Most people see technology as the know-how and the creativity to use tools, resources, and systems to solve problems and to enhance control over natural and man-made environments to improve the human condition. Three major implications follow from this view: technology is good and all kinds of technological development are desirable; anything that facilitates technological advancement should be encouraged; and education should impart the technical training and skills required by the technological enterprise. Does any technological development necessarily improve our quality of life? What are the trade-offs of any implemented new technology? Should a particular technology be implemented in the first place? Such questions commonly are not dealt with in traditional science education. In ordering priorities and goals, after all, one implies value judgments. But such judgments should be encouraged and fostered in technology education, and this means distinguishing between technical literacy (having the practical ability to handle or use the stuff') and being technologically literate (having the capacity to critically assess technology, as a basis for rational decision making and action). Although science and technology may establish what can technically be done, neither can tell us what should be done (Zoller & Watson, 1974). The crucial problem is not the technical aspects of handling and processing information, but rather the reasoned ability to select and to interpret critically available information. This is the deep-rooted rationale for science-technology-society (STS) education (Aikenhead, 1989; Bybee, 1987; Science Council of Canada, 1984; Yager, 1985; Zoller, 1987b). Those advocating the STS theme across the curriculum believe technology literacy is the combined functional capability to understand and communicate the interactions among science, technology, and society; to assess technology; and to exercise the rights and responsibilities of citizenship. STS should, thus, be mandatory for every student.