Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
International Journal of Technology and Design Education
Erschienen in: International Journal of Technology and Design Education 1/2017

29.09.2015

Mediation of artefacts, tools and technical objects: an international and french perspective

verfasst von: Maria Antonietta Impedovo, Colette Andreucci, Jacques Ginestié

Erschienen in: International Journal of Technology and Design Education | Ausgabe 1/2017

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

In this article we present a review of literature on the concept of Artefact, Tool and Technical Object in the light of in sociocultural approach. Particular attention is given to present and discuss the French research tradition on the Technical Object and Technological education. The aim is to give a broad perspective to explore the mediation between the individual and their environment.
Vorheriger Artikel Perception by French students of the gendered nature of material artifacts studied in technology education
Nächster Artikel How do different background variables predict learning outcomes?

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Literatur
Akrich, M. (1992). The description of technological objects. In W. Bijker & J. Law (Eds.), Shaping technology/building society (pp. 205–224). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Andreucci, C. (2007). La polysémie du concept d’espace occupé: Les différents sens du concept de volume selon la nature technique ou physico-mathématiques des objets concernés. (Eng. Trad: The multiple meanings of the concept of space occupied: the different meanings of the volume of concept technical or physical-mathematical nature of the objects concerned). In Regards croisés franco-helléniques sur l’éducation scientifique et technologique à l’école obligatoire (pp. 21–30) Skholê, n° hors série.
Andreucci, C., & Roux, J. P. (1992). Savoir comparer les contenances pour pouvoir conserver les quantités contenues. (Eng. Tras: Can compare capacities in order to keep the amounts contained). Enfance, 46(1–2), 79–98.CrossRef
Andreucci, C., & Ginestié, J. (2002). Un premier aperçu sur l’extension du concept d’objet technique chez les collégiens (Eng. Trad: A first overview of the extension of the technical object concept among college students). INRP, Lyon (FRA).
Andreucci, C., Chatoney, M., & Ginestié, J. (2012). The systemic approach to technological education: Effects of transferred learning in resolving a physics problem. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 22(3), 281–296.CrossRef
Ankiewicz, P. (2015). The implications of the philosophy of technology for the academic majors of technology student teachers. PATT 29 conference proceedings (pp. 13–29). Marseille: Presses Universitaires de Provence.
Ardies, De Maeyer, & van Keulen, (2015). Students attitudes towards technology. International Journal Technology Design Education, 25, 43–65.CrossRef
Barry, D., & Meisiek, S. (2010). Seeing more and seeing differently: Sense making. Mindfulness and the Workarts. Organization Studies, 31(11), 1505–1530.CrossRef
Béguin, P., & Rabardel, P. (2000). Designing for instrument-mediated activity. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 12, 173–190.
Bereiter, C. (2002). Artifacts, canons, and the progress of pedagogy: A response. In B. Smith (Ed.), Liberal education in a knowledge society. Chicago: Open Court.
Boeasch, E. (1997). The sound of the violin. In M. Cole, Y. Engeström, & O. Vasquez (Eds.), Mind, culture and activity: Seminal papers from the laboratory of comparative human cognition (pp. 164–184). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Boilevin, J. M. (2007). Séquences d’investigation: enjeux et repères. In L. Morge et J. M. Boilevin (dir.), Séquences d’investigation en physique-chimie. Collège, Lycée. Clermont-Ferrand: CRDP d’Auvergne, pp. 13–26.
Bonnardel, N. (2009). Activités de conception et créativité: de l’analyse des facteurs cognitifs à l’assistance aux activités de conception créatives. Le travail humain, 1(72), 5–22.CrossRef
Borillo, M., & Goulette, J. P. (2002). Cognition et création. Explorations cognitives des processus de conception. Sprimont: Mardaga.
Brey, P. (2010). Philosophy of technology after the empirical turn. Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology, 14(1), 36–48.
Carlile, P. (2004). Transferring, translating, and transforming: An integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries. Organization Science, 15(5), 555–568.CrossRef
Cazenobe, J. (1987). Esquisse d’une conception opératoire de l’objet technique. Techniques et culture, 10, 61–80.
Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Compton, V., & Jones, A. (1998). Reflecting on teacher development in technology education: Implications for future programs. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 8(2), 151–166.CrossRef
De Vries, M. J. (2005). The nature of technological knowledge: Philosophical reflections and educational. Consequences. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 15, 149–154.CrossRef
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. 3–11). Rotterdam/Taipei: Sense Publishers.
Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1994). What is philosophy? Trans. Hugh Tomlinson and Graham Burchell. New York: Columbia University Press.
Dewey, J. (1934). Art as experience. New York: Putnam Capricorn Books.
DiGironimo, N. (2011). What is technology? Investigating student conceptions about the nature of technology. International Journal of Science Education, 33(10), 1337–1352.CrossRef
Dugger, W. (2000). Standards for technological literacy: Content for the study of technology. Technology Teacher, 59(5), 8–13.
Dusek, V. (2007). Philosophy of technology: An introduction. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding an activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
Engeström, S. (2013). The different faces of staging a technology lessen and a science lesson. In P. John Williams (Ed.), Technology education for the future: A play on sustainability. In Patt 27 conference proceedings, (pp. 160–165). Christchurch, NZ: University of Waikato.
Engeström, Y., & Blackler, F. (2005). On the life of the object. Organization, 12, 307–330.CrossRef
Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2010). Studies of expansive learning: Foundations, findings and future challenges. Educational Research Review, 5(1), 1–24.CrossRef
Evans, A. M., & Wilkins, J. (2011). Social interactions and instructional artifact: Emergent socio-technical affordances and constraints for children’s geometry thinking. Educational Computing Research, 44(2), 141–171.CrossRef
Feinstein, N. (2010). Salvaging science literacy. Science Education, 95(1), 168–185.CrossRef
Findeli, A. (1994). Ethics, aesthetics, and design. Design Issues, 10(2), 49–68.CrossRef
Flick, U. (1992). Le sujet face à la technique. Le travail humain, pp. 313–327. Paris: P.U.F.
Fourez, G. (1994). Alphabétisation scientifique et technique. Essai sur les finalités de l’enseignement des sciences. Bruxelles: De Boeck-Wesmael.
Gillespie, A., & Zittoun, T. (2010). Using resources: Conceptualizing the mediation and reflective use of tools and signs. Culture & Psychology, 16(1), 37–62.CrossRef
Ginestié, J. (2001). Technology education in French primary school: Which direction for which goals? In C. Benson (Ed.), Third international primary design and Technology conference: quality in the making (pp. 70–74). Birmingham: CRIPT-UCE editions.
Ginestié, J. (2011). How pupils solve problems in technology education and what they learn. In M. Barak & M. Hacker (Eds.), Fostering human development through engineering and technology education (pp. 171–190). Rotterdam: Sense Publisher.CrossRef
Gumaelius, L, & Skogh, I. (2015). Work plans in technology. A study of technology education practice in Sweden. In PATT 29 conference proceedings, (pp. 188–194). Marseille: Presses Universitaires de Provence.
Haudricourt, A.-G. (1988). La Technologie science humaine : recherches d’histoire et d’ethnologie des techniques. Paris: Éditions de la Maison des sciences de l’Homme.
Holsapple, C. W., & Joshi, K. D. (2001). Organizational knowledge resources. Decision Support System, 31(1), 39–54.CrossRef
Hottois, G. (1977). L’inflation du langage dans la philosophie contemporaine. Thèse de doctorat, Bruxelles, Éditions de l’Université de Bruxelles.
Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Ihde, D. (1979). Technics and praxis. Boston: D. Reidel Publishing Company.
Ihde, D. (2003). If phenomenology is an Albatross, is post-phenomenology possible? In Don Ihde & Evan Selinger (Eds.), Chasing technoscience: Matrix for materiality (pp. 15–26). Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.
Impedovo, M. A., Andreucci, C., Delserieys-Pedregosa, A., Coiffard, C., & Ginestié, J. (2015). Technical objects between categorisation and learning: An exploratory case study in French middle school. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 20(2), 32–49. ISSN 1360-1431.
Ineke, F., Sonneveld, W., & de Vries, M. (2010). Teaching and learning the nature of technical artifacts. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 21, 277–290.
Janicaud, D. (1987). Des Techniques À la Techno-Science: L’Enjeu Philosophique. Questions Sur la Technique. Revue Internationale de Philosophie, 41(161), 184–196.
Johansson, L. (2009). Mathematics, science & technology education report. Brussel: European Round Table of Industrials.
Jones, A., Buntting, C., & de Vries, M. (2013). The developing field of technology education: A review to look forward. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23(2), 191–212.CrossRef
Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic Cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kroes, P. (2003). Physics, experiments, and the concept of nature. In H. Radder (Ed.), The philosophy of scientific experimentation. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Kuutti, K. (1996). Activity theory as a potential framework for human–computer interaction research. Context and Consciousness: Activity Theory and Human–Computer Interaction, 17–44.
Lagrange, J.-B. (2000). L’intégration d’instruments informatiques dans l’enseignement: une approche par les techniques. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 43, 1–30.CrossRef
Latour, B. (1991). Nous n’avons jamais été modernes. Essai d’anthropologie symétrique. Paris: Éditions de la Découverte.
Layton, D. (1994). Innovations in science and technology education (Vol. 5). Paris: UNESCO Editions.
Lebeaume, J. (2000). L’Éducation technologique - Histoires et Méthodes. Paris: ESF.
Lebeaume, J. (2011). Integration of science, technology, engineering and mathematics: Is this curricular revolution really possible in France? Design and Technology Education, 16(1), 47–52.
Lebeaume, J. (2015). Industrial technology and engineering sciences in France. The disciplinarization process and its impacts on technology education. PATT 2015, 7–12 April, Marseille.
Lubart, T. (2003). Psychologie de la créativité. Paris: Armand Colin.
Lucena, A. D. (2009). Thinking about technology, but…in Orega’s or in Heidegger’s style? Argumentos de Razón Técnica, 12, 99–123.
Martinez, J. F., Borko, H., & Stecher, B. M. (2012). Measuring instructional practice in science using classroom artifacts: Lessons learned from two validation studies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(1), 38–67.CrossRef
Mauss, M. (1948). Les techniques et la technologie. Journal de psychologie, n° spécial: Le travail et les techniques (dirigé par I. Meyerson et L. Febvre).
Miettinen, R., & Virkkunen, J. (2005). Epistemic objects. Artefacts and Organizational Change. Organization, 12(3), 437–456.
Mitcham, C. (1994). Thinking through technology. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Monod-Ansaldi, R., & Prieur, M. (2011). Démarches d’investigation dans l’enseignement secondaire : représentations des enseignants de mathématiques, SPC, SVT et technologie. Rapport d’enquête IFÉ - ENS de Lyon. Décembre.
Norman, D. A. (1993). Things that make us smart. London: Addison-Wesley.
Overdijk, M., & van Diggelen, W. (2008). Appropriation of a shared workspace: Organizing principles and their application. International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 3, 165–192.CrossRef
Paavola, S., Lipponen, L., & Hakkarainen, K. (2004). Modeling innovative knowledge communities: A knowledge-creation approach to learning. Review of Educational Research, 74, 557–576.CrossRef
Perrin, J. (2001). Conception, entre art et scienceRegards multiples sur la conception. Lausanne: PUR.
Pitt, J. (2000). Thinking about technology - Foundations of the philosophy of technology. New York: Seven Bridges Press.
Rabardel, P. (1995). Les hommes et les technologies - Approche cognitive des instruments contemporains. Paris: A. Colin.
Rabardel, P., & Samuçay, R. (2001). From artifact to instrumented-mediated learning, New challenges to research on learning. International symposium organized by the Center for Activity Theory and Developmental Work Research, University of Helsinki, March 21–23.
Ritz, J., & Martin, G. (2013). Research needs for technology education: An international perspective. International Journal Technology Design Education, 23, 767–783.CrossRef
Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research in science education (pp. 729–780). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Rychen, D. S., & Salganik, L. H. (2003). A holistic model of competence. In D. S. Rychen & L. H. Salganik (Eds.), Key competencies for a successful life and a wellfunctioning society (pp. 41–62). Cambridge, MA: Hogrefe & Huber Publisher.
Sannino, A. (2015). The principle of double stimulation: A path to volitional action. Learning, Culture, and Social Interaction, 6, 1–15.CrossRef
Schreiner, C., & Sjøberg, S. (2004). Sowing the seeds of ROSE. Background, rationale, questionnaire development and data collection for ROSE (The Relevance of Science Education) - a comparative study of students’ views of science and science education. Acta Didactica.
Séris, J. P. (1994). La technique. Paris: PUF.
Shamos, M. H. (1995). The myth of scientific literacy. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
Sigault, F. (1990). Folie, réel et technologie. Technique et culture, 15, 167–179.
Simondon, G. (1958). Du mode d’existence des objets techniques. Paris: Aubier.
Simondon, G (2001). Du mode d’existence des objets techniques. Ed. augm. d’une préface. Paris: Aubier.
Spengler, O. (1969). L’homme et la technique. Réédition du texte en allemand de 1936. Paris: Éditions Gallimard.
Star, S., & Griesemer, J. (1989). Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39. Social Studies of Science, 19(3), 393.CrossRef
Stiegler, B. (1998). Temps et individuation technique, psychique et collective dans l’œuvre de Simondon. Intellectica, 26–27, 241–256.
Trouche, L. (2003). From artifact to instrument: Mathematics teaching mediated by symbolic calculators. Interacting with Computers, 15(6), 783–800.CrossRef
Turkle, S. (2007). Evocative objects things we think with. Boston: The MIT Press.
Verillon, P., & Andreucci, C. (2006). Artifacts and cognitive development: How do psychogenetic theories of intelligence help in understanding the influence of technical environments on the development of thought? (Eng. Trad : Artifacts and cognitive development: how do psychogenic theories of intelligence help in understanding the impact of technical environments on the development of thought?). In M. de Vries & I. Mottier (Eds.), International handbook of technology education: Reviewing the past twenty years (pp. 387–398). Rotterdam/Taipei: Sense Publishers.
Vérillon, P., & Rabardel, P. (1995). Artifact and cognition: A contribution to the study of thought in relation to instrumented activity. European Journal of Psychology in Education, IX, (3), 77–101.CrossRef
Vinck, D. (2009). De l’objet intermédiaire à l’objet-frontière. Revue d’anthropologie des connaissance, 3(1), 51–72.CrossRef
Virkkunen, J., & Schaupp, M. (2011). From change to development: Expansing the concept of intervention. Theory and Psychology, 21, 629–655.CrossRef
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1997). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky. Vol. 4: The history of the development of higher mental functions. New York: Plenum.
Weisser, M. (2005). Le statut de l’artefact dans le discours de l’apprenant. ASTER, 41.
Wenger, E. (2000). Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organization, 7(2), 225–246.CrossRef
Zittoun, T. (2009). How doas any object become symbolic? Rooting semiotic artifact in dynamic shared. In B. Wagoner (Ed.), Symbolic Transformation. The mind in movement through culture and society (pp. 173–192).
Zittoun, T., Gillespie, A., & Cornish, F. (2009). Fragmentation or differentiation: Questioning the crisis in psychology. Integrative Psychological and Behavioural Science, 43, 104–115.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Mediation of artefacts, tools and technical objects: an international and french perspective
verfasst von
Maria Antonietta Impedovo
Colette Andreucci
Jacques Ginestié
Publikationsdatum
29.09.2015
Verlag
Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in
International Journal of Technology and Design Education / Ausgabe 1/2017
Print ISSN: 0957-7572
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-1804
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9335-y

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2017

International Journal of Technology and Design Education 1/2017 Zur Ausgabe

OriginalPaper

Perception by French students of the gendered nature of material artifacts studied in technology education

OriginalPaper

Two-stage hands-on technology activity to develop preservice teachers’ competency in applying science and mathematics concepts

OriginalPaper

How do different background variables predict learning outcomes?

OriginalPaper

Towards effective group work assessment: even what you don’t see can bias you

OriginalPaper

How an integrative STEM curriculum can benefit students in engineering design practices

OriginalPaper

Assessing changes in teachers’ attitudes toward interdisciplinary STEM teaching

    Premium Partner

    Bildnachweise