Advertisement

Perceptions and attitudes of pupils towards technology: In search of a rigorous theoretical framework

  • Piet AnkiewiczEmail author
Article

Abstract

The perceptions and attitudes of pupils towards technology have been researched for just over three decades. Recently, following an extensive review of the available literature, Ankiewicz (in: De Vries (ed) Handbook of technology education, Springer International Handbooks of Education, 2016.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-38889-2_43-1) provided an overview of the current state of research, in a chapter in the Springer Handbook of Technology Education. However, due to length restrictions the chapter had to be concise and thus focused primarily on the mainstream instruments and their derivatives. More detailed descriptions of the perceptions and attitudes of students as well as discussions of unconventional and non-related instruments therefore had to be omitted. Consequently, the purpose of this article is to extend the chapter concerned by providing a more extensive and nuanced review of the total substantive body of knowledge that has been generated in just over three decades. The following research question underpinned the literature review: How may the existing research and subsequent findings be systematised into a more rigorous theoretical framework that may assist scholars in navigating their way through the current research on the perceptions and attitudes of students towards technology? In addition to the previous findings made and conclusions drawn in the chapter, it was found that such a theoretical framework should be informed by the following guiding insights: viewpoints concerning the construct of attitudes towards technology, as well as measuring such attitudes; the mainstream instruments in The Pupils’ Attitudes Towards Technology (PATT) studies and their derivatives, as well as problematic aspects associated with these; unconventional, PATT-related instruments; new, non-related instruments for ascertaining students’ attitudes and concepts; the general research findings on students’ attitudes; means that may positively develop students’ attitudes; and unidimensional versus multidimensional studies studying the effect of all characteristics or determinants of all aspects of learners’ attitudes. Such a rigorous theoretical framework may serve as a valuable resource for future researchers embarking on this area of research, as it provides a synopsis that may assist in enhancing an understanding of research that has been done and work that needs to be done in order to contribute to developing new knowledge in the field of design, technology, and engineering education. It also indicates gaps in this research area, notably in researching the behavioural component of attitudes.

Keywords

Technology education Attitudes Concepts Behaviour Attitude measurement 

References

  1. Anderssen, E. C., & Myburgh, C. P. H. (1988). Problems of questioning in Southern Africa. Questioning Exchange, 2(3), 281–287.Google Scholar
  2. Androulidakis, S. (1991). Greek teachers’ attitudes towards technology, A first approach. In PATT 5 conference proceedings (pp. 219–223). Eindhoven, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  3. Ankiewicz, P. (2016). Perceptions and attitudes of pupils toward technology. In M. J. de Vries (Ed.), Handbook of Technology Education, Springer International Handbooks of Education.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-38889-2_43-1.
  4. Ankiewicz, P., Van Rensburg, S., & Myburgh, C. (2001). Assessing the attitudinal profile of South African learners: A pilot study. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 11(2), 93–109.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011210013642.Google Scholar
  5. Ardies, J., De Maeyer, S., & Gijbels, D. (2013). Reconstructing the pupils attitude towards technology-survey. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 18(1), 8–19.Google Scholar
  6. Ardies, J., De Maeyer, S., & Gijbels, D. (2015a). How do male and female secondary students’ attitudes towards technology evolve?. In: PATT 29 conference proceedings (pp. 26–34). Marseille: Presses Universitaires de Provence.Google Scholar
  7. Ardies, J., De Maeyer, S., Gijbels, D., & Van Keulen, H. (2015b). Students’ attitudes towards technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 25(1), 43–65.Google Scholar
  8. Bame, E. A. (1989). What do American teachers think of technology. In PATT 4 conference proceedings (pp. 320–323). Eindhoven, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  9. Bame, E. A. (1991). PATT-USA: A report of findings. In PATT 5 conference proceedings (Vol. 2, pp. 202–218). Eindhoven, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  10. Bame, E. A., & Dugger, W. E. (1989a). Pupils’ attitude towards technology: PATT-USA. In PATT 4 conference proceedings (pp. 309–319). Eindhoven, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  11. Bame, E., & Dugger, W., Jr. (1989b). Pupils’ attitude toward technology: PATT-USA Report Findings. Retrieved from http://www.iteea.org/File.aspx?id=40498&v=3084cd04.
  12. Bame, E., Dugger, W., De Vries, M., & McBee, J. (1993). Pupils’ attitudes toward technology—PATT-USA. Journal of Technology Studies, 19(1), 40–48.Google Scholar
  13. Becker, K. H., & Maunsaiyat, S. (2002). Thai students’ attitudes and concepts of technology. Journal of Technology Education, 13(2), 6–19.Google Scholar
  14. Boser, R. A., Palmer, J. D., & Daugherty, M. K. (1998). Students attitudes toward technology in selected technology education programmes. Journal of Technology Education, 10(1), 4–19.Google Scholar
  15. De Klerk Wolters, F. (1988a). PATT research in 1987/88. In PATT 3 conference proceedings (pp. 39–46). Eindhoven, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  16. De Klerk Wolters, F. (1988b). Directions for use of the TAS in class. In PATT 3 conference proceedings (pp. 509–535). Eindhoven, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  17. De Klerk Wolters, F. (1989a). The PATT-project, an overview of an international project in technology education. In PATT 4 conference proceedings (pp. 290–308). Eindhoven, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  18. De Klerk Wolters, F. (1989b). A PATT study among 10 to 12-year-olds. In PATT 4 conference proceedings (pp. 324–330). Eindhoven, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  19. De Vries, M. (1988). Technology in physics education. In PATT 3 conference proceedings (pp. 182–188). Eindhoven, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  20. De Vries, M. (1991). What do students in Dutch technology teacher programmes think of their subject? Research in Science & Technological Education, 9, 173–179.Google Scholar
  21. De Vries, M. J. (1992). Dutch technology education developments: A comment. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 2(3), 58–60.Google Scholar
  22. Dean, S., & Illowski, B. (2008). F distribution and ANOVA: Purpose and basic assumption of ANOVA. Available from http://cnx.org/content/m17068/1.5.
  23. Doornekamp, B. G. (1991). Gender differences in the acquisition of technical knowledge, skills and attitudes in Dutch primary education: The need for technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 2(1), 37–47.Google Scholar
  24. Dunlap, D. D., & Dugger, W. E. (1991). Comparing attitudes towards technology of third and forth grade students in Virginia relative to their exposure to technology. In PATT 5 conference proceedings (Vol. 2, pp. 194–201). Eindhoven, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  25. Fennema, E., & Sherman, J. A. (1976). Fennema-Sherman mathematics attitudes scales: Instruments designed to measure attitudes toward the learning of mathematics by males and females. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 7, 324–332.Google Scholar
  26. Ferguson, E., & Cox, T. (1993). Exploratory factor analysis: A user’s guide. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 1, 84–94.Google Scholar
  27. Fife-Schaw, C., Breakwell, G. M., Lee, T., & Spencer, J. (1987). Attitudes towards new technology in relation to scientific orientation at school: A preliminary study of undergraduates. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 57, 114–121.Google Scholar
  28. Fleming, K. L. (2005). An analysis of factors that influence community college students’ attitudes toward technology. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Texas A&M University.Google Scholar
  29. Gaotlhobogwe, M. (2010). Attitudes to and perceptions of design and technology students towards the subject: A case of five junior secondary schools in Botswana. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Wales Institute, Cardiff.Google Scholar
  30. Gaotlhobogwe, M. (2012). The impact of lack of resources on declining students’ enrolments in Design and Technology in Botswana junior secondary schools. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 17(1), 10–17.Google Scholar
  31. Güdel, K., Heitzmann, A., & Mueller, A. (2015). Affinity for technology—A potential instrument to measure PATT (pupils’ attitude towards technology)? In PATT 29 conference proceedings (pp. 180–187). Marseille: Presses Universitaires de Provence.Google Scholar
  32. Holter, C. A. (2016). Assessing elementary pupils’ attitudes toward technology. Unpublished DEd thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/bitstream/handle/10919/65148/Holter_CA_T_2016.pdf;sequence=1.
  33. Householder, D. L., & Bolin, B. (1993). Technology: Its influence in the secondary school upon achievement in academic subjects and upon students’ attitude toward technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 3(2), 5–18.Google Scholar
  34. Jack, B., & Clarke, A. (1998). The purpose and use of questionnaires in research. Professional Nurse, 14, 176–179.Google Scholar
  35. Järvinen, E. M., & Rasinen, A. (2015). Implementing technology education in Finnish general education schools: Studying the cross-curricular theme ‘Human being and technology’. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 25(1), 67–84.Google Scholar
  36. Jarvis, T., & Rennie, L. (1996a). Understanding technology: The development of a concept. International Journal of Science Education, 18(8), 977–992.Google Scholar
  37. Jarvis, T., & Rennie, L. (1996b). Perceptions about technology held by primary teachers in England. Research in Science and Technology Education, 14(1), 43–54.Google Scholar
  38. Jarvis, T., & Rennie, L. J. (1998). Factors that influence children’s developing perceptions of technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 8(3), 261–279.Google Scholar
  39. Jeffrey, T. J. (1993). Validation of a technology attitude scale for use by American teachers at the middle school level. In PATT 6 conference proceedings (pp. 357–364). Breukelen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  40. Jeffrey, T. J. (1995). Adaption and validation of a technology attitude scale for use by American teachers at the middle school level. In PATT 7 conference proceedings (pp. 53–58). Breukelen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  41. Kent, D., & Towse, P. (1996). Pupil-centred aims and objectives for technology education in Botswana and Lesotho. In PATT (South Africa) Conference proceedings (pp. 184–189). Cape Town, South Africa.Google Scholar
  42. Kőycű, Ü., & De Vries, M. J. (2016). What preconceptions and attitudes about engineering are prevalent amongst upper secondary school pupils? An international study. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 26(2), 243–258.Google Scholar
  43. Lou, S. J., Shih, R. C., Diez, C. R., & Tseng, K. H. (2011). The impact of problem-based learning strategies on STEM knowledge integration and attitudes: An exploratory study among female Taiwanese senior high school students. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 21(2), 195–215.Google Scholar
  44. Luckay, M. B., & Collier-Reed, B. I. (2014). An instrument to determine the technological literacy levels of upper secondary school students. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 24(3), 261–273.Google Scholar
  45. Mammes, I. (2004). Promoting girls’ interest in technology through technology education: A research study. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 14(2), 89–100.Google Scholar
  46. Martins, A. (1991). Attitudes of middle secondary school pupils in Portugal towards technology. In PATT 5 conference proceedings (Vol. 2, pp. 155–171). Eindhoven, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  47. Mawson, B. (2010). Children’s developing understanding of technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 20(1), 1–13.Google Scholar
  48. Meide, J. B. (1997). Pupils’ attitudes towards technology: Botswana. In PATT 8 conference proceedings (pp. 208–213). Scheveningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  49. Metsärinne, M., & Kallio, M. (2015). How are students’ attitudes related to learning outcomes? International Journal of Technology and Design Education.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9317-0.Google Scholar
  50. Mioduser, D., & Betzer, N. (2008). The contribution of project-based-learning to high-achievers’ acquisition of technological knowledge and skills. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 18(1), 59–77.Google Scholar
  51. Moore, J. L., & Songun, R. (1991). The development of scales to measure the attitude to technology of vocational education students in Turkey. In PATT 5 conference proceedings (Vol. 2, pp. 182–193). Eindhoven, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  52. Mottier, I., Raat, J. H., & De Vries, M. J. (Eds.). (1991). Report on the PATT 5 conference. In PATT 5 conference proceedings (Vol. 1, pp. 29–36). Eindhoven, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  53. Otieno, F. O. (1988). Technology as a school subject: The Kenyan experience. In PATT 3 conference proceedings (pp. 189–196). Eindhoven, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  54. Prime, G. (1991). The attitudes and concepts of Trinidad and Tobago secondary school students toward technology. In PATT 5 conference proceedings (Vol. 2, pp. 172–181). Eindhoven, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  55. Raat, J. H., & De Vries, M. (1985). What do 13-year old students think about technology? The conception of and the attitude towards technology of 13-year old girls and boys. Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 262-998).Google Scholar
  56. Raat, J. H., & De Vries, M. (Eds.). (1987). Technology in education: Research and development in the project “Physics and Technology”. International Journal of Science Education, 9, 159–168.Google Scholar
  57. Rattray, J., & Jones, M. C. (2007). Issues in clinical nursing. Essential elements of questionnaire design and development. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 16, 234–243.Google Scholar
  58. Rennie, L. J. (1988). How can we make technology interesting for girls?. In PATT 3 conference proceedings (pp. 397–414). Eindhoven, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  59. Rennie, L., & Jarvis, T. (1995a). Three approaches to measuring children’s perceptions of technology’. International Journal of Science Education, 17(6), 755–774.Google Scholar
  60. Rennie, L., & Jarvis, T. (1995b). English and Australian children’s perceptions about technology. Research in Science & Technological Education, 13(1), 37–52.Google Scholar
  61. Rennie, L. J., & Jarvis, T. (1995c). Children’s choice of drawings to communicate their ideas about technology. Research in Science Education, 25(3), 239–252.Google Scholar
  62. Rennie, L. J., & Treagust, D. F. (1989). Measuring students’ attitudes and perceptions about technology: A multidimensional concept. Research in Science Education, 19, 221–230.Google Scholar
  63. Rohaan, E. J., Taconis, R., & Jochems, W. M. (2010). Reviewing the relations between teachers’ knowledge and pupils’ attitude in the field of primary technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 20(1), 15–26.Google Scholar
  64. Schendstok, C. (2009). Improving the attitude towards science and technology in Dutch primary education. In PATT 22 conference proceedings (pp. 383–389). Delft, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  65. Svenningsson, J., Hultén, M., & Hallström, J. (2016). Understanding attitude measurement: Exploring meaning and use of the PATT short questionnaire. International Journal of Technology and Design Education.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-016-9392-x.Google Scholar
  66. Van Rensburg, S., Ankiewicz, P., & Myburgh, C. (1999). Assessing South Africa learners’ attitudes towards technology by using the PATT (Pupils’ Attitudes Towards Technology) questionnaire. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 9, 137–151.Google Scholar
  67. Volk, K. S., & Yip, W. M. (1999). Gender and technology in Hong Kong: A study of pupils’ attitudes toward technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 9, 57–71.Google Scholar
  68. Volk, K., Yip, W. M., & Lo, T. K. (2003). Hong Kong pupils’ attitudes toward technology: The impact of design and technology programs. Journal of Technology Education, 15(1), 48–63.Google Scholar
  69. White, R. T. (1988). Learning science. New York: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  70. Williams, P. J. (2013). Research in technology education: Looking back to move forward. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23(1), 1–9.Google Scholar
  71. Yu, K.-C., Lin, K.-Y., Han, F.-N., & Hsu, I. Y. (2012). A model of junior high school students’ attitudes toward technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 22(4), 423–436.Google Scholar
  72. Yurdugül, H., & Aşkar, P. (2008). An investigation of the factorial structures of Pupils’ Attitude towardsTechnology (PATT): A Turkish Sample. İlköğretim/Elementary Education Online, 7(2), 288–309.Google Scholar
  73. Zuga, K. F. (1997). An analysis of technology education 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.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Science and Technology Education, Faculty of Education (APK Campus)University of JohannesburgAuckland ParkSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations