Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Technology Education Pedagogy: Enhancing STEM Learning

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Pedagogy for Technology Education in Secondary Schools

Part of the book series: Contemporary Issues in Technology Education ((CITE))

Abstract

Depending on the educational context, technology education can be addressed in curricula as a separate or cross-curricular subject, and one that is either compulsory or an elective. Regardless, the nature of technology is clearly integrative, given that technological systems must incorporate and contextualize knowledge and practices from a broad range of disciplines. Furthermore, the scope of research and implementation strategies observed in authentic educational contexts embraces the breadth of integrative possibilities. Technology educators, therefore, have an intrinsic opportunity to investigate the potential of multiple approaches in technology education pedagogies. Furthermore, technology educators might also find themselves confronted with misconceptions about the nature of technology and the versatility of its research, design, and production processes, especially during curricular and interdisciplinary STEM team collaborations. In addition, in an educational context where technology, at one end of the spectrum, might well be misperceived as an applied activity, the technology educator is capable of introducing a richer and more accurate picture of the integrative nature of technology. At the other extreme, when only procedural or declarative aspects are emphasized, or when conceptual knowledge is handled only in the abstract, the technology educator is able to strengthen relationships with math and science by bringing in conceptual knowledge through the design of technological systems and demonstrating the authentic utility of scientific knowledge in context.

Set within the context of STEM education reform, this chapter presents an exploration into the pedagogical continuum for teaching technology education through integrative approaches with the intent to enhance STEM learning. The chapter is framed by the pedagogical premise underpinning technology education and describes, from that perspective, how a balanced curricular approach can be achieved through a range of integrative pedagogies when properly supported through curricular and instructional professional development.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS]. (1989). Science for all Americans. Washington, D.C.: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Assis-Cezarino, K. (2004). Strategies for sustainable professional development programs to promote effective pedagogical use of instructional Technology in Teaching. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Morgantown, WV: West Virginia University.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Banks, F., & Barlex, D. (2014). Teaching STEM in the secondary school: Helping teachers meet the challenge. London: Routledge. Internet: https://dandtfordandt.wordpress.com/

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Barak, M., & Assal, M. (2016). Robotics and STEM learning: Students’ achievements in assignments according to the P3 Task Taxonomy – Practice, problem solving, and projects. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28(1), 121–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berube, M., & Berube, C. (2007). The end of school reform. Landham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1). Retrieved April 7, 2018 from https://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/392/515

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denson, C., & Lammi, M. (2014). Building a framework for engineering design experiences in high school. Journal of Technology Education, 26, 75–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drake, S., & Burns, R. (2004). Meeting standards through integrated curriculum. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunham, P., Wells, J., & White, K. (2002). Biotechnology education: A multiple instructional strategies approach to biotechnology education. Journal of Technology Education, 14(1), 65–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament, Council of the European Union. (2006). Recommendation on key competences for lifelong learning. Internet: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32006H0962

  • Ferguson, D. (2009). Development of technology education in New Zealand schools 1985–2008. Research paper published by the New Zealand Ministry of Education. Available at https://technology.tki.org.nz/Teacher-education/Archived-papers/Development-of-technology-education-in-NZ-1985-2008

  • Flemish Government (2012). Actieplan voor het stimuleren van loopbanen in wiskunde, exacte wetenschappen en techniek 2012-2020. Stuk 1478– Nr. 1. 8 februari 2012 (2011-2012) (publication in Dutch). Internet: https://onderwijs.vlaanderen.be/sites/default/files/atoms/files/STEM-actieplan.pdf

  • Flemish Government (2015). STEM-kader voor het Vlaamse Onderwijs. Brussel. Departement Onderwijs en Vorming (publication in Dutch). Internet: https://www.vlaanderen.be/publicaties/stem-kader-voor-het-vlaamse-onderwijs

  • Flemish Government (2018). Decreet tot wijziging van de Codex Secundair Onderwijs van 17 december 2010, wat betreft de modernisering van de structuur en de organisatie van het secundair onderwijs. Stuk 1469 Nr. 3 van 28 maart (publication in Dutch). Internet: https://www.vlaamsparlement.be/parlementaire-documenten/parlementaire-initiatieven/1245244

  • France, B. (1997). Realising the technology curriculum: Professional development in biotechnology education (Unpublished D. Phil. thesis). Centre for Science, Mathematics and Technology Education Research, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand.

    Google Scholar 

  • France, B. (2007). Location, location, location: Positioning biotechnology education for the 21st century. Studies in Science Education, 43(1), 88–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • France, B. (2015). Technological literacy: A realizable goal or a chimera? ACE papers, issue 5: Issues in educational professional development, paper 3. Available: https://researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/2292/25056/ACE_Paper_3_Issue_5.pdf?sequence=1

  • Gagne, R., Wager, W., Golas, K., & Keller, J. (2004). Principles of instructional design (5th ed.). Independence, KY: Cengage Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garet, M., Porter, A., Desimonre, L. Birman, B., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4).

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, G. A. (Ed.). (1983). Staff development. Eighty-second yearbook of the National Society for the study of education. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guskey, T. R. (2002). Does it make a difference? Evaluating professional development. In Educational Leadership (pp. 45–51).

    Google Scholar 

  • Guskey, T. R. (2003). Analyzing lists of the characteristics of effective professional development to promote visionary leadership. National Association of Secondary School Principals, 87(637), 38–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammerness, K., Darling-Hammond, L., Bransford, J., Berliner, D., Cochran-Smith, M., McDonald, M., et al. (2005). How teachers learn and develop. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 358–389). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huber, M. T., & Hutchings, P. (2005). Integrative learning: Mapping the Terrain. Washington, D.C.: Association of American Colleges and Universities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Institute of Education Services [IES] (2017). Technical working group on career and technical education. Summary report. Washington, D.C. Available: https://ies.ed.gov/ncer/whatsnew/techworkinggroup/pdf/CTE_TWG.pdf

  • International Technology Education Association [ITEA]. (1996). Technology for all Americans: A rationale and structure for the study of technology. Reston, VA: ITEA.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Technology Education Association (ITEA) (2000). Standards for technological literacy: Content for the study of technology, Reston VA: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, A. (1997). Technology education in the New Zealand curriculum. In J. Burns (Ed.), Technology in the New Zealand curriculum – perspectives on practice (pp. 46–59). Palmerston North, New Zealand: Dunmore Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kearney, C. (2016). Efforts to increase students’ interest in pursuing mathematics, science, technology studies and careers. National measures taken by 30 countries – 2015 report. Brussels, Belgium: European Schoolnet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, T. R. (2008). Cognitive processes of students participating in engineering-focused design instruction. Journal of Technology Education, 19(2), 50–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, T. R. (2011). Engineer’s notebook – a design assessment tool. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 70(7), 30–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, T. R. & Knowles, J.G. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education. Internet: https://stemeducationjournal.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z

  • Kennedy, M. (1999). The role of pre-service teacher education. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of teaching and policy (pp. 54–86). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korea Institute of Curriculum and Instruction (2002). A study of the systemization of objectives and contents of school ‘Practical arts’ and ‘Technology & Hoe Economics’. Republic of Korea, Seoul, Korea.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, T. (2006). Design and inquiry: Basis for accommodation between science and technology education in the curriculum? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(3), 255–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, T. (2007). Engineering education in schools. International Journal of Engineering Education, 23, 843–852.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, M., & Shavelson, R.J. (2001). Examining the linkage between science achievement and assessment. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, Seattle.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipson, M., Valencia, S., Wixson, K., & Peters, C. (1993). Integration and thematic teaching: Integration to improve teaching and learning. Language Arts, 70(4), 252–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loucks-Horsley, S., Hewson, P., Love, N., & Stiles, K. (1996). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCormick, R. (2004). Issues of learning and knowledge in technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 14(2), 21–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCormick, R., & Davidson, M. (1996). Problem solving and the tyranny of product outcomes. Journal of Design & Technology Education, 1(3), 230–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mundry, S., & Loucks-Horsley, S. (1999). Designing professional development for science and mathematics teachers: Decision points and dilemmas (NISE Brief 3(1)). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin.

    Google Scholar 

  • NAE (National Academy of Engineering). (2009). Grand challenges for engineering.http://www.engineeringchallenges.org/challenges.aspx. Accessed 19 Mar 2011

  • National Education Association [NEA]. (1894). Report of the Committee of Ten on Secondary School Studies: With the reports of the conferences arranged by the committee. New York: American Book Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards; for states, by states. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development [OECD]. (2008). Encouraging student interest in science and technology studies. ISBN 978-92-64-04069-4. Available: https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/science-and-technology/encouraging-student-interest-in-science-and-technology-studies_9789264040892-en#.WVpUdoTyjIU#page5

  • Ravitch, D. (2000). Left back: A century of failed school reforms. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, A. (n.d.). Tech systems for year 3–4 students: Hydroponics. Available: http://technology.tki.org.nz/Resources/Case-studies/Classroom-practice-case-studies/Food-and-biotechnology/Tech-systems-for-year-3-4-students-Hydroponics

  • Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Macmillan Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Schunn, C. (2008). Engineering educational design. Educational Designer, 1, 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, J. E. (1988). Biotechnology. In New studies in biology (2nd ed.). London: Edward Arnold.

    Google Scholar 

  • STEM@school (2018). Learning modules for 9th grade: Autonomous driving car. Internet: http://www.stematschool.be/en/our-learning-modules

  • Thibaut, L., Ceuppens, S., De Loof, H., De Meester, J., Goovaerts, L., Struyf, A., et al. (2018). Integrated STEM education: Conceptualizing an instructional approach for secondary education. European Journal of STEM Education, 3(1), 02. https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/85525

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Velde, D., Van Boven, H., Dehaene, W., Knipprath, H., & De Cock, M. (2016). Pré-university STEM education: how do teachers perceive the implementation? Publication in Dutch: Doorstroomgericht STEM-onderwijs: hoe beleven en percipiëren leraren in de tweede graad van het secundair onderwijs de opstart? Brussels, Belgium: Impuls – Acco. Internet: https://www.acco.be/nl-be/items/TAB000086/Impuls-Jaargang-2016-2017%2D%2D-enkel-abonnement.

  • Van der Bolt, L., Studulski, F., Van der Vegt, A., & Bontje, D. (2006). De betrokkenheid van de leraar bij onderwijsinnovaties Een verkenning op basis van literatuur. Utrecht, Netherlands: Sardes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, J. G. (2007). Key design factors in durable instructional technology professional development. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 15(1), 101–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, J. G. (2008). STEM education: The potential of technology education. Invited paper presented at the 95th annual conference of the Mississippi Valley technology teacher education conference. St. Louis, MO. Available: http://www.mississippivalley.org/archives-2

  • Wells, J. G. (2013). Integrative STEM Education at Virginia Tech: Graduate preparation for tomorrow’s leaders. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 72(5), 28–35. Reston, VA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, J. G. (2016a). PIRPOSAL model of integrative STEM education: Conceptual and pedagogical framework for classroom implementation. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 75(6), 12–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, J. G. (2016b). Efficacy of the technological/engineering design approach: Imposed cognitive demands within design based biotechnology instruction. Journal of Technology Education, 27(2), 4–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wells, J. G. (2017). Design to understand: Promoting higher order thinking through T/E design based learning. Proceedings of the technology education New Zealand and International conference on technology education-Asia Pacific, 325–339. New Zealand: TEMS Education Research Center, University of Waikato.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, J. G. (2019a). Design based biotechnology literacy: Teaching guide (13th ed.). Blacksburg, VA: Technology Education Biotechnology Curriculum Project; Biosens, (self-published).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, J. G. (2019b). STEM education: The potential of technology education. In M. Daugherty & V. Carter (Eds.), The most influential papers presented at the Mississippi Valley technology teacher education conference. Council on technology and engineering teacher education, 62nd yearbook (pp. 195–229). Muncie, IN: Ball State University. Available: http://ctete.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/2019-CTETE-Yearbook-Mississippi-Valley-Conference-21st-Century.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilschut, A. Pijls, M. (2018). Effecten van vakkenintegratie: een literatuurstudie. Kenniscentrum Onderwijs en Opvoeding Hogeschool van Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winslow, C. (2017). Meria practical guide to inquiry based mathematics teaching. Available: http://www.meria-project.eu

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA

    John G. Wells

  2. Catholic Education Flanders, Catholic School Network, Brussels, Belgium

    Didier Van de Velde

Authors
  1. John G. Wells
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Didier Van de Velde
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John G. Wells .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia

    P. John Williams

  2. University of Exeter Associate, Brighton, UK

    David Barlex

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Wells, J.G., Van de Velde, D. (2020). Technology Education Pedagogy: Enhancing STEM Learning. In: Williams, P.J., Barlex, D. (eds) Pedagogy for Technology Education in Secondary Schools. Contemporary Issues in Technology Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41548-8_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41548-8_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-41547-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-41548-8

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation