Abstract
The nature of progression in technology is still a matter of debate in technology education. While there is a growing research-based literature exploring the elements of technological literacy that might be appropriate measures of progression, little has been written about the factors that may influence both group and individual development of technological literacy. This article reports the findings of a longitudinal ethnographic study of the progression in technological literacy of 20 children during their first 3 years at school. It focuses on the factors that affected their learning in technology, and identifies a number of personal and systemic factors that affected progression in technological literacy. The implications of these findings for teaching, and for further research are then explored.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Anning, A. (1993). Learning design and technology in primary schools. In R. McCormick, P.␣Murphy, & M. Harrison (Eds.), Teaching and learning technology (pp. 176–187). Reading, UK: Addison-Wesley.
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.
Anning, A. (1997a). Drawing out ideas: Graphicacy and young children. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 7(3), 219–230.
Anning, A. (1997b). Teaching and learning how to design in schools. The Journal of Design and Technology Education, 2(1), 50–52.
Assessment of Perfomance Unit. (1993). Learning through design and technology. In R. McCormick, P. Murphy, & M. Harrison (Eds.), Teaching and learning technology (pp. 58–67). Wokingham: Addison-Wesley.
Aubusson, P., & Webb, C. (1992). Teacher beliefs about learning and teaching in primary science and technology. Research in Science Education, 22, 20–29.
Burns, J. (1997a). Girls, women and scientific and technological literacy. In E. W. Jenkins (Ed.), Innovations in science and technology education (Vol. 6, pp. 125–139). Paris: UNESCO.
Burns, J. (1997b). Technology in the New Zealand Curriculum: Promise and Prospect. Paper presented at the Technology Education New Zealand, Christchurch, New Zealand.
Burns, J. D. (2000). Learning about technology in society: Developing liberatory literacy. In J.␣Ziman (Ed.), Technological innovation as an evolutionary process (pp. 299–311). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chidgey, J. (1994). A critique of the design process. In F. Burns (Ed.), Teaching technology (pp.␣89–93). London: Routledge.
Claire, H. (1992). Interaction between girls and boys: working with construction apparatus in first school classrooms. Design and Technology Teaching, 24(2), 25–34.
Compton, V., & Harwood, C. (1999, 14–16 April). TEALS research project—starting points and future directions. Paper presented at the Technology Education New Zealand Conference, Kings College, Auckland.
Compton, V., & Harwood, C. (2004). Moving from the one-off: Supporting progression in technology. Set:Research Information for teachers(1), 23–30.
Compton, V., & Harwood, C. (2004b). Technology indicators of progression: Emergent to Level Eight. Retrieved 13 October, 2004, from http://www.techlink.org.nz/default.cfm?main=Part_CSAssessment1.cfm
Cross, A. (2000). Design and technology: Raising the profile of teaching method. In S. Clipson-Boyles (Ed.), Putting research into practice in primary teaching and learning (pp. 81–91). London: David Fulton.
Davies, J. (2005). Revising the National Technology curriculum through Action Research: Practical and political action in New Zealand. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 10(3), 22–36.
Ely, M., Anzul, M., Friedman, T., Garner, D., & Steinmetz, A. M. C. (1991). Doing qualitative research: Circles within circles. London: Falmer Press.
Ferguson, E. S. (1993). Engineering and the mind’s eye. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
Fleer, M. (2000). Working technologically: Investigations into how young children design and make during technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 10(1), 43–59.
Flowers, J. (1998). Problem solving in technology education: A taoist perspective. Journal of Technology Education, 10(1), 20–26.
Grima, G. (2000). Group assessment: Exploring the influence of gender composition of the group. Set: Research information for Teachers(1), 37–39.
Hennessy, S., & McCormick, R. (1994). The general problem solving process in technology education. In F. Banks (Ed.), Teaching technology (pp. 94–108). London: Routledge.
Hennessy, S., & Murphy, P. (1999). The potential for collaborative problem solving in design and technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 9(1), 1–36.
Hennessy, S., McCormick, R., & Murphy, P. (1993). The myth of general problem-solving ability: Design and technology as an example. The Curriculum Journal, 4(1), 73–89.
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.
Johnsey, R. (1998). Exploring primary design and technology. London: Cassell.
Jones, A. (1998). Research to inform the implementation of the Technology Curriculum. set(set special: Technology), item 3.
Jones, A., & Carr, M. (1992). Teachers’ perceptions of technology education: Implications for classroom innovation. Research in Science Education, 22, 230–239.
Jones, A., & Carr, M. (1993). Analysis of student technological capability (Vol. 2). Hamilton: University of Waikato.
Jones, A., Mather, V., & Carr, M. (1994). Issues in the practice of technology education (Vol. 3). Hamilton: Centre for Science, Mathematics and Technology Education Research, University of Waikato.
Jones, A., & Moreland, J. (2000). The role and place of teacher knowledges in enhancing classroom formative interactions. Paper presented at the ASERA, Fremantle.
Jones, A., & Moreland, J. (2003) Developing classroom-focused research in technology education. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 3(1), 51–66.
Kimbell, R. (1994b). Tasks in Technology: An analysis of their purposes and effects. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 4, 241–256.
Kimbell, R., Stables, K., & Green, R. (1996). Understanding practice in Design and Technology, 1st edn. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Lawson, B. (1980). How designers think. London: The Architectural Press Ltd.
Limblad, S. (1990). From technology to craft: On teacher’s experimental adoption of technology as a new subject in the Swedish primary school. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 22(2), 165–175.
Mawson, B. (1999). In search of the missing strand: Technology and society. Paper presented at the TENZ Conference, Auckland.
McCormick, R., Murphy, P., & Hennessy, S. (1994). Problem-solving processes in technology education: A pilot study. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 4(1), 5–34.
Ministry of Education (1995). Technology in the New Zealand Curriculum. Wellington: Learning Media.
Ministry of Education (1996). Te Whaariki, He Whaariki Matauranga Mo Nga Mokopuna o Aotearoa, Early Childhood Curriculum. Wellington: Learning Media.
Ministry of Education (1997). School entry assessment. Wellington: Learning Media.
Ministry of Education (2001). The National Education Goals. Retrieved 17/9, 2005, from http://www.minedu.govt.nz/index.cfm?layout=document&documentid=8188&data=1.
Ministry of Education (2003). Technology draft matrices. Retrieved 10 November, 2003, from http://www.tki.org.nz/assessment/exemplars/tech/index_e.php
Ministry of Education (2005). Technology draft essence statement. Retrieved 12/11/, 2005, from http://www.talk2learn.think.com/pls/t2l1/think.s?p_app=CONVERSATION&p_cid=4727910017&p_id= 12217
Mittel, I., & Penny, A. (1997). Teacher perceptions of Design and Technology: A study of disjunction between policy and practice. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 7(3), 279–293.
Murphy, P. (1993). Gender differences in pupils’ reactions to practical work. In R. McCormick, P.␣Murphy, & H. Michael (Eds.), Teaching and learning technology (pp. 143–154). Wokingham: Addison-Wesley.
Murphy, P. (1999). Supporting collaborative learning: a gender dimension. In P. Murphy (Ed.), Learners, learning & assessment (pp. 258–276). London: Sage Publications.
Murphy, P., Hennessy, S., McCormick, R., & Davidson, M. (1996). Problem solving in Design and Technology—how to foster it. Primary Science Review, 42(April), 24–27.
Murphy, P., & McCormick, R. (1997). Problem solving in science and technology education. Research in Science Education, 27(3), 461–481.
Norman, E. (1998). The nature of technology for design. The International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 8(1), 67–87.
Norman, E., Cubitt, J., Urry, S., & Whittaker, M. (1995). Advanced design and technology. Harlow: Longman.
Paechter, C. (1995). Crossing subject barriers: The micropolitics of curriculum innovation. London: HMSO.
Parkinson, E. (2001). Teacher Knowledge and Understanding of Design and Technology for Children in the 3–11 Age Group: A study focussing on aspects of structures. Journal of Technology Education, 13(1).
Riggs, A. (1994). Gender and technology education. In F. Banks (Ed.), Teaching technology (pp.␣217–226). London: Routledge.
Roberts, P., & Norman, E. (1999). Models of Design and Technology and their signifigance for research and curriculum development. The Journal of Design and Technology Education, 4(2), 124–131.
Rogers, G., & Wallace, J. (2000). The wheels of the bus: Children designing in an early years classroom. Research in Science and technology Education, 18(1), 127–136.
Stables, K. (1997). Critical issues to consider when introducing technology education into the curriculum of young learners. Journal of Technology Education, 8(2), 1–15.
Stein, S. J., McRobbie, C. J., & Ginns, I. S. (1999). A model for the professional development of teachers in Design and Technology. Paper presented at the Australian Association for Research in Education, Melbourne.
Turnbull, W. (2002). The place of authenticity in technology in the New Zealand curriculum. International Journal of Design and Technology Education, 12(1), 23–40.
Weiner, N. (1993). Invention: The care and feeding of ideas. Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press.
Welch, M. (1999). Analyzing the tacit strategies of novice designers. Research in Science & Technological Education, 17(1), 19–34.
Welch, M., Barlex, D., & Lim, H. S. (2000). Sketching: Friend or foe to the novice designer. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 10(2), 125–148.
Williams, P. J. (2000). Design: The only methodology of technology. Journal of Technology Education, 11(2), 48–61.
Acknowledgement
I wish to express my gratitude to the children, and the teachers for welcoming me into their school and so generously giving up their time to me during this study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mawson, B. Factors Affecting Learning in Technology in the Early Years at School. Int J Technol Des Educ 17, 253–269 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-006-9001-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-006-9001-5