Proceedings of the First AAAS Technology Education Research Conference
Technology Education Research Conference: Reflections
Pam B. Newberry
International Technology Education Association
While compiling my thoughts and reflections on the Technology Education Research
Conference, I found myself asking to what degree the goals of the conference
were achieved and to what extent the conference changed or inspired participants
to take the steps necessary to focus on and to put into action a research
agenda for technology education. Consideration of the intended goals of the
conference planners, the interactions that took place during the conference,
and recognition of the dependence on the contributions of the participants
are paramount to answering these questions. The presentations and the live
discussions that followed helped to frame my reflections on the conference.
The hosting of the conference by the American Association for the Advancement
of Science (AAAS) was significant in that it provided a unique opportunity
for networking and discussion with science and technology educators. Members
of AAAS, the International Technology Education Association (ITEA), and related
professions discussed critical issues and concerns in an open forum that allowed
an exchange of ideas, perspectives, and culture that until now was not considered
or exploited.
One of our conference goals was to enable researchers and thinkers to collaborate
in the uncharted research area of how children learn technological ideas.
Presenters who shared their current studies had an opportunity to present
and exchange their successes, failures, and lingering questions with other
international science and technology scholars. In retrospect, I believe this
goal was achieved. It was a healthy mix made possible by the support of AAAS.
The resulting discussions with participants, particularly during the closing
session, seemed to reinforce that a research agenda is critically needed.
It became apparent that an agenda that deals with how children learn technological
ideas is paramount to the future of education in technology and science with
such projects as Benchmarks for Science Literacy and Standards
for Technological Literacy leading the initiative.
Furthermore, it follows that the legacy begun with the publication of Benchmarks
and the much anticipated Standards for Technological Literacy
demonstrates that there is a strong need to combine experience and practice
with research. This combination aids in the stimulation of change in practice
after careful reflection on the outcomes of research. Due to the small size
of the conference, we had the luxury of extensive interaction across disciplines,
cultures, and nations. It was largely an open event where results were discussed
freely and intensively! Aiming the conference at teachers with a strong interest
in research and researchers and using formats such as workshops, panel discussions,
and presentations was key to successful interaction.
Participants clearly declared and identified needed research areas. It was
interesting to note the various listings of those areas. Though a final listing
was not identified, the ideas that were gathered will provide much fodder
for an intended follow-up meeting at the ITEA conference in the spring of
2000.
The open forums and panel discussions about the variety of methodologies of
research available in technological research provide a window for thinking
out of the box. The idea of creating a "research culture" that is
taking a "journey" in the study of technology is the most important
aspect that evolved out of this discussion. From past experience, a research
agenda or plan has been proposed and developed for the study of technology
education, but there was no considerate effort to make the plan part of a
total picture of research for the study of technology. The resulting research
was rambled and haphazard as though we were just going "somewhere out
there." With a consciously developed "journey" of where we
want our "research culture" to move toward in the study of technology,
our profession may likewise move forward in developing curriculum and activities
that evolve out of alternative paradigms and reflect a global view of learning
technology.
Parallel to the theme of the study of technology for all were discussions about
the need for more studies, the ideas of constructivism, integration, diversity,
effectiveness of the study of technology, and public attitudes toward technology.
In addition, the reporting on how students are learning and why they learn
was an important contribution to the overall debate of where we need to go
from here. We acknowledged the lack of assessment and discussed how to develop
effective assessment tools. The questions that were repeated by many reflected
a need for the development of realistic experiences from which students can
learn. What abilities are core capabilities for a diploma? What is the balance
between ‘about’ and ‘how to do’ technology? How do all
of these issues and concerns contribute to overall technological literacy?
The conference revealed the idea that there are three ways to advance the course
of the field: research, teacher practice and reflection, and policy. We also
need to come to terms with the fact that the field is in the making and thus
we need to address questions proposed in different forms throughout the conference.
Do we want students to understand what technologists do? Do we want students
proficient to the point of being technicians, and, if so, to what degree?
Do we want students to be creative and capable of making and building? Do
we want students to have an understanding of how things work with a mastery
of the core concepts and processes? How much time does a student need to learn
technology with other students or alone? Where do students have difficulty
in learning technology and why?
Of the many special tasks faced by the field of technology, perhaps none is
more important than assessment. The day-to-day real world experiences of students
typically lead to powerful learning, however, we do not currently provide
documentation in a formal manner. In regard to assessment, questions abound.
Do we assess performance, knowledge, disposition, or aptitude? How do we put
assessments together in order to assess in a real way? The methods of assessment
we choose to initiate will reflect what we believe is necessary for students
to develop technological literacy and what they should know about technology.
The practices and methodologies we propose will also reflect how we consider
gender, multiple intelligences, performance, and the inclusion of hands-on
tasks.
Due to time restraints and many issues on the table, little time was given
to teacher education. Teacher education is a necessary requirement for implementing
the study of technology for all. Further education and professional development
for teachers is critical to the successful use of standards whether they come
from Benchmarks or Standards for Technological Literacy.
There are questions for future consideration. To what degree do teachers need
to understand and be able to do technology? What subjects should be taught?
Who should teach them? Where do teachers have difficulty teaching technology
and why? How does the delivery of education through multi-media, long distance,
and information technology effect the impact and possibilities of learning
about technology? From this standpoint, the preparation of teachers and the
contributions of reflected research and practice demands intensive work.
The AAAS Technology Education Research Conference provided a forum to raise
many questions that must be synthesized and massaged to formulate a research
agenda and course of action. We now must turn our attention to the follow-up
meeting at the ITEA conference in Salt Lake City as the next step of planning
our "journey." The "journey" cannot begin until we have
a map with a planned course. Currently, we have many suggestions on topics
we may visit, but we have not considered what we must take, how long we plan
to stay, or when we plan to return to a particular topic for further investigation.
The conference was a good beginning, but we need more focus on research issues
such as the relationship of technology to science, arts, language arts, social
studies, mathematics, the understanding of the evolution of design, systems
thinking, knowing and doing, and learning how to engage the unengaged. We
still need to address the proverbial question of time. What must be removed,
replaced, or adjusted from the school curriculum that will provide ample time
for all K-12 students to develop technological literacy? And in order to make
change happen, we need to identify what causes students to develop "wrong"
thinking about technology. Time is an issue not just for the school curriculum,
but also for the planning and developing of a research agenda that will enable
us to help the world recognize the value of technology. AAAS Technology Education
Research Concerence sparked the momentum. We must keep it going.
