INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UME films the text direct^ from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in ^ew riter 6ce, while others may be from any type o f conqmter printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
Oversize materials (e g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, b%innmg at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right m equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographicalty in this copy. Œgher quality 6” x 9” black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appeaimg m this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directty to order. UMI A Bell & Howell Infinmatios Cboipaiv^ 300 Noith Zeeb Road. Ann Aibor MI 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/S21-0600
A NATURALISTIC STUDY OF AT-RISK STUDENTS ENROLLED IN HIGH SCHOOL TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION
DISSERTATION
Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate
School of The Ohio State University
By
Phillip L. Cardon, M.S,
ir ir ir ir ir
The Ohio State University 1999
Dissertation Committee: Approved by Professor Karen F. Zuga, Adviser
Professor Michael L. Scott T] o m m u r. ' Advise^ JAdvise^ Professor Jeffrey P. Smith College of Education Graduate Program UMI Number: 9931572
UMI Microform 9931572 Copyright 1999, by UMI Company. All rights reserved.
This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Utle 17, United States Code.
UMI 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, MI 48103 ABSTRACT
The enrollment of at-risk students in technology education classes is pervasive throughout the country.
However, little was known about why at-risk students would want to take technology education classes, how they valued these classes, and if their desires to take and values of technology education classes helped them to remain in school. Qualitative research methods were used to study how at-risk students view a technology education program.
The theoretical basis for the study was related to three theories of learning. These were the knowledge construction, problem solving, and hands-on learning theories.
Findings indicated that at-risk students valued technology education courses for the achievements and successful experiences received through hands-on instruction and problem-solving experiences. An additional finding indicated five of the eight students in the study remained in school because of their enrollment and ability to enroll in technology education courses.
Ü In memory of Walter Courtland Mason, my maternal grandfather, whose strength of character and eternal belief
in education influenced a grandson.
XXX ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
It is with heartfelt gratitude that I acknowledge several individuals for the help and encouragement that they gave me during this endeavor.
First, to my Father in heaven who blessed me and gave me the opportunity to undertake this endeavor and who blessed me with the talent to do so.
Without my loving and wonderful wife, Yuko, this dissertation would not have been possible.
To my children, Anthony, Kenny, Charles, and Emelina, who were patient and understanding with their father.
For my parents, I express my love and devotion for providing me with life and supporting me in this process.
Appreciation is also extended to the high school teachers, students, students' parents, principals, and district directors who participated in this study.
Last, but certainly not least, I am indebted to my professors for their efforts in assisting me through the
Doctoral program. Special thanks is expressed to Dr. Karen
F. Zuga, Dr. Michael L. Scott, and Dr. Jeffrey Smith.
iv VITA
January 8, 1966 ...... Born - Moab, Utah
1990 ...... A.S. of Ind. Ed., Ricks College, Rexburg, Idaho
1992 ...... B.S. of Auto Technology, Weber State University, Ogden, Utah
1992-1994 ...... Product Engineer, Toyota Motor Sales, Torrance, California
1994-1995 ...... Graduate Work at Utah State University, Logan, Utah
1995-1996 ...... Graduate Assistant, Technology Education, Brigham Young University
1996 ...... M.A. of Technology Ed., Brigham Young University Provo, Utah
1996-1999 ...... Graduate Teaching Associate, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
PUBLICATIONS Research Publication
1. Cardon, P. L. (1998). The Utilization of Problem Solving for the Disabled. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 418 257) 2. Cardon. P. L. & Christensen, K. W. (1998). Technology- based programs and drop-out prevention. Journal of Technoloav Studies.24(It. 50-54.
3. Zuga, K. F., & Cardon, P. L. (1999). Issues in technology education related to the evolution of the field. In Albert J. Pautler, Jr. (Ed.), Workforce education: Issues for the new century. Ann Arbor, MI: Tech Directions Books, Prakken Publications, Inc.
FIELDS OF STUDY
Major Field: Education
Studies in Technology Education. Dr. Karen F. Zuga
Studies in Curriculum. Dr. Beverly M. Gordon
vx TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
A b s t r a c t ...... il
D e d i c a t i o n ...... iii
Acknowledgments...... iv
V i t a ...... V
Table of Contents...... vii
List of T a b l e s ...... xi
Chapters :
1. Introduction ...... 1
1.1 Initial Review of Literature ...... 6 1.1.1 Overview of Technology Education: Literature Pertaining to Secondary Education ...... 6 1.1.2 Overview of Literature Pertaining to At-risk Students in High School .... 11 1.1.3 Educational Literature Concerning At-risk Students'Perceptions of School 15 1.2 Statement of the P r o b l e m ...... 18 1.3 Goals of the S t u d y ...... 18 1.4 Questions of the S t u d y ...... 19 1.5 Objectives of the S t u d y ...... 21 1.6 Methods ...... 22 1.7 Assumptions...... 25 1.8 Significance of the Study ...... 27 1.9 Delimitations...... 28 1.10 Definition of Terms ...... 29 1.12 Time Line ...... 32
2. Procedures...... 33
2.1 Planning the S t u d y ...... 34
vii 2.1.1 P r e - S t u d y ...... 35 2.1.2 Choosing a S i t e ...... 36 2.1.3 Entering the F i e l d ...... 39 2.1.4 Participants...... 44 2.1.5 Gaining Acceptance...... 49 2.2 Collecting Evidence ...... 53 2.2.1 Observations...... 53 2.2.2 Interviews...... 63 2.2.3 P a r t i c i p a t i n g ...... 72 2.2.4 Document A n a l y s i s ...... 75 2.3 Evaluating...... 75 2.3.1 Relating Literature ...... 76 2.3.2 Describing...... 76 2.3.3 Interpreting...... 78 2.3.4 Appraising...... 79 2.3.4.1 Evidence Analysis ...... 80 2.3.4.2 Evidence Retrieval...... 81 2.3.5 Establishing Credibility ...... 83 2.3.5.1 Professional Judgement ...... 85 2.3.5.2 Triangulation ...... 87 2.3.5.3 Dependability ...... 88 2.4 Summary ...... 90
3. The Context ...... 91
3.1 The Environment...... 91 3.2 The Philosophy ...... 100 3.2.1 School Philosophy ...... 100 3.2.2 Technology Education Program Philosophy 108 3.3 The Curriculum ...... 112 3.3.1 The School c u r r i c u l u m ...... 112 3.3.2 The Technology Education Program Curriculum...... 115 3.3.3 The Technology Education Program Lessons ...... 118 3.3.4 Adapting to the Curriculum...... 132 3.3.5 Valuing the Subject Matter of the C u r r i c u l u m ...... 140 3.3.6 Modifying the Curriculum...... 148 3.4 Summary ...... 155
4. The Students' Perceptions of the Technology Education Experience ...... 156
4.1 Presentation, Evaluation, and Analysis of the E v i d e n c e...... 157 4-1.1 How the Students L e a r n e d ...... 157 4-1.1.1 The Construction of Knowledge . . . 158
viii 4.1.1.1.1 E v i d e n c e ...... 158 4.1.1.1.2 Analysis ...... 164 4.1.1.2 Learning Through the Problems . . . 168 4.1.1.2.1 Evidence ...... 168 4.1.1.2.2 A n a l y s i s ...... 177 4.1.1.3 Hands-on Learning ...... 183 4.1.1.3.1 Evidence ...... 183 4.1.1.3.2 Analysis ...... 189 4.1.2 Consistency and Triangulation Of Evidence...... 192 4.1.3 Linking theTh e o r i e s ...... 194 4.1.3.1 Evidence ...... 194 4.1.3.2 The Relationship Between the T h e o r i e s ...... 199 4.1.4 I n t e g r a t i o n ...... 203 4.1.4.1 Evidence ...... 203 4.1.4.2 Analysis Supporting Integration . . 206 4.1.5 Life S k i l l s ...... 209 4.1.5.1 Evidence ...... 209 4.1.5.2 Analysis of the Evidence ...... 215 4.2 A Reason to Stay in Sc h o o l ...... 220 4.2.1 Characteristics of Students in the S t u d y ...... 220 4.2.2 Staying in S c h o o l ...... 224 4.2.2.1 Hands-on Curriculum ...... 225 4.2.2.2 Successful Educational Experiences 228 4.2.2.3 Why They are Still in School . . . 233 4.3 Cross-Theory Analysis ...... 239 4.4 Summary ...... 241
5. Summary and Implications...... 243
5.1 Summary ...... 243 5.1.1 Theory and Evidence Analysis ...... 245 5.1.1.1 Evidence Evaluated According to Each T h e o r y ...... 246 5.1.1.2 Consistency and TrianguiaLiou of E v i d e n c e ...... 248 5.1.1.3 Linking the Theories ...... 249 5.1.1.4 Integration ...... 250 5.1.1.5 Life Skills ...... 251 5.1.2 A Reason to Remain in S c h o o l ...... 251 5.2 Implications...... 254 5.2.1 Questions of the S t u d y ...... 254 5.2.1.1 How do At-risk Students Respond to a Technology Education Program 254 5.2.1.2 Why do At-risk Students Enroll in Technology Education Classes . 256
ix 5.2.2 Practical Implications ...... 257 5.2.2.1 What do the findings in chis study tell us about teachers of at-risk students? ...... 257 5.2.2.2 What do the findings in this study tell us about the curriculum in schools?...... 258 5.2.2.3 What do the findings in this study tell us about the curriculum in technology education programs? 259 5.2.3 Theoretical Implications ...... 260 5.2.3.1 Limitations of the S t u d y ...... 260 5.2.3.2Implications for Future Research . 262
Appendixes
A L e t ters...... 265 B Interview...... Schedule ...... 269 C Observation Instrument ...... 272
R e f e r e n c e s ...... 274 LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Cross-theory analysis table ...... 240
xr CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
For several years I have been able to work with high
school technology education teachers and students in
classroom settings. The students came from various
backgrounds with very different interests, but most of the
students really enjoyed the projects and challenges provided
by the curriculum. Some of the students returned to take
more courses in technology education. Still, others decided
to make technology education a career.
While working with these students, observing their
actions, and learning more about them, I noticed that some
of the students in the classes were at-risk students. I
wondered why at-risk students were taking a technology
education class, and why some at-risk students would return
to take more technology education classes, and do well in
them.
To clarify the word "at risk," the following definition
of an at-risk student was given by McCann and Austin (1988) who define the at-risk student with three characteristics:
1 • First, they are students who are at risk of not
achieving the goals of education, of not meeting
local and state standards of high school
graduation, and of not acquiring the knowledge,
skills, and dispositions to become productive
members of society (receiving less than 2.00 grade
point average).
• Second, they are children who exhibit behaviors
that interfere with themselves and others
attaining an education, requiring disciplinary
action (at least three incidents).
• Third, they are those whose family background
characteristics may place them at risk (low income
to below poverty level, non-English native
speaker, etc.). (p. 1-2)
When discussing this topic with other technology education teachers, I learned that they noticed similar circumstances in their classrooms. At-risk students would enroll in a technology education class and perform as well as or better than they would perform in academic areas such as mathematics, science, or social studies. Although there were some at-risk students who would not perform very well, they would really enjoy the class. Did the students take the classes for fun and excitement or to be with friends? Did a guidance councilor recommend the class or did the student decide to take the class? Understanding what at-risk students thought of the technology education curriculum appeared to be a key to this concern.
In this light, the definition of technology education needs to be discussed. One definition of technology education is that it is the study of the transportation, manufacturing, construction, and communication fields of industry (Herschbach, 1992; p. 4). Also, technology education can be defined as the study of "human innovation in action. It involves the generation of knowledge and processes to develop systems that solve problems and extend human capabilities" (International Technology Education
Association, 1996; p. 16).
Another definition was found in the Jackson's Mill
Industrial Arts Curriculum Theory document by Snyder & Hales
(1981). This definition states that
Technology [education] is considered as the
knowledge and study of human endeavors in creating
and using tools, techniques, resources, and
systems to manage the manmade and natural
environment for the purpose of extending human potential and the relationship of these to
individuals, society, and the civilization
process, (p. 2)
Technology educators have sought to teach high school
students some of the basic knowledge and skills they need in
life through the study of the construction, manufacturing, communication, and energy/power/transportation systems of
industry (Herschbach, 1992). This subject is centered around hands-on activities, with the content focusing on the utilization of problem-solving principles in a systems approach related to industry.
A definition of problem solving is given by Cote.
According to Cote (1984), problem solving is "An adaptive process in which knowledge and skills are applied to move toward a goal" (p. 18). During this process of problem solving, a form of learning occurs (Gagne, 1985). Gagne went on to mention that problem solving is a higher-order intellectual ability and a way of learning.
Technology education is used as a method of integrating subjects in the curriculum (LaPorte & Sanders, 1995). The systems approach to education is used to teach students the various aspects of technology while incorporating the concepts of mathematics, science, social studies, or other subjects of the curriculum. Technology education serves as a means to integrate other subject matter.
These concepts are related Lo the work of John Dewey.
His curriculum included a theory of experiential learning through the study of occupations, as demonstrated in his experimental school. Dewey viewed the educative experience as an interaction of the student with environmental conditions, resulting in modified student-teacher relationships (Dewey, 1938). This study of how at-risk high school students view technology is founded on Dewey's theory of experiential learning. I hope that the information about at-risk high school students' experiences will be useful to educators interested in changing the curriculum to better benefit these students.
Currently, knowledge of how at-risk high school students experience and view the technology education curriculum is uncommon. Most technology education studies involving classrooms focus on process-product curricula, focusing on the outcomes or achievements of the students
(Zuga, 1994). Therefore, this study focused on at-risk high school students' interpretations of school experiences, through naturalistic inquiry, in order to examine the process of educational practice. Initial Review of Literature
This review of literature discusses the technology education literature related to the secondary education curriculum and studies related to at-risk students in secondary education.
Overview of Technoloav Education:
Literature Pertaining to Secondary Education
Industrial arts education had many promoters. Two of the initial professional educators in the field were Bonser
& Mossman. Bonser and Mossman (1923) defined industrial arts as the "study of the changes made by man in the forms of materials to increase their values, and of the problems of life related to these changes" (p. 5). These changes and the problems of life associated with them were the focus of i idustrial arts education subject matter (now technology education). Following Bonser & Mossman, Ericson (1946),
Olson (1963), Towers, Lux, and Ray (1966), Maley (1972), and
DeVore (1980) have written extensively about curriculum development for secondary students, just to name a few. They focused on curricular changes that would include activities as content and method. Following this period of curriculum innovation, the
Jackson's Mill Curriculum Project (Snyder & Hales, 1981)
established the curriculum to reflect the four areas of
communication, construction, manufacturing, and
transportation, and ultimately changed the field's name to
technology education. Approximately ten years following the
Jackson's Mill Curriculum Project, another group of
individuals met to redefine the technology education field
and bring a new consensus to the technology education
curriculum. The result of the conference was a publication
by Savage and Sterry (1990) entitled A Conceptual Framework
for Technoloav Education. The document stated that humans
satisfy their needs and wants by applying a problem solving
process to change resources into desired outcomes. The
document also reflected the consensus that the technology
education field should focus the curriculum on the four
areas of transportation, bio-related processes,
communication, and production. Although the document was meant to bring a general consensus to the field and assist outdated programs with the transition from industrial arts to technology education, so far this goal has not been realized (Herschbach, 1996).
-An analysis of research performed in the field from
1980 to 1986 was completed by McCrory (1987) . The research during this period of time focused primarily on history, philosophy, and objectives; human resources; status;
curriculum; learning process variables; instructional technology; student personnel and guidance; facilities; evaluation; teacher education; administration and supervision; and professional concerns. Following this research, a meta analysis regarding K-12 and teacher education research was completed by Zuga (1994). According to Zuga, during the years from 1987 to 1993:
• fifty percent of the research was devoted to
curriculum status, development, and change
• sixty-three percent focused on secondary
education
• fifty-three percent studied teachers/teacher
educators
• sixty-five percent used descriptive methods
• most of the research was conducted in a few
institutions
In both time periods, there were studies conducted regarding the handicapped, disabled, disadvantaged, and gifted and talented students and technology education (i.e..
Buffer & Scott, 1986; Calder & Horvath, 1979; Cobb, 1983;
8 Cunningham, 1982; Pallias, 1992; Ryan, 1992; Spewock, 1990).
However, there were no studies conducted regarding the
perceptions of at-risk high school students regarding their
experience with the curriculum. The study nearest to the
subject was conducted by Cottingham (1990) and focused on a
quantitative evaluation of the impact of industrial arts on
at-risk students. His findings showed that industrial arts
had an impact on the retention of at-risk students in
secondary schools. In summary, the nature of the research
effort remains focused on the curriculum, the teacher, and
the programs' effects on the students, not the students'
perceptions of the program.
Curriculum materials associated with technology
education programs are a good source of ideas and
information. Most widely known is the Industrial Arts
Curriculum Project (Towers, Lux, & Ray, 1966). The material
presents technology (industrial arts) education activities
integrated with the materials and processes of industry.
Another example is the Maryland Plan (Maley, 1972), which
focused on teaching students how to solve problems through personally-relevant activities. Still another example is the
Modular Approach to Technology Education (MATE). According
to Neden (1990), the MATE curriculum is "designed around
self-contained, two-student workstations that support self- directed, individualized instructional methodologies.
Everything to complete an assigned task is included in the
module area" (p. 2R). Although these curriculum plans are
focused on teaching students through and about technology,
knowledge about how at-risk students experience the
curriculum is missing.
Little evidence exists to indicate that a systematic
study of at-risk students' perceptions of the curriculum has
been undertaken by the members of the technology education
profession. Hypotheses stating that technology education
attracts and holds at-risk students in school have been
supported by little research (Cottingham, 1990). However, no
theoretical support via replication has been given to these
studies. At the time of this study, no other studies exist
in the field pertaining to the perceptions of at-risk
students with regard to the curriculum, hence, no theories
were previously postulated regarding the subject. At this point, it may be said that knowledge of the technology
education curriculum as perceived by at-risk high school
students may be insufficient.
10 Overview of literature pertaining to
at-risk students in high school
Of equal importance is the literature related to at-
risk students both from within and from without the field.
In the United States there are a large number of students who are labeled as at risk of leaving the educational system
before receiving a high school degree. These students
include ethnic and racial minorities, academically and
physically challenged students, and students with emotional
and psychological problems (Weber, 1986).
Many of these at-risk students may have had parents, educators, and fellow students try to help them to remain in
school. Other ways that at-risk students could be helped to
remain in school include high school education programs that capture their interests and help them to experience success through achievement (Ainley, Foreman, & Sheret, 1991).
It is generally accepted that at-risk students are labeled at risk because of their increased chances of permanently leaving school before receiving their diploma.
When students leave school with the intention of not returning to finish their secondary education, they are considered to be school dropouts (Dom, 1993) .
11 The problem of at-risk students leaving school should
not be addressed only after the student drops out of school,
but should be addressed while the student is still in
school. In order to do this, there must be a way of
determining the students who are at risk. Unfortunately,
there is not a specific definition of what determines at-
risk youth (Rush & Vitale, 1994). Therefore, a general
consensus of terms and characteristics must be used.
There are many terms and characteristics generally accepted by experts in the field of education to describe
at-risk high school students. The following definition of an at-risk student was given by McCann and Austin (1988) who define the at-risk student with three characteristics:
• First, they are students who are at risk of not
achieving the goals of education, of not meeting
local and state standards of high school
graduation, and of not acquiring the knowledge,
skills, and dispositions to become productive
members of society (receiving less than 2.00 grade
point average).
• Second, they are children who exhibit behaviors
that interfere with themselves and others
12 attaining an education, requiring disciplinary
action (at least three incidents).
• Third, they are those whose family background
characteristics may place them at risk (low income
to below poverty level, non-English native
speaker, etc.). (p. 1-2)
Batsche (1985) was successful in compiling a list of the common characteristics that help to define the profile of at-risk students.
Characteristics of the Individual
• history of school absenteeism,
• poor grades,
• low math and reading scores,
• low self-concept,
• history of behavioral problems,
• inability to identifying with other people,
• employed full time while in school,
• low socioeconomic background,
• more males than females,
• feel alienated and isolated, (p. 1)
13 Characteristics of the family
• family with several siblings,
• father absent from the home,
• father unemployed,
• father did not complete high school,
• mother absent from the home in early adolescence,
• little reading material in the home. (p. 1)
The preceding characteristics will be utilized to identify the at-risk students to be used in the study.
Other individual characteristics of at-risk students were identified by Gardner, Stone, Goldman, Scott, Withrow,
Edwards, Golden, Vasquez, Buoy, & Smoak (1988). Gardner, et al. reported that "As students, they are generally low achievers. They also differ from their more successful peers in development of self-esteem, task performance, cultural aspirations and life experiences" (p. 37).
From the research, it would appear some of the factors describing at-risk students include that they are primarily from low socioeconomic status, perform poorly in school, and have a low self esteem. These factors will help determine which students to include in the study.
14 Educational literature concerning
at-risk students' perceptions of school
Another significant question concerns the study of at-
risk students' perceptions of school. Recently, Wright
(1997) performed research regarding the manner in which
successful at-risk students perceive school. Personal
interviews were conducted with ten students in a rural
central Georgia high school. Results of the study suggested
that resilience had a direct relationship to individual
attributes, such as positive use of time, close family
bonding, and school related factors including adult
mentoring. Resilience referred to students who appeared to
develop stable, healthy personae and were able to recover
from or adapt to life's stresses and problems (McMillan &
Reed, 1993).
A qualitative study performed by Damico (1989) focused on the social learning factors that helped at-risk students
to remain in school. A total of 18 at-risk students were
interviewed regarding their perceptions of those factors that helped them to remain in school. The findings were classified into three groups: the persister, inside the classroom, and outside the classroom. The students viewed themselves as persistent and determined to graduate and have
15 a career. They also viewed the relationships with their teachers as a vital part of school. Finally, the students viewed extracurricular activities and relationships as important support factors.
The previous study was supported by another study performed by Taylor-Dunlop and Norton (1997). This study was performed qualitatively with eleven at-risk female students aged 15 to 17 in New York State. The three Latino, two
Caucasian, and six African American students participated in focus groups, individual interviews, and small group meetings. Data collection methods included shadowing and school profile information.
The results of Taylor-Dunlop and Norton^ s study supported the concept of having supportive links between at- risk students and school. These links include relationships between students and their teachers, counselors, and friends. The students also indicated that they came to school because they enjoyed math and hands-on classes (i.e. art). Taylor-Dunlop and Norton explained that
The students' criteria for a favorite course
appeared to depend on the amount of self-
expression they could achieve in the class,
whether it offered practical application, and
16 whether the subject matter came to them easily,
giving them a feeling of mastery or being smart.
(p. 277)
The study performed by Taylor-Dunlop and Norton (1997) supports this study in that the students showed a desire to attend math and hands-on classes like art. Similar to art classes, technology education classes, although centered around a curriculum of construction, manufacturing, communication, and transportation/power/energy, focus on teaching students through hands-on activities.
From the research regarding at-risk students' perceptions of high school, there appears to be a general lack of information. Only the study by Taylor-Dunlop and
Norton (1997) seemed to have any relevant support for the study of how at-risk students view hands-on classes. Since technology education is based upon providing manipulative activities as a part of the curriculum, a study of how high school students perceive the curriculum is valuable to both the field of technology education and all fields of education. If the educational experiences of students are to be improved, then educational researchers must begin to study how students interpret their school experiences.
17 statement of the Problem
The enrollment of at-risk students in technology education classes is pervasive throughout the country.
However, little is known about why at-risk students would want to take technology education classes, how they value these classes, and if their desires to take and value of technology education classes help them to remain in school
Goals of the Study
The primary goal of the study was to observe at-risk students in a technology education program and their reactions, thoughts, feelings, reflections, desires, and goals related to their experiences in and reasons for enrolling in a technology education program.
The goals of my study included the following items.
They are enumerated in order of importance.
1. To determine what it is that at-risk students
think about technology education classes.
2. To determine why at-risk students enroll in
technology education classes, and if this
enrollment is voluntary or not.
18 3. To determine why at-risk students want to return
to, or enroll in additional technology education
classes, or not.
Questions of the Study
The following questions were developed based on the brief review of literature. Although more questions developed as the study progressed, these questions provided a starting point for this study.
I. How do at-risk students respond to a technology
education program?
A. What do at-risk students believe about taking
technology education classes?
B. What do at-risk students believe about the content
of technology education classes?
C. Do at-risk students have a sense of achievement
and success in a technology education program?
D. Do at-risk students believe that their perception
of school life is improved or not improved through
the technology education program?
E. What life skills, if any, are at-risk students
learning in a technology education program?
19 F. Do at-risk students perceive technology education
to be the same or different from other subjects?
1. Do at-risk students believe technology
education is better or worse than other
subjects? In what ways?
2. Technology education is different from other
subjects? In what ways?
3. Technology education is easier than other
subjects? In what ways? Have the student
define easier.
4. Technology education is harder than other
subjects? In what ways? Have the student
define harder.
II. Why do at-risk students enroll in technology education
classes?
A. Did at-risk students know what technology
education was before they enrolled?
B. Do at-risk students enroll in technology education
classes to obtain career skills, or for something
else?
C. Do at-risk students take technology education
classes because they are easy? Have student define
easy.
20 D. Do at-risk students take technology education
classes because of the hands-on learning
atmosphere, or for something else?
E. Were at-risk students told to take technology
education classes by a counselor, teacher, friend,
or guardian?
Objectives of the Study
The major objective of this study was to generate information about how at-risk high school students interpret their experiences of the technology education curriculum. I investigated, described, interpreted, and analyzed how at- risk students viewed the phenomena of technology education.
I observed, recorded, and interpreted the student comments, behaviors, and expressions. This was done with the assistance of a qualitative data gathering instrument. This instrument was developed by listing the questions of the study on a sheet of paper and determining a code for each question and sub-question. This way, while observing the students, I could make notes about things that they did and said that answered the questions. In addition, I described the physical environment, general philosophy, and curriculum of the technology education program.
21 This was done in order to develop an idea of how at- risk high school students view the curriculum. New knowledge gained from an exploration of at-risk students' perceptions of technology education classes was thought to have an influence upon planning curricula. If educators wish to improve the quality of educational experience, knowledge of how technology education classes are perceived by at-risk students must be included in order to plan, implement, and evaluate future curricula.
In order to study the problem, the methods adopted were holistic, those of naturalistic inquiry.
Methods
The research was performed using case study qualitative research methodology. This methodology initially included nonparticipant observation, or naturalistic inquiry, and later developed into participant observation; informal and formal interviews with selected at-risk students; and examination of documents such as lesson plans, curriculum guides, courses of study, and policies adopted by the school district. This allowed me to study the problem in greater detail.
22 A piece of literature that supported the use of a qualitative method in the study of technology education as it relates to at-risk students is entitled "Learning to
Labor," by Willis (1977). This research supported Fraenkel and Wallen (1996, p. 458) who discussed the use of qualitative research to study individuals or groups over a period of time.
The context of the study included at-risk students enrolled in technology education classes in a high school located in a Midwestern school district. The technology education at-risk students were purposively selected by me using criteria to identify at-risk students, after which permission was obtained from the parents or guardians. The
Human Subjects Review Committee of The Ohio State University and the school district were asked to give permission through the proper documents. The evidence gathering methods
I used were observations, interviews, and written documents.
Credibility and transferability were ensured by four to six months of research in the field; thick, rich description; and the triangulation of information obtained through observations, student interviews, and focus group interviews (Fraenkel and Wallen, 1996). The interviews followed a standardized, open-ended approach, as outlined in
Fraenkel and Wallen. Dependability was ensured through the
23 use of peer debriefing and the use of a reflexive journal.
Trustworthiness was ensured through the application of all the above qualitative methods and the incorporation of a reflexive journal (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).
The means that were used to collect the evidence included audio tape (if permission granted by participant and school district), individual and multiple participant interviews, and observations performed by me. The use of several methods helped to strengthen the credibility of the research. These methods were used repeatedly until consistent evidence was obtained.
A number of questions were used during the interviews of the students. A list of these questions can be found in appendix B.
Evidence obtained from the study was grouped into topics and sub-topics and discussed in thick, descriptive detail in order to allow the reader to better understand the research environment (Fraenkel & Wallen, 1996). The NUD*IST® computer program was used to help support and explain the evidence, and to assist in the analysis.
24 Assumptions
My background is in technology education, with several years of industrial experience in transportation. Also, I have experience teaching technology education courses at both the high school and college level, and feel qualified to perform this study.
Qualitative research is not a new idea. This methodology has a long history in several disciplines.
However, interest in this approach has developed slowly in educational research. Only during the last 15 to 20 years have discussions over the relative strengths of qualitative methods gained enough interest to actually affect the practice of researchers and evaluators (Fraenkel & Wallen,
1996).
The concept of naturalistic inquiry is the method that
I used during my investigations. This is a broad term which captures the variety of approaches developed by other disciplines (ethnography, participant observation, etc.). It is a term that reflects a unique paradigm for inquiry which, until recently, departs substantially from paradigms most commonly used in educational research and evaluation.
Simply put, naturalistic inquiry is disciplined inquiry- conducted in natural settings (in the field of interest, not
25 in laboratories), using natural methods (observation, interviewing, thinking, reading, writing) in natural ways by people who have natural interests in what they are studying
(practitioners such as teachers, counselors, and administrators as well as full time researchers and evaluators) (Bogdan & Biklen, 1992).
Some of my assumptions regarding this study are explained below. They come from the things I see as self- evident, and from the feelings and biases I have toward technology education and at-risk students in general.
The first assumption is that all students want to pursue their wishes and their desires. If a student desires to go eat pizza for lunch, then that is what he or she wishes to do. If a student wants to leave school, then that is one wish that the student wants to pursue. Likewise, if a student wants to attend a specific class, then that is one wish that the student wants to pursue. Of course, there are reasons behind every desire, which this study will try to learn.
The second assumption is that technology education classes have something that at-risk students enjoy. Through observations performed during the pre-study, students appeared to be confident and very happy when engaged in hands-on activities in the technology education classroom.
26 It is assumed that this sense of enjoyment or satisfaction
is reflected in their grades as well (Ainley, Foreman, &
Sheret, 1991) .
The third assumption is that technology education
programs give at-risk students a sense of achievement and a
perception of an increase in the quality of school life
(Duttweiler & Shirley, 1993). Many at-risk students come to
technology education programs because they feel they have an
interest in technology or may perform well in the program.
Significance of the Study
There are several reasons which support the defense of
this study. First, there has been very little research
performed with the perceptions of at-risk students regarding
technology education. This is a major reason for the study -
to contribute to the research regarding technology education
and at-risk students.
The second reason supporting the study is that
technology education classes appear to be serving at-risk
students as well as regular students. The understanding of how at-risk students view the curriculum will assist in the development of better curricula to serve the population.
27 Delimitations
The delimitations of this study are limited to the perceptions that at-risk students have about technology education classes in a high school. This study was limited to the experiences of at-risk students in a technology education program in a Midwestern high school. Only selected at-risk students participated in the study. Special care was taken to follow all research procedures as outlined in this proposal while performing the study in the school.
Caution should be observed on the part of the reader, as this report was self-reported data. The reader should not look at the information in this report as absolute truth, but should think about it and compare it to their situation.
Please do not take my word for it. This is only my opinion of what I saw, heard, and thought.
In addition, care was taken to ensure that the students who participated in the study were selected only after permission was granted by the parents. For the purpose of this study, the following variables were not considered in the synthesis.
• views from more than one high school.
28 • absolute, unquestionable point of view is in the
report,
• those students who do not return a signed parental
permission form will not be allowed to
participate,
• applicable only to the time period identified in
the study,
• the time of year compared to other times of the
year,
• teachers' views on technology education,
• teachers' views about at-risk students,
• gender, race, religion, age, etc.
• anything regarding the teachers, and
• those students who moved away during the study.
Definition of terms
The following are the terms and definitions that I feel
need to be clarified for the reader. I attempted to define
these terms according to how they are used in the field.
The first term defined is that of the at-risk student.
The following definition of an at-risk student was given by
McCann and Austin (1988) who define the at-risk student with three characteristics:
29 • First, they are students who are at risk of not
achieving the goals of education, of not meeting
local and state standards of high school
graduation, and of not acquiring the knowledge,
skills, and dispositions to become productive
members of society (receiving less than 2.00 grade
point average).
• Second, they are children who exhibit behaviors
that interfere with themselves and others
attaining an education, requiring disciplinary
action (at least three incidents).
• Third, they are those whose family background
characteristics may place them at risk (low income
to below poverty level, non-English native
speaker, etc.). (p. 1-2)
The at-risk student is generally called that because he or she is more vulnerable to dropping out of school (leaving permanently) than the average student. The next term to be defined is that of the dropout.
The term which most Americans use to describe an at- risk person who leaves school early without receiving a high school diploma, with the intention to not return, is dropout
(Dom, 1993) .
30 other terms requiring definitions I feel that will assist the reader of this report are listed below. They refer to the language traditionally used in qualitative studies.
One is the term trustworthiness. This consists of credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability (Lincoln & Cuba, 1985).
Credibility is based on the validity and reliability of instruments, and internal validity. Credibility is supported by prolonged engagement, persistent observation, and triangulation (Lincoln & Cuba, 1985)
Triangulation is used to describe the use of different methods of evidence retrieval. This includes evidence from observations, individual and focus group interviews, document analyses, etc. (Lincoln & Cuba, 1985, p. 328) .
Transferability, established through thick, rich description, is the ability to transfer the findings of a study to other situations that are similar to that of the investigated situation, and is the same as external validity or generalizability (Lincoln & Cuba, 1985).
Dependability refers to the ability to account for observed changes over time. It is the same as reliability
(Lincoln & Guba, 1985).
31 Confirmability is the consistency at which evidence is collected. It includes the use of an audit trail, and is also establ ished through the replicability of a study
(Lincoln & Guba, 1985).
Time line
This study consisted of three phases. Phase I, the interviews and observations, were conducted over a four- month period of time from the beginning of the study. Phase
II, the document analysis, was conducted for the first four months of the study. Final evidence analysis and final write-up occurred in phase III, during the last four months of the study.
32 CHAPTER 2
PROCEDURES
As in daily life, the projects that we begin and complete do not come to a conclusion in an organized fashion. The inherent difficulties in
following a manufacturer's step-by-step directions have received wide play by cartoonists.
Directions, intended to aid one to assemble a
finished project, often lead one astray, require extra tools which need to be gathered, take longer
than expected, require integration of thought and action, or simply cannot be understood. As the project is in process, the work goes in fits, with starts and stops, triumphs and disasters, insights and confusion. All this can happen in a short period of time. Day-by-day life is like this. An article is read; a conversation with a caller interrupts; the mail comes in; a memory to stop by
the service station is recalled; a student needs to talk; a project begins; a final report is
33 mailed; and this continues throughout the day.
(Zuga, 1982, p. 57)
The previous quote from Zuga strikes very close to home. Since my study was similar to Zuga's (How elementary school students experience the curriculum: An educational criticism for industrial arts education. 1982), in writing this report, I followed a format similar to her study, making sure to write my own thoughts, ideas, and chosen references.
The procedures of this study include planning the study, choosing a site, participants, observations, interviews, document analyses, and evidence analysis. In these sections, I will discuss the specifics of the study.
Planning the Study
The foci of this study are three primary questions.
These are "Why do at-risk students want to take technology education classes," "How do at-risk students value these classes," and "Does their desire to take and value technology education classes help them to remain in school?'
The questions reflect thoughts and experiences I have had for several years. Teaching in the technology education
34 field, I noticed that the students shared an excitement about the activity in which they were engaged in classes.
This excitement seemed to be related to the type of experience that the students were having in the classroom.
Through this experience, the students seemed to learn things that were not being evaluated. Some of these things included the reason why weight and balance of a model rocket change the way in which it flies, and the ability to organize a project from nothing when students work together in a manufacturing project.
Pre-Study
In the Winter quarter of 1998, a mini-study was performed using the qualitative methods suggested by Lincoln
& Guba (1985). A site was selected in a Midwestern high school, and entry was obtained through permission granted by the technology education faculty and principal at the school.
Evidence from observations that I performed over a five-day period, along with interviews of 17 at-risk students, was compared to evidence reviewed in literature and evidence obtained frora 45 students who responded to written questions developed from evidence found in the
35 observations and interviews» Preliminary outcomes showed the evidence from observations and interviews to be consistent with evidence from the literature and written questions.
Follow-up interviews of participating students gave support that the students responded accurately in the interviews and to the written questions.
The next step, naturally, was for me to search for information about experience, especially the quality of experience. My questions, as stated before, led me Lu Lhe need to do a naturalistic study which involved the identification of the qualities of experience. My study focused on the use of naturalistic enquiry (Atkinson &
Hammersley, 1994). During the study, the events and observations began to help me focus the orientation of the study. During the planning stages of the study, I knew that the questions were guides for inquiry, knowing that they may be changed during the study (Atkinson & Hammersley, 1994).
Choosing a site
After reviewing various sampling techniques used in qualitative research, purposeful sampling seemed to best fit this study. According to Patton (1990) and Merriam (1988), purposeful sampling provided information-rich cases and "is
36 based on the assumption that one wants to discover, understand, and gain insight; therefore, one needs to select a sample which one can learn the most" (Merriam, 1988, p.
48). I observed what was occurring in regards to a technology education program, its classes, and curriculum, and the responses from at-risk students to technology education instruction. Therefore, purposeful sampling was the best choice for this study. "The logic and power of purposeful sampling lies in selecting information-rich cases for study in-depth. Information-rich cases are those from which one can learn a great deal about issues of central importance to the purpose of the research" (Patton, 1990, p.
169) .
Prior to the planning of this study, I was very interested in at-risk students' perceptions about technology education and how technology influenced them. I taught a course at OSU with an adjunct Midwestern high school teacher. This teacher explained his technology education program to me in great detail, and emphasized the fact that they served primarily at-risk students who excelled in technology education while performing less than mediocre in their other academic subjects.
After I planned the study and as I began to realize that it would involve a number of positively-identified at-
37 risk students, the high school where the teacher worked became more attractive as a site for the study. When asked, the other technology education teachers and the principal of the school agreed to allow me to conduct my study. The commitment was made near the end of the 1997-1998 school year.
I returned to the school prior to the beginning of the
1998-1999 school year to discuss the research with the principal and to submit a copy of the proposal for the study. At that time, I was acquainted with the four teachers whose classes I planned to visit. Unfortunately, during the
Autumn of 1998, this site became unavailable due to forces beyond my control.
In mid-September, I was able to secure a site to perform my research. I contacted a teacher at a Midwestern teacher academy high school whom I had as a student in several of my courses at OSU. He agreed to have me come and look at his program and discuss Lhe research proposal with him and his principal.
When I met with the teacher and observed his lab and students, I noticed that the majority of the students were at risk, and yet they were thoroughly enjoying the class. I became very excited about the possibility of doing research in this school, and subsequently went to discuss this with
38 the principal. After introductions and an explanation of ray proposal, the principal asked what he could do for me. I requested permission to perform my study in his school. The principal agreed and said he would do everything possible to assist me in my research.
Janesick (1994) discussed a strategy for entering the field relative to the dance of a professional dancer. Before any kind of work can occur, a warm-up period must take place. During this period relationships must be established and confidence must be obtained. This was not a problem for me. In fact, the interaction between the teacher, the principal, and I helped me to break the ice with the students.
Entering the field
When I was ready to begin research in the field, I had a great desire to perform a successful study, and I was concerned about the possibility of not being accepted by the students in the technology education classes. If this were to happen, the study would have to stop until another site could be found. Therefore, I knew the importance of establishing an honest and credible image with the teachers, principal, and most importantly the students. Without
39 interaction with the students based on trust, the evidence would be useless and untrustworthy. I knew I needed to work
with the students, the teachers, and the principal, along with other staff at the school.
Early in October 1998, I again went to the school to
obtain the signatures needed for official application to the
Human Subjects Review Board at The Ohio State University and
to the intended school district. I gave the teachers and the
principal a letter explaining the purpose of the study. A
few weeks later, a similar letter was sent home with the
students I desired to observe and interview. Later, a
similar letter was sent to the parents of the subject
students requesting permission Lo interview them (see
appendix A).
By the end of October I had received formal approval to
do my study from the Human Subjects Review Board at The Ohio
State University and from the school district. During the
first week in the classrooms, I introduced myself to the
students and let them know my purpose and answered any
questions they had. Their responses at first were rather
cold and distant, as if I were an outsider spying on their
actions in the classroom. I quickly realized that gaining
their trust was not going to be easy.
40 Following the roll call and opening discussions by the teacher, I would locate myself in an empty seat in a corner of the room. I initially began to observe and take field notes. I observed several classes and the different activities therein during the first week. I also observed the students between classes as they ran to their lockers and then to their next class, in the lunchroom as they interacted with friends and other students, and in the laboratories as they worked on their projects. The notes from the observations included short phrases, with a few quotes from teachers and students. After class changes, I would find a quiet place in the empty laboratory and record the things I had observed, either by writing them down or by speaking inLu a Lape recurdex. I found the latter to be most convenient.
During the second day of observations, I noticed the students seemed to feel uneasy about me being there, observing them. They did not act noriual, buL very rigid and reserved in their manner. I discussed this with the teacher, who also noticed the same behavior. At this point, I realized that a non-participative naturalistic study was going to be almost impossible to perform if I did not obtain lhe confidence and Lrusl of the students. Therefore, I decided to use the participant-observation method.
41 The interaction came very slowly. I discussed the study with the teachers during class breaks or lunch periods. I also approached the students on an individual basis, explaining my study and its purpose to them as we interacted in classroom activities and between classes. I would walk up to them slowly as they worked on their projects and stood at their side and observed what they were doing. Then I would ask questions. "Wiry do you draw your lines that way?" "Why did you design your water bottle rocket like that?" "That's an interesting design, where did you get that idea from?"
Through conversations about their work, I was able to break the ice. When it came time for the power-energy class to launch their water bottle rockets, the students asked me to participate and assist in the launchings. The teacher approved, so I was given the job of controlling the amount of air pressure produced by the air compressor. Before each launch, I would turn on the air compressor and turn it off again when it reached 100 psi (pounds per square inch). Then
I would signal the students that the air pressure was ready.
When the student was ready, they would pull a string that released the water bottle rocket from the launch pad and allowed it to soar into the air. If the launch was successful and resulted in a high altitude flight, the students would exclaim "Wowt That went really high," and
42 then argue about how many vertical feet it actually achieved. I would applaud them when their rocket did well, and encourage them when their rocket didn't do as well as others. Following several rocket launches and interactions between myself and the students, the students seemed to be more at ease around me, and began joking with me. One student, Henry, said "Yeah, if you're not careful, you'll get all wet." I responded, "Yes, I know. I've had that happen before. It happens all the time with me." Soon, students were asking me what I was doing at their school; why did I keep writing things on a sheet of paper; where did
I go to school; and what did I do? I answered each question briefly and honestly. I told them that I was trying to learn about what they thought of technology education classes, that I was taking notes so that I could remember what I saw and heard, that the notes would be written in my dissertation, that a dissertation was similar to a very large research paper, and that I was a student at The Ohio
State University. Each time I was asked about my notes, I let the students see it and asked them if they minded that I took notes about them. All of the students whom I asked said they didn't mind.
I eventually began to get a feel for the school and the technology education program. Due to my schedule, I began to
43 visit only two classes. I had planned to observe in two classes, and to observe a total of between four and six students. I wanted to observe and compare the students in a beginning class and an advanced class in a technology education program, as well as students from the freshman and sophomore classes.
The advanced class was the third period power/energy class. In this class were three at-risk students I observed who met the criteria set forth in the literature review seemed to open up to me. Price and some of his classmates welcomed me and talked at length with me about their technological interests in the beginning technology education class that met during fourth period. The first and second periods were out since family duties kept me busy during these class times. Fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth periods were out since they conflicted with scheduled duties at The Ohio State University. Therefore, I was limited to observing students in the third and fourth period classes.
Participants
The participants initially included eight 9*^^ and 10"^ grade at-risk students in two technology education classes
44 in a Midwestern high school. The population of the school was multi-cultural, consisting of Caucasian, African-
American, Latin-American, Middle East, and Asian students.
Before any students were approached regarding participation in the study, the following occurred. First, I obtained permission from the principal to conduct my study in the high school. In addition, I followed the proper protocol for filing a human subjects review with both the school district and OSU.
As for obtaining access to the technology education program I contacted the teacher from the technology education program in the high school and requested his assistance and permission in doing the study. After these steps were taken, I determined which at-risk students would be good candidates to participate in the study through observations, discussions with teachers and the principal, and information obtained from written documents regarding each student. These written documents included the students' attendance records, disciplinary record at the school, grades, and work in class. (Ainley, Foreman & Sheret, 1991).
In addition, I utilized criteria stipulated by Batsche
(1985) to identify each at-risk student that was used for my study. If the student in question demonstrated 80% of the
45 characteristics listed by Batsche, then he or she was considered a possible candidate for the study.
Batsche (1985) was successful in compiling a list of the common characteristics that help to define the profile of at-risk students. This list of characteristics was compared with the individual students' characteristics to determine which students participated in the study.
Characteristics of the Individual
history of school absenteeism,
poor grades,
low math and reading scores,
low self-concept,
history of behavioral problems,
inability to identifying with other people,
employed full time while in school,
low socioeconomic background,
more males than females,
feel alienated and isolated, (p. 1)
Characteristics of the family
• family with several siblings,
• father absent from the home,
• father unemployed,
46 • father did not complete high school,
• mother absent from the home in early adolescence,
• little reading material in the home. {p. 1)
The reason why I chose only a few at-risk students to study is that I wanted to see how at-risk students responded to technology education classes using in-depth case study analysis. I also believed that a few at-risk students were manageable given my proposed time schedule for observations and interviews at the high school. The at-risk students allowed for an in-depth study of the environment and people rather than a superficial, shallow study.
After observing students in two classes and conferring with the teacher and the principal regarding each student's qualifications as an at-risk student, I made the final decision to include each student in my study. Because there was only one girl between both classes, and since she was not at risk, I chose not to include her. In the third period power/energy class, Nick caught my attention with his bright green hair cut in the shape of a Polynesian grass hut and baggy pants that fell nearly to his knees; Henry caught my interest when I learned that he had no prior experience in technology education, and yet he seemed to love the subject;
John got me early with his lazy attitude and lack of desire
4 7 to do anything, except when the technology became exciting for him. In the fourth period. Price befriended me on the first day; Reed was the "macho, cool" super football "jock" who seemed to be trying to make sense of technology; Rick was very subdued at first and wanted assistance with his homework; Art was the class rebel, always trying to catch the girl's attention and impress others; and Doug was extremely quiet and seemed to confer with me more than the teacher. These are just some of the reasons for my choices.
I wanted a variety of at-risk students to observe in order to learn what they thought about a technology education program. I concentrated on these students during my observations. I interviewed them while at school. Although I wanted to interview all of the students and their parents in their homes, permission was given to interview only one student and parent in their home environment. The other parents and students were interviewed via the telephone. All of the students in the classes were not observed; only the students whom I chose who fit the criteria for being at risk. By the time I had selected the eight students, I was established in the school and in a routine of observations.
I had successfully entered the field and was able to gain acceptance with all of the subjects; some more than others.
4S Gaining Acceptance
When considering this study, I was concerned about the trustworthiness of the evidence. Trustworthiness is established by showing credibility, transferability, dependability, confirmability, and the use of a reflexive journal {Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Specifically, I was concerned with the novelty effect. The novelty effect refers to "increased interest, motivation, or participation on the part of subjects simply because they are doing something different" (Gay, 1996, p. 357).
In a qualitative study, the participant observer needs to be aware of and try to avoid this problem. It can take months for the researcher to learn if the subjects are reacting according to the Novelty effect (Bogdan & Biklen,
1992). During the course of events, the researcher may see signs that indicate this is occurring. Every day brings new experiences with each subject and provides opportunities to view them in a different light. Each experience is different from the experiences before or the experiences after. With each new experience, each individual acts in a different way.
My primary concern during the first few weeks was being accepted by the students and the teachers. I did not want
49 them to believe that I was just another teacher in the school. In addition^ I could not be a student, although that would be beneficial. I was a researcher in a foreign environment. However, according to the students and teachers, I was an outsider coming into their environment.
To be successful, though, I needed to be a participant in order for me to obtain trustworthy evidence through shared knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes.
There were times when I was able to share in the students' experiences. While Price was working on his drawings, he had a question about something and asked me if
I could help him with a problem. I said I would try my best.
After showing him what I knew about the problem, the teacher came over and said, "Nope, that's wrong Price, do it again I"
Price turned to me and said jokingly, "Thanks a loti Now we're both in hot water, because you told me the wrong thing." I felt bad and helped him again, and this time we both figured out the problem. When the teacher came by again to check Price's work, he said "Good job I See, you really do know how to do this, don't youI" Price turned to me, smiled, and gave me a high five. After that, many of the other students wanted my help with their work. I asked the teacher if it was okay for me to help them if they needed help, and he said that would be fine. The assistance I gave to the
50 students seemed to quickly melt the ice and brought a closer
friendship between me and the students.
Although I was becoming more of a friend than a
stranger to them, I was still a researcher, and the students
and I adapted. The relationships that developed between me
and the subject students helped me to believe that they were
honest in their communications and relationship with me. I
realize that they probably kept some secrets from me - as
teenagers usually do - and told these to only their closest
friends, but they were still honest.
I noticed that when I used a sheet of paper and wrote
down the things I observed as they were happening, the
students had an uneasiness about it. The information I was
getting seemed to be rigid and empty, almost without
meaning. So I tried interacting with the students as they
worked, and helped them when they wanted help. This seemed
to be more natural and, in turn, the evidence and
information became more natural and full. This took time,
but eventually after working through a drafting problem
together, problem solving the movements of a syringe robot,
and talking about common interests, information or evidence began to include observable behaviors and attitudes and beliefs. Trust was built between previous strangers.
51 My relationship with the teachers eventually developed
into mutual trust. I began to feel like a part of the school when the technology education teacher began to confide in me
regarding sensitive information that was usually reserved
for faculty or staff. On one occasion I noticed some
students smoking outside the school. When I reported it to
the technology education teacher, he said
Now don't be too concerned if you see students
smoking outside. It happens all the time, and it
is a real pain in the ass to try and catch them.
They will always deny it, and eventually you end
up looking like the bad guy for accusing them of
smoking. But if you want to go ahead and report
it, be my guest. I try every day to get them to
stop smoking, but they just keep coming back.
Later, it became obvious that we began thinking on the same
track when we would pick up our coats and head for Lhe lunchroom without ever mentioning the word "lunch," talking together about the class as if we were old friends. Through comments and events like this one, I began to recognize acceptance and a growing understanding of my role with students and faculty.
52 Collecting Evidence
In this study, I refer to "data" as "evidence." I prefer using the word "evidence," since it implies a greater scope than the word "data." Some of the things included in the evidence were facial expressions, body postures, time of day, and environmental conditions. These were some of the many types of Information that needed to be included to describe, interpret, and evaluate situations (Fraenkel &
Wallen, 1996). These pieces of information fit together to form a whole. This was done by observing, interviewing, audio-taping, and participating.
Observations
In order to further guide my study, I adopted a plan to observe and record information. At first, the method of nonparticipant observation was selected. Nonparticipant observation is when the "... researchers do not participate in the activity being observed but rather 'sit on the sidelines' and watch; they are not directly involved in the situation they are observing" (Fraenkel & Wallen,
1996, p. 452). However, after the first few days of observing the students, it appeared as though I was not
53 gaining their trust. Therefore, the techniques of participant observation were chosen. Participant observation as a method involves the researcher as an actual participant in the situation or setting they are observing (Fraenkel &
Wallen, 1996).
I planned to use descriptive and reflective field notes during the observations. The descriptive field notes are described by Fraenkel and Wallen (1996) as notes that
"describe the setting, the people and what they do according to what the researcher observes" (p. 460). Descriptive field notes include portraits of the subjects, reconstruction of dialogue, description of the physical setting, accounts of particular events, depiction of activities, and the observer's behavior.
Reflective field notes "present more of what the researcher himself or herself is thinking about as he or she observes" (Fraenkel & Wallen, 1996, p. 461). These include reflections on analysis, method, ethical dilemmas and conflicts, observer's frame of mind, and points of clarification.
Through the assistance of Dr. Smith, I developed an instrument to assist me in taking field notes (see appendix
C). This instrument had a left column for writing the descriptive field notes, and a right column for writing the
54 reflective field notes. I found this instrument to be very useful in writing and recalling what I saw, heard, smelled, felt, thought, etc. At times I had to put it away because it was causing some students to feel uneasy, but after the class I would quickly take them out again and write down the things I had observed and thought.
The evidence collected from observations were notes taken rapidly, often in abbreviated form, regarding descriptions of activities in which the students were involved. My reflections of the observations were written in short sentences or key words. Behaviors, actions, and interpersonal interactions as well as organization processes which took place between the subjects within and without a classroom were observed and recorded. Observations were also performed after school and at their home {Patton, 1990).
Also included were brief descriptions of the teacher's characteristics, student's characteristics, and the environment. The comments from the students and teachers were first written as notes, and then later expanded out as accurately as possible. Occasionally, when time was limited,
I recorded the notes and thoughts on tape for later transcription.
As I thought about developing my memory skills in order to better remember the occurrences of the day, I reflected
55 - on a passage by Bogdan & Taylor {1915). This passage states that
Although precise data recollection may seem like a
difficultr if not impossible, task to some, novice
observers will be amazed by the accuracy with
which they can recall specific details through
training, experience, and concentration. Some
observers use the analogy of a switch to describe
the ability they have developed to remember
people, conversations, and settings. That is, they
can "turn on" the intensive concentration they
need to observe and to recall. This analogy is a
good one if for no other reason than that it sets
the tone for the goal of other observation skills.
(p. 61)
Some of the specific hints Bogdan & Taylor (1975) gave included using key words, remembering first and last remarks, leaving the setting as soon as possible following a session, recording the notes as soon as possible following a session, not discussing anything until it is written down, tracing your movements through the setting, outlining
56 specific events throughout the setting, and picking up the pieces of lost evidence following the session.
The field notes contained primarily conversations and actions. There were also passages of information from things written on blackboards, from students' work, from textbooks, and from assignments. At times, I would use a tape recorder to elaborate on ray field notes in order to "flesh-out" the evidence and my thoughts while they were fresh in my mind.
The following excerpt was taken directly from one of my field note instruments.
November 12, 1998 (observation)
3rd Period:
Nick:
What I saw:
Motivation: Good. He worked very hard and with
intensity. He tried very hard to
finish his work.
Investment: He was looking for the bit gauge to
learn what size bit was in the
drill press, but he could not find
the bit gauge, so he said "got a
better idea. Let's look at the bit
to find the size."
57 Interaction: He showed Henry how to change the
bit in the drill press.
Lesson: They are still working on the syringe
robot.
Miscellaneous: Nick asked Mr. H. a question about
the specifications on the plans for
the robot.
Mr. H.: Make it to your own specs. Problem-
solve it.
Nick: Oh, cool I Does that mean I can
make it do whatever I want?
Mr. H.: Just as long as your robot meets
the criteria in the plans (rough
dimensions, lifting capacity,
movement, design, or aesthetics).
Nick: Don't worry, it will. I
promise.
When Nick asked Mr. H. about a drafting
question (a hidden line in Lhe base of the
robot), Mr. H. said to the class:
Mr. H.: Hey guys, I guess Nick isn't as
brilliant as I thought. He can't
remember what he learned last year
in drafting.
58 Nick: Yes I can. (Looking at Mr. H.)
Mr. H.: No you can't. You don't know what
those dashed lines represent.
Nick: Yes I do. That means there is
a hole through both sides of
the base. But it doesn't show
how far the holes are from the
sides.
Mr. H.: Yes it does.
Nick: Not from this view it doesn't.
Mr. H.: (walks over to Nick and points at
the paper) There, see?
Nick: Oh, Okay. I see it now.
Mr. H.: Nick, I want you to start making
those cognitive leaps and apply
what you learned last year to what
you are doing in here.
Nick: Okay, okay. Cut me some slack.
I'm just out of it today,
okay?
What I thought:
It would appear that Nick is very bright, because of his skills & knowledge about technology. But it would also appear that Nick wanted Dave to do some
59 thinking for him (lazy today). From his work, Nick
does not appear to be an at-risk student. But when
I take into consideration all the other
characteristics - wild hair, poor grades, family
problems, low self-esteem, disciplinary problems,
absences, etc. - he appears to be an at-risk
student.
Although Nick has had no wood shop classes in HS, he
seems to have a good working knowledge of the wood
tools. The scroll saw blade came out of the device that
holds it while Nick was using it. Nick did not want to
repair it, so he moved to the band saw and finished his
cuts.
Also, when Nick showed Henry how to change the bit in
the drill press, it appeared as though Nick really knew
what he was doing. Nick appears to be very
knowledgeable about tools and equipment and their
proper uses. This might be the reason why he is getting
a better than average grade in the class (B) even when
he is not doing his home work.
During times of intense flows of evidence that I needed to record, I chose to utilize the tape recorder for
60 dictation. This allowed for faster, more elaborate note taking than was possible with pen and paper.
The process of recording observations was not methodical. Occasionally I would become deeply engrossed in
thought about events in my high school years, or reflections of past experiences of my at-risk childhood. These experiences actually helped me to empathize with the students - to understand more about what was occurring in the classroom, and enter the situation as a participant. At other times, I reflected on my educational experiences regarding teaching practices, curriculum, and education in general. I would use these reflections to assist me in analyzing and evaluating the evidence and give me insight that I would not have had in my office or at home.
Following each observation session, I would record the evidence in the computer, evaluating it as I went. This helped me to see the holes where I needed to look for more evidence.
I performed my observations for four months, or until the events became predictable. The total number of weeks were sixteen which is approximately 80 school days. For the first three weeks I observed every day from nine o'clock a.m. until eleven o'clock a.m. I tried to be flexible enough to work with the class schedule that best worked for the
61 students. I took field notes during observations, which were categorized, indexed, and saved on the computer.
After returning from each observation, interview,
or other research session, the researcher
typically writes out . . . what happened. (The
researcher) renders a description of people,
objects, places, events, activities, and
conversations. In addition, as part of such notes,
the researcher will record ideas, strategies,
reflections, and hunches, as well as note patterns
that emerge. These are field notes: the written
account of what the researcher hears, sees,
experiences, and thinks in the course of
collecting and reflecting on the data in a
qualitative study. (Bogdan & Biklen, 1992, p. 74)
Following observation sessions, while still at the site, the field notes were elaborated upon through tape-recorder dictation and then transcribed in order to form a rich evidence base of the experiences of the at-risk students.
Additional entries in my journal helped to clarify and expound on the observations.
62 Interviews
I interviewed the at-risk students in order to get a
sense of how they perceived the technology education
curriculum and their experiences. I also interviewed the
parents of the subjects in a similar manner, regarding their
view of their child's experiences. These interviews were
informal in nature. Direct quotes from students were used in
the report of the study.
I had a very good idea of the types of information I
wanted from the students. I also knew that good questions
would solicit good information (Fraenkel & Wallen, 1996).
Therefore, I labored several hours trying to assemble an
interview schedule that would help me to obtain this
information (see appendix B). The interview schedule began with very broad questions, such as "What stands out for you
in your life over the past few years?", "Tell me something
about what your life is like right now.", and "Is the way
you see yourself now different from the way you saw yourself
in the past?" I eventually focused the questions more on topics related to technology education. Some of these questions were "What do you think will stay with you about your experiences in school [in the technology education program]?", "What do you think about technology education?",
63 and "Has being in the technology education program changed
the way you think about yourself? About the world?"
My skills with the process of interviewing and the
techniques involved gradually improved over time. During the
initial interview, I did not know which questions to ask or
how to word them. However, as I began to gather evidence, I
was able to assemble questions that revealed information
about how at-risk students viewed technology education.
Since each interview involved a different student or group
of students, or the same student at a different time, I had
to learn about the situation in order to conduct the
interviews properly. According to Fontana and Frey (1994),
"There is no single interview style that fits every occasion
or all respondents" (p. 364). I tried to be patient while
the student searched for words, letting the student answer
the question however he wanted. Sometimes extended pauses made the interviews a little uncomfortable, but I tried to be patient and let the student say what he wanted to say.
The quality of my interviewing techniques improved from the beginning of the study through the end of my stay at the
school. I attribute this not only to my learning how to ask questions, but also to my learning what questions to ask in
relation to the desired information. This was evident from
64 the written notes and audio tapes recorded during the interviews, as shown below.
November 30, 1998
Me: Alright. What do you think about
Technology education?
John: I think . . . Well, I used to think that it
was boring and that I hated it, but ever
since I came to (the High School), I kinda
liked it.
Me: Okay. Why is it that you like it here?
John: Well, 'cause I . . . I . . . I guess I just
thought of some of the big stuff and, you
know, do stuff hands on, rather than on
paper.
Me: Okay. So it is easier for you to think and
learn doing hands-on activities?
John: Easier, yeah, but I can do both hands-on and
book work.
Me: Okay, so you can do both ways, but it’s
easier doing hands-on?
John: Yeah.
Me: Okay. Um. Why did you take the technology
education class?
65 John: Because it was my fourth choice, and I'm past
citizenship, and I thought, well, I don't
really like any of the other electives, so
I'll just try this, so. And I ended up liking
it.
January 19, 1999
Me: Are things going pretty good for you in the
class?
John: Yeah.
Me: As far as your projects, I know Mr. H. wants
you to really work hard and do a good job.
It's pretty hard to do and especially in such
a short time. Are you having any problems
with your project?
John: Not a whole lot.
Me: Okay. I know from our last interview that you
really like computers and playing video
games. Can you tell me if you want to use
some of those ideas in your projects?
John: No. 'cause those are just computers and
games, and the class deals with hands-on
stuff.
66 Me: Okay» So the projects you are trying to do
are on topics that are not close to computers
and games?
John; Yeah, not really.
Me: Okay. Is that kind of hard to deal with?
John: No.
Me: Okay. Do you feel pretty comfortable using
the tools in the labs?
John: They're alright.
Me: Okay. Is there anything that you're having a
hard time with?
John: No.
Me: Okay. What about the assignments that Mr. H.
gives you. How do you think about those? Are
they more difficult than you would like to
have?
John: I think they're just right, you know. Not too
hard, not too easy.
Me: Okay. Can you give me an example of one of
the projects you did? And explain if it was
easy or difficult?
John: I can talk about the rockets. Some of those
two-liter bottles needed some wings that
would make them go higher. The parachute was
67 pretty hard to make. We did pretty good on
them until the end. I got the wings right
finally, but the parachute wouldn’t open. A
little trash bag parachute, or whatever you
call it. It just wouldn’t open. It went
really high, but didn’t stay in the air that
long. It was pretty fun.
Me; Okay. Would you consider that project easy or
hard?
John: A little of both really. Some aspects of it
were easy and some were hard.
Me: Like what?
John: Like makin’ the parachute was hard. Um,
gettin’ the design for the wings was a little
easy.
Me: Okay, so the parachute was the hardest thing.
Was it just making it, or was it getting it
to come out at the right time?
John: Well, sometimes it would come out and
sometimes it wouldn’t. I didn’t really make
it though. So I thought it was harder. Just
tryin’ to put it in the cap of the rocket,
you know.
6S Me: Okay. Now was your rocket one of the ones
that is still in the tree?
John: (he laughs) No.
The previous interviews demonstrated several things related to research procedures. First, the questions asked by the researcher need to have an organization that flows easily in a conversation. The questions cannot be preplanned, due to the nature of the discourse. Information about a setting and a situation are vital for the researcher to develop questions quickly during an interview. Second, I learned to relate questions to the immediate environment of the student, helping conversations flow toward abstract ideas.
Each student was interviewed at least four times during the course of the study. The first interview served to acquaint me with the student, to give them information about the study, including permission slips for parents to sign and return, and to allow the student and me to get to know each other. It also served to acquaint me with the environment and introduce me to ways of thinking about the experiences of these students in a technology education program. Subsequent interviews became easier to conduct.
There were several focus group interviews conducted during the study. These interviews consisted of separate
69 sessions for each class period, and involved between three and five students. Although these interviews posed similar challenges to individual interviews, they presented some unusual problems. First, I needed to keep the outspoken student, like Reed, Art, and Nick, from dominating their group. Second, I needed to encourage hesitant respondents, like Rick, Doug, and John, to participate. Third, I needed to keep the entire group involved in the process to ensure the fullest possible coverage of the topic (Fontana & Frey,
1994) .
The interviews were tape recorded if permission was granted by the subjects, and all of the interviews involved some form of written notes. Barring refusals and mechanical failures, the taping of interviews proceeded fairly well.
The tape recorder was not introduced until later in the series of interviews, since I wanted to establish a sense of trust before taping the students.
I was concerned that the tape recorder would influence the students to act unnatural in their school environment. I was aware that my presence as an outside observer could cause this problem. However, this fear did not materialize as my role as a participant observer seemed to greatly diminish the effect that the recorder had on the students.
70 All of the tapes were transcribed to make categorization and evidence analysis easier for me.
"Transcripts are the main 'data' of many interview studies"
(Bogdan & Biklen, 1992, p. 128). The recordings were indexed, dated, and filed. If tape recording was not preferred by the student, then handwritten notes were made.
The interviews were informal in structure. "They tend to resemble casual conversations, pursuing the intents of both the researcher and the respondent in turn. They are the type of interviews most common in qualitative research . . . The purpose of interviewing people is to find out what is on their mind - what they think or how they feel about something" (Fraenkel & Wallen, 1996, p. 385).
The initial interview was to determine if the student would be a participant in my study. After selection of the participants, I interviewed each of them one more time. This time the interview determined the actual at-risk severity of each student, and to l e a m their perceptions about technology education. Then, about five or six weeks into my observations, I interviewed each at-risk student again to learn the students' perceptions about technology education.
During the last week of my observations, I interviewed each student participant once more to learn their perceptions of
71 technology education. This was the procedural approach I enlisted within the interviewing process.
Participating
In participant observation research, the investigator is required to interact with the situation and the subjects in order to obtain and evaluate the evidence. During the course of the research, the investigators cannot allow themselves to become so involved with the situation that they jeopardize the study (Fine, 1994). In quantitative research, investigators in observation settings have been required to record evidence without the assistance of interacting with the students (Fraenkel & Wallen, 1996).
Although non-participation research reveals the overall picture of the situation, it does not provide additional information about the interactions that occur in the educational process (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).
During the entire research project, I was a full participant observer. If a student needed some assistance with an assignment, or asked me for help when they did not understand something, I tried my best to assist him or her by asking questions and directing them where they needed to go for answers. When it was lunch time, I left with the
72 students as often as possible, and went to the lunch room to eat. When the students were hanging out in the halls during breaks, I hung out with them and talked with their friends.
When the students were launching their bottle rockets, the students asked me to help them with the operation of the air compressor and launch pad. Following each day's activities and observations or interviews, I would go back to the university and try to make sense of the day's activities and the information obtained before returning to the classroom.
My attaciiments to the university and home prevented me from becoming too close to the students, and assisted me in reflecting about and focusing on the purpose of the study.
In a qualitative study, participating in the school environment affects the internal validity, or credibility, of a study. Credibility refers to "the match between researchers' categories and interpretations and what is actually true" (McMillan, 1996, p. 252). This is claimed through prolonged engagement; thick, rich description of the school environment; thorough delineation of the research process, and "unobtrusive entry and participation in the setting" (p. 252). By ensuring credibility, a more accurate report can be made. With each bit of evidence, I was able to view the subjects, environment, or situation in a different way. Although all the evidence was not reported but was
73 reduced in the report, the impressions of the total
experience were evident in the interpretations. The
interpretations were structured through the assistance of
effective participation. This participation contributed
greatly to the triangulation of evidence collection methods
within the study. According to Lincoln & Guba (1985)
Triangulation of data is crucially important in
naturalistic studies. As the study unfolds and
particular pieces of Information come to light,
steps should be taken to validate each against at
least one other source (for example, a second
interview) and/or a second method (for example, an
observation in addition to an interview). No
single item of information (unless coining from an
elite and unimpeachable source) should ever be
given serious consideration unless it can be
triangulated, (p. 283)
It was through participation with the students in as many aspects of their lives at school as possible that I was trying to understand their views. This was necessary to try and prevent trustworthiness problems in interpreting their viewpoints.
74 Document Analysis
I examined documents, such as lesson plans, curriculum
guides and guidelines, and school course outlines in order
to identify items focusing on the instruction and possible
retention of at-risk students in school. I also looked at
attendance records, grades, and course test scores to help
me to determine the background of each student and to
identify additional information about the student. According
to Patton (1990), this type of examination of documents
"yield excerpts, quotations . . . program records, and
. . official publications and reports" (p. 10). A copy of
all documents viewed by me were requested. The copies were
categorized, indexed, and filed. Access to "official
documents is readily available, although some are protected
as private or secret" (Bogdan & Biklen, 1992, p. 136).
Interviews, observations, and document analysis were
the primary evidence collection methods for my study.
Evaluating
The process of evaluating in a qualitative study is the constant reflection upon the obtained evidence and the present information. Evaluation started at the beginning of
75 the study, and continued through until the end of the study,
culminating in this report. There were several processes
that contributed to the evaluation of the evidence. This
included the relationship of the literature to the events.
There were three major phases of the evaluation: describing,
interpreting, and appraising (Bogdan & Biklen, 1992).
Relating Literature
The basis of the study was established by reviewing
literature closely related to the study, as explained in
chapter 1. In the review of literature chapter, my efforts
continued and expanded to encompass a wider field of enquiry
(Gay, 1996). Because this study focused on students' views
of technology education, I found a wealth of information
related to education, but almost none related to students'
views of education. I hope that this naturalistic study will
help to bridge the gap between literature and practice, and
point toward needed research (Gay, 1996).
Describing
The results of my study are found in chapters IV and V, with description being the bulk of chapter IV. The
76 descriptions in the study entailed pointing out the evident qualities in the classes, the curriculum, and in the student subjects themselves (McCutcheon, 1976b).
Throughout the study, I contacted key informants, who were at-risk students, within the technology education classroom, and focused on their views of technology and the technology education curriculum. In addition, I tried to choose the types of evidence that I thought would help me to best describe the culture of the class and the school. These things included the school philosophy and mission statements, various events, and the views from the students
I was observing. A savior for me was the utilization of the
NUD*IST 4.0 qualitative evidence analysis computer program, which allowed me to categorize and organize the evidence and search and recall key points of information on demand.
I tried to provide thick, rich description of the occurrences and interpretations I had encountered. As Geertz
(1973) stated.
If ethnography is thick description and
ethnographers those who are doing the describing,
then the determining question for any given
example of it, . . .is whether it sorts winks
from twitches and real winks from mimicked ones.
77 It is not against a body of uninterpreted data,
radically thinned descriptions that we must
measure the cogency of our explications, but
against the power of scientific imagination to
bring us into touch with the lives of strangers.
It is not worth, as Thoreau said, to go around the
world to count cats in Zanzibar, (p. 16)
During the process of writing this dissertation, I tried to choose and describe the details I observed with the students' interpretations in order to learn more about the students' experiences and views of technology.
Interpreting
In relating thick description to interpretation,
Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw (1995) stated:
At first glance, it might seem that the pursuit of
members' meanings is fundamentally a matter not of
writing but of what one does in the field - of
asking questions and of positioning oneself to
hear and observe others' concerns. Members'
meanings, however, are not pristine objects that
78 are simply "discovered." Rather, these meanings
are interpretive constructions assembled and
conveyed by the ethnographer, (p. 103)
Included in this report are the students' experiences, which
were observed, recorded, and interpreted. Geertz (1973)
explained that in interpreting the "native's point of view",
researchers should use thick, rich description to explain
the phenomenon, "fixing it into inspectable form" (p. 15) .
During the process of reporting, I used thick, rich
descriptions to show the evidence. Then, I interpreted the
evidence the best I could. Finally, I appraised the evidence
according to its value to the study.
Appraising
In the process of interpreting the evidence, I tried to
appraise them according to their value and quality as they
related to the at-risk students' view of technology
(McCutcheon, 1976b). In addition, I tried to analyze and
"sort out the structures of signification . . . and determine their social ground and import" (Geertz, 1973, p.
9). This was a part of the evidence analysis process.
79 Evidence Analysis
Evidence analysis is the process of systematically searching and arranging the interview transcripts, field notes, and other materials that I accumulate to increase my own understanding of them and to enable me to present to others what I have interpreted. "Analysis involves working with data, organizing them, breaking them down into manageable units, synthesizing them, searching for patterns, interpreting what is important and what is to be learned, and deciding what to tell others" (Bogdan & Biklen, 1992, p.
153) .
Since I was new to qualitative research, Bogdan &
Biklen (1992) suggested the use of analysis in the field approach to evidence analysis. They listed 10 steps:
• force yourself to make decisions that narrow the
study,
• force yourself to make decisions concerning the
type of the study you want to accomplish,
• develop analytic questions,
• plan evidence-collection sessions in light of what
you find in previous observations.
80 • write many 'observer's comments' about ideas you
generate,
• write memos to yourself about what you are
learning,
• try out ideas and thernes on subjects,
• begin exploring the literature while you are in
the field,
• play with metaphors, analogies, and concepts, and
• use visual devices (p. 154-164)
Bogdan and Biklen (1992) suggested that I speculate, vent ideas, and mark up the evidence with ideas in the margins of the field notes. They also suggested that evidence analysis continue into the writing stage of the study. The interviews, observations, and document analyses were categorized, indexed, dated, and filed.
Evidence Retrieval
I intended to compare the technology education curriculum and lesson plans, etc. with the evidence retrieved from observations, interviews, and documents to see if there was a commonality among them that can show if a
8t technology education program can assist at-risk students to remain in school.
The steps of evidence retrieval and analyses discussed by Dr. Lather in her Education Policy and Leadership 908 course were followed. These steps are outlined below:
• initial development of codes for note-taking; data
collection using codes; memo writing, theorizing
of ideas from codes and grounded from readings,
• additional data collection, focused from previous-
theorizing. Focusing and narrowing of coding; memo
writing, more theorizing of ideas from codes, and
grounded from readings,
• focused theoretical sampling. Look for data to
fill holes from previous data samples; memo
writing and theorizing of concepts,
• sorting of memos,
• integrating memos, and
• writing of patterns of the theoretical data.
This discussion of appraising and analyzing leads to the topic of validating. How do I let others know that I made the best possible interpretation?
82 Establishing Credibility
Credibility is defined by Mishler (1990) as the process(es) through which we make claims for and evaluate the 'trustworthiness' of reported observations, interpretations, and transferability. The essential criterion for such judgements is the degree to which we can rely on the concepts, methods, and inferences of a study, or tradition of inquiry, as the basis for our own theorizing and empirical research, (p. 419)
This study will be broadly validated through the judgement of its readers based upon the description, interpretation, and appraisal of the evidence. As Mishler
(1990) stated.
If our overall assessment of a study's
trustworthiness is high enough for us to act on
it, we are granting the findings a sufficient
degree of validity to invest our own time and
energy, and to put at risk our reputations as
competent investigators. As more and more
investigators act on this assumption and find that
it "works," the findings take on the aura of
83 objective facts; they become "well-entrenched" (p.
419) .
According to Scheurich (1996), this study will be validated by Lhe judgements of its readers based upon the description, interpretation, and appraisal of the evidence. Throughout the study, I followed specific procedures of validating the evidence. The information provided in this chapter reveals the credibility of the study through a description of what occurred (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).
Due to a lack of measurements in this study, there were no tests that could show measurements of trustworthiness and dependability. Instead, judgements about the accuracy of the evidence and the discussion of the procedures and the report rausL be made by the readers. This is called transferability
- how well the findings and presented evidence relates to the readers' situations (McMillan, 1996).
In reference to social science research, a combination of things contributed to the validation of the evidence.
Scheurich (1996) discussed credibility and transferability.
Transferability is established by the readers' assessment of the study. The rest of this section contains the provisions
I made to insure adequate criteria in order to judge the
S4 credibility and transferability of the evidence in this
study.
Professional Judgement
In support of the concept of professional judgement,
Guba and Lincoln (1981) mentioned that the naturalistic
inquirer should have considerable knowledge and experience within the field in which he or she is researching. The
researcher who has this knowledge and experience is more
likely to correctly evaluate the evidence.
Scheurich (1996) adds that having professional
judgement means: Did the researcher possess a knowledge of
students and classroom life? Was the researcher credible?
Did the researcher have the qualities of a professional in
education?
From my educational experiences in technology education, from my teaching experiences, and through
conducting this study, I believe that I became an expert in
technology education. This, however, will need to be assessed by the readers of this study.
My educational experiences include 16 years of exposure to education. Twelve of those years were involved with being a student and observing how I learned and how I was taught
85 in industrial arts (the predecessor of technology education). The remaining four years involved teaching. The combined experiences of being a student and a teacher have acquainted me with the education field.
Closely related to professional judgement is prolonged engagement in the field, and the method of establishing the credibility of the information (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). I spent hundreds of hours observing and interviewing students and their parents in the school, at home, and over the telephone in order to understand the situation. Over 250 hours were spent in the school as a participant observer from September 1998 through February 1999. An additional 25 hours were spent observing students in other settings, including watching basketball games in which they played and interviewing one of the students and their parents in their home. A number of visits were made to the school in March and April to validate interpretations. Observations were conducted during the third and fourth class periods in school. The interviews conducted in their homes were done in the evenings.
86 Triangulation
Lincoln and Guba (1985) relate triangulation to the nets of fishermen in the following way. "It is as though a fisherman were to use multiple nets, each of which had a complement of holes, but placed together so that the holes in one net were covered by intact portions of other nets"
(p. 306).
Another method to assist in the triangulation of evidence is member checking (Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Bogdan &
Biklen, 1992; Scheurich, 1996) and the establishing of credibility through patterns (Scheurich, 1996). Member checking and the establishment of patterns involve members of the study verifying the statements and interpretations made by the informants and the researcher, and using statements and interpretations of people to establish patterns. This is done to counteract the novelty effect and observer bias (Gay, 1996).
I performed validation of evidence at two levels during this study. First, I would use the statements of one child as the basis for a question for another child. Second, I would confirm a teacher's interpretation of a student's action with the student by asking him a question. To give an example, when the teacher told me that Doug had a hard time
87 working with tools because he didn't have much experience, I asked Doug if he had difficulty working with tools, and why that was the case. This was also verified through my observations of Doug as he worked in the laboratory.
I invited teachers and the principal to read the report in order to assess it for its trustworthiness (Bogdan &
Biklen, 1992). Also, once the writing process began, I observed the students again and spoke with them again in order to validate the information through the students.
Through this process, agreement was achieved between the report and the students' answers. In order to validate the information through member checking, I had each student review the information that was obtained through observations and interviews.
Through these methods, I was able to create triangulation from the evidence. As people read this report, the evidence of triangulation should be observed and evaluated. In other words, the students' comments should be similar or somewhat related.
Dependability
Assessing dependability, or reliability, is another method of validating a qualitative report. Fraenkel & Wallen
8S (1996) describe dependability as the consistency of the appropriateness, meaningfulness, and usefulness of inferences researchers make based on the evidence they collect, over time. This infers that the observed behaviors and information obtained should remain constant throughout the study (Fraenkel & Wallen, 1996; Lincoln & Guba, 1985).
The report should present as many of the events and actual words of the participants as possible (Bogdan &
Biklen, 1992; Fraenkel & Wallen, 1996). Bogdan & Taylor
(1975) stated that "Qualitative research yields descriptions and quotations that are rich in imagery and that can convey to a reader an understanding of what a situation or person is like" (p. 145) . Cottle (1977) goes on to elaborate that
"There is a great difference, after all, between merely saying that someone was talking to me about politics, and actually presenting the words of the person. Each way of recounting has its greater and lesser degrees of validity .
. ." (p. 17). This is a way of assessing the reliability of a qualitative study (Fraenkel & Wallen, 1996).
As I wrote the report, I tried to cite existing research related to the interpretations I made. I also utilized the phenomena and interpretations observed by other researchers to help support my interpretations.
89 Summary
Chapter three has been a discussion and review of the
procedures that were used in this study. Through describing
the specific procedures, it is hoped that the reader will be
able to understand how the study was done. The discussion of
those procedures allows the reader to understand the methodology of qualitative inquiry. Through this effort, the
reader may be able to assess the credibility and dependability of this study.
90 CHAPTER 3
THE CONTEXT
In this chapter, I intend to describe the environment, philosophy, and curriculum of the technology education program in order to provide the context of the situation. I am able to do this through the evidence provided by the students, teachers, aides, and principal.
The Environment
The study was conducted in one of fourteen high schools in a large school district in a suburban area of a large
Midwestern city in the United States. This high school was built in 1966 and has a maximum capacity of 1,600 students.
In recent years, the high school became a teaching academy, providing urban students with preservice support in the field of teacher education and college scholarships. The population of this city is approximately 700,000, with an
91 economy involving a major university, state government, and several large domestic and foreign corporations.
The residential area within close proximity to the high school has primarily side streets that interconnect to form a quiet neighborhood. The homes in the neighborhood are made of stucco, brick, and wood in two-story, ranch, or split level styles with front and back yards.
The regular school day begins at 7:30 a.m. and runs until 2:30 p.m., containing eight forty-one-minute class periods and one fifty-six-minute class period (home room).
However, on the first Monday of every month, each class is shortened by ten minutes, and the students are released early to provide time for a monthly faculty meeting at the end of the day. Each student is required to schedule eight class periods for study, and one class period for lunch
(usually fifth or sixth periods).
Following is an introduction to the school and the technology education program, as observed on the first day of observations. I tried to include the mood of the school in the description.
September 21, 1998 (observation)
The school building's front doors face north,
flanked on the east side by a baseball diamond, a
92 large green lawn area for soccer, and a moderately-sized football field with bleachers, scoreboard, and announcer box.
The interior of the school contains a large basketball/multipurpose gymnasium on the northeast corner next to the entrance. South and east of the gymnasium is the auditorium, used for large student gatherings, plays, and cultural events.
Directly west of the auditorium and across a hallway is the cafeteria. Directly adjacent to the entrance and north of the cafeteria are the administrative offices, counseling center, and nurse's station. Classrooms are located on the perimeter of the school on all sides. The teachers' lounge is located in the east section, between the gymnasium and the classrooms. The library is located upstairs, over the entrance.
As a person walks into the school, directly in front of them is a large showcase made of oak, displaying past athletic achievements and professional sports careers attained by students.
To the far left, located in a hallway that leads to the classrooms, are pictures of past class presidents and valedictorians. On the near left is
93 a bulletin board, located on the outside wall of
the gymnasium, highlighting the upcoming sports
events. To the right are administrative offices, which are usually bustling with activity.
In each of the classrooms, on a brown tile
floor, are neatly-placed desk-chairs that face a chalkboard; each board is green in color and
flanked on the right side by a bulletin board. The
right wall has a large bulletin board on which calendars, pictures, quotes, and posters are tacked and stapled. A cinder block wall, painted off-white, surrounds the class on the other two sides. One wall may contain windows if the classroom is located near the outer edge of the school. At the front of the room is a teacher's desk. Although all of the class rooms in the school look similar in size and shape, each one contains a unique style all its own, created by students and teacher.
The technology education classroom had its own unique personality. The students sit on stools facing long benches with a raised portion dividing the opposing benches. The teacher's desk is cluttered with signs of busy work, located at the
94 north end of the classroom, at one end of the long benches. The other end of the long benches butt up against the exterior wall. Directly opposite the teacher's desk is the rear exit door.
The floor was made of 2-inch lengths of oak
2X4s that were placed on one end and fitted together very tightly to make a very smooth walking surface. It was very comfortable to walk on and did not make me tired as I stood on it for over an hour.
There were shelves about eye level, when standing, on every wall in the room. Each shelf had objects related to one of the four areas of technology. There were small wooden trucks about 6 inches high, 12 inches long, and 5 inches wide.
Other objects included a wooden catapult with wheels, a solar cooker made from a box and some foil, a skateboard, airplanes, X-wing airplane, metal box, several coffee grinders, eind a train engine made from wood and a pop can.
The room smelled like oak wood and paper. It was laid out in such a way so that the teacher could see all the students and the students could see the teacher.
95 The chalkboard hanging on the wall behind the teacher's desk had the words "Technology is
Exciting 1" written on it in the top right c o m e r
in large, bold letters. In the left portion of the chalkboard were written the formulas "Velocity =
Distance/Time, Acceleration = Change in velocity/Time, Force = Mass X Acceleration." Along with the formulas was a drawing of an inverted 20 ounce plastic bottle with wings attached to the portion closest to the opening.
Students were busily working on projects.
These projects were plastic 20 ounce bottles. The students were cutting triangular shapes out of cardboard and gluing or taping them onto the bottles to form wings.
I went into the back of the lab, where I found Mr. H. outside with the rest of the class, launching water bottle rockets. He had a long extension cord going from an outlet in the lab to an air compressor outside. This air compressor had a hose going to a launching device. This device had a string attached to a door lock hinge-
Attached to the lock hinge was a chain that also connected to a sliding piece of metal with a "U"
96 cut out of the other side. This piece of metal was positioned in two opposite and parallel pieces of wood with a groove in them so the metal could slide freely. When the string was pulled, it moved the door lock hinge, which in turn pulled the chain, which was attached to the piece of metal, and pulled the metal piece in the grooved wood.
When you released the string, two springs attached to the metal piece and the wood pieces pulled the metal piece back to the resting position.
Beneath this metal piece was a machined nozzle with a groove which held a black rubber 0- ring. This nozzle had an attachment that connected to the air hose. When the air compressor was turned on, the air was forced through the air hose to the nozzle. A 20-ounce plastic beverage bottle could be placed so the mouth of the bottle was over the nozzle and pressed the 0-ring firmly inside its neck. Then the metal piece could be slid back so the "U" shaped notch surrounded the neck of the bottle and contacted the plastic lip around the base of the bottle's neck, preventing the bottle from coming off when air pressure was increased. As the air was flowing, it would move
97 through the nozzle and into the plastic bottle.
The air compressor would increase the air pressure
inside the bottle to 80 pounds per square inch
(psi) before Mr. Harmon told one of the students
to pull the string, which released the bottle and
sent it flying skyward.
The students seemed to be very excited and
enthusiastic about working with the project. They
would pour some water into the bottle to be
launched, measure the amount that was in the
bottle, adjust the level by pouring some out or
adding more, and then place the bottle over the
nozzle and move the metal piece over the bottle's
neck to prevent it from coming off. When the
bottle was launched, the students would all
exclaim, "Wow! That went really high!" and would
subsequently talk and joke with each other about
how high it went.
The technology education program in the high school was one of the best equipped schools in the district. The labs included a woodworking lab, a drafting lab, and a metal lab.
98 October 5, 1998 (observation)
The woodworking lab equipment included a table
saw, two band saws, three scroll saws, a disc/belt
Sander, two drill presses, a planer, a jointer,
and three lathes. A securable cabinet contained
hand and power tools for working with wood.
The drafting lab consisted of three long
bench tables for manual drawing. There was one
incline drafting table with arm, reserved for the
instructor's use. Lining the perimeter of the room
were 50 computers, used for Computer Assisted
Drafting (CAD).
The metal lab contained a large hand tool
cabinet at the south end of the room. Along the
west and north walls were benches for working on
small metal projects. Along the East wall were
five metal lathes. A foundry area was in the
southeast corner of the room. Located in the
center of the room were two long work benches,
breaks, shears, bench punches, benders, metal band
saws, and drill presses.
As I recall, my feelings on the first day included excitement, anxiety, and curiosity. I was excited because I
99 had finally begun a study that I had waited several years to perform. I felt anxious because I did not know how the teachers and students would react to my presence or my desire to study them. Finally, I was curious to l e a m about the answers to the questions of my study. All of these things were eventually pacified. The first thing I encountered in the school and the technology education program was their philosophies.
The Philosophy
I will first describe evidences and interpretations regarding the school's philosophy. Then I will describe the technology education program's philosophy.
School Philosophy
As a public education facility, the high school is committed to providing an education to students within the school district who are assigned to or who apply to the high school. Specifically, the high school has goals focused on empowering the children to function effectively in the society in which they will live. Parents and students are reminded of the philosophy of the staff and the school in the Student
lOO Handbook (1997), in interviews, and in the daily interaction with the school. "Through our doors lie [sic] opportunities for you to continue the basics and, at the same time, broaden your education into the areas of your talents and abilities, thereby laying a solid foundation for your future" (Student Handbook. 1997, p. 4).
The district goals helped to guide the philosophy of the school. These goals are to
• Increase student achievement,
• Operate an efficient and effective organization,
and
• Raise the hope, trust, & confidence in the . . .
schools (name of school district omitted by
author). (Student Handbook, 1997, p. 1)
The following are things I observed toward the beginning of the study. They reflect the philosophy and mood of the school.
October 7, 1998 (observation)
It is the morning of October 7, 1998. As I walked
up to the school, I noticed several students
standing at the far left corner of the building.
101 One of them has a cigarette in his hand, and hides
it quickly when he notices me looking at him.
I walk through the front entrance doors to
find three girls talking and giggling as they walk
through the foyer. Suddenly they stop and look
surprisingly at a man in a suit walking toward
them. He is the principal. He says, "Good morning
ladies." The students respond with soft voices,
"Good morning (principal)." The principal stops
and asks the girls, "Where are you supposed to be
right now?" One of the girls responds, "We went to
the ladies room, and now we are returning to Mr.
Gordon's class." The principal responds "Well,
let's get to class and stay out of the halls." The
girls nod in agreement and hustle down the
hallway.
An interview I conducted with one of the students helped to provide more information about how students view the philosophy of the school.
102 December 1, 1998 (interview)
Me: Okay. Urn. What do you think will stay
with you from your experiences in
school?
Art: (pause) Urn. This probably will 'cause if I
get a house I'm gonna have to know how to fix
something 'cause I probably won't have the
money to pay the repair guy. Basically
everything I learn in high school will
probably stay with me the rest of my life.
The mission statement of the school supports the philosophy of the staff. This mission statement reads as follows (the name of the school was omitted to protect the identity of those involved with the study).
The staff of [anytown] high school is committed to
creating an atmosphere that promotes high
expectations and successful achievements among its
student body; meeting the students' diverse
educational needs while encouraging and
stimulating creative and critical thinking and
developing positive, strong interpersonal skills
in our students which are needed for the
103 transition from school to career. (Student
Handbook, 1997, p. 2)
The philosophy about the purpose of education in this high school seems to be fairly similarly interpreted by both students and staff in the school. Clues from the principal, teachers, students, and parents seem to show some corroboration.
The principal of the high school places the purpose of education in the realms of learning how to learn and obtaining the necessary knowledge and skills to live in society. Although the principal seems to be extremely strict, he really does care about the students in this school. In a discussion with him prior to the study, I learned more about his philosophy.
September 16, 1999 (interview)
The students here at this school come from the
community, with a few being bused in from other
areas. Most of them come from academically-
challenged homes, homes that have not had much
education. These students are looking for
something they can call their own, something that
they can use to lift themselves out of their
104 situation, or at least cope with it as best they
can. It is our purpose to help these students to
become the best that they can be, and help them
attain goals that many of their parents may have
only dreamed of.
In interviews with the teachers, they echo the same
ideas as the principal. When talking with a teacher of
special education students, that teacher said she felt
exhausted at the end of the day, because the students
demanded so much attention. "They want to learn so much, and
they have so much more energy than I do, that by the end of
the day, I am exhausted."
In an interview with the technology education teacher,
he said that many of his students are at risk. "They tend to demand more time and energy to instruct and control than other students, but they also are some of the brightest
students in my classes."
In observing the teachers as they worked with the students, I learned that they really do care about the students, and they worked very hard to help them learn. In an interview with a student, he had a comment about a teacher in the school.
105 December 3, 1998 (interview)
Me: What do you think about this program?
Henry: It's, like, real good, especially if I become
a mechanical engineer. See, it's, like,
showin' me, like, certain stuff, like, that's
important for the future. Yeah, it's real
good. Mr. H. is a real good teacher. 'Cause
he, like, makes leamin' fun.
Evaluations of students at the high school are performed using standard letter grades on a 4.00 scale.
Honors classes are graded on a 5.00 scale. According to the teachers and the principal, every student who attends classes on a regular basis should receive a passing grade.
All students should receive grades that reflect their performance in class.
When asked why they are in school, students responded that they were there to l e a m about the things they would need in life, and about how to work in society. Below is an interview I had with a student about their performance in class.
106 December 3, 1998 (interview)
Me: Urn. (Pause) Okay. In the class here, is
there anything that helped you to think
differently about the school?
Doug: (pause) Uh (pause) Well, I learned now . . .
like I said, I really didn't want to come
here, but now that I came. I'm really glad. I
learned that askin' for help is not such a
bad idea. Uh. I'm sorta gettin' there.
Me: Okay. Getting where?
Doug: Well, like I said. My goal is to graduate
from high school, go to college, you know,
and get a job.
In the mission statement of the school, the emphasis seems to be on teaching the students "creative and critical thinking and developing positive, strong interpersonal skills in our students which are needed for the transition from school to career" (Student Handbook, 1997, p. 2). It would appear that the school is trying to teach the students the basic interpersonal and thinking skills they need to obtain a job when they graduate.
From a general perspective, it would appear that the philosophy of the school is being supported by students and
107 teachers. Both parties are focused on the future careers of
the students.
The students, teachers, and principal shape the
philosophy of the school. The specific goals stated in the
philosophy and mission statement serve as forces that shape
the social control of the school.
Technology Education Program Philosophy
The philosophy of the technology education program
seemed to be aligned with the philosophy of the school and
with technology education's philosophy, and reflects the
philosophy established by the Industrial Arts Curriculum
Project (Towers, Lux, & Ray, 1966). This philosophy was
defined by Bonser & Mossman (1923), who said that it is the
"study of the changes made by man in the forms of materials
to increase their values, and of the problems of life
related to these changes" (p. 5). Although this philosophy
originally defined industrial arts, it is still applicable
to technology education (Foster, 1994).
The teacher seemed focused on teaching the students
about technology so that they can utilize the information as
life skills. In a discussion with the teacher, he mentioned that "I want the students to understand the basics about
108 drafting and metalwork, and woodworking and electricity so that when they encounter it in life, they can handle the problem without turning to someone else for help"
(observation, October 6, 1998).
The students seemed to reflect that philosophy in their behaviors and in the interviews. However, they also seemed to think that the class is focused on teaching them the basic skills required in a variety of industrial fields. The following are interviews with students, showing the two sides to their view of the philosophy of the technology education program.
January 7, 1999 (group interview)
Me: Okay. I noticed from interviews with you,
that some of you mentioned that this class
would help you to build a house or fix a car,
or things like that. You would be able to do
something that you normally would not be able
to do. Is this the way you still think about
this?
Reed: It saves lives.
Me: Okay. How is that?
Reed: Well, if you know this stuff, then you can
wire a house correctly or build a house
109 correctly so that it doesn't cause a fire or
fall and kill someone.
Me: Okay. (Pause) What are some things that you
think this program could give you that the
school doesn't give you?
Art : Experience.
Me: Okay. How.
Art: You can learn how to do work that is
necessary in the real world. You can learn
how to make things out of metal and wood.
Me: Why do you think that's important?
Art: I'm gonna buy a house some day, and I don't
want to call someone every time somethin'
gets broke.
December 10, 1998 (interview)
Me: So where do you see yourself in 15 years?
Rick: I don't know, probably end up sittin' at
a desk.
Me: So you're going to be a drafter?
Rick: I'd like to be like my dad, and draw
buildings and things, and then be able to go
out to the site and see it being built.
no January 11, 1999 (group interview)
Me: Okay. One more question. What are you guys
going to be doing in 15 years?
Price: Architect.
John: Astronomy (Astronomer).
Nick: I'll probably do something with computers and
stuff.
Price: I'll probably play football for NFL on side,
and do Archi . . . Archi . . . architecture.
John: And then you woke up, right?
It would appear that the philosophy of the technology education program is aligned with the school's philosophy of teaching students to handle life's challenges, and is being upheld by the teacher as a method of teaching life skills to the students. The students viewed the program as giving them life skills. However, the students also viewed the program as a way of learning skills that can lead to employment when they leave high school.
Ill The Curriculum
The first part of this section explains the school's curriculum. The second part explains the technology education program's curriculum.
The School Curriculum
The school's curriculum seems to emphasize learning through textbooks and lectures. Through observations, I noticed most students have books for almost every academic class. These classes include mathematics, science, history, and literature. I did not learn all the textbooks available in the school, since I was primarily concerned with the technology education curriculum. The following journal entry and subsequent conversation with Doug about his books helped to describe the texts.
December 16, 1998 (observation)
Doug seemed to be doing a little better. He has
more enthusiasm about getting the work done. I
have noticed that his history and math books are
in very poor condition now. When I first came, I
noticed that they were new. I asked him how he was
112 doing in those classes, and he said his history
class was okay, but the math class was not doing
very well. The math book seemed to be less damaged
than the history book, indicating a usage pattern.
February 23, 1999 (interview)
Me: So how are the rest of your classes coming?
Doug: (With a big grin on his face) I'm doing very
well in math.
Me: Oh really? That's great! Is that in this
class (Pointing to the math text book)?
Doug: Yeah. Whenever the teacher asks a question.
I'm shouting out the answers as fast as I
can, beating everyone else. Everyone else is
very surprised that I can answer them.
The school maintains a firm stance on the importance of learning the basics. As described in the district goals that were adapted by the school, under the first goal of
"increase student achievement" are three sub-goals. These goals are
every student by the third grade will read at or
above grade level,
113 every student by the ninth grade will be ready for
algebra, and
every graduate of our district will have
participated in an internship program and know how
to use technology for lifelong learning, fStudent
Handbook. 1997, p. 1)
The school seems to focus on the basics, keeping their curriculum to a bare minimum. The required areas are social studies, math, language arts, science, and physical education. The students' schedules allow for a few electives. These electives include music, art, drama, family and consumer science, career education, honors courses, and technology education.
As stated before, students are required to enroll in eight periods or classes and one lunch period per day. These periods or classes usually include required courses and elective courses. A student may also enroll in one or more study hall periods, which do not count for credit. The freshmen and sophomore students typically have more required courses than electives per semester, and the juniors and seniors have more elective classes than required classes, as described in the interview below.
114 December 10, 1998 (interview)
Me: What do you think about this class?
Rick: I like it very much.
Me: Okay. Can you tell me why you like it?
Rick: (pause) 'cause they (the school) don't have
anything that I like. I's s'pose [sic] to
pick two like um . . . I don't know what you
call them . . . two. . . .
Me: You mean two electives?
Rick: Yeah, that's it. Electives.
Me: So you chose this course?
Rick: Not really, I didn't pick them. I chose study
hall for them, but they put me in this and
theater. And this I like but theater I don't.
I still have it (theater).
The Technology Education Program Curriculum
The curriculum of the technology education program at the high school was based primarily on the publications that resulted from the Industrial Arts Curriculum Project (lACP)
(Towers, Lux, & Ray, 1966) and the results of the Jackson's
Mill Industrial Arts Curriculum Theory document by Snyder &
Hales (1981). The program's curriculum focused on the areas
115 of construction, manufacturing, power/energy/transportation, and communication.
The curriculum of the technology education program focused on hands-on activities that helped students learn the material presented to them. In addition, it was noted during the study that the curriculum helped reinforce mathematic and science principles learned in other classes.
This phenomenon has been documented not only in technology education literature (LaPorte & Sanders, 1995), but also in the literature related to other academic areas as well
(Simon, 1991; Tooke, Hyatt, Leigh, Snyder, & Borda, 1992).
Most of the units of study involve both hands-on and textbook work. With every activity, there is a written paper activity and a lab activity. Each unit is completed with a test. In addition, weekly quizzes are given to students to assist them with remembering the material and their test- taking skills. Below are two interviews that describe the work.
December 10, 1998 (interview)
Me: Okay. Do you think this class is easier
or harder than your other classes?
Rick: (pause) Well, it’s a little harder. Like, the
measurement test, where you gotta, like,
116 multiply the denominator of a fraction to
find half of the fraction, I have difficulty
doing that. I think that's one of the hard
things for me.
November 30, 1998
Me: Do you play basketball right now?
Price: Naw, I got grades (meaning he needs to
improve his grades before he can be
eligible). I got bad grades this last
quarter.
Me: So you're hoping to get better grades this
quarter so you can play?
Price: I'm tryin'. I gotta have at least a 'A' in
this class, so I can play baseball.
Me: I saw you did very well on last week's test
(their weekly quiz)
Price: I didn't do that good. I didn't even remember
that test, it's so long ago (before
Thanksgiving break).
The program has ample resources in textbooks to support the curriculum. The textbooks include Mechanical Drawing
(French, Svensen, Hensel, & Urbanick, 1985), Enercry. Power.
117 & Transportation Technology (Bohn, MacDonald, Fales, &
Kuetemeyer, 1986), Metalwork; Technology & Practice (Repp &
McCarthy, 1989), M o d e m Woodworking (Wagner & Kicklighter,
1986), and Understanding electricity and electronics (Buban
& Schmitt, 1982).
The Technology Education Program Lessons
The lessons in both the power/energy/transportation class and the technology education survey class were made of two parts. First, the students learned material through books, lectures, and tests. This material was revisited several times during the quarter so the students could have time to ingest the information.
Second, the students learned through hands-on laboratory activities. These activities focused on reinforcing the information they learned from the textbooks and lectures. The activities also gave the students an opportunity to interact with the curriculum (Dewey, 1900).
The students in the power/energy/transportation course began the year by studying electricity and basic circuit design. They designed, built, and tested household electrical circuits during the first quarter. The students
118 learned about the properties of electricity, and the level
of safety required during all phases of the project.
October 1, 1998 (observation)
The students are working in groups of two, trying
to assemble a basic series and parallel electrical
circuit using residential-wiring electrical
supplies. Although they seem to have mastered
where to place the ground, hot, and common leads,
the students seem to be struggling with the
concepts of series and parallel circuits. One
student asked the instructor, "is this right?" The
instructor replied, "I don't know, why don't you
test it and find out? If it works, then it's
right. If it don't, then you know you have more
work to do."
During the second quarter, the lessons initially involved building and testing water bottle rockets. The students learned the principles of jet propulsion and pressure, basic flight characteristics, wind resistance, and the terminology involved with rocketry. The rockets were built using 20 ounce plastic bottles that had cardboard duct-taped to the sides. These bottles were then filled
119 partially with water. The spout end was placed over a machined nozzle and locked into place with a piece of sheet metal. Then air pressure was injected into the bottle through a hole in the center of the nozzle. When the air pressure was maximized, the sheet metal was quickly removed, allowing the bottle to fly into the air, propelled by the force of the compressed air rushing out of the bottle neck.
The students were given assignments to utilize the least amount of air pressure and the least amount of water possible while maintaining the highest zenith possible. They were also given extra points for length of time in the air.
The second quarter also included several small projects. These were a syringe robot, a report on the year
2000 computer crisis, and a vehicle or device which performed work utilizing two of the six simple machines, as discussed in the text by Bohn, MacDonald, Fales, &
Kuetemeyer (1986).
The third quarter lessons involved designing and building CO, cars. These cars, made of pine, were to be made following a detailed list of strict specifications that explained such things as maximum vehicle weight, maximum length, maximum height, etc.
During the fourth quarter, the students learned about the internal combustion engine. They learned the theory
120 first, and then they used their knowledge to rebuild a small gasoline engine. About three times per quarter, the technology education teacher would invite the disabled students and their teachers to join the lab activities. This allowed the disabled students to experience the technology education curriculum and learn about technology.
In the beginning class, named "technology education survey," the students studied basic construction, manufacturing processes, and communication. The power/energy/ transportation sector was reserved for a second-year course by that name. In the construction area, the students began by learning about drafting. After they mastered the skills of drafting, they were assigned to create the drawings for a "dream house." The house drawings were complete with call-outs on details like bay windows, garages, and door ways. Due to a lack of funding and time, the students were unable to build scale models of these houses.
Following the unit on drafting, the students studied a unit on manufacturing materials and processes. In this unit, the students made small metal objects using hand punches, drills, aviation snips, the miter sheer, and the break.
These activities helped the students to understand the basic shearing, bending, and stress properties of metal, and
121 various ways to shape metal. The students were given a demonstration on the foundry process, but were not allowed to experience the process due to the risk involved. The focus of the unit was on metals and metal working. Other materials would be experienced by the students in later quarters.
During the third quarter, the students studied woodworking materials and processes. After two weeks of instruction and safety tests, the students were allowed to begin work on a book shelf, a model car, or a miniature hand-powered oil rig. This unit emphasized safety, and various processes of forming and shaping wood to make an end product.
The final quarter involved students learning about electricity. The students were first instructed regarding the theory and properties, basic circuitry, various components, and safety with regard to electricity. Then, the students were given assignments for making various simple circuits and testing them for workability.
Throughout the study, I observed the students as they interacted with the lessons and the curriculum. Interviews were also performed to support the observations and the evidence from teachers.
122 October 29, 1999 (lesson)
The students in the technology education survey course are busy working on a final drafting project. This project includes the scale drawings of a dream house, complete with detailed call-outs and cost estimates. The students seem to like the unit very much. They are concentrating on the project as if it were due tomorrow.
December 3, 1998 (interview)
Me: In the past year, have you learned
anything in technology education that
helped you to see things in school
differently?
Henry: (pause) yeah, see, that time that we,
like, got to work with the
Disabled/handicapped (DH) kids, like,
when I was workin* with them, see, it,
like, changed my whole point of view
toward them, 'cause, see, these kids was
kinda smart, like, kinda like, really
interested in, like, what we were
interested in - rockets. Yeah. So it
kinda, like, showed me that they're not,
123 like, that different. I mean, they’re
different, but they're not, like, all
people make them to be. See, like, some
people make fun of them, but me, I never
make fun of them. See, I be tellin' my
friends that they’s just like us. They's
just like us.
Me: Okay. Um. Has this program helped to
change the way you see the world?
Henry: Yeah. (Pause) To see the way things
work, yeah.
Me: Okay. Can you explain more about that?
Henry: Yeah. ’Cause, see, industrial tech,
like, shows you, like, um, like, that
energy and power is, like, really
important to the world. 'Cause, like, in
the year 2000 (Y2K), see the days is
gonna be back to zero and this is gonna
screw up a lot of stuff. Like, you might
be without energy or somethin’. Yeah,
see, and this class is, like, showin*
me, like, to see what we should be
doin’, like, to prevent that from
happenin’. Stuff like that. ’Cause we
124 should be, like, ready for it. Just all
that kind of stuff. That's about it.
Henry was very interested in rocketry and the year 2000
(Y2K) computer problem. This interest stems from his concern for the future, and appears to be linked to the students' general desires to study current technology. He was also very interested in helping the handicapped/disabled students to learn about technology. This experience gave Henry an entirely different view of how people with disabilities l e a m and interact with technology and people. In an interview with Rick, he mentioned that drawing skills could assist someone to design and plan their own house.
January 7, 1999 (interview)
Me: Okay. (Pause) What are some things that
you think this program could give you
that the school doesn't give you?
Rick: Well, if you're gonna buy a house or
somethin', instead of just buyin' like
an old house, you can draw the house you
want to build.
125 Rick believed that the skills of drawing were important life skills to him, since he lives in an older home with his recently-remarried mother and younger brother, and would like to design and build a home for his mother to live in.
Rick performed very well during the drafting lessons. The extent of his knowledge of drafting before taking the course was that his uncle used drafting at his place of work.
Rick's assignments and final project were the best in the class.
When asked what they thought of the technology education class. Art, Reed, and Rick compared the class to other classes in school. They had the following to say.
January 7, 1999 (group interview)
Me: What do you think of this class?
Art: Different.
Me: Different? How?
Art: It's colder (The room is cold, because
it is very big, and has large windows
that face the outside. We all laugh,
because we all felt cold)
Reed: It's more fun.
Me: More fun? Okay.
126 Rick: You don't get to sleep in here
{interrupted by Art)
Art: More hands-on stuff. Not so much book
work.
Throughout the study, the students indicated that they preferred to learn through hands-on methods. According to
Jackson-Allen & Christenberry (1994), as mentioned in the review of literature, at-risk students were found to perform better and learn material easier through hands-on activities. When I asked Art why he said that the class was different, he clarified it by saying that the curriculum focused on "hands-on stuff" and made it easier to learn the material in the technology education class. In another interview. Art mentioned that he enjoys working with his hands.
December 1, 1998 (interview)
Me: What do you think about this class?
Art: (no hesitation) I like it.
Me: You do? Why?
Art: 'Cause it's like showin' me like a new
way to look at things.
127 Reed mentioned that the technology education course was more enjoyable than the other classes. This comment was supported by Rick, who said that he doesn't sleep in class because you are constantly moving around. The curriculum is focused on using a person's entire body in the learning process.
Students not only use their hands and eyes to write and to draw, but they also use their hands and arms to perform activities that help them learn the processes of forming and shaping materials. Some of these activities require that the student apply pressure to a hammer that is used to strike a chisel. This pressure needs to be controlled in such a way that the hammer is guided directly to the chisel head, and drives the chisel only the distance that is required
(Ericson, 1946). This concept is also supported by the following interviews with Nick and Art.
December 1, 1998 (interview)
Me: How do you think the industrial tech
classes compare to other school classes?
Nick: (pause) Dim. It's probably the best class
here. You know, I like this class,
'cause you get a lot of hainds-on
experience. It's not one of those
classes where they just tell you to look
128 at the book and it shows you how to do
it, you know. It’s not the kind of class
where you sit there and it shows you in
a book how to do it, and you just sit
there and look at it. You get up and you
make stuff, and you mess with things and
tools. You know, you have fun in this
class! This is a cool class!
December 1, 1998 (interview)
Me: Alright. Are there things that this
class gives you that are important to
you?
Art: (pause) I think it’s probably help my
coordination out. And, like I said, I
like workin' with my hands. That’s
pretty much it.
Me: Okay. So how does this class help you
with your coordination?
Art: (pause) ’cause I have to like see like
where I might drill a hole or use a
center punch to make a dent so that I
know where to drill or knowin’ exactly
like where to cut, stuff like
129 In the following interview, John discussed the
differences between the regular school curriculum and the
curriculum in the technology education class.
November 30, 1998 (interview)
Me: Okay. Are there things that you think
you learned in this class that you could
not have learned in the regular school
classes?
John: Well (pause) You know, we do more things
like . . . special curricular or
whatever. I think we do more of that
than just text book and what we have to
do normally. And I think this class is
better than that system.
According to John, the hands-on methods incorporated in the
technology education classes were more suited for his style
of learning. The observations of his performance in the
class indicate that he does not learn from books as well as
he learns from hands-on activities. During one unit, the power-energy class was given the assignment to incorporate
two of the six simple machines in a device that would perform some kind of work. After looking at the book for
130 almost two days, John had no idea how to begin. At this
point, Mr. H. told John, "Just go out in the lab and start
looking at the objects made by previous classes, and looking
at the materials available to you. You will be inspired, I
am sure." After one day in the laboratory, working with the
materials and looking at the previous projects, John and his
partner designed a windmill that could be cranked by hand.
This is just a sample of the evidence regarding the
lessons. Although there were assignments given that required
reading, writing, and mathematical calculations, it appears
that the students in the study preferred learning through
hands-on activities.
Art stated that he liked working with his hands, and
learning through hands-on activities. This was his best method for learning both concrete and abstract concepts.
This method tended to benefit the other students in the
study as well.
Nick expressed his desire to learn through hands-on
activities, and how interested he was in the technology education class because of the things he learned and the hands-on activities with which he was involved.
John summed up the primary focus of this subsection.
Book work is supplemented in the technology education
131 program with hands-on laboratory activities that help the
student to visualize the concepts learned in the class room.
In relation to hands-on learning theory, the previous
observations and student comments speak volumes about its
utilization in education. The at-risk students in this study
unanimously preferred learning through a hands-on curriculum
than learning through the traditional book-and-lecture
lessons that predominate education (Hunt, 1995). The
students also enjoyed learning about and acquiring the life
skills they will need for the future.
The previous overview of the curriculum of the school
and the technology education program influenced my thinking
about the hidden curriculum. How do students react to and
interpret their daily classes? What courses do they value
more than others, and how would they consider changing the
curriculum if it were possible? What extracurricular
activities and home experiences affected their school work?
Therefore, I will discuss these questions in the following
sections.
Adapting to the Curriculum
In writing about how the students in the technology education program adapt to the curriculum, I tried to l e a m
132 what the students did in the school and other classes, and in the technology education program. Much of the evidence came from observations and interviews.
March 2, 1999 (observation)
During second period, I observed Doug in his
social studies course. He mentioned in the
interviews that he really does not like this class
because he cannot remember facts and dates very
well. I did notice while watching him that he was
very nervous. While listening to the teacher, his
right leg was bouncing up and down, and he was
biting his pencil.
February 23, 1999 (interview)
Me: So how are the rest of your classes coming?
Doug: (With a big grin on his face) I'm doing very
well in math.
Me: Oh really? That's great 1 Is that in this
class? (Pointing to the math text book)
Doug: Yeah. Whenever the teacher asks a question.
I'm shouting out the answers as fast as I
can, beating everyone else. Everyone else is
very surprised that I can answer them.
133 Me: Oh really? What kind of questions are they?
Doug: Oh, questions about areas, dimensions, and
figures. Stuff like that.
Me: So what helped you to do so well in the math
class?
Doug: Well, I'll tell you (looking very confident).
It was this class.
Me: Oh really? This class helped you with your
math?
Doug: Yeah. See, it's the drawing and drafting
stuff that helped me to know the answers to
those math questions.
Me: Oh, that's great. So have you told Mr. H.
about it?
Doug: Naw. I'm too afraid to.
Me: Well, anyway, I think that's great. I'm proud
of you. You are doing very well in school.
Doug: Yeah, and it all came from this class. I'm
gonna get A's this quarterI
December 1, 1998 (interview)
Me: Okay. Um. How would you compare this class to
your other school classes?
134 Art: (pause) This is basically like a fun class
but you're learnin' at the same time. Most
other classes you gotta like sit and listen
to the teacher talk and then they assign you
some work and you do it. That's pretty much
it. But in this class you get to work,
especially, like, with problem solving.
December 1, 1998 (interview)
Me: Okay. Do you think this class is the same or
different from other school classes?
Art: It's pretty much different.
Me: Okay. How?
Art: (pause) 'cause the work in the other classes,
they just keep teachin' you the same thing
like over and over, 'cept for like different
ways of teacin* it. But like in this class,
like, I kinda l e a m somethin' new every day.
And that's about it.
It would appear that the students view other classes in school to be very different than the technology education class. They also expressed their views regarding how they felt about the other classes. Many of these views focused on
135 comparing the technology education class with the other school subjects. They discussed about excitement and boredom, motivation, and reasons why they enrolled in the classes. Doug expressed his excitement about successes in math class, and related the changes to work he did in the technology education class.
With regard to the things the students were doing in the technology education program, I was able to obtain evidence through observations and interviews. Examples of these are listed below.
October 5, 1998 (observation of beginning class)
They had just finished making isometric drawings
of objects and were working on drawing the
orthographic views (three views) of the objects.
These objects were on a sheet of paper that each
student received. In addition, the same objects
were available in three dimensions - created from
wood - so the students could handle them and look
at them from different angles.
October 6, 1998 (observations of beginning class)
When I was observing yesterday and today, I
noticed that Rick did quite well with his drawings
136 once he understood the ideas and the concepts. He did a lot of work today. He says he enjoys this kind of work, but that he does not do well in his other classes. Only in technology education.
Yesterday he did not have a pencil, so he did not do anything. I was able to show him a few drawings and sketches with a pen and let him take the ideas home and practice them.
January 7, 1999 (group interview)
Me: Okay. So you want to do some work in here.
Art?
Art: Yeah. I like wood. I don't like workin' with
metal. Metal is dirty and cuts my hands. (The
class is working on metal projects now.)
Me: Yes, I know what you mean. I believe they
have a woods class next year, don't they?
Reed: Yeah, they do. You have to take Survey of
Industrial Tech (this class) first before you
can take the woods or metals class. They
don't have a metals class this Winter, 'cause
they didn't have enough students sign up for
it.
137 Me: Oh. I see. So after this class, you can take
the woods class?
Reed: Yeah, or the metals class.
December 3, 1998 (group interview)
Me: So anyway, what do you think will be the
most important thing for you to learn
from this program?
Henry: (pause) Well, it's like, we really only did,
like, three things - the electrical socket,
switch, & outlet, the water bottle rockets,
and the syringe-operated robotic arm. But,
see, out of those three. I'd have to say
that, like, the arm is what I'd learn the
most from. 'Cause it, like, showed me, like,
see, how hydraulics really work. Like, it
showed me that. Yeah. So I'd have to say the
arm.
The students in the beginning class studied a variety of units. One unit was electricity. Another unit was drafting.
Other units included woodworking and metalworking. Each unit consisted of nine weeks of instruction and lab work. It would appear that the students understand the basic scope
138 and sequence of the units of study. They also were vocal in their opinions about the different units, explaining which units they liked and which they disliked, and in which units they learned the most.
The students also tried to adapt the curriculum to their own needs. Rick really enjoys drafting and creating drawings on a blank sheet of grid paper, but he does not do well in his other subjects. Art said he enjoys working with wood, but he does not like metal. Henry said he really enjoyed working with the syringe robots and learning how to
"engineer" a mechanical arm.
It would appear from observations and interviews regarding school classes in general and technology education classes that the students tend to decide which classes they enjoy the most and which classes they do not enjoy. Students need to have experiences that enable them to understand and reflect upon the relationships between ideas presented in different subject areas and to make judgements about what they believe to be meaningful to them. In this way, they adapt the curriculum to satisfy their own needs. Closely related to this is how the students value the subject matter of the curriculum.
139 Valuing the Subject Matter of the Curriculum
While observing and interviewing the subjects, I obtained evidence that expressed how the students valued the subject matter of the curriculum, both in the school and in the technology education program. Some of their expressions were quite vocal and emotional while others were quiet and subdued.
November 30, 1998 (interview)
Me: Okay. From the things you have learned in
this class or in other classes, do you think
about school differently?
Price: Sort of, sort of not.
Me: How so?
Price: It kinda like you gotta know math. If you
don't learn math, you won't be able to do
nothin' in here. So you gotta learn math.
Especially fractions. I'm bad with fractions.
Only thing I know really is 1/4, 3/4, and
So I gotta learn it. I don't need any help in
it, a lot of the stuff is easy.
140 Me: Okay. How do you think the technology
education class compares to the rest of the
classes in the school?
Price: It’s awesome! It's more fun. I mean the only
other class I could compare to this is Gym.
This and Gym are my best classes. Anything
else is like you're stuck in class just
studying. I mean, like your math, social
studies, history, science - I hate science.
You gotta study this, study that, you gotta
keep up with all the subjects. This is like a
real relief.
December 11, 1998 (interview)
Me: Okay. What do you think you would remember
and use from school?
Reed: In general?
M e : Yes.
Reed: Uh. I'll remember just about - not
everything, but - the more important stuff.
Reading skills, math skills. Just about
everything to do with that stuff. And of
course mainly stuff from this (technology
education) class.
141 December 3, 1998 (interview)
Me: Okay. Do you think this class is different or
the same as the other classes?
Doug: I think it's a little bit different, and yet
a little bit the same.
Me: How's that?
Doug: Well, (pause) like other classes teach you
how to deal with life, whereas this class
here teaches you how to make things, you
know.
The prior interview samples were representative of all the
interviews performed. All the students in every interview mentioned math as a major curricular subject that the
student felt was important for them to learn well. Other
subjects mentioned included science and reading skills. Even
though the students I observed emphasized math as being an
important subject, all of the subjects in both the beginning
class and power/energy class had prior math grades below a
"C." However, I did notice that Doug's math performance had
improved during the third quarter of the school year. He attributed the change to the drafting skills he learned in the technology education class.
142 With regard to the technology education curriculum, I looked at how the students valued the subject matter. I also tried to learn the ways in which they learned the subject matter best.
January 7, 1999 (group interview)
Me: So what do you think of the technology
education class?
Art: The class is more hands-on, and lets you move
around and do different things. Yeah.
Me: Okay. Um. Do you think there is a difference
in the way you l e a m in IT compared to
regular book work classes?
Reed: Yeah, I think you learn more through hands-on
learning. You pay more attention, so you soak
up more than you would in a regular book work
class, if someone just gave you a book and
told you to read it. It's like, if you read
out loud, you learn it more than if you read
it by yourself.
November 10, 1998 (interview)
Me: So what do you think about the technology
education class?
143 Henry: Oh, I like it a lot, a whole loti (Said
emphatically)
Me: Oh really? What do you like about it?
Henry: Hey man, it's real interesting. I mean,
there's lots of things to learn and do
with your hands. I love to work with my hands
and that stuff. This is my best class, 'cause
I can learn things here.
November 30, 1999 (interview)
Me: Okay. Are there things that you think you
learned in this class that you could not have
learned in the regular school classes?
John: Well (pause) You know, we do more things like
. . . special curricular or whatever. I
think we do more of that than just text book
and what we have to do normally. And I
think this class is better than that system.
January 7, 1999 (group interview)
Me: Okay. (Pause) What are some things that you
think this program could give you that the
school doesn't give you?
Art: Experience.
144 Me: Okay. How.
Art: You can learn how to do work that is
necessary in the real world. You can learn
how to make things out of metal and wood.
Me: Why do you think that's important?
Art: I'm gonna buy a house some day, and I don't
want to call someone every time somethin'
gets broke.
December 1, 1999 (interview)
Me: What do you think about this class?
Art : (no hesitation) I like it.
Me: You do? Why?
Art: 'Cause it's like showin' me like a new way to
look at things.
M e : How?
Art: You know like, I look at somethin' like . . .
like a can opener. I'll know how it was made,
or a chisel or somethin', or a chair or
somethin'.
Me: Okay, so you can look more in-depth at
something instead of . . .
Art: (interrupting me) Instead of just 'cause it's
there.
145 December 1, 1999 (interview)
Me: Okay. Um. How would you compare this class to
your other school classes?
Art: (pause) This is basically like a fun class
but you're learnin* at the same time. Most
other classes you gotta like sit and listen
to the teacher talk and then they assign you
some work and you do it. That's pretty much
it. But in this class you get to work,
especially, like, problem solving.
Me: Okay. Um. Doyou think this class is better
or worse than other classes?
Art: I think it's better.
Me: Better? How?
Art: 'Cause you like just . . . you're active.
You're not just sittin' around like just
doin' paper work. You're like really workin'
with your hands. Solvin' problems 'n seein'
what you can do.
I learned that the students viewed hands-on activities as being very important to their ability to l e a m the subject matter. In a group interview. Art and Reed mentioned that hands-on learning was very important to them, because that
146 was how they learned best. Henry mentioned that he learned more in technology education than in the other classes, and attributed it to the utilization of hands-on learning. John reflected Henry's remarks.
The students also valued the life skills that they learned from the program. Art mentioned that he valued the skills and education he was receiving in the technology education course. These skills, he said, would help him to save money by repairing his own house. He also mentioned that the class was helping him to see deeper into daily technological devices and understand more about how they are made.
With regard to problem solving, most of the students thought that technology education helped them to develop better problem-solving skills. Art said he believed that he was learning problem-solving skills in the technology education class, and that these skills were not being taught in the other classes.
The evidence from the interviews helped me to see what the students valued. The things they valued included hands- on learning, knowledge of life skills, and problem-solving skills.
147 Modifying the Curriculum
As I observed the students, I wanted to know how they would change and modify the curriculum if given the chance.
How would they want to be taught? Some of the answers I was looking for came out in interviews. First, the way in which the students would change the school is described. Second, the students' desired modifications regarding technology education are discussed.
December 3, 1998 (interview)
Me: Okay. Um. Are there things that the school
does not give you that you think you need,
that are important to you?
Doug: Well (sigh, pause). I wish it would
mainstream me into some classes 'cause there
was a teacher who said . . . well, I don't
know if she was a teacher or not, but . . .
she said that if I was mainstreamed, that I
would be able to go . . . see, I live on the
southwest side, or the west side, and I was
supposed to go school out that way, but I
can't go to school out that way unless I am
mainstreamed for certain classes.
148 December 1, 1998 (interview)
Me: Okay, thanks. Okay. Are there things that the
school does not give you that you think are
important to you?
Nick: My computer skills.
Me: Okay. So you haven't learned anything about
computers from school?
Nick: No. I mean, they've got computer classes, but
not the kind of stuff that I'm in to.
Me: Like what are you interested in?
Nick: Computer programming, computer repair. Typing
they do teach here, but I can do it on my own
without their help. I may not be as fast as
they want me to be, but I can type. And I
like playing and working with computers and
with my hands. Taking them apart and
rebuilding them, and fixin' them and
upgradin' them and that kind of stuff. And
they don't teach that here. They were going
to. They came up with a sheet last year that
showed us all the classes we could take, and
they had computer science on there. And
they didn't do it. And it made me mad, 'cause
I wanted that class.
149 December 10, 1998 (interview)
Me: What do you think about this class?
Rick: I like it very much.
Me: Okay. Can you tell me why you like it?
Rick: (pause) 'cause they (the school) don't have
anything that I like. I wanted drafting and
drawing classes, and more technology
education classes. But they don't have
classes for drafting or drawing.
All of the students I observed and spoke with mentioned that they wanted to change the school curriculum in some way.
Doug mentioned that he wanted to be mainstreamed into the school curriculum because there were several classes he wanted to take that he couldn't. School documentation showed that he has difficulty learning.
Nick mentioned that he wanted a more advanced computer programming and repair course. He is focused on establishing a computer career regardless of whether or not he graduates from high school.
Rick mentioned that he wanted to take courses in drafting and drawing. The only course similar to his desires was art.
150 The interviews and observations shown previously are representative of the observations of and responses by the students.
The students' perceptions regarding changes to the technology education curriculum are shown below. They were obtained through both observations and interviews.
February 23, 1999 (observations in power/energy class)
Henry worked on his C02 car, trying to
problem-solve why it didn't go very fast, or as
fast as his class mates' cars. He told me the car
was too slow because it was too heavy, but that
Mr. H. wouldn't allow him to modify the car or
make it lighter. The car was approximately 5
inches long and made of pine, which was very heavy
for this type of car. I felt his car was heavy by
lifting it, and noticed that it had a lot of sap
in it, making it very heavy. Henry said "If Mr. H.
would let me do what I wanted. I'd make the car
smaller and lighter."
151 December 1, 1998 (interview)
Me: Okay. Um. In the class here, have you learned
anything that may have made you think
differently about the school?
Nick: Yeah. The school is cheapI
Me: What do you mean the school is cheap?
Nick: Yeah. Some of these tools are older than met
But they're good tools. Yeah, we have a
program that's not completely funded by the
school. And we need more funding, but
we're doin' good as it is. But the school
doesn't really fund us like they should. I
mean, we'd be able to do a lot more things if
we had school funding.
January 7, 1999 (group interview)
Me: Okay. Um. What about doing work with
computers. Would you guys like to do more
work with computers?
Art: Yeah, a little. (Didn't seem too interested)
Reed: (nodded, but didn't seem too interested)
Rick: (didn't nod or do anything - no response)
Me: What about learning CAD and CAM?
Art: That would be interesting.
152 Reed: Yeah, when they get the computers workin’.
Rick: It would be easier to work with drawing.
December 3, 1998 (interview)
Me: Okay. Is there anything that you think you
need to learn that you are not learning from
this class?
Doug: Uh (pause). Well, if I wanted to make
something I would probably, like . . . well,
if I wanted to make tops, I would like to
learn how to do that. I would also like to
learn more about, um, electronics.
December 3, 1998 (interview)
Me: Okay. Good. Are there things that the school
does not give you that you think are
important to you?
Henry: No. Well, Yeah. They should, like, give us,
like, modern equipment, or, like, better
equipment. 'Cause some of the things we have
in here are, like, real old. So the school
should, like, raise the level of the
equipment, like, so we can, like, learn more
153 about technology, and, like, use better
equipment. Like, keepin' us up to date. Yeah.
From the previous interview segments, it was apparent
that the students wanted more than the school and the
technology education program could give them. From the
school, one student mentioned a desire to be mainstreamed
into the curriculum. Another student wanted an advanced
computer programming and architecture class. Drafting was mentioned by another student as a class they wanted to take
in school.
As for the technology education class, one student
wanted more freedom to do problem-solving. Another student
stated that the school invests little in equipment,
requiring teachers to instruct students using archaic machines and tools. Other students mentioned a desire to
learn computer-assisted drafting (CAD) and electronics.
As can be viewed by their comments, it would appear
that the students desired more freedom, better technology in
the classroom, and more classes dealing with technology.
Each student believed that the curriculum would be enhanced
by including his recommendation.
In a study performed by Power (1984), one of the
primary factors that helped at-risk students remain in
154 school was school programs. Power stated that "modifications in school structure and programs affect satisfaction and the desire to stay or leave" (p. 123).
Ainley, Batten, & Miller (1984a) conducted a study regarding at-risk student retention in high school. Their findings suggested that modifications to a school's curriculum helped retain more at-risk students than a school maintaining a curriculum offering only the traditional public examination subjects focused toward university entrance. The findings from Power (1984) and Ainley, et al.
(1984a) help to support the evidence obtained in this study.
Summary
This chapter has served to introduce the environment, philosophy, and curriculum of the school and the technology education program. The participants in the study helped to provide evidence supporting my description of the school and the technology education program. The students, teachers, and principal had different views about both the school and the program. Of specific interest were the views of the students, who interacted with the curriculum.
155 CHAPTER 4
THE STUDENTS' PERCEPTIONS
OF THE TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION EXPERIENCE
While observing and interviewing the students in the high school, there were several things that became visible.
These things did not appear immediately, but gradually, like a murky lake that eventually clears to reveal the living creatures below (Geertz, 1983). I did not realize that these things existed in the program until I reviewed the evidence approximately three months into the study.
The things I speak of include the construction of knowledge theory, hands-on learning theory, and reasons for staying in school. The focus of this chapter is to explain, through grounded evidence, documentation, and theory, the experiences of the students in relation to a technology education program. The next section of this chapter will focus on the evaluation and analysis of the evidence as it relates to the construction of knowledge, problem solving, and hands-on learning theories. The end of the chapter will
156 axscuss reasons wny m e ac-rxsK students want to remaxn xn
scnooi.
Presentation, Evaluation, and Analysis of the Evidence
The followxng xs a presentatxon or tne evxaence rouna
xn the study, roiiowed Dy an analysts or the evxdence.
Examples will be given or evidence round in the study. This evidence will be discussed regarding the emergence of the
construction of knowledge, problem solving, and hands-on
learnxng tneorxes aurxng tne study, it xs nopeo tnat by dxscussxng the evxdence and how xt relates to the tneorxes that a better understanding of the views of at-risk students
in technology education can be obtained.
HOW the Students teamed
In this section, I described the evidence I obtained regarding the things the at-risk students learned in the technology education courses. Then following each group of evxdence, i discussed the theory that related to eacn group
Of evxdence and related xt to the evxdence.
157 The Construction of Knowledge
The at-risk students in the study appeared to learn gradually, a little at a time. It seemed as though they were trying to comprehend and understand each concept before they would move onto the next concept.
Evidence. Kick was having difficulty understanding the concept behind drawing orthographic projections. After the teacher instructed the class over a period of a week, Rick was still confused. At one point, he just sat and stared at the paper. The teacher noticed he was not working, and came to assist him.
October 5, 1998 (observation)
After the last explanation, Rick said, "I don't
have a problem with what the drawing is to look
like, 1 just want to know why 1 need to have top,
front, and side views." Mr. H. proceeded to
explain that the views represent the top, front,
and side views of the object as if it were placed
in a box. At this point. Kick said, "Ah. so the
different drawings represent different views or
perspectives, as if the object were in a box and
158 each side was showing on a side of the box. Now I
understand. Thanks."
Rick was having difficulty understanding the concept of the three views of orthographic drawings. He did not have the basic knowledge of the relationship between the object and the top, front, and side views. Apparently, when Mr. H. lectured on this subject at the beginning of the year, Rick was absent. Once Mr. H. explained this relationship, Rick understood how to complete the drawings.
John, who was in the advanced power/energy/ transportation course, was particularly vocal about the knowledge he learned from the technology education program.
In an interview with him, he gave me the following information about his view of technology education classes.
November 30, 1998 (interview)
Me: Are there things that you have received
from this class that you feel are very
important to you?
John: Well, I learned how to do things a little
better. You know, I know how to fix something
or make something or do it better, you know.
159 John explained to me that his ability to work with materials and process, and tools, has increased since he has been enrolled in the technology education program. This ability did not come overnight, but was gradual, over time. He built upon previous knowledge wnicn ne had learned xn junior nign school and the beginning technology education course.
The teacher inrormed me that occasionally they get students who are enrolled in the advanced power/energy/' transportation course, who have very little knowledge regarding materials and processes, inese students nave difficulty performing well in a curriculum that focuses on the use or problem-solving skills. These students struggle to compete with the other students, who are often knowledgeable and skilled in materials and processes. Henry was one of these students.
Henry had not taken rhe survey of technology education course, and had not learned now to work with materials and processes. He would need to ask the teacher or other students for assistance with setting up a machine for a particular process. Since he did not nave a good knowledge base of materials, he had to remake several projects because the material was too soft, too thin, or too weak to serve a particular purpose.
160 On one occasion, Henry had to begin a syringe robot project again. He had removed too much material from a piece of wood with a drill and bit, causing it to split and crack when pressure was applied to it. In an observation, Henry was observed trying to construct new knowledge from his prior failed experience.
November 12, 1998 (observation)
While Henry was working with the wooden base of
the robot, he drilled a hole at each end of the
base, so that the hole ran horizontal (parallel to
the bottom of the base and to the front of the
base). Then he was trying to drill a second hole
down through the top of each end of the base to
connect to the horizontal holes he just drilled.
While he was doing this, I observed him. He said
to his partner, as they tried to position the wood
in the right place:
Henry: (talking to his partner) I changed the drill
bit to a smaller size so that the walls of
the base will not crack. If we drill too big
of holes, then the walls might crack.
Partner: Oh, l understand.
161 Henry was able to complete his drilling process and eventually his project, but not before he developed a knowledge base of materials and processes. The foundation of knowledge regarding the materials and processes needed to be learned by Henry.
Another student, Nick, was an extremely bright student who had difficulty associating previously-learned knowledge with technological activities. In an observation, the following evidence was recorded.
November 12, 1998 (observation)
When Nick asked Mr. H. about a drafting question
(a hidden line in the base of the robot), Mr. H.
told Nick:
Mr. H.: I guess you're not as brilliant as I thought.
You can't remember what he learned last year
in drafting.
Nick: Yes 1 can. (Looking at Mr. H.)
Mr. H.: No you can't. You don't know what those
dashed lines represent.
Nick: Yes I do. That means there is a hole
through both sides of the base. But it
162 doesn’t show how far the holes are from
the sides.
Mr. H.: Yes it does.
Nick: Not from this view it doesn't.
Mr. H.: (walks over to Nate and points at the paper)
There, see?
Nick: Oh, Okay. I see it now.
Mr. H.: Nate, I want you to start making those
cognitive leaps and apply what you learned
last year to what you are doing in here.
Nick: Okay, okay. Cut me some slack. I'm just
out of it today, okay?
Apparently, Nick had difficulty associating some of the
drawing concepts he learned in the survey of technology
education course with the problem-solving activities he was working with. He did not associate the planning portion of
the project with the knowledge he had obtained in the
introductory technology education class.
Another student discussed his knowledge regarding the technology education program. Price, in an interview, expressed his desire to work with tools in building projects.
163 November 30, 1998 (interview)
Me: What do you think you will l e a m and be
able to remember from these classes?
Price: (pause) How to use the machines, information
like drafting and electricity. A lot of stuff
that can help you if you want to make
somethin’ or show someone how to make
somethin’, then you can do it.
Price demonstrated en understanding about the need to know the tools and processes involved in the technology education curriculum. This was necessary for him to enroll in the next level of technology education courses.
Analysis. With regard to the construction of knowledge theory, the at-risk students in the study were given a basic knowledge base that was required to function in the technology education curriculum. For instance, before a student could learn how to draw properly, he or she would need to understand the differences in line weights, and the different kinds of lines required in orthographic and isometric drawings. Then, as the student began working with pencil, ruler, and paper, he or she could begin to build upon this knowledge by interacting with the curriculum.
Mistakes were made and lines were erased and redrawn, each
164 time a line was redrawn, new knowledge was formed in the
student's mind, and experience was gained (Dewey, 1900).
This process was repeated hundreds of times per day.
According to Dewey (1900), students need to have an
understanding o£ the basic knowledge in a subject in order
to construct new knowledge. Without this basic knowledge,
students have nothing to build on, and consequently have
difficulty understanding new concepts.
The concept of individual understanding regarding the
construction of knowledge theory should be noted here.
According to Jarvinen (1998), "knowledge and skills are
constructed ar the individual level from personal starting
points and through spontaneous action" (p. 47). When Rick was having difficulty understanding the orthographic drawing
concepts, Rick was starting at a different point with regard
to knowledge and experience than the other students. He had missed the discussion regarding that knowledge.
In some situations, students had obtained the knowledge
and experience necessary to work with materials and processes, but they had difficulty applying some of the basic concepts to higher levels of thinking. In other words, they had memorized the facts, concepts, and principles associated with a field of knowledge (Phye, 1997), but had not applied them to situations outside the confines of their
165 minds. They had not built upon the basic knowledge that was memorized through the construction of knowledge. Nick was a student who was in this situation.
This was common among the students who memorized information but did not have experience in associating the information with other ideas or activities. Cote (1984) stated that "The accumulation and acquisition of information for the purpose of reproduction in recitation and examination is made too much of" (p. 22). Students who memorize information and facts without making connections between those facts and external situations or experiences generally have a difficult time utilizing the facts and information they memorized in problem-solving situations
(Cote, 1984) .
In the course of working with materials and processes as a knowledge base for technology education, the students sometimes became engrossed in the use of tools and the development of skills, and were unaware of the underlying theoretical framework of the construction of knowledge (Lux,
19/9). This was demonstrated by Price's desire to work with tools and equipment.
As for a way in which the construction of knowledge theory can apply to at-risk students, the evidence presented here suggests that at-risk students need to be taught
166 according to their learning style. According to studies performed by Dunn, Dunn, and Price (1989), Hunt (1995), and
Jackson-Allen & Christenberry (1994), at-risk students need
to be instructed in a manner in which they can effectively
leam the concepts and principles presented to them. The studies suggested that at-risk students be taught using hands-on activities that allow mobility and interaction with the curriculum.
As Ainley, foreman, and Sheret (1991) stated, the at- risk students need to experience success in the classroom.
This success is predicated upon the students having a basic knowledge of the material, and having the opportunity to construct new knowledge in the curriculum.
in summary, the construction of knowledge theory was apparent in the evidence obtained during the study. In addition, the construction of knowledge theory was fairly consistent across the at-risk student subjects. Each student seemed to understand the importance of the construction of knowledge, even though they did not express it in academic terms. As the students worked with the knowledge given to them by the teacher, they were able to construct new knowledge, giving them successful experiences and a sense of achievement. The next section deals with the problem-solving theory in the technology education program.
167 Learning Through the Problems
In this subsection, I will discuss responses and
observations related to Rick and Price first, followed by the responses and observations related to John, Henry, and
Nick. Following these responses and evidence, I will analyze the evidence.
Evidence. Rick was a student who did not have much experience with technology education programs. Although he had taken one technology education course in junior high
school and worked in his grandfather's trophy-manufacturing business during the summer, he had no other classroom experience. In one observation, I obtained the following evidence.
February 23, 1999 (observation)
The students were assigned to continue working on
their projects? either a wooden car, a decorative
shelf, or a model petroleum oil pump. Rick's
project that he chose was a model car. The car had
a body which was cut from several pieces of wood
glued together to increase their thickness. There
were two fenders which were cut from separate
pieces of wood and attached to the sides of the
168 car. Wheels were also cut from layered pieces of wood and attached to a wooden dowel rod (axle),
which was placed through holes drilled through the bottom portion of the car.
Rick was having difficulty getting the
fenders to stay on the car. He put too much glue
on the fenders and they kept sliding from their position. Rick said, "If I could just get the
fenders to stay on the car. Then I would be able to finish drilling the holes for the axles. Then all I would need to do is cut my wheels."
At this point, Rick went to Mr. H. and asked
him for advice. Mr. H. told him to think about
something he could use to securely hold the
fenders in place. Rick said, "How about a clamp?"
Mr. H. said, "Now there's a good idea. Why don't you try that and see if it works."
Rick took a clamp and, after making sure the
fenders were in the correct places, securely placed the clamp across the width of the car, holding the fenders in place. With a smile on his
face, Rick said, "There. That should hold it."
169 Another student. Price, who also lacked problem-solving
skills, had a similar experience. During the second quarter of the school year, the first unit of the survey of
technology education course focused on the planning, materials, and processes regarding metallurgy. One of the required concepts was to know how to divide and add
fractions by two. For instance, if the assignment was to divide the fraction, 3/4, by two, the students needed to
know how to perform the operation quickly.
Price was one of many students in the course who had difficulty understanding this mathematical concept. In an interview with Price, I obtained the following evidence.
November 30, 1998 (interview)
Me: From the things you have learned in this
class or other technology education classes,
do you think about school differently?
Price: Sort of, sort of not.
Me: How so?
Price: It kinda like you gotta know math. If you
don’t l e a m math, you won’t be able to do
nothin’ in here. So you gotta learn math.
Especially fractions. I’m bad with fractions,
Only thing I know really is 1/4 and 3/4.
170 The type of problem solving that Price referred to was that of mathematics. He mentioned that technology education involved a lot of mathematical operations, dealing with measurement, area calculations, and dimensions. Price referred to the need to have mathematical skills in order to perform certain operations in technology education.
The next three students 1 will describe were enrolled in the power/energy/transportation course. These students,
John, Henry, and Nick, had similar experiences regarding the problem solving learning theory.
The first student, John, shared an experience with me regarding problem solving. He was working with a partner on a syringe robot project. During this unit of instruction,
Lhe students were to design, develop, analyze, probiem- solve, construct, and evaluate a robotic arm that operated via hydraulics. Syringes would be used to apply force to the fluid at one end of the tubes, and transmit the force to the robotic arm at the other end of the tubes.
At the end of the robotic arm was a claw-like hand that would be used to grasp a tennis bail. When John'' s eight fingered robotic hand was not grabbing or releasing the tennis ball the day before the project was due. Josh said "I sat down with my partner and devised a solution." They used rubber bands to open the hand and two syringes to close it
171 for added power. Their hand design proved successful when they not only lifted the tennis ball, but also a 12-ounce
claw hammer and a 20-pound weight, giving them the best
score in the class.
Another activity that the students performed well in was the development of a small CO2 wood car. One student,
Henry, was excited about working on the car. As Henry worked
on the CO2 car, he explained how he was goin to "make this car the fastest in the class." He cut the car to the right dimensions, drilled the holes for the axles, and assembled the wheels. When it came time to test the students' cars for distance, Henry's car did not go as far as he had anticipated. After talking with Henry about his car, l
learned that he did not know that the rolling operation of the car had an effect on its speed and distance. The axles had too much friction from holes that were too small in diameter.
Henry stated, "if Mr. H. would let me do what I wanted.
I'd make the car smaller and lighter." Henry believed that the weight of the car was the reason it did not perform as well as the other students' cars.
Mr. H. believed that every student should take a course that taught problem solving. According to Mr. H., the
teacher
172 November 30, 1998 (lunch w/teacher)
All students should be required to take a course
that stresses students learn problem-solving
techniques. In this day and age, the student who
leaves high school with problem-solving skills is
far better off and has better chances of getting a
job than someone who does not have these skills.
Mr. H. emphasized the use of problem-solving techniques in
his power/energy/transportation course. This was a vital
part of every unit of instruction. Each student was graded
on his or her ability to problem-solve a given assignment.
One student who showed tremendous problem-solving
abilities was Nick. While working on the syringe robotic
arm, Nick came up with a tremendousiy-ingenious idea about
the hand mechanism, and suggested that each robot should
pick up a tennis ball as the minimum grading criteria.
November 10, 1998 (interview)
Me: I noticed that in class today when you
mentioned the idea of texture on the objects
to be picked up by the robot arm. Where did
you get the idea from?
173 Nick: Well, I figured that a ping pong ball would
be too smooth for the robot hand to pick up,
and the key chain would be too skinny or too
heavy if it had keys on it. So I thought that
a tennis ball would be good, since it has a
rough texture for the hand to grasp and hang
on to, and it is light. Also, I thought that
we should design and use a robot hand that
has split fingers on top and an opposing
thumb on the bottom like this (he showed me
what he meant with his hand). That way when
the robot arm goes to pick up the ball, the
ball will get wedged into the crevice between
Che two fingers, and the opposing thumb will
hold it in place, and allow you to pick it up
and drop it at will.
Nick explained that he had thought about the different textures of balls, and which ball would be best to lift using a robotic arm. He also looked at the problem from a physics perspective, in that friction would assist the robotic arm to hold onto the tennis ball. This was apparent in an observation that follows.
174 October 5, 1998
The idea was to design the bottle so that it would
go the highest and stay in the air the longest.
Nick said, "I'm going to use a par. ..." but he
was interrupted by Mr. Harmon who said boldly
"Don't tell them anythingi Let them figure it out
for themselves."
During another observation, i observed Nick and his partner as they tried to problem-solve the reasons why their water bottle rocket would not fly very high.
October 5, 1998 (observation)
A student said “What if you put more water in it
than you have been?" Nick said, "Well, I guess it
might go higher." They subsequently started
putting more water in the bottle. They put one
inch in and launched it. Then they put two inches
in, and eventually up to half of a bottle. They
found that a bottle filled half full of water did
not launch as well as a bottle with two inches of
water. So they went down to two inches of water
and then down to 2 1/4 inches of water, and found
this to be the best amount . . .
175 Then the students brought out a two-liter
bottle and followed the same experimentation
procedure as with the 20-ounce bottle. They came
to the conclusion that a two-liter bottle flew
best when 1/3 full with water, so the students
filled it about 1/3 full of water and placed it on
the launch device and launched it. It went much
higher than the 20-ounce bottle. Both times they
used 80 pounds of compressed air to launch the
bottles.
The students in this observation tried to follow a
controlled procedure for determining the ideal amount of
water in both a 20-ounce bottle and a two-liter bottle in
order to maximize the propulsion from the compressed air and
allow their rocket to gain the most height. This took time.
Nick and his partner needed to measure the water into the
bottle and launch it. Then they repeated this process until
they had found the best solution for the problem.
Nick was very bright and knew a lot about technology and physics. In one conversation with him about the water bottle rockets, I asked him if he could explain to me why it
flew. He said "the bottle flies in the air because of a
combination of forces created by the pressure of the air and
176 the rush of the water from the nozzle. It/s like a rocket engine, only with water." When I asked Nick about his knowledge of physics, he replied, "what is physics anyway? it's the common sense knowledge of the world around you."
Analysis. As students began to interact with the technology education curriculum, they learned how to work with the materials and processes (Herschbach, 1992). From this point, they gain knowledge and experience by working with the materials and processes until they have a good knowledge and experience base. With this knowledge and experience, they can begin to actively engage in problem solving activities (Johnson, 1988).
In high school technology education programs, teaching
through problem-solving methodology has become a part of the curriculum (Waetjen, 1989). Problem solving is also recognized as a higher-order intellectual ability and as a way of learning (Gagne, 1985). As such, students in these programs are taught certain basic problem-solving skills before they are given assignments that require them to solve a problem. In addition, students must have a basic working knowledge of materials and processes in order to perform reasonably well in problem-solving situations (Berkemer,
1989).
177 Since the students in the beginning class, the survey
of technology education course, had little problem-solving
experience outside of mathematics, they were not expected to
perform well in the problem-solving area. The survey of
technology education course was a prerequisite for entry
into the advanced power/energy/transportation,
manufacturing, communications, and construction technology
courses.
in the power/energy/transportation class i observed,
the students were expected to have a background in materials
and processes, knowledge regarding the problem-solving
process, and some problem-solving experience. As mentioned
before, the problem-solving model incorporated in the
technology education program in the study followed the model
by Hutchinson and Karsnitz (1994).
The responses from Rick and Price demonstrated their
lack of problem-solving abilities, when compared to John,
Henry, and Nick. Rick and Price were enrolled in the
beginning survey of technology education course and did not
have the knowledge and background regarding the problem
solving process. Hence, their responses regarding problem
solving were weak at best.
Rick had obtained part of the basic knowledge regarding materials and processes necessary for effective problem
178 solving, but he lacked the formal knowledge and training in problem solving. As I watched Rick in the laboratories, I noticed that he would work through a process of trial and error, attempting to complete his projects.
In the evidence regarding Rick, he clearly did not know what to do in order to hold the fenders to the sides of the car. He had knowledge regarding materials and processes, but lacked the knowledge and experience in problem solving necessary to find a solution, when he asked the teacher for assistance, Mr. H. did not give him the answer, but helped him to think of a solution. In this manner, Mr. H. was helping Rick to experience problem solving (Waetjen, 1989).
John and his partner were also able to experience problem solving. They were able to work through a problem with their robotic arm claw using their problem-solving skills and knowledge (Johnson, 1988).
In some instances, the teacher in the technology education program placed criteria on certain aspects of the power/energy/transportation projects. One such project was the CO2 -propelled wooden car. This project had limitations on the size and weight of the vehicle, so that the students would need to think of other way in which to reduce friction and increase the length of travel.
179 Henry was a student who had little background in technology education, other than the knowledge and experience he gained in a junior high school technology education program. He had difficulty working through concepts dealing with planning, and materials and processes, and had to learn these concepts through trial and error, and from peers. Once he gained a basic knowledge of these concepts, he was able to function at a minimum level in the class, it was evident that Henry did not understand that friction played a role in reducing the distance his car would roll. This is another example of how knowledge regarding materials and processes needs to precede the process of problem solving (Berkemer, 1989; Johnson, 1988).
As students worked with the various units in the power/energy/transportation course, the teacher stressed problem solving as the key to developing a successful solution to the requirements for each assignment. According to Winek & Borchers (1993), problem solving ". . . is a skill students need in an advancing technical world" (p.
23). The teacher knew that the students needed to develop good problem-solving skills in order to compete not only in the classroom activities, but also to compete with other people when they leave school.
180 In relating Nick's experiences to theory and research,
Scarborough and White (1994) performed a study on the simultaneous integration of physics, mathematics, and technology through interdisciplinary teams and the resulting impact that such an approach had on learning physics. The results indicated that students who learned physics through an applied learning approach (technology education, physics, and math integration) demonstrated similar gains to those students enrolled in traditional physics courses, showing that physics principles can be learned in an applied learning environment.
As the at-risk students in the study worked through the problems associated with the assignments, they demonstrated through their actions and words that they enjoyed the activities and were actively learning through problem solving. Again, this speaks to studies performed regarding learning styles and the performance of at-risk students
(üunn, Uunn, and Frice, 1989; Hunt, 1995; Jackson-Allen &
Christenberry, 1994; Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989; O'Neil,
1990).
Through the problem-solving learning theory, the at- risk students in the study were able to experience success and achievement (Ainley & Sheret, 1992). According to Ainley
(1994), at risk students need to experience success and
m achievement in the classroom, giving them a greater desire to remain in school.
In summary, although the problem-solving learning theory was occasionally referred to in the survey of technology education course, it was greatly emphasized in the power/energy/transportâtion course as a vital part of the learning process. According to Winek & Borchers (1993),
'■'Problem solving is a needed higher order of thinking skill.
It is the pinnacle of human thinking skills with no other cognitive skill as complex (Lavoie, 1991; Stinespring, 1991;
Waetjen, 1989)" (p. 23).
As an extension of the construction of knowledge theory, the problem-solving learning theory "... allows students to draw on their past knowledge, combine it with new knowledge and use assimilation and evaluative skills to solve a problem" (Winek & Borchers, 1993, p. 23). According to Sanders (1995),
Our methods have been characterized by hands-on
activities and individualized instruction
supported by a general laboratory that allowed
students countless options for creative
problem-solving. We must be sure that others
understand that there is no better substitute for
182 this hands-on approach to technological
problem-solving, (p. 3)
As Sanders mentioned, hands-on learning theory goes hand-in- hand with the problem-solving learning theory. As the at- risk students work with the curriculum materials in a technology education laboratory, they engage in hands-on activities that give them the experience and knowledge they need to work through problem-solving activities. The next subsection discusses the hands-on learning theory.
Hands-on Learning
As I observed and interviewed the at-risk students in the study, it became apparent that they really valued hands- on learning activities. This is described in the evidence that follows. An analysis explains the relationship of the evidence to the theory.
Evidence. The following is an interview with Rick regarding the hands-on learning activities in the survey of technology education course. December 10, 1998 (interview)
Me: Is this class different or the same as your
other classes?
Rick: Urn. Well, here we do more, like, hands-on
work, and, like, you get to work in the shop
and work with tools and stuff. But in
theater, you gotta do more class work and
reading about plays. Plus, I don’t really
like to get up in front of people and talk or
do stuff.
Rick emphasized the importance of learning through hands-on activities. In a class observation, I talked with him about his thoughts regarding hands-on learning.
November 12, 1998 (observation)
Me: So what do you think about learning through
hands-on methods?
Rick: I like it. It’s easier for me to understand
the ideas and things Mr. H. teaches when I
get to work in the lab and actually see what
I’m learning. It’s definitely easier than
learning from a book.
184 From Rick's comments, it would appear that he found learning through hands-on activities easier than learning through reading and rote memory. Another student, John, had a similar comment.
November 30, 1998 (interview)
Me; Are there things that you think you learned
in this class that you did not learn in the
regular school classes?
John: Well (pause) You know, we do more hands-on .
. . special curricular or whatever. I think
we do more of that than just text book [sic]
and what we have to do normally. And I think
this class is better than that system.
When John discussed "special curricular" instruction, he referred to the use of hands-on activities as opposed to using text books. Regarding the curriculum, Henry mentioned the following.
November 10, 1998 (observation)
After the formalities of getting permission, I
asked him how he liked the class so far.
ISS Henry: Oh, I like it a lot, a whole loti {Said
emphatically)
Me: Oh really? What do you like about it?
Henry: Hey man, it's real interesting. I mean,
there's lots of things to l e a m and do with
your hands. I love to work with my hands and
that stuff. This is my best class, 'cause I
can l e a m things here.
Henry mentioned that, although he has had difficulty understanding the concepts in the other courses, he was able to leam and understand things in the technology education course. He believed that the hands-on learning atmosphere made the difference. In a later discussion with him, I was able to get the following evidence.
December 3, 1998 (interview)
Me: So you enjoy this class, so you give it
your full effort, and this is spilling
over into your English and other
classes?
Henry: Yeah, that's it. 'Cause this
is, like, what interests me.
See, 'cause I'm, like, real
186 interested in here. In the
rest of my classes, its, like,
blank compared to in here.
Yeah. So it’s hard for me to
stay focused. 'Cause it’s,
like, hard for me to get a A
[sic] in my other classes.
See, I can get a B in the rest
of my classes, but in here I
get a A [sic].
Me: Oh. So you do better in the classes you
are interested in?
Henry: Yeah, that’s it. 'Cause I ’m
not really, like, that
interested in nothin' else in
school. Only this. Yeah.
Henry's comments were corroborated with John's remarks regarding hands-on learning theory. Henry also mentioned that he had difficulty being focused in the academic subjects due to a lack of interest.
One student, Nick, mentioned in an interview the importance of experiencing the curriculum through hands-on activities. He stated that
187 December 1, 1998 (interview)
Me: Okay. Urn. How do you think the
industrial tech classes compare to other
school classes?
Nick: (pause) Um. It's probably the
best class here. You know, I
like this class, 'cause you
get a lot of hands-on
experience. It's not one of
those classes where they just
tell you to look at the book
and it shows you how to do it,
you know. It's not the kind of
class where you sit there and
it shows you in a book how to
do it, and you just sit there
and look at it. You get up and
you make stuff, and you mess
with things and tools. You
know. You have fun in this
class I This is a cool classl
Another student. Price, showed corroboration with Nick, as described in the following interview.
188 November 30, 1998 (interview)
Me: Okay. What do you think you will l e a m
and be able to remember from these
classes?
Price: (pause) How to use the
machines. Information like
drafting and electricity. A
lot of stuff that can help you
if you want to make somethin'
Or show someone how to make
somethin', then you can do it.
Nick and Price thought hands-on learning experiences were very important to their success in school. They explained that these experiences helped them to understand the curriculum, and the world around them.
Analysis. The concept of teaching through hands-on methods has been a part of technology education for over a century. As a supporter for manual training (a predecessor to technology education), Dewey (1900, 1938) discussed the importance of incorporating hands-on learning theory in education. He stated that
189 Again, we cannot overlook the importance for
educational purposes of the close and intimate
acquaintance got with nature at first hand; with
real things and materials, with the actual
processes of their manipulation, and the knowledge
of their social necessities and uses. In all this
there was continual training of observation, of
ingenuity, constructive imagination, of logical
thought, and of the sense of reality acquired
through first-hand contact with actualities.
(1900, P. 8)
Dewey believed in educating the whole child through hands-on experiences. This philosophy of education and theory of learning has been intricately woven in the contemporary technology education curriculum (Herschbach, 1996).
Another concept related to hands-on learning theory in technology education was the fact that students were able to obtain at least a minimum level of skills with the tools they used. According to Dewey, "... any mode of skill which is achieved with deepening of knowledge and perfecting of judgement is readily put to use in new situations and is under personal control" (Dewey, 1915, p. 259).
190 Dewey (1900) and Addams (1902) believed that the students should interact with their environment through hands-on learning methods, in order to apply the things they learned to real-life situations. This would allow the students to better understand the concepts and knowledge presented to them. As the at-risk students in the study worked through the information and knowledge in an interactive manner, they would be able to form learning habits that would assist them in learning additional knowledge and information (Bredo, 1993).
As mentioned before, research suggests that at-risk students learn better through hands-on activities (Jackson-
Allen & Christenberry, 1994; O'Neil, 1990). Hunt (1995) also demonstrated that at-risk students l e a m better when they are able to learn through hands-on activities- This supports the evidence in the study.
Ainiey, Foreman, and Sheret (1991) demonstrated through research that at-risk students decided to remain in school longer when they experienced achievement and success in their classes. According to Williams (1987), at-risk students were affected most by their achievement in class.
Their general satisfaction with school also helped them to decide against leaving-
191 In summary, as the at-risk students learned through
hands-on learning methods, they were able to better
understand the concepts presented in the lessons. This was
evident in the observations and interviews. Not only did the
students learn and understand the concepts, they were very
excited about the knowledge they were learning. Many of them
stated that they were able to l e a m the concepts in the
technology education courses better than the concepts
presented in other academic courses.
Consistency and Triangulation of Evidence
As can be viewed by the evidence presented regarding
Rick, John, Henry, Nick, and Price's experiences in the
technology education program, it would appear that the
evidence is somewhat consistent within each theory, except
for the problem-solving theory. Within the construction of
knowledge and hands-on learning theories, each student's
responses were reflective of and helped to support the other
students' responses. In addition, the responses coincided with the concepts found in the theories.
In the problem-solving learning theory, evidence from
Rick and Price demonstrated that they could not perform in a problem-solving activity as well as the other students. In a
192 comparison of their background and knowledge to that of
Reed, Nick, and John, Kick and Price demonstrated that they nad less problem-solving experience than John, Henry, and
Nick. This is normal, since Rick and Price were enrolled in the beginning survey of technology education course and did not have the same knowledge and skills regarding materials and processes as the other students, in this respect, this evidence would support the research by Johnson (1988) and
Berkemer (1989) regarding the necessity of having a basic knowledge of materials and processes before effective problem solving can occur.
It would appear that the evidence obtained from each student reflected evidence from the other students (Lincoln
& Guba, 1985). This helped to establish the credibility of the evidence and to support the trustworthiness of the study
(Guba & Lincoln, 1901). In conforming with triangulation and consistency as mentioned by Lincoln & Guba (1985), each student's discussions about each of the theories helped support the other students' stories, and formed a consistency among the students. In addition, the evidence helped to demonstrate the relationships between the theories, as discussed in the next section.
193 Linking the Theories
As I viewed the evidence from the study, I could see a link between the theories. Examples of these links are shown in the evidence that follows.
Evidence
The evidence shown here is reflective of the relationships I observed between the theories. The following evidence is from an observation of Henry.
November 23, 1998 (observation of Henry)
Henry was trying to attach the last syringe on the
arm. He had trouble finding a solution, but
eventually got it. He attached a U-shaped piece of
wood to the syringe plunger. Then he secured the
syringe to the upper arm. The U-shaped wood on the
plunger fit under the lower arm. This piece of
wood slid under the arm as the plunger extended,
and lifted the lower arm.
194 February 23, 1998 (observation)
Henry is learning the process of problem solving,
and is getting better at working with materials
and processes. He is thinking more deeply about
how to better modify a C02 car to make it more
efficient. At the beginning of this activity a few
weeks ago, he wasn't too concerned about the
weight of the car, thinking that it would go fast
because of its mass.
Henry did not take the survey of technology education course
that helps students to learn about and work with materials
and processes. He was behind the rest of the students in the
class, and had difficulty with his project, primarily
because Che materials would not hold the stresses that were
required. He eventually solved most of the problems, and
learned about materials and processes at the same time. This
was performed through the hands-on assignments in the class.
As I observed the students in the
power/energy/transportation class, I noticed that hands-on
activities were a major part of every assignment. These
assignments often required that the students utilize their problem-solving skills. As an example to illustrate this
195 concept, the following evidence was obtained in an observation involving problem solving.
February 23, 1999 (observation)
In a group activity involving the entire
power/energy/transportation class, the class was
assigned to build a solar water heater. The
teacher had initially requested Henry to staple
aluminum foil to the inside of the solar water
heater box. However, as he stapled the aluminum
foil, it tore and wrinkled to such a degree that
Henry determined it to be totally unacceptable for
reflecting heat into the box. Noticing the failure
of the material, he requested assistance from Mr.
H . . Instead of having Henry simply staple aluminum
foil to the inside of the box, which was painted
black, Mr. H. turned the project into a problem
solving activity. He assigned four pairs of
students the task of finding a better material
with which to line the box. The material needed to
be strong and shiny. After a few minutes of
discussion, with his group, John mentioned, "Well,
this is a metal lab, why don't we use some shiny
metal?"
196 The instructor responded, "Good idea, John.
Now go find some shiny metal for us." A few
minutes later, John was back with some tin-plated
24-gauge sheet metal. With the teacher's help,
they measured and cut the metal to general
lengths. Then each of the four groups of students
was given a length of metal and told to make it
fit into the box on a given side.
Immediately, the room was busy with working
students. Each group was problem-solving the best
method to measure, cut, and accurately place the
metal on their given side of the solar water
heater box. One group of students tried the hand
sheer. Another group tried the miter sheer. A
third group attempted to cut the metal with
aviation snips, eventually giving up when a
straight cut was not attained. The fourth group
measured their piece of metal in relation to their
side of the box, drew lines on the metal, and used
a lightweight sheer and the miter sheer to
accurately cut the metal.
As can be seen from the prior observation, the students
incorporated hands-on activities with the problem-solving
197 activity. The students worked to find the best solution to build a solar water heater.
As I mentioned earlier, most of the instruction in che technology education courses included hands-on activities.
As I observed the students working with the materials and processes, I could see how the students were learning the knowledge and concepts taught in the course. An example of this is given by the following evidence.
December 1, 1998 (interview)
Me: Are there things that this class gives you
that are important to you?
Art: (Pause) I think it's probably help my
coordination out. And, like I said, I like
workin' with my hands. That's pretty much it.
Me: Okay. So how does this class help you with
your coordination?
Art: (pause) 'cause I have to like see like where
I might drill a hole or use a center punch to
make a dent so that I know where to drill or
knowin* exactly like where to cut, stuff like
that.
198 In the interview with Art, he explained how the survey of
technology education course helped him to learn how to work
with the materials and processes through hands-on methods.
He had to l e a m "where" to drill a hole, or how hard to hit
a center punch in order to make a dent in a piece of metal
or wood. In addition, he needed to learn the basics of using
the tools; the hammer, center punch, drill, etc.
The Relationship Between the Theories
There were three links between the theories that I
observed. These links were between the construction of
knowledge and problem-solving theories, the problem-solving
and hands-on learning theories, and the hands-on learning
and construction of knowledge theories.
Link between the construction of knowledge and problem
solving theories. As can be seen from the evidence, the
construction of knowledge theory is linked with the problem
solving learning theory (Berkemer, 1989; Johnson, 1988). The
students needed to obtain knowledge and experience regarding materials and processes before they could advance toward performing in problem-solving situations, as demonstrated by
Rick and Price's lack of problem-solving abilities in the previous examples.
199 The construction of knowledge theory is not limited to only the elementary levels of technology education. In fact, it plays a vital part in the problem-solving learning theory. As the students work to solve a problem, new knowledge is developed, and new questions arise, sewing seeds for more problem solving (Hutchinson & Karsnitz,
1994). This is the cycle of learning in technology education programs. (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989, Dewey, 1900).
Link between the problem-solving and hands-on learning theories. There appeared to also be a relationship between the problem-solving and hands-on learning theories in the study. As a major part of technology education programs, hands-on learning theory incorporates physical activity with tools and machines in order to help students learn and understand the curriculum (Sanders, 1993).
In doing so, the students use the hands-on learning theory to work with problem-solving activities (Sanders,
1993; Gokhale, 1996). Bosworth III and Savage (1994) mentioned that the use of technology laboratories and hands- on theory are vital to the success of problem-solving activities.
Link between the hands-on learning and construction of knowledge theories. Another relationship of the hands-on theory is with the construction of knowledge theory.
200 Knowledge construction for students in technology education programs involves the use of hands-on methods in order to learn how to work with the materials and processes of industry (Dewey, 1900; Herschbach, 1996). Dewey (1900) explained that
Again, we cannot overlook the importance for
educational purposes of the close and intimate
acquaintance got with nature at first hand, with
real things and materials, with the actual
processes of their manipulation, and the knowledge
of their social necessities and uses. In all this
there was continual training of observation, of
ingenuity, constructive imagination, of logical
thought, and of the sense of reality acquired
through first-hand contact with actualities, (p.
8)
John Dewey believed that experiences, specifically hands-on activities, were very important in the educational process. Through hands-on activities, students could combine intellectual stimulation with activities that expanded learning, and assisted in the construction of knowledge
(Dewey, 1900).
201 Relating the hands-on learning theory to the at-risk students, research suggests that at-risk students need to l e a m through methods that fit their learning style. O'Neil
(1990) stated that "at-risk students . . . have the most to gain from style-based learning" (p. 5). Dunn, Dunn, and
Price (1989) support the concept that at-risk students can benefit from learning according to their learning style.
According to Jackson-Allen & Christenberry (1994), at-risk students learn best through activities that utilize movement and hands-on methods. This would include the problem-solving learning method (Hunt, 1995).
As these at-risk students learn through hands-on and problem-solving learning methods, they are able to experience success and achievement (Jackson-Allen &
Christenberry, 1994). According to Ainiey & Sheret (1992), at-risk students prefer to remain in school when they are able to experience achievement and success.
In summary, there were relationships between the construction of knowledge, problem-solving, and hands-on learning theories in the technology education program in the study. These relationships were visible in the evidence obtained from the students.
202 Integration
During the course of the study, evidence was received that seemed to show that the students were learning more than just materials and processes and problem solving. The other subjects included mathematics and science.
Evidence
In an interview with Doug, he mentioned how the survey of technology education course assisted him with his mathematics course.
February 23, 1999
Me: So what helped you to do so well in the
math class?
Doug: Well, I'll tell you (looking very
confident). It was this class.
Me: Oh really? This class helped you with
your math?
Doug: Yeah. See, it's the drawing and drafting
stuff that helped me to know the answers
to those math questions.
203 The evidence obtained from this interview were supported by the interview with Doug's mother.
Me: I was wondering how he likes the
technology education class?
Rebecca: Well, for the first month, he hated the
class. He didn't want to go. We told him
it is a pre-engineering class, and that
it would be good for him.
Me: Okay. That's good. Well, I have been
observing him in the class, and he seems
to really enjoy it now.
Rebecca: Well that's good. Maybe you can work
with him on his math too, since he
doesn't do very well in math. But the
class has helped his math a lot since
the first of the year. His math grades
have been improving since then.
It would appear from the interviews with Doug and his mother that the drafting unit in the technology education class helped Doug with his math concepts. These include the calculation of areas cind fractions.
204 While observing Art work on area calculations for the house drawing portion of the course, I spoke with him for a few minutes about his mathematics abilities.
Me: Say, Art, that house looks really nice.
Art : Thanks.
Me: I couldn't help but notice how quickly
you were performing your calculations.
You have very good math skills.
Art : Yeah. 'Been practicin'. Also, this class
seems ta help with calculatin' areas and
dimensions. I didn't understand
fractions very well 'til I came ta this
class. Now my fractions are easy ta do.
An example of the integration of science and technology education was explained by Nick in an observation. In one conversation with him about the water bottle rockets, I asked him if he could explain to me why it flew. He said
"the bottle flies in the air because of a combination of forces created by the pressure of the air and the rush of the water from the nozzle. It's like a rocket engine, only with water." When I asked Nick about his knowledge of
205 physics, he replied, "what is physics anyway? It's the common sense knowledge of the world around you."
Analysis Supporting Integration
In recent years, the concept of the integration of knowledge between disciplines has become popular. Johnson
(1989) discussed the relationship between mathematics, science, and technology education in the following quote.
The sciences and mathematics are important to the
understanding of the processes and meaning of
technology. Their integration with technology
education is vital. . . . Thus, a sound base in
mathematics and biological, physical, and social
sciences is vital to an understanding of modern
technology. They should be part of technology
education curricula, just as technology education
should serve to bring additional meaning to the
curricula of the sciences, (pp. 3,7) .
Regarding the contributions of technology education programs to mathematics and science, there are studies that suggest there is evidence to support the claim that the
206 hands-on approach to teaching science does at least assist
students in some of the basic areas of mathematics. After
synthesizing 57 studies, Bredderman (1985) concluded
It appears that the programs' design to encourage
the use of laboratozry science, starting in the
elementary school years, does in fact result in
improved student performance in a number of valued
curricular areas. Based on the available research
evidence, it also appears that the use of inquiry-
based programs increases the amount of student
laboratory activity and decreases the amount of
teacher talk in the classroom, (p. 586).
Another meta-analysis which supports the use of hands-
on activities in mathematics was conducted by Lenoir (1989).
After reviewing 45 studies regarding manipulâtives in mathematics instruction, Lenoir concluded that students in grades 6 to 9 who used manipulatives in learning measurement
skills demonstrated greater achievement and longer retention than those who did not use manipulatives.
Other studies have found similar results. A descriptive
study by Simon (1991) of third and fourth grade students who received manipulative instruction found that the students
207 were more focused on their work while the manipulative
lesson was given. In a double post test study by Korwin and
Jones (1990), they wanted to know if cognitive knowledge
increased when hands-on activities were included in
classroom instruction regarding geodesic domes. The results
indicated that hands-on activities improved the performance
of students on a cognitive achievement test.
Studies from general school literature indicate that
at-risk students can achieve success in other subjects and
experience satisfaction in school, helping them to maintain
interest in school. Talley and Martinez (1998) discuss
hands-on mathematics, science, and language arts programs
that assist at-risk students to experience achievement and
success, and ultimately decide to remain in school. Donmoyer
and Kos (1993) discuss portraits of at-risk students, and
policies, programs, and practices in language arts that
utilize learning methods that match the learning styles of
the at-risk students. Basham (1994) discusses hands-on
focused science programs that assist at-risk students to
experience success in the science classroom. The previous
studies regarding other school programs and at-risk students
indicate that the use of hands-on activities are effective
in helping at-risk students to learn the material and experience success in school.
208 In conclusion, there is substantial research that exists regarding the effects of hands-on learning theory on the general school curriculum, as well as the technology education curriculum (Bredderman, 1985; LaPorte & Sanders,
1995; Lenoir 1989). Hands-on learning theory can help students to experience success and achievement in school, and help students to want to remain in school (Ainiey &
Sheret, 1992; Jackson-Allen & Christenberry, 1994). The next section to be discussed reveals the evidence obtained regarding at-risk students and life skills.
Life Skills
As I observed and interviewed the at-risk students in the technology education program, I realized that they placed a great emphasis on the value of learning the knowledge and skills they would need later in life. This is presented in the following evidence and analysis.
Evidence
As an example of this concept, an interview with Reed and Art described not only some of the purposes of
209 technology education, but also how the students view the technology education program.
January 7, 1999
Me: Okay. What do you think of the
technology education class?
Reed: It saves lives.
Me: Okay. How is that?
Reed: Well, if you know this stuff, then you
can wire a house correctly or build a
house correctly so that it doesn't cause
a fire or fall and kill someone.
Me: Okay. (Pause) Art, can you think of anything?
Art: Experience.
Me: Okay. How.
Art: You can learn how to do work that is
necessary in the real world. You can
learn how to make things out of metal
and wood.
Me: Why do you think that's important?
Art: I'm gonna buy a house some day, and I
don't want to call someone every time
somethin' gets broke.
210 It would appear that Reed and Art were very concerned about
having the skills necessary to properly maintain a home.
They indicated that these skills would be the most important
for them. They were not concerned about gaining experience
to work in industry after graduation from high school. In
addition, they believed the purpose of the program as
instructing students regarding life skills. In an interview
with Crystal, Reed's mom, the following discussion
transpired regarding life skills.
February 4, 1999 (interview)
Me: I would like to know if Reed has spoken
with you about the class, and if he
likes it or not?
Crystal: Well, he's always breakin' stuff.
Me : Breaking stuff?
Crystal: Yeah, he's always breakin' stuff and
then tryin' to put it back together.
Reed explained his actions as "tryin' to learn how things work. To do that, sometimes you gotta break things."
The students in the study viewed the ability to repair homes, vehicles, and other personal belongings as an
211 important life skill. In the following interviews, the students focus on maintaining home dwellings.
January 11, 1999 (interview)
Me: Okay. Do you think anything you learned
in this class is going to help you in
life?
Nick: A lot, man. Electricity symbols, wiring.
Like I said, when the people try comin'
to your house and fixin' your wirin',
and chargin' you $300.00, tryin* to rip
you off, you can look at it and say. Hey
man, what you talkin' about, man. That
costs $8.00.
John: Yeah, I saw the price tagt
December 1, 1998 (interview)
Me: Okay. Urn. What do you think will stay
with you from your experiences in
school?
Art: (pause) Dm. This probably will 'cause if
I get a house I'm gonna have to know how
to fix something 'cause I probably won't
have the money to pay the repair guy.
212 December 11, 1998 (interview)
Me: So how do you think this class compares
to other classes in school?
Reed: I think it's just as important. You
know, you use math here just like you
use math in everyday life. And I think
that reading and math will help you
throughout your life, you know. But
knowing the stuff in this class will
help you to save money, you know. Like
you could install your own air
conditioning or add a room onto your
house.
The students appeared to be very concerned about paying
someone to perform a repair when they could learn the skills
themselves and repair their own homes. Reed also believed
that mathematics was an important life skill that is needed to surviving in the world. Henry had a different view, as
shown below.
213 December 3, 1998 (interview)
Me: Okay. Urn. Are there things that this
program gives you that are important to
you?
Henry: (no pause) yeah, see, like, we get to
have the knowledge about the different
things in the world. Like, it gave me
the knowledge about the knowledge on the
outlets on a house. How to wire houses
and where the hot and neutral wires go
and all that stuff. And all those wires,
like, gave me the knowledge of how the
wiring in the house works. So someday I
can do the wiring on my own house.
Henry was very concerned about knowing how to perform the home repair correctly. He mentioned later that a friend had been killed in a fire that was caused by faulty electrical wiring. In the following interview. Art described another view of life skills.
December 1, 1998 (interview)
Me: What do you think about this class?
Art: (no hesitation) I like it.
214 Me: You do? Why?
Art: ’Cause it’s like showin’ me like a new
way to look at things.
Me: How?
Art: You know like, I look at somethin’ like
. . . like a can opener. I’ll know how
it was made, or a chisel or somethin',
or a chair or somethin’.
Me: Okay, so you can look more in-depth at
something instead of . . .
Art: (interrupting me) Instead of just 'cause
it’s there.
Art had a very unique perspective. He viewed the life skills
learned from technology education as important to understand
the technology around us. In this way, a person could
understand what something is made of, and how it was made.
Analvsis of the Evidence
Dewey supported the concept of teaching not only academic subjects in school, but also knowledge and skills necessary in daily life. Dewey (1900) stated that
215 Verbal memory can be trained in committing tasks,
a certain discipline of the reasoning powers can
be acquired through lessons in science and
mathematics; but, after all, this is somewhat
remote and shadowy compared with the training of
attention and of judgement that is acquired in
having to do things with a real motive behind and
a real outcome ahead, (p. 8-9)
According to Dewey, students can learn to perform well in mathematics and science lessons if they are motivated to do so. Dewey (1900) went on to explain that
. . . We must conceive of work in wood and metal,
of weaving, sewing, and cooking, as methods of
living and learning, not as distinct studies.
We must conceive of them in their social
significance, as types of the processes by which
society keeps itself going, as agencies for
bringing home to the child some of the primal
necessities of community life, and as ways in
which these needs have been met by the growing
insight and ingenuity of man; in short, as
instrumentalities through which the school itself
216 shall be made a genuine form of active community
life, instead of a place set apart in which to
learn lessons.
. . . In educational terms, this means that
these occupations in the school shall not be mere
practical devices or modes of routine employment,
the gaining of better technical skills as cooks,
seamstresses, or carpenters, but active centers of
scientific insight into natural materials and
processes, points of departure whence children
shall be led out into a realization of the
historic development of man. (p. 11,17)
As Dewey explained, technology education programs should
focus on instructing students about the life skills that are necessary for everyday life. The technology education curriculum was never intended to prepare students for work
in industry, but to instruct them regarding the fields of
industry in order to teach them the daily "necessities of community life" (Dewey, 1900, p. 9) . According to Shield
(1996),
. . . technology education within our schools is
instrumental in enhancing problem solving skills,
217 craft skills and knowledge, aesthetic awareness,
graphic and wider communication skills, social
awareness and team work (including combating
racial and gender prejudice), scientific and
technical literacy, industrial and economic
understanding, environmental activism, (and) "life
skills". . . . (P. 59)
According to Shield, technology education programs claim to provide a wide variety of life skills for the students.
Although these programs may not be everything to everyone, they do provide some necessary life skills education.
In summary, the technology education program in the study provided life skills to the students in the program.
These skills were viewed by the students as very important to their integration into society (Dewey, 1916). These skills include household repair, automotive repair, and drafting. Art mentioned that he was able to learn more about what things are made of, and how technology was used to form things. One very important perspective the students had regarding learning life skills was that they would save money. This was evident in almost every interview.
The evidence in the study was supported by the following literature. According to a study performed by
218 Taylor-Dunlop and Norton (1997), at-risk students prefer
programs that give them experiences and skills that they can
use in real life situations. The students in this study
indicated that the most important subjects to them were
mathematics and art; the mathematics course was important
for dealing with money, and the art course was important to
give the students experiences to work with their hands,
develop dexterity skills, and give them a way to express
themselves.
Zullinger and Mentavlos (1998) discuss how the schools
in the Charleston, South Carolina school district are helping at-risk students to learn life skills in the school
curriculum. The at-risk students have shown increases in achievement and success, and a desire to remain in school
from the curriculum.
As mentioned by Ainley, Reed, & Miller (1986), at-risk
students who experience success and achievement in school tend to remain in school. Power (1984) indicated that at- risk students' individual achievement level and academic performance was directly related to the student's decision to remain in school. This leads us to the next section regarding reasons at-risk students remain in school.
219 A Reason, to Stay in School
In this section, the characteristics of the students in the study will be described and evidence will be shown.
Following this, evidence will be provided regarding the reasons why the at-risk students want to remain in school.
Literature regarding the at-risk student will be discussed following the evidence.
Characteristics of Students in the Study
To help illustrate the characteristics of the students,
I will describe a few of them through the observations and interviews. Then I will follow the evidence with evaluation from literature.
One major indicator of at-risk behavior was the students' grades. All the students were maintaining cumulative grade point averages below a "C". The best grades for all the students were in the technology education courses. In discussing this phenomenon with the teacher, he said:
220 November 10, 1998 (discussion with teacher)
All the students you are observing have grade
problems. They just don't have any interest in
other subjects. They do their work in here and do
it willingly most of the time. But that's not what
the other teachers say is happening in their
classes.
Another at-risk behavior that was apparent among the
students was their lack of discipline. As a teenager, a
certain level of maturity is demanded in school. Many of
these students did not possess this maturity. When talking
with the teacher about Price after he spit on a poster and
yelled profanities, he said "If Price were to act a little more mature and stop trying to show off to others, then he would get a better grade in this class." A similar story was
learned from teachers of his other classes. During an
interview with Rick, I learned he had some behaviors that were not only deviant, but illegal as well.
December 10, 1998 (interview)
Me: Can you tell me what your life is like right
now?
221 Rick: (signaled for me to turn off the tape
recorder so that he can talk with me without
being recorded, then he agreed to talk into
the tape recorder, as long as I destroyed the
evidence later so that his mom wouldn't find
out.) Um. Well, let me see. I like to skate
board, and if I have something to draw. I ’ll
draw that. I like the drawing class in here
better than the metal. (With some hesitation
. . .) What I was telling you about off the
record, I like to smoke weed. I don't know,
it’s like I got it from being around too many
people who do it. Um. Tryin' to quit
cigarettes. They cost too much money. They
cost 5 bucks a pack now.
Rick was very at risk of leaving school. He had been suspended for smoking on campus, arrested for "doing drugs," and given an ultimatum by his mother to "shape up" or be sent to a military or community school. Rick did not want to go to a community school, but he also did not want to give up his smoking habits. Another at-risk student was Reed. He was a football player for the high school. He seems to be level-headed and calm most of the time. However, he is at
222 risk because his grades are low in all his classes, he has been in trouble for fighting, and comes from a low SES family. He was ineligible to play basketball or wrestle this year due to his low grades.
Another student, Doug, returned from a vacation to
Canada approximately three weeks after the school year began. While observing him, I obtained the following evidence regarding at-risk behavior.
September 29, 1998 (observation)
(Doug) is very quiet and introverted. He does not
talk unless spoken to, and is afraid to ask
questions. He is a little slow with his work. He
is working on drawings that should have been
completed weeks ago. He returned from a vacation
to Canada a few weeks ago and has not caught up
yet, and I doubt he will.
Not only was Doug behind in his course work, he also lacked the desire to do anything in the classroom or the laboratory. The teacher was constantly telling him to work harder, or his grade would suffer. Other at-risk characteristics he demonstrated were low SES, absenteeism, low math and reading scores, low self-esteaa, and behavioral
223 problems. The following family characteristics contributed
to the list: Doug's father was unemployed, his mother was
seldom home, he had several brothers and sisters, his
parents did not complete high school, and there was little
emphasis on education in the home. These characteristics
were common among the students in the study.
As can be seen from the interviews, these students were
at risk of leaving school early without a diploma. They
qualified as at-risk students, according to the list of
characteristics given by Batsche (1985).
A review of literature regarding the characteristics of
at-risk students was presented in chapter two of this
report. The student participants in the study demonstrated
at least 80 percent of the at-risk characteristics as
described by Batsche (1985). This was a criterion for being
selected for the study.
Staving in School
In this section, evidence regarding hands-on curricula
and successful education experiences will be discussed.
Following the evidence, literature will be discussed related to at-risk students in secondary education.
224 Hands-on Curriculum
Utilizing hands-on theory, the technology education program in the study reflected the characteristics described in the literature. This program focused on the incorporation of hands-on learning in every unit of study, as described in the following student interviews.
January 7, 1999 (group interview)
Me: Do you think there is a difference in the way
you learn in this class, with hands-on stuff,
compared to regular book work classes?
Reed: Yeah, I think you learn more hands-on. You
pay more attention, so you soak up more than
you would in a regular book work class, if
someone just gave you a book and told you to
read it.
In this interview, Reed explained that a program focusing on hands-on learning provided an easier method for him to leam. He also said that he did not l e a m as well through traditional academic methods. A similar experience was recorded in the following observation. I was observing Henry
225 as he worked on his robotic arm, and was able to have the following conversation.
November 10, 1998 (observation)
Me: What do you like about the survey of
technology education class?
Henry: Hey man, it's real interesting. I mean,
there's lots of things to learn and do with
your hands. I love to work with my
hands and that stuff. This is my best
class, 'cause I can learn things here.
According to Henry, he is able to l e a m the material in the survey of technology education course more easily than the material presented in the other school courses. He attributes the difference to the hands-on learning theory incorporated into the curriculum.
The previous evidence are supported by a hands-on technology-based program reported by Peck and Catello
(1990). In this report, the school district in which the program resided reported that "daily instruction in a challenging, hands-on, technological environment is associated with improved student attendance, discipline, attitude, and achievement" (p. 55).
226 Studies have been performed regarding hands-on activities and their relationship to at-risk student performance. Kozma and Croninger (1992) discussed studies that suggest interactive curricula can assist at-risk students to learn difficult, often abstract concepts (Cole &
Griffin, 1987; Van Haneghan, Barron, Williams, Vye, &
Bransford, 1992). Specifically, they describe how hands-on activities with computer technology can help at-risk students to perform better in school, giving them successful experiences, and helping them to remain in school.
As mentioned in the review of literature. Research performed by Bowen (1992) suggests that at-risk students should be taught using instructional methods based in hands- on learning theory and problem solving. This is supported by research performed by Garbo (1997) suggesting that at-risk students should be taught using alternative learning styles in order to help them be successful in school and enhance their self-esteem. Midkiff (1991) reports findings that indicate at-risk students should be taught in a learning environment that best suits their learning style, preferably using short units that focus on learning through hands-on activities.
Many at-risk students have difficulty learning through traditional methods of reading and memorizing facts. They
227 tend to have learning styles in which they prefer hands-on interaction with the material they are studying
(Friedenberg, 1999; Hunt, 1995). With the increases in student performance requirements in academic courses, an increasing number of students are placed at risk of prematurely leaving school (Berryman, 1980; Dorn, 1993
Weber, 1987).
Through studies regarding vocational education's role in retaining at-risk students in school (Batsche, 1985;
Coyle-Williams, 1989; Naylor, 1987; Rydalch, 1990; Tindall,
1988; Weber, 1986, 1987), it has been determined that at- risk students learn better through hands-on learning curricula (Friedenberg, 1999). In addition, at-risk students prefer to remain in school when there is an opportunity to gain valuable work skills (Monaco & Parr, 1988) . This leads to the next topic of discussion regarding successful educational experiences of at-risk students in a technology education program.
Successful Educational Experiences
Regarding the at-risk students in the study, I obtained evidence relating to their successes in the technology
228 education program. The following is an observation of Doug toward the end of the study.
February 23, 1999 (observation)
Another thing I observed after our interview was
how he (Doug) worked in the lab. Normally, he just
sits around and asks others to help him with the
tools, because he is afraid to get hurt. But
today, he went and got a portable 3/8" drill and a
3/8" drill bit. While he was trying to chuck up
the bit, the chuck was completely closed. Doug
tried to press the switch to cause the chuck to
spin while grasping the chuck, like he had seen
many others do, thinking that the chuck would
open. Instead, the chuck twisted out of his hand,
and startled him. He said, "Whoa. That didn't
work." I showed him how to open the chuck manually
by twisting it with my left hand counterclockwise,
and he said, "Oh, that's how you do it. I didn't
know." Then he chucked up the drill bit and began
drilling his wood.
It seems as though Doug has become a new
person, and I have seen him transformed before my
eyes over the past five months. He began the year
229 as a very timid and shy, underachieving student
who was afraid of tools. Today, I observed him as
being someone who is outgoing and talkative, and
not afraid of tools at all. He used the drill bit
effectively and independently, even after the
drill-chuck incident.
At the beginning of the study, Doug was a timid, shy,
introverted student who would not try to complete the work.
He said he was afraid of the tools and did not want to get
hurt. From discussions with his parents and with Mr. H., I
learned that he was lazy and did not like doing work.
Gradually, over the course of the study, I saw Doug improve
his attitude toward school, and try to improve his performance and his grade. He said the change for him was when he started doing better in mathematics, and he attributed the success to the mathematics concepts he
learned in the survey of technology education course.
Another student, Henry, was observed as he experienced success with his syringe robotic arm. The following is an observation of him as he worked.
230 November 17, 1998 (observation)
Henry finished one syringe hydraulic circuit,
filled it with water, and moved his robotic arm.
After seeing the arm move the way they wanted it
to, he said "That's phat, man, that's phatl Real
PhatI"
I asked Henry what the word "phat" meant. He said it means
great or wonderful. During this assignment, I observed Henry
several times, and noted his excitement after each step in building the robotic arm was achieved. Henry told me he wanted to become a mechanical engineer because he liked building things and making things move.
John experienced success when he and his partner were able to develop a complicated robotic hand that was very strong. Their design gave them a good grade for having the most complicated and most powerful robotic arm. During an interview, Nick expressed his ideas about achievement in the technology education class.
December 1, 1998 (interview)
Me: What do you think about the technology
education class?
231 Nick: I think it's fun, 'cause I like to work with
my hands, and I like to build stuff. Then
admire what I built.
In this interview, Nick mentioned that he experienced success and achievement in the technology education course.
I learned that this was his favorite class.
Most of the students expressed a desire to take technology education classes, and said they experienced more success in these classes than in the other school classes.
These students said they could see the results of their work immediately, and felt a sense of achievement when they had completed a difficult project.
As mentioned in the review of literature chapter, a sense of achievement was the primary reason at-risk students remained in school (Ainley, Foreman, & Sheret, 1991). As can be viewed from the evidence described in the previous pages, the at-risk students in the study emphasized that they enjoyed taking technology education courses because of the sense of achievement they received. This sense of achievement was very important to them, and allowed them to l e a m through hands-on methods.
A successful hands-on oriented program that focused on assisting at-risk students to remain in school was located
232 in the Hueneme School District in Hueneme, California. The program converted a drafting lab and a wood lab into a technology room where students could experiment with computerized robotics, computer-aided manufacturing, computer publications, and aeronautics and pneumatic technology. Daily attendance was 98%, with few disciplinary referrals. The students in the program experienced unprecedented success regarding California Assessment
Program (CAP) scores (Tindall, 1988).
In summary, the at-risk students in the study indicated that achievements in the technology education program were important to them. These achievements they received in the technology education program helped them to experience success. The next section will discuss the reasons why the at-risk students in the study were remaining in school.
Why They are Still in School
During the course of the interviews, I received the following answers as to why these at-risk students remained in school. These answers were confirmed by the teacher and through second and third interviews.
233 November 30, 1998 (interview)
Me: What has been the most helpful thing for you
about this program?
John: The most helpful thing for me from this
program is that now I look forward to going
to school, because I know I will have
something to do in this class. I've never
really hated (school). You know, at least I
have something to do during second and third
period.
During the observations, John and the other students would come into the classroom, excited to work in the laboratory. During the class, the students were busy, working on their projects, trying to get as much done as possible. They were joking with each other, smiling, and enjoying themselves. When the bell rang for the class to end, many times the teacher had to tell them to leave or they would be late for their next class. The students left reluctantly, and sometimes requested an excuse from the teacher for being late to the next class. These observations were reflected in the interview responses of the students.
234 December 1, 1998 (interview)
Me: How do you think the industrial tech classes
compare to other school classes?
Nick: (pause) Um. It’s probably the best class
here. You know, I like this class, ’cause you
get a lot of hands-on experience. It’s not
one of those classes where they just tell you
to look at the book and it shows you how to
do it, you know. It’s not the kind of class
where you sit there and it shows you in a
book how to do it, and you just sit there and
look at it. You get up and you make stuff,
and you mess with things and tools. You know,
you have fun in this class 1 This is a cool
class! If it wasn’t for this class, I
wouldn’t come to school.
Nick was serious about only coming to school for the technology education class. He was caught several times skipping other classes, and was suspended once for smoking on campus while absent from a class. However, he only missed the technology education class when he was sick.
235 Henry also said that he only missed the technology education class if he was sick. As for the other classes, he had the following to say.
December 3, 1998 (interview)
Me: How are your classes coming?
Henry: They're goin' okay, I guess. But not as good
as this class, like. I'm, like, real into
this stuff.
Me: So you do better in the classes you are
interested in?
Henry: Yeah, that's it. 'Cause I'm not really, like,
that interested in nothin' else in school.
Only this. Yeah.
Rick was another student who mentioned his poor attendance record in the other classes. He had the following to say.
January 28, 1999 (interview)
Me: How are things going in your other classes?
Rick: They're alright. I don't like them much. I
skip them most of the time. Sometimes, like,
when I skip class sometimes. I, like, skip,
236 like, first, second, and third periods. But
then I'll come back to school to go to Mr.
H.'s class (technology education). And then
I'll just skip the rest of the day. I'll just
come just because of his class. When I skip,
I usually get a ride with a friend. I don't
hang around school, so I don't get caught.
But sometimes Mr. H. catches me, and then I
get a Wednesday school (staying after school
on a Wednesday).
Rick really enjoyed the technology education survey class, and said he would take classes from the program every year until he graduates. He did well in the class, and performed much better than in other school subjects. Another student.
Price, mentioned that the technology education program had influenced him to stay in school.
January 28, 1999 (interview)
Me: Have you had any problems with staying in
school?
Price: Like what? Dropin' out or somethin'?
Me: Yes.
237 Price: Well, sort of. I mean, if this school didn't
have a industrial tech class [sic], I
wouldn’t come to this school. I'd go to
another school that had the class before I
came here. If I couldn't take it no where
[sic], then I wouldn't come to school.
Price said he was serious about not going to school unless he could attend a technology education program. He said the experience and knowledge he gained from the classes meant a lot to him.
The students in this study seemed to value the technology education class. Their interview responses indicated that their achievements and successful experiences in the technology education classes helped them to remain in school. In addition, they mentioned that they preferred to learn through hands-on activities, where they could see their achievements.
As mentioned in the review of literature, at-risk students are more willing to remain in school when they experience success and have achievements in the classroom
(Ainley, 1994; Ainley, Foreman, & Sheret, 1991) . In addition, at-risk students want to remain in school longer when they are able to l e a m through other methods, such as
238 problem solving and hands-on activities. Technology education could help at-risk students to remain in school by giving students opportunities to experience success and achievement through probleru solving and hands-on activities.
Cross-Theory Analysis
As the evidence from the study was evaluated and analyzed according to the theories that emerged, it became apparent that there were commonalities among the students, the evidence, and the theories. This relationship is described in Table 1.
As can be seen from the brief statements from observations and interviews in Table 1, there seemed to be consistency among the students regarding their responses to each theory. The students reported similar experiences with regard to each theory. Although it was apparent that Rick and Price had responses which were focused less on problem solving compared to John, Henry, and Nick, they had similar responses regarding their experiences with the construction of knowledge and hands-on learning theories. The reason for the differences in responses regarding problem solving could be related to the fact that Rick and Price have less
239 THEORIES EVIDENCE FROM STUDENTS
Rick John Henry Nick Price
Construction of "Ah. So the "Well, I learned "I changed the "But it doesn't "How to use the Knowledge different how to do things drill bit to a show how far the machines. A lot drawings a little better. smaller size so holes are from of stuff that represent . . I know how that the walls the sides." can help you if different views to fix of the base will you want to make or per something." not crack." somethin'." spectives."
Problem Solving "If I could just When the robotic "If Mr. Harman "I thought that "It kinda like get the fenders arm wasn't would let me do we should design you gotta know to stay on the working, "I sat what I wanted. and use a robot math. If you car. " down with my I'd make the car hand that has don't learn partner and smaller and split fingers." math, you won't devised a lighter." be able to do solution." nothin' in here."
Hands-on "We do more, "We do more "Hey man, it's "You get a lot "Information Learning like, hands- on hands-on . . . real of hands-on like drafting work, and, like, special interesting. I experience. It's and elec you get to work curricular or mean, there's not one of those tricity. A lot in the shop and whatever. I lots of things classes where of stuff that work with tools think we do more to learn and do they just tell can help you if and stuff." of that than with your you to look at you want to make just (reading) hands." the book." somethin'." text books."
Table 1; Cross-theory analysis table.
240 problem-solving experience and less knowledge regarding materials and processes than John, Henry, and Nick.
The five students in the table were selected because of the amount of evidence obtained from them during the study.
The other three at-risk students were not shown in the table because they contributed considerably less evidence than the other five students.
Summary
In this chapter, I discussed the evidence obtained in the study, and related the evidence to the construction of knowledge, problem-solving, and hands-on theories of learning. Then I performed an analysis of the evidence between students to demonstrate consistency and to help validate the evidence. Following this, I demonstrated the relationships between the three theories and supported this with responses from the students. Included were discussions regarding the integration of mathematics and science curricula with technology education curricula, and the life skills provided to the students through technology education programs.
Next, I discussed evidence and literature regarding the characteristics of the at-risk students in the study,
241 followed by evidence and literature of things that help them to remain in school. During the observations and student and teacher interviews, evidence revealed that five out of the eight at-risk students in the study said they remained in school primarily because of their achievement and successful experiences in the technology education program.
242 CHAPTER 5
SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS
In this chapter, I will summarize the report given in the previous five chapters. Following the summary, I will discuss the implications for educational practice and research.
Summary
This research project followed study and contemplation regarding at-risk students and their enrollment in technology education classes. These students seemed to enjoy the content and activities involved in the curriculum. Yet when I searched the literature for research performed on the subject, few were found regarding students' views about school. No studies were found that reflected at-risk students' views of technology education programs or their predecessors.
243 To revisit the statement of the problem, the enrollment of at-risk students in technology education classes is pervasive throughout the country. However, little knowledge was known about why at-risk students would want to take technology education classes, how they valued these classes, and if their desires to take and value of technology education classes helped them to remain in school.
Through qualitative methods performed in a Midwestern high school, I was able to obtain evidence from eight at- risk students. As I observed and interviewed these students, reviewed records and documents regarding their performance in technology education and other courses, and interviewed their teachers and parents, I came to know them. We developed trusting relationships that helped to relax the students. They trusted me with some of their intimate secrets, some of which I cannot reveal in this report. This trust allowed me to peer into their lives and see what they were seeing in the school and at home.
When the evidence was gathered and organized in my mind and in the NUD*IST program, several recurring themes were obvious. First, I could see that the students were learning through the construction of knowledge, as explained in the construction of knowledge theory in chapter two. Second, the students viewed problem-solving as an important part of
244 their education. Third, the subject of hands-on learning surfaced in almost every conversation. The students emphasized their desire to learn through hands-on activities, rather than through traditional lecture and book methods.
The last recurring theme was that the students viewed the technology education program as the primary reason they remained in school. The students in the study showed at-risk characteristics that reflected those discussed by Batsche
(1985). Interviews with teachers and the principal supported the views of the students that if it were not for their enrollment in technology education courses, they would not be in school.
Theory and Evidence Analysis
In chapter five, I discussed the evidence obtained in the study and related the evidence to the construction of knowledge, problem-solving, and hands-on learning theories.
As the evidence was evaluated and analyzed according to the theories that emerged, it became apparent that there were commonalities among the students, the evidence, and the theories. This relationship was described in Table 1. Five of the eight students in the study were included in the
245 table, due to the abundance of evidence obtained from them.
Evidence from the other three students was used throughout the report. The evidence from the students indicated that there was consistency among them with regard to each theory.
Evidence Evaluated According to Each theory
When the evidence was evaluated according to each theory, consistencies were found among the students. With regard to the construction of knowledge theory, the students demonstrated that they were learning the technology education concepts in this manner. The students were given a knowledge base from lectures and book assignments, and then given hands-on activities in which to construct new knowledge to add to the knowledge base (Dewey, 1900;
Jarvinen 1998).
Findings indicated that the construction of knowledge was a part of the curriculum in helping the students to learn the concepts regarding planning, materials, and processes, and to give the students the experience of working with these concepts (Dewey, 1900; Towers, Lux, &
Ray, 1966). Examples of evidence from each student in Table
1 helped support the finding, and demonstrated consistency among the students.
246 Evidence to support the problem-solving theory was not
as consistent among the students as the construction of
knowledge or hands-on learning theories. The students in the
power/energy/transportâtion course, who had knowledge
regarding planning, materials, and processes, were able to
perform well in problem-solving activities. The students who
were in the survey of technology education course had
difficulty performing well in problem-solving activities
(Berkemer, 1989; Johnson, 1988).
One student, Henry, in the power/energy/transportâtion
course had difficulty with problem solving due to his lack of knowledge regarding materials and processes. Although the
evidence between students was not consistent with regard to the problem-solving theory, the evidence did demonstrate the
importance of learning the concepts of planning, materials, and processes. Evidence from students was used to support
the theory of problem solving.
The hands-on learning theory was supported by Dewey
(1900, 1916, 1938) as an essential tool in the education of children and students. This philosophy of education and theory of learning was shown to be a vital part of the contemporary technology education curriculum (Herschbach,
1996). The evidence was consistent among the students with regard to this theory. The students indicated that they
247 learned better through hands-on learning methods than through book work or lecture methods.
Consistency and Triangulation of Evidence
As the evidence was evaluated according to theories, consistency was found between the students in both the construction of knowledge and hands-on learning theories.
There was inconsistency found in the problem-solving theory between two students in the survey of technology education course and three students in the power/energy/transportation course. It was determined that the difference was partially due to the fact that the two students in the survey of technology education course did not have as good of a foundation of planning, materials, and processes as the students in the power/energy/transportation course
(Berkemer, 1989).
The survey of technology course, which focused on planning, materials, and processes, was a prerequisite for the power/energy/transportation course, which focused on developing problem-solving skills. As Berkemer (1989) and
Johnson (1988) mentioned, students need a good foundation in planning, materials, and processes before they can successfully perform in a problem-solving environment.
24S Linking the Theories
From the evidence presented in chapter five, there
seemed to be a clear link between the construction of
knowledge theory and the problem-solving theory. This link was described by Berkemer (1989) and Johnson (1988), who explained that the knowledge of planning, materials, and processes was vital for the success of students in problem solving activities. In addition, while engaged in a problem solving activity, students were constantly constructing new knowledge as they work through problems (Brown, Collins, &
Duguid, 1989, Dewey, 1900). This demonstrated that once a good knowledge base of planning, materials, and processes was established, then an interactive relationship between problem solving and the construction of knowledge can occur
(Bredo, 1993; Dewey, 1900).
The link between the problem-solving theory and the hands-on learning theory was also apparent in the evidence and in the literature. The technology education curriculum in the study required students to work interactively with tools, planning, materials, and processes as they solve problems (Sanders, 1993; Gokhale, 1996).
The interactive nature of the curriculum helped students to l e a m as they worked with problem-solving
249 assignments. The evidence helped to establish a link between the hands-on learning theory and the construction of knowledge theory. It was found that knowledge construction for students in the technology education program involved the use of hands-on methods in order to learn how to work with the materials and processes of industry (Dewey, 1900;
Herschbach, 1996). Through hands-on activities, students could combine intellectual stimulation with activities that expanded learning, and assisted in the construction of knowledge (Dewey, 1900). With each of the links between theories, evidence from the study was provided.
Integration
A brief literature review regarding the integration of mathematics, science, and technology education was performed to supported the concept of integration (Johnson, 1989;
LaPorte & Sanders, 1995). A discussion regarding the use of hands-on activities with mathematics and science lessons was described (Bredderman, 1985). During the study, there was evidence of the integration of knowledge between these subjects, and the influence of the technology education program in assisting students to understand mathematics and science concepts (Korwin and Jones, 1990).
250 Life Skills
Evidence was obtained during the study that emphasized the importance of life skills in the lives of the students.
During interviews and observations, the students indicated that one of the reasons they took the technology education course was to obtain knowledge and skills regarding technology that could help them in life. Much of the evidence reflected the students' desires to know how to maintain a home or a vehicle. Other evidence indicated that the students wanted to be knowledgeable about the technology. Support for technology education's role in providing life skills was given by Dewey (1900, 1916, 1938) and Shield (1996).
A Reason to Remain in School
A brief review of the characteristics of the students in the study was performed. These characteristics were related to the literature, and helped to establish that the students were at risk (Batsche, 1985}.
A discussion of the evidence from the students indicated that they preferred learning through hands-on methods (Friedenberg, 1999). In addition, literature and
251 evidence suggested that at-risk students should be taught using short, hands-on activities (Dunn, Dunn, & Price, 1989;
Midkiff, 1991).
As discussed in the review of literature, at-risk students remained in school longer when given opportunities to experience success and achievement (Ainley, Foreman, and
Sheret, 1991; Beck & Muia, 1980). Evidence from the students in the study corroborated with the literature and demonstrated that at-risk students did enjoy school more when they experienced success.
In the study, the at-risk students found school in general to be boring and focused on academics. Although the students in the study had difficulty experiencing achievement and success in their other subjects, they experienced success and achievement in the technology education program. This was demonstrated by the evidence from the observations and interviews.
Not only did the students enjoy school more when they had successful experiences, they also indicated that the technology education program had a profound influence in their decision to remain in school. In the interviews, five of the eight students mentioned they would not be in school if it were not for the technology education program. They mentioned that the successful experiences they received in
252 the technology education program and the hands-on learning environment were the two main reasons they remained in school.
From the evidence, Rick indicated that he skipped his other classes because he did not like them, but that he would not miss the technology education course unless he was ill. John mentioned that he looked forward to school because of the technology education class. Henry mentioned that he was only interested in the technology education courses.
Nick stated that "If it wasn't for this class, I wouldn't come to school" referring to the technology education course. Price, referring to the technology education course, also mentioned that "If I couldn't take it no where [sic], then I wouldn't come to school." These are strong evidence that the technology education program has much to offer at- risk students in assisting them to remain in school.
In this light, technology education programs may be able to fill a role to provide incentive for at-risk students to remain in school. The technology education programs utilize hands-on learning activities that focus on problem solving and learning through the construction of knowledge, all of which the at-risk students in this study have demonstrated are important to their success and achievement in school.
253 Implications
This section will discuss the implications of this study in three subsections. The first subsection will relate the findings to the questions of the study. The second subsection will discuss the practical implications regarding educational practice that stem from the findings. The third subsection will discuss the theoretical implications regarding further research.
Questions of the Study
There were two primary questions that guided this study of how at-risk students view technology. These are addressed in the following pages.
How do At-risk Students Respond to a
Technology Education Program?
This question related not only to the experiences and knowledge the students gained while in the present technology education course^ but also was related to their previous knowledge and experiences. Most of the students had some experience with technology education in junior high or
254 middle school, and reflected on this knowledge in their
interviews.
The knowledge they obtained from the high school
technology education program in the study allowed the
students to construct new knowledge and build upon the
knowledge they had previously obtained. This knowledge was
used to help the students to perform better during problem
solving activities.
The students in the beginning course, the survey of technology education course, performed few problem-solving
activities. Those activities that were completed were very
simple in nature. These included wooden cars, shelves, and oil pumps. The curriculum of this beginning course concentrated on the planning, materials, and processes
knowledge used in industry.
The students responded positively to the curriculum in the beginning course, and showed interest in learning about technology. In the interviews, the students mentioned that learning through hands-on activities helped them to gain a better understanding of the material in the course, and to assist them with learning concepts that related to mathematics and science courses.
The responses of the students to the problem-solving activities in the power/energy/transportation course was
255 very positive. The students demonstrated a sincere desire to work hard and complete their projects, competing for the best designed robotic hand or the highest flying water bottle rocket. The literature regarding at-risk students revealed that they perform better when they are in an environment that helps them to be successful (Midkiff,
1991).
The observations and interviews revealed that the students preferred hands-on learning in a curriculum to the traditional book and lecture method. The students performed well in the technology education classes. However, the students did not perform as well in the other school subjects. Evidence from the students indicated the possibility that a lack of hands-on experiences in other classes could hinder their performance in those classes
(Midkiff, 1991). The next question deals with the reasons why at-risk students choose to enroll in technology education courses.
Why do At-risk Students Enroll in
Technology Education Classes?
This question focused on the reasons behind a student's decision to enroll in a technology education course. Several
256 responses were given by the students. One response was that they had a positive experience in a junior high or middle school technology education course and wanted to enroll in another technology education course (Midkiff, 1991). A second reason was that they wanted to learn more about technology. In each of these cases, the student reacted positively to the technology education course and enjoyed the knowledge and experience they gained. A third response given by five of the eight at-risk students was that if they had not been allowed to enroll in the technology education course, they would have dropped out of school.
Practical Implications
What do the Findings in this Study Tell Us about Teachers of At-risk Students?
At-risk students have learning styles that are different from average students (Brandt, 1990). At-risk students appear to be more successful in school environments that offer hands-on and problem-solving learning experiences
(Taylor-Dunlop & Norton, 1997). When at-risk students are subjected to a curriculum that focuses on lecture or textbook reading only, they tend to not compete well with
257 more academic students, and tend to feel less successful
(Ainley, Foreman, and Sheret, 1991).
Teachers of at-risk students could consider including hands-on and problem-solving learning methods in their
curriculum. This would allow the at-risk students to achieve
success. In addition, teachers could consider instructional
strategies that promote learning through hands-on activities.
What do the Findings in this Studv Tell Us about the Curriculum in Schools?
Evidence exists from studies that indicates curriculum factors may influence at-risk students to remain in school
(Ainley, 1989). According to Ainley, Batten, and Miller
(1984b), schools that offer hands-on learning programs demonstrate higher graduation rates than schools who focus on lecture-and-examination subjects geared to university entrance.
The findings in this study corroborated with the evidence from existing research regarding at-risk students and the use of hands-on learning curriculum in the classroom. Developers of curricula could consider including hands-on learning theory in the curricula they develop in
258 order to assist at-risk students in learning the material and performing better in the courses.
The evidence in this study also suggested that the integration of mathematics, science, and technology education should be considered when developing curricula for each of these subjects. This is supported by extensive research in the fields of mathematics, science, and technology education curricula (Bredderman, 1985; Johnson,
1989; Korwin & Jones, 1990; LaPorte & Sanders, 1995; Simon,
1991)
What do the Findings in this Studv Tell Us about the
Curriculum in Technology Education Programs?
The technology education curriculum has theoretical foundations in the works of Rousseau and Pestallozzi
(Barlow, 1967), Dewey (1900, 1916, 1938), and others. The primary method of instruction in the technology education field has been hands-on learning activities structured around solving problems associated with the technologies of industry. The technology education program in the study followed this curriculum.
Evidence from this study regarding at-risk students and technology education programs suggested that technology
259 education curriculum should continue to include hands-on
learning methods associated with problem-solving activities.
In this type of curriculum, at-risk students would be able to engage in units of study that would allow them to have successful experiences (Cole & Griffin, 1987; Van Haneghan,
Barron, Williams, Vye, & Bransford, 1992). Evidence relating to the influence of the technology education program on students' performance in other subjects suggested that the technology education curriculum could play an important part in the instruction of students regarding other subjects, such as mathematics and science.
Theoretical Implications
The theoretical implications of the study include the limitations of the study and the implications for further research. These will be discussed in the following sections.
Limitations of the Studv
As with all research studies, there are limitations that exist. This research study was qualitative in nature and focused on eight at-risk students in a technology education program. Therefore, the study is limited to the
260 male at-risk students in the study, in the technology
education program in which the study was conducted. In
addition, the subjects were not randomly selected, so they were not representative of the class. In other words, the
results of the study are not generalizable to any at-risk students outside the study.
Although the findings are limited to the population of this study, generalizations may be made by the individual
readers. Fraenkel and Wallen (1996) discussed the generalizations made in a qualitative study.
In a qualitative study, . . . , the researcher
may also generalize, but it is much more likely
that any generalizing to be done will be by
interested practitioners - by individuals who are
in situations similar to the practitioner, rather
than the researcher, who judges the applicability
of the researcher's findings and conclusions, who
determines whether the researcher's findings fit
his or her situation, (p. 465)
Another limitation of the study deals with the manner in which I distanced myself from the students in the observations and activities. I kept myself aloof from the
261 students in order to maintain a more objective description of the evidence. This may limit the amount of in-depth information obtained regarding the experiences of the students.
A last limitation of the study is that I was limited in the number of classes that I could observe. Due to my schedule, I was limited to observing students in the third and fourth periods. I was unable to view at-risk students in classes scheduled in the fifth through ninth periods.
Implications for Further Research
Longitudinal research should be conducted regarding the utilization of hands-on learning and problem-solving methods for teaching at-risk students, not only in technology education, but in other academic subjects as well. Further research is needed to help determine curricula that can assist at-risk students to experience success in school.
Another method for studying this issue would be to ask teachers in the school to participate in hands-on activities that relate to their subject. Through a study of the way at- risk students respond to hands-on learning activities in regular school subjects, teachers could increase the number of at-risk students retained in school.
262 Also, more research needs to be performed regarding the ways in which at-risk students view technology education programs and other school subjects. This would add to the existing literature and research base, and assist teachers, administrators, and college professors in the development of curricula for at-risk students.
Further research needs to be performed regarding the enrollment of at-risk students in technology education courses with regard to their prior experience and possible future experiences. This could assist parents and counselors with helping at-risk students to select courses that will help them to learn through hands-on learning methods.
Also, research regarding the integration of mathematics, science, and technology education as curriculum for at-risk students should be explored. Evidence from this study suggests that the integration of subjects in a hands- on learning environment could benefit at-risk students.
The duplication of this research study in another part of the country would help to confirm the evidence found in this study. In addition, a duplication of this study might reveal evidence that was not obtained in this study.
On a grander scale, quantitative local, area, and national research regarding curricula for at-risk students should be performed. This would help to determine the
263 influence of technology education programs with regard to at-risk students. In addition, it would assist curriculum developers in the technology education field to consider at- risk students when developing technology education curriculum.
264 APPENDIX A
LETTERS
265 CONSENT FOR PARTICIPATION
I consent to my child's participation in research entitled:
"A Naturalistic Study of students Enrolled in Technology Education Courses in a High School"
Mr. Phillip L. Cardon has . . .
Explained the purpose of the study, the procedures to be followed, and the expected duration of my child's participation. Possible benefits of the study have been described.
I acknowledge that I have had the opportunity to obtain additional information regarding the study and that any questions I have raised have been answered to my full satisfaction. Furthermore, I understand that my child is free to withdraw consent at any time and to discontinue participation in the study without prejudice to me or my child.
Finally, I acknowledge that I have read and fully understand the consent form. I sign it freely and voluntarily. A copy has been given to me.
Date: ______Signed:______(Student)
Signed: ______Signed:______(Researcher) (Parent or guardian)
Witness: ______
266 Dear Parent:
Hello. My name is Phillip Carden, and I am a graduate student at The Ohio State University in the Technology Education program. I am working on a study involving students' views of industrie technology/technology education classes in a high school. I will be observing and interviewing students who choose to participate. I hope to learn more about why students take industrial technology/technology education classes.
I would like to know if you would be willing to let your child participate in the study. All I want to do is to observe what your child is doing and have a few interviews with them to learn about their experience and thoughts on industrial technology/technology education. Some of the benefits of being in the study include:
• The knowledge that you are taking part in a unique study focusing on students' perceptions of industrial technology/technology education. • The knowledge that, through the help of this study, the industrial technology/technology education programs in central Ohio may remain in-tact and not be terminated. • The opportunity to share this information with others.
The observations will take place every day for four months. I will walk around the class and observe what your child and other volunteer students are doing and record this information in a note book.
The interviews will take place once before I begin observing, once after one month of observations, once again after three months of observations, and then at the end of the observations. These will be tape recorded for accuracy. In addition, your child's school records will be accessed to assist in writing an accurate description of the study. However, this study will not have any impact on your child's performance or standing in school.
Neither you nor your child will be inconvenienced in any way. No risks to you or your child or anyone are foreseen. All information will be kept confidential. Any reference to your child's name or other information that may identify your child will be changed to protect confidentiality. All records, notes, sound tapes, etc. will be destroyed after the research and write up are complete. You and your child may ask questions whenever you want and they will be answered promptly and to your
267 satisfaction. Your child's participation is voluntary. You and your child have the right to refuse to participate and withdraw later without jeopardy to your child's grades or standing in school.
If you and your child agree to participate in the study, please sign the accompanying form and return it to school where I will collect them. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Phillip L. Cardon
268 APPENDIX B
INTERVIEW SCHEDULE
269 Interview Schedule
Section A - Background
Al. What stands out for you in your life over the past few years? What kinds of things have been important? What stays with you? A2. Tell me something about what your life is like right now. What do you care about, think about?
Section B - Self-Descriptions
Having talked a bit about your life, now I would like you to think about yourself.
Bl. How would you describe yourself to yourself? If you were to tell yourself who you really are, how would you do that?
B2. Is the way you see yourself now different from the way you saw yourself in the past? What led to the changes?
B3. How would you see yourself in the future?
Section C - Education
Cl. What do you think will stay with you about your experiences in school [in the technology education program]? (Probe for specific academic and non-academic experiences)
02. Has being in the technology education program changed the way you think about yourself or the world?
03. In your classes here, have you learned anything that made you see things differently or think about school differently?
04. What has been most helpful to you about the technology education program?
270 C5. Are there things that the school does not give you that are important to you? Are there things that the technology education program give you that are important to you? Are there things that you would like to learn that you don't think you can learn in school? In the technology education program?
Section D - Conclusion
Okay, thanks. Now before we stop I have just one or two more questions.
Dl. What will you and your life be like in 15 years?
D2. Are there any other questions that I should have asked you that would have thrown some light on the subject . . . that is technology education and at-risk students?
271 APPENDIX C
OBSERVATION INSTRUMENT
272 Data Gathering Instrument
Name of student: Date: Period:
What I See What I think
Student Attributes:
Motivation
Investment in lesson
Interaction w/ peers
Lesson Presentation:
Indiv/Small groups
Project(s)
Miscellaneous :
273 REFERENCES
Addams, J. (1902). Democracy and social ethics. New York: Macmillan.
Ainley, J. (1989). Changing aspects of postcompulsory schooling. Unicorn.15.3-6.
Ainley, J. (1994). Multiple indicators of high school effectiveness. Author/SLD. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 372 101)
Ainley, J., Batten, M., & Miller, H. (1984a). Patterns of retention in Australian government schools (ACER Research Monograph No. 27). Hawthorn, Victoria.
Ainley, J., Batten, M. , & Miller, H. (1984b). Staving at high school in Victoria. (ACER Research Monograph No. 23). Hawthorn, Victoria.
Ainley, J., Foreman, J., & Sheret, M. (1991). High school factors that influence students to remain in school. The Journal of Educational Research.85(2). 69-80.
Ainley, J., Reed, R., & Miller, H. (1986). School Organisation and quality of schooling. Hawthorne, Victoria: ACER.
Ainley, J., & Sheret, M. (1992). Effectiveness of high schools in Australia: Holding power and achievement. Author/EUR. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 342 081)
Atkinson, P. & Hammersley, M. (1994). Ethnography and participant observation. In Norman Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Pp. 248-61.
Barlow, M. L. (1967). History of industrial education in the united states. Peoria, IL: Chas. A. Bennett Co., Inc.
274 Basham, L. B. (1994). Active Learning and the At-Risk Student; Cultivating Positive Attitudes towards Science and Learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 374 088) .
Batsche, C. (1985). The high school drop out: Vocational education can help. Normal, IL: Illinois State University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 262 213)
Beck, L., and Muia, J. A. (1980). A portrait of a tragedy: Research findings on the dropout. The High School Journal.64(2), 65-72.
Berkemer, R. A. (1989). Evaluating the effectiveness of a design course in teaching creative problem solving. Unpublished dissertation. The University of Minnesota, Minnesota.
Berryman, S. (1980). Vocational education and the work establishment of youth. Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corporation.
Bogdan, R. C. & Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Bogdan, R. C. & Taylor, S. J. (1975). Introduction to Qualitative research methods. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Bohn, R. C., MacDonald, A. J., Fales, J., & Kuetemeyer, M. (1986). Energy, power. & transportation technology. Peoria, IL: Bennett & McECnight Publish Co.
Bonser, F. G. & Mossman, L. C. (1923) . Industrial arts for elementary schools. New York: Macmillan.
Bosworth III, F. M., & Savage, E. N. (1994). A concept for an environment for teaching and learning problem solving. Journal of Technology Studies.20(1).10-14.
Bowen, R. C. (1992). Infusing technology into education. Paper presented at the New Horizons Conference for the Virginia Community College System. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 345 759)
275 Brandty R. (1990). If only we knew enough. Educational Leadership,48(3),3.
Bredderman, T. (1985). Laboratory programs for elementary school science: A meta-analysis of effects on learning. Science Education,69> 577-591.
Bredo, E. (1993). The social construction of learning. In Gary D. Phye (Ed.), Handbook of Academic Learning: Construction of Knowledge. San Diego: Academic Press, Inc., pp. 3-46.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A. & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher,18(1),32-42.
Buban, P., & Schmitt, M. L. (1982). Understanding electricity and electronics. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.
Buffer, J. J., & Scott, M. L. (1986). Special needs guide for technology education. Reston, VA: International Technology Education Association, 1986.
Calder, C. R., & Horvath, L. J. (1979). Education of the handicapped and its implications for elementary industrial arts. ACESIA Monograph No. 7. Washington, DC: American Council for Elementary School Industrial Arts, 1979. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 187 946)
Carbo, M. (1997). Learning styles strategies that help at-risk students read and succeed. Reaching Today's Youth: the Community Circle of Caring Journal,1 (2),37-42.
Cobb, R. B. (1983). External and internal access to vocational education for handicapped students in Illinois. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana- Champaign.
Cole, M., & Griffin, P. (Eds.) (1987). Improving science and mathematics education for minorities and women. Madison: University of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Center for Educational Research.
Cote, B. S. (1984) . A paradigm for problem solving instruction. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education,21(4),17-30.
276 Cottingham, S. J. (1990). The impact of industrial arts classes on the retention of potential dropouts in southwestern Wisconsin. Unpublished thesis, Brigham Young University, Utah.
Cottle, T. J. (1977). Private lives and public accounts. Amherst, MS: University of Massachusetts Press.
Coyle-Williams, M. (1989). Vocational Education and the At-Risk Student. TASPP Brief. Berkeley, CA: National Center for Research in Vocational Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 339 814)
Cunningham, S. G. (1982). The effect of enablers on the performance of learning disabled, normal, and educable mentallv retarded children on selected industrial arts tasks. Ph.D. Dissertation, The Ohio State University.
Damico, S. B. (1989). Staving in school: Social learning factors which lead to retention. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (San Francisco, CA, March 27-31, 1989). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 324 776)
DeVore, P. W. (1980). Technology: An introduction. Worcester, MA: Davis.
Dewey, J. (1900). The school and society. (13^^ Ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York: Macmillan.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Collier.
Donmoyer, R., & Kos, R. (1993). At-risk students: Portraits, policies, programs, and practices. New York: State University of New York Press.
Dorn, S. (1993). Origins of the "dropout problem." History of Education Ouarterlv.33(3),353-373.
Dunn, R., Dunn, K., & Price, G. E. (1989). Learning stvle inventory (LSI). Lawrence, ECS: Price Systems, Inc.
277 Duttweiler, P. C. £ Shirley, L. (1993). Start making sense. Vocational programs reach students who tune out traditional schooling. Vocational Education Journal.68(5),22-25.
ESmerson, R., Fretz, R., £ Shaw, L. (1995). Pursuing members' meanings. In Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ericson, E. E. (1946). Teaching the industrial arts. Peoria, IL: Chas Bennett Co.
Fine, M. (1994). Working the hyphens: Reinventing self and other in qualitative research. In Norman Denzin £ Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Pp. 70-82.
Fontana, A. £ Frey, J. H. (1994). Interviewing. In Norman Denzin £ Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Pp. 361-76.
Foster, P. N. (1994). Technology Education: AKA industrial arts. Journal of Technology Education.5 (21.21-39.
Fraenkel, J. R., £ Wallen, N. E. (1996). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York, N.Y.: McGraw- Hill, Inc.
French, T. E., Svensen, C. L., Hensel, J. D., £ Urbanick, B. (1985). Mechanical drawing. New York: McGraw- Hill Book Company.
Friedenberg, J. E. (1999). Predicting dropout among Hispanic youth and children. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education.36f3). in press.
Gagne, R. M. (1985). The conditions of learning and theory of instruction (4th ed.). New York: Holt, Elinehart and Winston.
Gardner, M., Stone, A., Goldman, S., Scott, T., Withrow, F., Edwards, C., Golden, K., Vasquez, N., Bucy, S., £ Smoak, M. (1988). Technology and the at-risk student. Electronic Learning.8 (3),35-49.
278 Gay, L. R. (1996). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and application. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc.
Geertz, C. (1973). The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books.
Geertz, C. (1983). Local Knowledge. New York: Basic Books.
Gokhale, A. A. (1996). Effectiveness of computer simulation for enhancing higher order thinking. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 33(4), 36-46.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1981). Effective evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Herschbach, D. R. (1992). Curriculum change in technology education differing theoretical perspectives. Journal of Technology Education,3 (2),4-15.
Herschbach, D. R. (1996). On che proposition that technology education leaders have neglected important qualities of industrial arts education. Journal of Technology Studies.22(2),4-14.
Hunt, S. K. (1995). Learning the hard wav: Learning styles and at-risk populations. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Speech Communication Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 391 196)
Hutchinson, J., & Karsnitz, J. (1994). Design and problem solving in technology. Albany, NY: Delmar Publishers Inc.
International Technology Education Association (1996). Technology for All Americans. Reston, VA: Author.
Jackson-Allen, J. & Christenberry, N. J. (1994). Learning style preferences of low- and high-achieving young African-American males. Nashville, TN: Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 387 758)
279 Janesick, V. J. (1994). The dance of qualitative research design. In N. Denzin & Y, Lincoln (Eds) Handbook of Qualitative Research (p. 209-19). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Jarvinen, E. (1998) . The Lego/Logo learning environment: An experiment in a Finnish context. Journal of Technology Education,9 (2),47-59.
Johnson, S. D. (1988). Problem solving behavior research model for industrial education. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education,25(3),29-40.
Korwin, A. R., & Jones, R. E. (1990). Do hands-on, technology-based activities enhance learning by reinforcing cognitive knowledge and retention? Journal of Technology Education,1 (2),39-50.
Kozma, R. B., & Croninger, R. G. (1992). Technology and the fate of at-risk students. Education and Urban Society.24 (4),440-453.
LaPorte, J. E. & Sanders, M. E. (1995). Integrating technology, science, and mathematics education. In G. E. Martin (Ed.) Foundations of technology education (p. 179-220). Peoria, IL: Glencoe/McGraw-Hill.
Lavoie, D. R. (1991). The construction and application of a cognitive-network model of prediction problem solving. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching. Lake Geneva, WI.
Lenoir, P. (1989). The effects of manipulâtives in mathematics instruction in grades K-college: A meta analysis. (Doctoral dissertation. North Carolina State University). Dissertation Abstracts International. 50/05.1241A.
Lincoln, Y. & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park: Sage.
Lux, D. G. (1979). Trade and job analysis - The scourge of ia. School Shoo.38(7).2.
Maley, D. (1972). The Maryland plan. School Shoo.32(8).52-54.
280 McCann, R. A., & Austin, S. (1988). At-risk youth: Definitions, dimensions and relationships. Philadelphia, PA: Research for Better Schools Inc. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 307 359)
McCrory, D. L. (1987). Technology education: Industrial arts in transition, a review and synthesis of the research. Columbus, OH: National Center for Research in Vocational Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 290 935)
McCutcheon, G. (1976b). The use of ethnography and criticism as methods for disclosing classroom settings. Paper resented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 129 926)
McMillan, J. (1996). Educational research: Fundamentals for the consumer (2"'‘ Ed.). New York: Harper-Collins.
McMillan, J., & Reed, D. (1993). Defying the odds: A study of resilient at-risk students. Richmond, VA: Metropolitan Educational Research Consortium. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 389 780)
Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education: A Qualitative approach. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass Inc., Publishers.
Midkiff, R. B. (1991). Learning style needs of at-risk students: Teaching math and social studies the way they learn. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 331 632)
Mishler, E. G. (1990). Validation in inquiry-guided research: The role of exemplars in narrative studies. Harvard Educational Review.60(5),415-441.
Monaco, F., & Parr, P. (1988). From problems to promise in Pittsburgh. Vocational Education Journal,63(6).39-41.52.
Naylor, M. (1987). Reducing the Dropout Rate through Career and Vocational Education. Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 282 094)
Neden, M. (1990). Delta County technology project. The Technology Teacher.50(3) ,25-28-
2S1 Olson, D. W. (1963). Industrial arts and technology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
O'Neil, J. (1990). Making sense of style. Educational Leadership.48(3),4-8.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2“^ Ed.). London: Sage.
Peck, K. L., & Catello, J. P. (1990). Instructional Alternatives for At-risk Students. Media & Methods.2 6 (5),12.54-57.
Phye, G. (1997). Learning and remembering: The basis for personal knowledge construction. In Gary D. Phye (Ed.), Handbook of academic learning: Construction of knowledge, (pp. 47-64). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Power, C. (1984). Factors influencing retentivity and satisfaction with secondary schooling. The Australian Journal of Education,28(2),115-125.
Pullias, D. T. (1992). Integration of students with disabilities into a contemporary technology education program: A case study. Ed.D. Dissertation, University of North Texas. (Dissertation Abstracts International 53: 4192A)
Repp, V. E., & McCarthy, W. J. (1989). Metalwork: Technology & practice. Peoria, IL: Glencoe Publishing Co.
Rush, S., & Vitale, P. A. (1994). Analysis for determining factors that place elementary students at risk. Journal of Educational Research.87(6).325-333.
Ryan, J. E. (1992). High school technical drawing students teach computer-assisted drafting to gifted/learning disabled students: An action research study. Ed.D. Dissertation, University of Massachusetts. (Dissertation Abstracts International 53: 3497A)
Rydalch, J (1990). Jones Center Vocational/Academic Program (JCVA). Cincinnati, OH: American Vocational Association Convention, December, 1990. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 328 771)
2S2 Sanders, M. (1993). In praise of technology education content and method. Journal of Technology Education,5 (1), 1- 3.
Sanders, M. (1995). Technology for all Americans. Journal of Technology Education.6 (2),2-3.
Savage, E. & Sterry, L. (1990). A conceptual framework for technology education. Reston, VA: International Technology Education Association.
Scarborough, J. D., & White, C. (1994). Phys-Ma-Tech: An integrated partnership. Journal of Technology Education,5 (2).
Scheurich, J. J. (1996). The masks of validity: A deconstructive investigation. Qualitative Studies in Education,9 (1),1-12.
Shield, G. (1996). Formative influences on technology education: The search for an effective compromise in curriculum innovation. Journal of Technology Education,8 (11, 50-60.
Simon, P. J. (1991). Descriptive study of a third and fourth-grade manipulative-based mathematics program. (Doctoral dissertation, Lehigh University). Dissertation Abstracts International. 52/05. 1674A.
Snyder, J. F. & Hales, J. F. (1981). Jackson's mill industrial arts curriculum theory. Charleston, WV: West Virginia Department of Education.
Spewock, M. (1990). The effects of task analysis and instructional cues on engine assembly by mentally handicapped learners. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education,27(3),33-42.
Stinespring, J. A. (1991). Cognition: What we know and what it means for art teachers. Atlanta, GA: Paper presented at the Convention of the National Art Education Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 334 134)
Student handbook (1997). Unpublished manuscript.
283 Talley, S., & Martinez, D. H. (1998). Tools for Schools: School Reform Models Supported bv the National Institute on the Education of At-Risk Students. Washington, DC: National Inst, on the Education of At-Risk Students. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 418 174)
Taylor-Dunlop, K. & Norton, M. M. (1997). Out of the mouths of babes: Voices of at-risk adolescents. The Clearing House,70(5),274-78.
Tindall, L. W. (1988). Retaining At-Risk Students: The Role of Career and Vocational Education. Information Series No. 335. Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 303 683)
Tooke, D. J., Hyatt, B., Leigh, M., Snyder, B., & Borda, T. (1992, November). Why aren't manipulatives used in every middle school mathematics classroom? Middle School Journal. pp. 61-62.
Towers, E. R., Lux, D. G., and Ray, W. E. (1966). A rationale and structure for industrial arts subject matter. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University, Industrial Arts Department of Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 013 955)
Van Haneghan, J., Barron, L., Williams, S., Vye, N., & Bransford, J. (1992). The Jasper Series: An experiment with new ways to enhance mathematical thinking. In D. Halpern (Ed.), Enhancing thinking skills in the sciences and mathematics (pp. 15-38). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Waetjen, W. B. (1989). Technological problem solving: A proposal. Reston, VA; International Technology Education Association.
Wagner, W. H... & ECicklighter, C. E. (1986). Modern woodworking. South Holland, IL: The Goodheart-Wilcox Co., Inc.
Weber, J. M. (1986). The role of vocational education in decreasing the drooout rate. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University, National Center for Research in Vocational Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 264 444)
284 Weber, J. M. (1987). Strengthening vocational edtication*s role in decreasing the dropout rate. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University, National Center for Research in Vocational Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 284 062)
Williams, T. H. (1987). Participation in education. (ACER Research Monograph No. 30). Hawthorn, Victoria.
Willis, P. E. (1977). Learning to labor: How working class kids get working class jobs. Farnborough, England: Saxon House.
Winek, G., & Borchers, R. (1993). Technological problem solving demonstrated. The Technology Teacher.52(51.23-25.
Wright, D. E. (1997). A case study of at-risk students: how at-risk students succeed in spite of adversity. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Walden university.
Zuga, K. F. (1982) How elementary school students experience the curriculum: An educational criticism for industrial arts education. Unpublished dissertation. The Ohio State University, Ohio.
Zuga, K. F. (1994). Implementing technology education: A review and synthesis of the research literature. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 372 305)
Zullinger, C., & Mentavlos, M. (1998). Support programs for at-risk youth. North Charleston, SC: Charleston County School District. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 422 449)
285 IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (QA-3) //
(/ A4
e
L& |Z 8 1.0 ■ 3 0 ■■ L: 22 If lâà !? 1 * 0 i.i lUI 1.25 U III 1.6
150mm
%
/APPLIED A IIVI/4GE. Inc 1653 East Main Street Rochester. NY 14609 USA Phone: 716M62-0300 - = ^ - = Rue 716/288-6968
e 1993. AppBad Unag*. Inc. An ngMs Rasanod
/