2.3. Technology and education

A clear distinction should be made between vocational technological education and endeavors to provide technological literacy and capability for all people (Hacker & Barden 1988). Also, just teaching to make use of technology is far too narrow an interpretation of technology education. In this respect, the general notion of technology education also differs from educational technology where technology is widely seen as a medium to enhance and support teaching. (see for example Department for Education 1995, Black & Harrison 1985, Banks 1994, Hulsbosch 1997, Smithers & Robinson 1994, de Vries 1997, http://www.iteaorg/A1.html)

In a way, technology and education have been connected since prehistoric times. Stone age people carried the skills and knowledge essential in survival to their future generations (Hacker & Barden 1988). Much learning undoubtedly took place in real life contexts while pursuing emergent needs, wants and purposes. Otherwise the human race would not been able to live on this planet for such a long time.

The earliest occurrences to teach relevant skills and knowledge in technology are also described by Encyclopaedia Britannica on-line (1999):

In the early millennia of human existence, a craft was acquired in a lengthy and laborious manner by serving with a master who gradually trained the initiate in the arcane mysteries of the skill. Such instruction, set in a matrix of oral tradition and practical experience, was frequently more closely related to religious ritual than to the application of rational scientific principles.

(http://members.eb.com/cgi-bin/g?DocF=macro/5006/17/75.html&bold=on&sw=education&sw=technology& keywords=technology%20education&DBase=Articles&hits=10&pt=1&sort=relevance&config=config&firsthit=off)

The kind of education mentioned above developed into an apprenticeship system. During past centuries skills and knowledge in various areas of technology were taught in apprenticeship situations. The apprenticeship system employed a practical approach to teaching essential craft skills. Learning took place in an authentic real life context and integrated naturally. For example, mathematics, geology, geometry and structural engineering had to be taken into account in the practice of masonry. Thus, problem solving was set in the context of the authentic activity of solving the larger task at hand. (Honebein et al. 1993) In the apprenticeship system, skills and knowledge were carried forward to the further generations in the midst of lingering aura of secrecy and mystery. In those days apprenticeship had very little to do with the idea of general education. It was a tight novice-expert-like system, and outsiders of the craft guilds were not allowed to know anything about the skills and knowledge essential for mastering the trade in question.

However, due to its history as a method of teaching essential skills and knowledge, the apprenticeship model had an important role in the early history of technology education. Combined together with the idea of general education, the apprenticeship approach was used as a teaching method in general handicraft education. Necessary manual skills were demonstrated by an expert (teacher) to the children. The children had to practice those skills in order to gain mastery over them. It was essentially a learning by doing method and satisfied its purpose rather well. Moreover, the practice occurred in meaningful contexts, as the end-products were useful and necessary.

Since education became more organized we can also speak about the origins of general technology education, at least in cases where work was in an essential role. For example, the following forms of education can be found:

Calvin (the meaning of work),

Comenius (practical education and the meaning of play and concrete approaches),

Pestalozzi (the importance of the school to prepare children for life after school),

Fröbel (the meaning of play and hands on concrete teaching methods) and

Cygnaeus (the idea of educating children to understand the meaning of work, “to educate to work through work“). (Kananoja 1994a, Kananoja 1994b)

More formal teaching in technology began alongside with the industrial revolution. The first technical institutes were founded 1757 in France and during the 19th century tens of technical institutes and universities were founded in the United States. The purpose was to prepare students to participate directly in the labor market or serve as experts in special purposes like in the military. (Adams 1991)

The above-mentioned transition from the apprenticeship system towards a more general notion of teaching technology is also presented in Encyclopaedia Britannica on-line (1999):

Craft training was institutionalized in Western civilization in the form of apprenticeship, which has survived into the 20th century as a framework for instruction in technical skills. Increasingly, however, instruction in new techniques has required access both to general theoretical knowledge and to realms of practical experience that, on account of their novelty, were not available through traditional apprenticeship. Thus the requirement for a significant proportion of academic instruction has become an important feature of most aspects of modern technology..…..French and German academies led in the provision of such theoretical instruction, while Britain lagged somewhat in the 19th century, owing to its long and highly successful tradition of apprenticeship in engineering and related skills. But by the 20th century all the advanced industrial countries, including newcomers like Japan, had recognized the crucial role of a theoretical technological education in achieving commercial and industrial competence.

(http://members.eb.com/cgi-in/g?DocF=macro/5006/17/75.html&bold=on&sw= education&sw=technology&keywords=technology%20education&DBase=Articles&hits=10&pt=1&sort=relevance&config=config&firsthit=off)

In the above chapters, the context of technological education was more specific and not so much in all-round general education, not to speak of compulsory education for all citizens. However, the present idea of technology education as a part of general education in many countries has its roots in teaching connected to technical subjects and industry. During the cold war the Eastern block developed a Polytechnic education, while for example in the United States Industrial Arts prevailed. The idea was to familiarize people with technology, but still the aim was to prepare to children to support their nation’s technological endeavors. Nordic countries, especially Finland and Sweden but also Norway to some extent, were oriented towards handicraft education. (Kananoja 1994a, Dugger & Yung 1995)

The above-mentioned orientation is due to the work of the Finnish educator Uno Cygnaeus. He developed the idea of educative handicraft and introduced in 1866, first in the world, a mandatory sloyd education for boys as a school subject for general education. Soon after Cygnaeus’s idea about educating children into the world of work was further developed, with a vocational pitch, by the Swedish educator Otto Salomon. Subsequently, Scandinavian sloyd tradition, still widely known among technology educators around the world, was established. In spite of the growing influences of industrial revolution in Scandinavia, most of the population still lived in the countryside far away from the din of the factories. In that environment sloyd education based on producing useful artifacts needed at homes was a fully relevant content of general education. (see Kananoja, 1994b) Interestingly, Uno Cygnaeus was already a proponent of technological creativity, as cited by Kananoja (1994a, p. 47) “The teacher should not give models for everything, but to make pupils think for themselves, to invent and to use their eyes and hands.“

Cygnaeus also seemed to understand the importance of ‘technological literacy’, since one of his ideas was to promote appropriate education in the transition period from the pre-industrial era to the industrial world (Kananaoja 1994a). When and where were these important pieces of Cygnaeus’s legacy lost in Finnish handicraft education? Are not innovation and creativity together with demand for technological literacy the very issues that have gained attention among the developers of the technology education curriculum?

Actually, in many western countries craft education has formed a background for developing technology education (de Vries 1994). In its most traditional form craft education was about the production of artifacts through manual training, and the main emphasis was in learning manual skills to use different tools. In this respect the Finnish educational system has nothing to be ashamed of. Actually, our craft tradition and Uno Cygnaeus’s work has been recognized all over the world, even in Japan (Yokoyama 1999).

In spite of its valuable contribution especially in the first half of the 20^th century, in many countries handicraft education has became increasingly old fashioned at the beginning of the new millennium. Basic crafting techniques have been seen to be inadequate in terms of giving relevant skills and knowledge to cope with the technological world around us. This dilemma has also been noticed among the handicraft teachers. (see Kankare 1998, Alamäki 1999)

In the Netherlands, for example, current developments in technology education curriculum have also been based on craft traditions. The aim is to provide a broader understanding concerning technology and its effects on the modern world, to take into account the social factors of technology, as well as to emphasize the design aspects of technology. (de Vries 1997)

At the beginning of the 20^th century polytechnic education emerged in the former Soviet Union. The polytechnic idea to educate children to serve the industrial life on behalf of the nation also spread to the other Warsaw Pact countries. The polytechnic education was strongly bound to serve general aims of communist governments and thus included doctrines of Marxist ideology. Interestingly, mathematics and science were seen as important factors in polytechnic education. Lenin’s wife Krupskaya, who was in charge of polytechnic education expressed the following ideas: The basis of national economy is in the children who are interested in technical issues; polytechnic education should deepen the children’s technical orientation and, moreover, “polytechnic” cannot be a separate subject but it has to be closely connected with the natural sciences, especially with physics and chemistry and societal issues as well. (Kananoja 1994b)

In the United States the current notion of technology education was preceded by the Industrial Arts (see Dugger & Yung 1995, Dyrenfurth 1994, LaPorte 2000). The American Industrial Arts Association (AIAA) was established in 1939, but due to the Second World War, its first conference was not held until 1947. The theme of the conference was “A Curriculum to Reflect Technology.“ It was generally agreed that Industrial Arts should contribute more to the general education than merely providing vocational skills. (Dugger & Yung 1995). The name of the American Industrial Arts Association was changed to the International Technology Education Association (ITEA) in 1984. The programs that led to technology education in the United States can be seen to be essentially influenced by the work done in Scandinavia (La Porte 2000). The latest development in technology education in the United States has been the creation of the Standards for Technological Literacy (International Technology Education Association 1996, 2000, see also http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/TAA/TAA.html).

By launching Sputnik, the Soviets gave a boost for curriculum development in the western world. This was especially true in the United Kingdom and the United States. They were concerned that their technological development lagged behind the Soviet Union. Since then, science and technology were given more emphasis in the general education curriculum and the aim was to surpass Soviet Union in terms of scientific and technological superiority. The decisions which were made on behalf of science and technology education can be interpreted to have had a positive influence. The United States, for example, has become one of the most powerful nations in technological, scientific and economical precedence. (see Urevbu 1997)

Is technology education a universally standardized concept and understood in the same way? No, not by any means. As seen in the previous chapter, the concept of technology itself can be defined in various different ways. Thus it is not a big surprise that there are quite diverse interpretations of technology education as well. De Vries (1997, pp. 30-31) has explored different international variations of technology education over previous decades and has come up with the following definitions:

1. The craft-oriented approach. This approach is the one from which most other approaches have originated. Central to this approach are practical making abilities. Pupils get working drawings in which the design has been elaborated in detail, including the materials and treatments. Most of the time is spent on making work pieces. A variety of materials is used, but wood and metal are found most frequently. Moreover, De Vries (1994, p. 33) says that “In most cases, when conforming to this approach, the subject was taken by boys.“

2. The industrial production oriented approach. This approach can be regarded as a kind of extension of the previous one. Now the practical skills are chosen in such a way that they relate to production in industry. Work preparation in industrial settings is given much attention. According to de Vries (1994, p. 34) in the above-mentioned approach “Both boys and girls take the subject, although for the girls it can be different from the boys.“

3. The high tech approach. Although at first sight this approach seems very different from the previous one, it resembles it in a kind of concept of technology that enhances the high status that is given to technology. Usually in this approach the computer plays a dominant role, but it is not always demystified for pupils. In high-tech approach “The subject is seen as relevant for both boys and girls.“ (de Vries 1994, p. 34)

4. The applied science approach. This approach has been developed by science educators, looking for ways to make their subject more relevant to pupils. Technology is seen as a direct application of scientific knowledge and methods. Historically this paradigm is not correct. De Vries (1994, p. 35) notes that “As science in many cases is mostly taken by boys, this approach tends to be male-dominated in practice, although sometimes issues are chosen that appeal to girls as well.“

5. The general technological concept approach. This approach has been developed in close correspondence with the academic engineering disciplines. It often gives the school subject a rather analytical flavor. According to de Vries (1994, p. 35) “usually both boys and girls take the subject when this approach is followed, though it tends to be male-dominated....this approach encourages pupils to develop a concept of technology in which creativity and design is often absent.“

6. Design approach. This approach is usually an extension of the craft oriented approach: here not only the making skills but also the designing skills are included. In the Design approach “Both boys and girls can be enthusiastic about this way of learning technology. By using this approach a concept of technology in which creativity is central can be encouraged.“ (de Vries 1994, p. 36)

7. The key competencies approach. This approach differs from the previous one in the greater emphasis on using theoretical concepts in the assignments. This approach is often promoted by business corporations. Key competencies are for example: innovative thinking and co-operation skills. De Vries (1994, p. 36) states that “both boys and girls are stimulated to take the subject.“

8. The STS [Science-Technology-Society] approach. This approach is an extension from the applied science approach, but pays more attention to the human and social aspects of technology. “One reason for implementing this approach is that it can enlist girls’ interest in science education“ (de Vries 1994, p. 37).

After presenting all the above approaches de Vries (1994, p. 31) continues “In fact every technology teacher makes a choice between one of these approaches or makes a combination of them.“ Consequently, the following perspectives are taken in relation to the differing approaches listed above:

Skills and materials are in an essential role in technology education, but the focus of the activities is not in just producing work pieces through detailed instructions guiding both working techniques and materials. To some extent, the industrial production approach is acceptable, but technology education which this thesis is concerned about takes place in the context of general education framework. Thus, technology education is not about vocational education, nor does it directly educate the future work force for industry. Information technology and other kinds of high tech play undeniably an important role in today’s modern world. Thus, in order to make technology education relevant in relation to the world outside the schools, information technology with computers and the like is important to some extent. However, the “high status“ high tech might yield to the schools is not an essential factor. The role of information technology in technology education can be understood only as a tool to enhance and enable teaching, say, if the learning environment is a computer-driven one. On the other hand, the computer itself can be in the focus of learning: What are the main components in it? What are their roles in the whole system? How do they work? and so forth. In this regard, demystifying technology, i.e. to open ‘black boxes’, is a vital part of educating about technology.

As stated in chapter 2.2., technology is not regarded as an applied science. Consequently, the applied science approach is rejected as well. However, the STS (science-technology-society) approach, with its human and social aspects, is closer to the interpretation this thesis is based upon. Analytical activities should not surpass the possibilities for creativity and innovation in designing and making technology. The co-operation skills also need to be taken into account in technology education.

As a complementary consideration, technology education should be driven by a natural human volition, or will, to satisfy human needs, wants and purposes.