Skip to main content

Human-Centered Design Pedagogies to Teach Values in Technology Education

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Applications of Research in Technology Education

Part of the book series: Contemporary Issues in Technology Education ((CITE))

  • 429 Accesses

Abstract

Technology is value laden; hence technology education should create opportunities for students to learn about and practically apply value judgements to enable them to become future agents of change. Over the past three decades the rationale to include values, especially moral values, in technology education has gained increased momentum. Incorporating values in technology education would prevent the discipline from becoming mere technical education. The exploration of the context for designing and making is one stage in the technological process to support students’ exploration of value judgements. The current orthodox pedagogy should be replaced by one in which values relating to technology and technology education are co-constructed rather than imposed. Hence, a new pedagogy known as co-design is proposed. Co-design is an approach to human-centered design (HCD). Co-design is acknowledged as a novel design field which sees the user as a valuable contributor to counterbalance the values of the ‘hero-designer.’ Co-design can be applied as a pedagogy in design and technology education. However, design education is critiqued for the lack of opportunity for collaboration because of disciplinary silos even though the process begins with understanding core values of inclusion and questioning the notion of who designs in the age of collaboration. For co-design, the core values of inclusion and collaboration imply partnerships with users. Hence, co-design pedagogy aligns with technology education in socially constructed values which are inter-subjective and co-constructed. The first part of the chapter deliberates on a co-design pedagogy in fashion design education and findings revolving around three design principles emanating from HCD interventions, namely: (1) users as core and inspirational source, (2) design with users, and (3) identify user needs for integration with design. These three design principles act as input for design action, planning and making. Discussion then shifts to the second part where linkages are drawn to propose strategies for including the teaching of moral values in technology education.

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

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Amiel, T., & Reeves, T. C. (2008). Design-based research and educational technology: Rethinking technology and the research agenda. Educational Technology & Society, 11(4), 29–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ankiewicz, P. (2019). The implications of Feenberg’s critical theory for technology education. In J. R. Dakers, J. Hallström, & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), Reflections on technology for educational practitioners: Philosophers of technology inspiring technology education. Brill/Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baynes, K. (2010). Models of change: The impact of ‘designerly thinking’ on people’s lives and the environment. Seminar 4 modelling and society. Design: Occasional paper 6. Loughborough University. https://repository.lboro.ac.uk/articles/Models_of_change_the_impact_of_designerly_thinking_on_people_s_lives_and_the_environment_seminar_4_modelling_and_society/9350111

  • Barlex, D. (1993). The Nuffield approach to values in design and technology. Design and Technology Teaching, 26(1), 42–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breckon, A. (1998). National curriculum review in design and technology for the year 2000. The Journal of Design and Technology Education, 3(2), 101–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conway, R. (1994). Values in technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 4(1), 109–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conway, R., & Riggs, A. (1994). Valuing in technology education. In F. Banks (Ed.), Teaching technology. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, A., Joseph, D., & Bielaczye, K. (2004). Design research: Theoretical and methodological issues. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 15–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dakers, J. R. (2005). The hegemonic behaviorist cycle. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 15(2), 111–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, K. H. (1997). Science and technology as social relations towards a philosophy of technology for liberal education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 7(1–2), 49–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, R. N. (2018). A Human-centered design approach to fashion design education (Doctoral thesis). University of Johannesburg. https://ujcontent.uj.ac.za/vital/access/manager/Repository/uj:32308?site_name=GlobalView

  • Harvey, N. Ankiewicz, P., & Van As, F. (2019a). Fashion design education: Effects of users as design core and inspirational source. In Conference Proceedings of the 37th International Pupils’ Attitudes Towards Technology (PATT) Conference held in Malta. Conducted by the L-Università ta’ Malta.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, N. Ankiewicz, P., & Van As, F. (2019b). Design-based research: Bridging the gap between fashion design education and research on design. In Conference Proceedings of the 8th International Design Education Forum of Southern Africa (DEFSA) Conference held in Cape Town. Conducted by IIE Vega School and Cape Peninsula University of Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holdsworth, I., & Conway, B. (1999). Investigating values in secondary design and technology education. The Journal of Design and Technology Education, 4(3), 205–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, A., Buntting, C., & De Vries, M. J. (2013). The developing field of technology education: A review to look forward. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23(2), 191–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Layton, D. (1991). Aspects of national curriculum: Design & technology. National Curriculum Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, M. (2002). Values and attitudes in design and technology. In S. Sayers, J. Morley, & B. Barnes B. (Eds.), Issues in design and technology teaching. Routledge Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLaren, S. V. (1997). Value judgements: Evaluating design—A Scottish perspective on a global issue. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 7(3), 259–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Middleton, H. (2005). Creative thinking, values and design and technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 15(1), 61–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ordaz, M. N., Klapwijk, R., & van Dijk, G. (2018). Supporting learning design language in primary education. In Conference Proceedings of the 36th International Pupils’ Attitudes Towards Technology (PATT) Conference held in Malta. Conducted by the Athlone Institute of Technology, Co. Westmeath.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pavlova, M. (2005). Knowledge and values in technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 15(2), 127–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plomp, T. (2010). Educational design research: An introduction. In T. Plomp & N. Nieveen (Eds.), An Introduction to Educational Design Research. Seminar Proceedings Conducted at the East China Normal University, Shanghai (PR China). Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development: SLO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prime, G. M. (1993). Values in technology: Approaches to learning. Design and Technology Teaching, 26(1), 30–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeves, T. (2006). Design research from a technology perspective. In J. V. D. Akker, S. Gravemeijer, S. McKenny, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rekus, J. (1991). Teaching technology with a focus on moral education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 2(2), 41–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riggs, A., & Conway, R. (1991). Values and technology education. Design & Technology Teaching, 24(1), 31–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, E. B. N., & Stappers, P. J. (2012). Convivial toolbox: Generative research for the front end of design. BIS Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saldaña, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stables, K. (2017). Critiquing design: Perspectives and world views on design and design and technology education, for the common good. In P. J. Williams & K. Stables (Eds.) Critique in design and technology education. Contemporary issues in technology education. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steen, M. (2011). Tensions in human-centred design. CoDesign, 7(1), 45–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Neshane Harvey .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Harvey, N., Ankiewicz, P. (2022). Human-Centered Design Pedagogies to Teach Values in Technology Education. In: Williams, P.J., von Mengersen, B. (eds) Applications of Research in Technology Education. Contemporary Issues in Technology Education. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-7885-1_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-7885-1_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-16-7884-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-16-7885-1

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics