Design knowledge and teacher–student interactions in an inventive construction task
- 476 Downloads
The teacher plays an important role in the Technology and Design (T&D) classroom in terms of guiding students in their design process. By using concepts developed within engineering philosophy along with a framework for teacher–student interactions the design process in a T&D classroom is classified. The material shows that four of six predefined categories of design knowledge and three of seven predefined classes of activity are present in the material. Findings suggest that two categories of design knowledge, fundamental design concepts and practical considerations, are particularly significant in the students’ work. The teacher’s influence with respect to particularly the first of these categories is crucial for the students’ design process. Direct trial is found as the students’ dominating activity for solving the technological challenges. The results indicate that it is beneficial for students to be introduced to an operational principle before they can be innovative and develop their own design configuration when they establish their fundamental design concept. Curriculum developers, designers of teaching materials as well as teachers should take into account the students’ need of sufficient time to explore their design configuration.
KeywordsDesign knowledge Teacher–student interaction Design process Technological knowledge Construction task
This work has been supported by the Research Council of Norway.
- Arthur, W. B. (2009). The nature of technology: What it is and how it evolves. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
- Barlex, D., & Welch, M. (2001). Educational research and curriculum development: The case for synergy. The Journal of Design and Technology Education, 6(1), 29–36.Google Scholar
- Bungum, B. (2006a). Teknologi og design i nye læreplaner i Norge: Hvilken vinkling har fagområdet fått i naturfagplanen? NorDiNa, 2(4), 28–39.Google Scholar
- Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Jones, A., Buntting, C., & de Vries, M. (2011). The developing field of technology education: A review to look forward. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 1–22.Google Scholar
- Kimbell, R. (1997). Assessing technology: International trends in curriculum and assessment: UK, Germany, USA, Taiwan, Australia. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
- Mitcham, C. (1994). Thinking through technology: The path between engineering and philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Polanyi, M. (1967). The tacit dimension. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.Google Scholar
- Roberts, P., & Norman, E. (1999). Models of design and technology and their significance for research and curriculum development. The Journal of design and Technology Education, 4(2), 124–131.Google Scholar
- Staudenmaier, J. (1985). Technology’s storytellers: Reweaving the human fabric. Cambridge, MA: Society for the History of Technology and the MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Tiles, M., & Oberdiek, H. (1995). Living in a technological culture: Human tools and human values. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Utdanningsdirektoratet. (2006). Curricula for subjects in primary and secondary school. Oslo: Utdanningsdirektoratet. Available from http://www.udir.no.
- Vèrillon, P. (2009). Tools and concepts in technological development. In A. Jones & M. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 175–197). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
- Vincenti, W. G. (1990). What engineers know and how they know it: Analytical studies from aeronautical history. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar