Abstract

Technology education is globally still relatively new, and it lacks a substantive research base, a well-established classroom pedagogy and a scientifically founded, subject-based philosophical framework that may serve as a directive for related aspects. Technology is also a developing school subject with no equivalent academic discipline upon which curriculum development and classroom pedagogy may rely. The Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS) for Technology in the Senior Phase was officially implemented in 2014. However, responses to the intended or specified curriculum, either positive or negative, are often elicited from various stakeholders and interest groups. In the absence of philosophical-founded criteria for the development and evaluation of an intended technology curriculum, it is often unclear whether such responses are justified. Subsequently it is impossible to make fair judgments about such subject curricula. Based on Mitcham’s framework, the literature reports on a philosophical framework that is directive for technology classroom pedagogy, technology teacher education and Science, Technology and Society Studies (STS). The purpose of the article is to investigate how a scientifically founded, philosophical framework of technology can be directive for the development and evaluation of the intended technology curricula. The following research question served as point of departure for the theoretical reflection: Based on the four modes of the manifestation of technology – namely as object, knowledge, activity, and volition – which scientifically founded criteria can be deduced to be applied as part of the development and evaluation of intended technology curricula? In answering the research question it is important to point out that curriculum developers and evaluators should ensure that they take note of the philosophical framework for technology which guides subject-curriculum development and evaluation. A fourfold set of applicable criteria, based on the four manifestations of technology, have been deduced accordingly.

Highlights

  • Read online: Scan this QR code with your smart phone or mobile device to read online

  • Dog by die gebrek aan vakfilosofies gefundeerde kriteria vir die ontwikkeling en evaluering van die intensionele tegnologiekurrikulum is dit dikwels nie duidelik of sulke reaksie geregverdig is nie

  • Die doel van hierdie artikel was om ondersoek in te stel hoe ’n wetenskaplik deurdagte, filosofiese raamwerk vir tegnologie rigtinggewend in die ontwikkeling en evaluering van tegnologiekurrikula kan wees

Read more

Summary

Oorspronklike Navorsing

’n Teoretiese besinning oor die implikasies van die filosofie van tegnologie vir kriteria vir vakkurrikulumontwikkeling en -evaluering. Die volgende navorsingsvraag het as vertrekpunt vir die teoretiese besinning gedien: Gebaseer op die vier wyses waarop tegnologie manifesteer – naamlik as objek, kennis, aktiwiteit, en wilshandeling – watter wetenskaplik gefundeerde kriteria kan afgelei word vir die ontwikkeling en evaluering van die intensionele tegnologiekurrikula? Die volgende navorsingsvraag het as vertrekpunt vir die teoretiese besinning gedien: Gebaseer op die vier wyses waarop tegnologie manifesteer – naamlik as objek, kennis, aktiwiteit, en wilshandeling – watter wetenskaplik gefundeerde kriteria kan afgelei word in die ontwikkeling en evaluering van tegnologiekurrikula?. Uit die voorafgaande bespreking en twee vorige opeenvolgende artikels (Ankiewicz 2013a, 2013b), blyk dit dat ’n wetenskaplik deurdagte, filosofiese raamwerk vir tegnologie ook insig- en rigtinggewend vir die ontwikkeling en evaluering van tegnologiekurrikula kan wees. Sodanige oorsprong en verwantskappe is nie noodwendig in hierdie artikel herhaal nie

Bespreking en gevolgtrekking
Mededingende belange
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call