Your research topic has many overlaps with my own, but you add a refreshingly different perspective. I wonder if part of the difference arises due to the fact that you operate in a multicultural environment while the Japanese one is predominantly uni-cultural? That as maybe, I was very interested in this statement;
“With technological innovations, learners have become more talented, incredibly creative, social, ambitious and curious. That is why they resist the formal way of learning and prefer informal learning areas where they can rethink, reject, and resist” (Qiqieh, 2016).
In part, these statements offer clues towards your second question; “What are the possible challenges facing educators and curriculum developer these days?” (Qiqieh, 2016), but I would love to see your argument about resisting developed. Intuitively, I find myself agreeing with the idea that young adults have a tendency to resist, but I think that this notion needs more investigation. At the propositional level, the truth value of the statements needs to be empirically supported. Technology is changing the brain structure of digital natives (Eccles & Feltovich, 2008), possibly allowing them more procedural control over technology. However, in my experience, many college-age students’ abilities and speed are limited to a very narrow range of digital skills. For example, Google search operators are unknown to most students prior to taking my courses, as is a working knowledge of Excel, databases, statistical software and so on. Yes, students can manipulate technology faster (arguably), but their range of skills is weaker. A clear understanding of the scope of skills in young adults is needed.
Furthermore, your claim that young adults “resist the formal way of learning” (Qiqieh, 2016) also needs empirical support to qualify its truth value. Again, intuitively I feel that you are right. The resisting may be cultural, for in Japan, very little resisting happens. There may be a cultural dimension inside your question. Certainly, there is a physical developmental issue in play. Teenagers’ prefrontal cortex structure is not fully developed (Miller, 2011), an area which plays a crucial role in moral argumentation (Stets, 2010). I don’t suppose that your research design needs to incorporate this aspect so much if you choose to investigate other impediments to instructional designers’ curricula. However, I for one, would be fascinated to see a study of how teenage rebellion impacts on curriculum design. Just a thought.
Eccles, D. W., & Feltovich, P. J. (2008). Implications of Domain-General “Psychological Support Skills” for Transfer of Skill and Acquisition of Expertise. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 21(1), 43–60. http://doi.org/10.1002/piq
Miller, P. H. (2011). Theories of Developmental Psychology (5th ed.). New York: Worth.
Qiqieh, S. (2016, October 15). RE: Week 2 – Research as a way of knowing. Message posted to https://elearning.uol.ohecampus.com/webapps/discussionboard/do/message?action=list_messages&forum_id=_1160653_1&group_id=_442972_1&nav=group_forum&conf_id=_539530_1&course_id=_1607246_1&message_id=_19913621_1#msg__19913621_1Id
Stets, J. E. (2010). The social psychology of the moral identity. In S. Hitlin & S. Vaisey (Eds.), Handbook of the Sociology of Morality (pp. 385–409). New York: Springer Science and Business Media. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6896-8