Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Technology Education as a Practice-Based Discipline

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of Technology Education

Part of the book series: Springer International Handbooks of Education ((SIHE))

  • 160 Accesses

Abstract

The existing literature suggests a mismatch between what and how engineering and technology students are learning in the classroom and what employers and society in general are demanding from them in their careers. This mismatch between engineering learning and practice is rooted in a fundamental dissonance between what technology is and how it is taught; engineering and technology education programs continue to portray engineering through building the curricula and infrastructure upon the notion that engineering is more of a platform for conceptual understanding than a complex and contextualized practice of solving problems, achieving sustainable design, and/or employing creative skills, such as design. The purpose of this chapter is to provide a model that conceptualizes engineering as a complex and contextualized activity and to consequently argue for a new positioning of the role of conceptual understanding. First, this chapter briefly discusses the existing prevalent model of technology and engineering that focuses on the attainment of conceptual knowledge, giving primarily attention to its main assumptions, limitations, and implications in the context of engineering/technology education and practice. Then, the discussion proceeds to some precursor frameworks of the proposed model that already exist in a more fragmented form, including frameworks developed in the form of theoretically derived rationales, as well as those models that have drawn from naturalistic approaches of inquiry. Finally, this new model of engineering and technology is introduced as a complex and contextualized practice along with its main tenets, how it reframes the fundamental questions of technology and engineering and technology/engineering practice, and the possible implications for technology/engineering education and practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alexander, P. A. (1992). Domain knowledge: Evolving themes and emerging concerns. Educational Psychology, 27(1), 33–51. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep2701_4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allie, S., Armien, M. N., Burgoyne, N., Case, J. M., Collier-Reed, B. I., Craig, T. S., et al. (2009). Learning as acquiring a discursive identity through participation in a community: Improving student learning in engineering education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 34(4), 359–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atman, C. J., Sheppard, S. D., Turns, J., Adams, R. S., Fleming, L. N., Stevens, R., Streveler, R. A., Smith, K. A., Miller, R. L., Leifer, L. J., Yasuhara, K., & Lund, D. (2010). Enabling engineering student success: The final report for the Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education (p. 2010). San Rafael, CA: Morgan & Claypool Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bronfenbrenner, U., & Ceci, S. J. (1994). Nature-nurture reconceptualized in developmental perspective: A biological model. Psychological Review, 101(4), 568–586. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.101.4.568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42. doi:10.3102/0013189X018001032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. S. (2006). In search of pedagogy: Volume I. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, H. M. (1985). Changing order: Replication and induction in scientific practice. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Graaff, E., & Kolmos, A. (2007). Management of change. Implementation of problem-based and project-based learning in engineering. Rotterdam/Taipei: Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York, NY: Collier Books, Macmilian.

    Google Scholar 

  • Du, X., & Kolmos, A. (Eds.). (2009). Research on PBL practice in engineering education. Boston: Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edström, K., & Kolmos, A. (2014). PBL and CDIO: complementary models for engineering education development. European Journal of Engineering Education, 39(5), 539–555.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, J. S. B. T. (2010). Thinking twice: Two minds in one brain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, R., & Gabriel, J. (2007, October 10–13). Performing engineering: How the performance metaphor for engineering can transform communications learning and teaching. Proceedings of the 37th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Engineering Education Conference, 10–13 October 2007, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrari, M., & Sternberg, R.J. (1998). The development of mental abilities and styles. In W. Damon (Series Ed.), & D. Kuhn and R. Siegler (Vol. Eds.), Handbook of child psychology Vol. 2: Cognition, perception and language (5th ed., pp. 899–946). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gattie, D. K., Kellam, N. N., Schramski, J. R., & Walther, J. (2011). Engineering education as a complex system. European Journal of Engineering Education, 36(6), 521–535. doi:10.1080/03043797.2011.622038.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. G. (2005). Toward the development of intellective character. In E. W. Gordon & B. L. Bridgall (Eds.), Affirmative development: Cultivating academic ability (pp. 17–47). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holt, J. E., Radcliffe, D. F., & Schoorl, D. (1985). Design or problem solving – A critical choice for the engineering profession. Design Studies, 6(2), 107–110. doi:10.1016/0142-694X(85)90020-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huff, J. L., Zoltowski, C. B., & Oakes, W. C. (2016). Preparing engineers for the workplace through service learning: Perceptions of EPICS alumni. Journal of Engineering Education, 105(1), 43–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Itabashi-Campbell, R., Gluesing, J., & Perelli, S. (2012). Mindfulness and product failure management: An engineering epistemology. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 29(6), 642–665. doi:10.1108/02656711211245647.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johri, A., & Olds, B. M. (2011). Situated engineering learning: Bridging engineering education research and the learning sciences. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(1), 151–185. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2011.tb00007.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D., Strobel, J., & Lee, C. B. (2006). Everyday problem solving in engineering: Lessons for engineering educators. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(2), 139–151. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2006.tb00885.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, R., Maytham, B., Case, J., & Fraser, D. (2005). Engineering graduates’ perceptions of how well they were prepared for work in industry. European Journal of Engineering Education, 30(2), 167–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNeill, N. J., Douglas, E. P., Koro-Ljungberg, M., Therriault, D. J., & Krause, I. (2016). Undergraduate students’ beliefs about engineering problem solving. Journal of Engineering Education, 105(4), 560–584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meter, P. N. V., Firetto, C. M., Turns, S. R., Litzinger, T. A., Cameron, C. E., & Shaw, C. W. (2016). Improving students, conceptual reasoning by prompting cognitive operations. Journal of Engineering Education, 105(2), 245–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J., & Land, R. (2006). Overcoming barriers to student understanding: Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, P. H. (2011). Theories of developmental psychology (5th ed.). New York, NY: Worth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, I. (1991). The knowledge-creating company. Harvard Business Review Press, 69, 96–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pan, R. (2014). Engineering students’ experiences and perceptions of workplace problem solving (Order No. 3636485). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses A&I. (1615400888).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sawyer, R.K. & Greeno, J.G. (2009) Situativity and learning (pp. 347–367) in Murat Aydede & P. Robbins (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Situated Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheppard, S., Colby, A., Macantangay, K., & Sullivan, W. (2006). What is engineering practice? International Journal of Engineering Education, 22(3), 429–438.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, S. J., & Edmondson, A.C. (2006). When learning and performance are at odds: Confronting the tension. HBS working paper no. 07-032, Harvard University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, S. J., & Edmondson, A. C. (2008). When learning and performance are at odds: Confronting the tension. In P. Kumar & P. Ramsey (Eds.), Learning and performance matter (pp. 33–61). Hackensack, NJ: World Scientific Books.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Splitt, F. G. (2003). The challenge to change: On realizing the new paradigm for engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 92(2), 181–187. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2003.tb00756.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, R., O'Connor, K., Garrison, L., Jocuns, A., & Amos, D. M. (2008). Becoming an engineer: Toward a three dimensional view of engineering learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Streveler, R. A., Litzinger, T. A., Miller, R. L., & Steif, P. (2008). Learning conceptual knowledge in the engineering sciences: Overview and future research directions. Journal of Engineering Education, 98(3), 279–294. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00979.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thagard, P. (2002). Coherence in thought and action. Cambridge: MIT press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trevelyan, J. (2010). Reconstructing engineering from practice. Engineering Studies, 2(3), 175–195. doi:10.1080/19378629.2010.520135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuncer, C. (2003). Broadening the manufacturing practitioner’s education. Manufacturing Engineering, 130(1), 16–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westbury, C., Wilensky, U., & Resnick, M. (2001). ¿Sabemos cómo se aprende?: nuevos enfoques sobre el aprendizaje. Perú. Ministerio de Educación.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wulf, W. A., & Fischer, G. M. C. (2002). A makeover for engineering education. Issues in Science and Technology, 18(9), 35–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yadav, A., Subedi, D., Lundeberg, M. A., & Bunting, C. F. (2011). Problem-based learning: Influence on students’ learning in an electrical engineering course. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(2), 253–280. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2011.tb00013.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zitter, I., Hoeve, A., & de Bruijn, E. (2016). A design perspective on the school-work boundary: A hybrid curriculum model. Vocations and Learning, 9(1), 111–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Information Science and Learning Technologies, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA

    Johannes Strobel

Authors
  1. Johannes Strobel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Johannes Strobel .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Delft University of Technology , Delft, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands

    Marc J. de Vries

Section Editor information

  1. University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand

    Wendy Fox-Turnbull

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this entry

Cite this entry

Strobel, J. (2017). Technology Education as a Practice-Based Discipline. In: de Vries, M. (eds) Handbook of Technology Education. Springer International Handbooks of Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-38889-2_39-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-38889-2_39-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-38889-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-38889-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference EducationReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Education

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation