Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The use of design practice to teach mathematics and science

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Journal of Technology and Design Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Relatively low participation in the hard sciences (mathematics, science, engineering and technology) has become a concern with respect to the capacity of Australia to meet critical infrastructure projects. This problem has its roots in poor student attitudes towards and perceptions about the study of prerequisite subjects including mathematics and science. Perception formation commences early in students’ education where students have claimed that mathematics was not intrinsically useful and was difficult to understand. With this mind, an intervention was planned and implemented in which technology and design practice was used to integrate the study of mathematics so students could produce and explain a useful artefact. The integrated design project included a focus upon instructional and regulatory discourse. Useful integration tools were developed that facilitated positive cognitive discourses such that students demonstrated a functional understanding of mathematical concepts, reported a broader and more applied understanding of the nature of mathematics and a belief that integration had helped them to make more sense of mathematics.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) (2005). AAAS Mission. Available online: http://www.aaas.org/aboutaaas/.

  • Anderson, J. (1999). Being mathematically educated in the 21st century: What should it mean. In C. Hoyles, C. Morgan, & G. Woodhouse (Eds.), Rethinking the mathematics curriculum, (pp. 8–21). London: The Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Australian Academy of Science (AAS) (1994). Primary investigations: Teacher resource book: Energy and change. Canberra: Australian Academy of Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering (AATSE) (2002). The teaching of science and technology in Australian primary schools: A cause for concern. Melbourne: Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering.

    Google Scholar 

  • Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers (1997). Numeracy in contemporary education. Numeracy = everyone’s business (pp. 11–16). Adelaide: Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers.

  • Australian Education Council (1989). The Hobart Declaration on Schooling, Retrieved 1.8.2005 from http://www.mceetya.edu.au/hobdec.htm.

  • Australian Science Technology and Engineering Council (1997). Foundations for Australia’s future science and technology in primary schools. Canberra, ACT: Australian Government Publishing Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Australian Science Teacher’s Association (ASTA) (2002). National professional standards for highly accomplished teachers of science. Canberra: ASTA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, P. (2004). On the theoretical breadth of design-based research in education. Educational Psychologist, 39(4), 243–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bereiter, C. (2002). Design research for sustained innovation. Cognitive Studies, Bulletin of the Japanese Cognitive Science Society, 9(3), 321–327.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrington, F. (2006). Participation in Year 12 Mathematics Across Australia 1995–2004. International Centre of Excellence in Mathematics and Australian Mathematical Science Institute. Melbourne: University of Melbourne.

  • Batterham, R. (2000). The chance to change final report of the chief scientist. Canberra, Australia: Commonwealth Government.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowler-Reyer, A. (1999). Becoming a woman in the 1970’s: Female adolescent sexual identity and popular literature. In S. R. Mazzarella & N. O. Pecora (Eds.), Growing up girls: Popular culture and the construction of identity (pp. 21–48). New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, T., Nuyen, A., & Baturo, A. (2003). Rich task project: Integrated mathematics outcomes with rich tasks within a productive pedagogies framework. Queensland University of Technology. Available from: http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=cache:dx6p-TQV0hEJ://www.ansearch.com.au/out%3Feducation.qld.gov.au/corporate/newbasics/pdfs/richtaskrep3-final-8.4.03.pdf+Nuyen+Cooper+Baturo.

  • Corte, E. (2004). Mainstreams and perspectives in research on learning (mathematics) from instruction. Applied Psychology, 53(2), 279. Available online http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/links/doi/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2004.00172.x/full/?cookieSet=1.

  • Curriculum Corporation (1994a). A statement on technology for Australian schools. Carlton, Victoria: Curriculum Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Curriculum Corporation (1994b). Technology—A curriculum profile for Australian schools. Carlton, Victoria: Curriculum Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Custer, R. (2003). Technology education in the United States—A status report. In G. Martin & H. Middleton (Eds.), Initiatives in technology education: Comparative perspectives. (pp. 16–29). Brisbane, Australia. Technical Foundation of America and the Centre for Technological Education Research: Griffith University.

  • Daniels, H. (2001). Bernstein and activity theory. In A. Morais, I. Neves, B. Davies, & H. Daniels (Eds.), Towards a sociology of pedagogy (pp. 99–112). New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, T. (1996). Modelling and creativity in design and technology. Retrieved 10 November 2005 from: http://www.lboro.ac.uk/idater/download96davies96.pdf.

  • De Bono, E. (2004).Thinking course: Powerful tools to transform your thinking. London: BBC Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deek, F., Hiltz, S. R., Kimmel, H., & Rotter, N. (1999). Cognitive assessment of students’ problem solving and program development skills. Journal of Engineering Education, 88(3), 317–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Design-Based Research Collective (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Education Queensland (2001). New basics project; Technical paper. Retrieved July 1 2003, from: http://www.education.qld.gov.au/corporate/newbasics/docs/nbftech.doc.

  • Ethington, C. (1992). Gender differences in a psychological model of mathematics achievement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 23(2), 166–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. (1998). Fourth generation evaluation. Sage: Newbury Park, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoadley, C. M. (2004). Methodological alignment in design-based research. Educational Psychologist 39(4), 202–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollingsworth, H., Lokan, J., & McRae, B. (2003). Teaching mathematics in Australia: Results from the TIMSS 1999 video study. Melbourne, Victoria: Australian Council for Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, G., Langton, C., Thornton, C., & Nesbit, S. (2002). Elementary students’ access to powerful mathematical ideas. In L. English (Ed.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 113–141). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karplus, R., Pulos, S., & Stage, E. (1983). Proportional reasoning of early adolescents. In R. Lesh & M. Landan (Eds.), Acquisition of mathematical concepts and processes (pp. 44–90). Orlando: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (2000). Participatory action research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 567–606). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khoo, S., & Ainley, J. (2005). Longitudinal surveys of Australian youth, Research report 41: Attitudes, intentions and participation. Camberwell, Victoria: Australians Council for Educational Research.

  • Liljedahl, P. (2005). Mathematics discovery and affect: Effect of the AHA! Experiences on undergraduate mathematics students. International Journal of Mathematics Education in Science and Technology, 36(2&3), 219–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macklin, J. (20005). Media Release 26 April 2005. http://jennymacklin.net.au/infocentre.asp?data=480E0F0504094F5851515E587E45555F48454B4E.

  • Markku, S. (2002). Attitude toward mathematics: Emotions, expectations and values. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 49(1), 67–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murdoch, K., & Hornsby, D. (2003). Planning curriculum connections: Whole-school planning for integrated curriculum. South Yarra, Victoria: Eleanor Curtain Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, P. F., & Gibbs, C. V. (1996). Equity in the classroom: Towards effective pedagogy for girls and boys. London: The Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Advisory Committee on Creative and Cultural Education (NACCCE) (1998). All our futures: Creativity, culture and education. Nottingham, UK: DfEE Publications.

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (2005). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Available online: http://www.standards.nctm.org/document/chapter1/index.htm.

  • Norby, R. (2003). It is a gender issue: Changes in attitudes towards science in a technology based K-8 pre-service preparation science classroom. Philadelphia: Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching.

  • Norton, S. J., McRobbie, C. J., & Ginns, I. S. (2004a). Studentes to design in a robotics challenge. In H. Middleton, M. Pavlova, & D. Roebuck (Eds.), International conference on technology in educational research, Gold Coast, 9–11th December, pp. 26–36.

  • Norton. S. J., McRobbie, C. J., & Ginns, I. S. (2004b). Using activity theory to investigate the influence of teachers’ beliefs upon their teaching of science through robotics. In the proceedings of the Australian computers in education conference, Adelaide, 5th–8th July.

  • Papert, S., & Harel, I. (1991). Situated constructivism. Retrieved 21 February 2002. From: http://www.papert.com/articles/SituatingConstructionism.html.

  • Qualter, A., Strang, J., Swatton, P., & Taylor, R. (1990). Exploration: A way of learning science. Oxford: Blackwell Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Queensland School Curriculum Council (1999). Science initial in-service materials. Brisbane, Queensland: The State of Queensland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Queensland Studies Authority (QSA) (2003). Technology: Years 1–10 syllabus. Brisbane, Queensland: The State of Queensland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Queensland Studies Authority (QSA) (2004a).Queensland Years 3, 5 and 7 tests in aspects of literacy and numeracy. Brisbane, Queensland: The State of Queensland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Queensland Studies Authority (QSA) (2004b). Mathematics: Years 1 to 10 syllabus. Brisbane, Queensland: The State of Queensland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reid, N., & Skryabina, E. (2002). Attitude toward physics. Research in Science and Technology Education, 20(1), 67–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W.-M., Tobin, K., & Ritchie, S. (2001). Re/constructing elementary science. New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, P. (2001). Pedagogic discourses and student resistance in Australian secondary schools. In A. Morais, I. Neves, B. Davies, & H. Daniels (Eds.), Towards a sociology of pedagogy (pp. 251–286). New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skamp, K. (2004). Teaching primary science constructively. South Bank, Victoria: Thompson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stepulevage, L. (2001). Gender/technology relations: Complicating the gender binary. Gender and Education, 13(3), 325–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, A. G. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and conceptions: A synthesis of the research. In D. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 127–146). New York: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

  • Townend, S. (2001). Integrating case studies in engineering mathematics: A response to SARTOR 3. Teaching in Higher Education, 6(2), 203–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority (VCAC) (2005). Victorian essential learning. Available online http://www.vels.vcaa.vic.edu.au/about/rationale/index.html.

  • Watt, H. (2005). Exploring adolescent motivations for pursuing maths-related careers. Australian Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, 5, 107–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • William, E. D. (2003). Technological literacy. In G. Martin & H. Middleton (Eds.), Initiatives in technology education: Comparative perspectives (pp. 16–29). Brisbane, Australia.

  • Yin, R. (2003). Case study research design and methods. Sage Publications Inc.

  • Zubrowski, B. (2002). Integrating science into design technology projects: Using a standard model in the design process. Journal of Technology Education, 13(2), 48–67.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CTL–Education, Griffith University, Logan Campus, Logan, Brisbane, QLD, 4131, Australia

    Stephen John Norton

Authors
  1. Stephen John Norton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephen John Norton.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Norton, S.J. The use of design practice to teach mathematics and science. Int J Technol Des Educ 18, 19–44 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-006-9019-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-006-9019-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation