Advertisement

Theorising Technology Education from a Cultural-Historical Perspective: Foundations and Future Imaginings

Chapter
  • 2.1k Downloads
Part of the Contemporary Issues in Technology Education book series (CITE)

Abstract

In this chapter, three interrelated concepts drawn from cultural-historical theory are interrogated to develop a futures orientation to technology education. They are: tools and signs as cultural practice, everyday concepts and technological concepts in technology education, and imagination and creativity in design and technology education. Bringing these together in technology education offers a way for students and teachers to together consider the way the cultural and historical (and future) ecology of societies is realised through the knowledge base and values-oriented activity of design and technology, and to understand that technological activity is embedded in a deep knowledge of self and community. As such, technology education has both an ethical and moral responsibility to support imaginings that sustain people and communities in harmony and for the well being of the broader ecological and social environment.

Keywords

Technology Education Technological Knowledge Technological Activity Future Orientation Mind Equation 
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.

References

  1. Bjorklund, L. (2008). The repertory grid technique. Making tacit knowledge explicit: Assessing creative work and problems solving skills. In H. Middleton (Ed.), Researching technology education. Methods and techniques (pp. 46–69). Dordrecht: Sense.Google Scholar
  2. Compton, V., Compton, A., & Patterson, M. (2012). Student understanding of the relationship between fit for purpose and good design: Does it matter for technological literacy? In H. Middleton (Ed.), Explorations of best practice in technology, design and engineering education (Vol. 1). Proceedings of the 7th Biennial International Technology Education Research Conference (pp. 68–78). Brisbane: Griffith Institute for Educational Research, Griffith University.Google Scholar
  3. Dakers, J. R. (Ed.). (2006). Defining technological literacy. Towards an epistemological framework. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
  4. De Vries, M. J. (2005). Teaching about technology. An introduction to the philosophy of technology for non-philosophers. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  5. De Vries, M. J. (2006). Technological knowledge and artifacts: An analytical view. In J. R. Dakers (Ed.), Defining technological literacy. Towards an epistemological framework (pp. 17–30). New York: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
  6. De Vries, M. J., & Tamir, A. (Eds.). (1997). Shaping concepts of technology: From philosophical perspectives to mental images. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  7. González, N., Andrade, R., Civil, M., & Moll, L. (2005a). Funds of distributed knowledge. In N. González, L. Moll, & C. Amanti (Eds.), Funds of knowledge. Theorizing practices in households, communities, and classrooms (pp. 257–271). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  8. González, N., Moll, L., & Amanti, C. (Eds.). (2005b). Funds of knowledge. Theorizing practices in households, communities, and classrooms. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  9. Hakkarainen, K. (2009). A knowledge-practice perspective on technology-mediated learning. Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 4, 213–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hammond, L. A. (2003). Building houses, building lives. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 10(1), 26–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Harper, D. (1987). Working knowledge. Skill and community in a small shop. Chicago: The University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  12. Hedegaard, M. (2002). Learning and child development: A cultural–historical study. Aarhus: Aarhus University.Google Scholar
  13. Ilyenkov, E. V. (2003). The ideal in human activity. A selection of essays by Evald Vasilyevich Ilyenkov. Pacifica: Marxist Internet Archives.Google Scholar
  14. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lemke, J. L. (2000). Across the scales of time: Artifacts, activities, and meanings in ecosocial systems. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 7(4), 273–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Leonard, M. J., & Derry, S. J. (2011). What’s the science behind it? The interaction of engineering and science goals, knowledge, and practice in a design-based science activity (Working paper No. 2011–5). Retrieved from University of Wisconsin–Madison, Wisconsin Center for Education Research website: http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/publications/workingPapers/papers.php
  17. Leontiev, A. N. (2005). Lecture 13. Language and consciousness. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 43(5), 5–13. (Lecture was given on 20th December 1973, Moscow University)Google Scholar
  18. Loy, J., & Canning, S. (2012). Changing the emphasis of the learning through making in technology education. In H. Middleton (Ed.), Explorations of best practice in technology, design and engineering education (Vol. 2). Proceedings of the 7th Biennial International Technology Education Research Conference (pp. 19–24). Brisbane: Griffith Institute for Educational Research, Griffith University.Google Scholar
  19. McCormick, R. (2006). Technology and knowledge: Contributions from learning theories. In J. R. Dakers (Ed.), Defining technological literacy. Towards an epistemological framework (pp. 31–47). New York: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
  20. Moll, L. C., & Greenberg, J. B. (1990). Creating zones of possibilities: Combining social contexts for instruction. In L. C. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and education: Instructional implications and applications of sociohistorical psychology (pp. 319–348). Cambridge: Cambridge University.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Moll, L., Amanti, C., Neff, C., & González, N. (2005). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. In N. González, L. Moll, & C. Amanti (Eds.), Funds of knowledge. Theorizing practices in households, communities, and classrooms (pp. 71–87). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  22. Pavlova, M. (2012). Generic green skills: Can they be addressed through technology? In H. Middleton (Ed.), Explorations of best practice in technology, design and engineering education (Vol. 2). Proceedings of the 7th Biennial international technology education research conference (pp. 49–57). Brisbane: Griffith Institute for Educational Research, Griffith University.Google Scholar
  23. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University.Google Scholar
  24. Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. New York: Oxford University.Google Scholar
  25. Rogoff, B. (2011). Developing destinies. A Mayan midwife and town. Oxford: Oxford University.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rogoff, B. (2013). Intent community participation. Retrieved from www.intentcommunityparticipation.net
  27. Stetsenko, A., & Arievitch, I. M. (2010). Cultural-historical activity theory. Foundational worldview, major principles, and the relevance of sociocultural context. In S. R. Kirschner & J. Martin (Eds.), The sociocultural turning psychology. The contextual emergence of mind and self (pp. 231–252). New York: Cambridge University.Google Scholar
  28. Stetsenko, A., & Vianna, E. (2009). Bridging developmental theory and educational practice. Lessons from the Vygotskian project. In O. A. Barbarin & B. H. Wasik (Eds.), Handbook of child development and early education. Research to practice (pp. 38–54). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  29. Stevenson, J. (2008). Capturing knowledge and activity. In H. Middleton (Ed.), Researching technology education. Methods and techniques (pp. 155–171). Dordrecht: Sense.Google Scholar
  30. Verillon, P. (2009). Tools and concepts in technological development. In A. Jones & M. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 175–197). Dordrecht: Sense.Google Scholar
  31. Vygotsky, L. S. (1930/1997). The problem of the cultural development of the child. In R. Van Der Veer & J. Valsiner (Eds.), The Vygotsky reader (pp. 57–72). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  32. Vygotsky, L. S. (1930/2004). Imagination and creativity in childhood. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 42(1), 7–97.Google Scholar
  33. Vygotsky, L. S. (1931/1997). The history of the development of higher mental functions. In L. S. Vygotsky & R. W. Rieber (Eds.), The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky, Vol. 4 (M. H Hall, Trans.). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  34. Vygotsky, L. S. (1934/1987). Problems of general psychology. In R. W. Rieber & A. S. Carton (Eds.), The collected work of L.S. Vygotsky, Vol. 1 (J. E. Knox & C. B. Stevens, Trans.). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  35. Vygotsky, L. S. & Luria, A. (1930/1994). Tool and symbol in child development. In R. Van Der Veer & J. Valsiner (Eds.), The Vygotsky reader (pp. 99–174). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  36. Williams, P. J. (2012). Technology teachers PCK: The need for a conceptual revision. In H. Middleton (Ed.), Explorations of best practice in technology, design and engineering education (Vol. 2). Proceedings of the 7th Biennial International Technology Education Research Conference (pp. 165–179). Griffith Institute for Educational Research, Griffith University.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Early Childhood EducationMonash UniversityMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations