promoting excellence in preparation and excellence in ... · sunderland, u.k. sr2-8jb...
TRANSCRIPT
A refereed publication of the international honorary for professions in technology.
Promoting Excellence in Preparation and Excellence in Practice Volume XXVIII, 2002No. 1 Winter/Spring
TechnologyTechnology
A refereed publication of
Promoting Excellence in Preparationand Excellence in Practice
The International Honorary for Professions in Technology
On-line EditionVolume XXVIII, Number 1 Winter/Spring 2002
of
StudiesStudies
The JournalJournal
On-line Edition
Editor & PublisherJerry Streichler
Board of EditorsE. Stephanie AtkinsonUniversity of SunderlandSchool of EducationHammerton Hall, Gray Rd.Sunderland, U.K. [email protected]
David DevierUniversity of CincinnatiClermont College4200 Clermont College DriveBatavia, OH 45103513.732.5209fax: [email protected]
Michael J. DyrenfurthDepartment of Industrial TechnologyPurdue University1410 Knoy Hall, Room 461West Lafayette, IN 47907-1410765.496.1203fax: [email protected]
Sharon HartNorth Dakota State Collegeof Science800 6th Street NorthWahpeton, ND 58076-0002701.671.2221fax: [email protected]
Marie KraskaEducational Foundations, Leadership,and TechnologyAuburn University4036 Haley CenterAuburn University, AL 36849-5221334.844.4460fax: [email protected]
Linda Rae Markert200 Poucher HallState University of New Yorkat OswegoOswego, NY [email protected]
Howard E. MiddletonSchool of Vocational Technologyand Arts EducationFaculty of EducationGriffith UniversityNathan 4111 QueenslandAustralia61.7.3875.5724fax: [email protected]
Sam C. ObiDepartment of TechnologySan Jose State UniversityOne Washington SquareSan Jose, CA 95192-0061408.924.3218fax: [email protected]
Christopher J. Shelley CMfgEW. L. Gore & Associates705 Guido Dr.Middletown, DE [email protected]
Xeushu SongDepartment of TechnologyNorthern Illinois UniversityDekalb, IL 60115-2854815.753.1349fax: [email protected]
Robert Wenig(representing the Board of Directors)
Board of Directors
Region 1 (The nations of Europe, theEastern Provinces of Canada, and theNortheastern United States)Kenneth P. DeLuccaDept. of Industry and TechnologyMillersville University of PennsylvaniaP.O. Box 1002Millersville, PA 17551-0302717.872.3868fax: [email protected]
Region 2 (The nations of Africa, theCaribbean Islands, and theSoutheastern United States)Robert E. WenigDepartment of Mathematics, Science, &Technology EducationBox 7801North Carolina State UniversityRaleigh, NC 27695-7801919.515.1742fax: [email protected]
Region 3 ( All members-at-large, theCanadian Province of Ontario, and theNorth Central United States)David DevierUniversity of Cincinnati, Clermont College4200 Clermont College DriveBatavia, OH 45103513.732.5209fax: [email protected]
Region 4 (The nations of Central andSouth America, the Northern Territoryand Central Provinces of Canada, andthe Central United States)Kennard G. LarsonDept. of Industrial TechnologyUniversity of Nebraska at Kearney905 West 25th St.Kearney, NE 68849308.865.8504fax: [email protected]
Region 5 (Australia, the island nations ofthe Pacific and Indian Oceans, the nationsof Asia, the Yukon Territory and WesternProvinces of Canada, and the WesternUnited States)James EdwardsDepartment of Design & IndustrySan Francisco State University1600 Holloway AvenueSan Francisco, CA 94132415.338.7896fax: [email protected]
Associate Executive Director forInternational AffairsMichael J. DyrenfurthDept. of Industrial Education & TechnologyIowa State UniversityAmes, IA 50011-3130515.294.0131fax: [email protected]
Associate ExecutiveDirector for Communityand Technical CollegesJerry C. OlsonTechnology BuildingBowling Green State UniversityBowling Green, Ohio 43403419.372.0378fax: [email protected]
Executive DirectorJerry StreichlerTechnology BuildingBowling Green State UniversityBowling Green, Ohio 43403419.372.0378fax: [email protected]
A refereed publication of the international honorary for professions in technology.
Editorial ConsultantsNancy HooseSeth A. Streichler
Office ManagerSusan Pickens
Staff for this Issue
Art & Layout DirectorJan Claybaugh
The Journal of Technology Studies (ISSN 1071-6084) is a publication of Epsilon Pi Tau,Incorporated, a nonprofit academic and professional honorary. Headquarters andeditorial offices are located at the Technology Building, Bowling Green State University,Bowling Green, OH 43403-0305. This address or email to [email protected] shouldbe used for all author and editorial inquiries and for purchase of copies or subscriptions.Foreign subscriptions quoted on request. Rates subject to change without notice.
Copyright 2002 by Epsilon Pi Tau, Inc.
The opinions expressed by the journal’s authors are not necessarily those of the Board ofDirectors, staff, or members of Epsilon Pi Tau.
The scope of interests in articles and in authors is as broad as the world of technology,with members of Epsilon Pi Tau receiving the same consideration as nonmembercontributors. Instructions for preparing and submitting manuscripts and a detailed de-scription of the processes we follow in review and publication preparation arecontained in the guidesheets reproduced in this issue as “Guidelines for Authors” and“Editorial Review and Procedures.” Submissions that fail to comply with these will notbe reviewed and will not be returned to authors.
Two issues of the journal are published each year in online versions. At the end of theyear, the two issues are combined and published in a hard copy volume that is providedto subscribers and to all members who, having paid their fees and dues for that calendaryear, are in good standing.
The journal is currently indexed in Current Index to Journals of Education and Australia’sInternational Vocational Education and Training and Research Database. It is availableonline at three sites:
• http://www.ncver.edu.au• http://www.EpsilonPiTauHonorary.org• http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTS/ (Virginia Tech’s
scholarly communications project)
Separate articles or complete issues are available on microform or hard copy fromProQuest Information and Learning Co., P.O. Box 1346, Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346.
Printed in the United States by Gray Printing Company, Fostoria, Ohio.
IDEAS
85
43
59
33
Portable Document Format (PDF)—Finally, a Universal DocumentExchange TechnologyWan-Lee Cheng
Distance Learning in IndustrialTeacher Education ProgramsHassan B. Ndahi and John M. Ritz
Attitudes Toward Computer-Mediated Distance TrainingSarah S. Cramer, William L. Havice,and Pamela A. Havice
Mapping Dimensions ofTechnological Literacy to theContent StandardsLarry Hatch
A New High School GraduationExperience Requires Increased StaffComputer LiteracyAddie M. Johnson
Business Education LeadersCompare E-mail and Regular MailSurvey ResearchAllen D. Truell and Perry Goss
ARTICLES (continued)
70
76IDEAS
78
64
As soon as the editorial process is completed, each article is posted online. As articles are added, theorder and sequence in the Table of Contents and within the body of the journal may be changed to reflect andcommunicate the editor’s concept and intentions for the issue and for this print version.
Table of ContentsVolume XXVIII, Number 1, Winter/Spring 2002
4 Social and Professional Responsibilityin Our Professions...or...Pragmateia inthe Grand Scheme of ThingsErnest N. Savage
Samson’s Hair: Denuding theTechnology Curriculum?James G. Edwards
Technology Transfer: A ThirdWorld PerspectiveAnthony I. Akubue
Pupils Identify Key Aspectsand Outcomes of aTechnological LearningEnvironmentYaron Doppelt and Moshe Barak
Perspectives on EmployingIndividuals with Special NeedsJames P. Greenan, Mingchang Wu, andElizabeth L. Blacktraditional Bachelor of Science DegreeTechnology Education inNew ZealandMichael Forret, Alister Jones, andJudy Moreland
Recognizing Surface Roughnessto Enhance Milling OperationsMandara D. Savage and Joseph C. Chen
The Implications of Service-Learningfor Technology StudiesJames E. Folkestad, Bolivar A. Senior,and Michael A. DeMiranda
GUEST EDITARTICLE
81
45
8
14
22
29
38
ARTICLES
TABLE OF CONTENTSVOLUME XXVIII, Number 2Summer/Fall 2002
52
GuestEditarticle
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
4
I’ve been a member of this honorary forover a quarter of a century, and I’ve oftenreflected as a trustee on the words of the threecounselors while listening to the ritual, orwhile hearing a charge to the new members,or some words from members of the executivecommittee. Last year at the Mississippi ValleyTechnology Teacher Education conference Iwas honored to share a platform with a numberof individuals who were addressing theirinvolvement in some of the major initiativesin our field over the years. Ken Phillips, whowas an original member of A Curriculum toReflect Technology (Warner et al., 1947) team,spoke eloquently and respectfully of thecontributions of W. E. Warner to that effortand many other initiatives in what we now maycall Technology Studies. It struck me that, asyou might expect, Warner’s socialreconstructionist philosophy found its way intothe Epsilon Pi Tau ritual as Pragmeteia—socialand professional proficiency—to think ofprofessional and social needs first in order tolive in peace and to assume an effective placein our society. In the grand scheme of thingswe might ask, How can we reconstruct ourschool and our profession in order to create abetter society? The question is riddled withpitfalls, among them those value-laden issuesrelated to what is a better society. Perhaps abit more focus on the direction that TechnologyStudies is heading and the role of the professionin getting us there will be more manageable.
The Life Cycle of Technology StudiesIf we look at a life cycle pattern containing
seven stages—precursor, invention, devel-opment, maturity, pretenders, obsolescence,and antiquity (Rogers, 1995), we can clearlysee the position of the old industrial arts as inthe last gasp position of antiquity. But wheredo we see the new technology educationpositioned? Is it at the development stagewhere the program is protected and supportedby doting guardians? Or has it advanced to thematurity stage where it now has a life of itsown and has its place in the fabric of theinternal and external community? Although Ihesitate to speak the term aloud, could it be in
the pretender stage, lacking some key elementof functionality or quality? Where would youplace our profession? For the sake of thisarticle, I will assume that we have evolved onlyto the development stage and that there is stilltime and room for additional creation thatcould lead to even greater significance for thestudy of technology.
Our Social ChallengeIs there content in our field of study that
would help all learners understand and workfor peace in the world? Certainly theTechnology Content Standards in theStandards for Technology Literacy (STL; ITEA,2000) support that idea in providing acomplete strand titled “Technology andSociety” where four standards are devoted tothat topic. It’s interesting to note in retrospectthat this project is a product of the Technologyfor All Americans Project. Isn’t that part ofour social problem today? While there arereferences to global issues in the documents,the overall project is a product of isolationism!On the flip side, it’s the best document everproduced for our profession. Our challengeappears to be that we must become more globalin our instruction and much more sensitive tothe cultural and societal impacts of ourtechnologies.
Input, Output, and GroupingWe have all been “content sensitized” to
the point where when the STL came out weall jumped to chapter 7 to see if our favoritecontent area was represented. I’ll not go theretoday. Rather, I’d like to talk about those inputsand outputs that should be fundamental toliteracy in all learners. If that literacy is notaddressed, the learning that occurs on theinside of our learning organization will not beequal to the learning that occurs on the outsideof those organizations. That, according toRevans (1980), a pioneer in organizationallearning, will result in the decline anddecimation of the organization. The inputshave been aptly classified by the North CentralRegional Educational Laboratory (NCREL,2001) as digital-age literacy, inventive thinking,
Social and Professional Responsibility in OurProfessions...or...Pragmateia in the Grand Schemeof ThingsErnest N. Savage
This article is basedon a presentation at theMarch 16, 2002, Epsilon Pi TauInternational Breakfast heldat the annual conference ofthe International TechnologyEducation Association inColumbus, Ohio.
effective communication, and highproductivity. The output of digital-age literacyis a compilation of “today’s basics,” basic,scientific, and technological literacy. Basicliteracy, as has always been the case,incorporates the essential components oflanguage literacy: reading, writing, listening,and speaking, but in today’s context alsoincludes the use of technology-based media.For example, do you listen to or read a bookand do you read text off of an LCD screen, apage, or, in the near future, directly. Scientificliteracy today relates more than ever to thesynergy among science, mathematics, andtechnology. It must include a fundamentalunderstanding of the bodies of knowledge ofeach of these disciplines as well as practice inthe scientific method. Technological literacy,according to STL, is the ability to use, manage,assess, and understand technology. This levelof literacy must include literacy in culture andglobal awareness. Cultural literacy assumes theability to recognize and appreciate the diversityof peoples and cultures. Global awarenessallows learners to understand and recognize theinterrelationships among nation states,multinational corporations, and the people ofthe world. Digital-age literacy must, therefore,be contextualized globally and culturally. Todo otherwise is to continue to perpetuateisolationism.
The outputs of inventive thinking aremanifested in information problem solving andare operationalized by a person’s ability to takeinto account contingencies, anticipate changes,and understand interdependencies within andamong systems. They presume a person’scommitment to lifelong learning bystimulating curiosity, creativity, and risk taking.Curiosity is a “desire to know.” Creativityinvolves using one’s imagination to developnew and original things, and risk takinginvolves taking a chance to lose something ofworth for the opportunity to gain greaterthings. Other outputs of inventive thinkingare higher-order thinking and sound reasoning.These outputs ought to be precursors toproblem solving but often are dismissed asnonessential processes of the creative enterprise.In fact, higher-order thinking leads toinformed, thoughtful opinions, judgments,and conclusions, where problem solving inisolation often leads to only one acceptablesolution. The capacity to think logically inorder to find results that meet appropriate
criteria is a process of sound thinking andsound reasoning.
Another 21st century skill input is effectivecommunication. This skill is sorely absentfrom the products of our high schools anduniversity programs. Often our students haveexcellent technical capability, but they lack thesocial and personal skills necessary to beeffective at many levels of enterprise. Theoutputs of this skill are teaming, collaboration,and the development of interpersonalcapabilities. These outputs reflect the abilityto work effectively as a member of a group ofindividuals who are dedicated to a commongoal, to interact efficiently among the team,and to work in concert to achieve that goal.
The final skill output that NCRELaddresses is high productivity. In some waysthis is the 2000 version of TEXNIKH—skillin systems and processes related to information,organizations, and materials. These skills aresoft and hard; a concept that we sometimesforget. Soft skills include the ability to carefullyplan and manage work, concentrating on themain goal of the project while anticipatingcontingencies, to arrive at satisfactory results.Hard skills refer to the application of tools,materials, and machines to real world situationsin ways that add value. Experience with highproductivity skills provide students withinsights across the domains of knowledge.
Mastery of 21st century skills requires theuse of effective learning strategies, many ofwhich have been alluded to already in thisarticle. Specifically, social proficiency, orPragmateia, must be reflected in the classroomthrough learning groups. Damian (2001) ofENC Instructional Resources has identifiedthree learning group strategies that haveimplications for our field. Problem-solvingpartnerships allow students to apply theirknowledge of mathematics, science, andtechnology principles to problems that couldbe encountered in life or work situations.Multiple approaches to solving the problemare encouraged, and individual students havethe opportunity to explain and discuss theirsuggested solution. In cooperative teams ateam plan of operation is created and goals arespecified for highly structured teams. Teammembers share leadership roles within theframework of specific roles, while stressingcooperation in the achievement of goals.Collaborative groups allow for a high level offlexibility and creativity while allowing peer
5
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
6
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
support and the opportunity to have extendedamounts of time to think and work together.Garmston and Wellman (2000) identifiedseven norms of collaborative work: pausing,paraphrasing, probing, putting ideas on thetable, paying attention to self and others,presuming positive intentions, and pursuing abalance between advocacy and inquiry. Thistype of behavior provides the “habits oflearning” that could lead to a better under-standing of culture and societies.
Collaborative work should also be a part ofevery teacher’s portfolio. The National ScienceEducation Standards (National ResearchCouncil, 1996) and the Principles andStandards for School Mathematics (NationalCouncil of Teachers of Mathematics, 2000)emphasize the need to establish collaborativelearning groups for teachers as well as students.According to these standards documents, strongcollegial support where teachers are workingtogether to improve their own teaching skillsand content knowledge results in systemicimprovement and brings about a feeling ofbelonging and deeper meaning to the learningprocess.
“Leaning” Up the ProfessionIf our profession becomes committed to
devoting more resources to Pragmateia-basedinitiatives, what will have to occur? We can lookto the manufacturing enterprise for that answerin the “lean” movement. Lean organizations• Accelerate improvements in speed and
quality.• Eliminate the “end of the month” crunch.• Gain control and eliminate chaos.• Earn performance recognition and
rewards.• Eliminate stressful work routines.• Move from “fire fighting” to proactive
problem solving.• Contribute to improving the institution’s
bottom line.Don’t you sometimes feel like you’re riding
an old broken-down workhorse when otherprofessionals are riding thoroughbreds?Perhaps it’s because we operate in a mannerthat supports that kind of perception insideand outside of the profession. With all duerespect to our associations and leadership, ifwe were to reflect upon becoming lean as aprofession we might consider the following:
• Sharing the “technology” role. There isat least one state that is creating standardsbased on the following nationalstandards:
• National Educational TechnologyPlan
• National Education TechnologyStandards for Students
• Standards for Technology Literacy• Information Literacy Standards for
Student LearningThe thinking is that there is plenty ofcontent to go around. What is importantis that students meet the outcomes.
• Changing the name of the profession.We’ve done this before, but we may havemissed the mark. I’m aware of confusionon virtually every standards committee,whether at the local, state, or national levelwhere there is misinterpretation betweentechnology education, educationaltechnology, computer technology, andinformation technology. If we aren’tgoing to embrace the approach identifiedby the first bullet, we should considerchanging the name to something moredescriptive such as Technology Studies. Itworks for Social Studies!
• Unify the profession. This is, of course,heresy in the cathedral. However, themore associations that we haverepresenting us, the more diluted ourmessage becomes, and the less strengthour representative bodies have, sometimesall the way down to the local level.
• Make a commitment to standards.Regardless of the standards selected, theprocess used to create these documents isaccountable and defensible. As webecome more committed at a nationallevel to the linkage of funding toassessment, it will be necessary to link ouroutcomes to valid documents.
If we were required to take an oath uponbecoming teachers, would it include “advancingunderstanding, appreciation, and awareness oftechnology as both an enduring and influentialendeavor and an integral element of culture?” Iwould hope so. We all believe in this statementbecause it is the last statement in the Code ofEpsilon Pi Tau. Through this is our opportunityto go far.
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
7Dr. Ernest Savage is professor and deanof The College of Technology at BowlingGreen State University. He is a member of
Alpha Gamma Chapter of Epsilon Pi Tauand received his Distinguished Service Citationin 1994.
ReferencesDamien, C. (2001). Student learning groups that really work. Encfocus, 8(2), 25–29.
International Technology Education Association. (2000). Standards for technological literacy. Reston, VA: Author.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for teachers of mathematics. Reston,
VA: Author.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy
Press.
North Central Regional Educational Laboratory. (2001). EnGauge—21st century skills. Retrieved from
http://www.ncrel.org/engauge/skills/skills.htm
Revans, R. (1980). Action learning. London: Blond & Briggs.
Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York: The Free Press.
Warner, W., Gary, J., Gerbracht, C., Gilbert, H., Lisack, H., Kleintjes, P., & Phillips, K. (1947). A curriculum to
reflect technology. Presentation to the American Industrial Arts Association Conference, Cincinnati, OH.
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
The ideas in this article
are drawn from the
author’s address at the
Epsilon Pi Tau Breakfast
at the California Industrial
and Technology Education
Association Conference,
March 11, 2000, Pasadena,
California.
Samson’s Hair: Denuding the TechnologyCurriculum?James G. Edwards
8
The biblical story of Samson (Judges 13–16) tells of a bold, super-strong hero of hispeople who was compromised when his hair,the source of his supreme strength, was cut offwhile he slept. What is occurring in thetechnology curriculum in the United Statesmay indeed parallel the Samson tale. For, inspite of glorious concepts, relevant content, andambitious standards, its effectiveness may becompromised. It appears that the curriculum’s“Samson’s hair,” activity that includes hand skilldevelopment which, for so long, has been thesource of its uniqueness and strength, is beingdiminished. Regrettably, this importantelement is totally nonexistent in sometechnology instruction. In the face of thiscircumstance, I argue that efforts should beundertaken to ensure that the imaginativecurriculum change that is underway integratesand includes, wherever possible, true activitythat includes hand skill development.
To consciously and conscientiously includehand skill development in technology courseswill continue a unique and distinctive approachto activity learning that was evident inindustrial arts. That approach contributedpowerfully and positively to individual learningand student development. Inclusion of thatelement in technology courses today will ensuredelivery of instruction that benefits studentsin a way that is not achieved in other schoolsubjects because it will:• Maintain the interest of students to a
greater extent than occurs in most othersubject areas.
• Respond to learning styles that theinstructional devices commonly used inother subject areas do not do.
• Make a contribution to students’cognitive development in a manner notenjoyed by virtually every other subjectarea in the schools.
With hand skill development, pursuedconsciously and effectively, the technologycurriculum will reflect unique but importantqualities, as did industrial arts. Thus, inresponse to the industrial age, the content ofmanual arts and manual training programsappropriately responded to changing societaland human needs. But activity and hand skill
Now, technology curriculum efforts areresponding to the information and computerage in the same way that industrial artsupgraded the manual training and manual artscontent to respond to the industrial age.Interestingly, while we have learned more aboutthe efficacy of activity and hand skilldevelopment, technology curriculumdevelopers seem to have chosen not to followthe industrial arts approach to changingcontent while maintaining the efficacious partof the methodology.
A well-founded fear is that although thenew standards characterize the new directionas an activity curriculum, the nature andstructure of the laboratory settings, learningactivities, and equipment in the laboratorysettings result in a dearth of learning experiencethat include true hand skill development.
Thus, we may be witnessing noble andefficacious curriculum content and conceptspromulgated and implemented without thatelement that may be considered the mostimportant and beneficial learning aspect thatour field has to offer. If this is true, then it isappropriate to challenge leaders to ensure thatthe new technology content is organized anddelivered so that hand skill developmentremains prominent.
I assert that the lack or diminution of handskill development in our schools limits thestudent’s engagement in the active learningprocess and retards the student’s growth anddevelopment. Thus, my challenge is thatleaders should bravely draw upon, integrate,and ensure that the heritage of the rich, unique,and educationally viable industrial arts learningand instructional method that included handsskill development will be carried forward andbe pervasively evident in the new curriculum.
While the preceding outlines today’ssituation in general, I offer some specifics inthe three following parts: First, I relate ourheritage as imbedded in the views of an earlyindustrial arts leader. The second part reviewsstatements regarding that heritage made bycontemporary leaders who support activity andhand skill development. The third part is
Articles
development, practiced in the curriculumsbeing replaced, were maintained.
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
devoted to the views of an eminent neurologistwho elaborates the importance of hand skilldevelopment in his recent best-selling book.Finally, I take the liberty to follow-up andconclude with a summary that reiterates thecritical need to include hand skill developmentactivity in the technology curriculum in orderfor that curriculum to serve the needs ofstudents and continue in American publicschools.
Frederick Gordon Bonser’s ViewsWe travel 90 years back in time to trace
the recognition of the strength and importanceof hand skill development in industrial artsinstruction. The historical roots are found atColumbia University with the ‘“father” ofindustrial arts, Dr. Frederick Gordon Bonser.
Born on June 14, 1875, on a farm in Pana,Illinois (Bawden, 1950), Bonser’s early life wasfilled with doing chores and learning the handskills necessary for working on a small farm.There were no schools in Pana, and when hereached high school age Bonser moved 160miles from home to attend high school. Afterhigh school he attended the University ofIllinois and completed his bachelor’s degree inpsychology in 1901 and a master’s degree in1902. In 1905 Bonser received a graduatefellowship to Teachers College, ColumbiaUniversity, where he completed his doctoratein 1906. After teaching in the field for threeyears, Bonser received an appointment toTeachers College, Columbia University, as headof the newly formed Department of IndustrialEducation.
In 1912, Bonser and James Russell, deanof Teachers College, published a pamphlet thatfocused on the introduction of the industrialarts hand skill development curriculum as away to reform education. This landmarkpublication emphasized the importance of thehand and the mind as co-equals in educationof all children.
Bonser believed that hand work was notjust for the development of a skill, but was ameans of developing understanding andattitudes (Russell & Bonser, 1912). He alsobelieved that hand skill development was ameans of satisfying the constructive impulsesof the learner and that all students wouldbenefit from the development of “generaldexterity and control appropriate for normalphysical growth and general life participation”(Bonser, 1932, p. 158). He emphasized that
“the industrial arts as a study utilize hand workas a means to help in developing meanings andvalues, as a way of clarifying ideas andcultivating appreciations” (Bonser, 1932, p. 203).
Some years later, Bonser (1932) advocatedthat the purpose of hand skill development ofindustrial arts was to “bring more meaning tolife. Hands would be used, true enough, butas the willing servants of a better and finer mindand soul” (p. vii). He also supported theimportance of his view by the conjecture “as ifsomething good could be done by the handsapart from the mind and soul” (p. viii). Withthese statements Bonser focused on theintegration of hand work into all aspects ofeducation.
It should be added that as an early advocateof the hand and the brain as co-creators of theyoung person’s perception of meaning andvalue in life, Bonser said:
The use of the industries is basic as a material outof which and up which to build that culture ofhand and brain and soul which make theindividual alert, inventive intelligent,appreciative, and moral in any vocational activitywhich either choice or circumstance may impose.(Russell & Bonser, 1912, p. 36)
Bonser (1912) asserted that culture “thatis genuine” (p. 36) is founded upon and vitallyinvolved in utilitarian activities. His vision ofhand skill training and its role in educationwas of two parts. The first part emphasized theimportance of hand skill training as a meansfor having a fulfilling life. In this regard hisvision supports the unit shop of industrial arts.However, the second part of his visionemphasized the importance of hand skilltraining as an integral part of every child’seducation. In this regard his vision more closelysupports the underpinnings of today’stechnology curriculum.
Contemporary Leaders’ ViewsTechnology education must return to and
embrace hand skill development as equal to,and integrated with, its own modulecurriculum if it is going to be of strategicimportance in the new century (Foster, 1994;Herschbach, 1997; Petrina & Volk, 1995;Volk, 1996).
In 1994, a paper published in the Journalof Technology Education argued that technologyeducation has drawn its philosophical basefrom industrial arts and it follows that handskill development should be included (Foster,
9
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
Many researchers have reported that thestrength of the industrial arts curriculum is itsability to engage the learner in individualizedprojects that require hand skill development(Jewell, 1995). Volk (1996) suggested thathand skill development is the “hiddencurriculum” and the “real strength and truevalue of industrial arts programs” (p. 34).
In a presentation to the 85th MississippiValley Technology Teacher EducationConference, Karnes (1999) reported on aquestion he posed to leaders in the field: “Whatare the most critical changes or improvementswhich must be made if technology educationis to be an integral component of strategicimportance in the total educational enterpriseof the new century?” (p. 11).
He received and reported on responsesfrom 35 distinguished leaders in our profession(Karnes, 1999). Five papers touched on thecontribution of the industrial arts curriculumand hand skill development. Onerecommended that the foundation of the newtechnology education curriculum is the historyof industrial arts (Barnett, 1999). A secondrecommended that students learn best when“actively engaged in meaningful activity” andthat this activity must have a “hands-onorientation” (Custer, 1999, p. 17). A thirdasserted that we must not forget that “we teachskills as an integral part of technologicalknowledge” (Lux, 1999, p. 22). A fourth paperargued that hands-on, realistic experiences withtools, materials, and processes are themethodology of the field (Moss, 1999). Buffer(1999) offered strong support for both Bonser’sand Wilson’s attitude toward activity and handskill development (my detailed discussion onWilson is in a following section).
Buffer (1999) remonstrated that theleadership of technology education mustremember their historical roots and focus on anew mission and new goals that embrace theprinciples of industrial arts and hand skilldevelopment. He asserted, as did Bonser in
1912, that technology studies must be a “viableand integral component of our educationalfabric” (p. 15) and relevant to the social,economic, and political well-being of thestudents. He closed by pointing out theimportance of hand skill development andtechnical knowledge: “Students need to haveexperiences with real tools, materials,equipment, and processes in laboratory settingsthat enable them to achieve technical skills andcompetencies to solve problems confronted indaily life experiences” (p. 16).
As the new technology curriculumcontinues to grow and expand, as it ought to,we can only hope that those who write andimplement the curriculum heed the wisdomof Barnett (1998), Bonser (1932), Buffer(1998), Custer (1998), Foster (1994),Herschbach (1996), Lux (1998), Moss (1998),Pertina (1995), Volk (1996), and many othersand include hand skill development as co-equalwith mind development.
The curriculum developers andimplementers and the teachers may appreciatethe preceding statements from historical andcontemporary leaders. They will be persuadedfurther by Frank R. Wilson’s views about handskill development.
A Neurologist’s Views: The Thoughtsof Frank R. Wilson
Interestingly, like Bonser, Wilson is analumnus of Columbia University. His book,The Hand: How Its Use Shapes the Brain,Language, and Human Culture, published in1998, defines his vision about the importanceof the hand in daily life. Wilson identifiesrecent discoveries and research that providesupport for Bonser’s vision including: “It mayalso be that the most powerful tactic availableto any parent or teacher who hopes to awakenthe curiosity of a child, and who seeks to jointhe child who is ready to learn, is simply tohead for the hands” (p. 296).
Wilson is a neurologist and the medicaldirector of the Peter F. Ostwald HealthProgram for Performing Artists at theUniversity of California School of Medicine,San Francisco. In spite of the program’s title,Wilson is a neurologist to all occupations whohave problems with their hands. He servesperforming artists who have serious handcomplications and can no longer play theirinstruments. He serves teachers with handdamage who want to return to the classroom
10 1994). Two years later, a second paper inthat journal (Volk, 1996) argued for therecognition of “the value of hands-oncreative and design process” (p. 35) of theindustrial arts curriculum and acknowledgedits value as equal to technology education.Petrina and Volk (1995) and Volk (1996)suggested that the problem is that technologyeducation has rejected its historical roots—industrial arts.
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
and write well. He serves writers who havechronic writer’s cramps and also plumbers,carpenters, auto mechanics, and computerprogrammers who are having trouble withhand control.
The 1998 book reports the results of 15years of research. Wilson began his researchwith a plan to identify how the brain controlsthe hand. Through his extensive research andinterviews, he found, to the contrary, that thehand not only controls a large portion of thebrain but also actually trains the brain andcreates value for it.
Wilson argues that the hand has shapedour development cognitively, emotionally,linguistically, and psychologically. In supportof this view, he shares recent compellingresearch in anthropology, neuroscience,linguistics, and psychology and the results ofpersonal interviews with 27 professionals whodepend on the use of their hands for thefulfillment of their life’s work.
Anthropological research, according toWilson (1998), suggests that the brain tripledin size in response to the developmentalrequirements of the hands, arms, andshoulders. He cites research that demonstrateshow the bones of the hand, arm, and shoulderare not connected in a physical joint but aresuspended in position by a complex networkof muscles, membranes, and ligaments. Thiscomplex network instructs the brain on howto follow so that a finger extended can moveand land at an exact point that may or maynot have been visually identified. The hand canaccomplish this, over and over again, with greataccuracy and without the conscious awarenessof the other one third of the brain.
Wilson (1998) further asserts that thefingertips are the most sensitive part of thebody. The fingertips can describe to the brainthe unseen nut or bolt as the skilled automechanic removes a small part. Upon repairof the removed part, the hand working inconcert with the brain brings the partaccurately back into a hidden position that canbe around a corner, up a bit, and angled to theleft. The hand can do all this with the accuracyof the violinist or with skill of the surgeonbecause two thirds of the brain has “pre-wiring”(p. 125) that serves as a blueprint for thedevelopment of hand skills. This pre-wiringremains dormant until the hand skills aredeveloped and becomes active once the handskills are developed. The information, which
is coming from the hand, is automaticallyprocessed in the brain and brings meaning andvalue to life experiences. Without theawakening of the hand skills and the pre-wiringin the brain, the meaning and value will remainunknown and out of reach.
Wilson (1998) makes the fascinatingpoint that the hand talks to and developsthe brain as much as, or even more than,the brain dictates to the hand. He argues, asBonser did, that to ignore and not tointegrate hand skill training of the individualinto the school curriculum creates aneducational process that is “grosslymisleading and sterile” (p. 7). He calls forthe understanding, integration, andacceptance of hand development as centralto human culture and a “basic imperativeof human life” (p. 10). The educationalsystem, he suggests, “should accommodatethe fact that the hand is not merely ametaphor or an icon for humanness, butoften the real-life focal point—the lever orthe launching pad—of a successful and agenuinely fulfilling life” (p. 277).
The premise for Wilson’s (1998) book isthat the hand is at the core of human life as muchas the brain. He also asserts that because of thecentral role of the hand in bringing meaning,understanding, and value to one’s life that handdevelopment is as much about intelligence andintellectual thinking as the brain.
Wilson (1998) has found that many youngpeople are gifted at using their hands—theycan build and fix complicated things ineveryday life. He points out that often thesesame students have difficulties in learning whenthe hand is not involved. He asserts that wemust come to understand that there are twokinds of intelligence: the hand as “handknowledge” represents one and the other isrepresented by the brain as “symbolicknowledge.” He asserts that the two should beintegrated and that both are equally powerfulin leading the student to a meaningful andsuccessful life. However, he maintains that theintelligence of hand knowledge is not equallyappreciated when it comes to the praise andreward systems of our schools. Wilsonrecommends that educators should find waysto explore and to integrate into theircurriculum the “interaction of intelligence-as-information [book and language basedknowledge] and intelligence as action [hand-skill knowledge]” (p. 284).
11
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
Destroy the Temple?Readers will recall that in the Bible story
Samson regains some strength from a slightregrowth of hair. In spite of the fact that hisenemies had blinded him, he induces someoneto lead him to the central pillars of his enemies’temple. His last act in life is to find the strengthand energy to move those supports and thetemple is destroyed. We could take the analogya bit farther and urge the field to build uponthe small amount of true activity and hand skilldevelopment that exists in some technologycourses. When it succeeds to completelyreintroduce hand skill development, thetechnology curriculum will enjoy a strengthand attractiveness that will result in its wideradoption and that will endure. Or, we couldlearn from Samson’s blindness. It did not stophim from achieving the objective of destroyinghis enemies. But, in the case of the technologycurriculum, blindness to the importance ofactivity that includes hand skill developmentmay be akin to pulling the temple down uponthe field.
Could some future historian of educationpoint out that leaders of a most vital curriculumdenuded that curriculum of its salientcontribution of hand skill developmentintegrated with activity? Could the historianwrite that in response to the changing needsof the population and society those leaderscreated intriguing and highly popularcurriculum materials and conceptualized theirdelivery in laboratories that were appealing anda la mode? Could that future observer go on tosay that while they spoke of “activity,” it wasnot the historical and tried and true hand skilldevelopment activity of industrial arts? And isit possible that the writer would conclude thatwith the uniqueness lost, the teachablemoments in the curriculum they developedcould then be done by others such as science,mathematics, or social studies teachers.
I hope that that scenario will never occurand that we will endeavor not to “cut theSamson’s hair” from our curriculum but ensurethat all our curriculum efforts and all ourmodules and all our new laboratories willprovide, in as many cases as possible withinthe curriculum, the “Samson’s hair” of ourfield—activity that includes hand skilldevelopment with tools and materials. In thisregard and as a segue to my close, I share amessage from one teacher to another. After all,I quoted a number of leaders, all of whom did
or are operating at the university level.Now let me draw from a true leader who
is doing the curriculum. He is in a position toreally know. Following is a message to a fellowteacher from Joe Leogrande (personalcommunication, March 27, 2002), a highlysuccessful middle and high school teacher andthe newly elected president of the New YorkState Technology Education Association:
[Yes...] RJT, Lab Volt, Hearlihy, Paxton-Pattersonmodular technology labs and others like them arevery well-developed curriculum [materials]provided the students can read manuals, andassemble prescribed projects. As you mentioned,authentic assessment activities where studentsdesign, draw, construct, test, optimize, test, andpresent, are the most valuable. A blending of laband authentic assessment activities are the bestsolution, and Sayville Middle School, which wasprogram of the year in 2001 does just that. Theyhave a computer lab and a “shop” to combinetheir activities. Yes, students who just sit atcomputers and build or just simulate real stuffwill not do as well on the assessment since all thestandards of tools and resources are not beingcovered, and no saw dust will ever be in the cuffsof kids. My friend from Sodus Middle School justinstalled a computer-based tech lab, and he feelssorry that his students will never touch a bandsaw or sander in middle school, they will just seeand hear a simulated version of them on acomputer.
There is a danger to be avoided. We oughtto ensure that students are not considered tohave completed a course in technology that isdevoid of real and meaningful hand skilldevelopment opportunities. Those of us whoplan experiences that may include work withmodules, kits, and computers ought not acceptthe hand work associated with those elementsas equivalent to the true hand skilldevelopment experiences that would have beenacceptable to Bonser in his lifetime andaccepted by leaders in the field today and toWilson. The changed nature of the content isnot an excuse to cast hand skill developmentout. Rather, if the new content is to be offeredand be meaningful, the challenge to thedeveloper is to discover, create, and implementlearning experiences with the new content thatprovide hand skill development opportunities.For, if anything can be learned from the tourthat I have taken with you, dear reader, is thatthe content of the field is fleeting and is likelyto remain so. But the real contributions tostudent growth have come from the field’sunique instructional methods, its activity base
12
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
and hand skill development. That fact, alongwith the realization that those are the enduringaspects, should guide curriculum andinstructional development efforts. We owe noless to our clients.
Dr. James Edwards is a professor in the Department ofDesign and Industry at San Francisco StateUniversity. He is a member of the Beta Beta Chapterof Epsilon Pi Tau and received his DistinguishedService Citation in 2001.
ReferencesBarnett, E. (1999). Critical changes in technology education. In M. R. Karnes (Ed.), Technology education in
prospect: Perceptions, change, and the survival of the profession. The Journal of Technology Studies, 25(1), 13.
Bawden, W. T. (1950). Leaders in industrial education. Milwaukee, WI: Bruce.
Bonser, F. G. (1932). Life needs and education. New York: Columbia University, Teachers College, Bureau
of Publications.
Buffer, J. J., Jr. (1999). In M. R. Karnes (Ed.), Technology education in prospect: Perceptions, change, and the
survival of the profession. The Journal of Technology Studies, 25(1), 15–16.
Custer, R. L. (1999). Prospects for the future: It’s our call. In M. R. Karnes (Ed.), Technology education in
prospect: Perceptions, change, and the survival of the profession. The Journal of Technology Studies, 25(1), 17.
Foster, P. N. (1994). Technology education: AKA industrial arts. Journal of Technology Education, 5(2), 15–30.
Herschbach, D. R. (1996). “What is past is prologue”: Industrial arts and technology education. The Journal of
Technology Studies, 22(1), 28–39.
Herschbach, D. R. (1997). From industrial arts to technology education: The search for direction. The Journal of
Technology Studies, 23(1), 24–32.
Jewell, L. (1995). Attitudes of North Carolina principals toward secondary technology education programs. In V.
Arnold (Ed.), North Carolina Council of Vocational Teacher Educators tenth annual research council report
(pp. 14-21). Greenville, NC: East Carolina University.
Karnes, M. R. (1999). Technology education in prospect: Perceptions, change, and the survival of the profession.
The Journal of Technology Studies, 25(1), 11–35.
Lux, D. (1998). Change imperatives. In M. R. Karnes (Ed.), Technology education in prospect: Perceptions,
change, and the survival of the profession. The Journal of Technology Studies, 25(1), 22.
Moss, J., Jr. (1999). Connections. In M. R. Karnes (Ed.), Technology education in prospect: Perceptions, change,
and the survival of the profession. The Journal of Technology Studies, 25(1), 23.
Petrina, S., & Volk, K. (1995a). Industrial arts movement’s history, vision, and ideal: Relevant, contemporary, used
but unrecognized—Part I. The Journal of Epsilon Pi Tau, 21(1), 24–30.
Petrina, S., & Volk, K. (1995b). Industrial arts movement’s history, vision, and ideal: Relevant, contemporary, used
but unrecognized—Part II. The Journal of Epsilon Pi Tau, 21(2), 28–35.
Russell, J. R., & Bonser, F. G. (1912). Industrial education. New York: Columbia University, Teacher College.
Volk, K. S. (1996). Industrial arts revisited: An examination of the subject’s continued strength, relevance and
value. Journal of Technology Education, 8(1), 27–39.
Wilson, F. R. (1998). The hand: How its use shapes the brain, language, and human culture. New York:
Pantheon Books.
13
Technology Transfer:A Third World PerspectiveAnthony I. Akubue
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
14
The application of technology to stimulatedevelopment in the Third World receivedunqualified endorsement and support afterWorld War II. In the postwar period from thelate 1940s through the early 1960s inparticular, a great number of former Europeancolonies in Africa and Asia emerged from thebonds of colonialism to become independentcountries. The acquisition and application oftechnology was considered integral toaccelerated development in the newlyindependent nations. From a classicaleconomic standpoint, development wassynonymous with economic growth andindustrialization was essential to that growth.Thus, to industrialize, capital accumulation,infrastructure development, foreign technicalexperts, and the importation of moderntechnology from the industrialized countrieswere deemed indispensable. Each newlyindependent country opted for a strategy ofindustrialization deemed appropriate for itsnational development goals. Depending onthose goals, a country adopted either animport-substitution industrialization (ISI; toenable the country to manufacture goods thatwere previously imported for domesticconsumption), an export-orientedindustrialization (EOI; to enable the countryto manufacture goods for export to othercountries), or a combination of both.Regardless of the strategy adopted,implementation invariably required theimportation of capital goods (that is, machines,equipment, and plants) and the developmentof national infrastructure for domesticproduction of manufactured goods. Theimportation of technology or the so-calledtransfer of technology from the rich to the newnations that ensued, especially from the mid-1960s, was intended to spur developmentthrough industrialization. Thus thedevelopment of the Third World for all intentsand purposes was linked with the acquisitionand utilization of technology from advancedWestern countries.
Decades of technology transfer have notproduced the expected outcome, consideringthe dismal social and economic conditions inmany Third World countries today. The
anticipated transformation in the economiesof Third World countries has, so far, beenelusive. What went wrong? Why has theoutcome of technology transfer to the ThirdWorld been so disappointing? What istechnology? What is technology transfer? Istechnology transfer to the Third World whatit should be? Under what conditions can thetransfer of technology stimulate innovation anddevelopment in the Third World?
We in the technology education and alliedprofessions contribute significantly to thetechnological and socioeconomic developmentof the Third World. Graduates of our programsare successfully developing and implementingtechnology education programs in anincreasing number of Third World countries.We also contribute through the scholarly workwe undertake in some Third World countriesfrom time to time. Our professionalconferences and journals, where papers suchas this are presented and published, disseminateuseful information for use in the Third World.Suffice it to say that in our profession we takepride in making a difference worldwide.
This article discusses the issues raised inthe preceding questions concerning technologyand its transfer to the Third World, specifically,the current practice of technology transfer andhow it can be made more effective instimulating development in the Third World.
Technology Transfer to the Third WorldAs many in our profession know,
technology encompasses both material andnonmaterial components. That said,perceptions and assumptions about technologycan and do affect the outcome of its transfer.A popular perception of technology is that itcomprises physical devices. However, theproblem with equating technology withphysical objects is that so much is oftenassumed away. It is often assumed that if amachine or a “technique of production” worksperfectly well in the country and circumstancesin which it was created and nurtured, it oughtto do just fine in any other locale. First,technology does not function in a socialvacuum as this line of reasoning seems tosuggest; it depends on factors such as the
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
15prevailing social relations, physical as well ashuman infrastructure, and raw materialavailability. Second, the suggestion is also madethat the transfer of technology provides all thatThird World countries need for technological,social, and economic development when thesecountries receive machines or techniques ofproduction from the advanced countries. Thisnotion of technology transfer is overlyexaggerated and sanguine. It is even false,because several implied elements have no basisin reality. It is not true that Third Worldcountries have no problem absorbingtransferred technologies, that adaptations arenot required, that all companies remain equallyefficient, and that firm-specific learning ortechnical effort is unnecessary and irrelevant(Lall, 1992).
Indeed, capital goods embody, but do notby themselves constitute, technology; they areproducts or object-embodied technologies thatcan be purchased freely on the internationalmarket. If the import of such means ofproduction were all that was necessary, manyThird World countries would be asindustrialized today as their counterparts inEurope and North America. Saudi Arabia canbe used to illustrate this point. With all its oilwealth and billions of dollars in foreignreserves, Saudi Arabia is able to buysophisticated machines and equipment fromEurope, North America, and Japan; however,the country’s telephone system, for instance,remains comparatively second-rate. Thetransfer of technology entails much more thanthe mere acquisition of physical assets. Thepurchase of a house, for instance, does notconstitute a transfer of the architectural andconstruction knowledge and skill that wentinto its establishment. The technology transferprocess is more like learning carpentry thanpurchasing a new drill. “If one does notdevelop the skill to use the tool adeptly, and ifone does not understand how one particularstage relates to other stages of production, one’sproduct will be inferior and not sell”(Mittelman & Pasha, 1997, p. 61). By the sametoken, the purchase and possession of amachine or equipment by a Third Worldcountry neither bestows upon the people ofthe country the scientific and technologicalknowledge essential to its production locallynor the ability to set it up for efficientproduction. In fact, it is often the contentionthat material-transfer is not actually a form of
“technology” transfer. According to this schoolof thought, the important ingredient inmaterial-transfer “is not ‘know-how’ but ‘show-how’ and the core technologies are embodiedwithin the physical items” (Simon, 1991, p.8). Emmanuel (1982), an adherent of thisschool of thought, argued similarly that theexport of a machine “rather constitutes asubstitute for the transfer of the technologywhich would have been necessary in order toproduce it locally, and is a sort of non-transfer”(p. 22).
Nevertheless, most models of thetechnology transfer process do seem based onacross the board assumptions that do not reflectcurrent realities. The models are usually basedon ideal conditions for technology transferwhere transactions involve equally endowedsenders and receivers of technology. In otherwords, no distinction is made whatsoeverbetween senders and receivers of technology.Thus, Third World countries are expected topossess the capacity to integrate importedtechnology into production processes on theirown without needing assistance. As Stolp(1993) pointed out, “this perspective places therecipient and its capacity to absorb newtechnology on an equal conceptual footingwith Northern senders of technology” (p. 156).It is rather obvious that this is certainly notthe case. Whereas the transfer of technologyinvolving two firms from two technologicallyadvanced countries often results in mutualbenefits and technological interdependencebetween the participants, the same cannotalways be said about transactions involvingindustrialized and Third World countries. Astrategic alliance involving Motorola of theUnited States and Toshiba of Japan illustratesthis point. In this alliance, Motorola exchangedits microprocessor technology with Toshiba forthe latter’s memory technology. In addition,Toshiba also agreed to assist Motorola inexpanding its sales into the Japanese electronicsmarket (Simon, 1991). This is typical in moststrategic alliances, where the critical anddetermining factor is the existence of parity inthe benefits that each firm derives from thetransaction. That the transfer of technologybetween two firms from industrializedcountries is mutually beneficial to the firmscan be attributed to their superior scientificand technological knowledge, which constitutethe basis for the development of capital goodsand related physical structures. The successful
16
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
economic recovery of both Europe and Japanafter World War II, with the help of the U.S.Marshall Plan, is another event that illustratesthis point. Those who equate technology withphysical structures believe that the fast recoveryof Europe and Japan was an “economicmiracle.” The truth is that physical structuresconstitute only the visible character oftechnology or, metaphorically, a tip of theiceberg. The submerged base of the iceberg orthe invisible aspect of technology—knowledge,skills, and organization—remained intact afterthe physical industrial structures were smashedto pieces during World War II. It was thisinvisible form of technology, of which peopleare the carriers, which enabled the countriesto rebuild their economies as rapidly as theydid after the war. Europe and Japan possessedan absorptive capacity lacking in most ThirdWorld countries and were able to rebuild oncethey received Marshall aid funds (Aharoni,1991).
Technology “transfer connotes themovement of knowledge, skill, organization,values and capital from the point of generationto the site of adaptation and application”(Mittelman & Pasha, 1997, p. 60). It is theuseful exchange of ideas and innovationsenabling the receiving region or country toexpand on and utilize the knowledge received.This means that technology transfer alsoincludes the knowledge of getting things done(Ofer & Polterovich, 2000). A critical test oftechnology transfers, therefore, is whether theystimulate further innovations within therecipient country. It is wrong to see technologytransfer as an end in itself; rather, its importancederives from its ability to stimulate andstrengthen the innovation process. In otherwords, it is an avenue with a great potential toincrease the rate of technological innovation(Osman-Gani, 1999). For instance, thetransmission of information about the inventionof gunpowder and some basic gun-like devicesin China stimulated the invention of theformidable cannon in Europe. Informationabout transistor technology from the UnitedStates provoked the development of new kindsof consumer products in Japan (Pacey, 1990).This is not happening in Third World countriesto the extent expected despite decades of massiveimportation of object-embodied technologiesfrom the industrialized world.
The intent here is not to imply that capitalgoods are not important. On the contrary,
investment in capital assets is an indispensableprerequisite of economic growth. However, theprimacy of people as the ultimate basis for thewealth of nations is indisputable. As the activeparticipants in any economy, human beingsaccumulate capital, exploit natural resources,build social, economic, and politicalorganizations, and affect national development.Capital and natural resources, on the otherhand, are passive factors of production thatdepend on human manipulation to be useful.In other words, the development of a nationsignificantly depends on the skills andknowledge of its human capital.
The point is that many Third Worldcountries are not developing the human aswell as the physical capital that they need tobuild and enhance the national stock ofcapital. Domestic capital development andinvestment is essential to a country’s incomegenerating capacity. Foreign ownership ofcapital has served foreign investors well,enabling them to repatriate large amountsof income or profit abroad at the expense ofthe host Third World countries. Aggarwal(1991) identified the direct or first ordercosts associated with the disadvantages oftechnology transfer to Third World countriesvis-a-vis the transferring firm to include the“outflow of dividends, profits, managementand royalty fees, interest on loans, and otherremittances by the firm including thepossible use of high transfer prices” (p. 69).The transfer of technology as we know it hasneither engendered domestic expansion ofinnovations nor done much to promoteindigenous human as well as material capitaldevelopment in most Third World countries.
When a country cannot on its own exploitimported technology to improve domesticproduction, let alone learn from it to furtherdomestic innovation, it is inappropriate tospeak of a transfer of technology taking place.The capacity to assimilate, adapt, modify, andgenerate technology is critical to an effectivetransfer of technology. It is perhaps appropriateto note the deficiency of the phrase “technologytransfer”—it suggests a process in which therecipients of a new technique passively adoptit without modification. Pacey (1990)suggested differently: “transfers of technologynearly always involve modifications to suit newconditions, and often stimulate freshinnovations” (p. 51). The capacity to makenecessary adjustments to imported technology
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
17requires a superior level of skill, knowledge,and expertise of the recipients.
Without the benefit of absorptive capacitymostly achieved from capacity-transfers, ThirdWorld countries cannot take advantage of thepreponderant power of technology as aneffective means of fostering sustainablesocioeconomic development. The concept ofabsorptive capacity is not limited in meaningonly to the acquisition or assimilation ofknowledge, but also includes the ability toexploit it. The concept is similar to what theUnited Nations terms indigenous technologicalcapability (ITC), which has to do with theknowledge and skills of a country’s humancapital, and other absorptive provisions suchas infrastructure, raw materials, and such thingsas the nature of the soil and climate. Amongthe attributes of a society with ITC are: anunderstanding of its technological needs; aneffective policy on technology and itsacquisition; effective global scanning and searchprocedures for identifying and selecting the mostbeneficial technology and supplier; the abilityto evaluate the appropriateness of thetechnology to be imported; a strong bargainingor negotiating expertise needed fortechnological acquisitions; technical andorganizational skills to use importedtechnology; the ability to adapt importedtechnology to local conditions; the availabilityof requisite infrastructure and raw materials;and the capacity to solve its problem usingits resources. According to the United Nations(1983), ITC is not an alternative to a successfultechnology transfer but a necessary conditionfor it. The difficulty that most Third Worldcountries face in trying to build their ITCcan be blamed on internal as well as externalobstacles.
Obstacles to Building IndigenousTechnological Capability (ITC)
Third World countries have relied heavilyon industrialized world sources for theacquisition of technical knowledge and skills.Those involved in the export of technologyfrom industrialized countries are individualentrepreneurs, nongovernmental organizations(NGOs), government agencies, multilateralagencies, religious organizations, foundations,universities, consulting firms, and, of course,multinational corporations (MNCs). In termsof the magnitude of activity undertaken,MNCs, described as the most prolific
purveyors of technology transfer (Simon,1991), are by far the dominant group. Theyown and operate multibillion-dollar researchand development facilities for generating newknowledge and innovations. The resultingknowledge and innovations are protectedunder lock and key within the confines of theMNCs. The extent to which MNCs transferor provide technological knowledge andinnovations to Third World countries remainsopen to debate. It is no exaggeration that thevaunted transmission of technologicalknowledge and innovations by MNCs oftenis a carefully monitored flow from corporateheadquarters to the premises of a subsidiaryin the Third World (Mittelman & Pasha,1997). In fact, the activities of most MNCsmay be described as guided primarily by theprofit motive. It does not come as a surpriseto anyone that MNCs do not operate withthe objective to intentionally transferinnovative capacity to the Third World. Infact, Mittelman and Pasha (1997) observedthat “the transfer of technology, to the extentthat it actually occurs, is nothing other thanleakage from [M]NCs” (p. 63). In otherwords, MNCs are not into capacity-transfersto host Third World countries. Ironically,capacity-transfers are the most covetedcategory of technology transfer that can leadto the development of absorptive capacity inThird World countries. According to Osman-Gani (1999), capacity-transfer “involves thetransfer of knowledge and the capability todevelop new technology” (p. 4). As criticalas capacity-transfers are to the developmentof absorptive capacity, it is easy to understandwhy MNCs generally will not willinglytransfer such capabilities outside the confinesof their own organizations. It is naïve to expectMNCs to work willingly to build the self-reliance of countries that constitute a verysignificant source of corporate profits.
Similarly, bilateral and multilateralassistance to Third World countries is not, asmost people would believe, an act of charity.It has been said that aid actually inhibits formsof development that do not suit the donor(Mason, 1997). This statement cannot beentirely false, especially knowing thatgovernment-to-government assistance withoutexpecting something in return goes against thefundamental law of economics that “there isno free lunch.” Foreign aid was intended toaccomplish two major purposes:
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
18 to ensure that the economies of the Third Worldfunctioned efficiently, because the prosperity of theWest was closely connected to the purchasing powerand raw materials of the non-West; and, just as inEurope, to discourage the development of nationalcapitalism or communism in any form. (Mason,1997, p. 433)
This is not an attempt to diminish the valueof foreign aid. The point, however, is thatforeign aid seldom happens without stringsattached. It is hardly a secret that foreign aidhas helped create foreign appetite in the ThirdWorld. Not too long after World War II, mostThird World countries could feed themselves,but that is hardly the case anymore. Mason(1997) noted, for instance, “As a result of U.S.food aid policies, recipient countries wereforced to modify both their own food policiesand the eating habits of their people” (p. 431).The beneficiaries of this turn of events weremost U.S.-based multinational agribusinesses,U.S. farmers, and consumers. Today, in theThird World “local peoples largely producewhat they do not consume and consume whatthey do not produce” (Mittelman & Pasha,1997, p. 47). Thanks to sophisticatedcommunications and transportationtechnologies, the Third World is no longershielded from the global wind of changeushering in what Mason (1997) termed“‘McWorld,’ a gustatory metaphor forglobalization” (p. 408).
However, the impediments totechnological development in the Third Worldare not all externally induced. Reluctance onthe part of Third World elite to undertake theeducational and technological effort needed togain mastery over technology is also a part ofthe problem. Believing the acquisition ofmachines and other technical devices to be theirpriority, Third World countries embarked ona massive but passive importation oftechnology. Today, the landscape of most ThirdWorld countries is littered with expensivemachines and construction equipment that arerusting away due to scarcity of spare parts andlack of maintenance. The literary educationalcurriculum inherited from past colonialadministrations has not been changed oradapted to address the technological andsocioeconomic needs of most Third Worldcountries. Technical, technology, andvocational education are regarded to be less inimportance relative to literary education. Infact, graduates of technical and vocationaleducation are often looked down upon as
individuals without enough brainpower ormental aptitude for literary education, who are,therefore, routed to the less prestigioustechnical schools. In other words, they arerejects of literary education (Akubue & Pytlik,1990). The ambition of most Third Worldyouth to work in air-conditioned offices justlike the former colonial administrators,themselves graduates of literary education, canbe attributed to the assimilative effect ofcolonialism. Until they see fit to developeducational systems that address theirparticular needs and develop a sense of theirtrue priorities, Third World countries willcontinue to lack the absorptive capacity toutilize technology to foster their developmentand raise the general standard of living. This isa point that is supported by the many yearsthese countries have tried to take advantage ofdifferent mechanisms of technology transfer tono avail. Mechanisms of technology transferare vast and varied, including direct foreigninvestments, joint ventures, licensing, training,commercial visits, print literature, the Internet,sales of products, turnkey projects, and so on.Some of these are discussed in the next section.
Mechanisms for Technology TransferDue to the constraint of space only four
of the major modes of technology transfer arediscussed here; namely, foreign directinvestments, joint ventures, licensing, andturnkey projects.
Foreign Direct InvestmentsForeign direct investment (FDI) is one of
the more frequently used channels oftechnology transfer. An FDI is usually a long-term productive investment in foreigncountries in which an investing multinationalcorporation exercises either full or partialmanagement control of assets and productionin the countries involved (Mallampally &Sauvant, 1999; Siddiqi, 2001). To attractFDIs, Third World countries are promisingpolicy liberalization, political stability,privatization, and minimal governmentintervention. Where all or a portion of theseconditions are assured, a foreign corporationmay be motivated to set up production facilitiesin a Third World country. Among other things,multinational corporations invest in the ThirdWorld to protect an existing market or to createa new one, to bypass prohibitive barriers andimport restrictions, to discover or protect raw
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
19material sources, to renew a product’s life cycle,to take advantage of cheap labor and skills, andto increase profits (Kaynak, 1985). Opinionsdiffer as to the benefits of FDI to the ThirdWorld. While some argue that benefits includetransfers of production technology, managerialexpertise, skills, innovative capacity, andincreasing access to global markets, others areless convinced and argue that any transfersto the Third World as a result of FDIs aremainly unintended leakage (Mittelman &Pasha, 1997). Whatever the argument, it isdoubtful, from decades of experience, thatFDIs are a significant source of capacitybuilding and national capital formation in hostThird World countries.
In any case, FDIs are once more in highdemand after the setback in the 1970s when anumber of Third World governmentsnationalized many foreign firms after accusingthem of exploitation and excessive profitrepatriation. It has to be pointed out, however,that as many Third World countries improvetheir bargaining power and the ability to absorbforeign technology, their quest for equity incontract negotiations with foreignmultinational corporations has been growing.One of the consequences of this developmentis a growing interest in establishing jointventures between multinational corporationsand host Third World country governmentsor enterprises. According to Goulet (1989),“Pressured by new demands fromgovernments, many TNCs which have favoreddirect foreign investments only when theycould be sole owners of enterprises are nowagreeing to become minority equity holders injoint ventures.
Joint VenturesJoint ventures have become attractive as
many MNCs seek to take advantage of similarbenefits as in FDIs, but at the same time avoidthe risk of nationalization that may bepotentially high with FDIs. Broadly, a jointventure may be defined as “a partnershipformed by a company in one country with acompany in another country for the purposeof pursuing some mutually desirable businessundertaking” (Certo, 1986, p. 521). Instrategic alliances such as this, ownership isbased on equity share. The partners in thealliance each provide a portion of the equityor the equivalent in physical plant, rawmaterials, cash, or other assets (Griffin, 1990).
In some Third World countries, MNCs arelimited in equity ownership to 50% or less.Even then, joint ventures are attractive toMNCs for reasons that are both tangible andintangible. First, the Third World private orgovernment partner may contribute land andfunding as well as vital knowledge of domesticmarkets, suppliers, and patterns of businesspractice (Kaynak, 1985). The alliancecombines the technical expertise of the MNCwith the understanding that the host-countrypartner has regarding how to circumvent oreliminate government red tape that may affectthe operations of the firm. In addition, jointventures offer a number of intangibleadvantages, such as creating goodwill withThird World governments, employees, andcustomers as well as reduced risk ofnationalization or unfavorable governmentlegislation (Kaynak, 1985). In a rather unusualalliance, Cabot Corporation, a majormanufacturer of carbon black, agreed to “50%ownership in Malaysia and Iran, and in Brazilit sought an equity share lower than one-halfso as to be legally able to charge technical feesto its Brazilian affiliate” (Goulet, 1989, p. 55).Still, other MNCs remain less tolerant of jointventures that require substantial, not tomention controlling, interest held by hostThird World partners. These corporations mayprefer to have firms in the Third Worldmanufacture or market their products under alicensing agreement.
Licensing Agreements“Under a licensing agreement, a firm
allows another company to use its brand name,trademark, technology, patent, copyrights, or otherexpertise” (Griffin, 1990, p. 794). The licenseein this case agrees to operate under specifiedconditions in addition to the payment of feesand royalties. The fees and royalties are usuallybased on a percentage of sales or value-added.
Licensing relationships can be betweenindependent business enterprises, parentcompanies, and wholly or partially ownedsubsidiaries, and joint ventures between privateand/or public firms. The dominant form oflicensing occurs between MNCs and theiraffiliates in Third World countries. This is alsothe most suitable arrangement for transferpricing. With improving absorptive capacity,an increasing number of Third World firmsare signing licensing contracts with foreignMNCs as a technique to expand innovation
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
20 domestically. According to Larson andAnderson (1994), “Licensing arrangements aregenerally associated with a greater degree oflocal, post transfer innovation as compared toother forms of transfer” (p. 548). As ThirdWorld countries gain in domestic technologicalcapability, they are turning increasingly tolicensing arrangements as a method offurthering domestic innovation. Japan, forexample, made extensive use of licensing in itssocioeconomic transformation into a worldeconomic power. Where a country is interestedin running a production facility after it is setup by a foreign source, the appropriate modeof transfer of choice may be a turnkey project.
Turnkey ProjectsThe last technology transfer technique is
known as a turnkey project. A turnkey projectis one in which a foreign organizationundertakes the construction of a productionfacility and turns the key to a domestic firm orsome other organization when the facility isready for operation. “Investments funded byinternational organizations and governmentagencies are basically of the turnkey nature”(Stewart & Nihei, 1987, p. 11). Turnkeyprojects usually are more suited to a singleactivity production facility such as a cementfactory, sugar refinery, steel mill, etc. Forinstance, several Indian steel mills wereinitiated through turnkey operations. Aturnkey project may also include the trainingof domestic personnel to eventually take overthe operation of the factory. It is worth notingthat in a turnkey investment domesticpersonnel are able to operate the new plant butmay lack the ability to set up a cement factoryor a sugar refinery. The ability to reproduce orset up a production plant may indeed be morebeneficial in terms of fostering self-sustainingdevelopment in the long run than having onefrom a turnkey arrangement in which therecipient only consumes or operates thetechnology involved.
Remaining ChallengesI have focused on explaining the concept
of technology and the conditions in whichit can be more beneficial to Third Worldcountries in their efforts to achieve self-sustained socioeconomic development.Technology is a passive resource whoseeffectiveness depends on an active humanresource capital. To take advantage of
technology as a potent source of positivechange, Third World countries must workhard on their absorptive capacity. It iserroneous to speak of technology transfer ifthe ability of Third World countries toassimilate, adapt, modify, and createtechnology is l imited or nonexistent.Channels of technology transfer such as theMNCs will train Third World workers onlyto the extent it enables them to maximizeprofits. By their nature MNCs do notoperate to make Third World countries self-sufficient, self-reliant, and able to do “theirown thing.” Training domestic labor to beable to operate production facilities neitherputs them in a position to produce capitalgoods nor automatically prepares them tobe able to set up production facilities ontheir own. It is the ability to create andaccumulate national capital, to set up thenecessary infrastructure, and to operate andmaintain the infrastructure that promotesself-sustained development.
The importance of producing domesticvocational education graduates, technicians,technologists, engineers, scientists, andentrepreneurs as sources of a country’sabsorptive capacity cannot be stressedenough. Any country that hopes to developa modern industrial system will realize sooneror later that developing this cadre ofprofessionals is an indispensable requirement.Without these professionals in place toestablish the foundational technicaldevelopments upon which the prosperity ofa country depends, attempts to developsocially, economically, politically, andtechnologically will be no more than a falsestart. As experience has shown, this approachto development only serves to perpetuateThird World dependence on the West. It isperhaps appropriate to end with a quote thatcaptures the message of this article: “Acountry’s comparative advantages increasinglylies [sic] in its ability to use effectively newtechnology, which is generally a function ofthe capacity of its population to absorb newtechnologies and incorporate them in theproduction process” (Aharoni, 1991, p. 80).
Dr. Anthony Akubue is a professor in the theDepartment of Environmental and TechnologicalStudies at St. Cloud State University. He is amember-at-large of Epsilon Pi Tau.
ReferencesAggarwal, R. (1991). Technology transfer and economic growth: A historical perspective on current developments.
In T. Agmon & M. A. Von Glinow (Eds.), Technology transfer in international business (pp. 56–78).
New York: Oxford University Press.
Aharoni, Y. (1991). Education and technology transfer: Recipient point of view. In T. Agmon & M. A. Von Glinow
(Eds.), Technology transfer in international business (pp. 79–102). New York: Oxford University Press.
Akubue, A. I., & Pytlik, E. (1990, Summer/Fall). Technology, technical, and vocational education in Nigeria: Past
neglect and present attention. Journal of Epsilon Pi Tau, 16(2), 43–48.
Certo, S. C. (1986). Principles of modern management (3rd ed.). Dubuque, IA: Brown.
Emmanuel, A. (1982). Appropriate or underdeveloped technology? New York: Wiley.
Goulet, D. (1989). The uncertain promise: Value conflicts in technology transfer (New ed.). New York:
New Horizons Press.
Griffin, R. W. (1990). Management (3rd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Kaynak, E. (1985). Transfer of technology from developed to developing countries: Some insights from Turkey. In
A. C. Samli (Ed.), Technology transfer (pp. 155–176). New York: Quorum Books.
Lall, S. (1992). Technological capabilities and industrialization. World Development, 20(2), 165–186.
Larson, B. A., & Anderson, M. (1994, August). Technology transfer, licensing contracts, and incentives for further
innovation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 76, 547–556.
Mallampally, P., & Sauvant, K. P. (1999). Foreign direct investment in developing countries. Finance &
Development, 36(1), 34–37.
Mason, M. (1997). Development and disorder: A history of the Third World since 1945. Hanover, NH: University
Press of New England.
Mittelman, J. H., & Pasha, M. K. (1997). Out from underdevelopment revisited: Changing global structures and
the remaking of the Third World. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Ofer, G., & Polterovich, V. (2000). Modern economics education in TEs: Technology transfer to Russia (transition
economies). Comparative Economic Studies, 42, 5.
Osman-Gani, A. A. M. (1999). International technology transfer for competitive advantage: A conceptual analysis
of the role of HRD. Competitiveness Review, 9, 9.
Pacey, A. (1990). Technology in world civilization: A thousand-year history. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Siddiqi, M. (2001, January). Luring the investor. African Business, pp. 14–16.
Simon, D. (1991). International business and the transborder movement of technology: A dialectical perspective.
In T. Agmon & M. A. V. Glinow (Eds.), Technology transfer in international business (pp. 5–28). New York:
Oxford University Press.
Stewart, C. T., Jr., & Nihei, Y. (1987). Technology transfer and human factors. Lexington, MA: Heath.
Stolp, C. (1993, March). Technology, development, and hemispheric free trade. The Annals of the American
Academy, 526, 151–163.
United Nations. (1983). Transnational corporations in world development (ST/CTC/46). New York: Author.
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
21
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
22 Pupils Identify Key Aspects and Outcomes of aTechnological Learning EnvironmentYaron Doppelt and Moshe Barak
Over the past two decades, thecontribution that a rich learning environmentmakes toward attaining educational goals suchas improvement in learning achievements andattitudes towards studies and school has beenconsidered in educational research (Fraser,Giddings, & McRobbie, 1995; Fraser & Tobin,1991; Perkins, 1992). The term rich learningenvironment not only includes physical devices,such as experiment kits or computers, but alsothe teaching technique, the type of activitypupils engage in, and the method ofassessment. Associating science and technologystudies with a rich, flexible, computer-embedded learning environment may enablepupils to attain higher academic achievementsand overcome their cognitive and affectivedifficulties (Barak, Waks, & Doppelt, 2000).
The Creative Thinking and Technology(CTT) program (Barak & Doppelt, 1998) wasdeveloped for that purpose. The CTTprogram’s main goal is to cultivate creativethinking via project-based learning. Theprogram integrates creative thinking tools fromthe CoRT 1 series of thinking tools (De Bono,1986) within the technology curriculum(Barak & Doppelt, 1999). The pupils createauthentic technological projects and prepareportfolios that are used for assessing thelearning process. LEGO/Logo is attractive totechnology education, as previous works haveshown (Jarvela, 1995; Jarvinen, 1998;Kromholtz, 1998; Papert, 1991; Resnick &Ocko, 1991). The current research shows anapplication of LEGO/Logo by using pupils’authentic projects for learning technology as amajor subject in high school. This articleconcentrates on the pupils’ perspective on thepreferred learning environment.
BackgroundOne of the proclaimed goals of science and
technology education is to enhance pupils’higher-order intellectual skills, such asmathematical-logical thinking and creativity(Gardner, 1993; Perkins, Jay, & Tishman,1993; Sternberg, 1998). De Bono (1986)suggested a series of creative thinking tools thatcan be used as a general approach to teachthinking. Perkins and Swartz (1992) suggested
that the fostering of thinking should beintegrated in the learning of a specific context,such as science and technology.
Waks (1997) observed that lateral thinkinginitiates the learning process when working ona technological project, as pupils seek foralternatives and examine different solutions.Vertical thinking is essential in the stage ofchoosing a solution and developing it. Verticalthinking and lateral thinking complement eachother, and both are the essential elements ofcreative thinking (De Bono, 1986).
Imparting creative thinking within scienceand technology education requires not onlychanging the teaching methods and learningenvironment, but also adopting newassessment methods such as portfolioassessment, which is based on records of pupils’activities. The portfolio can consist of writtenmaterial, computer files, audio and video items,sketches, drawings, models, or pictures. Theportfolio reflects what pupils have learned andhow they question, analyze, synthesize, solveproblems, and create new ideas or design andbuild useful products or systems. The portfolioalso shows how pupils interact intellectually,emotionally, and socially with others (Collins,1991; Wolf, 1989).
Perkins (1992) identified several featuresof learning environments: informationdatabase, symbol platforms, constructionsystems, phenomenarium (microworlds), andassignment organizers. A learningenvironment should be sufficiently flexible,allow different learning styles (Kolb, 1985), anddevelop different skills (Gardner, 1993;Sternberg, 1998). It should include a portfolioassessment of pupils’ original projects, ratherthan pen and paper examinations.
A rich, flexible learning environment isnecessary for accelerating the learning of at-risk pupils (Levin, 1992). How to advance low-achieving pupils is an on-going challenge foreducational systems. Routing low-achievers tolower-level learning tracks creates a viciouscircle. The school system has low expectationsfrom the pupils, the pupils accumulate a historyof failure, and the teachers emerge as having alow self-esteem and professional image (Barak,Yehiav, & Mendelson, 1994).
This article is based on apresentation at the ITEAConference - PATT 9Session, Indianapolis,1999.
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
23The LEGO/Logo learning environmentwas selected as the basis for implementationof these guidelines. LEGO/Logo is a widelyused learning environment for technologyeducation in elementary and secondaryschools. It combines LEGO bricks and Logocommands for creating procedures thatcontrol the prototype. In addition to theordinary LEGO bricks, the LEGO systemscontain motors, sensors, and gears that allowpupils to create complicated projects and tolearn principles in technology and science.According to Resnick and Ocko (1991), theLEGO/Logo learning environment createsa community of learners, changes theteacher’s role in class, and fosters thedevelopment of pupils’ authentic projects asthe basis for the learning process. Learningenvironments such as LEGO/Logo enablethe learner to construct concepts (Papert,1991). When pupils create an authenticproject in the LEGO/Logo environment,they experience meaningful study thatenables the exercise of sophisticated ideasthat originate from their own projects.
The CTT program embraces thefollowing: learning through completingauthentic projects, integrating creative thinkingactivities into the technology curriculum, andallowing freedom to learn and encouraginglearning from mistakes. Because the pupilsstudy technology as a major, it is pertinent tocreate authentic technology projects as a wayto advance pupils’ competencies andknowledge. This article focuses on theinfluence of the CTT program upon affectiveand cognitive domains from the pupils’ pointof view.
InterventionThe CTT program (Barak & Doppelt,
1999) encompasses two hours of study eachweek during an entire school year. During thefirst semester (about 15 weeks), the class learnsthinking tools from the CoRT 1 thinkingprogram (De Bono, 1986). This programconsists of a series of thinking tools, such asPMI (plus, minus, interesting), CAF (considerall factors), and APC (alternatives, possibilities,choices). In the first stages, the pupils learnand exercise these thinking tools bydrawing examples from their daily lives. Later,learning focuses on design, construction, andimprovement of small devices such as cars orrobots using LEGO building blocks and
mechanical components. For example, allpupils construct identical cars according to agiven LEGO design, compare their features,and suggest improvements while using theCAF and APC thinking tools. In the course ofthis process, the pupils also become familiarwith the LEGO/Logo system, the computerinterface, and simple programming in Multi-Techno-Logo. This is a Hebrew version ofLEGO/Logo that combines the advantages ofLogo-Writer and LEGO/Logo using themother tongue for programming (Doppelt &Armon, 1999).
During the second semester (about 15weeks), the pupils choose and create originaltechnological projects. As Barlex (1994) stated,“It is difficult to capture the breath of springthat successful technology project work bringsto a wintry curriculum. Perhaps it’s the risk offailure and the uncertainty with no rightanswers, only one possible solution” (p. 143).Barak and Doppelt (2000) reported that thepupils coped with complex problems andfound solutions that were dependent on thesynthesis of lateral and vertical thinking intocreative thinking.
The pupils create portfolios in which theycollect their documentation of creativethinking and other outcomes of the learningprocess. Over a period of several years, eachclass developed criteria for assessing theportfolios. A scale for assessing pupils’ creativethinking through their portfolios was createdon the basis of these experiences (Barak &Doppelt, 2000).
This scale comprises four levels: awarenessof thinking, observation of thinking, thinkingstrategy, and reflection upon thinking. Theproposed scale is applied to two portfoliodomains: (a) learning outcomes, such as a pieceof research, or a technological product, and (b)processes of learning, thinking, and teamworkin the class. Several examples of the scale’sapplication to pupils’ portfolios demonstratehow this methodological assessment can helpeducators to develop and evaluate learningassignments aimed at fostering creativethinking. Through designing, andsystematically reflecting upon the portfolio,pupils can develop an awareness of theirinternal thinking processes and learn to directtheir own thinking.
Research GoalsThe main goal of this research was to learn
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
24
about pupils’ perception of the influence thelearning environment has on their outcomes.Several characteristics of learning environmentshave been expounded in the theory. This articlefocuses on the contribution of thesecharacteristics to learning outcomes from thepupils’ point of view.
MethodSubjects
The participants in this study were 10thgrade pupils in a high school in northern Israel.These were low-achieving pupils who hadchosen to major in the Machine Control
Department. Some of the pupils chose thisroute on their own; others had been thusdirected by school advisors, in whose opinionthis route is the only solution for low achievers.
In Israel, at the end of junior high school,pupils have to choose one or more areas inwhich to major, such as sciences, humanities,art, or technology. The high school technologycurriculum includes several major subjects thatare related to physics and mathematics, suchas computers and electronics, mechanics, andcontrol systems. Typically, the “high achievers”are directed to computers and electronics andthe “low achievers” are directed to mechanics.
Figure 1. A mapping sentence for assessing “inputs” and “outcomes” of atechnology project-based curriculum.The pupils rate the contribution of each one of the inputs (for example,self-learning) to all the 25 outcomes. A sentence can have a structure such as, pupil 1 assessesthat the influence of [self-learning] upon [curiosity] is [little].
Pupil X assesses the influence of input A
’
on desirable pupil’s outcome B
Increase in other pupils’appreciation of the department
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
25
Barak, Yehiav, and Mendelson (1994) havepreviously raised the issue of integrating lowachievers into technology studies in Israel.Some of the pupils considered here may fitLevin’s (1992) definition of at-risk pupils.
The CTT program ran for five yearsbetween 1994 and 1998. A total of 56 pupilsparticipated in this program (9 to 24 pupilseach year). This article examines the program’sinfluence on the first participating group ofpupils, who were in 10th grade in 1994,through 12th grade in 1996.
Data CollectionThis research combines qualitative and
quantitative tools: observations of classactivities, interviews with pupils and parents,and follow-up of the pupils’ academicachievements. Such a combination has beenfound to be effective and contributes to theunderstanding of the research field (Fraser& Tobin, 1991). In quantitative research,it is common to validate conclusions fromthe findings of one instrument by thefindings of another instrument (Denzen &Lincoln, 1994).
As a result of content analysis of theinterviews, a questionnaire was developed forassessing pupils’ progress in an open learningenvironment, in terms of the input-outputrelationship from the pupils’ viewpoint. Themapping sentence presented in Figure 1provides a flexible structure for researchers toconstruct and use similar questionnaires inclasses (Waks, 1995). The terms for both theinput and the output category were extractedfrom interviews with the pupils. This
questionnaire is based on an assessment of theinfluence of a learning environment’s inputson pupils’ outcomes. Pupils completed thisquestionnaire by rating each pair on a scalefrom 1 (having a very high influence) to 5(having a very low influence).
FindingsExamples of Pupils’ Projects
Over the five-year period during which theCTT program was implemented, 56 pupilsbuilt approximately 50 different team projects.All the ideas were suggested by the pupilsthemselves. Two examples are presented inFigure 2. Figure 2a illustrates a robot thatmoves forward or in circular motions andtraverses obstacles, and Figure 2b depicts acrane that scans an area, collects randomlydistributed objects, and then delivers themonto a train.
Other examples include an automaticconveyor belt that receives, identifies, andcounts items loaded off a truck, and a chocolatedrink machine that fills powder into a glass,mixes it with milk, and delivers the glass ontoa conveyor. These examples demonstrate howthe project-based learning approach enabledthe pupils to create various authentic projects.These projects won nationwide attention fromeducational curriculum councils and otherresearch groups.
Community of LearnersObservations in class revealed a variety of
interactions between younger and oldermembers of the Machine ControlDepartment, between parents and children,
a. An obstacle climbing robot b. An object identifying crane
Figure 2. Examples of pupils’ projects.
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
26 and between pupils and teacher. An externalspectator could observe pupils, who wereworking individually or in pairs, and theteacher, who circulated among the groupsin turn. The laboratory became a secondhome to the pupils. They came to work ontheir projects during breaks and free hours,and even after school. They could familiarizethemselves with projects made by formerpupils who still visit the Machine ControlDepartment from time to time.
Pupils’ and Parents’ ViewpointsThe following quotations, taken from
interviews with pupils and their parents,demonstrate the impact of the CTT programand its influence on the learning atmosphereat school.
Adam: “It is very important to continuethe LEGO/Logo lessons...it is away for me to achieve my goal, inmy way...there is freedom tochoose, and nobody tells me whatto do...the teacher only guidesme...this is like independentlearning...I like the creativitythrough the lessons. It gives theopportunity to understandthe theoretical issues ofmechanics.”
David: “I was an average pupil in juniorhigh school...since I came to theMachine Control DepartmentI have changed...my achievementsin the technology subjects arehigh...even in humanities subjectsI have improved...the way welearn through LEGO/Logo,the team work, and theindependence the teachergives us all encourageus to help one another.”
Benny: “We do not build robots only forfun, we learn how to designprototypes...we learn automation,center of gravity, it demandsthinking, develops us, and we canapply what we learn...it isinteresting and adds spice andmotivation to learn more.”
Mother of twins, speaking of her children who
achieved well in the matriculationexaminations and finished high school, despiteboth having a history of difficulties duringjunior high school:
“There is a dramatic change in their self-confidence. They are alive and they havestarted to smile again; they were very sadin their past experiences in school.Learning LEGO/Logo has developed myson’s thinking about how technologysystems work. There was a drastic changein his self-confidence during learning inschool.”
A mother who decided to send her son tomajor in the same department as well as hissister:
“I am proud that my daughter studiestechnology as a major. She started tolearn from her own motivation...theLEGO/Logo strengthens her and itcaused her to invest efforts in othersubjects at school. It was a challenge forher...we are going to send her brotherto the same department as well.”
Questionnaire ResultsA closed questionnaire was constructed in
order to probe further the influence of thelearning environment from the pupils’ view-point, based upon the interviews with thepupils. The questionnaire included 15 “inputs”of the learning environment, such as freedomto choose subjects, team projects, individualprogress, and construction activities. Theseaspects are considered as inputs of the learningenvironment because they are concerned withthe organization of the learning in the class,such as various activities that have beenintroduced to the pupils, flexibility, and degreeof freedom to choose activities. Pupils pointedto 25 outcomes that were influenced by theCTT program, for example, personal initiative,self-confidence, interest in technology studies,and challenge.
As mentioned above, the pupils ratedthe contribution of each input to each ofthe 25 outcomes on a scale of 1 (very high)to 5 (very low). An average score for each ofthe inputs and outcomes was calculated,representing the weight attributed by thepupils to the inputs and the outcomes.Figure 3 presents the final results, where themost significant inputs and outcomes areshown in rank order.
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
27
Figure 3. The most influential inputs upon the major outcomes of a richtechnological learning environment from the pupils’ point of view.
Discussion and ConclusionsThe current research addresses the issues
of how to promote low achievers by providingthem with a rich, modern, and flexibletechnological learning environment. Thepupils created authentic technologicalprojects using their own imagination anddocumented their work in rich portfolios(Barak & Doppelt, 1999, 2000).Observations of pupils’ activities in class,interviews with pupils and their parents, andquestionnaire f indings al l indicatedimproved pupil self-esteem and self-confidence. Pupils changed their attitudestowards their everyday learning and theirfuture intentions to continue studying.
The findings from this research suggestthat educators invest resources in thedevelopment of learning environments thatcombine hands-on activities with whatPapert (1980) has cal led “heads-in”activities. Computerized simulations andprogramming are important components inthe learning environment, but they do notstand alone. Educators can use LEGO/Logoto advance learning and thinking. LEGO/Logo is attractive to technology education,as demonstrated in previous studies (Jarvela,1995; Jarvinen, 1998; Kromholtz, 1998;Papert, 1991; Resnick & Ocko, 1991).Moreover, the current research shows anapplication of LEGO/Logo for studyingtechnology, mainly mechanics and machinecontrol, as a high school major.
The present study directs attention
towards the kind of learning environmentsthat pupils opt for: construction activities,team projects, and freedom to learn. Themost important outcomes, in the pupils’eyes, are independence, personal initiative,and interest in technology. In many cases,the school ignores these outcomes becauseeducation systems concentrate mainly onacademic achievements. A rich learningenvironment is especially important for low-achieving pupils. Sophisticated schoolscience and technology labs are frequentlyreserved for the high achievers, while otherpupils study craft in lieu of technology inoutdated workshops, which are often locatedat the far end of the school.
Finally, the present findings regarding themost influential characteristics of the learningenvironment, from the pupils’ perspective,agree with the principles that have guided theAccelerated Schools Project (Levin, 1992),aimed at advancing at-risk pupils. Schoolsshould seek alternative ways to develop pupils’learning skills, instead of trying to offer themslow learning programs.
Dr. Yaron Doppelt is an academiccoordinator of The Science and TechnologyYouth Center at the Technion, Israel Instituteof Technology.
Dr. Moshe Barak is a professor in theDepartment of Education Technology and Scienceat Technion Israel Institute of Technology. He is amember-at-large of Epsilon Pi Tau.
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
28 ReferencesBarak, M., & Doppelt, Y. (1998, September). Promoting creative thinking within technology education. Paper
presented at the International Workshop for Scholars in Technology Education, WOCATE, George
Washington University, Washington, DC.
Barak, M., & Doppelt, Y. (1999). Integrating the Cognitive Research Trust (CoRT) program for creative thinking
into a project-based technology curriculum. Research in Science & Technological Education, 17(2), 139–151.
Barak, M., & Doppelt, Y. (2000). Using portfolios to enhance creative thinking. Journal of Technology Studies,
26(2), 16–24.
Barak, M., Waks, S., & Doppelt, Y. (2000). Majoring in technology studies at high school and fostering learning.
Learning Environment Research, 3, 135–158.
Barak, M., Yehiav, R., & Mendelson, N. (1994). Advancement of low achievers within technology studies at high
school. Research in Science & Technological Education, 12(2), 175–186.
Barlex, D. (1994). Organizing project work. In F. Banks (Ed.), Teaching technology (pp. 124–143). London:
Routledge.
Collins, A. (1991). Portfolio for biology teacher sssessment. Journal of School Personnel Evaluation in Education,
5, 147–167.
De Bono, E. (1986). The CoRT thinking program (2nd ed.). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Denzen, K. N., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Doppelt, Y., & Armon, U. (1999, August). LEGO/Logo (Multi-Techno-Logo) as an authentic environment for
improving learning skills of low-achievers. Paper presented at the Euro-Logo Conference, Sofia, Bulgaria.
Fraser, J. B., Giddings, J. G., & McRobbie, J. C. (1995). Evolution and validation form of an instrument for
assessing science laboratory classroom environments. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(4), 399–422.
Fraser, J. B., & Tobin, K. (1991). Combining qualitative and quantitative methods in classroom environment
research. In J. B. Fraser & J. H. Walberg (Eds.), Educational environments: Evaluation, antecedents and
consequences (pp. 271–292). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligences/The theory to practice. New York: Basic Books.
Jarvela, S. (1995). The cognitive apprenticeship model in a technological rich learning environment: Interpreting
the learning interaction. Learning and Instruction, 5, 237–259.
Jarvinen, E. (1998). The Lego/Logo learning environment in technology education: An experiment in a Finnish
context. Journal of Technology Education, 9(2), 47–59.
Kolb, D. A. (1985). Learning Styles Inventory. Boston: McBer.
Kromholtz, N. (1998). Simulating technology processes to foster learning. Journal of Technology Studies,
24(1), 6–11.
Levin, H. (1992, May). Accelerating the education of all students (Restructuring Brief ). North Coast Professional
Development Consortium. Retreived from http://www.smcoe.k12.ca.us./pdc/PDS/restruct2.html
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms, children, computers and powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books.
Papert, S. (1991). Perestroika and epistemological politics. In I. Harel & S. Papert (Eds.), Constructionism
(pp. 13–28). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Perkins, N. D. (1992). Technology meets constructivism: Do they make a marriage? In T. M. Duffy & H. D.
Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and technology of instruction: A conversation (pp. 45–55). Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Perkins, N. D., Jay, E., & Tishman, S. (1993). Beyond abilities: A dispositional theory of thinking. Merrill-Palmer
Quarterly, 39(1), 1–21.
Perkins, N. D., & Swartz, R. (1992). The nine basics of teaching thinking. In L. A. Costa, L. J. Ballanca, & R.
Fogarty (Eds.), If minds matter: A forward to the future Vol #2(pp. 53–69). Palatine, IL: Skylight.
Resnick, M., & Ocko, S. (1991). LEGO/Logo: Learning through and about design. In I. Harel & S. Papert (Eds.),
Constructionism (pp. 141–150). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Sternberg, J. R. (1998). Teaching and assessing for successful intelligence. The School Administrator, 55(1), 26–31.
Waks, S. (1995). Curriculum design: From an art towards a science. Oxford, England: Tampus.
Waks, S. (1997). Lateral thinking and technology education. Journal of Science Education and Technology,
6(4), 245–255.
Wolf, D. (1989). Portfolio assessment: Sampling student’s work. Educational Leadership, 45(4), 35–39.
Since the Civil Rights Act of 1964 wasimplemented three decades ago, society hasbeen engaged in improving the lives of peoplewith disabilities (Sarkees & Scott, 1986). In1977, the Secretary of Health, Education, andWelfare, Joseph A. Califano, approvedregulations for Section 504 of theRehabilitation Act of 1973 and said, “It willusher in a new era of equality for handicappedindividuals in which unfair barriers to self-sufficiency and decent treatment will begin tofall before the force of the law” (Mancuso,1990). Legislation such as Section 508 of the1986 Amendments to the Rehabilitation Actof 1973, the Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA) in 1990 (Carney, 1990), the Individualswith Disabilities Education Act of 1990 andits 1997 amendments, and the School-to-WorkOpportunities Act of 1994 were enacted toimprove the lives of individuals withdisabilities. This legislation was also enactedto facilitate the marketable and saleable skillsof individuals with special needs and tofacilitate their employment under the fewestlimitations (Appell, 1990; Johnson &Halloran, 1997; National Center for EducationStatistics, 1996; U.S. General AccountingOffice, 1996).
In response to the requirements of thefederal legislation and to increase theemployment of individuals with special needs,vocational special needs educators have alsobeen endeavoring to improve vocationalprograms by modifying teaching strategies andcoordinating resources (Chadsey-Rusch &Gonzalez, 1988). In addition, computertechnology is being applied to assist individualswith disabilities to learn and work. Further,supported employment is advocated for theemployment of individuals with disabilities inthe real world (Hill, Banks, Handrick,Wehman, Hill, & Shafer, 1987; Unger, 1999).
Employment accommodations do notnecessarily guarantee employment success untila match is found between employee capabilitiesand the requirements of specific jobs (Bowman,1987; Mancuso, 1990). Further, theemployment rate among special needspopulations does not increase directly inrelation to the activities of vocational special
educators and legislators (Bowe, 1990).Expenses related to accommodatingpopulations with special needs are one of themajor American economic costs. Social welfaresubsidies for people who are either unemployedor not in the workforce comprise the majorityof this expense. The subsidiary costs for specialneeds populations who were unemployedrepresent a large portion of these funds. Thedemographically changing workforce and thedeclining number of available workers hascaused employers to pay more attention to theneed for integrating persons with disabilitiesinto the labor market.
The success of individuals with disabilitiesin employment is influenced by cooperationamong employers and employees, support oflegislation, and appropriate efforts ofvocational programs (Greenan & Tucker, 1990;National Council on the Handicapped, 1987;Salomone & Paige, 1984; Storey & Garff,1999; Tilson & Neubert, 1988). Therefore,transition services that are developed tointegrate contributions from various resourcesand match supply-and-demand of business andindustry in communities become the emphasisof the vocational special needs agenda (Sarkees& Scott, 1986).
Our ObjectivesWe sought to (a) enhance the awareness
of employers’ concerns related to theemployment of people with special needs, (b)identify employers’ difficulties encounteredwhen attempting to assimilate people withdisabilities in their businesses, (c) identifydifficulties in applying computer technologyto assist the employment of people withdisabilities in their businesses, and (d) identifygovernment policies that encourage employersto hire people with disabilities. This knowledgewill potentially assist legislators and vocationaleducators to improve current policies. Forpeople with disabilities, this knowledge is alsocrucial to meet their entry-level job-relatedskills requirements and plan their careers. Inaddition, the results can be importantconsiderations for educators and computercompanies for improving software to meet userneeds in the world of work.
Perspectives on Employing Individuals withSpecial NeedsJames P. Greenan, Mingchang Wu, and Elizabeth L. Black
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
29
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
30 What We DidThe target population for this study
consisted of all employers within industries andbusinesses in the state of Indiana. A list oflocal advisory committee members ofsecondary trade and industrial educationprograms composed of proprietors andvocational special educators (N = 1,200) wasused. A random sample (n = 250) was selectedfor this study. This population was assumedto be representative of employers in Indiana.
A cross-sectional survey was developed tocollect data regarding employer perspectivesconcerning the employment of individualswith disabilities. The questionnaire combinedthe researchers’ experience, employers’suggestions, relevant literature, andinstruments used in previous research. It wasrevised on the basis of the suggestions andrecommendations of local leadership personnelin the fields of vocational education, specialeducation, and rehabilitation, universityfaculty, and several employers in Indiana. Thequestionnaire was composed of 24 items andfocused on four key areas: (a) employerawareness of current legislation related to theemployment of individuals with disabilities andsuccess of vocational special needs educationprograms, (b) employer perceptions on theemployability of individuals with disabilities,(c) employer difficulties encountered whileemploying individuals with disabilities, and (d)employer expectations of government policiesand relevant services that facilitate theemployment of individuals with disabilities.
A 5-point Likert scale was used to identifyemployer attitudes. The responses werecomputed using the following scheme: stronglydisagree, disagree, uncertain, agree, and stronglyagree. After several revisions, the questionnairewas determined to have adequate content andface validity and internal consistency reliability.In addition, the Statistical Analysis Software(SAS) statistical packages were used to code,compute, and analyze the data for the study.
Each of the 250 subjects received a coverletter and a survey instrument. The letter andinstrument described a wide variety ofdisabilities to assist the subjects in theirresponses. The disability categories included,but were not necessarily limited to, mild andmoderate mental, physical, and learningdisabilities, and visual and hearingimpairments. Three weeks after the firstmailing, the first follow-up letters and surveys
were mailed to all nonrespondents. Secondand third follow-up letters and surveys weremailed six and nine weeks after the initialmailing to all nonrespondents. After the finalmailing, follow-up telephone contacts weremade to all nonrespondents. The final responserate was 76% (n = 190), including usable andnonusable responses. To diminish the possiblenonresponse bias caused by the low responserate, a method of resampling was used(Hartman, Fuqua, & Jenkins, 1986; Miller, &Smith, 1983). Resampling consisted ofobtaining responses using telephone interviewsfrom a sample (n = 10) of nonrespondents (N= 60). If item response results for therespondent and nonrespondent groups werenot significantly different, it could beconcluded that nonresponse bias did not exist.
The SAS packages were selected togenerate descriptive statistics to answer the fourresearch questions posited for this study. Bothqualitative and quantitative methods were usedto analyze the data. Open-ended responseswere coded and analyzed for the four researchquestions using qualitative methods.
Resampling strategies using the telephoneinterview method were conducted to identifythe reasons for nonresponses and the differencebetween opinions of respondents and those ofnonrespondents. The comparison of resultsfrom respondents and those from resamplednonrespondents using an F test indicated thatthese two groups had similar awareness of theimpact of the current legislation onemployment of people with disabilities (F =0.0, p = .99), information resources aboutvocational rehabilitation programs (F = .26,p = .61), and knowledge of assistive technologyfor people with disabilities (F = 1.08, p = .30).Since most of the resampled nonrespondentshad no experience with people with disabilities,fewer than 5 of the 10 nonrespondentsprovided responses to research questions 2, 3,and 4. Quantitative data from fewer than fiverespondents are usually not consideredstatistically relevant. The F test indicated thesetwo data sets were not significantly different.In addition, these two data sets yielded similarqualitative responses to the open-ended items.
All resampled nonrespondents stated thatthey had no experience working with peoplewith disabilities. The major reasons foremployers not hiring nontraditional employeeswere either their businesses were characteristicof intensive labor, such as driving and pushing
trucks, or their businesses were too small toaccommodate employees with disabilities. Themajority of resampled nonrespondents alsostated that they would be willing to employqualified employees with disabilities if theyapplied. These responses were very similar tothose of the respondents. It is, therefore, logicalto conclude that the respondents’ opinionscould reasonably represent the opinions of theentire sample for the study.
What We LearnedOur findings are organized around the
research questions that guided this study. Theyinclude:
1. To what extent are employers informedabout the achievement of localvocational special education programsand current legislation with respect tothe employment of individuals withdisabilities?
In regard to employers’ awareness aboutthe contribution of legislation and educationon employment of people with disabilities,employers were somewhat aware of the impactof current legislation (e.g., the ADA) on peoplewith disabilities (M = 3.75, SD = .83) andassistive technology for people with disabilities(M = 3.60, SD = 1.00), and they were alsoinformed about the success of vocationalrehabilitation programs for people withdisabilities (M = 3.43, SD = 1.00). Although,there appears to be relative disagreementamong respondents, employer awareness mightindicate a concern with the employment ofpersons with special needs. The general public’sintensive concerns with the currentdevelopment of employment transition forindividuals with disabilities are usually themain driving force for its implementation.
2. How satisfied are employers with the job-related performance of employees withdisabilities?
Employers demonstrated a willingness tohire qualified individuals with disabilities (M= 3.98, SD = .69). Employers generallybelieved employees with disabilities couldperform as well as employees withoutdisabilities (M = 3.48, SD = .96). Employersneither believed that employees with disabilitieswere unable to satisfy job requirements (M =
2.65, SD = 1.08) nor that they were unable toget along well with coworkers (M = 2.12, SD= .87). Employers also reported that theiremployees no longer worked for them becausethey sought other employment (M = 3.06, SD= .92).
In response to the open-ended questions,the reasons employees with disabilities were nolonger employed included:• We do not have experience in having
employees with disabilities (25 responses).• We have lost a few employees in the last
eight years; if an employee withdisabilities has left, his or her reason wasnot different than other employeeswithout disabilities (1).
• They (employees with disabilities) soughta job they could do well (1).
• One gentleman got his workman’scompensation settlement after hisinjury and quit to start his own businesswith the money (1).
• Employees with disabilities had personalproblems that other people withoutdisabilities have to some extent (1).
• Most employees were unable to get alongwith others (1).
Employers generally supported theemployment of individuals with disabilities.They were also impressed with these persons’academic and interpersonal skills and favorableattitudes toward work. These perspectives arethe fundamental and crucial components ofsuccessful employment transition forindividuals with disabilities (Carney, 1990;Greenan & Tucker, 1990). The majority ofsurveyed employers stated that they did nothave experience with employees withdisabilities because none applied for jobs attheir sites. The fact that most individuals withdisabilities were not in the education pool alsocaused employers difficulty in hiring qualifieddisabled employees. Some employers indicatedthat employees could not get along well withcoworkers. This finding implied that socialdistance existed to some extent betweenindividuals with and without disabilities(Bowman, 1987). Rehabilitation counselingservices are, therefore, urgently needed tooptimize the congruence between individualsand their environments by counselinginterventions such as expectation adaptation,behavior modification, and communicationimprovement (Szymanski, Hanley-Maxwell, &Asselin,1990). Further, employers needed
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
31
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
32 some flexible administration strategies forsupervising these nontraditional employees(National Council on the Handicapped,1987). That is, employer services should beincluded in transition plans to assure effectivetransdisciplinary coordination amongemployment transition service deliveryagencies (Szymanski et al., 1990).
3. What difficulties do employers tend toencounter while employing individualswith disabilities?
Employers possessed a variety of attitudestoward the job skills of people with disabilities(M = 3.03, SD = 1.00). In employing peoplewith disabilities, employers did not believethese people have the following difficulties:inadequate academic skills (M = 2.61, SD =.86), negative attitudes toward work (M = 2.32,SD = .74), and lack of interpersonalrelationship skills (M = 2.57, SD = .74).Employers reported that they were slightlyaware of information resources of peripheraland assistive devices (M = 2.86, SD = .93).Also, employers believed that assistive deviceswere applicable to their businesses (M = 2.71,SD = .91). Their opinions on the affordabilityof assistive devices varied (M = 3.14, SD =1.02). Small businesses generally reported thatthis type of assistive equipment was tooexpensive.
The open-ended responses indicated that:• We are willing to take a chance when a
good match of a student’s needs andtraining site is found.
• Abilities to think and act quickly areneeded for most of our jobs, but thenmost employees without disabilitieshave the same problems.
• No individual with disabilities hasapplied for a position to date.
• Few applicants with disabilities inthe education pool have disabilities.
• I do not think they (individuals withdisabilities) can apply to my business(an engineering lab setting, awoodworking lab, railcarmaintenance industries, or otherlabor intensive businesses).
• In industries, only a skilled andsemiskilled workforce is needed. Nojob is available for them (employeeswith disabilities).
• To date, there is no training required
by state law. There is an inability tomake adaptations.
Regarding difficulties in providingperipheral and assistive devices to employeeswith disabilities in employment, employersgenerally possessed uncertain and a variety ofattitudes toward accessibility to relevantresources and the affordability of equipment.However, employers generally believed thatassistive technology would be available to theirbusinesses in order to enhance the employmentof people with disabilities. In spite of someemployers’ statements that no problems existedwith employees with disabilities, the open-ended responses indicated some reluctancetoward applying assistive technology in theemployment of people with disabilities:• It (applying advanced technology to
employment of people withdisabilities) has not become important.
• We do not have experience in this area.• We do not have adequate information
regarding this type of assistive technology.• Cost is difficult for a small business.
Employers participating in this studygenerally believed that individuals withdisabilities possessed the fundamental jobrequirements such as general job skills,academic skills, attitudes toward work, andinterpersonal skills. However, the highunemployment rate of these competentindividuals could result from either their lackof specific skills for certain jobs or their lack ofmotivation to seek and obtain employment.Employers speculated that education systemscould provide more specific job skills andcounseling services to individuals withdisabilities and help them initiate careers fromavailable job positions. It may be due to theemployers’ limited understanding, specialneeds populations’ lack of job skills, or poorcommunication between employers andindividuals with disabilities. Some employersbelieved that people with disabilities could notwork in labor-intensive job settings. Employersrealized the feasibility of assistive technologyfor the employment of individuals withdisabilities and recognized the availability ofinformation resources. However, unacceptablehigh costs were believed to be the main obstaclefor purchasing this type of equipment. Thisfinding was contradicted by employers whohad utilized assistive devices and found thatthe costs of remodeling and purchasing assistiveequipment for disabled employees were close
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
33to that for employees without disabilities(National Council on the Handicapped, 1987).
The beliefs of employers concerning thehigh costs of assistive devices might reflect thatinadequate information has been provided byrehabilitation agencies and assistive technologymanufacturing companies. Severalgovernmental funding programs and assistivedevice manufacturing companies have beenestablished to financially assist industry andbusiness in purchasing assistive devices (Reeb,1989; Webb, 1992). However, these policiesseemed not to be known and benefit potentialconsumers. Dissemination plans regarding theavailability and utility of these resources shouldbe known for the development and utilizationof advanced technology.
4. What support services do employers tendto need to successfully employ peoplewith disabilities in their businesses?
In order to support the employment ofpeople with disabilities, employers were willingto provide employment opportunities (M =3.77, SD = .63), job training (M = 3.38, SD =.86), and promotion of job redesign (M = 3.31,SD = .85). Respondents demonstrated variousinterests in providing monetary contributionssuch as financial contributions (M = 2.80, SD= .91) and tools and/or equipment used in theirbusiness (M = 3.01, SD = .83) to vocationalprograms.
The incentive factor that would mosteffectively encourage the employment ofindividuals with disabilities was public support(e.g., equipment subsidies, funding, staff, andemployee training; M = 3.62, SD = .91),followed by tax benefits (M = 3.51, SD = .96),access to a community resource network (M =3.51, SD = .82), and public relations (M =3.36, SD = .92).
Regarding the factors encouragingemployers to hire people with disabilities,employers responded that:• Proper training and skills are only
needed; no outside help is needed.• Employers have no problem with hiring
people with disabilities when they are ableto perform needed jobs and jobs areavailable at the same time.
• Getting the government out of the privatebusiness sector makes it easier toterminate employees.
Since employers were willing to provide
job training and employment opportunities toindividuals with disabilities, it could explaintheir concerns with special needs populationsand their realization of the importance ofemployment for people with disabilities. Thisassumption also indicates that employersbelieved that only specific job skills for certainpositions were needed in industry and business.Employers were generally hesitant to providemonetary contributions to local vocationalrehabilitation programs. This might imply thatemployers were not sure how contributionswould be used. That is, employers might beunaware of the successes and activities of localvocational rehabilitation programs.
However, monetary incentives such as taxbenefits and public supports were higherpriorities than others. Employers believed thataccessibility to a community resource networkwould effectively encourage them to hireemployees with disabilities because of theimportance of information resources.Employers desired financial aids to purchaseassistive devices and remodel facilities fornontraditional employees, and they neededstaff and employer training programs toimprove their administrative strategies forsupervising employees with whom they werenot familiar. Some government regulationsregarding the employment of individuals withdisabilities were viewed as inappropriate, evenharmful, to industry and business. Thisresponse demonstrated that either employmenttransition plans needed furthercommunication among legislative agencies andcommunities or the appropriateness andeffectiveness of government regulations shouldbe reevaluated. Disability professionals,therefore, play a crucial role in bridging thegap between employers and individuals withdisabilities and facilitating the interdisciplinarycollaboration for the success of employmenttransition for individuals with disabilities(Szymanski et al., 1990).
When asked to make additionalcomments, suggestions, and recommen-dations regarding the employment ofindividuals with disabilities, individualemployers responded that:• The only comment I would have is the
degree of disability and the equationbetween production and wages.
• I believe people with disabilities arecapable of doing a very good job incertain positions, however, our business is
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
34 very labor intensive and I am not sure inthis case. It would depend on theparticular disability.
• I have employed a disabled employee. Hewas capable in electrical constructionactivities. Safety is primary. A prospectiveemployee must be capable of performingconstruction activities withoutjeopardizing his or her own safety or thesafety of his or her teammate.
• If they know how and are able to perform,I will hire them just like anyone else.
• We run only a small business and do nothave funds to renovate our whole facilityto accommodate physically handicappedpersons. However, we are willing to workwith the mentally impaired.
• The labor pool, handicapped or not,is basically unskilled. We need moresemiskilled and skilled workers. Thebiggest threat to our business and thecreation and retention of jobs isgovernment regulation.
• We have hired one person in the last6–7 years. If a person can handle a joband has a disability, no problem. We aretoo small and too poor to provide specialtraining. We cannot afford to go farenough on health insurance for those weemploy.
• The one person employed who has adisability, left leg crippled by polio, Ifound that he thinks the world owes hima living.
• Besides employment opportunities,we utilize a rehabilitation center wheneverpossible for cleaning and simplemanufacturing services.
• I would like to see improvements injob training on electronic motor repair,wheel pump repair, and office jobs.
• Better public relations are needed. Itis too expensive for employers toaccommodate them. Who is goingto pay for the remodeling of facilities?
• I am appalled that the Congress andsome branches of the federal governmenthave been excluded.
• Our people must do shampoos, styles,cuts, fingernails. These jobs may bedifficult for a disabled person to perform.
• Our business has no need for extraemployees. Farming involves use of heavymachinery and chemicals undersometimes adverse conditions. There
would be no place here for mosthandicapped people and use of themcould develop life-threatening situations.Liability would be too great.
Most employers obviously held favorableattitudes toward individuals with disabilitiesand were willing to hire them if their job skillsmatched available positions. Applicants’specific job skills, interpersonal relationshipskills, motivation to search for employment,and knowledge about safety were the majorconsiderations in employment practice. To theproprietors of small businesses, individualswith disabilities were generally perceived to beunqualified due to their lack of versatility inseveral different types of job positions. Thefinancial investment in remodeling facilitiesand purchasing assistive devices for employeeswith disabilities were major difficulties in hiringthem. However, the existing financial aidprograms seemed not to benefit them due tolimited marketing plans or inappropriatestrategies. From the employers’ point of view,government incentive policies could facilitateemployment transition for individuals withdisabilities; whereas, mandatory regulationswould only prevent employers from hiringthese nontraditional employees. In order toovercome the barriers existing in theemployment of nontraditional employees,industry and business need disabilityprofessionals to provide strategies forsupervising and communicating withemployees with disabilities. They also expectedgovernment to provide appropriate job trainingto individuals with disabilities before requiringthem to hire these nontraditional employees.Therefore, further communication andprofessional coordination among resources inemployment transition were the highest needsat this time.
Implications and ImportanceContributions from a variety of resources,
such as legislation, vocational special education,assistive technology manufacturing companies,and individuals with disabilities, have createda remarkable impact on the employmentpreparation of individuals with disabilities.However, the current low employment rate ofspecial needs populations seems to result frompoor transition planning, lack of programcoordination, and insufficient informationresources (Szymanski et al., 1990). This studywas conducted to further understand the
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
35existing obstacles and possible resolutions tothe improvement of employment of individualswith disabilities. The foci of this studyincluded employers’ awareness of currentlegislation regarding employment of specialneeds populations and the activities ofvocational rehabilitation programs, employers’difficulties and expected incentives when theytry to hire nontraditional employees, and theavailability of applying assistive technology totheir businesses for special needs employees.
As with most studies, this study had somelimitations. The sample used was randomlyselected from local advisory committeemembers of secondary trade and industrialeducation programs in the state of Indiana.However, these employers did not likelyrepresent all employers in the state of Indiana.It was assumed that employers would beentirely frank to express their perspectives onthe posited questions, but some employersmight have tried to avoid the suspicion ofdiscrimination and concealed their negativeattitudes toward some issues. The otherlimitation could be caused by the low responserate. Only 41.04% of the sample completedthe survey questionnaires. In order tominimize the possible nonresponse bias, atelephone follow-up survey of nonrespondentswas utilized to identify the reasons fornonresponse and the differences betweenperspectives of norrespondents andrespondents. The telephone follow-up surveyrevealed that nonrespondents possessedperspectives similar to the respondents.Therefore, only low response bias may exist.
Several conclusions may be drawn fromthis study. First, employers were generallyconcerned with the employment of individualswith disabilities and relevant issues regardingpeople with disabilities. Second, employerswere impressed with these persons’ highpotential to work in terms of academic skills,interpersonal skills, and positive attitudestoward work. Third, employers also realizedthe function of assistive technology used forthe employment of individuals with disabilitiesand the importance of employment forindividuals with disabilities and communities.They were willing to provide employmentopportunities and relevant contributions tothem whenever applicants’ job skills matchedcertain positions.
The favorable perspectives of employersprovided an advantageous environment for the
employment transition of individuals withdisabilities. However, the existence of the lowemployment rate of individuals with disabilitiesimplied that several challenges still existed insome aspects such as counseling services,vocational programs for special needspopulations, government policies, and thedevelopment and utilization of assistivetechnology and included the following:Limited communication among employmenttransition agencies inhibited individuals withdisabilities from entering and succeeding inemployment; employers perceived thatvocational rehabilitation programs failed toprepare individuals with disabilities with thespecific job skills needed in the world of work;some government regulations were believed tobe inappropriate, even harmful, to theemployment of individuals with disabilities;and employers realized the applicability ofassistive technologies but did not benefit fromit due to limited accessibility to informationresources and financial aids.
Successful employment transition ofnontraditional employees needs moreprofessional coordination and transdisciplinarycollaboration than individual service deliverysystems (Szymanski et al., 1990). Accordingly,the following recommendations are offered:1. Further communication and
collaboration among a variety ofagencies and resources should befacilitated by counseling services that areimportant to the employment transitionfor people with disabilities.
2. Vocational programs for special needspopulations should consider therecommendations of business andindustry along with student needs tobetter prepare students for employment.
3. Teachers in special needs education arethe first counselors and facilitators. Theyshould develop and implementappropriate curriculum and instructionfor students with disabilities to improvetheir job-related skills and motivationfor work.
4. Some government regulations related tothe employment of persons withdisabilities should be reevaluated andadjusted to match employerconsiderations and needs.
5. Professional coordination is necessary tosatisfy the assistive equipment needs andinterdisciplinary collaboration of
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
36 individuals with disabilities.6. Disability professionals at the
university level should provideindustry and business with professionaltraining concerning strategies forsupervising employees with disabilitiesto assist employers to manage issuesaccompanied with nontraditionalemployees.
7. Future studies should include morediverse samples and populations toexamine the issues from a greatervariety of employers.
8. Further studies should consideradopting naturalistic methods ofinquiry, such as case study, to gain a
more in-depth understanding of theissues under examination.
Dr. James P. Greenan is a professor in theVocational and Technical Department at PurdueUniversity, West Lafayette, IN.
Mingchang Wu is an associate professor and chairin the Department of Vocational and TechnicalEducation, National Yunlin University of Scienceand Technology, Taiwan, R.O.C.
Elizabeth L. Black was an undergraduate researchtrainee in career and technical education in theDepartment of Curriculum and Instruction,School of Education, Purdue University, WestLafayette, IN.
ReferencesAppell, L. S. (1990). Using simulation technology to promote social competence of handicapped students. (ERIC
Documentation Information No. 324839)
Bowe, F. (1990). Employment and people with disabilities. OSERS News in Print, 3(2), 2–6.
Bowman, J. T. (1987). Attitudes toward disabled persons: Social distance and work competence. Journal of
Rehabilitation, 53(1), 41–44.
Carney, N. C. (1990). The Americans with Disabilities Act, civil rights for an emerging minority. American
Rehabilitation, 16(4), 2, 31.
Chadsey-Rusch, J., & Gonzalez, P. (1988). Social ecology of the workplace: Employers’ perceptions versus direct
observation. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 9, 229–245.
Greenan, J. P., & Tucker, P. (1990). Integrating science knowledge and skills in vocational education progams.
The Journal for Vocational Special Needs Education, 13(1), 19–22.
Hartman, B., Fuqua, D., & Jenkins, S. (1986). The problems of and remedies for nonresponse bias in educational
surveys. Journal of Experimental Education, 54(2), 85–90.
Hill, M. L., Banks, P. D., Handrick, R. R., Wehman, P. H., Hill, J. W., & Shafer, M. S. (1987). Benefit-cost
analysis of supported competitive employment for persons with mental retardation. Research in Development
Disabilities, 8, 71–89.
Johnson, D., & Halloran, W. (1997). The federal legislative context and goals of a state systems change initiatives
on transition for youth with disabilities. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 20(2), 109–122.
Mancuso, L. L. (1990). ADA and employment accommodations: What now? American Rehabilitation, 16(4),
15–17, 32.
Miller, L. E., & Smith, K. L. (1983). Handling nonresponse issues. Journal of Extension, 21, 45–50.
National Center for Education Statistics, Office of Education Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of
Education. (1996). Youth indicators 1996: Trends in the well-being of American youth. Washington, DC:
U.S. Government Printing Office.
National Council on the Handicapped and the President’s Committee on Employment of the Handicapped.
(1987). The ICD Survey II: Employing disabled Americans. New York: Louis Harris & Associates.
Reeb, K. G. (1989). Assistive financing for assistive devices: Loan guarantees for purchase of products by persons
with disabilities. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 348829)
Salomone, P. R., & Paige, R. E. (1984, December). Employment problems and solutions: Perceptions of blind
and visually impaired adults. The Vocational Guidance Quarterly, pp. 147–156.
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
37Sarkees, M. D., & Scott, J. L. (1986). Vocational special needs. Homewood, IL: American Technical Publishers.
Storey, K., & Garff, J. T. (1999). The effect of coworker instruction on the integration of youth in transition in
competitive employment. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 22(1), 69–84.
Szymanski, E. M., Hanley-Maxwell, C., & Asselin, S. (1990). Rehabilitation counseling, special education, and
vocational special needs education: Three transition disciplines. Career Development for Exceptional
Individuals, 13(1), 29–38.
Tilson, G. P., & Neubert, D. A. (1988). School-to-work transition of mildly disabled young adults: Parental
perceptions of vocational needs. The Journal of American Rehabilitation, 65(3), 34–45.
Unger, D. D. (1999). Workplace supports: A view from employers who have hired supported employees. Focus
on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 14(3), 167–179.
U.S. General Accounting Office. (1996, March). At-risk and delinquent youth: Multiple federal programs raise
efficiency questions (GAO/HEHS–96–16–34). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Webb, B. W. (1992). But, we don’t have the money. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 345458)
Technology is one of the seven essentiallearning areas included to achieve theknowledge and understanding that all NewZealanders need to acquire (Ministry ofEducation, 1993). Responsibility for theimplementation of these curricula rests withschools which have flexibility in makingimplementation decisions. Within the nationalcurriculum framework, all curriculumstatements must reflect the principles of thenational curriculum framework, specify clearlearning outcomes against which students’achievements can be assessed, have learningoutcomes or objectives defined over eightprogressive levels, and be grouped in a numberof strands. The national curriculumframework’s principles relate to learning andachievement, development of school programs,and aspects of social justice and equity.
The Technology CurriculumThe general aim of Technology in the New
Zealand Curriculum (Ministry of Education,1995) is to achieve technological literacy forall New Zealanders. Technological literacy isseen as an amalgam of three strands aimed atdeveloping technological knowledge andunderstanding, technological capability, and anunderstanding and awareness of therelationship between technology and society.Each of these strands is seen as equallyimportant, to be taught as an integral wholerather than as separate parts. This integrationrecognizes that technology has its ownknowledge base, involves practical andprocedural skills and techniques, and cannotbe separated from the social and culturalenvironment within which it takes place.Technological activities in the classroom areintended to be based on learners identifyingneeds and/or opportunities that can beaddressed through technological design andproblem solving and on learners developing theknowledge, skills, and social awarenessnecessary to understand and critique moderntechnological practice.
The practice of technology covers a diverserange of activities. Each technological area hasits own technological knowledge and ways ofundertaking technological activity, and it was
considered important that students experiencea range of technological areas and contexts.Learning in a variety of technological areas andcontexts is thought to develop more effectiveunderstanding of technological principles aswell as enhance the transfer of knowledgebetween contexts and areas (Jones, 1997;Perkins & Salomon, 1989). Allied todeveloping a broadly based curriculum was thedesire to have the curriculum reflecttechnologies that were appropriate in the NewZealand context (Jones & Carr, 1993). It wastherefore decided to include the followingtechnological areas: materials technology,information and communication technology,electronics and control technology,biotechnology, structures and mechanisms,process and production technology, and foodtechnology.
The technology curriculum also recognizesthe centrality of graphics and design in alltechnological areas, and rather than listinggraphics and design as a separate technologicalarea, it is expected to be an integral part ofteaching and learning in all areas of technologyeducation.
In 1999 technology became a compulsorypart of the school curriculum for years 1–10.It is optional in years 11–13 (senior secondaryschool). It was therefore necessary to developstrategies to support teachers in theimplementation of this new curriculum area,and the Centre for Science and TechnologyEducation Research, University of Waikato, hasbeen closely involved in a number of researchand development projects to enhance theteaching and learning of technology. Theseprojects include teacher professionaldevelopment, resource development inassociation with Technology Education NewZealand and The Royal Society, and classroomresearch.
Teacher Professional DevelopmentTeachers’ understanding and perceptions
of a subject have a considerable impact on theirinterpretation and subsequent implementationof that curriculum (Goodson, 1985). Becausemost New Zealand teachers currently have littleor no background in either technology or
Technology Education in New ZealandMichael Forret, Alister Jones, and Judy Moreland
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
38
technology education, their perceptions tendto be narrow, seeing technology as essentiallyconcerned with modern, sophisticatedmachinery and electronics (Jones & Carr,1992). While teachers’ views of teaching aremuch more informed, they are subjective,having been developed within the subjectsubculture with which they identify (Paechter,1992). For the introduction of technology thiswas a multiple problem. Not only wereteachers’ views of technology inconsistent withthe much broader view of technology inherentin the technology curriculum statement, buttheir approach to teaching technology waslikely to be dominated by their subjectsubculture’s consensus view of the nature ofthe subject, the way it should be taught, therole of the teacher, and what might be expectedof the student (Paechter, 1992).
There was a danger that approaches toteaching technology would be based ontechniques more suited to other subjects andthat these approaches would be applied to adistorted version of the curriculum.Consequently, teacher development programswere developed to enhance teachers’understanding of technology and technologyteaching (Compton & Jones, 1998). In theseprograms it was seen as important to developnot only a broader concept of technology, butalso awareness and understanding oftechnological practice. The implications of thiswere that teachers needed to experiencetechnological practice in some form to becomeconfident in the teaching of technology.Learning about technological practice was notsufficient. It needed to be experienced, reflectedon, and critically analyzed in terms of a conceptof technology that was compatible with thecurriculum statement (Jones & Compton, 1998).
Two programs were developed and trialedin the New Zealand context: the NationalFacilitator Training Program and theTechnology Teacher Development ResourcePackage Program.
National Facilitator Training ProgramThe Facilitator Training Program was a
year-long program and ran for two years, 1995and 1996. It involved training a total of 30educators—15 each year—from all over NewZealand. Program evaluations by theparticipants (facilitators) indicated theimportance of developing a theoreticalperspective of technology education. This was
found to be particularly helpful whendiscussing implementation issues with schoolmanagers and boards. Participants also stressedthe importance of learning about thetechniques and practices of differenttechnological areas.
Following the training program thesefacilitators worked with teachers on a nationalbasis. Teachers’ evaluations of these programswere very positive, with 87.2% of responsesrating the program as above average orexcellent. The majority of teachers commentedthat the program had met their needs andrequested further teacher development of thiskind. Most of the teachers (83%) found thatthe programs developed by the facilitators hadhelped them with their understanding oftechnology teaching generally and thetechnology curriculum specifically. Over halfof the teachers (63%) also found the programhelped them with their understanding of theconcept of technology itself. Approximatelythree quarters of the teachers (76%) consideredthe areas of school and classroomimplementation had been helpful, and overhalf of the teachers (66%) had found theprogram helpful in providing them with ideasfor classroom activities—even though this wasnot a primary focus of the programs.
National Technology Teacher DevelopmentResource Package Program
The Technology Teacher DevelopmentResource Package Program was trialed in 14schools over a three to six month period in1996 and included video material oftechnological practice, classroom practice, andaccompanying explanatory text as well asworkshop activities. All the evaluations bothin the trial schools and from subsequent generaluse indicate the successful nature of theseprograms and the usefulness of the model as abasis for teacher professional development intechnology education. This resource package(Ministry of Education, 1997) is now used in mostschools and forms the basis of nationally fundedprofessional development in New Zealand.
Key Features of Teacher ProfessionalDevelopment
Our experience with these teacherprofessional development programs, designedto be consistent with both New Zealand’snational curriculum statement in technologyand relevant research findings, suggests that the
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
39
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
40 following features are central in their success.In these programs it was important todevelop:• robust concepts of technology and
technology teaching;• understanding of technological practice in
a variety of contexts;• technological knowledge in a number of
technological areas;• technological skills in a number of
technological areas;• understanding of the way in which
people’s past experiences both within andoutside education impact theirconceptualization of technology teaching;and
• understanding of the way in whichtechnology content and experiences canbecome a part of the school and classroomcurriculum. This must be based on asound pedagogy in keeping with theconcept of technology education.
Developing Resource Material WhichEmphasizes Effective School/Enterprise Links
The curriculum document for technologyemphasizes that the link between schools andthe community, including business andindustry, tertiary institutions, and localauthorities, is important to a well-developed,inclusive technology curriculum. It is expectedthat students will develop an understandingof the nature of technological practice andrecognize its similarities and differencesbetween different communities of practice. Asuccessful resource assisting teachers in this areais the Delta Series (The Royal Society of NewZealand, 1999). This is a collaborative venturebetween TENZ (Technology Education NewZealand), IPENZ (Institute of ProfessionalEngineers of New Zealand), and The RoyalSociety of New Zealand.
The Delta Series consists of a series of casestudies built around school enterprise links.For example, five of the units have involvedlinks specifically established through theIPENZ Neighborhood Engineers program.Each case study incorporates reflectivecomments from teachers involved. The outsideexperts associated with the technologicalactivity have also commented on theknowledge and experience they were able tobring to the process. An additional featureis an external perspective provided throughcomments offered by a reference panel of
experienced technology educationalists,including researchers.
It is hoped that the case studies will beused constructively both by classroom teachersand those from the wider community who areinterested in becoming involved in technologyeducation programs in schools. Those teacherswho are just starting the process of developingtheir classroom technology programs will gainan insight into the thinking of others who havetaken positive first steps along the path. Moreexperienced teachers will be able to reflect onthe experiences and views of others as theywork to refine their own programs to bettermeet the needs of their students and localcommunity. The wider community should beable to see ways in which they too may be ableto become involved at all levels of thetechnology curriculum.
Enhancing and Sustaining ClassroomPractice Through Research andDevelopment
There are two research programs(Moreland & Jones, 2000; Moreland, Jones,& Northover, 2001) that have been examiningclassroom practice in technology, particularlyin the area of formative assessment. The firstexamined existing practice, while the secondexplored the development of effectiveformative interactions. This research feedsdirectly into a resource development strategyfor use by classroom teachers.
Research MethodologyThe first year of the research (1998)
explored teachers’ emerging assessmentpractices in teaching technology. Nine teachers(two male, seven female) from two primary(years 1–6) schools were involved. The teachers’classroom experience ranged from a first-yearteacher to a teacher with 16 years of experience.In terms of technology teacher development,three had had minimal involvement; two,moderate involvement; and four, extensiveinvolvement over a whole year.
The research focused particularly onteachers’ concepts of technology and classroompractices in technology. A case study approachwas utilized to gain an understanding ofclassroom assessment practices in technology.The project was set within the theoreticalframework that technological knowledge andassessment knowledge is socially constructedand context dependent.
The researcher took the role of a participantobserver in the classroom during the technologyeducation sessions; this contact involved 100 hours.Several methods of data collection were usedincluding classroom observations, field notes,individual and group interviews, and writtenresponses. Throughout the process, individual andgroup interviews provided an opportunity to explorestudent interaction with the classroom activities.Group interviews were valuable since many of thestudents worked collaboratively and the researchendeavored to take this into account. Teachers’observations and comments provided furtherconsideration of context and student performance.
The classroom discussions between theteacher and students and the studentsthemselves were taped and analyzed. Students’written work and teachers’ written material,including planning and assessment, werecollected and analyzed. All of the analyzed datawere then used to write individual case studiesfor each of the nine teachers involved in theresearch. The case studies are presented in CaseStudies of Classroom Practice in Technology(Moreland & Jones, 1999).
The second year of the research wasexpanded to involve working in five primaryschools (years 1–8) with 14 teachers (3 male,11 female). The teachers’ classroom experienceranged from a second-year teacher to a teacherwith 26 years of experience, while technologyteacher development ranged from minimalinvolvement to extensive experience, such as atechnology facilitator.
Contact during this year includedclassroom observations, individual and groupinterviews, and teacher observation andcomment. Workshops were an essential partof the process of enhancing assessmentprocedures, with the teachers attending sevendays of workshops: an initial three-dayworkshop and two, two-day workshops spreadthrough the year. The first three-day workshopfocused on discussions of the findings from the1998 research and the implications. As well, themodels for assessment developed by the researchteam were introduced and trailing began. Thesecond two-day workshop offered the teachersopportunities for reflection and enhancementof the use of the models. The final two-dayworkshop focused on assessing the use of themodels and their further enhancement.
Year One Research Findings (Existing Practice)After substantial classroom research in
1998, there appeared to be significantproblems for teachers in assessing technology.Teachers commented that their difficultieswere not just confined to technology but werealso related to other subjects. In comparisonwith earlier research (Jones & Carr, 1992) itwas found that, as a result of the teacherdevelopment models discussed earlier and thetrialing of curriculum material in classrooms,teachers had developed broader concepts oftechnology (Jones & Compton, 1998;Moreland, 1998). These concepts, however,were still not broad or detailed enough to takeinto account many conceptual and proceduralaspects, and this appeared to be confiningteachers’ assessment in technology to assessingaffective aspects of learning such as enjoymentand the social and managerial aspects such asworking in groups, turn-taking, and sharing.Technology had yet to become an integral partof the talk of classroom teachers and thecommunity. This meant that a sharedlanguage of technology had not developed toany degree of specificity, which Black (1998)stated is vital for assessment.
In their planning of technology, teacherswere focusing on the activities rather than onspecific learning outcomes. With this focus onactivities it became almost impossible forteachers to provide feedback at the conceptualand procedural level. The learning outcomesthat were identified were often nottechnological and therefore learning intechnology was not enhanced.
Formative assessment was not wellunderstood in technology. Like the learner, theteacher needs to have a perception of a gapbetween a desired goal and where the studentis currently operating. They also need to knowwhat action needs to be taken to close the gapin order to reach the desired goal (Black &Wiliam, 1998). These teachers were not ableto articulate what that gap might be in termsof conceptual and procedural aspects becausethey did not know what the desired goal was.They therefore could not know what detailedaction to take because they did not know wherethe student was going, or even the currentposition of the student.
Also impacting teacher assessmentpractices in technology were the existingsubcultures in schools. What teachers relied onfor assessing in technology became largelydependent on what they already did andknew in other curriculum areas. All teachers in
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
41
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
42 primary schools have common understandingsof teamwork, leadership, turn-taking,discussing, depicting ideas, gatheringinformation, describing, reflecting, etc., andthese common understandings of social andmanagerial skills had became the focus ofassessment in technology.
Year Two—Developing FormativeInteractions
During this year, the conceptual andprocedural aspects of learning in technologywere highlighted as the means to enhanceteachers’ formative interactions and thelearning outcomes for the students. Thisresulted in teachers moving from using generalconcepts about technology to more specificconcepts within different technological areas.For the first time teachers were able to identifythe specific technological learning outcomesthey wished to teach and assess. The teachers’developing conceptual and proceduralknowledge enabled them to write specificlearning outcomes, and they began to movewith more confidence between the genericdimensions of the nature of technology andthe specific technological learning outcomesassociated with particular technological areas.
This shift in focus from providing atechnology experience to providingopportunities for students to developtechnological learning outcomes wassignificant. They became focused on thetechnological learning of their students.Teacher talk about technology education had ahigher profile and was increasingly embeddedin teacher conversations. Teacher talk alsodeveloped relating to progression and the linkingof learning outcomes from one unit to the nextas illustrated by this teacher’s comments:
I felt we were looking for progression and I feltthat the children built on certain things that werecovered last time very well. There was a lot moremovement in the iterative process this time. Thechildren really started to move backwards andforwards through the design process very well…we might go on to extend by looking at differenttypes of food packaging…going perhaps to theopening mechanism of packages as well…so wecan start looking at the ergonomics of packages…we could go more into specification drawingsor perhaps three dimensional conceptualdrawings.
Teachers demonstrated greater confidencewith formative assessment, particularly inrelation to providing appropriate feedback to
the learners. Not only was there more emphasison providing feedback and assistance to studentsto develop particular technical skills, there wasalso more emphasis on conceptual and proceduralaspects rather than social and managerial aspects.Additionally, there was less emphasis on praise asthe sole formative interaction and more emphasison assisting students to move on, to reflect, toassess their own progress.
The models that were developed in theproject had a key role in enhancing the teachers’planning and classroom strategies. The teachersvalued the following intervention strategies:• Identifying specific and overall learning
outcomes rather than just activities.• Identifying procedural, conceptual,
societal, and technical learning outcomes.• Summative assessment during the unit as
well as at the end.• Questioning using technological
vocabulary.• Allowing for multiple outcomes.
These are illustrated in some of theteachers’ comments below:
Dividing planning into conceptual, procedural,societal, and technical allowed me to moreeffectively hone in on the technology involved.
The identification of possible and plannedlearning outcomes made me more aware of thequestioning that would be required.
Evident was the development of initialteacher understanding of progression instudent learning in technology. This wasreflected in task selection and development.Tasks were identified to develop particularconceptual and procedural aspects rather thanjust providing a variety of experiences. The useof the models also enabled the teachers todifferentiate between the different levels ofeffectiveness of student learning and to explainthe differences. The teachers also noticedenhanced student learning. Their commentswere illustrative of this:
Children’s differences in learning can be betteridentified with specific learning outcomes withmore effective children coping with morevariables.
Have had quality opportunities to show whatthey can do with improved vocabulary, language,and skills.
The more effective children were engaged all ofthe time; they had the vocabulary and could use itappropriately. This was evidenced in their mockup and drawing.
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
43The teaching, learning, and assessmentstrategies that have been developed in thisintervention year also impacted the teachingand learning in other curriculum areas. Allteachers made comments on this, for example:
I am looking at making my learning outcomesvery focused for other curriculum areas to developmore purposeful and structured formative andsummative assessment practices. I am thinkingmore carefully about what I want the children tolearn.
I am now probing, in-depth questioning andconstantly challenging. I am thinking about howmy learning activities link and how I can helpchildren transfer ideas and skills.
This research project has developedintervention strategies that encourage teachersto identify the conceptual, procedural, societal,and technical aspects, task definition, andaspects of holistic assessment. The results arevery encouraging with the focus at theconceptual and procedural level rather than interms of an activity.
General comments made by the teachersat the conclusion of the year included thefollowing:
My technology teaching has made huge leapsforward because of my involvement. It has beenvery demanding, but the risks have beenworthwhile.
The models have helped immensely, and it hasbeen particularly rewarding to see the quality ofwork that is being produced by the children as aresult of the research.
Continuing the ProcessTo successfully introduce and sustain a new
curriculum requires a long-term research anddevelopment program that informs classroompractice. In New Zealand, this program hasincluded teacher development, resourcedevelopment (for teacher development andclassroom materials), development of strategiesto enhance teacher knowledge and classroompractice, and mechanisms for the disseminationof the research findings to inform all teachers.
Our research has shown that to improveand sustain learning in technology, it isnecessary to enhance both teachers’technological knowledge and theirunderstanding of technological practice.Resources and teacher development programsbased on these goals have proved very successfulin improving teachers’ confidence andcompetence in teaching technology.
While teacher development programshelped to improve teachers’ understanding oftechnology, classroom research has shown thatteachers required further help with assessingtechnology. In particular, teachers found itdifficult to identify specific conceptual andprocedural aspects of technological learning,relying instead on social and managerialoutcomes to define their desired learning. Toassist teachers with this problem, well-developed models were used to focus theteachers’ attention on the conceptual,procedural, societal, and technical aspects ofstudent learning in technology. These modelshave allowed teachers to identify theirknowledge gaps in technology and encouragedthem to develop effective strategies to addressthese gaps and become more effective in theclassroom. As highlighted by Fenstermacher(1994), it is more important that teachers knowwhat they know than for researchers to knowwhat teachers know.
However, while these results areencouraging, this is only the beginning, andmore research and development work isrequired to develop sustained classroompractice in technology consistent with the NewZealand technology curriculum.
AcknowledgmentsWe are appreciative of the teachers’
involvement and the challenges they undertookin their classrooms. The Ministry of Education,New Zealand, funded the intervention researchprogram.
Dr. Michael Forret is a senior lecturer at theCentre for Science and Technology EducationResearch and the School of Education at TheUniversity of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand.He is a member-at-large of Epsilon Pi Tau.
Dr. Alister Jones is director of the Centre for Scienceand Technology Education Research at TheUniversity of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand.He is a member-at-large of Epsilon Pi Tau.
Judy Moreland is a lecturer and project officer atthe Centre for Science and Technology EducationResearch at The University of Waikato, Hamilton,New Zealand.
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
44 ReferencesBlack, P. J. (1998). Testing: Friend or foe? Theory and practice of assessment and testing. London: The Falmer Press.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7–74.
Compton, V., & Jones, A. (1998). Reflecting on teacher development in technology education: Implications for
future programs. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 8(2), 151–166.
Fenstermacher, G. (1994). The knower and the known: The nature of knowledge in research on teaching. Review of
Research in Education, 20, 3–56.
Goodson, I. F. (Ed.). (1985). Social histories of the secondary curriculum. London: Falmer Press.
Jones, A. (1997). Recent research in student learning of technological concepts and processes. International Journal
of Technology and Design Education, 7(1–2), 83–96.
Jones, A., & Carr, M. (1992). Teachers’ perceptions of technology education: Implications for curriculum
innovation. Research in Science Education, 22, 230–239.
Jones, A., & Carr, M. (1993). Towards technology education (Vol. 1). Hamilton, New Zealand: Centre for Science
and Mathematics Education Research, University of Waikato.
Jones, A., & Compton, V. (1998). Towards a model for teacher development in technology education: From
research to practice. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 8(1), 51–65.
Ministry of Education. (1993). New Zealand’s curriculum framework. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media.
Ministry of Education. (1995). Technology in the New Zealand curriculum. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning
Media.
Ministry of Education. (1997). Towards teaching technology: Know how 2. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning
Media.
Moreland, J. (1998). Technology education teacher development: The importance of experiences in technological practice.
Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand.
Moreland, J., & Jones, A. (1999). Case studies of classroom practice in technology (Working Paper 523, Research in
Assessment of Primary Technology Project). Hamilton, New Zealand: Centre for Science, Mathematics and
Technology Education Research, University of Waikato.
Moreland, J., & Jones, A. (2000). Emerging assessment practices in an emergent curriculum: Implications for
technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 10(3), 283–305.
Moreland, J., Jones, A., & Northover, A. (2001). Enhancing teachers’ technological and assessment practices to
enhance student learning in technology: A two year classroom study. Research in Science Education,
31(1), 155–176.
Paechter, C. (1992). Subject subcultures and the negotiation of open work: Conflict and co-operation in cross-
curricular coursework. In R. McCormick, P. Murphy, & M. Harrison (Eds.), Teaching and learning technology
(pp. 279–288). Wokingham, England: Addison-Wesley, Open University Press.
Perkins, D. N., & Salomon, G. (1989). Are cognitive skills context bound? Educational Researcher, 18(1), 16–25.
The Royal Society of New Zealand. (1999). The Delta series. Wellington, New Zealand: SIR.
Metal cutting is one of the most significantmanufacturing processes in the area of materialremoval (Chen & Smith, 1997). Black (1979)defined metal cutting as the removal of metalchips from a workpiece in order to obtain afinished product with desired attributes of size,shape, and surface roughness. Drilling, sawing,turning, and milling are some of the processesused to remove material to produce specific,high-quality products.
The quality of machined components isevaluated by how closely they adhere to setproduct specifications of length, width,diameter, surface finish, and reflectiveproperties. In high-speed turning operations,dimensional accuracy, tool wear, and qualityof surface finish are three factors thatmanufacturers must be able to control (Lahidji,1997). Among various process conditions,surface finish is central to determining thequality of a workpiece (Coker & Shin, 1996).Attaining and tracking a desired surfaceroughness is more difficult than producingphysical dimensions because relatively morefactors affect surface roughness. Some of thesefactors can be controlled and some cannot.Controllable process parameters include feed,cutting speed, tool geometry, and tool setup.Factors that cannot be controlled as easilyinclude tool, workpiece, and machinevibration; tool wear and degradation; andworkpiece and tool material variability (Coker& Shin, 1996).
Techniques of Surface RoughnessMeasurement
Surface measurement techniques aregrouped into contact and noncontact methods.An amplified stylus profilometer is the mostpopular and prevalent contact instrumentused to measure surface roughness in industryand research laboratories because it is fast,repeatable, easy to interpret, and relativelyinexpensive (Mitsui, 1986; Shin, Oh, & Coker,1995). In addition, stylus profilometers areused as the standard for comparing mostof the newly invented surface roughnessmeasurement instruments or techniques.This instrument uses a tracer or pickupincorporating a diamond stylus and atransducer. Running the stylus tip across the
workpiece surface generates electrical signalscorresponding to surface roughness. Theelectrical signals are amplified, converted fromanalog to digital, processed according to analgorithm, and displayed. The measurementhas a fairly good resolution and a large rangethat satisfies the measurements of mostmanufactured surfaces. However, this stylusprofilometer is limited because it requires anexcessive amount of time to scan large areas, ithas a limited range of use on nonflat surfaces,and it is restricted to off-line use (Shin et al.,1995). Off-line and in-process measurementsare compared in the next section.
In-Process Versus Off-Line MeasurementMonitoring can be performed in-process
or off-line using direct or indirect methods(Cook, 1980). Critical need for in-processtool and process monitoring has developedsince computer numerically controlled(CNC) machines and automated machiningcenters have become more widespread(Koren, 1989). Monitoring individualmachining processes in real time is criticalto integrating those processes into the overallmachining system. The in-processdesignation for a sensing method means thatit is performed while metal is being removed(or during normal disengagement) withoutinterrupting the process.
Off-line methods can be performed on themachine or away from the machine. In eithercase, off-line methods require either schedulingidle time or interrupting the process formeasurement. In-process and off-line methodsare effective in gathering importantinformation about surface characteristics, butin-process methods are preferred. In-processmonitoring provides real-time informationconcerning the machining process. This real-time feedback enables the machinist oroperator to adjust the appropriate machiningparameters in order to produce the desiredsurface roughness, reduce tool wear, and/orreduce the probability of tool breakage.However, monitoring or measurementconducted in-process or off-line would not bepossible without the use of sensory devices.
Sensor technology is playing an ever-increasing role in the manufacturing
Recognizing Surface Roughness to Enhance MillingOperationsMandara D. Savage and Joseph C. Chen
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
45
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
46 environment for a wide variety of tasks, suchas tool wear assessment, machine toolcondition monitoring, and quantification ofthe surface finish. The demand forincorporating sensor technology into theproduction environment is being driven byincreasing need to minimize manufacturingcosts while simultaneously producing higherquality products.
Sensor technology can measure surfacecharacteristics either directly or indirectly.Direct measurement methods using sensorsinclude optical, electromagnetic, and ultrasonicmethods. Direct sensors scan the workpiecesurface directly and obtain surface roughnessinformation as well as workpiece dimensions.However, these processes are limited becausethe presence of chips and/or cutting fluidblocks the line of sight they require to measurethe workpiece surface. Indirect methods havebeen successfully used (Tsai, Chen, & Lou,1999) to extrapolate the surface condition fromvibration signals measured by the accelerometeror dynamometer. Indirect measurement is notimpeded by the presence of chips and cutting,and thus is a more robust measurementmethod. For that reason, the present researchemploys an accelerometer sensor to indirectlymeasure surface roughness in real time.
Purpose of the StudyThe purpose of this research was to develop
a multilevel, in-process surface roughnessrecognition (M-ISRR) system to evaluatesurface roughness in process and in real time.To develop this system precisely, the followingkey factors related to surface roughness duringthe machining process had to be identified:feed rate, spindle speed, depth of cut of theprocess, tool and workpiece materials, and soon. In addition, the dynamics of the machiningprocess generate vibration between the tool andworkpiece while the machining process istaking place. Vibration information was a keyfactor in the development of the M-ISRR system.
Research by Lou and Chen (1997)involving an in-process surface recognition(ISR) system resulted in the successfuldevelopment of a surface recognition system.Their study attained approximately 93%accuracy with only one tool type and one workmaterial. The M-ISRR system in the presentresearch extends Lou and Chen’s findings byusing multiple tools and work materials. Thepresent M-ISRR system provides a more robust
Ra
prediction system by incorporating multiplework materials, tools, and setup parameters.This system will provide the real-time surfaceroughness (R
a) values needed for in-process
decision making in a more realistic industrialenvironment. A multiple regression analysisapproach was used to develop the M-ISRR system.
Experimental Setup and SignalProcessing
In any study, equipment and hardwareplay critical roles in conducting a viableexperiment and collecting results consistentwith the purpose of the study. A fundamentalunderstanding of computer/machiningequipment and data acquisition devices, whichinclude proximity sensors, accelerometers, andsignal converters (i.e., analog to digital ordigital to analog), is important in under-standing the activities conducted in thisresearch. Accordingly, hardware and softwareused in this research are discussed in the nexttwo sections.
Hardware SetupAll machining was done in a Fadal VMC
(vertical machining center) with multiple tool-change capability. This machine is capable ofthree-axis movement (along the x, y, and zplanes). Programs can be developed in theVMC directly or downloaded from a 3.5"diskette or data link. Information was collectedusing a 353B33 accelerometer and a MicroSwitch 922 Series 3-wire DC proximity sensor.The accelerometer was used to collect vibrationdata generated by the cutting action of thework tool. The proximity sensor was used tocount the rotations of the spindle as the toolwas cutting. The proximity information thenwas graphed along with the accelerometer data,which enabled the identification of vibrationsproduced during different phases of the cuttingsequence. Data from both sensors wereconverted from analog to digital signalsthrough an Omega CIO-DAS-1602/12 A/Dconverter. The A/D converter-output wasconnected to a Pentium I personal computervia an I/O interface (see Figure 1).
Two power supplies were used. One powersupply was used to amplify the signal from theaccelerometer. This amplified signal was thensent to the A/D board. The second powersupply was used to power the proximity sensorand circuitry. A signal was produced duringthe switched phase of the proximity sensor.
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
47
This signal was sent to the A/D board ona separate channel from the one used for theaccelerometer signal.
The workpiece material used in thisresearch was 6061 aluminum and 1018 steelblocks. The blocks were cut 1.00" x 1.00" x1.00". Various feed and spindle speeds, depthsof cut, work materials, tool materials and types,and tool diameters were tested.
The Federal PocketSurf stylus profilometerwas used off-line to measure the surfaceroughness value of the machined samples. Thesurface finish measurements were made off-linewith the roughness average R
avalues rated in
microinches (µi).
Software SetupThe software setup consisted of a CNC
machining program, an A/D convertingprogram, and a rotational average calculationprogram. The CNC machining program waswritten for cutting the workpieces at differentspindle speeds, feed rates, and depths of cut.The A/D converting program was developedin C programming language. The rotationalaverage calculation program calculated the
vibration average per revolution. The StatisticalPackage for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version8.0 software was used for computation and inthe development of the multiple regression model.
Experimental Design of MR-M-ISRRThe multiple regression model contained
seven independent variables. The sevenindependent variables were comprised of threecategorical parameters and four intervalparameters. The four interval parameters were(F) feed rate (X
1i), (D) depth of cut (X
2i), (S)
spindle speed (X3i), and (V) vibration average
per revolution (X4i) of the accelerometer sensor.
The three categorical parameters were (TD)tool diameter (CX
1i), (TM) tool material (CX
2i),
and (WM) work material (CX3i). The regression
equation for each design did not include TD,TM, or WM. These were categorical variablesand could not be used as predictors.
The vibration average per revolution fromthe accelerometer was collected and convertedto digital data through the A/D converter andstored. Figure 2 displays an example of theproximity and accelerometer data collectedwith a 1.00" cutting tool at a feed rate of
Figure 1. Experimental setup.
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
48
coefficient, or R2.3. Determine whether the value of multiple
R is statistically significant. For multiplecorrelation, one can test the nullhypothesis H
o: R = 0. An F statistic can
be used to test this hypothesis by thefollowing :
where R = the multiple correlationcoefficient and k = the number ofpredictor variables. If the computedvalue of F exceeds the critical value of Ffor a given level of significance, then H
o:
R = 0 is rejected.4. Determine the significance of the
predictor variables. The regressioncoefficient can be tested for statisticalsignificance by the value:
where ßi = the regression coefficient andS
ßi = the standard error of the respective
coefficient.In this proposed model, the dependent
variable was the surface roughness averagevalue, R
a (Y
i). The structure of the multiple-
regression, multilevel in-process surfaceroughness recognition (MR-M-ISRR) modelis depicted in Figure 3. The proposed multiple-regression model was a two-way interactionequation:
Yi = ß
0 + ß
1X
1i + ß
2X
2i + ß
3X
3i + ß
4X
4i
+ ß5X
1iX
2i + ß
6X
1iX
3i + ß
7X
1iX
4i
+ ß8X
2iX
3i + ß
9X
2iX
4i + ß
10X
3iX
4i + ß
i
Three methods were used in developing
Figure 2. Sample vibration and proximity signal.
Vi =J
i*k
j=(i-1)*k
|Vibration(j)|/k, i=1,2,3,4,and 5
RY•1,2...K = ß1r
Y1+ ß
2r
Y2+ ... + ß
Kr
YK= R
yyP
20 ipm. The following equation indicates themethod of calculating the five average vibrationdata:
where k represents the total number of data ineach revolution, as indicated in Figure 2. Forexample, if i = 1, then the V
iwas calculated
through the vibration data points from pointnumber 0 to point number k (to have a totalof k data in one revolution). Vibration (V
i)
was measured in units of voltage.Four steps were used in developing the
regression model:1. Determine the regression model (Kirk,
1995):Y
i=ß
0+ß
1X
il+ß
2X
i2+...+ß
h-lX
i,h-l+ß
i (i,...,N)
where Yi=the predicted R
avalue,
ß0,...,ßh-1
are the partial regressioncoefficients, X
i1,...,X
i,hi are the
independent variables, and ßiis the
random error term with mean equal tozero and variance equal to «2
ß.2. Determine R, R2, Adjusted R2. The
multiple correlation coefficient R is aPearson product-moment correlationcoefficient between the criterion variableY and the predicted score on the criterionvariable, Y. R can be expressed as:
The proportion of the variation in thecriterion variable that can be attributedto the variation of the combinedpredictor variables is represented by thesquare of the multiple correlation
ˆ
ˆ
F = R2 / k2
(1 - R2)/(n - k - 1)
t =ß
i
Sßi
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
49
the multiple-regression equations. First wasthe enter method, which entered allindependent variables into the regressionmodel regardless of the their significance.Second was the forward method, which enteredthe independent variables one at a time basedon their significance. This method was builtusing only significant independent variables.Third, the forward method was used againexcept that the dependent variable R
awas
transformed with the natural log function (ex).This method was used to smooth thedispersion of the R
a values.
Analysis and ResultsEight multiple-regression equations were
developed from the training data collected. Atotal of 384 experimental runs were carried out
in order to develop the regression equation forthe eight designs. Table 1 shows the parametersand settings of samples collected for developingthe multiple-regression equations for eachdesign. Within these experimental runs, somedata were used for testing as well. In additionto these experimental runs, a total of 64 runs(as shown in Table 2) were performed to gathertesting data for evaluating the accuracy of theproposed model. From each sample, five R
a
readings were taken with the profilometer andfive (V
i) averages were collected. The two-way
interaction equation was used for each designin order to develop the best-fit model forsurface roughness recognition.
The accuracy of the proposed MR-M-ISRR system was determined by calculating thedeviation of the proposed regression model
Figure 3. The structure of the MR-M-ISRR model.
Table 1. Parameters and Settings forthe Training Data
Table 2. Parameters and Settings forthe Testing Data
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
50
(Raij) from the actual profilometer
measurement (Raij) taken from each sample.
The deviation for each testing sample underdesign j was denoted by ¯
kjand was defined
as follows:
After the deviation of each testing sample underdesign j was determined, the average deviationof each design (j) was calculated as follows:
where m = number of samples with each design(in this case, m = 8). After the deviation ofeach design was calculated, the overall averagefor the MR-M-ISRR system was defined asfollows:
where n is the number of designs (in this case,n = 8).
Results and SummaryEight multiple regression designs were
developed successfully with the resultantequations displayed in Table 3. Therecognition accuracy of this proposed MR-M-ISRR system is summarized in Table 4.Designs 2 and 7, both using the forwardmethod, resulted in the least deviation fromthe actual R
avalue. Design 4 had the third
least deviation from the Ravalue. The method
used for Design 4 was the forward method withR
a transformed.
The overall MR-M-ISRR systemdemonstrated 82% accuracy of predictionaverage, establishing a promising step to furtherdevelopment in in-process surface roughnessrecognition systems. In consideration of theMR-M-ISRR systems’ less-than-exceptionalrecognition accuracy, this research does supportthe use of regression analysis techniques tomodel dynamic machining processes.Improved accuracy utilizing regression analysistechniques is achievable but will require adramatic increase in experimental sample sizesinvolving the use of multiple tools andmaterials. Furthermore, an alternative methodfor developing an in-process prediction systemshould be considered. Alternative methodsdemonstrating learning capability within theprediction system are most desirable. The use
økj
= |Raij - Ra’
ij|
Raij
Table 3. Multiple Regression Equations for Design (j )
øj=-
økjJ
m
k=1m
ø ==
øjJ
n
j=1n
-
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
51
of neural network algorithms or fuzzy netmethodologies provides feasible alternatives forsurface roughness recognition modeldevelopment. In the development of an ISRRsystem, similar research utilizing neuralnetworks and fuzzy nets has demonstratedcommendable results. Therefore, continuedresearch focused in ISRR system developmentis promising.
ReferencesBlack, J. T. (1979). Flow stress model in metal cutting. Journal of Engineering for Industry, 101(4), 403–415.
Chen, J. C., & Smith, R. A. (1997). Experimental design and analysis in understanding machining mechanisms.
Journal of Industrial Technology, 13(3), 15–19.
Coker, S. A., & Shin, Y. C. (1996). In-process control of surface roughness due to tool wear using a new ultrasonic
system. International Journal of Machine Tools Manufacturing, 36(3), 411–422.
Cook, N. H. (1980). Tool wear sensors. Wear, 62, 49–57.
Kirk, R. E. (1995). Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA:
Brooks/Cole.
Koren, Y. (1989). Adaptive control systems for machining. Manufacturing Review, 2(1), 6–15.
Lahidji, B. (1997). Determining deflection for metal turning operations. Journal of Industrial Technology,
13(2), 21–23.
Lou, M. S., & Chen, J. C. (1997). In-process surface roughness recognition ([VG2C2]ISRR) system in end-
milling operations. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 15, 200–209.
Mitsui, K. (1986). In-process sensors for surface roughness and their applications. Precision Engineering, 9,
212–220.
Shin, Y. C., Oh, S. J., & Coker, S. A. (1995). Surface roughness measurement by ultrasonic sensing for in-process
monitoring. Journal of Engineering for Industry, 117, 439–447.
Tsai, Y., Chen, J. C., & Lou, S. (1999). An in-process surface recognition system based on neural networks in end
milling cutting operations. International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture, 39, 583–605.
Table 4. The Overall Accuracy for the MR-M-ISRR System Using theTesting Data Sets
Dr. Mandara D. Savage is an assistant professorin the Department of Industrial Technology atSouthern Illinois University. He is a member ofthe Alpha Xi Chapter of Epsilon Pi Tau.
Dr. Joseph C. Chen is an associate professor in theDepartment of Industrial Education and Technologyat Iowa State University. He is a member of theAlpha Xi Chapter of Epsilon Pi Tau.
Throughout their educational careersstudents are taught that there are right andwrong answers. Students are also rewarded forfinding correct answers and discoveringsolutions ahead of their classmates. This typeof conditioning, or lack of preparation, oftenleaves college graduates struggling in aworkplace that no longer rewards people forthe “right” answer but rather rewards those whocan get projects accomplished while workingwith others. Having the right answer and gettingtasks accomplished are often mutually exclusiveevents. These are important skills and learningobjectives that educators often fail to deliver.
Technical educators should beemphasizing a student’s social attitude towardworking with others while simultaneouslyproviding the formal knowledge required fortechnical literacy. While a good academicrecord is part of stated requisites, industrialleaders are also seeking new hires who can workwith others to affect change. Although this isimportant, there are few pedagogical tools tofoster students’ competency in this area.
This article describes a pedagogicalapproach called service-learning. Although itappears that this pedagogical approach isrelatively new to those teaching in the area oftechnology studies, it must be acknowledgedthat similar work-based or project-basedpedagogical approaches have been studied byprevious authors of this journal (Harnish,1998; Resnick, 1987). Service-learning isunique from these work/project-basedapproaches because of the service orientationand because it challenges students to engagein a high level of reflection and has animportant goal of helping students build civicresponsibility and social awareness skills. The
philosophy and elements of the service-learningpedagogical tool are discussed, along with someof the implementation issues found whileintegrating it into a technology managementcourse at Colorado State University.
Service-LearningThe National Society for Experiential
Education has defined service-learning as “anycarefully monitored service experience in whicha student has intentional learning goals andreflects actively on what he or she is learningthroughout the experience” (Furco, 1994, p. 2).This definition requires some furtherdiscussion, since the term service-learning hasbeen applied to many forms of experientialeducation. Figure 1 shows the distinctionsamong experiential programs.
Figure 1 also shows how service-learningrequires that both the recipient and the providerbenefit from the experience. This is afundamental distinction between service-learningand community service or volunteerism, wherethe provider of the service does not intend torealize any personal gain. On the other hand, aninternship makes the service component anaccessory to the study of technology, or may beabsent altogether. A mutually beneficial situationcould result, for example, from engaging amanufacturing class to design a toy for the Toys-for-Tots holiday gift project. While acommunity’s children will benefit from thefinished toy, the students will also benefit fromthis service-learning and structured classroomexperience. Furthermore, an important elementof service-learning is the need for a deliberatelearning goal. In the Toys-for-Tots example, ifstudents would simply produce toys without anyprogrammatic design from the class instructor,
The Implications of Service-Learning forTechnology StudiesJames E. Folkestad, Bolivar A. Senior, and Michael A. DeMiranda
Recipient BENEFICIARY Provider
Service FOCUS Learning
SERVICE-LEARNING
COMMUNITY SERVICE FIELD EDUCATION
VOLUNTEERISM INTERNSHIP
▼▼
▼▼
Figure 1. Distinctions among service programs (Furco, 1996).
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
52
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
53the experience would qualify as volunteerism,but not as service-learning.
The need to introduce reflection and self-regulation into the learning experience isperhaps the most neglected component ofservice-learning. However, it is a well-established fact that we learn throughcombinations of thought and action, reflectionand practice, theory and application (Kendall,1988). Effective learning can be achieved whilediscussing intellectual, civic, ethical, moral,cross-cultural, career, or personal goals(Kendall, 1990; Lisman, 1998). Using theToys-for-Tots example again, some validdiscussion topics may be: Why shouldunderprivileged families be given toys duringthe holiday session? How do other countriesdeal with the problem of poverty? How couldthe cost of manufacturing the toys be reduced?How should society deal with the issue ofpoverty during a time of extreme economicprosperity? Should product safety regulationsbe relaxed for this type of manufacturing? Partof the instructor’s duties is to think in advanceand discuss such topics with the students.Reflection should not be postponed to the endof the experience, but be part of the learningexperience as it unfolds.
Service-learning should also include astrong reflective and self-regulation componentthat directs students to discuss current socialissues and encourages them to talk about valuesand what being an active member of societymeans to them (Lisman, 1998; Rhoads, 1997).
Purpose: What Service-Learning Hasto Offer Technology Studies
In order to appreciate the need andadvantages of service-learning and similarhands-on pedagogical approaches, it isnecessary to reflect on the state of highereducation. Recent articles have criticized thecurrent environment in institutions of highereducation for their “indifferent undergraduateteaching, overemphasis on esoteric research,failure to promote moral character and civicconsciousness, and narrow focus on preparinggraduates for the job market” (Jacoby, 1996,p. 4). Also, in a 1999 Society of ManufacturingEngineers (SME) education report a group ofindustry education leaders identifiedcompetency gaps among newly hired collegegraduates in the areas of development ofpersonal character and the ability to work wellwith others. Deficiency areas included
communication skills, teamwork, personalattributes, and an ability to affect change. Thecommunication skills included presentationskills, written report generation capabilities,graphic computer software usage, and meetingorganization and facilitation.
Service-learning combines all theadvantages of expanding knowledge acquisitionwith practical exposure. In virtually all modernlearning theories, the need for such hands-onopportunities is a central component. Bloom’staxonomy (Bloom, Engelhart, Furst, Hill, &Krathwohl, 1956), generally recognized as acentral element of modern learning theory,identifies six major divisions of the cognitivedomain: knowledge, comprehension,application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation.These are useful to demonstrate the richness ofservice-learning. Solving a typical service-learning problem requires a deeperunderstanding of the meaning of technicalalternatives than the simple aggregation oftechnical facts (comprehension). It also requiresthe application of these facts in a particularconcrete situation (application): the breakingdown of a relatively complex problem intomanageable pieces and then finding a wholisticsolution to these pieces (analysis and synthesis).A reflective assessment of the problem and theapplied solution (evaluation) is a central elementof the service-learning. Components of otherlearning theories such as Perry’s theory ofdevelopment of college students and Kolb’slearning cycle also support service-learning(Culver, 1985; Kolb, 1984; Perry, 1970).
The strengthening of character throughservice is discussed less in the literature. Themanufacturing industry, however, offerstestimony of improvement and even dramaticchange in the character of many participantsin internships and similar practical experiencesthat are arranged through Colorado StateUniversity. In addition, Time Magazineconducted a survey of 608 middle and highschool students with some previous exposureto community service. It found that 75% ofthe students said that they “learned moreduring community service than in a typicalclass” (Cloud, 1997, p. 76). Althoughjudgment must be exerted to extrapolate theseresults to all technology study students engagedin service-learning, Colorado State University’sIndustrial Technology Management (ITM)students show that Bloom’s taxonomy seemsto hold true insofar as the education value of
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
54 service in general.The Higher Education Research Institute
at the University of California, Los Angelesconducted a number of studies on the impactthat the service-learning experience has on thedevelopment of undergraduates. One studyinvolving 3,450 students attending 42institutions concluded that studentparticipants in service-learning were morelikely than those in non-service-learning classesto strengthen their commitment toparticipating in community action programs,influencing social values, and promoting racialunderstanding. In the area of life skills, serviceparticipants showed greater positive changesin understanding community problems,knowledge of different races/cultures,interpersonal skills, understanding of thenation’s social problems, the ability to workcooperatively, and skills in conflict resolution.In addition, students who have had acommunity service course tend to carry theseattributes with them over the long term. Thestrongest of these long-term attributes wasrelated to the students’ commitment tovolunteerism and community activism (Sax &Astin, 1997). Eyler, Giles, and Braxton’s(1997) study on the impact of service-learningon college students found similar effectsincluding that service-learning was a predictorof students valuing a career helping people andthat students volunteering time in thecommunity resulted in students being moreactive within the political system. A positiveimpact on skills of political participation,tolerance, communication, issue identification,and critical thinking were evidenced.
Although these studies provide evidenceof the impact of service-learning, a commonobjection to this pedagogy is that service-learning consumes time and energy thatstudents may otherwise devote to academicpursuits. Sax and Astin (1997) asserted that“this argument has been laid to rest by theresults of our longitudinal analysis which revealsignificant positive effects on all ten academicoutcomes included in the study” (p. 27).
Toys-for-Tots: Implementing Service-Learning at Colorado State University
An attempt to integrate service-learninginto the manufacturing technology curriculumwas made by author James Folkestad, whomodified the traditional delivery of ProcessPlanning and Costing, a required junior course
in the ITM curriculum at Colorado StateUniversity. The course is offered during thespring semester and has an average enrollmentof 25 students for each section. Studentsenrolled in Process Planning and Costingtypically have already taken courses on qualityimprovement and safety. A traditional lecture/laboratory format, slightly adjusted toaccommodate each instructor’s teaching style,had been the standard for more than 10 years.Folkestad chose to implement a Toys-for-Totsexperience into Process Planning and Costingbecause the course content aligned with theservice project although service-learning canbe introduced in other courses, such as in acapstone experience. This required thedevelopment and planning of a toy using aplanning process that was directly related tothe learning objectives of the Process Planningand Costing curriculum content. In order forstudents to fully understand the class concepts,they were required to work with variousstakeholders. Stakeholder diversity is similarto what students would experience working inindustry. The Toys-for-Tots program bringsdiversity to the class by including stakeholderssuch as parents, students, and professors whohave dissimilar backgrounds and usuallydifferent and sometimes conflicting demands.
A local community service agency calledEven-Start Learning Center had been involvedwith the ITM program for 11 years, receivingtoys that were manufactured by students andgiven to economically disadvantaged familiesduring the December holiday session. Until1997 toy designs had remained the same andwere designed by retired faculty members andformer students. Although these toys weregreeted with great excitement each year, theprogram needed new ideas, toy designs, andproduction plans.
The goal of the Process Planning andCosting students was to provide designs fornew toys and toy production plans. Courserequirements included establishing processes,planning, and determining costing for amanufacturing project. These basics include“best practices” in the definition and controlof the scope, costs, quality, and time. Thestudents were introduced to best practicesand then expected to apply them to theservice-learning project. These best practicesincluded problem definition and statements,project mission and mission hierarchy, scopedefinition and control techniques, stakeholder
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
55
identification and interviews, qualityfunctional deployment, duration estimatingand scheduling, schedule control, and projectprogress reporting. All of these items weredocumented in a project notebook and givento the manufacturing student club for toyproduction (Folkestad, 1999).
The class began the project approximatelyhalfway through the spring semester with fourmajor deadlines. Figure 2 shows the projectschedule, which outlines the project deadlinesand project deliverables. The project wasassigned halfway through the semester to allowstudents to complete the requirements and toavoid end-of-semester pressures.
Students worked to develop their project
notebooks (which were the course’s finalproject) in teams of four to five students.Students were randomly assigned to teams inorder to distribute talent and friends and tosimulate the workplace where employees arerequired to work with a variety of individuals(motivated, not motivated, etc.). Each teamwas responsible for designing one toy thatwould meet all stakeholder demands. The firsttask was to establish a list of stakeholders,including the children, their parents, teachers,and internal university stakeholders such asmanufacturing club members (thoseindividuals responsible for manufacturing thetoys) and the department’s machine shopdirector. Figure 3 represents an example of a
Figure 2. Project milestones and deliverables.
Figure 3. Stakeholder listing and analysis.
STAKEHOLDER LISTING AND ANALYSIS
1. Project Manager & Dr. James Folkestad - Must be aware of the progress of entire project. Information needs consist ofproject progress reports and audits throughout the planning process.
2. Parents - Must be certain that product conforms with cultural and moral beliefs that the parents are trying to teach.Initial consultation will be done to narrow design specifications for product. Information needs consist of final productdesign(s) for verification and/or suggestions.
3. Even=Start Family Center - Must be certain that product does not violate company standards or applicable laws. Initialconsultation will be done to narrow design specifications for product. Information needs consist of final product design(s)for verification and/or suggestions.
4. Design Team - Must be aware of cost and time factors as well as product specifications and design constraints.Information needs consist of milestones for design(s) and manufacturing constraints.
5. Marketing Team - Must be aware of design features and project milestones. Information needs consist of consultationwith parent(s), final product design with features, and dates needed for customer confirmation.
6. Manufacturing & Dr. Steve Schaeffer - Must verify that product can be manufactured using tools available.Information needs consist of product design(s), manufacturing process assumptions and material list.
7. Suppliers - Must be certain that suppliers will be able to meet the cost and time restrictions that production willrequire. Information needs consist of delivery dates, lot sizes and payment process.
8. Notebook coordinator - Must be certain that thorough documentation is given to the project manager and Dr.Folkestad on time. Information needs consists of all documentation required for notebook fulfillment.
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
56
stakeholder analysis document. Thisstakeholder analysis led the students into theservice-learning activity requiring them to workclosely with key stakeholders within the Even-Start Program.
The next step was a field trip to the Even-Start Learning Center to conduct thestakeholder interviews. Although all teamsidentified the children as major stakeholders,it was agreed that they would not beinterviewed to preserve the surprise of theholiday celebration. However, the parents andteachers of the children were interviewed.During this interview, students were instructedto capture the customer’s voice in their ownwords. An example of a typical statement was,“My child likes the toys that are bright andhave moving parts.” Comments such as thiswere then inserted into a quality functionaldeployment (QFD) chart to translate the “voiceof the customer” into product/engineeringspecifications as shown in Figure 4.
During these interviews the studentslearned several facts about their customers’interests. The parents interviewed spokelimited English. Although a translator wasrequired, students and parents overcame thisbarrier by using paper and pencil to sketch ideasand gather information through drawings.Many of the parents wanted their children tohave traditional toys similar to those found inMexico. These included items ranging from asimple wooden noisemaker to an intricatehand-carved wagon and horse. One of thecomments was related to a previously produced
toy, a (wooden) duck. One parent expressedher concern that she had six children and thatfor the past three years at least half of themhad received a duck. Her concern, humorouslyexpressed, was that she was running out ofroom for ducks.
In general, several reflective sessions arerecommended for a service-learning experience.The fact that only one was conducted in thiscase reflects more the instructor’s inexperiencein this field than any deliberate decision.Overall, the service-learning experience was verypositive for the majority of the students in theclass. In the student evaluation of the course atthe end of the semester, service-learning wasconsistently considered to have enhanced thelearning of the course contents.
Challenges to Service-Learning andImplications
The first challenge to consider regardingservice-learning comes from the fact that it hasonly recently been applied to technology fieldssuch as industrial technology management. Inareas of study such as social work, students areexpected to gain a deep understanding of theircommunity. There is an evident link betweenservice-learning and their educational goals.This is not often the case in technology studies.An instructor trying to implement service-learning in a course has the burden of proof toconvince colleagues of the merits of thisapproach. An extensive literature search wasconducted before implementing Folkestad’sproject, and it became apparent that another
Figure 4. Quality functional deployment (QFD) chart.
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
57consequence of this absence of precedent is thatthere is no instruction or lessons learnedspecifically for technology education. Incontrast, and of great importance, is the sizablebody of literature offering insights aboutexperience gained from implementing service-learning in the social science areas.
Another challenge for new service-learninginstructors is the nature of the reflectioncomponent. A few possible topics that werementioned previously (i.e., why shouldunderprivileged families be given toys duringthe holiday session?) may seem too ideologicalto technology instructors and distant from thescope of their traditional curriculum. However,civic and industrial leaders are emphasizing theimportance of this type of social awareness.Discussing social issues is an importantcomponent of service-learning, and perhaps theawkwardness of dealing with social issues is thebest testimony of the chronic deficiency of thetechnology studies field to address thisimportant area.
The above aspects can be overcome by awillful instructor. However, other issues aregenerally beyond the control of anyone inparticular (Senior, 1999). An issue may beidentifying an appropriate project in the firstplace. In Senior’s (1999) case study, the ServiceIntegration Project staff at Colorado StateUniversity identified a project and providedthe initial contacts. Senior reported that severalof these contacts led to projects that didn’t fitthe objectives of his course and were discardedafter interviewing representatives from theinvolved agencies. Furthermore, several of theproject’s timelines did not meet the course’ssemester duration and could not beaccommodated. Conversely, the Toys-for-Totsactivity is well suited for a service-learningproject. First, the toys can be designed andthe project notebooks developed within asemester course and well in advance of toyproduction. In addition, the toys are producedannually and are delivered at the end of thefall semester. Finding a service-learning projectwith similar time demands is critical to success.Instructors should identify a project that canbe completed within a standard academictimeframe and that offers a level of year-to-year consistency.
Assistance in implementing service-learning is readily available on many campuses.Instructors are likely to have access to somelevel of institutional support through their
office of community services (or equivalent).There, they can find literature and get help inlocating suitable service projects, modifying thecourse syllabus, and other initial tasks. Forexample, Colorado State University offersgrants to help in the start-up of such efforts.In general, service integration seems to havepolitical momentum. The state of Marylandnow requires 75 hours of community servicefrom all high school students. Miami beganrequiring 75 hours in 1996, and Chicago beganrequiring 40 hours in 1998 (Cloud, 1997).Although revolutionary by Americanstandards, these requirements are still shy ofthe more extensive service system that has beenin place for decades in Germany, Austria, andother European nations. Furthermore, thecurrent federal administration is pushing forservice-learning as a requisite for federal grantsand local service programs (Cloud, 1997).
Such momentum does not guaranteeultimate success. In an article dealing withcommunity service entitled “InvoluntaryVolunteers,” Cloud (1997) explained that eventhough 91% of students polled agreed that theyshould be “encouraged” to participate incommunity service, only 36% think that theyshould be required to participate. At the moreimmediate level, untenured instructors mayface the dilemma of keeping their teachingwithin the comfortable realm of traditionallecturing, or entering into relatively unchartedterritory with service-learning. As Morton(1996) noted, “the growth of service-learningwill require that executive officers, fromdepartment chairs to presidents, find ways torecognize and reward different teaching styles,assign equitable teaching loads…and otherwiseprotect and promote the careers of faculty whowish to commit to the integration of serviceand learning” (p. 289).
Service-learning presents a uniquelypositive opportunity for technology studiesstudents and their community. Significantnationwide studies do indicate the positiveimpact this type of program has on studentswithin a variety of educational disciplines. Themembers of Colorado State University’s ITMindustrial advisory board have stated that theyneed people with a combination of technologyskills and strong personal character; service-learning has helped promote these desirablecharacter traits.
An essential element to the adoption ofservice-learning for technology studies is the
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
58 creation of a body of literature specific to thisdiscipline. The publication of new case studiesshould be encouraged to achieve this objective.This case study shows encouraging, thoughinformal, indications that the students inProcess Planning and Costing benefit from theexperience. Future research should examinethe hypothesis that service-learning indeedimproves technology education and promotescivic responsibility and awareness of technologystudies students.
James E. Folkestad is an assistant professor in theDepartment of Manufacturing Technology and
Construction Management at Colorado StateUniversity in Fort Collins, Colorado.
Bolivar A. Senior is an assistant professor in theDepartment of Manufacturing Technology andConstruction Management at Colorado StateUniversity in Fort Collins, Colorado.
Michael A. DeMiranda is an associate professorin the Department of Manufacturing Technologyand Construction Management at Colorado StateUniversity in Fort Collins, Colorado. He is anEpsilon Pi Tau member of Alpha Phi Chapter.
ReferencesBloom, B. S., Engelhart, M., Furst, E., Hill, W., & Krathwohl, D. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives.
Book I: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay.
Cloud, J. (1997, December 1). Involuntary volunteers. Time Magazine, p. 76.
Culver, R. S. (1985). Applying the Perry model of intellectual development to engineering education. In
Proceedings, ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Engineering Education Conference (pp. 95–99), New York; NY.
Eyler, J., Giles, E. D., Jr., & Braxton, A. (1997). The impact of service learning on college students. Michigan
Journal of Community Service Learning, 2(1), 5–15.
Folkestad, J. E. (1999). Toys-for-Tots: Integrating toy production into the classroom. Unpublished manuscript,
Department of Manufacturing Technology and Construction Management. Colorado State University,
Ft. Collins, CO.
Furco, A. (1994). Partial list of experiential learning terms and their definitions. (Available from the National Society
for Experiential Education, Raleigh, NC)
Furco, A. (1996). Service-learning: A balanced approach to experiential education. Expanding boundaries: Serving
and learning, Vol 1. (Available from the Corporation for National Service Learn and Serve America: Higher
Education, New York)
Harnish, D. (1998). Work-based learning in occupational education and training. Journal of Technology Studies,
24(2), 21–30.
Jacoby, B. (1996). Service-learning in higher education: Concepts and practices. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kendall, J. C. (1988). From youth service to service-learning. Facts and faith: A status report on youth service,
Washington, DC: William T. Grant Foundation.
Kendall, J. C. (1990). Combining service and learning: A resource book for community and public service (Vol. 1).
Raleigh, NC: National Society for Experiential Education.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as a source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Lisman, D. C. (1998). Toward a civil society: Civic literacy and service learning. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.
Morton, K. (1996). Service-learning in higher education: Concepts and practices. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Perry, W. G., Jr. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A scheme. New York: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston.
Resnick, L. (1987). Learning in school and out. Educational Researcher, 16(9), 13–20.
Rhoads, R. A. (1997). Community service and higher learning: Explorations of the caring self. Albany: State
University of New York Press.
Sax, L. J., & Astin, A. W. (1997, Summer/Fall). The benefits of service: Evidence from undergraduates.
Educational Record, 78, 25–32.
Senior, B. A. (1999). Service-learning: A win-win resource for construction education. Journal of Construction
Education, 3(1), 13–20.
Society of Manufacturing Engineers: Educational Foundation. (1999). Manufacturing education plan: 1999
critical competency gaps. (Available from the Society of Manufacturing Engineers, One SME Drive,
Dearborn, MI 48121)
Electronic File ExchangeAs you well know, electronic and computer
technologies have revolutionized the graphic/visual communications industry over the past24 years. Word processing, computer graphics,desktop publishing, digital media, and theInternet have completely changed thecommunication flow in every environment.Now people can enjoy producing and receivinghigh quality, color realistic, and informationrich visual images in affordable forms.However, despite the rapid technologicaladvancement, there have always beeninformation exchange problems between usersbecause of incompatibility among differentcomputer platforms and software programs.
Many approaches in both hardware andsoftware development have attempted to solveelectronic file exchange problems, but nonehave proved promising until the developmentof the Portable Document Format (PDF) in1993. Hamilton (1999), in his article “PDFOutput,” pointed out the value of PDF:
After wandering in its infancy, PDF is nowentering the commercially viable stage of its life.Having been initially pitched to the corporate/office communications and online publishingmarkets as a stable, cross-platform tool fordocument distribution, it is finding a home withAcrobat’s core audience in publishing, prepress,and commercial printing. (p. 26)
One of the keys to making informationexchange work well is to have a universalvehicle to deliver electronic data without losingits fidelity and integrity. Therefore, developingan exchangeable file format has been quitediligently carried out by the computer industry.Some of the resulting accomplishments suchas Text Only, Rich Text Format, Initial GraphicsExchange Specification (IGES), DrawingInterchange Format (DXF), Tagged Image FileFormat (TIFF), Joint Photographic ExpertsGroup (JPEG), and Graphics InterchangeFormat (GIF) did make file transfer possible,but they only worked for particular kinds ofimage files and did not solve all problems.
For example, Text Only and Rich TextFormat are useful for word processing files.Even though problems about exchanging dataamong users of different word processing
software mostly get solved, type fonts, styles,and text-formatting requirements may not allbe converted properly. Other solutions—suchas IGES and DXF—cater to computer-aideddrawing files that exchange vector-based data,while TIFF, JPEG, and GIF are designed forpixel-based image conversion.
PDF, however, brings new promise.Finally, a software technology provides acommon file format for computer users ofMacintosh, PC Windows, and UNIXplatforms, allowing them to communicateregardless of operating system, hardwareconfigurations, or even native applicationsoftware. Kessling (1998) clearly summarizedthe purpose behind the development of PDF:
PDF is the ground-breaking format of the AdobeAcrobat product line, which celebrated its marketdebut in 1993. Its intended purpose was theeffortless exchange of electronic documents withouthaving to worry about platforms, applications,versions, or fonts. (p. 213)
Features of PDFPDF allows information containing text,
graphics, sound, animations, and movies to befaithfully delivered via digital means. AdobeAcrobat—actually a suite of software—converts documents to PDF and allows usersto view the file contents with their originalvisual richness across computer platforms.
Furthermore, a PDF document can laterbe converted back to the PostScript format,then go through the Raster Image Process (RIP)for printed media reproduction. (RIP is anessential process to transform digital images toprintable visual images in any printing process.)In fact, the latest development of PostScriptLevel 3 allows a PDF file to be RIPped directlywithout going through the extra PostScriptconverting process. To RIP a PDF file directlywill not only increase productivity but alsoreduce potential errors by eliminating the PDFto PostScript conversion process.
Many large advertising, book, magazine,and commercial printing businesses haveadopted PDF for their digital workflow in bothprepress and printing production. TCAdvertising, an insert printer; McNughtonand Gunn, a book printer based in Salina,
Portable Document Format (PDF)—Finally, aUniversal Document Exchange TechnologyWan-Lee Cheng
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
59
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
60
Figure 1. Typical PDF process and applications.
INPUT PROCESS OUTCOME
Word File PageMakerFile
PhotoshopFile
IllustratorFile
World Wide WebPage
Printed PageorPhotograph
Viewing from Web
Readfrome-mail
ViewingfromCD-ROM
ReadingfromPrinted Page
Adobe Acrobat
ReadfromE-mail
Michigan; Exped Printing in New York City;and R.R. Donnelley are just some of thecompanies across the United States that havealready implemented PDF standards in theirbusiness operations (Hamilton, 1999).
Another great benefit of using PDF is themuch reduced file sizes. For example, the filesize of a typical eight-page, two-color newslettercan be reduced from 1.7 MB in its nativeAdobe PageMaker format to only 117 KB afterit is distilled to PDF. Intranet and Internet usershave recognized the small file size advantagefor effective online communications for a longtime. Because of its simplicity and portability,printing and publishing industries along withother businesses have already relied on PDF asa principal solution for archiving documentsand storing them (Messenger, 1999).
Although PDF is still growing, there is nodoubt that it will become the mainstreamtechnology for electronic communications,document distribution, and printing/publishing workflow. Furthermore, itseditiblity, portability, accessibility, andflexibility apply to both electronic media andprint media for personal and professional use.As John Deubert (1999), president of AcquiredKnowledge suggested, PDF will displacePostScript and TIFF/IT as the primary fileformat for document distribution for printing/publishing, CD-ROM, and Internet web-based applications. In fact, the Committee forGraphic Arts Technologies Standards
(CGATS), accredited by the AmericanNational Standards Institute (ANSI), isdeveloping the standard for using PDF files incomposite data exchange (Witkowski & Kew,1999). Figure 1 illustrates the sources,processes, and typical applications of PDF.
Adobe Acrobat—PDF SoftwareSeveral software developers were engaged in
the development of PDFs in the early 1990s.Adobe Systems developed Acrobat and definedits PDF as cross-platform and independent ofnative application software. Through its distillingprocess, a PostScript file can be converted to aPDF file containing embedded type fonts,compressed image elements, and many originalgraphic characteristics. Anyone who receives thedocument can then view it in its original state,regardless of the operating system of the sender(Mac OS, PC DOS, Windows, or UNIX), theavailability of native application software, or thetype of font files involved.
Acrobat was indeed designed for multipleapplications. According to Stoy (1999),
Adobe has historically recognized four majorapplications for PDF files: first are files to bedownloaded from online sources, second are filesto be distributed on CDs, third are files directedtoward output devices such as inkjet and laserprinters and digital copiers, and fourth are filesdirected toward conventional printing prepress orcomputer-to-paper devices such as Xeikon DCP-1, Agfa Chromapress, and Indigo e-Print. (p. 27)
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
61In 1996, Adobe Acrobat 3.0 was released,which was a breakthrough from previousAcrobat versions. It not only solved manyproblems, such as errors during distillingcomplicated vector-based entities andincapability of integrating into the prepressworkflow, but it included functions to handlehigh-end printing needs. With the Acrobat 4.0version upgrade in 1999, it further refinedmany of the weaknesses that 3.0 could notaddress, such as TrueType font support, editingcapability, and color management. Acrobat’slatest version (Acrobat 5.0) again enhanced itsfunctions of editing, large formataccommodation, and Asian font support,which not only increased the output power butalso has made it a truly universaldocumentation exchange tool.
Adobe Acrobat consists of the followingsix parts:• Acrobat Reader is a free software download
from the Adobe web site (http://www.adobe.com). It is also distributedwith other Adobe application software. Itis a viewing program, so users can open aPDF file and navigate through pages ofthe document and even print out hardcopies.
• Acrobat Distiller is a program thatconverts a PostScript file to a PDF file.After a document is created with a nativeapplication software, then saved as aPostScript file, Distiller converts it intoPDF file format. Many of the latestAdobe applications, such as Photoshop,Illustrator, and PageMaker, are equippedwith a built-in distilling function tohandle the one-step direct conversionfrom the document itself to PDF.However, many non-Adobe programs stillneed to go through the PostScriptconversion process.
• Acrobat is both a viewing and editingprogram. Acrobat provides many usefulediting features to an already existingPDF document. For example, insertingpages, replacing a page with another page,cropping a page, deleting pages, creating anote, editing text, and adding annotationsare all available for users to customizePDF documents. There are also manythird-party plug-ins, which can be usedwith Acrobat to enhance the editingfunctions.
• PDF Writer is a printer driver that
converts native documents into PDF files.Instead of sending the document to acomputer printer for a hard copy,selecting PDF Writer as a printing devicecreates a soft copy of the PDF file. Thismethod of creating a PDF file is thesimplest method. Even so, it must benoted that PDF Writer has fewer optionsthan Acrobat Distiller.
• Acrobat Capture is a plug-in item that canbe executed within Acrobat. The functionof Capture is to allow scanned text imagesto be converted to a character-based PDFdocument. Therefore, text editing can beapplied to the document.
• Acrobat Catalog is a program that indexeslarge volumes of PDF files for easy accessat a later time. Similar to the card catalogsystem in a library, it lets the user easilylocate a particular PDF document via thesearch engine in Acrobat Reader orAcrobat. Catalog is an essential tool forarchiving PDF files in a structuredmanner.
Creating a PDF FileFigure 2 explains how PDF files can be
created.There are three methods to convert a
native application document to a PDF file.1. To use PDF Writer, you must have the
PDF Writer driver installed and select itfrom the Chooser. Then, choose PDF toprint your document. This is aconvenient one-step process. However,because of some limitations, use thismethod only when the documentcontains mainly text and a small amountof graphics.
2. To use Acrobat Distiller, save the file inPostScript. The PostScript file will thenbe distilled into the final PDFdocument. Although this methodrequires extra steps for the conversion,the resulting PDF document will bemost accurate and reliable. In general, ifa document contains a sophisticateddesign or rich visuals, especially withEncapsulated PostScript images, use thismethod.
3. Some application software (Photoshop,Illustrator, PageMaker) have a built-infeature to create a PDF version of thedocument directly within the applica-tion. Use this method when it is available.
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
62
4. A scanned document can, likewise, beconverted. A built-in Capture function,which is similar to OCR, can convertpicture mode of scanned-in type-matterto a character mode text document.
Maximizing PDF’s Final OutcomesIn order to preserve the accuracy of the
graphic elements and the integrity of theoriginal design, the following key controlfactors must be set up properly:1. Optimization: Screen Optimized, Print
Optimized, and Press Optimized optionsare available to enhance the user’soutcomes.
2. Compression and Quality: While the sizeof a file is an important factor for storageand data transport, the image’s integrityis essential for high-quality printreproduction. Select the best possiblelevel of compression according to thetypes of images and the intended enduse of the document. In general, forcontinuous tone, with color bitmapimages used in printed matter, chooseHigh or Maximum Quality. Medium orLow Quality is adequate for Web- andscreen-based display.
3. Font Embedding: Retaining the exactfont information of all original design iscritical. The Font Embedding functionin both PDF Writer and AcrobatDistiller enable PDF documents tomaintain the exact fonts and formatinformation in the original file.Therefore, the PDF document willreproduce the same type characteristicsof the original, regardless of thecomputer platform used and/or theavailability of such fonts in the system.
(To make sure that all type will beaccurately reproduced and displayed,select the Embed All Fonts option.)
Applications of PDF DocumentsApplications of a PDF file can be as simple
as exchanging files between individuals or assophisticated as serving a major role in theautomated printing/publishing workflow.Following are some examples of PDFapplications:1. File exchange: One can send a PDF to
another person for viewing/reproducingthe document in its original form.
2. Proof or hard copy: To order acommercial-quality proof or hard copiesfrom a service bureau, PDF is the mosttrouble-free file format for the process.
3. Presentations: PDF can be used forinstructional or marketing presentations.The presentation can be kept in itsoriginal design and form even if thehardware and/or software that createdthe document are not available.
4. Electronic publications: Newsletters,magazines, instructional manuals, andeven books can be published on CD-ROMs or via the Internet with PDFfiles. Interactive user interfaces andmultimedia features can be created inthe publications to make readings moreinteresting and enjoyable.
5. Archives: Because of the smaller file sizeof PDF files, images or text documentscan be archived with the use of PDF tosave considerable storage space.
6. Designer-client interaction: Graphicdesigners can send PDF comprehensivesto their clients via modem/ISDN forproofing and approval.
Document Files:Text, Illustrations, Photos, Pages, etc
PDF WriterDriver
PostScriptPrinter Driver
PostScriptFile
PDF File
AcrobatDistiller
Acrobat ReaderAcrobat
PDF Command withinApplication Software
For Some Programs
Figure 2. Typical workflow of creating a PDF file.
.
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
637. Printing/publishing workflow: Designers/clients can send PDF files to printerselectronically for reproduction withoutworrying about missing fonts, nativeapplication software incompatibility,and/or PostScript errors.
ConclusionAdobe Acrobat’s PDF has become the
information exchange standard because of itssimplicity, flexibility, and universal ability.Differences in computer systems, platforms,
and application software are no longer barriersto communicating and exchanginginformation electronically, even if the contentsare visually very rich. Applications of PDFcover all areas of visual communications, fromprinted media to displayed media tonetworking media.
Dr. Cheng is an associate dean in the College ofCreative Arts at San Francisco State University.He is a member of Beta Beta Chapter and receivedthe Distinguished Service Citation in 2000.
ReferencesDeubert, J. (Interviewed by Keith Hevenor). (1999). Perspective. Electronic Publishing, 23(4), 20–22, 24.
Hamilton, A. (1999). PDF for output. Electronic Publishing, 23(3), 26–28, 30, 34, 36.
Kessling, M. (1998, May). Adobe Systems, digital media technology keeps all options open. Pira International-
Profit Through Innovation, p. 213.
Messenger, J. C. (1999). From asset management to asset utilization. Electronic Publishing, 23(8), 41–42.
Stoy, J. W. (1999). Color workflow with PDF. Electronic Publishing, 23(4), 26–28, 30, 32, 34.
Witkowski, M., & Kew, D. (1999). Composite workflow: Getting it together in 1999. GATF World, 11(1), 37.
Developments in electronic technologiesare having major impacts on higher education.With the expansion of these technologies,programs listed in the Industrial TeacherEducation Directory (Bell, 1999-2000) arebeginning to experiment with alternativemeans of delivering courses and programs.Universities as a whole are beginning to usealternative forms of instructional delivery.Some are researching the instructionalpossibilities of catering to new studentpopulations (Smith, Smith, & Boone, 2000).Others are investing in new delivery systemssuch as Web-based courses, one-way and two-way television, videotapes, and CD-ROMdelivered courses (Okula, 1999; Pisel, 2000;Wang & Lawrence, 1996; Zirkle, 2000).
Two-way television is being used to teachclasses at regional sites without having facultytravel miles to deliver the instruction. Otherprograms use correspondence and prerecordedvideo materials to deliver instruction at adistance. With the developments of the WorldWide Web and its capabilities to store academicmaterials, some faculties are beginning to offerWeb-based courses and programs. This is anatural for faculty who are experienced inteaching with various technologies.
Recently, a number of conferencepresentations and journal articles have beendeveloped on the topics of distance learningand education. These scholarly works reportedsuccess stories (Russell, 2001). Because of theincreased dialogue on distance learning, weundertook a study to determine the state-of-the-art of distance learning in those programslisted in the Industrial Teacher EducationDirectory (Bell, 1999-2000).
An Analysis of the Use of DistanceLearning Technologies
Delivering instruction through distancelearning is gaining increased use in all aspectsand all levels of education. It providesadditional means to reach students in differentgeographic locations; these may be studentswith individual needs, students with family andwork responsibilities, and students who needto update their knowledge and skills for theircurrent and future careers.
As a result, more and more institutions areoffering distance learning courses and degreeprogram options. This is a trend for programgrowth and positioning within the universitysetting. Although the quality of thesealternative methods of delivery concern bothinstructors and institutions, there is not anagreement on which courses or methods ofdelivery are best for their programs oruniversities. While these issues are beingdebated, there is a continuing increase in thedelivery of courses through distance learningmethods. A survey by the U.S. Department ofEducation revealed that the number of distanceeducation programs increased by 72% from1995 to 1998, with most of the expansioncoming from online offerings (Carnevale,2000). Because of these trends, we wanted togain information and learn from colleagueswhat methods of distance learning are beingused to deliver distance learning courses anddegree program options.
Distance Learning InstitutionsDistance learning is referred to as the
acquisition of knowledge and skills throughmediated information and instruction,encompassing all technologies and other formsof learning at a distance (U.S. DistanceLearning Association [USDLA], 2000). It usescurrently available technologies to achieve twomain objectives for teaching and learning: (a)providing equitable access to quality educationand (b) meeting the unique learning needs andstyles of individuals (Barron, 1994).
Through the use of advanced andtraditional means of instructional delivery, boththe instructor and student rely on electronicdevices and print materials to deliver andreceive instruction. The National Center forEducation Statistics (1999) reported that onethird of the nation’s two-year and four-yearpostsecondary education institutions offereddistance education courses and another onefifth of the institutions planned to start offeringcourses within the next three years.
Typical technologies used for distancelearning include satellite, fiber-optic, televisionbroadcast, compressed video, computerconferencing, audio-conferencing, radio, and
Distance Learning in Industrial Teacher EducationProgramsHassan B. Ndahi and John M. Ritz
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
64
videotapes. Currently, the more commontechnologies used for distance learning deliveryare interactive satellite systems, cable televisionsystems, microwave systems, instructionaltelevision fixed service systems, compressedtelevision systems, and the audiographicspublic switched telephone networks (Baker &Dickson, 1996). These technologies enable thetransmission of live one-way and two-wayauditory and visual signals. Two-way audio andlive video transmissions provide the teacher-student interactions that most other distanceteaching technologies lack (Roach, 1998). Thetelecommunications industry is changing withcontinued improvements promised for the 21stcentury. Higher education faculty are takingadvantage of these improvements and adaptingtheir program delivery systems to using thesetechnologies.
Determining Our State-of-the-Art inDistance Learning
Since faculty are active in discussing theconsequences and methods of deliveringcourses and degree program options at adistance, we chose to survey colleges/universities to determine the extent of their useof distance learning in their instructions. Ourresearch goals were to (a) identify whichindustrial teacher education institutions offerdistance learning courses or degree programoptions; (b) identify which programs are beingdelivered through distance means (i.e., teachereducation, industrial technology, engineeringtechnology, etc.); (c) identify forms of distancelearning technologies being used to deliverinstruction; and (d) determine whetherinstitutions allow students to take courses fromother institutions through distance learningtechnologies and apply them toward theirprogram degree requirements.
PopulationThe Industrial Teacher Education Directory
(Bell, 1999-2000) was used to identifydepartment chairs, program leaders, or deansresponsible for academic programs intechnology education, industrial education,occupational education, trade and industrialeducation, vocational education, vocational-technical education, industrial technology,engineering technology, and other specialprograms included within this directory. Allinstitutions listed in the directory, national andinternational, were surveyed. This included
201 institutions, 185 national and 16international.
InstrumentA survey instrument was developed to
determine the state-of-the-art of distancelearning instruction in these technicalprograms. It was based on the goals of thisproject and consisted of six questions. Thestudy used closed and open-ended questionsto gather information to achieve this purpose.Two demographic questions were directed tothe individual respondents which included theinstitution and respondents’ names.
Four other questions sought informationon whether the university programs wereinvolved with distance learning, courses ordegree programs offered through distancelearning technologies, technologies used forcourse/program delivery, and the transferabilityof distance courses for meeting degreerequirements. These questions were based onstudies that indicated the number ofinstitutions involved in distance learningdelivery (Ndahi, 1999), transfer of credits(Robertson, 1994), technology used (Okula,1999; National Center for Education Statistics,1999; Wang & Lawrence, 1996), and degreeprograms offered (Collins, Hemmeter, &Schuster, 2000).
What Was LearnedWe organized and coded the responses
from the open-ended questions into categoriesbased on the pattern of responses. Frequenciesand percentages were also used to analyze thedata. A total of 201 institutions were surveyedincluding 16 from Australia, Canada, Japan,and Taiwan. A total of 91 surveys werereturned, representing a 45.2% response rate.This included one follow-up tononrespondents.
Institutions offering distance learning coursesor degree. Of the 91 institutions returningsurveys, 55 institutions (60.4%) offered coursesor degree program options via distancelearning, while 36 institutions (39.5%) did notoffer distance learning courses or degreeprograms.
Types of degrees or programs options offeredby institutions engaged in distance learning.Several degree programs and courses wereoffered by the responding institutions. Thedegrees offered were Safety Management (BSand MS), Human Resource Development,
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
65
Training, and Management (BS, MS, andPhD), Occupational, Vocational, andTechnical or Trade and Industrial Education(AS, BS, and MS), Workforce Education andDevelopment (BS and MS), Human Ecology(BS), Industrial Technology (BS and MS), FireService Management and Training (BS),Technology Education (MS), and TechnologyManagement (PhD). Occupational,Vocational, and Technical, and Trade andIndustrial Education (AS, BS, and MS) were themajor degree programs offered by 10 institutions.Table 1 lists the degree programs, levels of degreesoffered through distance education at institutionscited in the Industrial Teacher Education Directory(Bell, 1999-2000), and the number of insti-tutions offering the degrees.
The courses taught via distance learningincluded Occupational Safety and Health,Basic Electricity/Electronics, AC Circuits,Electronics Technology, IndustrialManagement, Auto CAD, TechnologyManagement, Multi-Media, Vocational
Education Administration, Technology andSociety, Computer Training, CurriculumDevelopment, Learning Theory, EngineeringManagement, Technology Leadership,Industrial Safety, Advance TechnologyEducation, and Applied Technology Training.
Types of technology used for delivery ofinstruction. Different types of technologies werebeing used to deliver distance instruction. Theinstitutions surveyed used one or moretechnologies for delivery of instruction. Thesurvey provided the following selections thatwere based on past findings (Okula, 1999;Pisel, 2000; Wang & Lawrence, 1996): printonly, audiotape, videotape, Web-basedinstruction, computer-based instruction, CD-ROM, and television. Television had thefollowing subcomponent selections: one-wayvideo, two-way video, compressed video, orother to be filled in by the respondent. Ananalysis of the technologies used showed 44institutions used Web-based delivery systems,30 institutions used televised two-way audio
Degree Programs Degree Levels No. of Institutions
1. Occup./Voc./Tech. Edu./ Trade & Ind. AS, BS, MS 10 2. HRD/Training & Development BS, MS, PhD 5 3. Industrial Technology BS, MS 4 4. Safety Management BS, MS 2 5. Workforce Education & Development BS, MS 2 6. Engineering Technology Not Specified 1 7. Fire Service Management & Training BS 1 8. Human Ecology BS 1 9. Technology Management PhD (Consortium) 110. Technology Education MS 1
Table 1. Degree Programs and Levels of Degrees Offered Via Distance Learning
Table 2. Technology Used for Delivery
Technology Used No. of Institutions
1. Web-based 44 2. Print/competency-based instruction packets 10 3. Videotape 9 4. CD-ROM 8 5. Audiotape 1 6. Televised instruction 45 a. Compressed video 11 b. Two-way audio and video 30 c. One-way audio and video 4
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
66
and video, and 11 institutions used compressedvideo. The least used technology was audiotape,used by only one institution. Table 2 showsthe methods of distance learning delivery usedby the institutions within these technicaleducation programs.
Transfer of distance learning course credits.One area of concern for distance learningstudents was whether the credits earned viadistance learning could be transferred to theirhome institutions to meet graduationrequirements. Although cohesiveness is a majorpart of a degree program, all institutions hadtheir own transfer policies. If students werewithin the guidelines of the home institutiontransfer policy and the faculty of the programallowed the transfer, then they were allowed tocomplete transfer courses from otherinstitutions using distance learning techniques.
Forty-six institutions (83.6%) said thatcredits could be transferred into theirinstitution, and only two institutions (3.6%)said courses could not be transferred into theirprograms. Seven institutions (12.7%) gavereasons such as it depends on the homeinstitution procedures for accepting creditsearned via distance learning and it was donethrough collaboration with institutions towhich the student intended to transfer his orher credits.
Implications for the Profession
1. Institutions InvolvedOf the 201 institutions listed in the
Industrial Teacher Education Directory (Bell,1999-2000), 91 responded to our survey, butof these, 55 institutions (28.4%) offereddistance learning courses/program options totheir students. Statistics for all of highereducation showed 33% offering programs ordegree options via distance learning. Whencompared to all higher education, it showedthat industrial teacher education institutionswere beginning to participate in distancelearning, but our programs were not necessarilyamong the leaders of disciplines employing thetechnologies of modern learning.
One reason for this lower percentage mightbe that most programs had technical/laboratory equipment-oriented classes as thecore of their degree programs. The literaturewas void of writings on the delivery oftechnical/laboratory-based classes throughdistance learning techniques. However, the
data gathered through this study indicated thatclasses such as computer-assisted drafting andelectronics were currently being offeredthrough distance learning methods.
2. Programs Being OfferedIt was found that various types of programs
were available from industrial teachereducation institutions through distancelearning systems. These included TechnologyEducation, HRD/Training and Development,Occupational/Vocational/Trade and IndustrialEducation, Safety Management, WorkforceEducation and Development, Human Ecology,Industrial Technology, Fire ServiceManagement and Training, and TechnologyManagement. The program offered the mostwas Occupational and Technical teacherpreparation, by 10 institutions, representing18.18% of the 55 institutions that respondedto the survey. We believe that this programhad used alternative means of delivery for along time, since many of the trade teachers werehired from industry and had different staterequirements for teacher licensure. The print/competency-based materials produced by theAmerican Association for VocationalInstructional Materials had provided thefoundation for licensure courses for thispopulation of teachers.
3. Distance Learning TechnologiesAll forms of distance learning delivery were
available within the professions of industrialteacher education studied. The instrumentallowed respondents to check more than onemethod of distance learning delivery. As thefollowing figures show, this, in fact, isoccurring. Of the 57 institutions that offeredprograms through distance learning, thegreatest numbers of courses/programs weredelivered using televised instruction (two-wayaudio and video, one-way audio and video, andcompressed video) by 45 institutions (81%).Forty-four institutions (80%) used Web-baseddelivery systems, while 18 institutions (32.7%)used CD-ROM and print/competency-basedmaterials as delivery systems. Nine institutions(16.4%) used videotapes, and the least useddelivery system was audiotapes, limited to asingle institution.
4. Transfer ProceduresTo determine if programs were seeking to
take advantage of distance learning courses
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
67
offered by other institutions, a question wasposed regarding the transferability of distancelearning courses into and out of their programs.Forty-six institutions (83.6%) allowed theirstudents to enroll in and transfer distancelearning credits. This is especially importantto the institutions in our profession. It takestime to develop distance classes. By openingand advertising the accessibility of classes,institutions can collaborate so students canhave access to complete degree requirements.For institutions involved in televisedinstruction, studio time may not be availablefor the transmission of all classes required fora complete program, and collaboration couldenable higher education institutions to developcompletely televised programs.
A Final WordAlthough distance learning using
electronic technology is not new to highereducation, continued updates are needed togauge the impact that it has on the professionscited in the Industrial Teacher EducationDirectory (Bell, 1999-2000). Of the 201institutions surveyed, 28.4% were involved insuch delivery. Further research is needed onthe assets of its applicability to our professions.Research is needed to show that students areable to learn subject matter as efficiently as theydo in traditional classroom/laboratory settings.
Research to explore methods of distancedelivery of technical courses also needed to beundertaken. Some institutions are currentlysearching for methods that can be used to offerlaboratory-oriented classes at a distance.Accessibility to equipment and liability issuesalso need to be explored.
The health care and engineeringtechnology professions have proven thatlaboratory-based classes can be offered throughdistance means. In health care, internships areused to allow students into facilities and learntechniques from practicing health careprofessionals. Engineering technology hasemployed a procedure of offering occasionalweekend classes at regional sites to enablestudents to complete their hands-on laboratorylearning. What are the possibilities forindustrial teacher education programs? This isan important issue for those programs thatprovide teacher licensure. Shortages oftechnology education and trade and industrialeducation teachers are nationwide. If distancelearning can be used to license these teachers,
it can become a winning situation for teacherpreparation and teacher shortages in our publicschools.
Research needs to investigate the comfort levelfactors associated with distance learning for bothstudents and teachers. Teaching and learning froma distance requires adjustments for both studentsand teachers. What are the differences and whattypes of training are needed for both faculty andstudents (Ndahi, 1999)?
The very nature of a virtual degree usingadvanced electronic instructional delivery alsoneeds to be explored. Many instructors usevideotapes to support classroom instruction.
These videos are up-to-date and bringcontemporary industry, business, and societyinto our classrooms and laboratories. Theaddition of this technology has been acceptedby most faculty. Can electronic instruction beadapted to allow the industrial teacher educationprofessions to create virtual degree programswhere students learn more or all of theirinstruction from home, or provide accessibilityto courses that meet their degree needs andschedules?
This research allows our professions tounderstand where we are in the use of distancelearning for technology-based programs inhigher education. We need to becomeimaginative as we look into the future.Technology applied in the marketplace andclassrooms will continue to change. Distancelearning can provide increased access to learning.Will we use the assets of distance learning toenable more people to gain teaching licensesand/or university degrees? Will we apply theteleconferencing procedures to update graduatesto new technical processes or managementtechniques? Will we develop consortiums thatshare credits to enable students to obtaincredentials without necessarily relying on onlyone university? Will distance learning lead tovirtual education that will strengthenindividuals’ and society’s access to education?Continued research needs to be undertaken tointegrate distance learning technologies to thebenefit of the student learning process.
Hassan B. Ndahi is an assistant professor andJohn M. Ritz is a professor and chair in theDepartment of Occupational and TechnicalStudies, Darden College of Education, OldDominion University, Norfolk, VA. John M. Ritzis a member of the Alpha Upsilon Chapter ofEpsilon Pi Tau.
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
68
ReferencesBaker, B. O., & Dickson, M. W. (1996). Factors in determining rural school readiness to use distance learning.
Rural Educator, 17, 14–18.
Barron, D. D. (1994). Distance education: The virtual classroom update. School Library Media Annual, 12, 76–81.
Bell, T. P. (Ed.). (1999-2000). Industrial teacher education directory. Millersville, PA: CTTE and NAITTE,
Department of Industry and Technology, Millersville University of Pennsylvania.
Carnevale, D. (2000). Survey finds 72% rise in number of distance education programs. The Chronicle of Higher
Education, 46(18), A57.
Collins, B. C., Hemmeter, M. L., & Schuster, J. W. (2000). Using team teaching to deliver course work via distance
learning technology. Teacher Education and Special Education, 19, 49–58.
National Center for Education Statistics. (1999). Distance education at postsecondary education institutions: 1997–
1998. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Research and Improvement.
Ndahi, H. B. (1999). Utilization of distance learning technology among industrial and technical teacher education
faculty. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 36(4), 21–37.
Okula, S. (1999). Going the distance: A new avenue for learning. Business Education Forum, 53(3), 7–10.
Pisel, K. P., Jr. (2000). The design of a planning process for the implementation of distance education in higher
education and corporate training. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA.
Roach, R. (1998). Cyber diversity. Black Issues in Higher Education, 21(10), 28–29.
Robertson, D. (1994). Proposal for an associate degree: The search for missing link of British higher education.
Higher Education Quarterly, 48, 294–322.
Russell, T. L. (2001). The “no significant difference phenomenon.” Retrieved March 13, 2001, from http://
nova.teleeducation.nb.ca/nosignificantdifference/
Smith, S. B., Smith, S., & Boone, R. (2000). Increasing access to teacher preparation: The effectiveness of
instructional methods in an online learning environment. Journal of Special Education Technology, 15(2), 37–46.
U.S. Distance Learning Association. (2000). Research information and statistics distance learning defined. Retrieved
March 13, 2001, from http://www.usdla.org/04_research_info.htm
Wang, S., & Lawrence, B. (1996). A practical setting of distance learning classroom. International Journal of
Instructional Media, 23(1), 11–22.
Zirkle, C. J. (2000). Preparing technical instructors through multiple delivery systems: A working model. T.H.E.
Journal, 28(4), 62–68.
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
69
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
70
Industry is demanding quality and relevanttraining, and is seeking new and more efficientways to distribute training to its workers(VanBuren & Erskine, 2002). Many trainingprograms require trainees to travel to thetraining location, with industry assumingmuch of the cost of room and board as well astransportation (Goldstein, 1997; Kasten,1998). Training distributed at a distance canallow industry-training programs to reach morepeople while allowing the industry to save timeand money. This study explored the attitudesof participants receiving training in industrythrough a means of computer-mediateddistance training known as audiographics.Audiographics combines the use of voicetransmission, computer networking, graphics,and data transmission through narrow-bandtelecommunications channels (Bradshaw &Desser, 1990; Summers, 1998).
The integration of distance educationtechnologies provides a perfect forum fordelivering training to industry. “Smart use ofnew training technologies will ensure that wecontinue to provide effective, high qualityinstruction and skills training while keepingcosts down” (Pendaranda, 1995, p. 11).Computer-mediated distance delivery oftraining can allow professionals the trainingnecessary to stay up-to-date in this ever-changing technical society without the expenseof time, personal well-being, and money fortravel to training locations.
According to VanBuren and Erskine(2002), total training expenditures in U.S.companies increased in 2000 and 2001 despitethe slowing of economic growth and recession.Additionally, the majority of U.S. companiesexpect their training expenditures to increaserather than decrease in 2002. Furthermore, theuse of outside training providers such as privateconsultants and educational institutions willincrease (VanBuren & Erskine, 2002).Corporations can utilize distance educationtechnology to distribute cost-effective andquality training to their employees. Becausethere is a need for constant upgrading andretraining knowledgeable employees (Kiplinger& Kiplinger, 1996), business will increase itsrole in education and training (VanBuren &
Attitudes Toward Computer-Mediated DistanceTrainingSarah S. Cramer, William L. Havice, and Pamela A. Havice
Erskine, 2002). Therefore, as the cost oftraining continues to rise, industry will requiremore cost effective ways to deliver instruction.
Distance Education and DistanceTraining
Forms of communication such as audio-,video-, and computer-conferencing havehelped to make distance learning sophisticated,exciting, and efficient for the distance learnerwho is not actually in the physical presence ofhis or her trainer while learning. With theseforms of communication the learner can be inthe next building, at home, or in a place locatedhundreds of miles away (Duguet, 1995) andstill access the training.
What is the difference between distanceeducation and distance training? Devlin (1993)described the difference between distanceeducation and distance training as follows:Distance education is typically student centered.Learners are encouraged and facilitated to pursuetheir own needs and preferences within thesubject matter under study. Much of the literaturedefines distance education as learning that takesplace when time and space separate student andteacher. Distance education is defined by theNational Center for Education Statistics (1998)as “education or training courses delivered toremote (off-campus) locations via audio,video, or computer technologies” (p. 1).Correspondence courses are an example ofdistance education that has been available formany years.
Distance training, conversely, is driven andcontrolled principally by the needs of theorganization. These needs, expressed simply,are to have effective, generally task-orientedskills acquired by trainees in the most cost-efficient manner possible. The role of definingthe student’s learning and competence needsis assumed by the organization (Devlin, 1993).Training involves a narrow focus aimed atspecific skills and competencies. Typically,training goals are those of the organizationrather than the personal goals of the individual(Chute, Thompson, & Hancock, 1999).
Distance Delivery Methods and MediaOf the two modes for delivering distance
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
71training, synchronous instruction is whenlearners and instructors participate ininstruction simultaneously and in “real time”(Steiner, 1995). Examples of synchronousinstruction include interactive television, audio-conferencing, audiographics, teleconferencing,satellite conferencing, interactive relay chat(IRC), and multi-user object oriented (MOO).
Asynchronous instruction does not requiresimultaneous participation. Chute et al. (1999)defined asynchronous as “interaction betweentwo or more people that is time-delayed, thatis, separated by minutes, hours, or even days”(p. 219). Examples of the asynchronousdelivery mode for delivering education at adistance include e-mail, videotaped courses,correspondence courses, and World WideWeb-based courses (Steiner, 1995).
Interaction among learners, between thelearners and the content, and between thelearners and the instructor is important to thelearning process. Moore and Kearsley (1996)described three types of interaction to beincluded in a distance-training program:learner-content interaction, learner-instructorinteraction, and learner-learner interaction.They stated that it is “most desirable fordistance educators to use all three kinds ofinteraction” (p. 132). Hillman, Willis, andGunawardena (1994) identified a fourth typeof interaction not mentioned by Moore andKearsley. Learner-interface interaction is “aprocess of manipulating tools to accomplish atask” (Hillman et al., 1994, p. 34). Anappreciation for this type of interaction hasbecome necessary because of the increasing useof high-technology communication systems indistance education. In other words, “theinability to interact successfully with thetechnology will inhibit his or her involvementin the educational transaction” (Hillman et al.,1994, p. 34).
Audiographics uses existing computernetworks and telephone lines to delivereducation and training to anyone on thecomputer network. This method of delivery isseen as more cost effective and practical thanexpensive videoconferencing. Freeman (1999)found that “the comparative costs associatedwith delivering graduate instruction viaaudiographics were calculated at less than 14%of the cost of satellite based instructionaltelevision” (p. iii).
Microsoft® NetMeeting, a commercialsoftware application that can be used to deliver
training by audiographics, includes audio,video, and whiteboard capabilities (Summers,1998). NetMeeting allows instructors andstudents to login synchronously. The trainercan show a Microsoft® PowerPoint slidepresentation from his or her computer to theclass who can view the presentation whetheror not they have the PowerPoint applicationavailable. The quality of the audio capabilitiesof NetMeeting can be problematic and isprobably not adequate for use in all trainingsituations (Summers, 1998). A conference callover a standard telephone line can besubstituted for the audio capabilities ofNetMeeting, successfully providing qualityaudio to all participants at multiple locations.
AttitudesThe majority of studies conducted on
distance education and training compared totraditional education and training have foundthat there is no significant difference inachievement among learners (Freeman, 1999;Havice, 1999; McGreal, 1994; Ryan, 1996).The technology used for delivering the courseis not the most important factor, but ratherwell-designed courses that are well deliveredand conducted are important (Moore &Kearsley, 1996; Russell, 1999). Havice (1999)concluded in his study that “it is the methodnot the medium that influences thepsychological processes that allow learning totake place” (p. 54).
There have only been a handful of studiescomparing audiographics to traditionallearning environments. Freeman (1999) found“no significant difference in the learningperformance of any of the groups as measuredby the cumulative course scores” (p. ii). Twoother studies comparing traditional withaudiographics delivery of courses also foundno significant difference in the success of thestudents (McGreal, 1994; Ryan, 1996).Furthermore, Wisher and Curnow (1999)concluded that there is no training advantageto having a video image of the instructor.
Extensive research in the area of studentattitudes towards televised courses has beendone by Biner and his colleagues (Biner, 1993;Biner & Dean, 1995; Biner, Welsh, Barone,Summers, & Dean, 1997). They havesuggested that attitude is as important asachievement to determine the effectiveness ofa distance education program, and they expressthe importance for an ongoing plan of
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
72 attitudinal assessment. The conclusions ofBiner et al. are further supported by Havice(1999), who noted that people pay attentionto what they enjoy and that “information isretained when it is consistent with attitudeand disregarded when it is in conflict withattitude” (p. 51). Therefore, high learnersatisfaction with a distance training programcan mean lower dropout rates, greaternumbers of referrals to bring other learnersinto future programs, and higher levelsof learner motivation and commitment tothe program.
What We DidThe purpose of this study was to explore
the attitudes of trainees who attended acustomer service representative workshopthrough the use of audiographics in one of twolocations. An experimental group (n = 20)received the graphic presentation through theInternet and Microsoft® NetMeeting projectedonto a screen from one computer. Theexperimental group also received the audiothrough a standard telephone line and aspeakerphone. The control group (n = 20)received on-site training face-to-facewith the instructor. There were 20 participantsin each group for a total of 40 subjects (N =40) in the sample.
Research QuestionThe research question asked if there was
a significant difference in attitude betweenthose participants instructed throughtraditional training and those participantsinstructed through audiographics in acustomer service workshop. A revisedversion of the Telecourse EvaluationQuestionnaire (TEQ; Biner, 1993) wasadministered at the conclusion of theworkshop to measure the participants’attitudes towards training delivered at adistance through audiographics.
The TEQ contains four sections. Section1 contains 14 questions about instruction andinstructor characteristics. Section 2 looks attechnological characteristics with 7 questions,while Section 3 reviews course managementand coordination with 5 questions. Section 4asks for general course and demographicinformation. Each question 1 through 27required a response on a 5-point Likert-typescale in which 1 = very poor, 2 = poor, 3 =average, 4 = good, and 5 = very good.
What We LearnedTechnology provides a way to meet
training needs by delivering low-cost, high-quality instruction. Several aspects ofteletraining are very important, includingupfront preparation of the program, along withallotting sufficient time and money forplanning, design, materials preparation, andpreproduction. Solid preparation, added to theright technology, results in training that is bothinstructionally sound and cost effective. Notechnology by itself will solve a problem ormeet a training need. Training will not beeffective, no matter what technology is used,without good instructional design(Pendaranda, 1995).
The resulting means for each questionwere addressed. For every question but one,the overall means and the means for each groupwere above the average score of 3. The meanscore for the question concerning the audioquality from the control group was 2.47, whilethe mean score for the experimental group was2.7, both below the average score of 3.Although high-quality speakerphones wereused at each location to facilitate quality audiobetween the two groups, both groups rated theaudio from participants at the other locationas poor to average. All other aspects of thetraining were rated as above average to verygood. Therefore, it can be inferred that overall,participants had very positive attitudes towardthe delivery of the workshop.
On each question of the revised TEQ, ttests for independent means were performed(see Table 1). For every question, the criticalvalue was greater than the observed valuemeaning. Therefore, the attitudes were thesame for the control and experimental groups.
It was determined that the location ofthe speakerphones in the training room, thenatural voices of the participants, and theother distractions in the room can affect thequality of the audio between traininglocations. It is recommended that theparticipants be seated around and close tothe speakerphone and speakerphone remoteantennae. Chute et al. (1999) wrote thataudiographic equipment dictates the needfor a conference table large enough for 14people to sit around comfortably with roomaround the perimeter for additional chairsand equipment. Participants should also beencouraged to speak up and not mumble asthey communicate with the other location.
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
73
Overall Participant Analysis of theWorkshop
Overall, participants rated the workshopas above average to good (see Table 2). Themajority of participants rated this workshopas about the same to a little better thanconventional workshops they had taken.Thirty-six participants (N = 40) indicated thatthey would take another workshop deliveredlike this one. Four participants in theexperimental group (n = 20) indicated that theywould rather see the instructor.
Thirty-four of the participants (N = 40)indicated that they would recommend thisworkshop, while three participants at eachlocation indicated that they would notrecommend this workshop. Those participants
who would not recommend this workshop gavethe course an overall rating of average to poorand said that this course was the same as, worse,or much worse when compared to conventionalworkshops. Participants in the experimentalgroup who would not recommend this workshopcited lack of visual contact with the instructor asa disadvantage of distance training and the causefor difficulty in concentration. They alsorecommended videoconferencing as analternative. None of these participants wouldenroll in another workshop delivered like this one.The control group participants who would notrecommend this workshop cited poor audioquality from the remote participants, lessinteractivity, and problems with the phone andcomputer as disadvantages of distance training.
Table 1. Means and t Values for Participant Attitudes
Question Control Experimental Total t value
1. Clarity of communication 4.20 4.33 4.26 0.60
2. Time graphics shown 3.70 4.10 3.90 0.15
3. Degree graphics helped 3.95 3.80 3.88 0.57
4. Quality of graphics 4.20 3.95 4.08 0.26
5. Help of instructor techniques 4.25 4.00 4.13 0.30
6. No environmental distractions 4.10 4.05 4.08 0.87
7. Extent you felt a part of the class 4.35 4.50 4.43 0.53
8. Instructor’s communication 4.45 4.35 4.40 0.68
9. Instructor’s class prep and organization 4.20 4.45 4.33 0.31
10. Instructor’s enthusiasm 4.60 4.55 4.58 0.81
11. Instructor’s teaching ability 4.50 4.45 4.48 0.82
12. Class participation encouraged 3.85 4.00 3.93 0.60
13. Instructor’s professional behavior 4.70 4.55 4.63 0.43
14. Overall, the instructor was… 4.50 4.40 4.45 0.63
15. Quality of screen picture 4.30 3.50 3.90 0.01
16. Quality of instructor audio 4.55 3.70 4.13 0.00
17. Adequacy of screen size 4.50 4.25 4.38 0.27
18. Quality of participant audio 2.47 2.70 2.60 0.51
19. Brevity of talkback delay 3.77 4.21 4.00 0.05
20. Promptness of instructor answers 3.71 4.26 4.00 0.03
21. Confidence of no interruptions 3.37 3.85 3.62 0.12
22. Reaction of material exchange 3.80 4.10 3.95 0.27
23. Conscientiousness of site coordinator 4.05 4.45 4.25 0.06
24. Accessibility of site coordinator 4.11 4.60 4.36 0.01
25. Someone able to operate computer 3.75 4.55 4.15 0.00
26. Registration procedures 4.00 4.39 4.18 0.15
27. Overall, the course was… 4.05 4.15 4.10 0.75
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
74
Two of these control group participants indicatedthat they would enroll in another workshopdelivered like this one, while the third did notanswer the question. Fifteen of the participantsin the experimental group (n = 20) indicated thatthey would not have been able to attend theworkshop if they had had to travel.
What It MeansFindings from this study indicate that well-
designed workshops, which foster positiveattitudes among participants, can be deliveredeffectively through distance media. Thissupports studies done by Moore and Kearsley(1996) and Russell (1999). Using cost-efficientsoftware, such as Microsoft® NetMeeting, incombination with high-quality instructionensures that effective, low-cost instruction andskills training can be a reality. Audiographics isjust one of the many ways that distance learningcan touch the lives of many learners who becauseof time, money, and/or other commitmentscannot devote the resources to attending on-site workshops, courses, or seminars.
Further studies would be useful in studyingseveral facets of distance learning. These couldinclude the following issues: rate of retention forparticipants in distance training, determining theeffectiveness of audiographics versus video-conferencing, allowing a second remote site to
see the instructor during the workshop,determining the effectiveness of differentpresentation methods, determining therelationship between prior exposure to distancetraining and attitudes towards computer-mediated distance training, determining theeffectiveness of delivering the training directly tothe workplace, and determining the effectivenessof a multiweek training course delivered at adistance through audiographics.
*For more information about theTelecourse Evaluation Questionnaire (TEQ),please contact Sally Cramer, EdD, [email protected].
Dr. Sally Cramer is a former instructor in theGraphic Communications Department atClemson University in Clemson, South Carolina.She is a member of Gamma Tau Chapter ofEpsilon Pi Tau.
Dr. Bill Havice is associate dean for the College ofHealth, Education, and Human Development andprofessor of Technology and Human ResourceDevelopment in the School of Education at ClemsonUniversity in South Carolina. He is a member ofthe Gamma Tau Chapter of Epsilon Pi Tau.
Dr. Pam Havice is an assistant professor in theSchool of Education at Clemson University.
Table 2. Overall Analysis from Participants
General Workshop Questions Control Experimental Total
Overall, the course was…* Good (4.05) Good (4.15) Good (4.1)
Compared to conventional Same as to Same as Same ascourses, this course:* better (3.6) (3.1) (3.35)
Would you enroll in another Yes: 19** Yes: 16 Yes: 16workshop delivered like this one? No: 4 No: 4
Would you recommend this Yes: 16 Yes: 17 Yes: 16workshop to a friend? No: 4 No: 3 No: 4
Would you still have been ableto attend this workshop if it had Yes: 5not been offered through distance No: 15training? (Experimental only)
Including this course, how 1.35 1.25 1.3many courses taught at a distancehave you taken to date?
* Scale 1 to 5.
** One person did not respond to this question.
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
75ReferencesBiner, P. M. (1993). The development of an instrument to measure student attitudes toward televised courses. The
American Journal of Distance Education, 7(1), 62–73.
Biner, P. M., & Dean, R. S. (1995). Reassessing the role of student attitudes in the evaluation of distance education
effectiveness. The Distance Educator, 1(4), 1, 10–11.
Biner, P. M., Welsh, K. D., Barone, N. M., Summers, M., & Dean, R. S. (1997). The impact of remote-site group
size on student satisfaction and relative performance in interactive telecourses. The American Journal of
Distance Education, 11(1), 23–33.
Bradshaw, D. H., & Desser, K. (1990). Audiographics distance learning: A resource handbook. San Francisco: Far
West Laboratory for Educational Research and Development.
Chute, A. G., Thompson, M. M., & Hancock, B. W. (1999). The McGraw-Hill handbook of distance learning.
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Devlin, T. (1993). Distance training. In D. Keegan (Ed.), Theoretical principles of distance education (pp. 254–268).
New York: Routledge.
Duguet, P. (1995). Education: Face-to-face or distance? OECD Observer, 194, 17–20. Retreived from
http://www.newark.rutgers.edu/pubadmin/phd/D_Learning/Controversies/comp2.htm
Freeman, M. W. (1999). Effectiveness and costs of hybrid audiographics and instructional television in delivering college
graduate distance education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Clemson University, Clemson, SC.
Goldstein, J. (1997). A special report on distance training. Rochester, NY: PicturePhone Direct.
Havice, W. L. (1999). College students’ attitudes toward oral lectures and integrated media presentations. The
Journal of Technology Studies, 25(1), 51–55.
Hillman, D. C. A., Willis, D. J., & Gunawardena, C. N. (1994). Learner-interface interaction in distance
education: An extension of contemporary models and strategies for practitioners. The American Journal of
Distance Education, 8(2), 30–42.
Kasten, P. (1998, January/February). Customer service training: Within budget. Technical Training, pp. 20–22.
Kiplinger, A., & Kiplinger, K. (1996). The Kiplinger Washington Letter, 73(52).
McGreal, R. (1994). Comparison of the attitudes of learners taking audiographic teleconferencing courses in
secondary schools in Northern Ontario. Interpersonal Computing and Technology, 2(4), 11–23.
Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance education: A systems view. New York: Wadsworth.
National Center for Education Statistics. (1998). Issues brief: Distance education in higher education institutions:
Incidence, audiences, and plans to expand. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Pendaranda, E. A. (1995). Teletraining: From the mailbox to cyberspace. Journal of Instructional Delivery Systems,
9(2), 11–16.
Russell, T. L. (1999). The “no significant difference” phenomenon as reported in 335 research reports, summaries, and
papers (5th ed.). Raleigh: North Carolina State University.
Ryan, W. F. (1996). The effectiveness of traditional vs. audiographics delivery of senior high advanced mathematics
courses. Journal of Distance Education, 11(2), 45–55.
Steiner, V. (1995). What is distance education? Distance Learning Resource Network. Retreived from
http://www.dlrn.org/text/library/dl/whatis.html
Summers, R. (1998). Official Microsoft® NetMeeting book. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Press.
VanBuren, M. E., & Erskine, W. (2002). The 2002 ASTD state of the industry report. Alexandria, VA: American
Society for Training and Development.
Wisher, R. A., & Curnow, C. K. (1999). Perceptions and effects of image transmissions during Internet-based
training. The American Journal of Distance Education, 13(3), 37–51.
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
76 IDEASMapping Dimensions of Technological Literacy to the ContentStandardsLarry Hatch
The Standards for TechnologicalLiteracy: Content for the Study ofTechnology (ITEA, 2000) provides theprofession with a blueprint to address animportant public need. The public,however, is often not inclined to read a200+ page volume or even an executivesummary. When the United Kingdom’s(UK) National Curriculum for Designand Technology was introduced, Gordon(1992) developed and used a graphic orcontent map illustrating the majorelements of the plan in a single diagram.For visual learners a content map canconcisely link content components in anorganized fashion. With a tighteningschool curriculum, communicatingclearly and concisely is vital.
The content standards must not beviewed as ever-larger doses of knowledgeto be injected into children as displayedin this figure. Mere inoculations of moreinformation about technology cannothope to provide the transferable skills fortomorrow’s citizens. Rather the purpose(i.e., technological literacy) and thecontent standards must be clearly linkedin a manner that communicates with theaudience. The relevance, realism, andrichness of the standards can be illustratedthrough a content map. The content
standards are more than just big needlesof information; they reflect the importantand realistic goal of achieving the civic,practical, and cultural dimensions oftechnological literacy.
These dimensions are never directlyreferred to in the content standardsdocument but nonetheless underpin therationale. Aspects of the dimensions areeven imbedded in the content standard’sdefinition of technological literacy,which is described as “the ability to use,manage, understand, and accesstechnology” (ITEA, 2000, p. 242).
A definition of technologicalliteracy that does include thesedimensions appears in the Council onTechnology Teacher Education 40thYearbook (Dyrenfurth, Hatch, Jones, &Kozak, 1991):
Figure 2. Dimensions of technological literacy. Figure 3. Practical dimension.
Figure 1. Injection curriculumtheory.
Technological literacy is a multi-dimensional term that necessarilyincludes the ability to use technology(practical dimension), the ability tounderstand the issues raised by our use oftechnology (civic dimension), and theappreciation for the significance oftechnology (cultural dimension). (p. 7)
The civic, practical, and culturaldimensions describe the citizen who isinformed, productive, and cultured.Graphically these dimensions can beused to map out the relationship to thecontent standards.
The practical dimension is centralto technology education and representsthe heritage of this curriculum area. Thisdimension resides graphically in the coreof the content map.
The practical dimension in thediagram reflects the content standards 8–13.The term technological method coined bySavage and Sterry (1990) is used as anappropriate label for this dimension. Thetechnological method is the mechanismused to engage students in working withreal problems; this is the focal point, thevery heart of the unique contributiontechnology education offers. The termcapability is used here to replace themultiple use of the term ability withinthe benchmarks.
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
77
Figure 4. Civic dimension. Figure 5. Cultural dimension.
Figure 5. Content map for technological literacy.
Content standards 1–3 and 14–20reflect the civic dimension oftechnological literacy. An under-standing of the Nature of Technologyand the Context of the Designed Worldare the building blocks needed for aninformed citizen. This dimension bringsrelevance to the curriculum and providesa starting point to engage students inthe technological method (practical).This list of what use to be course titlesnow becomes a reservoir for contextualreal world problems.
Therefore, the knowing and doingelements are interactive to makelearning both relevant and real. Thetechnological method providestransferable skills that equip students tobetter understand the technologicalissues and challenges in additionalcontexts. What is missing in thisgraphic is the cultural dimension oftechnological literacy.
The cultural dimension challengesthe learner to step back and examine theartifacts of the created world in light of
their impact on society. Mosttechnological advances take the form ofa product, system, or environment. Infact, almost every student project canbe classified along these lines. Analysisof products, systems, and environmentsover time can provide a sense of aperson’s technological heritage and therole technology will play in his or herlife. This brings richness to thetechnology education curriculum.
This content map can be used toexplain both the what and the why of
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
78 the content standards. The map can tellus where we are going and how we aregetting there. It links the contentstandards to the outcomes oftechnological literacy. It has beenadapted here to reflect the content
standards and dimensions oftechnological literacy. It is importantto consider this or other content mapsthat provide the public with a concisegraphic of both the rational and contentstandards for technological literacy.
Dr. Larry Hatch is chair of theDepartment of Visual Communicationsand Technology at Bowling Green StateUniversity. He is a member of AlphaGamma Chapter of Epsilon Pi Tau.
ReferencesDyrenfurth, M. J., Hatch, L., Jones R., & Kozak, M. (1991). Prologue. In M. J. Dyrenfurth & M. R. Kozak (Eds.), The 40th yearbook of the Council
on Technology Teacher Education: Technological literacy (pp. 1–7). Peoria, IL: Glencoe.
Gordon, A. T. (1992). A design and technology policy statement. Stafford, United Kingdom: Staffordshire Education Committee.
International Technology Education Association. (2000). Standards for technological literacy: Content for the study of technology. Reston, VA: Author.
Savage, E., & Sterry, L. (1990). A conceptual framework for technology education. Reston, VA: International Technology Education Association.
More than ever before, teachers arebeing required to gain more refinedtechnical knowledge in computer-basedliteracy. New academic and technologystandards are being initiated asexemplified by their introduction intoPennsylvania’s high school curriculum.
In addition, this state has instituteda culminating project for graduatingseniors as a basis for awarding studentmerit diplomas rather than merelycertificates of school attendance. Sincemany high school students either takecomputer literacy courses or are self-taught through their own explorationand creativity, they have gained a broadrange of technical skills beyond that ofmost of their regular classroom teachers.Although there has been an increase inthe number of computer-literateteachers in Pennsylvania, theirpopulation is still inadequate toeffectively guide student technology-based graduation projects. Whilestudents enjoy exploring the latesttechnology, many veteran teachers avoid
A New High School Graduation Experience RequiresIncreased Staff Computer LiteracyAddie M. Johnson
experimenting beyond basic wordprocessing and e-mail. Students whodo need assistance must either fend forthemselves or learn from their peers inutilizing PowerPoint and otherapplications to create acceptable seniorprojects. Therefore, professionaldevelopment focused on increasingteacher competency to guide studentsas they develop creative, well-designed,and aesthetically acceptable projectsneeds to become a local school districtpriority.
Computer literacy training involvesnumerous unresolved issues betweenschool district administrators andteachers. One primary issue resides inschool district financial capability tooffer updated training in technologyskills; this is juxtaposed against the lackof teacher desire to gain essentialexpertise through professionaldevelopment programs. Many schoolboards across the country generally allota little over 1% of a school district’sbudget for professional development.
Decisions regarding time and moneyallocation are often determined forspecific school district curricular goalsmandated by state and/or federalguidelines that diminishes the focus onproviding professional development forfaculty, staff, and administrators.
Although issues of “funding” and“faculty participation” in technicaltraining will be resolved over time, thereis a widespread movement towardimproving the technology preparationof teachers. The National Board forProfessional Teaching Standardsstrongly encourages states to includetechnology as a requirement for teacherlicensing. During the Clintonadministration, the U.S. Department ofEducation created the office ofPreparing Tomorrow’s Teachers to UseTechnology with the responsibility ofdeveloping a national training initiative.Dr. Thomas Carroll, the first appointedprogram director, stated that
the power of technology for studentlearning doesn’t come from the presence
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
79of classroom computers. The real powerof technology in education will comewhen teachers have been trained well andhave captured the potential of technologythemselves. Teachers should model thebehavior students are expected to learn.(Seeger, 1999)
Many teachers currently enteringthe field are more technicallycompetent; it is hoped that theirenthusiasm will motivate and assistveteran colleagues in becomingcomputer literate.
In Pennsylvania, newly appointedteachers are mandated to completecertification requirements by acquiringan additional 24 graduate school credits;most novices do so in conjunction withwork for the master’s degree. Althoughthere are no state requirements fortechnology courses as part of teacherlicensing, the availability of universitytechnology course electives for teacherpermanent certification becomes onecommendable pathway to enhanceteacher technical skill.
Pennsylvania’s technology standardsfor student instruction and assessmentwere reviewed by the Department ofEducation for approval andimplementation during the year 2000.The endorsement of technologystandards by the state representedanother mechanism necessitating schooldistricts to hire more computertechnology coordinators and providemore training for K–12 staff.
The following section provides aglimpse of the type of programrequirements for Pennsylvania’s studentgraduation project, thereby offering aperspective on the rationale for morewidespread teacher computer literacytraining.
Graduation Project ProgramDescriptors: A Perspective
The philosophical background ofthe “project” approach is one advocatedby Sizer (1992) in his theoretical premiseof the nine principles of learningfostered in “The Coalition of EssentialSchools” program. Sizer believed firmlyin offering students alternativeassessment formats such as exhibitionsand projects where student knowledge
can be displayed and assessed better thanusing traditional means. His thesis issupported by Gardener’s (1993) work,which offers students opportunities tolearn according to their dominantintelligence and to demonstrate thatknowledge using relevant assessmentformats.
In requiring a culminating projectfor graduation, Pennsylvania Depart-ment of Education curriculumpersonnel and state lawmakersapparently believe that studentdemonstration of an area of knowledge,utilizing projects and exhibitions,represents a valid form of alternativeassessment. In addition, a by-productof this mandate perhaps will increaseand maintain student interest in seniorhigh course offerings and constitute onefacet of a preventative dropout program.In keeping with a gradual national trendtoward terminal school yeardemonstrations of student knowledge,using the exhibition style as a“gatekeeper” for obtaining a high schooldiploma of merit serves as an acceptableaccountability factor in satisfying futureemployers and a critical taxpayingpublic.
Graduation Project ComponentsThe Pennsylvania state guidelines
for graduation require “coursecompletion and grades, completion ofa culminating project, and results of(successful) local (and state) assessmentsaligned with the academic standards” fora diploma with a state seal of Proficiencyor Distinction (Pennsylvania Code, Title22). Pennsylvania Department ofEducation guidelines assert thatGraduation Project procedures are to bea part of each school district’s strategicplan (a document submittedperiodically to the PennsylvaniaDepartment of Education) by 2003.Although guidelines are vague, theyprovide individual districts with somedegree of latitude for interpretation asexemplified in the statement mandatingthis initiative:
The purpose of the culminating project isto assure that students are able to apply,analyze, synthesize and evaluate
information and communicate significantknowledge and understanding.(Pennsylvania Code 4.24, Title 22, StateBoard of Education)
Many senior high school teachersview this mandate as an opportunity tofacilitate student enrollment retentionthrough graduation, motivate studentcompletion of course requirements inanticipation of a diploma of proficiencyor distinction, and encourage studentresponsibility in being better preparedfor either postsecondary education orthe workplace. Aligned with thisprocedure is a small but developing planamong Chamber of Commerce groupsto require diplomas of merit for entry-level positions in local labor markets,thus granting more value to graduatingsenior achievement. Culminatingprojects would demonstrate skillsrepresentative of student achievementthroughout a 12-year educationalexperience. For purposes of definition,graduation projects representculminating reports consisting ofresearch topics or work-relatedexperiences conducted over an agreedupon period of time, in a student-selected field of interest, to be completedwithin school procedures and guidelinesfor reporting and presentation.
Project topic selection may be madefrom a wide variety of available sources.Many high schools encourage studentsto become actively involved in agraduation project that may becommunity service oriented or bearsome relationship to a student’s futuregoals; however, the primaryrequirements are that it is student-selected and represents a high degree ofstudent interest. Representative projecttopics may consist of computer repairapprenticeships, veterinary medicineexperiences, expanded science fairprojects, historical meteorology, automechanics computerization, or designof an interactive visual basic programfor mathematics remediation, etc.Resources for project activities exist bothwithin and outside of schools; forexample, library research (both actualand online), interviews with experts ina field, volunteer activities in areas of
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
80 interest, community civic service,research/work experiences in healthorganizations and agencies, local busi-nesses and universities, computer labs, etc.
Since many senior high students areeither currently enrolled in computercourses or self-taught, students appearto enjoy creating presentations utilizingdifferent types of technology. Projectsmay range from sound-videos to morehi-tech productions. In many seniorhigh schools, students having masteredcomputer courses in Microsoft Officeand Hyperstudio are capable of creatingpresentations utilizing word processing,spreadsheet, multimedia, video, CD-ROM, digital cameras, and pertinentinformation from Internet sites. What’smissing in this picture is the capabilityof regular subject discipline teachers to
provide the guidance essential to thedevelopment of an organized,aesthetically viable project.
There is the argument that sincemany senior high students possess anunderstanding of a variety of computerapplications, why is there the necessityfor subject area teachers to understandthese technologies? The answer to thisquery resides primarily in the fact thatstudents may select a graduation projectadvisor from any subject disciplinerelevant to their project topic regardlessof teacher proficiency in computertechnology. Although some senior highschools retain a technology coordinator,normal position responsibilities wouldnot allow sufficient time for adequatestudent project assistance. Studentpopulation size, another constraining
factor, would limit faculty access andpreclude quality research andpresentation formats. Additionally, thereis the question of whether faculty whodevelop rubrics to judge graduationprojects and student oral presentationswill do so considering the type ofmedium students may select to utilizein project development.
According to the design offered bySchell and Hornberger (2000) in theirGraduation Project Booklet, studentsare scored on project content,organization, and delivery in additionto submittal of some form of writtenresearch work. Therefore, theprospective auto mechanic may createan audio/video presentation but is alsoexpected to submit a written researchpaper of the length agreed upon with
Topic Subtopic
Senior High Faculty Roles Graduation Project Coordinator (entire school)Research Paper CoordinatorTechnical Assistants (Professional/Paraprofessionals)Graduation Project Advisors
Project Timeline From Sophomore to Senior YearFrom May of Junior Year to March of Senior Year
Project Procedures Project Topic SelectionProject Advisor SelectionGraduation Project Proposal FormAdvisor Approval Form/Course CreditMonthly Progress ReportsResearch Paper/Oral Presentation Schedule
Graduation Project Requirements Academic/Honors/Grading ProceduresMinimum/Maximum Hour Allotments for Research Paper & OralPresentation Preparation
Guidelines Faculty/Student ResponsibilitiesSample Logs and Formats
Project Topics Project Resources
Grading Scales Research Paper (Content/Organization/Conventions)Rubrics for Oral PresentationPresentation Skills/Content/Audience Interaction
Rubric Range (6 domains) Superior/Above Average/Competent/Marginally Competent/Not Competent/Seriously Flawed
Note: From Schuylkill Valley School District Graduation Project Information Manual (pp. 5–20) by S. Schell andD. Hornberger, 1998, Schuylkill Valley, PA: Schuylkill Valley School District.
Table 1. Sample of Topics Normally Covered in Graduation Project Booklets
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
81
ReferencesGardener, H. (1993). Multiple intelligences: The theory in practice. New York: Harper/Collins.
Johnson, A. M. (1999). A web-based interdisciplinary graduation project. Penn State University, Great Valley School of Graduate Professional Studies.
Retrieved from www.gv.psu.edu/faculty
Pennsylvania Code, State Board of Education. Title 22, Chapter 4: Academic standards and assessment. Curriculum and Instruction. 4.24. High School
Graduation Requirements.
Schell, S., & Hornberger, D. (1998). Schuylkill Valley School District graduation project information manual. Schuylkill Valley, PA: Schuylkill Valley
School District.
Seeger, J. (1999, November). ISTE develops unprecedented tech standards for student learning. International Society for Technology in Education.
Retrieved from www.iste.org/News/NETS
Sizer, T. (1992). The dilemma of the American high school: Horace’s compromise. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
his or her selected graduation projectadvisor. Sample criteria for honorsstudents mandate reports with arequired number of citations fromliterary sources. Students opting formultimedia presentations likewise arerequired to follow similar guidelines, butadaptations of these models will varyaccording to individual school decisions.However, the main point is that teachersneed a more substantial knowledge ofcomputer applications to provide theguidance essential for those studentswho elect to engage in computer-basedprojects.
A Framework for PennsylvaniaGraduation Project Requirements
A brief overview of sampleguidelines based on a review of severalformats of graduation projectsrepresentative of different senior high
schools in Pennsylvania reveals similarpatterns of project requirements. First,many districts introduce the project inthe student’s sophomore year to providesufficient time for student explorationof topics, selection of project advisor,decisions regarding methods ofpresentation including use of variedtechnologies, and identification ofavailable resources. Second, a booklet,devised by a faculty committeeconsisting of instructions, procedures,sample logs, and requirements, isdisseminated to teachers, students, andparents. A representative sample oftopics normally covered in graduationproject booklets is outlined in Table 1.
As demonstrated in this article,there is a need for teachers, especiallythose serving senior high schoolstudents, to acquire appropriatecomputer literacy skills and knowledge
of content-specific curriculum softwareas well as learning to guide students inutilizing appropriate search engines toobtain worthwhile information from thewealth of knowledge available on theInternet. The rapid pace oftechnological progress at the onset of the21st century represents an opportunityto radically transform educationalpractice. Innovative curriculum andpedagogical changes are required tocapitalize on this opportunity. It ishoped that school districts and teachergroups will join forces to achievecompetency in technological literacy forthis represents essential survival skills inour century.
Addie M. Johnson, EdD, is a seniorresearch associate at the Mid-AtlanticRegional Educational Research Laboratoryat Temple University, Philadelphia, PA.
As we step into the new century andadapt to many new technologicaladvancements, researchers are lookingto technology to increase theeffectiveness of the data collectionprocess. Indeed, researchers have touted
the notion that e-mail will be thepreferred survey delivery method in the21st century (e.g., Bachmann, Elfrink,& Vazzana, 1996). Several writers haveoutlined the strengths of e-mailtechnology as a survey delivery method
Business Education Leaders Compare E-mail and Regular MailSurvey ResearchAllen D. TruellPerry Goss
(e.g., Oppermann, 1995; Thach, 1995;Truell, 1997). As a technology, e-mailoffers several strengths as a surveydelivery method, chiefly delivery/response speed, lower costs, worldwidegeographic coverage, favorable response
82
Th
e J
ou
rna
l o
f T
ec
hn
olo
gy
Stu
die
s
rates, ease of editing, openness ofresponses, environmental correctness,semi-interactive nature, and a variety ofresponse options (Truell, 1997).Despite the strengths associated withusing e-mail technology for surveydelivery, it behooves researchers tocompare the use of this technology withan established method such as postalmail prior to making decisions on itsappropriateness for use. Indeed, Truell(1997) noted that the difficulties ofusing e-mail technology for surveydistribution will likely be reduced asresearchers conduct more e-mailresearch and establish a protocol.
Researchers who have used e-mailtechnology for survey delivery reportmixed results. Investigators, in themajority of studies, have reported higherresponse rates for postal mail than fore-mail delivered surveys (e.g.,Bachmann et al., 1996; Kittleson, 1995;Mavis & Brocato, 1998; Tse, 1998).Kawasaki and Raven (1995) reportedmixed results depending on theparticipants involved, while Parker(1992) indicated a higher return rate fore-mail than for postal mail surveys. Inaddition to response rates, e-mail andpostal mail surveys have been assessedregarding response speed and responsequality. In all cases, email surveys weredistributed and returned faster thanpostal mail surveys (e.g., Bachmann etal., 1996; Mavis & Brocato, 1998;Oppermann, 1995). Researchers havereported similar response quality for thetwo methods (Mavis & Brocato, 1998;Mehta & Sivadas, 1995; Tse, 1998).
The literature contains relativelyfew studies that compare the
effectiveness of email technology withpostal mail as a survey delivery method(i.e., Bachmann et al., 1996; Kiesler &Sproull, 1986; Kittleson, 1995; Marvis& Brocato, 1998; Parker, 1992; Rafaeli,1986; Schuldt & Totten, 1994; Tse,1998). In fact, “the potential forcollecting data through e-mail isrelatively unknown in the socialsciences” (Kittleson, 1995, p. 27).Mehta and Sivadas (1995) stated that“very few studies have attempted toevaluate newer informationtechnologies as a way of collecting data”(p. 429). Many of “the earliest studiesof e-mail surveys were restricted topopulations sampled from within asingle company or university”(Bachmann et al., 1996, p. 31).Consequently, this research builds uponthe previous studies that have examinedthe feasibility of e-mail as a surveydelivery method by assessing itseffectiveness for use with leaders in thefield of business education and byincorporating recommended designchanges put forward by earlier researcherinto this study. Results of this study areexpected to provide insight as to thepotential of using e-mail as a surveydelivery method in a setting involvingleaders in the field of business education.
The Why and How of the StudyWe worked to examine the response
rate, response speed, and responsequality of e-mail and postal mail surveysdistributed to business educationleaders. Specifically, we wanted todetermine (a) the response rate of e-mail and postal mail surveys distributedto leaders in the field of business
education, (b) the response speed ofe-mail and postal mail surveys, and (c)the difference in the response quality ofe-mail and postal mail surveys. Twohundred fifty-six leaders in the field ofbusiness education included on theBusiness Education ProfessionalLeadership Roster that appeared in theDecember 1998 issue of BusinessEducation Forum with working e-mailaddresses served as study participants.A 10-question dummy surveycontaining five closed-ended and fiveopen-ended questions was used tocollect data. The same questions wereincluded in both versions of the surveywith the e-mail version consisting of aslightly different format to avoid anypotential word wrap viewing problems.Recipients of the e-mail version of thesurvey were also provided additionaloptions of returning completed surveysby regular mail or fax because of theflexibility these options reportedlyprovide respondents (Parker, 1992;Truell, 1997). The 256 participantswere randomly assigned to one of twogroups. One group was e-mailed thesurvey while the other group was mailedthe paper version of the survey. Threeweeks following the initial distribution,a follow-up e-mail or postal mail surveywas sent to nonrespondents. Datacollection ended on day 56 of the study.
What We LearnedUsing the Statistical Package for
Social Sciences (SPSS), we useddescriptive statistics of means andpercentages. We also used tests todetermine differences on response speedand response quality. Tests of
Figure 1. Response rate for e-mail and postal mail surveys.
123456789012345678901234567890121234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901212345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012123456789012345678901234567890
123456789012345678901234512345678901234567890123451234567890123456789012345
111
123456789012345678901234567890121123456789012345678901234567890121123456789012345678901234567890121
No reply
Returned unusable
Returned completed
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Total distributed123456712345671234567Postal Mail
Th
e J
ou
rna
l of T
ec
hn
olo
gy S
tud
ies
83significance were set at alpha = .05.For Objective 1 (Response Rate): Of
the 128 e-mail surveys distributed, 59(46%) were returned to the researchersin one form or another. Specifically, 34(26.6%) surveys were completed andreturned via e-mail, 13 (10.1%) werecompleted and returned via postal mail,and 12 (9.4%) were returned via e-mailbut were blank and deemed unusable.The total number of usable e-mailresponses was 47 (36.7%). Of the 128surveys distributed via postal mail, 73(57%) were completed and returned.All postal mail surveys returnedprovided usable data. Figure 1 providesa breakdown of e-mail and postal mailsurvey response rates.
For Objective 2 (Response Speed): Ittook, on average, 12.5 days over the tworounds of instrument distribution for anemail survey to be returned. By contrast,it took, on average, 24.2 days over the tworounds of instrument distribution for apostal mail survey to be returned. Resultsof the data analysis, t(118) = 5.42, p <0.00, show a statistically significantdifference in the response speed of e-mailand postal mail distributed surveys. Inbeing returned to the researchers, emailsurveys were significantly faster than postalmail surveys.
For Objective 3 (Response Quality):
On average, participants responding tothe e-mail survey completed 20.9 of the35 possible responses. By contrast,respondents filling out the postal mailsurvey completed, on average, 19.4 ofthe possible 35 responses. Results of thedata analysis, t(118) = -0.99, p < 0.32,show no statistically significantdifference in response quality of e-mailand postal mail distributed surveys.
What It MeansThe postal mail distribution method
had a higher return rate than the e-maildistribution method. This is consistentwith earlier research comparing e-mailsurveys and postal mail surveys.Response speed of e-mail surveys wassignificantly faster when compared to theresponse speed of postal mail surveys.These results are also consistent with thefindings of earlier researchers. Theresponse quality of e-mail distributedsurveys and postal mail surveys wassimilar. This, too, is consistent with thefindings of earlier researchers.
Recommendations1. A replication of this study should
be undertaken using a probabilitysample. Many of the earlierstudies, including this one, havenot been able to generalize
because of the nonprobabilitynature of participant selection. Areplication of this study using aprobability sample would enhancethe findings of any future studycomparing the response rate,speed, and quality of e-mail andpostal mail surveys.
2. A study comparing the responserate, response speed, and responsequality of surveys presented onthe Internet with postal mailsurveys should be conducted.Many businesses andorganizations post surveys on theInternet as a method of collectingdata from their various publics.Participants may be more likely torespond to a survey presented onthe Internet than they are to asurvey presented by e-mail simplybecause of format and familiarity.E-mail messages could be sent toparticipants with a link to thesurvey site embedded in the textfor ease of locating andresponding to the survey.
Allen D. Truell is an assistant professorin the College of Business at Ball StateUniversity, Muncie, IN.
Perry Goss is a doctoral student at theUniversity of Missouri, Columbia.
Author’s Note: This article is a derivative of a paper presented at the 1999 Delta Pi Epsilon National Conference in St. Louis, Missouri. The paper of which this
article is a derivative was included in a collected work (Book of Readings) and distributed to the approximately 115 conference attendees.
ReferencesBachmann, D., Elfrink, J., & Vazzana, G. (1996). Tracking the progress of e-mail vs. snail-mail. Marketing Research, 8(2), 31–35.
Kawasaki, J. J., & Raven, M. R. (1995). Computer administered surveys in extension. Journal of Extension, 33(3). Retrieved from
http://www.joe.org/joe/1995june/rb3.html
Kiesler, S., & Sproull, L. S. (1986). Response effects in the electronic survey. Public Opinion Quarterly, 50, 402–413.
Kittleson, M. J. (1995). An assessment of the response rate via the postal service and email. Health Values, 18(2), 27–29.
Mavis, B. E., & Brocato, J. J. (1998). Postal surveys versus electronic mail surveys: The tortoise and the hare revisited. Evaluation & The Health
Professions, 21(3), 395–408.
Mehta, R., & Sivadas, E. (1995). Comparing response rates and response content in mail versus electronic mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research
Society, 37(4), 429–439.
Oppermann, M. (1995). E-mail surveys—Potentials and pitfalls. Marketing Research, 2(3), 28–33.
Parker, L. (1992, July). Collecting data the e-mail way. Training and Development, pp. 52–54.
Rafaeli, S. (1986). The electronic bulletin board: A computer-driven mass medium. Computers and the Social Sciences, 2, 123–136.
Schuldt, B. A., & Totten, J. W. (1994). Electronic mail vs. mail survey response rates. Marketing Research, 6(l), 36–39.
Thach, L. (1995, March-April). Using electronic mail to conduct survey research. Educational Technology, pp. 27–31.
Truell, A. D. (1997). Survey research via e-mail: Assessing its strengths and weaknesses for use by the business educator. NABTE Review. 24, 58–61.
Tse, A. (1998). Comparing the response rate, response speed and response quality of two methods of sending questionnaires: E-mail vs. mail. Journal
of the Market Research Society, 40(1), 353–361.