Research Challenges for the Future

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


Starting with a brief review of research in technology education, this chapter goes on to propose research that continues to be needed in the context of technology education, a school subject that continues to have uncertain status and a problematic image. While remarkable progress has been made in technology education research over a relatively short period of time, significant work remains. First, research questions and research findings need to connect more closely with teachers. An important possibility here is involving teachers more closely in the research. Second, targeted policy-oriented research is needed and policy makers need to be recognised as an important audience for future technology education research. Third, more sophisticated research is needed on how to better support students’ technology learning. For this, a design-based methodology may be particularly fruitful. The extent to which researchers are able to realise closer links between their work and educational practice, and enhance their understanding of policy processes, will likely significantly impact the future of technology education.


Science Education Teacher Education Educational Research Pedagogical Content Knowledge Technology Education 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Broekkamp, H., & van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M. (2007). The gap between educational research and practice: A literature review. Educational Research and Evaluation, 13, 303–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Custer, R. L., Daugherty, J. L., & Meyer, J. P. (2010). Formulating a concept base for secondary level engineering: A review and synthesis. Journal of Technology Education, 22(1), 4–21.Google Scholar
  3. de Vries, M. J. (2003). Editorial. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 13, 199–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Foster, W. T. (1992). Topics and methods of recent graduate student research in Industrial Education and related fields. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 30(1), 59–72.Google Scholar
  5. Garmire, E., & Pearson, G. (2006). Tech tally. Approaches to assessing technological literacy. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  6. Jones, A., & de Vries, M. J. (Eds.). (2009). International handbook of research and development in technology education. Rotterdam/Taipei: Sense.Google Scholar
  7. Katehi, L., Pearson, G., & Feder, M. (2009). Engineering in K–12 education: Understanding the status and improving the prospects. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  8. Kimbell, R., & Stables, K. (2007). Researching design learning. Issues and findings from two decades of research and development. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  9. Petrina, S. (1998). The politics of research in technology education: A critical content and discourse analysis of the Journal of Technology Education, Volumes 1-8. Journal of Technology Education, 10, 27–57.Google Scholar
  10. Rehbein, F., Kleimann, M., & Mößle, T. (2010). Prevalence and risk factors of video game dependency in adolescence: Results of a German nationwide survey. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 13, 269–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Rossouw, A., Hacker, M., & de Vries, M. J. (2011). Concepts and contexts in engineering and technology education: An international and interdisciplinary Delphi study. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 4, 409–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Sjøberg, S., & Schreiner, C. (2010). The ROSE project: An overview and key findings. Oslo: University of Oslo.Google Scholar
  13. Skogh, I.-B., & Gumaelius, L. (2012). Technology teachers as researchers: The TUFF experience. In H. Middleton (Ed.), Explorations of best practice in Technology, Design & Engineering Education (Vol. 2, pp. 118–127). Brisbane: Griffith Institute for Educational Research.Google Scholar
  14. The Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32, 5–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Torrence, E. P. (1972). Can we teach children to think creatively. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 6, 114–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Wicklein, R., & Hill, R. B. (1996). Navigating the straits with research or opinion? Setting the course for technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 6, 31–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Williams, P. J., & Lockley, J. (2012, July). An analysis of PCK to elaborate the difference between scientific and technological knowledge. Paper presented at the Pupils Attitude Toward Technology (PATT) 26 Conference: Technology Education for the 21st Century. Stockholm.Google Scholar
  18. 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, 203–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Delft University of TechnologyDelftNetherlands
  2. 2.Eindhoven University of TechnologyEindhovenNetherlands

Personalised recommendations