In this chapter, students’ conceptions of technology, perceptions
of school technology, their enjoyment of school technology and their perceptions
of ability in school technology technology are examined. This is reported
on in three sections: in Section 7.1 student understandings of technology
are examined; in Section 7.2 student enjoyment of technology is examined
and in Section 7.3 student perceptions of achievement in technoloy are
examined.
7.1.1 Students’ Conceptions of Technology
It has been found that a lack of understanding of technology and of what
school technology entails has repercussions for student learning. Mather
and Jones (1995) found that students’ concepts of technology placed
more constraints on students’ technological practice than teaching
strategies that were employed to teach them. The understanding and conception
of technology that forms the basis of school technology is broader than
the conceptions of technology given in this study by primary students
in New Zealand, being defined in the curriculum document as “a creative
purposeful activity aimed at meeting needs and opportunities through the
development of products, systems or environments”. (Ministry of
Education, 1995)
There was a general lack of understanding of technology among the primary
students. This finding is not unexpected for two reasons. Firstly, the
teaching of technology as an independent learning area is relatively recent
in New Zealand and is not yet a mandatory requirement. Students taking
part in this study at this time may not have a background of technology
education that reflects the current technology curriculum. Students who
do not receive technology education have a “poor understanding of
technology” (Burns, 1990, p.62). Secondly, the development of a
generalised concept of technology has been found to be age related (Jarvis
and Rennie, 1996), and indeed, in this study, Year 8 students were more
likely to give an explanation of technology than the Year 4 students.
The predominant explanation of technology by students in both these age
groups was narrow in focus, defining technology in terms of technological
artefacts.
The Year 8 students were more likely to give an explanation of technology
that included more than one category of response (about half of the Year
8 students compared to a fifth of the Year 4 students) but these more
complex conceptions of technology still did not reflect the curriculum
definition. Less than 10% of the students gave an explanation of technology
that referred in any way to a purposeful activity to meet societal needs;
although an awareness of this increased with age. Jarvis and Rennie (1996)
have found that holding multiple aspects of a conception of technology
is one stage in the development of a broad concept of technology, but
these multiple aspects are often inconsistently applied and are lacking
in strength of conviction. These findings are not unexpected. The development
of a concept that reflects an understanding of the diversity of technology
is a complex matter, requiring the synthesis of many ideas, understandings
and experiences. Students can need assistance with developing a concept
of technology that reflects the one presented in the technology curriculum
by, for example, being provided with definitions and exemplars (Johnson,
1966) and by engaging in useful discussion with someone with the knowledge
required (Skemp, 1979).
Groups of students that have previously been found to be disadvantaged
in school subjects for instance science, mathematics and technology such
as girls (Brown, 1993; Doornekamp, 1991) and Mäori students (Ohia,
1992; McKinley, 1992, Ministry of Education, 1989) also held concepts
of technology which could be further limiting. A previous study in New
Zealand (Burns, 1990) and overseas studies have found that boys have better
concepts of technology than girls. This was confirmed in this research:
boys at both age levels were more likely to be able to give an explanation
of technology and to give an explanation that was either fuller or referred
to meeting needs. At Year 8, the concepts of technology given showed gender
stereotyping: girls referring more to equipment; boys being more likely
to refer to doing something, for example, making and designing and inventing.
Non-Mäori students were more likely to give an explanation of their
conception of technology and to give an explanation of technology that
was fuller than that of their Mäori counterparts.
A lack of understanding of the concept of technology has implications
for the teaching of technology. If students retain a narrow view of technology
(seen in this study as being technology as artefacts) then students could
be disappointed by the implementation of the technology curriculum which
does not reflect that view (Burns, 1990). Jarvis and Rennie (1996) state
that children should be provided with explanations and exemplars of technology
and not be left to infer meaning, as mixed understandings of technology
leads to impaired learning.
While nearly all of the Year 8 students gave a response to the question of what they did for school technology, Year 4 students were less likely to give a response to this question and less likely to give as many categories of response. One reason for this difference could be that Year 8 students are more likely to be aware of different subjects and how they are timetabled than Year 4 students who may have some learning areas grouped together under common name such as “theme” or “topic study”, and therefore not be aware of subject specialisation. Jarvis and Rennie (1996) study of young children in Australia and England found that there was a lack of identification of fun activities in the classroom as technology education, and that this could have repercussions as students did not either recognise technology or realise that they enjoyed it.
Very few (less than 10%) of the students mentioned solving problems or looking for solutions to practical or human needs as part of their technology programmes. This indicates that the students are not seeing their technology education as a “creative, purposeful activity aimed at meeting needs and opportunities” as technology is defined in Technology in the New Zealand curriculum, but rather as a series of isolated activities. This is especially true for younger students - only 5% of Year 4 students mentioned problem solving in any form.
Computers featured prominently in the student answers with nearly 40% mentioning using computers as doing technology with further questions in the survey showing that this referred mainly to playing games and to word processing. Computers may feature in the students’ responses because they are technological artefacts that fit with the popularly held idea that technology is complex electronic equipment and therefore students are more likely to identify using them as “doing technology”. Another factor for the high profile of computers could be related to what Knezek and Miyashita (1993) refer to as the novelty factor: computers and the continuing introduction of new software, are relatively new or novel for the students so they have a high impact on student perceptions of what they are doing.
Mather and Jones (1993) found that Year 5 and 6 students saw technology and technology education as related to artefacts, and at Years 7 and 8, students held concepts of technology and technology education based on “making”. This is confirmed in this research - significantly more Year 4 students referring to computers and learning about equipment (artefacts) as school technology than to making and designing, while at Year 8, there were more references to making and designing and workshop subjects (the making aspects of school technology) than to computers and learning about equipment.
A similar number of students referred to science and mathematics in their description of what they did for technology education as referred to workshop subjects and this highlights an ongoing debate on the nature of technology education. Donnelly (Donnelly, 1993) refers to a continuum for technology within the British school curriculum with one end occupied by the “aesthetic design” (referring to the Craft and Design aspects of technology, with an emphasis on designing and making) with science traditionally representing the other. Research shows that teachers interpret the technology curriculum differently according to their subject preferences (Paechter, 1991; Jones and Carr, 1992) including some placing an emphasis on designing and making and some placing an emphasis on technology as applied science. The responses given here would indicate that students, while giving a greater emphasis to design and make aspects of technology, are also being exposed to technology as applied science.
Within both age groups there were only slight differences in responses between gender subgroups. At both levels boys were more likely to mention computers: 39% of Year 4 boys as compared to 34% of the girls; 44% of Year 8 boys compared to 40% of Year 8 girls. This difference, while not large, could be important as research (Durndell, 1995; Kinnear, 1995; Sashaani, 1994) shows that boys are more likely to dominate the use of computers within classrooms and the girls lower response rates could indicate a slightly lower level of access to computers in the classroom.
There were fewer responses by Mäori students than Non-Mäori in the category of problem solving or meeting a practical need is considered and the gap increases between age groups. This could suggest that Year 8 Mäori students are not being exposed to as rich a variety of experiences when studying technology at school as there is a higher concentration of Mäori students in schools which the Ministry of Education rate as low SES schools. These schools may not have funds available to provide as wide a range of experiences for these students.
The students were very positive towards school technology with only a very small proportion of the students saying that they did not enjoy technology. It has been found that older students’ are less positive towards schooling in general than younger students, and that this is more so for girls (Schibeci, 1984; Simpson et al, 1994; Speering and Rennie, 1996). However, a positive disposition towards school technology was retained between Year 4 and Year 8 by the boys. But, while the older boys retained their enthusiasm, the girls’ enjoyment of technology declined as they got older. Therefore while, for girls, the decrease in enjoyment of technology was in line with an anticipated decrease in enjoyment of schooling in general, the boys did not reflect this trend.
The high positive enjoyment of technology was not reflected in students’ choices of technology as a favourite subject, with relatively few students choosing technology as their “favourite”. A number of factors could contribute to this including student lack of identification of “fun” activities as technology education, lack of awareness that these activities are related to a curriculum area and technology may not yet be being taught in every school. It could also mean that while students really enjoy technology, they also really enjoy other learning areas as well.
While students stated that they enjoyed technology, the majority of students did not identify the aspects of technology that they enjoyed. Of the students who did identify the aspects of technology that they enjoyed, most referred to the subject content, with the Year 8 boys in particular enjoying this. This is similar to the findings of Speering and Rennie (1996) who, when looking at the attitudes of girls and boys to school subjects, found that the attitudes of girls were related strongly to their “perceptions of student-teacher relationship, but for boys the interest level of the subject was more important” (p.294). For both the older girls and the older Mäori students, more referred to not enjoying the way that school technology is taught than to enjoying that, although in both these cases this was less than 10% of the students.
The technological activities students identify for leisure activities have repercussions for student learning in two ways: firstly, students “mainly form their ideas about technology from incidental and often out-of-school experiences” (Rennie and Jarvis, 1995, p.50); and, secondly, because of the influence of home activities and culture of subsequent achievement (Solomon, 1994; Brown, 1993, Doornekamp, 1991). The effect of home experiences on subsequent achievement in technology is an area of particular concern when the different experiences of boys and girls, and Mäori and Non-Mäori students are considered. The students’ perceptions of the technological activities they do in their own time will be influenced by their perceptions of what is a technology activity, and what has traditionally been male, European activities may be more easily recognised as technology. The majority of students indicated that they chose to make things, through construction activities and, as students got older, cooking or sewing. There were significant differences in the type of technological leisure activities between the boys and girls and between Mäori and Non-Mäori students, with boys and Non-Mäori students reporting a greater frequency and a greater range of activities. The inequality of opportunity to experience a wide range of technological experiences out of school has implications for the provision of access to these type of experiences in school.
The high enjoyment of technology education by these primary school students is heartening. Students do enjoy the technology education that they are receiving, many students indicating on their survey forms that they wish that they could do more technology at school. Enjoyment of technology is important if students are going to both achieve in and continue with technology education.
In this study, students rated themselves as doing well in technology, although the Year 4 girls were slightly less positive than the Year 4 boys and this difference increased as the students get older. Girls are not only slightly less positive than the boys in their rating of their achievement in technology, but their feeling of success declines as they get older, this change did not occur for boys whose ratings were slightly more positive at Year 8. This decline in the girls’ perception of their achievement could be problematic, as McCarthy and Moss (1994) found that girls need to experience higher levels of success in technology education than boys to affect their choices for technology. There is much research that supports the tailoring of technology programmes, considering both how and what is taught, to ensure that girls are given the same opportunity to achieve in technology as boys (Brown, 1993; Donnelly, 1993; Egan, 1990), with some indication that girls can perform better in technology than boys when their needs are addressed (Compton and Lagache, 1996).
When ethnicity was considered, Mäori students were less positive about their achievement in technology than Non-Mäori students, with the gap widening between Year 4 and Year 8. Mäori students having a perception of lower achievement in technology than Non-Mäori students is particularly concerning when it is considered in line with research concerning the low participation and low achievement of Mäori students generally in schooling (McKinley, 1992; Ohia, 1993; Wagemaker, 1987). Steps need to be taken with the introduction of the technology curriculum to ensure that Mäori students develop a positive concept of their achievement in technology education.
There was no correlation between students perception of their ability in technology education and their actual achievement in a number of NEMP tasks. This would indicate that these primary school students are unable to gauge their level of achievement in aspects of technology education. This is problematic in two ways. If student attitudes towards a subject are influenced by their achievement in that subject [Rennie, 1991 #165], it is a problem that the students in this sample who were achieving well in technology education were unaware of this. Conversely, the students in this sample who were not performing well were also unaware of this, so the areas that they may have been able to improve on were not being identified. This situation may improve over time as students are exposed to a greater range of technological activities with the implementation of the Technology curriculum.
For students to retain a positive attitude towards technology education, all students, but especially girls and Mäori students, need to both be able to identify their success in technology and to have their successes reinforced.
In this chapter the key findings of this research are presented, the implications of these findings for the New Zealand technology cuuriculum are discussed and recommendations for technology educators are presented for consideration.
8.1.1 Conceptions of Technology
| w | Very few students’ responses reflected the broad concept of technology as presented in Technology in the New Zealand Curriculum. |
| w | At Year 8 level, most students gave a concept of technology but at Year 4 40% of the students did not. |
| w | The two most frequent responses were the concepts that technology is hi-tech equipment or making and designing. |
| w | At Year 4, boys were more likely to give a concept of technology than girls, although there was little difference between these subgroups at Year 8. |
| w | At Year 4, Non-Mäori students were more likely to give a concept of technology than Mäori students, although there was little difference between these subgroups at at Year 8. |
Implications
for Technology Education
The narrow conceptions of technology held by primary students has implications
for the teaching of technology in schools in three key areas. Firstly,
students lack of understanding of the basic concept of technology can
result in impaired learning (Jarvis and Rennie, 1996, p.977). Secondly,
students’ expectations for school technology may not be met by
a curriculum based on a different concept of technology than the one
the students hold. Thirdly, if students do not associate the broad and
positive experiences they have as technology education in their early
schooling, they are less likely to take or to value technology later.
In order to develop a broad concept of technology, students generally,
but particularly girls and Mäori students, need opportunities to
explore and articulate their understandings of technology.
| w | Student responses reflected a narrow view of technology. |
| w | The most frequently identified school technology activities were using computers and construction activities. |
| w | One fifth of the Year 4 students said they did not do technology at school. |
| w | Boys at both levels were most likely to identify using the computer as school technology, and at Year 4 boys were more likely than girls to refer to construction activities. |
| w | Mäori students were more likely to identify using the computer as school technology, while Non-Mäori students were more likely to refer to identify construction activities. |
Implications for Technology Education
The students view of what they do for technology at school reflects their perceptions of what is being taught, but does not indicate if this is an accurate picture of what is being taught for technology education or if students are not recognising other aspects of technology being taught. Again, there needs to be opportunities for students to identify and clarify their technology education experiences.
| w | Students were very positive in their rating of their enjoyment of school technology, with over 90% of both year groups rating it positively. |
| w | Year 8 boys were more likely than girls of this level to give the highest rating of their enjoyment. |
| w | At both year levels Mäori students were more likely to give the most positive rating of their enjoyment of technology, but the gap between the subgroups declined between Year 4 and Year 8. |
| w | Of the students who gave a reason for why they enjoyed technology at school, most students said they enjoyed the subject content. |
| w | Just over 20% of the students mentioned technology as one of their three favourite school subjects, Year 8 students were more likely to rate technology as one of their three favourite subjects. |
| w | The most frequently mentioned technology leisure activities were construction activities followed by using computers, Year 8 students also referred to cooking and sewing. About a quarter of the students did not do identify any technology activities in their free time. |
| w | Girls at both levels were more likely to say that they do not do any technology activities in their spare time. Boys were nearly twice as likely to refer to construction activities, aand, at Year 8, girls are nearly six times more likely to refer to cooking and sewing activities. |
| w | At Year 8 Mäori students were more likely to refer to cooking and sewing, for technology leisure activities while Non-Mäori students were more likely to refer to computers and other electronic equipment. |
Implications for Technology Education
Students are very positive in their rating of their enjoyment of school technology. However, this needs to be considered with regard to their perceptions of what they do at school for technology. As the students view of school technology as using computers and as construction activities, it needs to be ensured that other activities reflecting the broader scope of technology education are recognised as technology by the students and enjoyed by them.
Girls appear to have an unequal access to technology activities for leisure than boys,and this lack of familiarity and resulting confidence wth technology activities needs to be kept in mind by educators when planning classroom activities.
| w | Nearly a third of the students thought that to be good at technology a person had to be intelligent or to be good at personal skills. |
| w | Despite computers being seen as the main technology activity in schools, only 8% of students thought that being good at technology was dependent on being good at computers. |
| w | Year 4 boys were more likely to respond that being good at technology is dependent on construction skills than Year 4 girls. |
| w | Mäori students at both levels were more likely to say that they did not know what aperson needs to do to be good at technology. |
| w | Most students thought that they were good at school technology, with 76% giving themselves a positive rating, and 19% giving themselves the highest rating. |
| w | Boys were more likely to give themselves the highest rating for how good they are at technology than girls, and this was moreso at Year 8. |
| w | At Year 8 Non-Mäori students were twice as likely as Mäori students to give themselves the highest rating for how good they are at technology. |
| w | The students rating of how good they were at technology did not correlate with their performance on a number of activities they participated in for the National Education Monitoring Project. |
Implications for Technology Education
Overall, students’ perceptions of how good they are at technology
were positive, however at Year 8, boys were more positive about their
performance in technology than girls and Non-Mäori students were
more positive than Mäori. There has been ongoing concern for girls
and for Mäori students regarding the decline in their success and
their adoption of a more negative perception of their own success for
schooling in general. It would appear that, for technology, these students
are following this trend. The feeling of competence in a subject has
been linked with enjoyment of that subject (Rennie & Punch, 1991),
and enjoyment in turn has been linked with success in a subject area
(Doran, Lawrenz & Hegelson, 1994; Dweck, 1986; Rennie & Punch,
1991; Schibeci, 1984). For girls and Mäori students, a declining
belief in their competence in technology could lead to the self-perpetuating
treadmill: the feeling that you aren’t that good at technology,
leads to a lack of enjoyment of technology, which leads to lack of success
in technology.
There is also research (McCarthy & Moss, 1994) that shows that a
feeling of success in technology is a factor that influences the choosing
of technology for further study in senior secondary education. However,
their research also shows that for this factor to influence girls in
their choices, girls need to experience a higher level of success than
boys do. The results from this study show that, as girls get older they
become less positive than boys about how good they are at technology.
This can be of concern, girls’ positive feelings about their success
in technology are declining, yet girls need to feel a higher level of
success than boys need to feel in order for this to influence their
choices.
The ratings that students gave themselves for achievement in technology
did not correlate to the rating given to their work in the NEMP tasks.
There is a discrepancy between how well students think they are doing
at technology and how well they are actually doing. The students do
not appear to have formed a clear enough picture of what is required
to be good at technology to enable them to identify areas of strength
and weakness - there is a lack of clear concepts of what is required
in technology by these students.
