I have no idea what methodology MTV used or even how many people were included in their study, but according to a blog post in HBR today, MTV has some lessons to impart! In a post called Millennials Are Playing With You, there are statements like Half of Millennials said "People my age see real life as a video game" and almost 6 out of 10 said "#winning is the slogan of my generation".
Now, while I rage against stereotypes, as I rarely feel like the stereotypes about MY generation fit ME, I think it is still worth contemplating if there are any generalizions that may be useful. If it is true that "They see the workplace as a multiplayer game where power players can find the back door to the top floor; cell phone contracts are riddled with exploitable loopholes; and navigating the car purchasing experience is akin to advancing levels, with 'experience points' gained along the way."...should libraries and publishers talk to milennials differently? Does it mean that we shouldn't engage with these students in a way that has them feeling that others see them as novices? Alternately, does entering the scholarly game as a novice make students work harder...or do they just look for the easter eggs? I admit that when I play games, if there is a tough game, I buy the guide that includes mapping out the levels AND provides the loopholes! If that is common with millennials, than shouldn't we all do more to create meaningful guides, guides that acknowledge the oddities of our game and that then provide a way for students to engage differently...to engage meaningfully and without having the perception of "cheating"?