Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

The Future of Technology Education pp 99–120Cite as

Conversations to Support Learning in Technology Education

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

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

Abstract

This chapter argues for the crucial place of conversation in technology education, using sociocultural theory to propose that talk plays a significant role in cognitive development through group interactions and collaborative learning. Three major and interrelated themes in technology education conversations are introduced: deployment, conduit and knowledge. Notions of ‘inquiry’ and ‘21st Century’ learning place the student at the centre of the process, and when implemented together with informed understandings of the importance and nature of conversation, facilitate deep learning. The significance of the funds of knowledge that students bring to the classroom from home and community is also highlighted.

This is a preview of subscription content, 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   99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   129.99
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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alexander, R. (2008). Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk (4th ed.). Cambridge: Dialogos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barlex, D. (2006). Pedagogy to promote reflection and understanding in school technology courses. In J. Dakers (Ed.), Defining technological literacy—Towards an epistemological framework (pp. 179–196). New York: Palgrave MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box—Raising standards through classroom assessment (1st ed.). London: King’s College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blythe, T. (1998). The teaching for understanding guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, D., & Thompson, T. (2000). Cooperative learning in New Zealand schools. Palmerston North: Dunmore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, S. (2005). Formative assessment in action: Weaving the elements together. Oxon: Hodder Murray.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, S. (2008). Active learning through formative assessment. London: Hodder Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Claxton, G. (2007). Expanding young people’s capacity to learn. British Journal of Educational Studies, 55(2), 115–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Compton, V. (2011). Technology in the primary sector in New Zealand: Reviewing the past twenty years. In C. Benson & J. Lund (Eds.), International handbook of primary technology education (Vol. 7, pp. 29–38). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Daniels, H. (1996). An introduction to Vygotsky. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darling-Hammond, L. (2008). Powerful learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, R., Mahar, C., & Noddings, N. (Eds.). (1990). Constructivist views on the teaching and learning of mathematics. Reston: National Council for Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doise, W., & Mugny, G. (1984). The social development of intellect. Oxford: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleer, M. (1995). Staff-child interactions—A Vygotskian perspective. Canberra: Australian Early Childhood Association Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleer, M., & Jane, B. (1999). Technology for children: Developing your own approach. Erskineville: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleer, M., & Quiňones, G. (2009). Assessment of children’s technological funds of knowledge as embedded community practices. In A. Jones & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 477–491). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox-Turnbull, W. (2012). Learning in technology. In P. J. Williams (Ed.), Technology education for teachers (pp. 55–92). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fox-Turnbull, W. (2013). Themes of conversation in technology education. Paper presented at the International Technology and Engineering Educators’ Association Conference, Columbus, OH.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. (2005). Catching the knowledge wave? The knowledge society and the future of education. Wellington: NZCER.

    Google Scholar 

  • González, N., Moll, L. C., & Amanti, C. (Eds.). (2005). Funds of knowledge. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, C. (2009). Assessment for learning. In A. Jones & M. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 449–459). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hennessy, S., & Murphy, P. (1999). The potential for collaborative problem solving in design and technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 9(1), 1–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kreber, C., Klampfleitner, M., McCune, V., Bayne, S., & Knottenbelt, M. (2007). What do you mean by “authentic”? A comparative review of the literature on conceptions of authenticity in teaching. Adult Education Quarterly, American Association for Adult and Continuing Education, 58(1), 22–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhlthau, C., Maniotes, K., & Caspari, A. (2007). Guided inquiry: Learning in the 21st century. Westport: Libraries Unlimited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1996). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lopez, J. K. (2010). Funds of knowledge. Learn NC. Retrieved from www.learnnc.org

  • Mercer, N. (2006). Words & minds: How we use language to think together. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mercer, N., & Dawes, L. (2008). The value of exploratory talk. In N. Mercer & S. Hodgkinson (Eds.), Exploring talk in school (pp. 55–71). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mercer, N., & Littleton, K. (2007). Dialogue and the development of children’s thinking—A sociocultural approach. Oxon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education. (2007). The New Zealand curriculum. Wellington: Learning Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreland, J., & Cowie, B. (2007). Teaching approaches. In M. de Vries, R. Custer, J. Dakers, & G. Martin (Eds.), Analyzing best practices in technology education (pp. 213–219). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murdoch, K. (2004). Classroom connections—Strategies for integrated learning. South Yarra: Eleanor Curtain.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murdoch, K., & Hornsby, D. (2003). Planning curriculum connections. Whole school planning for integrated curriculum. South Yarra: Eleanor Curtain.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, P., & Hall, K. (2008). Learning and practice: Agency and identities. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newmann, F. M., & Wehlage, G. G. (1993). Educational leadership: Five standards of authentic instruction. Educational Leadership, 50(7), 8–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2009). A framework for 21st century skills. Accessed 1 Feb 2014 from www.p21.org

  • Petraglia, J. (1998). The [mis]application of constructivism to the design of educational technology. The real world on a short leash. Journal of Educational Research and Development, 46(3), 53–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reeves, T., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2002). Authentic activities and online learning. In A. Goody, J. Herrington, & M. Northcote (Eds.), Quality conversations: Research and development in higher education (Vol. 25, pp. 562–567). Jamison: HERDSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Resnick, L. B., Levine, J. M., & Teasley, S. D. (Eds.). (1991). Perspectives on social shared cognition. Washington: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, K. (1998). Models of cognitive development. Hove: Psychology Press Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riggs, E. G., & Gholar, C. R. (2009). Strategies that promote students engagement (2nd ed.). California: Corwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogoff, B., & Lave, J. (1999). Everyday cognition: Its development in social context. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, P. (2008). Talking a way to understanding in science classrooms. In N. Mercer & S. Hodgkinson (Eds.), Exploring talk in school: Inspired by the work of Douglas Barnes (pp. 17–36). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siraj-Blatchford, J. (1997). Learning technology, science and social justice: An integrated approach for 3–13 year olds. Nottingham: Education Now.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slavkin, M. L. (2004). Authentic learning: How learning about the brain can shape the development of students. Maryland: Scarecrow Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. B. (1998). Understanding children’s development (4th ed.). Wellington: Bridget Williams Books Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snape, P., & Fox-Turnbull, W. (2011a). Perspectives of authenticity: Implementation in technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23(1), 51–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snape, P., & Fox-Turnbull, W. (2011b). Twenty-first century learning and technology education nexus. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 34, 149–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tessmer, M., & Richey, R. C. (1996). The role of the context of learning and instructional design. Journal of Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(2), 85–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wertsch, J. (Ed.). (1981). General genetic law of cultural development. Armonk: Sharp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wertsch, J. (1998). Mind as action: The task of sociocultural analysis. New York: Oxford University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wertsch, J., Del Rio, P., & Alverez, A. (Eds.). (1995). Sociocultural studies of the mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wertsch, J., Minick, N., & Arns, F. (Eds.). (1999). The creation of context in joint problem-solving. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand

    Wendy Fox-Turnbull

Authors
  1. Wendy Fox-Turnbull
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wendy Fox-Turnbull .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Environmental, Mathematics and Science Education Research Centre, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand

    P John Williams

  2. University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand

    Alister Jones

  3. Faculty of Education, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand

    Cathy Buntting

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Fox-Turnbull, W. (2015). Conversations to Support Learning in Technology Education. 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_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation