Abstract
Technology education has long struggled to establish itself as an equal partner in general education and often struggled to gain recognition for the value of its instruction. Frequently technology educators tout the effectiveness of their programs based on anecdotal evidence gathered from their classroom experiences on how their instructional methods empower students to learn. Although technology education originated without any meaningful input from cognitive science research, it appears that technology education instruction methods are remarkably consonant with findings from cognitive science that define good instruction. Specifically, there is considerable accord between how instruction in technology education and cognitively based instructional models such as collaborative learning, socially distributed expertise, design/engineering, and project-based instruction can be connected. The role of the cognitive research findings on instruction could inform a long over-due theoretical grounding of instruction in technology education. The absence of research on learning and instruction in technology education could be attributed to a lack of theoretical grounding in this relatively new field. This paper examines four cognitively based models of instruction and reviews the relationships between research in the cognitive sciences on learning and instruction in technology education. The consonance between the research recommendations from the cognitive sciences and practice in technology education instruction could serve to stimulate debate on the theoretical grounding of an emerging field of study.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
American Association for the Advancement of Science: 1989, Science for all Americans, Oxford University Press, New York.
American Association for the Advancement of Science: 1993, Benchmarks for Science Literacy, Oxford University Press, New York.
Aronson, E. & Patnoe, S.: 1997, The Jigsaw Classroom: Building Cooperation in the Classroom, Longman, New York.
Aronson, E.: 1978, The Jigsaw Classroom, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.
Boyer, E. L.: 1995, The Basic School: A Community for Learning, Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, Princeton, NJ.
Bransford, J. & Vye, N. J.: 1989, 'A Perspective for Cognitive Research and Its Implications for Instruction', Yearbook of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 173-205.
Brown, A. L., Ash, D., Rutherford, M., Nakagawa, K., Gordon, A., & Campione, J. C.: 1993, 'Distributed Expertise in the Classroom', in G. Salamon (ed.), Distributed Cognitions: Psychological and Educational Considerations, Cambridge University Press, New York, 188–228
Brown, A. L.: 1992, 'Design Experiments: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges in Creating Complex Interventions in Classroom Settings', Journal of the Learning Sciences 2(2), 141–178.
Brown, A. L.: 1985, 'Mental Orthopedics the Training of Cognitive Skills: A Conversation with Alfred Binet', in S. Chipman, J. Segal, & R. Glaser (eds.), Thinking and Learning Skills: Current Research and Open Questions 2, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 319–337.
Bruer, J. T.: 1993, Schools For Thought: A Science of Learning in the Classroom, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Buch, A.:1999, 'Learning and Construction in Engineering Jobs', in H. S. Olsen & K. Forrester (eds.), Adult Education and the Labour Market V: Papers from the Seminar of the ESREA (European Society for Research into the Education of Adults) Research Network 5, Frederiksberg, Roskilde University Press, Dubrovnik, Croatia, 7–16.
Cajas, F.: 2001, 'The Science/Technology Interaction: Implications for Science Literacy', Journal of Research in Science Teaching 38(7), 715–729.
diSessa, A. A.: 1992, Images of learning. Unpublished manuscript. Graduate School of Education, University of California, Berkeley.
Educational Testing Service: 1996, National Assessment of Educational Progress, Author, Washington, DC.
Educational Testing Service: 2000, National Assessment of Educational Progress, Author, Washington, DC.
Exxon Education Foundation: 1984, Science Education in the United States: Essential Steps for Achieving Fundamental Improvement 1, The Foundation, New York, NY, 21–44.
Goodlad, J. I.: 1993, A Place Called School: Prospects for the Future, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Holbrook, J. & Rannikmae, M.: 1996, Creating Exemplary Teaching Materials to Enhance Scientific and Technological Literacy, Science Education International 17(4), 3–7.
International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement: 1987-88, Second International Science Study, Science Achievement in Seventeen Countries: A Preliminary Report, Pergamon, Oxford.
International Technology Education Association: 2000, Standards for Technological Literacy: Content for the Study of Technology, Author, Reston, VA.
Minstrell, J.: 1984, 'Teaching for the Development of Understanding of Ideas: Forces on Moving Objects', in Observing Classrooms: Perspectives from Research and Practice, The Ohio State University.
National Research Council: 1996, National Science Education Standards, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
National Science Board Commission on Pre-college Education in Mathematics, Science, and Technology: 1983, Educating Americans for the 21st Century. Author, Washington, DC. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 233 912)
National Science Foundation, & US Department of Education: 1980, Science and Engineering Education for the 1980s and Beyond, The Foundation, Washington, DC.
Palincsar, A. & Brown, A. L.: 1998, 'Teaching and Practicing Thinking Skills to Promote Comprehension in the Context of Group Problem Solving', Remedial and Special Education (RASE) 9(1), 53–59.
Pea, R. D.: 1993, 'The Collaboration Visualization Project', Communications of the ACM 36(5), 60–63.
Pea, R. D. & Gomez, L. M.: 1993, 'Distributed Multimedia Learning Environments: Why and How', Technological Horizons in Education Journal 5, 35–47.
Pearson, G. & Young, A. T. (eds.): 2002, Technically Speaking: Why All Americans Need to Know More about Technology, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
Petrina, S.: 1994, 'Curriculum Organization in Technology Education: A Critique of Six Trends', Journal of Industrial Teacher Education 31(2), 44–69.
Petrina, S.: 1993, 'Under the Corporate Thumb: Troubles with Our MATE [Editorial]', Journal of Technology Education 5(1).
Ralph, J., & Dwyer, M. C.: 1988, November, Making the Case: Evidence of Program Effectiveness in Schools and Classrooms (Criteria and Guidelines for the US Department of Education's Program Effectiveness Panel). US Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, Washington, DC.
Rannikmae, M.: 2001, "sTL Teaching-Immediate and Longitudinal Influence on Students' Learning', in Science and Technology Education: Preparing Future Citizens. Proceedings of the IOSTE Symposium in Southern Europe (1st, Paralimni, Cyprus, April 29-May 2, 2001). Volume I [and] Volume II, p. 10.
Resnick, L.: 1987, Education and Learning to Think, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
Roper, J.: 1989, 'Technology Creates a New Physics Student', The Physics Teacher 27(1), 26–29.
Sadler, P. M., Coyle, H. P., & Schwartz, M.: 2000, 'Engineering Competitions in the Middle School Classrooms: Key Elements in Developing Affective Design Challenges', The Journal of the Learning of Sciences 9(3), 299–324.
Schauble, L., Klopfer, L. E., & Raghavan, K.: 1991, Students Transition from an Engineering Model to a Science Model of Experimentation. Unpublished manuscript, Learning Research and Development Center, University of Pittsburgh.
Sirotnik, K. A., & Soder, R. (eds.): 1999, The Beat of a Different Drummer: Essays on Educational Renewal in Honor of John I. Goodlad, P. Lang, New York.
Slavin, R. E.: 1987, Cooperative Learning: Student Teams, National Education Association, Washington, DC.
Smith, T. A., Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., & Kelly, D. L.: 2000, Profiles of Student Achievement in Science at the TIMSS International Benchmarks: US Performance and Standards in an International Context. (International Study Center, Lynch School of Education). International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement, Boston College, MA.
Sternberg, R. J.: 1998, 'Principles of Teaching for Successful Intelligence', Educational Psychologist 33(2-3), 65–72.
Sternberg, R. J. & Williams, W. M. (eds.): 1998, Intelligence, Instruction, and Assessment: Theory into Practice [Monograph]. (Serial No. 080582510X)
Spector, J. M., & Anderson, T. M. (eds.): 2000, Integrated and Holistic Perspectives on Learning, Instruction and Technology: Understanding Complex Domains, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht.
US House of Representatives, 105th Congress, Second Session: March 24, 1998, Educating our children with technology skills to compete in the next millennium: Joint hearing before the Subcommittee on Technology of the Committee on Science and the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Youth, and Families of the Committee Education and the Workforce. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
Whimbey, A. & Lochhead, J.: 1980, Problem Solving and Comprehension: A Short Course in Analytical Reasoning, The Franklin Institute Press, Philadelphia.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
De Miranda, M.A. The Grounding of a Discipline: Cognition and Instruction in Technology Education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education 14, 61–77 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:ITDE.0000007363.44114.3b
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:ITDE.0000007363.44114.3b