Intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival. New York: McGraw Hill.

Kelly. F. S.. McCain. T.. & Jukes. I. (2009). Teaching the digital generation: No more cookie cutter high schools. California: Corwin Press.

Kennedy. G.. Judd. T.. Dalgarno. B.. & Waycott. J. (2010). Beyond natives and immigrants: Exploring types of net generation students. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 26(5). 332–343.

Kivunja. C. (2014). Theoretical perspectives of how digital natives learn. International Journal of Higher Education 3(1). 1927–6044.

Lei. J. (2009). Digital natives as pre service teachers: what technology preparation is needed? Journal Of Computing in Teacher Education. 25(3).

Prensky. M. (2001). Digital native. digital immigrant. On the Horizon. 9(5).

Reeves. T. C. & Oh. E. (2008). Generational Differences. In Jonassen. D.. Spector. M. J.. Driscoll. M.. Merrill. M. D.. van Merrienboer. J. & Driscoll. M. (Eds) Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 296–303). New York: Routledge.

Rideout. V.. Foehr. U.. & Roberts. D. (2010) Generation M2: Media in the lives of 8 to 18-year-olds (Kaiser Family Foundation Study). Retrieved from http://www.kff.org/entmedia/8010.cfm

Sari. D. R.. & Dirgahayu. T. (2017). Adopsi Theory of Planned Behavior untuk Pengembangan Model Pengaruh Budaya Terhadap Penggunaan E-Commerce. Jurnal Buana Informatika. 8(2). 67–76.

Sarkar. N.. Ford. W.. & Manzo. C. (2017). Engaging digital natives through social learning. Systemics. Cybernetics and Informatics. 15(2).

Siregar. L. N.. Mayadewi. R. A. P.. & Rosely. E. (2016). Penilaian Budaya Organisasi Perguruan Tinggi Menggunakan Values Survey Module 2013 Hofstede di Universitas Telkom Bandung. Seminar Nasional Sistem Informasi Indonesia (pp.1–10).

Tapscott. D. (2009). Grown up digital: How the net generation is changing your world. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Thompson. P (2013). The digital natives as learners: Technology use patterns and approaches to learning. Computers & Education 65.

Uygarer. R.. Uzunboylu. H.. & Ozdamli. F. (2016). A piece of qualitative study about digital natives. Anthropologist 24(2). 623–629.

Watson. J. A.. & Pecchioni. L. L. (2011). Digital natives and digital media in the college classroom: assignment design and impacts on student learning. Educational Media International. 48(4). 307–320.

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.