Advertisement

Factors Influencing Successful Achievement in Contrasting Design and Technology Activities in Higher Education

  • Stephanie AtkinsonEmail author
Article

Abstract

The aim of the study was to investigate the relationship between such factors as learning style, gender, prior experience, and successful achievement in contrasting modules taken by a cohort of thirty design and technology trainee teachers during their degree programme at a University in the North East of England. Achievement data were collected from three design and three electronic modules at levels 1, 2 and 3. Data concerning appropriate, previous experience before starting the course was obtained through a short questionnaire. The learning style of each member of the sample was ascertained using the Cognitive Style Analysis test. The findings from the study indicated that the learning style groupings were not as expected. A positive relationship between achievement and past experience in both electronics and design activity was found, although improvement for those with no prior experience in comparison to those with previous experience was only evident in electronics. A concern arising out of the data was the differences in terms of achievement between male and female students and also the difference in achievement when learning style and gender were scrutinised. The implications of the findings in relation to the success of the trainees as impending teachers of design and technology were discussed. The problems associated with the small cell size caused by splitting the sample by the three variables was acknowledged and a suggestion was made that further study would be required to ascertain whether the gender and learning style differences witnessed in this study would be replicated in a larger sample.

Keywords

learning style design and technology achievement gender prior learning design and technology teacher training 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Banks, F. 2002‘Research in Design and Technology Education’Owen-Jackson, G. eds. Teaching Design and Technology in Secondary SchoolsRoutledge FalmerLondon299317Google Scholar
  2. Biggs, J. B., Moore, P. J. 1993The Process of Learning3Prentice HallNJGoogle Scholar
  3. Bryne, E. M. 1978Women and EducationTavistock PublicationsLondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Cassidy, S. 2003‘Learning Styles: An overview of Theories, Models and Measures’Armstrong, S.Rayner, S.Graff, M.Sadler-Smith, E.Lashley, C.Schiering, M.Peterson, E.Spencer, D. eds. ELSIN 2003–Bridging Theory and PracticeThe University of HullHull80102Google Scholar
  5. Coffield, F., Mosely, K., Ecclestone, K., Hall, E. 2003‘A Systematic Review of Learning Styles and Pedagogy’Armstrong, S.Rayner, S.Graff, M.Sadler-Smith, E.Lashley, C.Schiering, M.Peterson, E.Spencer, D. eds. ELSIN 2003–Bridging Theory and PracticeThe University of HullHull115Google Scholar
  6. Curry, L.: 1983, ‘An Organisation of Learning Style Theory and Constructs’, ERIC Document 235, 185.Google Scholar
  7. Denton, H. G. 1992‘The Design and Make Task (DMT): Some Reflections on Designing in Schools’Smith, J. S. eds. Design and TechnologyLoughborough UniversityLoughborough7073IDATER93Google Scholar
  8. Design and Technology Association (DATA): 1995, Minimum Competencies for Students to teach Design and Technology in Secondary Schools–Research Paper No. 4. DATA, Wellesbourne.Google Scholar
  9. Dunn, R. 2003‘The Dunn and Dunn Learning Style Model: Theoretical Cornerstone, Research and Practical Applications’Armstrong, S.Rayner, S.Graff, M.Sadler-Smith, E.Lashley, C.Schiering, M.Peterson, E.Spencer, D. eds. ELSIN 2003-Bridging Theory and PracticeThe University of HullHull181205Google Scholar
  10. Dunn, R., Dunn, K. 1993Teaching Elementary Students Through Their Individual Learning Styles: Practical Approaches for Grades 3–6Allyn and BaconBoston, MAGoogle Scholar
  11. Entwistle, N., Ramsden, P. 1983Understanding Student LearningCroom HelmKentGoogle Scholar
  12. Evans, C. 2003‘Exploring the Relationship Between Cognitive Style and Teaching Style’Armstrong, S.Rayner, S.Graff, M.Sadler-Smith, E.Lashley, C.Schiering, M.Peterson, E.Spencer, D. eds. ELSIN 2003–Bridging Theory and PracticeThe University of HullHull206229Google Scholar
  13. Gilligan, C. 1982In a Different VoiceHarvard University PressNew YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Goldstein, K. M., Blackman, S. 1978Cognitive Style: Five Approaches and Relevant ResearchWileyNew YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Harding, J., Grant, M. 1984Girls and Technology EducationChelsea CollegeLondon University, LondonGoogle Scholar
  16. Harding, J. 2002‘Gender and Design and Technology’Owen-Jackson, G. eds. Teaching Design and Technology in Secondary SchoolsRoutledge FalmerLondon237248Google Scholar
  17. Kelly, A., Smail, B., Whyte, J. 1981The Initial GIST Survey: Results and ImplicationsGISTManchesterGoogle Scholar
  18. Kelly, C. A.: 1999, ‘Gender and Inquiry: an Investigation into Identifying and Defining the Role of Inquiry in Higher-order Thinking, in M. Whitehead (ed.), European Journal of Teacher Education22(1), 101–114.Google Scholar
  19. Kimbell, R., Stables, K., Wheeler, T., Wosniak, A., Kelly, V. 1991The Assessment of Performance in Design and Technology: The Final Report of the APU Design and Technology Project 1985–91School Examination and Assessment Council/Evaluation and Monitoring UnitLondonGoogle Scholar
  20. Kolb, D. A. 1984Experiential Learning: Experience as a Source of learning and DevelopmentPrentice HallEnglewood Cliffs, NJGoogle Scholar
  21. Lawson, B. 1990How Designers Think: the Design Process De-mystified2Butterworth ArchitectureLondonGoogle Scholar
  22. LJ Systems, Product information [Online] Available URL: www.ljgroup.com [Accessed: 05.07.07].Google Scholar
  23. McKeachie, W. J., Pintrich, P., Lin, Y.G., Smith, D. 1986Teaching and Learning in the College ClassroomNCRIPTAL, University of MichiganMIGoogle Scholar
  24. Peterson, E. R., Deary, I. J., & Austin, E. J.: 2002, The Reliability of Riding’s Cognitive Style Analysis Test [Online] Available URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science? [Accessed: 05.07.04]..
  25. Piaget, J. 1936The Origins of Intelligence in ChildrenW. W. NortonNew YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Riding, R. J. 1991Cognitive Style Analysis–Research AdministrationLearning and Training TechnologyBirminghamGoogle Scholar
  27. Riding, R. J. 1996Learning Styles and Technology-based TrainingDepartment for Education and ScienceSheffieldGoogle Scholar
  28. Riding, R. J. 2002aCognitive Style Analysis–Research AdministrationLearning and Training TechnologyBirminghamGoogle Scholar
  29. Riding, R. J.: 2002b, ‘On the Assessment of Cognitive Style: A Commentary on Peterson, Deary and Austin’, Personality and Individual Difference [On line] Available URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science? [Accessed: 05.07.04]..
  30. Riding, R. J., Burton, D., Rees, G., Sharratt, M. 1995‘Cognitive Style and Personality in 12-Year-old Children’British Journal of Educational Psychology65113124Google Scholar
  31. Riding, R. J., Cheema, I. 1991‘Cognitive Styles: An Overview and Integration’Educational Psychology11193215Google Scholar
  32. Riding, R. J., Douglas, J. 1993‘The Effect of Cognitive Style and Mode of Presentation on Learning Performance’British Journal of Educational Psychology63297307Google Scholar
  33. Riding, R. J., Pearson, F. 1994‘The Relationship Between Cognitive Style and Intelligence’Educational Psychology1681106Google Scholar
  34. Riding, R. J. & Rayner, S.:1998, Cognitive Styles and Learning Strategies, Fulton, London.Google Scholar
  35. Riggs, A. 1993‘The Female Perspective on Technology’Smith, J.S. eds. Design and TechnologyLoughborough UniversityLoughborough148150IDATER93Google Scholar
  36. Skaalvik, E. M., Rankin, R. J. 1994‘Gender Differences in Mathematics and Verbal Achievement, Self-perception and Motivation’British Journal of Educational Psychology64419428Google Scholar
  37. Smail, B. 1984Girl-friendly Science: Avoiding Sex Bias in the CurriculumLongmanLondonGoogle Scholar
  38. Tennant, M. 1988Psychology and Adult LearningRoutledgeLondonGoogle Scholar
  39. Teacher Training Agency (TTA)2002Qualifying to Teach: Professional Standards for Qualified Teacher Status and Requirements for Initial Teacher TrainingTTALondonGoogle Scholar
  40. Vygotsky, L. S. 1962Thought and LanguageMassachusetts Institute of Technology PressCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  41. Witkin, H. A., Oltman, P., Raskin, E., Karp, S. 1971A Manual for Embedded Figures TestCA Consulting Psychologists PressPalo AltoGoogle Scholar
  42. Moore, H. A., Witkin, C. A., Oltman, P.K., Goodnough, D. R., Friedman, F., Owen, D. R., Raskin, E. 1977‘Role of the Field Dependent and Field Independent Cognitive Styles in Academic Evolution: A Longitudinal Study’Journal of Educational Psychology69197211Google Scholar
  43. Wong, K.-C., Lam, R., Ho, L-M. 2002‘The Effect of Schooling on Gender Differences’British Educational Research Journal28827843CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Reader Design and Technology EducationSchool of Education and Lifelong LearningSunderland

Personalised recommendations