Warning: The next generation might just be the biggest pile of idiots in U.S. history

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by Taualumna

I think we also have to define Gen Y. There are those who say that Gen Y began immediately after Gen X ended - that means those born in 1977 or later are Gen Y. Then there are those who believe that Gen Y/Millennial generation begins in 1980 and yet again, those who believe that it begins in 1982 (as 1982ers turned 18 in 2000) So which is it? If you are including those born in 1977-1981 (what I like to call Cuspers), then you probably aren't going to find significant differences...except the increased likelihood of reading things online rather than in traditional print format.

Almost every source I trust goes no earlier than '81 for Gen Y - at no point should '77 reasonably be included anywhere but Gen X, in my opinion.

This is a go-nowhere argument based purely on minutiae, and represents everything that is wrong with the entire concept of 'generational consistencies' - it's a hijack.

The 'cuspers' argument is totally disingenuous, as it is well-documented that the borders are exceptionally fluid - Gen Y status is likely influenced by how affluent your family was growing up, as the traditional elements of Gen Y upbringing lagged in some parts of the nation, especially poorer parts.

In short - start a new thread, this has nothing to do with the current one, don't you think? After all, today's students are wholly unaffected by "where Gen Y begins" unless you're worried that it somehow magically began in 1989 (for HS students), right? You bring this point (and your blog) up in the weirdest spots, and I think it's purely to push some weird agenda you have against being labeled "Gen Y" - which you wouldn't anyway, because of your corner-case "traditional" upbringing. It just doesn't matter.

[Taualumna]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Almost every source I trust goes no earlier than '81 for Gen Y - at no point should '77 reasonably be included anywhere but Gen X, in my opinion.

This is a go-nowhere argument based purely on minutiae, and represents everything that is wrong with the entire concept of 'generational consistencies' - it's a hijack.

The 'cuspers' argument is totally disingenuous, as it is well-documented that the borders are exceptionally fluid - Gen Y status is likely influenced by how affluent your family was growing up, as the traditional elements of Gen Y upbringing lagged in some parts of the nation, especially poorer parts.

In short - start a new thread, this has nothing to do with the current one, don't you think? After all, today's students are wholly unaffected by "where Gen Y begins" unless you're worried that it somehow magically began in 1989 (for HS students), right? You bring this point (and your blog) up in the weirdest spots, and I think it's purely to push some weird agenda you have against being labeled "Gen Y" - which you wouldn't anyway, because of your corner-case "traditional" upbringing. It just doesn't matter.

There's already a thread somewhere about this (posted a long time ago....at least a couple of years....do a search...)...in any case, this is a response to those who seem to lump all Gen Ys together, whether they're in high school, in college or already in the workforce. Posters have mentioned that Gen Y doesn't learn/process information the same way as Gen X or Boomers. This is why I asked what one means by "Gen Y." Being a 79er, I don't like being lumped with Gen Y...I'm usually not, as you've said, but there are those who believe that Gen X ended in 1976 rather than '81 or '82...maybe because 76ers turned 18 the year Kurt Cobain died. Who knows.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Taualumna

Posters have mentioned that Gen Y doesn't learn/process information the same way as Gen X or Boomers. This is why I asked what one means by "Gen Y." Being a 79er, I don't like being lumped with Gen Y...I'm usually not, as you've said, but there are those who believe that Gen X ended in 1976 rather than '81 or '82...maybe because 76ers turned 18 the year Kurt Cobain died. Who knows.

I think most people who use Gen X or Gen Y aren't trying to use them with any academic precision or even anythink more than a generic, shorthand meaning. I certainly have never spent a minute wondering where Gen X ended and Gen Y began. Seems like a fruitless question, to me; these generational labels are purely social and articificial contructs anyway.

It also seems to me that people who try to answer the more important questions about how kids are doing in school are going to completely miss the forest for the trees if they're worried about where Gen X ends and Gen Y begins.

[33girl]

1977 is not Generation X in any way, shape or form. If you can't remember MTV never not being there (and I don't mean because you lived in the boonies w/ no cable), you are not Generation X. Per the ORIGINAL definition of it from Coupland's book, Gen X births probably at the LATEST ended in 1974 (Nixon's resignation).

I thought that it went baby boomers, X, Y, Millenials. Remember, kids that are college freshmen now were born in 1989.

[Taualumna]

Originally Posted by 33girl

1977 is not Generation X in any way, shape or form. If you can't remember MTV never not being there (and I don't mean because you lived in the boonies w/ no cable), you are not Generation X. Per the ORIGINAL definition of it from Coupland's book, Gen X births probably at the MOST ended in 1974 (Nixon's resignation).

I thought that it went baby boomers, X, Y, Millenials. Remember, kids that are college freshmen now were born in 1989.

I thought Coupland's book defined Gen X as the last few years of the baby boom generation...i.e. 1960-1964.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by Taualumna

I thought Coupland's book defined Gen X as the last few years of the baby boom generation...i.e. 1960-1964.

4 years is not a generation, and they are not part of the baby boom.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by 33girl

4 years is not a generation, and they are not part of the baby boom.

The Baby Boom generation is often, though not always, counted as being from 1945 to 1964 or so (1964 being when a sharp decline in the birth rate can be seen). Steve Gillon breaks that into Boomer (up to 1957, when the birth rate hit its peak) and Shadow Boomers (1958-64). Strauss and Howe defined Gen X (calling the "13th generation") as those born between 1861 and 1981.

But again, these are mainly social constructs. Whether I'm labeled as a Boomer or Gen X is meaningless as far as understanding how I learn. Sideline question to show how this kind of label may not be valuable: As a child born in 1961, does it matter that I'm the youngest in the family, or that my parents were depression children and WWII-era adults rather than WWII-era children?

The whole Gen X/Gen Y question really seems like a red herring to me. It's may be useful for advertisers, but I question it's usefulness beyond making broad generalizations about learning styles.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by 33girl

1977 is not Generation X in any way, shape or form. If you can't remember MTV never not being there (and I don't mean because you lived in the boonies w/ no cable), you are not Generation X. Per the ORIGINAL definition of it from Coupland's book, Gen X births probably at the LATEST ended in 1974 (Nixon's resignation).

Coupland's book is a pretty poor judge (although ground-breaking in some of its conclusions - it really started the 'field' of study), especially since it was published in '91 so the '81 group did not have nearly enough time to actually matter. MTV is not as good a dividing line as the generalized pre-Internet destruction of long-held trust or monoliths, including MTV, tainted Tylenol, Berlin Wall, etc. Coupland's book was a starting point, and has been refined since - those born in '79 in most parts of the country likely have more similar upbringings to those in '74 than '84, I would posit.

Almost all research I've read agrees closely with what MysticCat posted, although the edges are quite fluid (up to five years in some estimations) as I posted earlier - and that's if you think the 'trends' are worthwhile at all to start.

The term "millenials" is suspect at best, in my mind.

Originally Posted by Taualumna

You mean 1961 to 1981.

No, he clearly means 1861 - anyone born post-slavery is Gen X. Seriously?

[AlphaFrog]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

No, he clearly means 1861 - anyone born post-slavery is Gen X. Seriously?

LOL.

I think she was just excited at the chance to correct MysticCat. The opportunities present themselves so infrequently. Not unlike yourself, RC.