Technology Education: The Promise of Cultural-Historical Theory for Advancing the Field
- 15 Downloads
Although technology education has a long history in practice (i.e. apprenticeship model, guilds), the theorisation of learning technology and design is relatively recent when compared with other disciplines, such as science education. Consequently, this chapter examines how scholars of technology education in contemporary times have theorised their work in their quest for better understanding how teachers teach and young people learn in technology education. To achieve this goal, this chapter conceptualises the outcomes of this focused theoretical review by examining the essence of what constitutes constructivism, social-constructivism, sociocultural theory and cultural-historical theory. In drawing upon primary sources, the questions posed for critique are: How does each inform design and technology education? What is unique to each? What is the same? What might be the gaps? A critique of the grey zone between social constructivism and cultural-historical theory will be made in the context of theories placed on a continuum, which moves from ‘in the head’ and ‘in the hand’, to a dialectical relation between cultural and societal contexts and the cultural development of the person through technology education. It is argued that through examining the alignment, contradictions and movement of thought practice, a theoretically informed discussion of learning the practice and knowledge of technology and design is possible. The chapter concludes by returning to the theoretical review to present a discussion on the place of theory for informing a dialectical understanding of how young people learn and teachers teach in technology and design education.
- AP images. (2018). http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Self-Driving-Vehicle-Fatality/d7a9837e1275452d84aed6ea70a7f9ec/2/0). Accessed 12th July 2018.
- Barlex, D. (2012). Curriculum development. In P. J. Williams (Ed.), Technology education for teachers. International Technology Education Studies. (pp. 196–230). Sense Publishers, Rotterdam.Google Scholar
- Barlex, D. (2017). Disruptive technologies. In P. J. Williams & K. Stables (Eds.), Critique in design and technology education. Contemporary issues in technology education. Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
- De Vries, J. R. (2014). Technological knowledge and artifacts: An analytical view, In De Vries, J.R. (eds). Defining technological literacy. Towards an epistemological framework. Palgrave MacMillan, New York, US, (pp. 23–40).Google Scholar
- Djordjevic, B., Spirtovic, O., & Acimovic, D. (2016). Social constructivism and technology. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 7(11), 178–189.Google Scholar
- Eames, C. (2016). Exploring teacher pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) development using CoRes (content representations). In D. S. P. Gedera & P. J. Williams (Eds.), Activity theory in education. Research and practice (pp. 169–182). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Education Council. (2018). Optimising STEM industry-school partnerships: Inspiring Australia’s next generation, final report, STEM Partnership Forum, Carlton South, Australia.Google Scholar
- Fox-Turnbull, W. H. (2015). Conversations to support learning in technology education. In P. J. Williams, A. Jones, & C. Buntting (Eds.), The future of technology education (pp. 99–120). Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
- Gonzalez, N., Moll, L. C., & Amanti, C. (2005). Funds of knowledge. In Theorizing practices in households, communities and classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.Google Scholar
- Gumbo, M. T. (2015). Indigenous technology in technology education curricula and teaching. In P. J. Williams, A. Jones, & C. Buntting (Eds.), The future of technology education (pp. 57–76). Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
- Himmelreich, J. (2018). The everyday ethical challenges of self-driving cars Posted March 27, 2018 9.42pm AEDT, The Conversation, http://theconversation.com/the-everyday-ethical-challenges-of-self-driving-cars-92710. Accessed 12th July 2018.
- Koycu, U., & 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, 243–258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9306-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Liu, C. H., & Matthews, R. (2005). Vygotsky’s philosophy: Constructivism and its criticisms examined. International Education Journal, 6(3), 386–399.Google Scholar
- Papert, S., & Harel, I. (1991). Situating constructionism. In S. Papert & I. Harel (Eds.), Constructionism. New York: Ablex Publishing.Google Scholar
- Pavlova. (2015). Design and technology education for sustainable futures: In preparation for global citizenship. In K. Stables & S. Keirl (Eds.), Environment, ethics and cultures. Design and technology education’s contribution to sustainable global futures (pp. 87–100). Rotterdam Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
- Scharff, R. C., & Dusek, V. (Eds.). (2003). Philosophy of technology. The technological condition. An anthology. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
- Seeman, K. (2015). Designing for cultural groups and humanization: Two ideas from design anthropology. In K. Stables & S. Keirl (Eds.), Environment, ethics and cultures. Design and technology education’s contribution to sustainable global futures (pp. 101–118). Rotterdam Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
- Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). Problems of general psychology. In R. W. Rieber & A. S. Carton (Eds.), Trans by N. Minick. The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky (Vol. 1). New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
- Vygotsky, L. S. (1994). The problem of the environment. In J. Valsiner & R. vander Veer (Eds.), The Vygotsky reader (pp. 347–348). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
- Wajcman, J. (2004). TechnoFeminism. Cambridge, UK: Polity.Google Scholar
- Williams, J., Eames, C., Hume, A., & Lockley, J. (2012). Promoting pedagogical content knowledge development for early career secondary teachers in science and technology using content representations. Research in Science and Technological Education, 30(3), 327–343. https://doi.org/10.1080/-2635143.2012.740005CrossRefGoogle Scholar