Advertisement

Problem Solving in Real-Life Contexts: An Alternative for Design in Technology Education

  • Ann Marie Hill
Article

Abstract

This article focuses on one way to study technology, through technological problem solving situated in real-life contexts. In problem solving for real-life contexts, design processes are seen as creative, dynamic and iterative processes that engage exploration; join conceptual and procedural knowledge-both thought and action; and can encourage considerations to technology, human and environmental interactions. This approach is a demarcation from what is typically found in schools; design, make and appraise cycles based on closed design briefs that are teacher assigned and unrelated to the students' world. An interpretation of technology education as problem solving for real-life contexts using design processes as tools for creation and exploration offers an alternative approach to design in technology education. Alternative curriculum and instruction then emerge. Elementary and secondary school programs in technology education and teacher education can all be seen through this kind of design lens. Episodes from case studies are reported with the intent to briefly describe technology education programs in elementary and secondary schools that interpret technology education in this way. Educational implications of this approach are offered.

community creativity design processes exploration invention problem solving real-life contexts technology education 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Anning, A., Jenkins, E. & Whitelaw, S.: 1996, Bodies of Knowledge and Design-based Activities: A Report to the Design Council, The University of Leeds, Leeds.Google Scholar
  2. Beakley, G. C.: 1975, Introduction to Engineering Graphics, MacMillan, New York.Google Scholar
  3. Cross, N.: 1983, Design: Processes and Products Course Units, Open University Press, Buckingham.Google Scholar
  4. Dewey, J.: 1977, Experience and Education (20th printing), MacMillan Collier, New York.Google Scholar
  5. Dunn, S. & Larson, R.: 1990, Design Technology: Children’s Engineering, The Falmer Press, Lewes.Google Scholar
  6. Eggleston, J.: 1992, Teaching Design and Technology, Open University Press, Buckingham.Google Scholar
  7. Ferguson, E. S.: 1993, Engineering and the Mind’s Eye, The MIT Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  8. Franklin, U.: 1990, The Real World of Technology, Anansi Press, Toronto, ON.Google Scholar
  9. Friesen, D.: 1997, ‘Exploring Self-Study from a Postmodern Perspective’. Paper presented to the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, 24-25 March, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  10. Gardner, H.: 1983, The Theory of Multiple Intelligences, Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
  11. Gardner, H.: 1993, Multiple Intelligences: The Theory in Practice, Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
  12. Hill, A. M.: 1994a, ‘Perspectives on Philosophical Shifts in Vocational Education: From Realism to Pragmatism and Reconstructionism’, Journal of Vocational and Technical Education 10(2), 37-45.Google Scholar
  13. Hill, A. M.: 1994b, ‘Technology in the Elementary School’, MSTE News 4(1), 1-4.Google Scholar
  14. Hill, A. M.: 1994c, ‘Technology in the Elementary School’, Technology Teacher 55(5), 19-23.Google Scholar
  15. Hill, A. M.: 1997, ‘Reconstructionism in Technology Education’, International Journal of Technology and Design Education 7(1-2), 121-139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hill, A. M. & Hopkins, R.: 1997, ‘Two Paths Converge: A Story of University and School Collaboration in Teacher Education’. Paper presented to the International Study Association on Teacher and Teacher Thinking (ISATT), 8th Annual Conference, 1-5 October, Kiel, Germany.Google Scholar
  17. Hill, A. M. & Smith, H. A.: 1996, ‘The Evolution of an Exemplary Secondary School Program in Technological Education: An Ontario Perspective’. Paper presented to the 8th Symposium of the International Organization of Science and Technology Education (IOSTE), 17-24 August, Edmonton, AB.Google Scholar
  18. Hill, A. M. & Smith, H. A.: 1997, ‘Bringing Classroom Design and Community-based Projects Together: Attributes of an Innovative Technology Education Program’. Paper presented to the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, 24-25 March, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  19. Jenkins, E.: 1993, ‘Knowledge and Action: Science as Technology?’, in R. McCormick, P. Murphy & M. Harrison (eds.), Teaching and Learning Technology, Addison-Wesley for The Open University Press, Wokingham, pp. 3-14.Google Scholar
  20. Jones, A.: 1997, ‘Recent Research In Learning Technological Concepts and Processes’, International Journal of Technology and Design Education 7(1-2), 83-96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jones, A.: 1997, Know How 2, Video Modules, Copeland Wilson, Wellington.Google Scholar
  22. Jones, A. & Carr, A.: 1994, ‘Students Technological Capability: Where Do We Start?’, SAME papers 1994, 165-186.Google Scholar
  23. Jones, A., Mather, V. & Carr, A.: 1995, Issues in the Practice of Technology Education, Centre for Science and Mathematics Education Research, University of Waikato, Hamilton.Google Scholar
  24. Kimbell, R.: 1986, Craft Design & Technology, The Open University Press, Milton Keynes.Google Scholar
  25. Lave, J.: 1988, Cognition in Practice: Mind, Mathematics and Culture in Everyday Life, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  26. Lave, J.: 1991, ‘Situated Learning in Communities of Practice’, in L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine & S. D. Teasley (eds.), Shared Cognition: Thinking as Social Practice, Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition, American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  27. Lawson, B.: 1990, How Designers Think, Butterworth Architecture, London.Google Scholar
  28. Layton, D.: 1993, ‘Science Education as Praxis’, in R. McCormick, P. Murphy & M. Harrison (eds.), Teaching and Learning Technology, Addison-Wesley for The Open University Press, Wokingham, pp. 3-14.Google Scholar
  29. McCormick, R.: 1997, ‘Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge’, International Journal of Technology and Design Education 7(1-2), 141-159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McCormick, R., Murphy, P. & Hennessy, S.: 1994, ‘Problem Solving Processes in Technology Education: A Pilot Study’, International Journal of Technology and Design Education 4(1), 5-34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. McCormick, R., Murphy, P., Hennessy, S. & Davidson, M.: 1996a, ‘Research on Student Learning of Designing and Problem Solving in Technology Activity in Schools in England’. Paper presented to the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, 8-12 April, New York.Google Scholar
  32. McCormick, R., Murphy, P., Hennessy, S. & Davidson, M.: 1996b, ‘Problem Solving in Science and Technology’. Paper presented to the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, 8-12 April, New York.Google Scholar
  33. Milgram, R. A.: 1990, ‘Creativity: An Idea Whose Time Has Come and Gone?’, in M. Runco & R. Albert (eds.), Theories of Creativity, Sage Publications, London, pp. 215-233.Google Scholar
  34. Miller, M. D.: 1985, Principles and Philosophy for Vocational Education, The Ohio State University, The National Center for Research in Vocational Education, Columbus, OH.Google Scholar
  35. Norman, E., Riley, J., Urry, S. & Whittaker, M.: 1990, Advanced Design and Technology, Longman, Essex.Google Scholar
  36. Ontario Ministry of Education and Training: 1995, The Common Curriculum, Queen’s Printer, Toronto, ON.Google Scholar
  37. Ontario Ministry of Education and Training: 1995, Broad-based Technological Education, Queen’s Printer, Toronto, ON.Google Scholar
  38. Raizen S. A., Sellwood, P. Todd, R. D. & Vickers, M.: 1995, Technology Education in the Classroom: Understanding the Designed World, Jossey Bass Publishers, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  39. Runco, M. & Albert, R.: 1990, Theories of Creativity, Sage Publications, London.Google Scholar
  40. Taylor, C.: 1991, ‘The Dialogical Self’, in D. R. Hiley, J. F. Bohman & R. Shusterman (eds.), The Interpretive Turn: Philosophy, Science, Culture, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, pp. 304-314.Google Scholar
  41. Taylor, I.: 1975, ‘An Emerging View of Creative Actions’, in I. Taylor & J. V. Getzels (eds.), Perspectives in Creativity, Aldine, Chicago, pp. 297-325.Google Scholar
  42. Tickle, L.: 1990, Design and Technology in Primary School Classrooms: Developing Teachers’ Perspectives and Practices, The Falmer Press, Lewes.Google Scholar
  43. Waetjen, W. B.: 1995, ‘Technology and the Humanities’, in G. E. Martin (ed.), Foundations of Technology Education, 44th Yearbook, Council of Technology Teacher Education, Glencoe/McGraw/Hill, Peoria, IL.Google Scholar
  44. Walker, D. & Cross, N.: 1983, An Introduction to Design, Open University Press, Buckingham.Google Scholar
  45. Wallas, G.: 1926, The Art of Thought, Harcourt, Brace and Co., New York.Google Scholar
  46. Wallas, G.: 1973, ‘The Art of Thought’, in P. E. Vernon (ed.), Creativity: Selected Readings, Penguin, Harmondsworth, pp. 91-97.Google Scholar
  47. Wiener, N.: 1993, Invention: The Care and Feeding of Ideas, The MIT Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  48. Williams, P. H. M.: 1990, Teaching Craft, Design and Technology: Five to Thirteen, Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  49. Yin, R. K.: 1994, Case Study Research: Design and Methods (2nd ed.), Sage, Thousand Oaks.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ann Marie Hill
    • 1
  1. 1.Queen's UniversityKingston

Personalised recommendations