Abstract
This chapter examines the traditional separation, or siloing, of knowledge domains into distinct school subjects—languages, mathematics, science, social science, the arts, and technology—and considers the benefits and challenges of breaking down these silos and bringing about closer alignment between technology as a school subject, and other subject areas. One key purpose for aligning technology with other subjects is to increase the scope and opportunities for students to develop relevant skills and dispositions to address ‘wicked problems’—complex problems with multiple causes and interdependencies that are difficult or even impossible to solve, or even define, using the tools and techniques of only one organisation or discipline.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Barlex, D., Davies, S., & Hardy, A. (2012). Engaging trainee teachers of science and design & technology in cross curricula collaboration—A case study. In H. Middleton (Ed.), Explorations of best practice in Technology, Design and Engineering Education (Vol. I, pp. 102–117). Brisbane: Griffith Institute for Educational Research.
Broadfoot, P. (2000). Comparative education for the 21st century: Retrospect and prospect. Comparative Education, 36(3), 357–371.
Brown, J. S. (2006). New learning environments for the 21st century: Exploring the edge. Change, 38(5), 18–24.
Bull, A., & Gilbert, J. (2012). Swimming out of our depth: Leading learning in 21st century schools. Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.
Buntting, C., & Jones, A. (2009). Unpacking the interface between science, technology and the environment: Biotechnology as an example. In A. Jones & M. de Vries (Eds.), Handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 275–285). Rotterdam/Boston/Taipei: Sense.
Campbell, C., & Jobling, W. (2012). Integrating technology and science—An opportunity missed. In H. Middleton (Ed.), Explorations of best practice in Technology, Design and Engineering Education (Vol. II, pp. 102–117). Brisbane: Griffith Institute for Educational Research.
Cowie, B., Moreland, J., & Otrel-Cass, K. (2013). Expanding notions of assessment for learning. Inside science and technology primary classrooms. Rotterdam/Boston/Taipei: Sense.
de Vries, M. (2009). The developing field of technology education: An introduction. In A. T. Jones & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 1–9). Rotterdam/Boston/Taipei: Sense.
Gallagher, J. J. (1971). A broader base for science education. Science Education, 55(3), 329–338.
Gilbert, J. (2005). Catching the knowledge wave? The knowledge society and the future of education. Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.
Hipkins, R. (2011). Learning to be a new school: Building a curriculum for new times. Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.
Jones, A. (2012). Technology in science education: Context, contestation, and connection. In B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 811–821). Dordrecht: Springer.
Jones, A., & Buntting, C. (2013). The role and place of science and technology education in developing innovation education. In L. V. Shavinina (Ed.), Handbook on innovation education (pp. 419–429). New York: Routledge.
Jones, A., Buntting, C., & de Vries, M. (2013). The developing field of technology education: A review to look forward. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23, 191–212.
Kelly, G., Luke, A., & Green, J. (2008). What counts as knowledge in educational settings: Disciplinary knowledge, assessment and curriculum. Review of Research in Education, 32, vii–x.
Lewis, T., Barlex, D., & Chapman, C. (2007). Investigating interaction between science and design & technology (D&T) in the secondary school—A case study approach. Research in Science and Technological Education, 25(1), 37–58.
Roth, W.-M., Tobin, K., & Ritchie, S. (2001). Re/constructing elementary science. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.
Sanders, M. E. (2008). STEM, STEM education, STEMmania. The Technology Teacher, 68 (4), 20–26.
Sanders, M. (2012). Integrative STEM education as ‘best practice’. In H. Middleton (Ed.), Explorations of best practice in Technology, Design and Engineering Education (Vol. II, pp. 102–117). Brisbane: Griffith Institute for Educational Research.
Sanders, M. E., & Wells, J. G. (2006). Integrative STEM education. Retrieved January 8, 2013, from http://www.soe.vt.edu/istemed/
Shavinina, L. V. (Ed.). (2013). Handbook on innovation education. New York: Routledge.
Williams, P. J. (2002). Processes of science and technology: A rationale for cooperation or separation. In I. Mottier & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), Proceedings of PATT12. Technology education in the curriculum: Relationships with other subjects (pp. 33–50). Accessed June 12, 2013, from http://www.iteea.org/Conference/PATT/PATT12/PATT12.pdf
Young, M. (2010). Alternative educational futures for a knowledge society. European Educational Research Journal, 9(1), 1–13.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Buntting, C., Jones, A. (2015). The Alignment of Technology with Other School Subjects. In: Williams, P., Jones, A., Buntting, C. (eds) The Future of Technology Education. Contemporary Issues in Technology Education. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-170-1_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-170-1_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-287-169-5
Online ISBN: 978-981-287-170-1
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)