Abstract
The purpose of this study is to verify whether pupils (15–16 years old) who have received technology education on a systemic approach of industrial systems, are better than other pupils (of the same age but from other academic domains such as literary ones or ones that are economics-based) at solving physical science problems which involve systemic reasoning. The results show that there is a positive transfer effect of the systems approach applied to industrial automatisms on systems of another nature (hydrodynamic and electrical problems). However, this effect is less important for the pupils who study engineering sciences initiation for just 1 year (ISI) than for those who continue this education (SI) for a further year.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
It is somewhat surprising that a counter argument (like less water passes through B but it circulates faster, so the flow stays the same) which normally marks the passing from the intermediary stage to the conserving stage is never used here.
This term seems preferable to that of “constant” flow, which may be deemed ambiguous, and which is reserved for qualifying the responses of pupils who esteem that the flow remains unchanged at all points in the circuit after an increased loss of charge. But one could also talk about “conservative flux"as physicists do, or less technically, of “conservation of water quantity”.
(cf. the 1 answers in Table 2 where—it means that the flow was judged as being lesser + greater, and = identical to what it was in S1).
References
Andreucci, C. (2006). La fabrication d’artefacts comme moyen didactique de conceptualisation de la réalité technique. Aster, 41, 153–184.
Andreucci, C. (2008). The structuring role of artefacts in thought development. In J. Ginestié (Ed.), The cultural transmission of artefacts, skills and knowledge. Eleven studies in technology education (pp. 21–41). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Barak, M. (1990). Imparting basics in technology through an instructional system for computerized process control. Research in Sciences and Technology Education, 8(1), 53–67.
Barak, M., & Williams, P. (2007). Learning elemental structure and dynamic processes in technology systems: A cognitive frameworks. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 17, 323–340.
von Bertalanffy, L. (1968). Organismic Psychology and systems theory. Worchester: Clark University Press.
Blondin, C., Closset, J. L., & Lafontaine, D. (1990). Résolution de problèmes d’hydrodynamique face à un circuit concret - Comparaison des stratégies avant et après apprentissage. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 5(4), 517–531.
Blondin, C., Closset, J. L., & Lafontaine, D. (1992). Raisonnements naturels en hydrodynamique. Revue Française de Pédagogie, 100, 71–80.
BOEN, Bulletin officiel du ministère de l’éducation nationale et du ministère de la recherche (2001). 8, HS du 31 aout. www.education.gouv.fr/bo/2001/hs2/seconde2.htm.
Brousseau, G. (1997). Theory of didactical situations in mathematics: didactiques des mathématiques, 1970–1990 (N. Balacheff, M. Cooper, R. Sutherland & V. Warfield, Trans.)., Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Brown, J. S., et al. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.
Chatoney, M. (2005). Activités de production et construction du concept de matériau en réalisation sur projet en classe de CP. In P. Vérillon, P. J. Ginestié, et al. (Eds.), Produire en technologie à l’école et au collège (pp. 279–306). Paris: INRP.
Chatoney, M. (2006). Organiser les activités de production à l’école primaire–Sélectionner des matériaux avec des élèves de 6 ans. Aster, 41, 139–158.
Closset, J. L. (1989). Les obstacles à l’apprentissage de l’électrocinétique. Bulletin de l’union des physiciens, 716, 931–950.
de Rosnay, J. (1975). Le macroscope. Paris: Seuil.
de Vries, M. (2005). Teaching about technology. Dordrecht: Springer.
Deforge, Y. (1985). Technologie et génétique de l’objet industriel. Paris: Maloine.
Dorst, K. (2006). Design problems and design paradoxes. Design Issue, 22(3), 4–17.
Dubois, S. & Gartiser, N. (2005). L’impact du concept de problème sur son processus de résolution. Application à la conception de systèmes techniques. Actes du 6° congrès international de génie industriel, 7–10 juin, Besançon.
Froment, J. P. (2002). La valeur du schéma cinématique en tant qu’artéfact cognitif. Didaskalia, 21, 43–80.
Gille, B. (1978). Histoire des techniques. Paris: Gallimard.
Ginestié, J. (1992). Contribution à la didactique des disciplines technologiques: acquisition et utilisation d’un langage d’automatisme. Thèse de doctorat de l’Université de Provence (mention sciences de l’éducation). France: Aix-en-Provence.
Ginestié, J. (2008). Gestepro, a research laboratory in science, technology and vocational education. In J. Ginestié (Ed.), The cultural transmission of artefacts, skills and knowledge: eleven studies in technology education (pp. 3–6). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Inhelder, B., & Cellerier, G. (1992). Les chemins de la découverte chez l’enfant. Paris: Delachaux and Niestlé.
Joshua, S., & Dupin, J. J. (1993). Introduction à la didactique des sciences et des mathématiques. Paris: PUF.
Lebahar, J. C. (2006). Pratiques professionnelles et enseignement de la technique d’organigramme en architecture: problèmes de transposition didactique. Didaskalia, 29, 9–40.
Lebeaume, J. (2000). L’éducation technologique. Histoire et méthode. Paris: ESF.
Lemoigne, J. L. (1990). La modélisation des systèmes complexes, EFCET system. Paris: Dunod.
Martinand, J. L. (2003). L’éducation technologique à l’école moyenne en France: Problèmes de didactique curriculaire. Revue canadienne de l’enseignement de sciences des mathématiques et des technologies, 3(1), 101–106.
Morin, E. (1990). Introduction à la pensée complexe, Communication et complexité. Prague: ESF.
Simon, H. A. (1991). Sciences des systèmes, sciences de l’artificiel. Paris: Dunod.
Tiberghien, A. (2003). Des connaissances naïves au savoir scientifique. In M. Kail & M. Fayol (Eds.), Les sciences cognitives et l’école. La question des apprentissages (pp. 333–443). Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Viennot, L. (2006). Modélisation dimensionnellement réductrice et traitement particulaire dans l’enseignement de la physique. Didaskalia, 28, 6–32.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Andreucci, C., Chatoney, M. & Ginestie, J. The systemic approach to technological education: effects of transferred learning in resolving a physics problem. Int J Technol Des Educ 22, 281–296 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-010-9148-y
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-010-9148-y