| CODE | EDS3304 | ||||||||
| TITLE | Technology Education for Democratic Citizenship | ||||||||
| UM LEVEL | 03 - Years 2, 3, 4 in Modular Undergraduate Course | ||||||||
| MQF LEVEL | 6 | ||||||||
| ECTS CREDITS | 4 | ||||||||
| DEPARTMENT | Education Studies | ||||||||
| DESCRIPTION | This unit exemplifies the arguments for the role of technology education in our society's education both locally and internationally. It presents four main arguments namely: an economic argument, a utilitarian argument, a democratic argument and a cultural argument. This unit discusses the interpretations and orientations given to the technology education curriculum according to political influences, cultural influences or academic and philosophical influences through time. It emphasizes the existence and role of values in a technology education curriculum which aims to support the formation of a democratic society. A debate of the roles held by vocational technology education versus general technology education is also presented. Study-Unit Aims: 1. To explore how technology education can influence democratic citizenship; 2. To present at least four arguments for the defence of a technology education curriculum: an economic argument, a utilitarian argument, a democratic argument and a cultural argument; 3. To argue the roles held by vocational technology education versus general technology education in a modern society. Learning Outcomes: 1. Knowledge & Understanding: By the end of the study-unit the student will be able to: 1. Describe how academic, cultural and political influences in different countries have shaped the technology curriculum through time; 2. Discuss what values can be imparted by a well-planned technology curriculum and how these may be delivered in a typical technology learning environment; 3. Discuss how academic or philosophical drives and political or economic requirements may sometimes conflict with respect to the interpretation or bias given to the content within a technology curriculum. 2. Skills: By the end of the study-unit the student will be able to: 1. Present strong arguments, in written and oral form, for major debates relating technology curricula and democratic citizenship. Main Text/s and any supplementary readings: Main Texts: - WILLIAMS, P. J., JONES, A. & BUNTTING, C. (eds.) 2015. The Future of Technology Education, Singapore: Springer. - BARLEX, D. 2015. Developing a Technology Curriculum. In: WILLIAMS, P. J., JONES, A. & BUNTTING, C. (eds.) The Future of Technology Education. Springer. - DE VRIES, M. J. (ed.) 2011. Positioning Technology Education in the Curriculum, Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. - EGGLESTON, J. 1993. The politics of technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 3, 59-64. - KIMBELL, R. & PERRY, D. 2001. Design and Technology in a Knowledge Economy. London: Engineering Council. - PAVLOVA, M. 2005a. Knowledge and Values in Technology Education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 15, 127-147. - PAVLOVA, M. 2005b. Social Change: How Should Technology Education Respond? International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 15, 199-215. - PETRINA, S. 2000a. The Political Ecology of Design and Technology Education: An Inquiry into Methods. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 10, 207-237. - PETRINA, S. 2000b. The Politics of Technological Literacy. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 10, 181-206. - PETRINA, S., VOLK, K. & KIM, S. 2004. Technology and Rights. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 14, 181-204. - WAKEFIELD, D. & OWEN-JACKSON, G. 2013. Government Policies and Design and Technology Education. In: OWEN-JACKSON, G. (ed.) Debates in Design and Technology Education. London: Routledge. - WILLIAMS, P. J. 1998. The Confluence of the Goals of Technology Education and the Needs of Industry: An Australian Case Study with International Application. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 8, 1-13. - WILLIAMS, P. J. 2009. Technological literacy: a multliteracies approach for democracy. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 19, 237-254. Supplementary Readings: - DAKERS, J., DOW, W. & MCNAMEE, L. 2009. De-constructing technology’s masculinity. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 19, 381-391. - MARKERT, L. R. 2011. Cultural Aspects of Becoming Technologically Literate. In: BARAK, M. & HACKER, M. (eds.) Fostering Human Development through Engineering and Technology Education. The Netherlands: Sense Publishers. - PAVLOVA, M. 2008. Technology and Vocational Education for Sustainable Development: Empowering Individuals for the Future, Springer Science and Business Media. - WAKS, L. 1996. Citizenship in Transition: Globalization, Postindustrial Technology and Education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 6, 287-300. |
||||||||
| STUDY-UNIT TYPE | Lecture and Independent Study | ||||||||
| METHOD OF ASSESSMENT |
|
||||||||
| LECTURER/S | Francois Zammit |
||||||||
|
The University makes every effort to ensure that the published Courses Plans, Programmes of Study and Study-Unit information are complete and up-to-date at the time of publication. The University reserves the right to make changes in case errors are detected after publication.
The availability of optional units may be subject to timetabling constraints. Units not attracting a sufficient number of registrations may be withdrawn without notice. It should be noted that all the information in the description above applies to study-units available during the academic year 2023/4. It may be subject to change in subsequent years. |
|||||||||