Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The developing field of technology education: a review to look forward

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

Abstract

This paper attempts to review the development of technology education over the last 20–25 years. The purpose is to reflect on how far the field has come and where it might go to, including what questions need to be considered in its ongoing development. The data for this paper draw on our work in developing The International Handbook of Research and Development in Technology Education (Jones and de Vries 2009). However, the paper is more than a summary of this work, instead representing a synthesis in its own right. The work was not undertaken to report solely on the collective achievement of a large number of people internationally, but rather to use this as a means for setting a sound foundation for future research, development and teaching in technology education. By considering the underlying philosophy, international development of curriculum, relationships of technology education with other subject areas, teaching, learning and assessment as well as teacher education, and educational research, we are able to scope past activities and present an agenda for moving forward in teaching, research and development.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Banks, F. (2009). Research on teaching and learning in technology education. In A. T. Jones & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 373–390). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banks, F., Barlex, D., Jarvinen, E.-M., O’Sullivan, G., Owen-Jackson, G., & Rutland, M. (2004). DEPTH: Developing professional thinking for technology teachers: An international study. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 14(3), 141–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, B., & Cowie, B. (2001). The characteristics of formative assessment in science education. Science Education, 85(5), 536–553.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, B., Jones, A., & Carr, M. (1995). The development of the recent national New Zealand science curriculum. Studies in Science Education, 26, 73–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benson, C. (2009). Design and technology: A ‘new’ subject for the English national curriculum. In A. T. Jones & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 17–30). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, P. (1998). Testing: Friend or foe? Theory and practice of assessment and testing. London: Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. London, UK: King’s College London, Department of Education and Professional Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carr, M., Jones, C., Lee, W., Smith, A. B., Marshall, K., & Duncan, J. (2010). Learning in the making: Dispositions and design in early education. Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carr, M., McGee, C., Jones, A., McKinley, E., Bell, B., Barr, H., et al. (2000). The effects of curricula and assessment on pedagogical approaches and on educational outcomes. Literature review. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cobb, P. (1996). Where is the mind? A coordination of sociocultural and cognitive constructivist perspectives. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (pp. 34–52). New York: Teachers College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cobb, P. (2002). Reasoning with tools and inscriptions. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(2/3), 187–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corrigan, D. J. (1999). Industry and technology links with chemistry curriculum. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Australia: Monash University.

  • Cowie, B. (2003). Learning perspectives: Implications for pedagogy in science education. Waikato Journal of Education, 9, 65–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowie, B., Jones, A., & Otrel-Cass, K. (2011). Re-engaging students in science: Issues of assessment, funds of knowledge and sites for learning. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9, 347–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowie, B., & Moreland, J. (2009). Methodological considerations in studying classroom interactions in technology education. In A. T. Jones & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 625–635). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowie, B., Moreland, J., Jones, A., & Otrel-Cass, K. (2008). The classroom InSiTE project: Understanding classroom interactions to enhance teaching and learning in science and technology. Teaching and learning research initiative (Final Report). Hamilton, New Zealand: University of Waikato.

    Google Scholar 

  • DATA. (2003). Minimum competences for trainees to teach design and technology in secondary schools. Research Paper No. 4. Wellesbourne, UK: Author.

  • de Vries, M. (2000). Can we train researchers and teachers to make a team? Win-win strategies in technology education. Paper presented to the 1st Biennial International Technology Education Research Conference, Gold Coast, Australia.

  • de Vries, M. J. (2005). Teaching about technology: An introduction to the philosophy of technology for non-philosophers. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ding, B. (2009). The development of technology education in Mainland China. In A. T. Jones & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 131–137). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Driver, R. (1995). Constructive approaches to science teaching. In L. P. Steffe & J. Gale (Eds.), Constructivism in education (pp. 385–400). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dugger, W. E., Jr. (2009). Developments in technology education in the United States of America. In A. T. Jones & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 65–84). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fensham, P. J. (1987). Physical science, society and technology: A case study in the sociology of education. In K. Riquarts (Ed.), Science and technology education and the quality of life (Vol. 2, pp. 714–723). Kiel: University of Kiel, Institute for Science Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fosnot, C. T. (Ed.). (1996). Constructivism: Theory, perspectives and practice. New York: Teachers College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fullan, M., & Stiegelbauer, S. (1991). The new meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, J. J. (1971). A broader base for science education. Science Education, 55(3), 329–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, P. (1995). Representations of the relationship between science and technology in the curriculum. Studies in Science Education, 24, 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ginestié, J. (2009a). Thinking about technology education in France. In A. T. Jones & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 41–50). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ginestié, J. (2009b). Training technology teachers in Europe. In A. T. Jones & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 569–580). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hargreaves, A. (2003). Teaching in the knowledge society: Education in the age of insecurity. Maidenhead, UK: Open University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harlen, W. (1997). Confidence rising slowly: Primary teachers’ feelings about science and technology. Edinburgh: Scottish Council for Research in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harlen, W., Holroyd, C., & Byrne, M. (1995). Confidence and understanding in teaching science and technology in primary schools. Edinburgh: Scottish Council for Research in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hextall, I., & Mahony, P. (1998). Effective teachers for effective schools. In R. Slee, G. Weiner, & S. Tomlinson (Eds.), School effectiveness for whom? Challenges to the effectiveness and school improvement movements (pp. 128–143). London: Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, A. M. (2009). The study of technology in Canada. In A. T. Jones & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 85–92). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, D. (2009). Technology in science-technology-society-environment (STSE) education: Introductory remarks. In A. T. Jones & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 325–333). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyland, T. (1993). Professional development and competence-based education. Educational Studies, 19(1), 123–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ITEA. (2000/2002/2007). Standards for technological literacy: Content for the study of technology. Reston, VA: Author.

  • Jones, A. (1997). Recent research in student learning of technological concepts and processes. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 7(1–2), 83–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, A. (2007). The valuing of technology in the science curriculum. In D. Corrigan, J. Dillon, & R. Gunston (Eds.), The re-emergence of values in science education (pp. 89–100). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, A. (2009). Towards an articulation of students making progress in learning technological concepts and processes. In A. T. Jones & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 407–417). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, A., & Carr, M. (1992). Teachers’ perceptions of technology education—implications for curriculum innovation. Research in Science Education, 22, 230–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, A., & Compton, V. (1998). Towards a model for teacher development in technology education: From research to practice. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 8, 51–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, A., & Compton, V. (2009). Reviewing the field of technology education in New Zealand. In A. T. Jones & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 105–116). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, A. T., & de Vries, M. J. (Eds.). (2009). International handbook of research and development in technology education. Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, A., & Moreland, J. (2003). Considering pedagogical content knowledge in the context of research on teaching: An example from technology. Waikato Journal of Education, 9, 77–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, A., & Moreland, J. (2004). Enhancing practicing primary school teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 14(2), 121–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, A., & Moreland, J. (2005). The importance of pedagogical content knowledge in assessment for learning practices: A case study of a whole school approach. The Curriculum Journal, 16(2), 193–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kananoja, T. (2009). Technology education in general education in Finland. In A. T. Jones & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 51–64). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimbell, R. (2009). Performance portfolios… problems, potentials, and policy. In A. T. Jones & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 509–522). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimbell, R., Wheeler, T., Miller, S., & Pollitt, A. (2007). e-Scape portfolio assessment: A research and development project for the department for education & skills (DfES) and the qualifications and curriculum authority (QCA). Phase 2 report. London: Technology Education Research Unit, Goldsmiths, University of London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimbell, R., Wheeler, T., Shepard, T., Brown-Martin, G., Perry, D., Hall, P., et al. (2005). e-scape portfolio assessment: A research and development project for the department for education and skills (DfES) and the qualifications and curriculum authority (QCA). Phase 1 report. London: Technology Education Research Unit, Goldsmiths, University of London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinson, R., & Turner, S. (2001). Valuable lessons: Engaging with the social context of science in schools. London: Wellcome Trust. http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/About-us/Publications/Reports/Education/WTD003435.htm. Accessed 1 September 2010.

  • Levy, F., & Murnane, R. J. (2004). The new division of labour: How computers are creating the next job market. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University and the Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, T. (1999). Research in technology education—some areas of need. Journal of Technology Education, 11(1), 41–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lingard, B., Hayes, D., Mills, M., & Christie, P. (2003). Leading learning: Making hope practical in schools. Maidenhead, UK: Open University.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCormick, R. (1997). Conceptual and procedural knowledge. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 7(1–2), 141–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCormick, R. (2009). Learning and teaching: An introduction. In A. T. Jones & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 363–371). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • McWilliam, E. (2008). Making excellent teachers. In A. Phelan & J. Sumison (Eds.), Critical readings in teacher education (pp. 33–44). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Middleton, H. (2009). Technology education and research in Australia: A coming of age in the 21st century. In A. T. Jones & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 93–104). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitcham, C. (1994). Thinking through technology. The path between engineering and philosophy. Chicago: Chicago University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moll, L., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & González, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory into Practice, 31(2), 132–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreland, J. (2009). Assessment: Focusing on the learner and the subject. In A. T. Jones & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 445–447). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreland, J., & Cowie, B. (2009). Making meaning in primary technology classrooms through assessment for learning. In A. T. Jones & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 461–476). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreland, J., Cowie, B., & Jones, A. (2007). Assessment for learning practices in primary technology classrooms. International Journal of Design and Technology Education, 12(2), 37–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreland, J., Jones, A., & Barlex, D. (2008). Design and technology inside the black box. London: GL Assessment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Natarajan, C., & Chunawala, S. (2009). Technology and vocational education in India. In A. T. Jones & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 117–130). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • NFG-W&E. (2007). Position paper of the national focus group on work and education. New Delhi: NCERT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novak, J. D. (1993). Human constructivism: A unification of psychological and epistemological phenomena in meaning making. International Journal of Personal Construct Psychology, 6, 167–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, J., & Henning Hansen, K. (1994). Research on technology education. In D. Layton (Ed.), Innovations in science and technology education (Vol. V, pp. 225–239). Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oulton, C. (2004). Reconceptualizing the teaching of controversial issues. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 411–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedretti, E. G., Bencze, L., Hewitt, J., Romkey, L., & Jivraj, A. (2008). Promoting issues-based STSE perspectives in science teacher education: Problems of identity and ideology. Science & Education, 17(8&9), 941–960.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrina, S. (1998). The politics of research in technology education: A critical content and discourse analysis of the Journal of Technology Education, Volumes 1–8. Journal of Technology Education, 10(1), 27–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Qualifications and Curriculum Authority. (1998). A scheme of work for KS 1, 2, 3: Design and technology. London: Author.

  • Robitaille, D., & Dirks, M. (1982). Models for the mathematics curriculum. For the Learning of Mathematics, 2(3), 3–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W.-M. (2001). Learning science through technological design. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(7), 768–790.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W.-M., & Pozzer-Ardenghi, L. (2006). Tracking situated, distributed, and embodied communication in real time. In M. A. Vanchevsky (Ed.), Focus on cognitive psychology research (pp. 237–261). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryle, G. (1949). The concept of mind. New York: Barnes and Noble.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sachs, J. (2003). The activist teaching profession. Buckingham, UK: Open University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schon, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossy-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J. F. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: Research and development in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2–3), 235–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smyth, J., Dow, A., Hattam, R., Reid, A., & Shacklock, G. (2000). Teachers’ work in a globalizing economy. London: Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, J. (1988). Science technology and society courses: Tools for thinking about social issues. International Journal of Science Education, 10(4), 379–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stables, K., & Kimbell, R. (2000). The unpickled portfolio: Pioneering performance assessment in design and technology. In R. Kimbell (Ed.), D&T international millennium conference: Learning from experience: Modelling new futures (pp. 195–202). Wellesbourne, UK: DATA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stables, K., & Kimbell, R. (2007). Evidence through the looking glass: Developing performance and assessing capability. In L. Taxén, (Ed.), The 13th international conference on thinking. linköping electronic conference proceedings, No. 21 (pp. 175–182). Norrköping, Sweden: Linköping University Electronic Press. Retrieved 10 January 2009, from http://www.ep.liu.se/ecp/021/vol1/175-182.

  • Stevens, A. (2009). The introduction and development of technology education in South Africa. In A. T. Jones & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 131–137). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. (2005). Education for all global monitoring report 2005. http://portal.unesco.org/education/en/ev.php-URL_ID=35939&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html. Accessed 10 January 2009.

  • von Glasersfeld, E. (1993). Questions and answers about radical constructivism. In K. Tobin (Ed.), The practice of constructivism in science education (pp. 23–38). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wertsch, J. (1998). Mind as action. New York: Oxford University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, P. J. (2009). Teacher education. In A. T. Jones & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 531–540). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wragg, T. (23 February 2001). Welcome to the Dalek factory. Times Educational Supplement, p. 40.

  • Yost, D. S., Sentner, S. M., & Forlenza-Baily, A. (2000). An examination of the construct of critical reflection: Implications for teacher education programming in the 21st century. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(1), 39–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research-based framework of socioscientific issues in education. Science Education, 89(3), 357–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuga, K. F. (1997). An analysis of technology education research in the United States based upon an historical overview and review of contemporary curriculum research. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 7(3), 203–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuga, K. F. (2004). Improving technology education research on cognition. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 14, 79–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Education, University of Waikato, Private Bag 3105, Hamilton, New Zealand

    Alister Jones & Cathy Buntting

  2. Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands

    Marc J. de Vries

Authors
  1. Alister Jones
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cathy Buntting
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marc J. de Vries
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alister Jones.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jones, A., Buntting, C. & de Vries, M.J. The developing field of technology education: a review to look forward. Int J Technol Des Educ 23, 191–212 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-011-9174-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-011-9174-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation