Advertisement

Research in Technology Education: Some Insights

  • George Shield
Conference paper

Abstract

The tradition of curriculum development in technology education has been based upon the implementation of educational ideals, some of which are fuelled by political/economic concerns and others based on learning theories or philosophical movements. This approach, however, whilst valuable, is not in itself sufficient. It is essential that such discussion is informed by the results of research into what is possible. Research, into technology education however, is at present sparse and is also influenced unduly by what is ‘measurable’. As this approach leads to the neglect of whole areas of interest it needs to be enhanced by utilising techniques which are employed by other academic traditions such as historians, sociologists and ethnographers. The paper looks briefly at one such approach. The establishment of a resource base of grounded research is essential for the development of technology education.

Keywords

Curriculum development technology technology education research methodology 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Assessment of Performance Unit: Learning through Design and Technology. In: McCormick, R., Murphy, P., Harrison, M. (eds.) Teaching and Learning Technology. Wokingham. Addison-Wesley/Open University, 1993Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anderson, G.: Fundamentals of Educational Research. London, Falmer Press 1990Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bassey, M.: On the Nature of Research in Education (Part 1). Research Intelligence. No. 36. pp. 35–38, (1990)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Blandow, D., Dyrenfurth, M. (eds.): Technological Literacy, Competence and Innovation in Human Resource Development. Proceedings of INCOTE 92. Weimar 1992Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bougon, M. G.: Uncovering Cognitive Maps. The Self-Q Technique. In: Morgan, G. (ed.) Beyond Method: Strategies for Social Research, Newbury Park, CAL, Sage 1983Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dieckman, E. A.: A procedural check for researcher bias in an ethnographic report. Research in Education. Vol. 50 pp. 1–4 (1993)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eggleston, J.: The Politics of Technology Education. In: Blandow, D., Dyrenfurth, M. (eds.) Technological Literacy, Competence and Innovation in Human Resource Development. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Technology Education. Weimar 1992Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Eisner, E. W.: The Art of Educational Evaluation. Lewes. Falmer 1985Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hammersley, M.: Some reflections on ethnography and validity. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education. Vol. 5 (3) pp. 195–203 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Elbaz, F., Hoz, R., Tomer, Y.y Chayot, R., Mahler, S., Yeheskel, N.: The use of concept mapping in the study of teachers knowledge structures. In: Ben-Peretz, M., Bromme, R., Halkes, R. (eds.) Advances of Research on Teacher Thinking. Lisse, ISATT/Swets & Zeitlinger 1986Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hennessy, S., McCormick, R., Murphy, S.: The Myth of General Problem- Solving Capability: Design and Technology as an Example. Curriculum Journal 4 (1) pp. 74–89 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    HM3: Craft Design and Technology 5–16. London, HMSO 1987Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hopkins, C. D., Antes, R. L.: Classroom Measurement and Evaluation. Itasca, Peacock 1990Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kimbell, R., Stables, K., Wheeler T., Wosniak, A., Kelly, V.: The Assessment of Performance in Design and Technology. London. SEACXHMSO 1991Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jenkins, E. W.: Towards an Agenda for Research in Technology Education. In: Blandow, D., Dyrenfurth, M. (eds.) Technological Literacy, Competence and Innovation in Human Resource Development. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Technology Education. Weimar 1992Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kimbell, R., Stables, K., Wheeler, T., Wosniak, A., Kelly, V.: The Assessment of Performance in Design and Technology. London. SEACXHMSO 1991Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kincheloe, J. L.: Teachers as Researchers: Qualitative Inquiry as a Path to Empowerment. London, Falmer 1991Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Layton, D.: Innovators’ dilemmas: recontextualising science and technology education. In: Layton, D. (ed.) Innovations in science and technology education. Vol. 1. Paris, UNESCO 1986Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    McCormick, R.: The Evolution of Current Practice in Technology Education. Part 1. The Journal of Epsilon Pi Tau. Vol. 18 (2) pp. 19–28 (1992)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    McCormick, R.: The Evolution of Current Practice of Technology Education. Part 2. The Journal of Technology Studies. Vol. 19 (1). pp. 26–32 1993Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Millar, R.: The pursuit of the impossible. Physics Education. Vol. 23 pp. 156–159 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mottier, I., Raat, J. H., de Vries, M. J. (eds.): Technology Education and Industry. The proceedings of the Pupils Attitude Towards Technology Conference. No 5. Eindhoven. PATT foundation 1991Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    National Curriculum Council: Technology: Non-Statutory Guidance. Design and Technology Capability. York. NCC 1990Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ormell, C.: Is ‘process’ good for your health. Cambridge. Journal of Education. Vol. 22 (2). pp. 227–242 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Parlett, M.: The New Evaluation. In: McCormick, R. (ed.) Calling Education to Account. Milton Keynes. Open University 1982Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Savage, E., Sterry, L.: A Conceptual Framework for Technology Education. Reston, VA. International Technology Education Association. 1990Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Scarth, J., Hammersley, M.: Some problems in assessing the closedness of classroom tasks. In: Hammersley, M. (ed.) Case Studies in Classroom Research. Milton Keynes. Open University Press 1986Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    HMI: Craft Design and Technology 5–16. London, HMSO 1987Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Smith, H. W.: Strategies of Social Research: The Methodological Imagination. London. Prentice Hall 1975Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Rist, R. C.: On the Utility of Ethnographic Research for the Policy Process. Urban Education. Vol. 15 (4) 1981Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Smithers, A., Robinson, P.: Technology in The National Curriculum London. The Engineering Council 1992Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Stenhouse, L.: The Study of Samples and the Study of Cases. British Educational Research Journal. Vol. 6 (1) pp. 1–6 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Stenhouse, L.: What counts as research. British Journal of Educational Studies. Vol. 29, June 1981.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Tesch, R.: Qualitative Research Analysis Types and Software Tools. London. Falmer 1990Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    de Vries, M. J.: Pupils’ Attitudes Towards Technology. In: Blandow, D., Dyrenfurth, M. (eds.) Technological Literacy, Competence and Innovation in Human Resource Development. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Technology Education. Weimar 1992Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • George Shield
    • 1
  1. 1.School of EducationUniversity of SunderlandSunderlandUK

Personalised recommendations