generation z gen z diligent coaching intergenerational

This is part of a series of blogs on Generation Z. Over the course of these blogs and through the talk I have put together I explain

how and why Generation Z is different, naming seven key characteristics
the challenges this presents for leaders and organisations
the actions not only to overcome those challenges but ensure future prosperity.

Gen Z is the most important generational shift yet. Their experiences and outlook are not understood well enough by those who have come before them. Generation Z has huge, as yet mostly untapped, potential to meet the challenges of today.

Inflated outcomes? If not, then what?

The table below summarises the degree classifications from English universities across the 2010s, as produced by the independent regulator. Although these figures only cover English universities the pattern is similar across the UK.

Figures for 2020 and 2021 are not comparable with this period, as they were the two years affected by the pandemic. As was the case with secondary schools, universities had to find a new way of awarding qualifications. This led to a further increase in outcomes, including the percentage of first class degrees rising to almost 40%. The intention is for 2023 outcomes to ‘return to pre-pandemic levels’.

Approximately two thirds of ‘other’ is represented by ‘lower seconds’ (2:2) and the rest is evenly split between a third class degree and not passing.

The figures show a significant rise in the average degree classification over time. In the mid-90s, when it was still Generation X who was graduating, the combined figure for first and upper second alone was less than 50% (around 48%). In the mid 2000s, as Millennials completed their degrees, the combined figure moved up to the mid fifties.

Since Generation Z started to graduate in the mid 2010s the climb has been steep. It is also worth noting that there was an increase of approximately 10% in the Higher Education Participation Rate across this period, despite the imposition of the higher tuition fee cap. The increased number of undergraduates did not lead to a dilution in outcomes.

It’s the percentage of first class degrees which stands out here in particular, as it has almost doubled in ten years.

There are a number of factors behind this, some of which have been better researched than others. They include the increased costs of attending university, which led to undergraduates demanding more from their lecturers. There have also been suggestions that the improvement in outcomes was artificial and was created as an incentive for students to attend particular universities.

The university sector is sensitive to these claims, and understandably so. There’s a case for saying that both teaching and facilities improved, as did resources for learning through the digital revolution.

I am not saying that any of these factors are totally fictitious or have had no impact. It is difficult to ignore the analysis in articles like this one.

Gen Z diligence

However, I am saying that a contributory factor is that Generation Z works harder and has been more diligent in their studies.

A further effect of the increased costs of going to university meant that students demanded more from themselves. I saw it for myself in the schools I led, and not just in the sixth form. Students stayed later, arrived earlier and took more home with them. Their focus and desire to succeed grew. The messages about the combined impact of technological advances, an uncertain economy and globalisation on their future prospects also cut through.

I would also argue that to rule out the idea that Gen Z works harder than previous generations without at least looking is narrow minded, mean-spirited even. It reflects well on how they have been raised by their parents for one thing, as well as the investment made in education over time through their taxes.

There is also an element which is a little less savoury. This is the idea that as the number of undergraduates from disadvantaged backgrounds has grown, that this would also ‘naturally’ have led to lower outcomes. The same applies to those arriving at university with lower grades on entry. If anything, the rate of educational progress shown by many of these young people over time is an indication that they are more likely to do well at university.

As the regulator, Office for Students states ‘We believe the OfS must be careful not to assume that students with lower entry grades, typically from more disadvantaged backgrounds, cannot achieve first-class degrees.’

These figures cover a wider period of time than for universities. The A* grade was introduced at A level in 2010, partly in response to concerns about grade inflation.

The changes in A level outcomes are not as significant as with university degrees, despite the fact that there has been far more media attention on the former.

In 2001, when the older Millennials were finishing their studies, 38% of grades were A or B. Six years later in 2007 (still Millennials) it was almost 10 points higher. In the Gen Z years (2013 onwards) it’s 5 points higher again.

Over time it remains a clear shift. It is also worth adding that it is possible, likely even, that over time a student can receive a worse grade despite having achieved a higher score because grade boundaries moved upwards. There is a lot more to this than can be described here, and there is also an argument that ‘exam factory’ schools, a narrower curriculum, school accountability and teacher workload have also been contributory factors.

GCSE outcomes are harder to measure over time because the entire grading system changed in 2017 (from A*-G to 9-1) , and the qualifications permitted to count towards the main accountability measures changed a lot over the 2010s too. Both of these developments were made at least partly in response to grade inflation concerns. However, there is a similar pattern in terms of outcomes as seen with A levels.

For those who say that improvements in outcomes are down to grade inflation, parental pressure, school accountability measures and so on I do understand this perspective. I am not arguing that Gen Z’s gains are purely down to their own diligence, just that it is genuine and a significant contributory factor.

Gen Z attitudes

The table below is from the Economist in 2018, from a survey of 13-17 year olds in the USA. The title of the piece says it all - Generation Z is stressed, depressed and exam-obsessed. I would say this tallies with my own experience in schools. The young people were asked about what matters most to them.

‘Getting good grades’ is way out in front, with more than twice as many responding ‘a lot’ than any other category and very small proportions responding ‘not too much’ or ‘none at all’. For those of you who read the first blog in the series about how well behaved Gen Z has proved to be, this shows further evidence.

A recent multi-generational survey from Monster shows an interesting dichotomy. Gen Z will work at unsociable times for higher pay, but also that salary is not everything. I should add the caveat that there may also be a time of life element here; having children can affect your answers to such questions. Having said that, there is also likely to be a lot of millennials without children answering the survey, and there is a step change in attitudes between these generations.

In the same survey 76% of Gen Z respondents described themselves as responsible for driving their own career. They know it is on them.

Gen Z should not be characterised, or stereotyped, as slackers or snowflakes. The extent to which they will uphold their personal values about, for example, equality or work/life balance should not be conflated with a reluctance to work hard. The educational outcomes show otherwise.