Teaching primary school technology: Coming to terms with the challenge.
JUDITH COUSINS
Edith Cowan University
Perth
Western Australia.
Paper presented at the
AUSTRALIAN ASSOCIATION FOR RESEARCH IN EDUCATION
ANNUAL CONFERENCE
Brisbane,
December, 1998
Teaching primary school technology: Coming to terms with the challenge.
Judith Cousins
Edith Cowan University
Perth.
Introduction
The implementation of a new learning area, Technology and Enterprise,
in the K-12 curriculum has raised some concerns among primary teachers
in Western Australia. This paper focuses on these concerns and
discusses results gained through the use of a survey, questionnaire and
interviews with four exemplary teachers to reach recommendations.
The Western Australian perspective
In Western Australia, primary technology has originated from two
directions, from science and computing. Computers were introduced into
primary schools in Western Australia in the 1980's and were seen by
teachers, parents and the Education Department as introducing children
to technology. From 1985, Science and Technology formed one of the
seven components of the K-10 curriculum. Many teachers prepared
programmes of work titled 'Science and Technology' which closely
matched their previous work in science alone and had little or no
resemblance to technology as it now appears in the learning area
Technology and Enterprise.
In 1994 the National Student Outcome Statements, prepared by the
Curriculum Corporation, were presented to administrators in Western
Australia and along with other States and Territories it was decided
that these statements would be adapted to meet local needs. The first
document which was presented to teachers was 'Technology and
Enterprise. Student Outcome Statements with Pointers and Work Sample's
(1994) and except for the addition of ÔEnterpriseÕ to the title there
was no significant change to the greater part of the Curriculum
Corporation material.
This new discipline, Technology and Enterprise, was introduced to
teachers as one of the eight learning areas, to be included into their
already crowded primary programmes. There was no statement by the
Education Department that Technology and Enterprise was to be seen as a
subject in its right, with its own special content and processes, and
no indicators were given of where it integrated or linked with other
learning, no hint that it would be supported by professional
development courses, or no suggestion that resources or support of any
kind would be given.
As Technology and Enterprise was introduced along with the Student
Outcome Statements for the other seven learning areas, without any
special information, supporting documents, etc. many teachers showed
concerns as to how they would effectively implement an area where they
lacked confidence and competence. It seemed as though the history of
primary science, where many teachers avoided teaching the subject, was
about to be repeated with Technology and Enterprise.
Aim of the study
This study set out to gain insights into how teachers were viewing the
implementation of technology tasks in primary classrooms. Research
questions included:
1. What concerns do teachers have about implementing Technology and
Enterprise in primary classrooms?
2. What teaching strategies are most suited to enhancing student
involvement and learning in Technology and Enterprise?
3. How do exemplary teachers approach teaching Technology and
Enterprise?
Methodology and Results
A three-pronged approach was used to ensure that several avenues were
explored to gain information. The first of these was a survey,
followed by a questionnaire and then interviews with exemplary
teachers.
The survey.
Data was obtained on the survey from four different groups: three
groups, totalling 49 practicing teachers and a larger, fourth group of
120 pre-service teachers in the third year of their course.
The purpose was to find which factors/issues teachers considered to be
significant when implementing technology lessons. It was designed to
be as simple as possible and was a single piece of paper with eight
possible concerns listed. Teachers were required to rank their
concerns in order of importance from 1 being most important to 8 being
least important. (see Appendix 1).
The eight factors were: resources, evaluation, safety, support, cost,
time, likely difficulties and personal skills. These factors had been
derived from various sources. Some were gained by the researcher in
informal discussions with teachers and Principals and other from
literature on the topic, (Treagust, Kinnear and Rennie (1991); Aubusson
and Webb (1992); Hoban and Hoban (1992); Eggleston (1992); Clayfield
and Hyatt (1993); Anning (1994).
The factors in the survey were randomly listed and the survey
administered with little introduction beyond saying the researcher was
trying to find out factors which would influence teachers implementing
technology programmes in their classroooms. There was no explanation
of why the factors had been chosen, what they meant, or opportunity for
the respondents to elaborate on their rankings. A total of 169 surveys
was completed.
Table 1. Mean rankings given by four groups of practicing and
pre-service teachers.
Item
_Group1
N=25_Group 2
N=12_Group 3
N=12_Group 4
N=120__Resources
_1.80
_1.75
_2.00
_1.68
__Time
_3.52
_3.66
_2.08
_4.65
__Skills
_4.48
_4.75
_3.58
_4.90
__Cost
_4.72
_3.66
_3.58
_6.12
__Difficulties
_5.00
_5.50
_6.50.
_5.55
__Safety
_5.08
_4.25
_6.50
_3.78
__Support
_5.64
_6.25
_7.00
_5.02
__Evaluation
_5.76
_6.16
_4.50
_4.26
__
The results from Table 1 show that resources was the factor of prime
concern to all groups of teachers. This can be interpreted in several
ways as resources may mean equipment, consumable materials, written
curriculum materials, or all three. It can also be defined as human
resources. Time was the second priority for practicing teachers, which
appears to indicate they believe that the planning and preparation of
technology lessons may be time consuming. The cost factor was given
reasonable priority by the practising teachers, always in the top four.
Safety was high on pre-service teachers priorities, which may be due
to a perceived lack of confidence in managing classes with all children
engaged in active learning. The low ranking of evaluation by the
practising teachers may be interpreted as teachers not feeling the need
to address evaluation at this stage of implementation of the learning
area.
The questionnaire
The questionnaire was divided into four sections to gain insights into
teacher background, aspects of teaching technology, teachers'
familiarity with the Technology and Enterprise Student Outcome
Statements and some thoughts on the integration of technology and other
subjects. There was an opportunity for teachers to make additional
comments. As the teachers completed the questionnaire in their own
time there was no set time limit. The questionnaire used a mixture of
response types, both closed and open-ended items.
The questionnaire was produced following analysis of the surveys. The
aim was to focus on the survey responses and to obtain a more detailed
picture of the issues and factors teachers were concerned with in
implementing this new learning area.
The questionnaire was given to 40 teachers. Thirty of these teachers
were studying part time working towards completion of their Bachelor of
Education degree, while still teaching full time. They were enrolled
in either a science education unit or a mathematics education unit and
the questionnaire was given out at the end of a lecture and collected
the following week. The other ten teachers were from the primary
division of an Independent Girls school and they were given the
questionnaire at the conclusion of a one hour professional development
session on "Teaching Technology". The questionnaires were completed in
their own time and posted to the researcher. The response rate for the
first group was 90% and for the second group, 80%.
Results from the questionnaire were analysed under the four sections of
teacher background; teaching technology; student outcome statements;
and integration of technology with other learning areas.
Section 1: Teacher background.
The experience of the responding teachers is presented in Table 2.
Table 2. The teaching experience of the 34 responding teachers.
Number of years teaching_Number of teachers__1-5_7__6-10_11__11-15_10__16-20_6__
The above Table indicates the teachers were very experienced, with 80%
having a minimum of six years of classroom experience.
The Year Level the teachers were currently teaching is indicated in
Table 3.
Table 3. Year Level teachers are currently teaching.
Year Level_Number of teachers__Pre Primary_7 __Junior Primary (Years 1-3)_11
__Middle and Upper Primary_11 __Support (different classes)_1 __Relief
(moving between schools)_4 __It can been seen that there was a good spread
of responses across the Year levels.
Section 2. Teaching technology.
The purpose of this section was to try to ascertain at what stage these
teachers were in implementing technology within their classrooms. The
first question asked teachers to choose which of four levels they
thought described themselves. The results are in Table 4. Two
teachers did not respond, but both wrote: "I am not sure what
technology means".
Table 4. Teacher's levels of technology teaching experience.
Response choice_Number of teachers__Just a beginner_18 __Have made a start
but need further guidance_9 __Have done some activities reasonably
successfully_2__Feel confident I know where I am going_3
__
These data clearly show that at the time of this study a number of
teachers were still at the beginning of implementing technology (53%),
while another 30% considered they needed further guidance. Only 3 (9%)
teachers indicated that they felt confident in this learning area, with
2 teachers (6%) feeling that they were reasonably successful. These
results were not surprising because the Technology and Enterprise
learning area did not seem be being implemented at all in many schools
at this time.
The second question in this section asked: What would motivate you to
teach more technology? The responses covered a range of areas which
could be categorised under five headings shown in Table 5.
Table 5. Motivation required to teach technology.
Motivational source_Number of teachers__Resources_17__More knowledge about
what technology is_10__Professional development_5__Curriculum materials_3__Time_3__
Consistent with the findings from the survey, the teachers were finding
the provision of resources for technology tasks as one of the major
difficulties to be overcome in the classroom situation. The responses
indicated that 'resources' could mean materials as well as ideas.
Other questions in this section related to the technology being taught,
sources of ideas for technology lessons, the documentation used in the
planning process, the main difficulties being experienced, the best
technology each teacher considered they had done and aspects of
assessment. The responses varied but can be summarised as follows:
Technology being taught: 'design, make, appraise' activities;
computing; building with Lego; using calculators; and exploring
mechanical items.
Ideas for technology lessons: other teachers; own ideas, professional
development courses; and resource books.
Documentation used in planning: daily work pad; programming; 'Primary
Investigations'; and Lego resource cards.
Main difficulties being experienced: having time to do extended
activities; providing enough materials; knowing how to plan
appropriately; finding ideas.
Best technology taught: making boats from junk; using Lego Technics;
building kites; and making spaghetti bridges.
Assessing technology.
Sixteen teachers responded to this item, with only 7 giving a positive
response. Methods of assessment included: evaluation of the final
product; observation of the children as they worked; listening to
children's discussions; use of a checklist, and interviewing children.
Problems associated with assessment were mentioned, such as, time to
teach and assess, time to mark final products and the difficulty in
making subjective judgements.
Section 3. The Technology and Enterprise Student Outcome Statements.
The purpose of this section was to determine teachers' familiarity with
the Technology and Enterprise Student Outcome Statements. Four levels
of response were provided, as shown on Table 6.
Table 6. Teacher's responses to familiarity with the Technology and
Enterprise Student
Outcome Statements
Response _Number of teachers__Haven't read it_15 __Have skimmed it_16 __Have
read it thoroughly_3__Have a good understanding of it_0__
Table 6 shows that of the 34 teachers in the sample, not one considered
he/she had a good understanding of this document and only three had
read it thoroughly. 44% had not read it and 45% had only skimmed it.
This material was available in all schools in early 1995, many months
before the questionnaire was administered, so it appeared, from this
sample, that little organised discussion had occurred and individual
schools or teachers were working with the document in some isolation.
Section 4. Technology and integration.
This section tried to find out if teachers were seeing Technology and
Enterprise as a separate subject or whether they expected to integrate
it with other learning areas. Thirty two teachers responded to this
item, with three teachers stating they would teach it separately and
twenty six that they would integrate it. A question relating to
assessing technology if it was taught in an integrated manner was
ignored by 9 teachers. Other responses indicated a lack of confidence
in this area , examples included:
"Not sure" ,"You tell me" and "Good question!".
Interviews
Four exemplary primary technology teachers were interviewed to gain
insights into their practices when implementing Technology and
Enterprise lessons. The interviews contained eighteen structured
questions and other non-scripted questions, based on the responses of
the interviewee. These interviews produced an extensive amount of data
which can only be summarised in this paper.
The teaching experience of these four teachers ranged from eight to
thirty years. They were currently teaching Year 1, Year 4, Year 6 and
Year7/8. They were all enthusiastic, and indicated they felt confident
and competent to teach Technology and Enterprise and were willing to
assist others to gain greater understanding and expertise in this
learning area. They were all well conversant with the Technology and
Enterprise Student Outcome Statements.
These exemplary teachers were asked what problems they saw in teaching
this learning area, so a comparison could be made with responses from
the surveys and questionnaires.
These four teachers gave a range of responses to this question on
perceived problems or concerns. Two teachers commented on the lack of
direction for teachers as to where technology fitted into the school
curriculum and that many teachers did not understand the philosophy
behind technology education. They stated that there was no syllabus
and that although there were plenty of 'one-off ideas' available there
was nothing that presented teachers with a coherent programme. One
teacher mentioned 'teacher apathy' as a problem, with some teachers not
wanting anymore change nor wanting to try anything different. Three of
these four teachers highlighted the lack of resources and the fact that
little money was being set aside for this learning area. It should be
noted that the schools where these teachers were working had all
allocated some money for Technology and Enterprise activities.
The question of safety was raised but all four teachers considered that
technology tasks just required sensible planning and supervision. As
one commented, "Technology doesn't introduce any extra safety aspects
that you wouldn't already cover in your classroom."
The aspect of resourcing for technology education was discussed and all
four teachers saw the provision of resources as essential for
technology tasks. Depending on the topic being undertaken the type of
resources varied but these teachers mentioned the importance of tools
and simple equipment. Items such as glue guns, hammers, nails, and
clamps were seen as necessary for construction activities.
The area of assessment was addressed, with each teacher having
thoughtful ideas and suggestions on what and how this should be carried
out. The importance of 'skilling up' children so they could design,
build and evaluate was highlighted. The process the children went
through during the completion of a technology task was seen as equally
important to the final product and a range of assessment procedures,
such as group assessment, peer assessment, use of checklists and
observations were all seen as methods of assessing children's progress
in this learning area. All four teachers conceded that this was a
difficult aspect of teaching technology and that they felt they needed
to further consider their methods and strategies.
These teachers all taught technology in an integrated way. Although
they often began a topic as a technology task there were always
'spin-offs' into other learning areas, and this was seen as natural and
positive.
These four teachers had established practices and styles suited to
their individual skills and teaching contexts. They were leading by
example and the interviews provided useful information on how exemplary
practitioners were viewing the Technology and Enterprise learning area.
Conclusion
This paper has summarised a study to gauge the concerns of teachers in
Western Australia related to implementing the Technology and Enterprise
learning area.. The results indicated that a number of teachers had
little understanding or familiarity with the Technology and Enterprise
Student Outcome Statements, were uncertain how to include technology
activities successfully within their curriculum, and saw the provision
of resources as a necessary requirement for classroom implementation of
technology tasks. Some teachers showed concern about safety aspects
and few indicated any confidence in assessing this learning area.
Recommendations
This study has proceeded on the basis that Technology and Enterprise,
being a new learning area, should develop from informed research, and
suggests that:
¥ teachers need quality professional development courses to assist them
to implement technology teaching in their primary classrooms;
¥ professional development courses should cover teacher's concerns,
such as safety, time management, appropriate resources, assessment
procedures and integration of technology with other learning areas;
¥ exemplary teachers should be identified and used as role models and
mentors for beginning and less confident/competent teachers;
¥ the education systems in Western Australia should produce quality
resources which will provide teachers with content guidelines.
References
Anning, A. (1994). Dilemmas and opportunities of a new curriculum:
Design and technology for young children. International Journal of
Technology and Design Education. 4(2). pp.155-178.
Aubusson, P., & Webb, C. (1992). Teacher beliefs about primary science
and technology education. Unpublished paper. Australian Science
Education Research Association, Waikato.
Clayfield, H., & Hyatt, R. (1993). Designs on technology. Melbourne:
Oxford University Press.
Curriculum Corporation (1994). A statement on technology for
Australian schools. Carlton.
Education Department of Western Australia. (1994). Technology and
enterprise. Student outcome statements with pointers and work samples.
Perth.
Eggleston, J. (1992). Teaching design and technology. Buckingham:
Open University Press.
Hoban, G. & Hoban, S. (1992). Primary science and technology.
Cammeray: Martin Education.
Treagust, D., Kinnear, A., & Rennie, L. (1991). Teaching technology as
a design process. Perth: The School Technology Group Inc.