A New Kind of NASA

A few days ago, Adfreak of all places turned me on to a story about about a few NASA employees who had turned out a somewhat provocative powerpoint presentation (at least by NASA standards).  Normally, such news would be of little interest to me (which, interestingly enough, is the entire point), but then I noticed that the title of the presentation was "Generation Y Perspective" and my ears perked up.  I'm self indulgent like that ;-)

The presentation, which you can check out here, is based around a very simple question:  Why isnt a whole generation (that being GenY) connecting to NASA?  Their answer?  NASA isnt going enough to engage a new type of information consumer.  In the end, the powerpoint calls for a new look at how NASA communicates with people and a need to engage in both "the conversation" and other activities that can help to make the mission of space exploration relevant and exciting to a whole new group of people.  Check out the presentation if you want to nitty gritty, but if you follow the Digital Native narrative, then you probably won't find anything you havent heard before.

So what then, made this presentation worth sharing?  Two main things:

• It reminded me a lot of the "A Vision of Students Today" video that came out of KState last year.  But rather than coming from an institute of higher learning, it was coming from an organization.  And whats more, it was coming from a small group of people within that organization.  While there are most certainly a multitude of forward thinking companies that are changing the way they work to cater to a new demographic of people, this is the first time I've really seen it come from the bottom up in such a grassroots way.

• The presentation does touch on one area in particular that you don't hear much about when it comes to catering to the young folk - cash money (and subsequently accountability).  Most of the time, when you hear about companies making a shift to be GenY friendly, it has to do with the workplace.  Something along the lines of "Baby Boomers are retiring and if you can't find ways to recruit a new type of worker to replace them, you will loose out on the best and brightest" the next generation has to offer".   But NASA is a government organization, sponsored by tax money.  And if support for a government program wanes, tax money can dry up.  The creators of the NASA presentation then insinuate that if you don't take the time to engage the people that write your checks, you could eventually find yourself on the street.
  

It is this second point in particular that I think resonates a lot with me being an employee of a higher educational institution and (perhaps more importantly) a former student who knows what kind of impact a mountain of college loans can have.

There are a lot of differences between a University and a government organization like NASA - but there is also a big similarity.  They both require support to function - a confidence that the service they provide is worth the money being spent on it.  For a public University like Penn State, some of that money comes from governmental funding.  But some of it also comes directly from its students - the people who pay for the opportunity to earn an education.

I get asked a lot why  I spend so much time thinking about unconventional teaching opportunities (like gaming for example), and I think this notion of the bling gets at part of my motivation.  A college education is expensive and its not getting any cheaper. And while I do not question its worth, I wonder if  students will always share my sentiment. I wonder if there will come a time where students will sit back and question whether or not  $5,000, $10,000, $20,000 a year is worth it if that education is not delivered in a meaningful way that resonates with the 18 year old mind.

Maybe that time will never come.   After all, a college education is just about essential for any long term career prospects.  And a degree achieved such significance through plenty of traditional teaching techniques - the same way that NASA and its old school information policies did just fine to land a man on the moon and a rover on Mars. 

But just because things have worked well in the past, does it mean we shouldn't continue to make efforts to improve them?  Just because learning is an intellectual pursuit with rich traditional methods, does it mean it should not be fun, or adjust to the changing nature of the student?

Because in the end, the students hold the cards.  They decide where they will go to school.  They decide what opportunities interest them.  They decide whats worth spending money on.  And they decide what means something to them. We don't have to listen to them.  But wouldnt it be in our best interests (and theirs) to do so?

Whens the last time you watched a shuttle launch?