Recent Research in Learning Technological Concepts and Processes

  • Alister Jones
Chapter

Abstract

This paper examines recent research in student learning of technological concepts and processes. To explore this area three inter-related aspects are considered; existing concepts of technology, technological knowledge and processes. Different views of technology and technology education are reflected in both research outcomes and curriculum documents. Teacher and student perceptions of technology impact on the way in which technology is undertaken in the classroom. Teacher’s perceptions of technology influence what they perceive as being important in learning of technology. Student’s perceptions of technology and technology education influence what knowledge and skills they operationalise in a technological task and hence affect student technological capability. Technological concepts and processes are often defined in different ways by particular groups. Subject subcultures are strongly held by both teachers and students. The influence of subject subcultures and communities of practice will be discussed in terms of defining and operationalising technological concepts and processes. Technological concepts are not consistently defined in the literature. For students to undertake technological activities, knowledge and processes cannot be divorced. Recent research highlights the problems when processes are emphasised over knowledge. This paper will examine different technological concepts in an attempt to create a critical balance between knowledge and process. Much of the literature in technology education has rightly emphasised definitions, curriculum issues, implementation and teacher training. This paper argues that it is now time to place a great emphasis on in-depth research on student understanding of technological concepts and processes and ways in which these can be enhanced.

Keywords

technological concepts and processes student learning teacher and student perceptions student capability 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anning, A.: 1993, ‘Learning Design and Technology in Primary Schools’, in R. McCormick, P. Murphy & M. Harrison (eds.), Teaching and Learning Technology, Addison-Wesley Publishing Co, Wokingham.Google Scholar
  2. Anning, A.: 1994, ‘Dilemmas and Opportunities of a New Curriculum: Design and Technology with Young Children’, International Journal Technology and Design Education 4(2), 155–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barlex, D.: 1993, ‘The Nuffield Approach to the Role of Tasks in Teaching Design and Technology’, in R. McCormick, P. Murphy & M. Harrison (eds.), Teaching and Learning Technology, Addison-Wesley Publishing Co, Wokingham.Google Scholar
  4. Black, P. J.: 1994, Technology in the School Curriculum. Papers from Science, Mathematics and Technology (SMT) Education in OECD countries.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, J. S., Collins, A. & Duguid, P.: 1989, ‘Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning’, Educational Researcher 18(1), 32–42.Google Scholar
  6. Burns, J.: 1992, ‘Student Perceptions of Technology and Implications for an Empowering Curriculum’, Research in Science Education 22, 72–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Donnelly, J.: 1992, ‘Technology in the School Curriculum: A Critical Bibliography’, Studies in Science Education 20, 123–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gardner, P.: 1995, ‘The Relationship between Technology and Science: Some Historical and Philosophical Reflections’, Part 2. International Journal Technology and Design Education 5(1), 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Goodson, I. F.: 1985, ‘Social Histories of the Secondary Curriculum’, in I. F. Goodson (ed), Subjects for Study, Falmer Press, Lewes.Google Scholar
  10. Gunstone, R.: 1994, ‘Technology Education and Science Education: Engineering as a Case Study of Relationships’, Research in Science Education 24, 129–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hansen, R. & Froelich, M.: 1994, ‘Defining Technology and Technological Education: A Crisis, or Cause for Celebration’, International Journal Technology and Design Education 4(2), 179–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hennessy, S., McCormick, R. & Murphy, P.: 1993, ‘The Myth of General Problem Solving Capability: Design and Technology as an Example’, The Curriculum Journal 4(1), 73–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hennessy, S.: 1993, ‘Situated Cognition and Cognitive Apprenticeship: Implications for Classroom Learning’, Studies in Science Education 22, 1–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jones, A. & Carr, M.: 1992, ‘Teachers’ Perceptions of Technology Education — Implications for Curriculum Innovation’, Research in Science Education 22, 230–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jones, A. T. & Carr, M. D.: 1993, Analysis of Student Technological Capability. Vol 2. Working Papers of the Learning in Technology Education Project. Centre for Science and Mathematics Education Research, University of Waikato. Hamilton, pp 148.Google Scholar
  16. Jones, A. & Carr M.: 1994, ‘Student Technological Capability: Where Do We Start?’, SAMEpapers 1994, pp 165–186.Google Scholar
  17. Jones, A. T., Mather, V. & Carr, M. D.: 1995, Issues in the Practice of Technology Education. Centre for Science and Mathematics Education Research, University of Waikato, Hamilton p 125.Google Scholar
  18. Kimbell R.: 1994, ‘Tasks in Technology. An Analysis of Their Purposes and Effects’, International Journal Technology and Design Education 4(3), 241–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kimbell R., Stables, K., Wheeler, T., Wosniak, A. & Kelly, V.: 1991, The Assessment of Performance in Design and Technology, Schools Examination and Assessment Council, London.Google Scholar
  20. 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.Google Scholar
  21. Layton, D.: 1991, ‘Science Education and Praxis: The Relationship of School Science to Practical Action’, Studies in Science Education 19, 43–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Layton, D.: 1994, ‘A School Subject in the Making?: The Search for Fundamentals’, in D. Layton (ed.), Innovation in Science and Technology Education, Vol 4. UNESCO Publishing, Paris.Google Scholar
  23. Lindblad, S.: 1990, ‘From Technology to Craft: on Teachers’ Experimental Adoption of Technology as a New Subject in the Swedish Primary School’, Journal of Curriculum Studies 22(2), 165–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mather, V.: 1995, Students’ Concepts of Technology and Technology Education: Implications for Practice, Unpublished M.Ed Thesis, University of Waikato.Google Scholar
  25. Mather, V. & Jones, A.: 1995, ‘Focusing on Technology Education: The Effect of Concepts on Practice’, SET Number 2 Item 9.Google Scholar
  26. McCade, J.: 1990, ‘Problem Solving: More Than Just Design’, Journal of Technology Education 2(1).Google Scholar
  27. McCormick, R., Murphy, P. & Hennessy, S.: 1994, ‘Problem Solving Processes in Technology Education: A Pilot Study’, International Journal Technology and Design Education 4(1), 5–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Paechter, C: 1991, ‘Subject Subcultures and the Negotiation of Open Work: Conflict and Cooperation in Cross-curricular’. Paper presented to St. Hilda’s conference, Warwick University.Google Scholar
  29. Perkins, D. N. & Salomon, G.: 1989, ‘Are Cognitive Skills Context Bound?’ Educational Researcher 18(1), 16–25.Google Scholar
  30. Perkins, D., Jay, E., & Tishman, S.: 1993, ‘Beyond Abilities: A Dispositional Theory of Thinking’, Merril-Palmer Quarterly 3(1), 1–21.Google Scholar
  31. Raat, J. H., Klerk Wolters, F. de & Vries, M. J. de: 1987, Report PATT Conference 1987. Volume 1. Proceedings. University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  32. Rennie, L. & Jarvis, T.: 1994, ‘Children’s Developing Perceptions about Technology’. Paper presented at ASERA, Tasmania, July 1994.Google Scholar
  33. Rennie, L., Treagust, D. & Kinnear, A.: 1992, ‘An evaluation of Curriculum Materials for Teaching Technology as a Design Process’, Research in Science and Technological Education 10(2), 203–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Salomon, G.: 1995, ‘Reflections on the Field of Educational Psychology by the Outgoing Editor’, Education Psychologists 30(3), 105–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Stables, K.: 1995, ‘Discontinuity in Transition: Pupils Experience If Technology in Year 6 and Year 7’, International Journal Technology and Design Education 5(2), 157–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alister Jones
    • 1
  1. 1.University of WaikatoHamiltonNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations