Introduction
To explore this question, we analysed 3 h of video material from a Swedish technology classroom. The technology teacher is experienced and the students, aged 14, have had technology once a week for nearly a year.How does the teacher interact with the student-milieu to facilitate the learning of school technology content?
Theoretical framework
Teachers’ interactions with student-milieu
“Here, one sees the student interacting with a particular (mathematical)/(technological)1 milieu, which has its own mathematical (technological) structure… The student–milieu interaction is ‘‘adidactic,’’ in that the milieu constrains the student(s) mathematically (technologically) by virtue of its own structure. The teacher has selected/established the rules of the game;2 and then the didactical moves made by the teacher interact with the student(s) and the student–milieu system.” (ibid. p. 590)
-
Joint attention is the sharing of attention to what is required in the situation, such as objects, processes and concepts.
-
Common ground refers to the shared preconceptions and the conceptions that develop, which make the communication of objects, processes and concepts possible in the practical problem situation.
-
Joint affordances means that participants in a given environment recognise the same affordances—they see the same possibilities and alternatives in regard to the objects, processes and concepts.
Technology knowledge
-
Procedural knowledge is described as know-how-to-do-it knowledge, being able to take on and solve a problem in a practical way (McCormick 2006). It is knowledge about processes, or knowledge transmitted through processes of making things, including creative processes and real-life technological problem solving (Hill 1998; Pirttimaa et al. 2015). Solving technological problems also includes handling objects, tools and machines, which requires practical skills regarding how, when and why we use them. De Vries (2005) also includes non-verbal knowledge in procedural knowledge, a sense of what is right or wrong, e.g. the plumber’s sense of how hard a pipe must be tightened.
-
Conceptual knowledge is described as understanding how things are connected and related to each other, and being able to think out solutions and link knowledge from different areas (McCormick 2006).
A practical problem-solving activity in technology education is a didactical system where the teacher, students and content meet and are mutually dependent on each other. However, the teacher’s interactions with the student-milieu, the didactical moves, are of special interest in this study, where didactical moves are the teachers’ part of the joint actions. The joint actions in practical problem-solving activities imply teachers and students’ joint attention to the material in hand, the process for developing a solution and the requirements of the solution. Joint affordances in these practical situations could be the constraints and possibilities of using tools. Common ground relates to preconceptions, such as understanding of technological principles and material properties.“technology knowledge is not the sum of distinct categories of knowledge that are either conceptual or procedural, but forms an amalgamation of insights and skills adjusted to the context at hand and immersed in technology activity.” (p. 677)
Context and method
Setting the scene
Data collection
Excerpt | Time | Teacher: main interaction | Identified didactical moves |
---|---|---|---|
1 | 13.43 | Examines how work is progressing—lolly stick properties | Joint attention |
2 | 28.32 | Examines students’ knowledge about stability—lolly sticks and stability; triangles, direction of load and stability | Common ground |
3 | 29.30 | Discusses limitations and possibilities—lolly sticks as the building material for the bridge model | Joint affordances |
4 | 34.00 | Finds out how the work has progressed—using triangles to build stable bridge pillars | Joint attention |
Method of analysis
How does the teacher interact with the student-milieu to facilitate learning of technology knowledge?
Didactical moves: joint attention
Lolly stick properties
-
1.1. Teacher: How’s it going?
-
1.2. Student B: Badly
-
1.3. Student A: No, we… should not have it like this (using the lolly sticks to show what she means, assembling the lolly sticks as in Fig. 2a)×
-
1.4. Student C: Then like this… under the… (wants to assemble the lolly sticks as in Fig. 2b)
-
1.5. Teacher: Is it going badly?
-
1.6. Student C:… and then like this
-
1.7. Student B: I don’t know what she’s doing [referring to Student A]
-
[…]
-
1.16. Teacher: How are the lolly sticks strongest? In which direction?
Using triangles to build stable bridge pillars
-
4.29 Teacher: Have you counted that there is enough for the legs of the bridge [bridge pillars]
-
4.30 Student A: Yes
-
4.31 Teacher: Count that there is enough for the legs first. What are you doing now?
-
4.32 Student A: Yes I will…
-
[…]
-
4.35 Teacher: Have you put…
-
4.36 Student B: No. Leave it as it is (referring to how to use lolly sticks in the bridge pillar, not agreeing with Students A and C)
-
4.37 Teacher: A question… have you put aside the ones for the legs [bridge pillars].
-
4.38 Student C: Look, this is what you do…
-
4.39 Teacher: Student B, have you put aside the ones for the legs [bridge pillars]?
-
4.40 Student B: No
-
4.41 Teacher: Do that, so you can use the rest to stabilise [the bridge]
Didactical moves: common ground
Lolly sticks and stability
-
2.1. Teacher: How are the lolly sticks strongest? In which direction? This way or lying on the flat side?
-
2. 2. Student B: Like this (puts a lolly stick flat on the bench, see Fig. 5b)
-
2.3. Student A: Yes, like that…or
-
2.4. Teacher: I am not answering. Discuss it
-
2.5. Student B: Oh no
Triangles, direction of load and stability
-
2.12. Teacher: In which direction do you load the triangle? In which way is the triangle strong?
-
2.13. Student A: Like this (showing a triangle form with her hands, Fig. 4a)
-
[…]
Didactical moves: joint affordances
Lolly sticks as building material
-
3.11. Teacher: Yes in which direction are the lolly sticks strongest?
-
3.12. Student B: I don’t know
-
3.13. Teacher: Like this or like this (turns the lolly stick on its side and then flat, see Fig. 5a, b)×
-
3.14. Student B: I think it is like this (lolly stick lying flat, see Fig. 5b)… because
-
3.15. Teacher: Yes if you try to break the lolly stick…
-
3.16. Student B: Well…
-
3.17. Teacher: Like this or like this (turns the lolly stick in both directions, Fig. 5a, b)
-
3.18. Student B: Yes, like this…aha (holds the lolly stick as shown in Fig. 5a)
Joint attention | Common ground | Joint affordances | |
---|---|---|---|
Teacher’s didactical moves | |||
Procedural knowledge | Repeated redirections of students’ attention towards the limited amount of material to make them aware of resources | Challenging the students to establish common ground by themselves regarding how to use stability when building | Making the students aware of the limited amount of material for building |
Conceptual knowledge | Interrupting by asking questions to redirect students’ attention towards properties and stability to make them aware of knowledge that is important | Asking questions and showing the students with gestures how to investigate and establish common ground about stability | Asking questions about properties and stability of lolly-stick triangles to make students see what the material affords |