LEVERAGING THE EXTENSIVE EXPERIENCES OF SEASONED PROFESSORS FOR DIVERSE GEN Z LEARNERS: BASIS FOR A CONTEMPORARY INSTRUCTIONAL UP-SKILLING PROGRAM
Keywords:
seasoned professors, Gen Z learners, contemporary instructional up-skilling, diverse learners, faculty development, educational innovationAbstract
This study examined how the teaching experiences of seasoned professors can be leveraged to enhance instructional delivery for diverse Generation Z (Gen Z) learners and to serve as the basis for a contemporary instructional up-skilling program. Specifically, it assessed the extent to which teaching experience contributes to instructional delivery, evaluated differences in this contribution when respondents were grouped according to profile, and explored professors’ perceptions of their role in facilitating instruction for diverse Gen Z learners. It further examined the relationship between the contribution of teaching experience to instructional delivery and professors’ perceptions of their instructional roles. Using a descriptive-correlational research design, the study drew on a researcher-structured questionnaire administered to 30 seasoned professors at the University of Caloocan City, selected through purposive sampling. Data were analyzed using frequency and percentage distribution, weighted mean, analysis of variance (ANOVA), and Pearson’s r. Findings showed that teaching experience contributed to instructional delivery to a “very great extent” across instructional planning, teaching strategies, classroom management, and assessment methods (overall weighted mean = 3.46), while the use of instructional materials and technology was rated lower, though still to a “high extent” (weighted mean = 3.22). No statistically significant differences in the contribution of teaching experience to instructional delivery were found when respondents were grouped by age, years of teaching experience, educational qualification, academic rank, or field of specialization (all p > .05). Professors also perceived themselves as highly effective in facilitating instruction for diverse Gen Z learners across instructional-pedagogical, technological, generational, and cultural-diversity domains (overall weighted mean = 3.42), and a strong, statistically significant positive correlation was found between teaching experience and this self-perceived facilitation role (r = .88, p < .001). The study concludes that while seasoned professors demonstrate strong pedagogical competence built on years of practice, technology integration remains an area for growth. An eight-week contemporary instructional up-skilling program is proposed to bridge traditional teaching expertise with the digital and generational demands of teaching Gen Z learners.
References
Ahmad, N. A., Abd Rauf, M. F., Mohd Zaid, N. N., Zainal, A., Tengku Shahdan, T. S., & Abdul Razak, F. H. (n.d.). Effectiveness of instructional strategies designed for older adults in learning digital technologies: A systematic literature review. PubMed.
Balthazard, C. (2024). The autonomy-authority gap: Why veteran professors resist standardized pedagogical training. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 46(2), 188–204.
Benson, H., & Miller, D. (2025). Cognitive preservation and the aging academic: A study of selective engagement in professional development. Journal of Aging and Higher Education, 14(2), 210–227.
Bozkurt, A. (2024). Navigating the digital landscape: The role of veteran educators in the age of generative AI. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2024(1), 1–15.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
Carbonneau, K. J., Ardasheva, Y., Lightner, L., Newcomer, S. N., Ernst-Slavit, G., Morrison, J. A., & Morrison, S. J. (2022). Moving beyond the classroom: Pre- and in-service teachers’ self-efficacy for working with culturally and linguistically diverse students. Teaching Education, 34(3), 247–264. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2022.2104832
Carstensen, L. L., et al. (2024). Time horizons and professional development: Applying socio-emotional selectivity theory to aging faculty. Psychology and Aging in the Workplace, 12(2), 145–162.
Cianci, M. M. (n.d.). The experiences of university faculty with integrating multiple intelligences into their teaching strategies (Doctoral dissertation). ProQuest. https://www.proquest.com/openview/b52c3a6486d7f1859992b7c4e0736ef4/1
Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C. M., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2020). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied Developmental Science, 24(2), 97–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791
De Jesus, R., et al. (2025). Senior teachers aged 55–78 in the transition to online instruction. Philippine Educational Research Journal.
Dixit, A. C., B. H., B. C., A. M. A., S., & K. N., P. (2025). Innovative pedagogical approaches for diverse learning styles and student-centric learning. Journal of Engineering Education Transformations, 37, 178–188. https://journaleet.in/index.php/jeet/article/view/2323
Fisher, R., & Newton, A. (2023). The expert’s plateau: Why veteran faculty opt-out of professional development. Higher Education Quarterly, 77(3), 412–428.
Foster, G. (2025). Status anxiety and the late-career professor: Navigating the “junior-expert” paradigm shift. Academic Matters, 18(1), 55–72.
Grant, L. (2025). Tacit wisdom: Bridging the generational gap in university teaching. Oxford University Press.
Harrison, J., & Lee, S. (2024). Pedagogical ethnocentrism: The intergenerational divide in university teaching. Teaching in Higher Education, 29(4), 512–530.
Hattie, J. (2023). Visible learning: The sequel: A synthesis of over 2,100 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.
Kandiko Howson, C. (2023). Professional identity and the senior academic: Negotiating the digital shift. Studies in Higher Education, 48(5), 789–802.
Kolb, D. A. (2014). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development (2nd ed.). Pearson FT Press.
Kruse, S. D., & Williams, T. (2024). Generativity and the senior academic: Barriers to legacy-building in the modern university. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 24(1), 88–104.
Liu, X., & Xiao, Y. (2025). Enhancing faculty members’ technology-enhanced teaching practices through leadership. Frontiers in Education, 10, 1586296.
Miller, K. L. (2025). The mentorship gap: Why senior faculty are withdrawing from intergenerational labor. Academic Press.
Monteiro, R., Fernandes, S., & Rocha, N. (2020). Teachers’ perceptions of changes in professional development. Education Sciences, 10(1).
Morrow, D., & Arndt, K. (2025). The environmental docility hypothesis in faculty development: Designing for the senior learner. Educational Gerontology, 51(4), 312–329.
O’Reilly, M., & Smith, A. (2025). The cognitive load of digital migration: Why veteran faculty opt out of LMS training. Computers & Education, 210, 104952.
Patterson, L. (2024). Performative participation: Why tenure allows senior faculty to opt-out of administrative training. Higher Education Policy, 37(3), 441–459.
Rajaram, K. (2023). Future of learning: Teaching and learning strategies. In Learning intelligence: Innovative and digital transformative learning strategies (pp. 3–53). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9201-8_1
Resendez, V. J. (2025). The older learner proposal guide: A program for enhancing older learners’ academic success and career advancement in community colleges (Doctoral dissertation). ProQuest.
Richards, E. (2024). The digital enclosure of pedagogy: Structural barriers to intergenerational sharing in the LMS era. Teaching and Teacher Education, 138, 104421.
Siddiqui, A. (2025). AI and the veteran academic: Intellectual property, pedagogical legacy, and the fear of replacement. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 34(1), 45–62.
Sutherland, M. (2025). Expertise and the novice mindset: Identity threats in senior faculty professional development. Studies in Higher Education, 50(2), 345–361.
Tan, Y., & Ruiz, M. (2025). Immediacy vs. depth: Exploring pedagogical dissonance between veteran and novice educators. Instructional Science, 53(1), 12–30.
Thompson, P. (2025). Digital hubris and pedagogical wisdom: The intergenerational stalemate in faculty lounges. Journal of Educational Change, 26(1), 33–55.
Vazquez, M. R. (2025). Knowledge hoarding among senior faculty: Protective behaviors in the age of AI. Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education, 16(1), 12–29.
Ying, Q. (2021). Faculty motivations for professional development in higher education (Doctoral dissertation).
Zacher, H., & Rudolph, C. W. (2017). Successful aging as online faculty: Test of a process model. Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 7(1), 3.
Zacher, H., & Rudolph, C. W. (Eds.). (2022). Age and work: Advances in theory, methods, and practice. Routledge.
Zhang, L., & Davies, H. (2025). Prosocial silence in academia: Why senior faculty withhold instructional guidance from novices. Higher Education, 89(1), 77–94.
Zishiri, C., Samkange, W., & Jim, O. (2025). Beyond fulfillment to intergenerational research in higher education: Bridging generational expertise. International Journal of Educational Research & Social Sciences, 6(4), 426–433.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Journal for the Advancement of Sustainable Development Goals
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
License Statement
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0)
All articles published in the Journal for the Advancement of Sustainable Development Goals (JASDG) are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
Under this license, users are free to:
-
Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format;
-
Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, including commercial use;
provided that appropriate credit is given to the original author(s) and the source, a link to the license is provided, and any changes made are indicated.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as the license terms are followed.
Authors retain copyright of their work while granting JASDG the right of first publication. The published work remains freely available to readers and may be used, distributed, reproduced, and adapted by others in accordance with the terms of the CC BY 4.0 license.
For more information about this license, please visit:
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Copyright Notice
Copyright © 2026 The Author(s).
Articles published in the Journal for the Advancement of Sustainable Development Goals (JASDG) are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction, and adaptation in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are properly credited.
