Skip to main content
Log in

Recognising Uniqueness in the Technology Key Learning Area: The Search for Meaning

  • Published:
International Journal of Technology and Design Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate areas of significance which were related to the understanding of technology and technology education, identified by teachers introducing the key learning area, technology, into their primary school classrooms for the first time. Working from Australia's national document on technology education, A Statement on Technology for Australian Schools (Curriculum Corporation, 1994), two teachers wrestled with how to fit this new curriculum area into their current classroom programs, their understandings of technology as a phenomenon and with their beliefs about teaching and learning in general. The study showed that the teachers made sense of technology education as it related to, from their perspectives, ideas about and aspects of primary school classrooms with which they felt comfortable. Implications for professional development include the need to acknowledge and value the prior experiences and understandings of primary teachers. The challenge for teachers in implementing technology education is gaining a conceptualisation of the learning area, which in some respects, is very like other more familiar learning areas in the primary curriculum, but in many other respects, unique.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Anning, A.: 1994, ‘Dilemmas and Opportunities of a New Curriculum: Design and Technology with Young Children’, International Journal of Technology and Design Education 4, 155-177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Australian Science Technology and Engineering Council (ASTEC): 1997, Foundations for Australia's Future, Science and Technology in Primary Schools, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banks, F. R. J.: 1996a, ‘Approaches and Models in Technology Teacher Education: An Overview’, The Journal of Design and Technology Education 1(3), 197-211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banks, F. R. J.: 1996b, ‘Developing Professional Knowledge During Initial Design and Technology Teacher Education’, The Journal of Design and Technology Education 1(2), 175-178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Briscoe, C. & Peters, J.: 1997, ‘Teacher Collaboration Across and Within Schools: Supporting Individual Change in Primary Science Teaching’, Science Education 81(1), 51-65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, J.: 1996, July, ‘Different Teachers, Different Outcomes: Describing Teacher Change During a Professional Development Program in Primary Science and Technology’, Paper presented at the annual conference of the Australasian Science Education Research Association, Canberra, Australia.

  • Compton, V., Jones, A. & McGregor, G.: 1997, July, ‘Reflecting on Teacher Development in Technology Education: Implications for Future Programmes’, Paper presented at the annual conference of the Australasian Science Education Research Association, Adelaide.

  • Curriculum Corporation: 1994, A Statement on Technology for Australian Schools, Curriculum Corporation: Carlton, Victoria.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erickson, F.: 1998, ‘Qualitative Research Methods for Science Education’, in B. J. Fraser & K. G Tobin (eds.), International Handbook of Science Education (Part 2), Kluwer Academic Publishing, Dordrecht, pp. 1155-1173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fish, G. (Chairperson): 1991, K-12 Technology Curriculum Map 1990: A Report to the Australian Education Council, Curriculum Corporation, Carlton, Victoria.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fosnot, C. T.: 1996, ‘Constructivism: A Psychological Theory of Learning’, in C. T. Fosnot (ed.), Constructivism: Theory, Perspectives and Practice, Teachers College Press, New York, pp. 8-33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fullan, M.: 1988, ‘Research into Educational Innovation’, in R. Glatter, C. Preddy, C. Riches & M. Masterton (eds.), Understanding School Management, Open University Press, Milton Keynes, UK, pp. 195-211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grundy, S.: 1995, Action Research as Professional Development, Arts Accord Affiliation of Arts Educators, West Perth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guba, E. G. & Lincoln, Y. S.: 1994, ‘Competing Paradigms in Qualitative Research’, in N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holroyd, C. & Harlen, W.: 1996, ‘Primary Teachers' Confidence about Teaching Science and Technology’, Research Papers in Education 11(3), 323-335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jarvis, T. & Rennie, L. J.: 1996, ‘Understanding Technology: The Development of a Concept’, International Journal of Science Education 18(8), 977-992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnsey, R.: 1995, ‘Criteria for Success’, Design and Technology Teaching 27(2), 37-39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, A. & Carr, M.: 1992, Teachers' Perceptions of Technology. Learning in technology project [Working paper 502]. Centre for Science and Mathematics Education Research, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, A. & Compton, V.: 1998, ‘Towards a Model for Teacher Development in Technology Education: From Research to Practice’, International Journal of Technology and Design Education 8, 51-65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Layton, D.: 1993, Technology's Challenge to Science Education, Open University Press, Buckingham.

    Google Scholar 

  • Layton, D. (ed.): 1994, Innovations in Science and Technology Education, UNESCO, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindblad, S.: 1990, ‘From Technology to Craft: on Teachers' Experimental Adoption of Technology as a New Subject in the Swedish Primary School’, Journal of Curriculum Studies 22(2), 165-175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCormick, R. & Davidson, M.: 1996, ‘Problem Solving and the Tyranny of Product Outcomes’, The Journal of Design and Technology Education 1(3), 230-241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oja, S. N. & Smulyan, L.: 1989, Collaborative Action Research: A Developmental Approach, The Falmer Press, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, J.: 1992, Understanding Teaching, Open University Press, Milton Keynes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, J., James, E. & Lang, M.: 1998, April, ‘Changing the Subject: The Challenge to Teacher Professionalism of Innovation in OECD Countries’, paper presented at the annual conference of American Education Research Association, San Diego, CA.

  • Owen, C. & Abbott-Chapman, J.: 1990, Technology in the Curriculum-Trends and Issues Emerging for the 1990s, Education Participation Studies Unit, University of Tasmania, Hobart.

    Google Scholar 

  • Queensland School Curriculum Council: 1998, Technology Key Learning Area. Years 1-10 Technology Key Learning Area Curriculum Development Project Design Brief, November 1998, available: http://www.uq.net.au/qscc/technology/.

  • Rennie, L. J. & Jarvis, T.: 1994, Helping Children Understand Technology, Department of Industry, Science and Technology, Adelaide.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaverien, L. & Cosgrove, M.: 1997, ‘Learning to Teach Generatively: Mentor-Supported Professional Development and Research in Technology-and-Science’, The Journal of the Learning Sciences 6(3), 317-346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. S.: 1986, ‘Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching’, Educational Researcher 15(2), 4-14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, J.: 1998, ‘Technology in the Primary School: Blind Variation and Selective Retention’, Research in Science Education 28(1), 153-167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stables, K.: 1997, ‘Critical Issues to Consider When Introducing Technology Education into the Curriculum of Young Learners’, Journal of Technology Education [online] 8(2), available: http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/jte-v8n2/stables.jte-v8n2.html.

  • Stein, S. J., McRobbie, C. J. & Ginns, I.: 1998, November-December, ‘Insights into Preservice Primary Teachers’ Thinking about Technology and Technology Education [available: http://www.swin.edu.au/aare/98ap/abs98.html (MCR98085)], paper presented at the annual conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education, Adelaide.

  • Thiessen, D.: 1992, ‘Classroom-based Teacher Development’, in A. Hargreaves & M. G. Fullan (eds.), Understanding Teacher Development, Teachers College Press, New York, pp. 85-109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, G., Wineburg, S., Grossman, P., Myhre, O. & Woolworth, S.: 1998, ‘In the Company of Colleagues: An Interim Report on the Development of a Community of Teacher Learners’, Teacher and Teacher Education 14(1), 21-32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K.: 1989, Case Study Research. Design and Methods, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, California.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Stein, S.J., Mcrobbie, C.J. & Ginns, I. Recognising Uniqueness in the Technology Key Learning Area: The Search for Meaning. International Journal of Technology and Design Education 10, 105–123 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008945013123

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008945013123

Navigation