Weitere Artikel dieser Ausgabe durch Wischen aufrufen
The teacher plays an important role in the Technology and Design (T&D) classroom in terms of guiding students in their design process. By using concepts developed within engineering philosophy along with a framework for teacher–student interactions the design process in a T&D classroom is classified. The material shows that four of six predefined categories of design knowledge and three of seven predefined classes of activity are present in the material. Findings suggest that two categories of design knowledge, fundamental design concepts and practical considerations, are particularly significant in the students’ work. The teacher’s influence with respect to particularly the first of these categories is crucial for the students’ design process. Direct trial is found as the students’ dominating activity for solving the technological challenges. The results indicate that it is beneficial for students to be introduced to an operational principle before they can be innovative and develop their own design configuration when they establish their fundamental design concept. Curriculum developers, designers of teaching materials as well as teachers should take into account the students’ need of sufficient time to explore their design configuration.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Arthur, W. B. (2009). The nature of technology: What it is and how it evolves. New York: Free Press.
Barak, M., & Zadok, Y. (2009). Robotics projects and learning concepts in science, technology and problem solving. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 19(3), 289–307. CrossRef
Barlex, D., & Welch, M. (2001). Educational research and curriculum development: The case for synergy. The Journal of Design and Technology Education, 6(1), 29–36.
Bräuning, K., & Steinbring, H. (2011). Communicative characteristics of teachers’ mathematical talk with children: From knowledge transfer to knowledge investigation. ZDM, 43(6), 927–939. CrossRef
Brown, J., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32. CrossRef
Bungum, B. (2006a). Teknologi og design i nye læreplaner i Norge: Hvilken vinkling har fagområdet fått i naturfagplanen? NorDiNa, 2(4), 28–39.
Bungum, B. (2006b). Transferring and transforming technology education: A study of Norwegian teachers’ perceptions of ideas from design & technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 16(1), 31–52. CrossRef
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hill, A. M. (1998). Problem solving in real-life contexts: An alternative for design in technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 8(3), 203–220. CrossRef
Hill, A. M., & Anning, A. (2001). Comparisons and contrasts between elementary/primary ‘school situated design’ and ‘workplace design’ in Canada and England. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 11(2), 111–136. CrossRef
Johnsey, R. (1995). The design process—Does it exist? A critical review of published models for the design process in England and Wales. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 5(3), 199–217. CrossRef
Jones, A., Buntting, C., & de Vries, M. (2011). The developing field of technology education: A review to look forward. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 1–22.
Kimbell, R. (1997). Assessing technology: International trends in curriculum and assessment: UK, Germany, USA, Taiwan, Australia. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Layton, D. (1991). Science education and praxis: The relationship of school science to practical action. Studies in Science Education, 19(1), 43–79. CrossRef
Layton, D. (1994). Constructing and reconstructing school technology in England and Wales. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 5(2), 89–118. CrossRef
Mawson, B. (2003). Beyond ‘the design process’: An alternative pedagogy for technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 13(2), 117–128. CrossRef
Mawson, B. (2007). Designers as teachers and learners: Transferring workplace design practice into educational settings. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 17(2), 163–177. CrossRef
McCormick, R. (1997). Conceptual and procedural knowledge. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 7(1–2), 141–159. CrossRef
McCormick, R. (2004). Issues of learning and knowledge in technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 14(1), 21–44. CrossRef
Mitcham, C. (1994). Thinking through technology: The path between engineering and philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Murphy, P., & McCormick, R. (1997). Problem solving in science and technology education. Research in Science Education, 27(3), 461–481. CrossRef
Polanyi, M. (1967). The tacit dimension. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
Rauscher, W. (2011). The technological knowledge used by technology education students in capability tasks. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 21(3), 291–305. CrossRef
Roberts, P., & Norman, E. (1999). Models of design and technology and their significance for research and curriculum development. The Journal of design and Technology Education, 4(2), 124–131.
Ropohl, G. (1997). Knowledge types in technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 7(1), 65–72. CrossRef
Rossouw, A., Hacker, M., & de Vries, M. (2011). Concepts and contexts in engineering and technology education: An international and interdisciplinary Delphi study. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 21(4), 409–424. CrossRef
Staudenmaier, J. (1985). Technology’s storytellers: Reweaving the human fabric. Cambridge, MA: Society for the History of Technology and the MIT Press.
Tiles, M., & Oberdiek, H. (1995). Living in a technological culture: Human tools and human values. London: Routledge.
Utdanningsdirektoratet. (2006). Curricula for subjects in primary and secondary school. Oslo: Utdanningsdirektoratet. Available from http://www.udir.no.
Vèrillon, 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). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Vincenti, W. G. (1990). What engineers know and how they know it: Analytical studies from aeronautical history. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
- Design knowledge and teacher–student interactions in an inventive construction task
- Springer Netherlands
International Journal of Technology and Design Education
Print ISSN: 0957-7572
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-1804
Neuer Inhalt, AVL List GmbH/© AVL List GmbH, dSpace, BorgWarner, Neuer Inhalt, Neuer Inhalt, Smalley, Valeo Logo/© Valeo, FEV