UPDATE

• UPDATE stands for Understanding and Providing a Developmental Approach to Technology Education

• The aim of the programme is to improve technology teaching in Europe in order to entice young people in to technology related disciplines, especially girls.

• New learning material and methods shall evolve out of the project which focuses on three age groups: early childhood, elementary school (age 6 to 12) and general education (age 13-18).

Project Partners

• University of, Jyväskylä Finland, Dr. Aki Rasinen, Dr. Marja Kankaanranta, Dr. Leena Turja, Päivi Fadjukoff

• University of Glasgow, United Kingdom, John R. Dakers and Wendy Dow

• UFM University Institute for Teacher Training of Aix-Marseille, France, Prof. Jacques Ginestié

• "Alexandru Ioan Cuza" University of Iasi, Romania, Prof. Dr. Doina Balahur

• Ovidius University Constanta, Romania, Prof. Ph.D. Valentina Pomazan,

• University of Tallinn, Estonia, Ene Lind

• Dortmund University of Applied Sciences, Ada-Lovelace-Mentoring-Association, Germany, Prof. Dr. Sylvia Neuhäser-Metternich,

Project Partners

• University of Koblenz, Ada-Lovelace-Project, Germany, Dr. Martina Endepohls-Ulpe, Judith Ebach, Prof. Dr. Wolf-Andreas Liebert,

• FCRI Catalan Foundation for Research and Innovation, Spain, Dr. Jordi Mas,

• Competence Center Technology-Diversity-Equal Chances, Germany, Sabine Mellies, Carmen Ruffer,

• Institute of Philosophy at the Bratislava Slovak Academy of Sciences, Slovakia, Prof. Tatiana Sedovà,

• State College of Education in Vienna, Austria, Prof. Christine Hahn, • Regional Institute for Educational Research Marche, Italy, Prof.

Cristina Pavisic.

Project Partners

• Aristotle University, Dept. Of Mechanical Engineering, Greece, Prof. Dr.Eng. Kostas Karatzas.

• University Complutense de Madrid, Spain, Dr. Jesus Pintor, Prof. Maria Asuncion Peral Cerda

• IDEC S.A, Greece, Xenia Chronopoulou.

• Strathclyde University. Susan MacLaren

Workpackage 1

• Digital portfolio platform

• Marja Kankaanranta

Workpackage 2

• Early childhood education

• Leena Turja

Workpackage 3

• Elementary school

• Aki Rasinen

Workpackage 4

• General education

• John Dakers

Workpackage 5

• Motivation and Barriers

• Doina Balahur

Workpackage 6

• Restructuring curricula

• Jacques Ginestié

Workpackage 7

• Dissemination and exploitation

Workpackage 8

• Project management

• Päivi Fadjukoff

Programme

• 9.30am Setting the scene: A curriculum for excellence. Presentation by Susan McLaren (Strathclyde

University), Joyce Henderson (ACfE LTS

Officer for the technologies)

Programme

• 11.00amDavid Barlex: A socio cultural constructivist approach to technology teaching - pipe dream or possibility?

Resources to support an appropriate pedagogy

Programme

• 1.00pm Patricia Murphy: Gender and pedagogy in technology education

Programme

• 2.00pm Patricia Murphy, David Barlex and Donna Trebell. Developing and evaluating innovative practice in

Technology Education: an iterative

approach

Programme

• 3.30pm Wendy Dow: Workshop on case study approaches

Programme

• 4.30pm Group discussion

Programme

• 7.30pm Dinner in the Kibble Suite

Programme

• 10.00amSunday - questionnaire design

• 12.00midday Lunch

Some things to ponder

• Andrology

• From the Greek andros, which means man and logos which means knowledge

• Do you know what the female version is?

• Gynaik is the Greek for woman

Some things to ponder

• The term gender refers to the different roles men and women play in a society or a community.

• These roles are determined by cultural, social and economic factors and differ within and between cultures and countries.

• Shiela Rowbotham observes that that the term ‘gender’ has no single meaning, but is affected by a whole complex of social relationships. Gender roles are different from sex differences in that sex difference is biological, and for the most part, unchangeable.

• Gender roles are dynamic and change over time.

Some things to ponder

• The term gender refers to the different roles men and women play in a society or a community.

• These roles are not fixed and immutable. However, perceptions about them are often difficult to change, as in technology education.

Females and technology

• Hidden from history

• Women in technology: vastly under-represented

• Technology is not neutral and as such, it embodies patriarchal values (Wajcman)

• Women are alienated from technology which reflects male power (Wajcman)

Females and technology

• Game and Pringle point out gender distinctions in the discourse surrounding technology such as heavy/light, dirty/clean and technical/non-technical, which, they argue, are constructed to preserve a sexual division of labour.

• Modern research and particularly recent feminist thinking, stresses that technology and gender are not fixed and given. They are a cultural process which (like other cultural processes) are subject to negotiation, contestation, and, ultimately transformation.

Flis Henwood

• “Our theorizing of the gender and [] technology relationship should not be reduced to the simple ‘man equals technology literate, woman equals technology illiterate’ formulation. Technological meanings are not ‘given’; they are made. Our task trying to transform the gendered relations of technology should not be focused on gaining access to the knowledge as it is but with creating that knowledge. By this I mean to be involved at the level of definition, of making meanings and in creating technological culture”.

Final word

• We need to rethink, not so much the content, but the delivery of technology education. The development of procedural skills related to engineering and construction (predominantly male preserves) must include conceptual knowledge relating to technology in order to entice females.

• In other words, we need to change pedagogy