Towards a three-part heuristic framework for technology education

Author:

Nordlöf CharlottaORCID,Norström PerORCID,Höst GunnarORCID,Hallström JonasORCID

Abstract

AbstractThere is not one single global version of technology education; curricula and standards have different forms and content. This sometimes leads to difficulties in discussing and comparing technology education internationally. Existing philosophical frameworks of technological knowledge have not been used to any great extent in technology education. In response, the aim of this article is to construct a heuristic framework for technology education, based on professional and academic technological knowledge traditions. We present this framework as an epistemological tripod of technology education with mutually supporting legs. We discuss how this tripod relates to a selection of epistemological views within the philosophy of technology. Furthermore, we apply the framework to the Swedish and English technology curricula, to demonstrate its utility as an analytic tool when discerning differences between national curricula. Each leg of the tripod represents one category of technological knowledge: (1) technical skills, (2) technological scientific knowledge and (3) socio-ethical technical understanding. The heuristic framework is a conceptual model intended for use in discussing, describing, and comparing curriculum components and technology education in general, and potentially also as support for planning and conducting technology teaching. It may facilitate common understanding of technology education between different countries and technology education traditions. Furthermore, it is a potentially powerful tool for concretising the components of technological literacy.

Funder

Linköping University

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

General Engineering,Education

Reference52 articles.

1. Ankiewicz, P., De Swardt, E., & de Vries, M. (2006). Some implications of the philosophy of technology for science, technology and society (STS) studies. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 16(2), 117–141.

2. Ankiewicz, P. (2013). The alignment of the caps for technology in the senior phase with the philosophy of technology: A critical analysis. In Conference proceedings of the international conference on mathematics, science and technology education (ISTE): “Towards effective teaching and meaningful learning in mathematics, science and technology”. Mopani camp, Kruger National Park (pp. 327–336).

3. Ankiewicz, P. (2015). The implications of the philosophy of technology for the academic majors of technology student teachers. In Conference proceedings of the Pupils’ Attitudes towards Technology (PATT) 29th international conference, Marseille, France, 7–10 April, 2015 (pp. 13–25).

4. Bzdak, D. (2008). On amnesia and knowing-how. Techné, 11(1), 36–47.

5. Chesky, N. Z., & Wolfmeyer, M. R. (2015). Philosophy of STEM education: A critical investigation. . London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Cited by 7 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3