You are here

Home » Content

‘STANDARDS’ ON THE BENCH: DO STANDARDS FOR TECHNOLOGICAL LITERACY RENDER AN ADEQUATE IMAGE OF TECHNOLOGY?

Journal Name:

  • Journal of Technology and Science Education

Publication Year:

  • 2016
DOI: 
http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jotse.207

Key Words:

Author NameUniversity of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
The technological literacy of students has recently become one of the primary goals of education in countries such as the USA, England, New Zealand, Australia, and so forth. However the question here is whether these educations – their long-term policy documents as well as the standards they provide in particular – address sufficient learning about the nature of technology. This seems to be an important concern that through taking advantage of the philosophy of technology (the arena which affords a bountiful ground of various reflections on the nature of technology) is intended to be discussed throughout this study. In the first place, the paper presents a relevant framework based upon Mitcham’s (1994) four-aspect account of technology, i.e., technology as objects, knowledge, activities, and volition. Then it categorizes the main relevant concepts and concerns put forward by many other philosophers of technology into this framework; this will yield a concrete model (tool) to analyze any intended standard such as the above mentioned ones. Afterwards, to show how this model works, the well-known case of the USA – Standards for Technological Literacy (ITEA, 2007) – will be used as an example for inspection; the results will disclose the points where the current American case needs to be modified.
Bookmark/Search this post with
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-standards-bench-do-standards-technological-literacy-render-adequate-image-technology.pdf
  • 1
5
18
  • English

REFERENCES

References: 

Australian Education Council (1994). A statement on technology for Australian schools, a joint project of the
states, territories and the commonwealth of Australia initiated by the Australian Education Council. Victoria:
Curriculum Corporation.
Boon, M., & Knuuttila, T. (2009). Models as epistemic tools in engineering sciences. Philosophy of technology
and engineering sciences (pp. 693-726). Oxford: Elsevier B.V. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-51667-1.50030-6
Compton, V. (2007). The role of technology education in supporting a democratic literacy. In Keynote
presentation published in conference proceedings of Technology Education New Zealand, 6th biennial
conference (pp. 8-14). Auckland, New Zealand: TENZ.
Dakers, J. (2005). Technology education as solo activity or socially constructed learning. International Journal of
Technology and Design Education, 15, 73-89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10798-004-6196-1
De Vries, M.J. (1997). Science, technology and society: A methodological perspective. International Journal of
Technology and Design Education, 7, 21-32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1008821322208
De Vries, M.J. (2000). Technology education: Towards a new school subject. In B. Moon, S. Brown, & M. Ben-
Peretz (Eds.), The Routledge international companion to education (pp. 910-920). London: Routledge.
De Vries, M.J. (2005a). Teaching about technology: An introduction to the philosophy of technology for nonphilosophers.
Dordrecht: Springer.
De Vries, M.J. (2005b). The nature of technological knowledge: Philosophical reflections and educational
consequences. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 15, 149-154.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10798-005-8276-2
De Vries, M.J. (2006). Two decades of technology education in retrospect. In M.J. De Vries, & I. Mottier (Eds.),
International handbook of technology education. Reviewing the past twenty years (pp. 3-10). Rotterdam: Sense
Publishers.
De Vries, M.J. (2013). Modeling in technology and engineering education. In P.J. Williams, & D. Gedera (Eds.),
Technology education for the future: A play on sustainability. Proceedings of the PATT27 conference (pp 122-
127). Hamilton: Technology Environmental Science and Mathematics Education Research Centre, University of
Waikato.De Vries, M.J. & Tamir, A. (1997). Shaping concepts of technology: What concepts and how to shape them.
International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 7, 3-10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1008869205370
Department of Education of South Africa. (2002). Revised national curriculum statement grades R-9 (schools);
technology. Pretoria, South Africa.
Department of Education of the UK (2013). National curriculum in England: Design and technology programmes
of study Design and technology. Available online at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-inengland-
design-and-technology-programmes-of-study
Dusek, V. (2006). Philosophy of technology: An introduction. MA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Franssen, M. (2009). Artifacts and normativity. Philosophy of technology and engineering sciences
(pp. 923-952). Amsterdam: Elsevier B.V. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-51667-1.50038-0
Frederik, I., Sonneveld, W., & De Vries, M.J. (2011). Teaching and learning the nature of technical artifacts.
International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 21, 277-290. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10798-010-9119-3
Head, G. & Dakers, J. (2005). Vérillon’s trio and Wenger’s community: Learning in technology education.
International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 15, 33-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10798-004-6194-3
ITEA (2007). Standards for technological literacy: Contents for the study of technology. Reston, USA.
Jones, A., Buntting, C., & De Vries, M.J. (2013). The developing field of technology education: A review to look
forward. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23, 191-212. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10798-
011-9174-4
Kaplan, D.M. (2004). Readings in the philosophy of technology. Lanham: Rowman& Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
Meijers, A. (2009). Philosophy of technology and engineering sciences. Amsterdam: Elsevier B.V.
Ministry of Education of New Zealand (2007). The New Zealand curriculum. Wellington, New Zealand.
Ministry of Education of New Zealand (2010). Technology curriculum support. Wellington, New Zealand.
Mitcham, C. (1994). Thinking through technology. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Mitcham, C. (2001). Philosophizing about technology: Why should we bother?. Available online at:
http://ethix.org/2001/06/01/philosophizing-about-technology-why-should-w...
National Academy of Engineering, National Research Council, Pearson, G., & Young, A. (2002). Technically
speaking: Why all Americans need to know more about technology. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
Olsen, J.K.B., Pedersen, S.A., & Hendricks, V.F. (2009). A companion to the philosophy of technology. Chichester:
Blackwell Publishing Ltd. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781444310795
Olsen, J.K.B, Selinger, E., & Riis, S. (2009). New waves in philosophy of technology. Basingstoke: Macmillan
Publishers Ltd.
Rossouw, A., Hacker, M., & De Vries, M.J. (2010). Concepts and contexts in engineering and technology
education: An international and interdisciplinary Delphi study. International Journal of Technology and Design
Education, 21, 409-424. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10798-010-9129-1
Vermaas, P., Kroes, P., Van De Poel, I., Franssen, M., & Houkes, W. (2011). A philosophy of technology. Milton
Keynes: Morgan & Claypool Publishers.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com