Learning good electronics or coping with challenging tasks: The priorities of excellent students

Journal of Technology Education

Volumn 14, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 20-34

  Barak, Moshe ^a  

^a BEN GURION UNIVERSITY OF THE NEGEV   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0242603063     PISSN: 10451064     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.21061/jte.v14i1.a.2     Document Type: Review

References (33)

1. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
2. Atkinson, S. (2000). The development of creativity versus the need for high levels of performance in design and technology. The International Conference of Scholars on Technology education. Braunschweig, Germany, September 24-27.
3. Barak, M. (2001). Evaluation of MeteOrite program for promoting science and technology studies at Ort Schools in Northern Israel (Research report). Haifa: Technion I.I.T.
4. Barak, M., & Doppelt, Y. (1999). Integrating the Cognitive Research Trust (CoRT) program for creative thinking into a project-based technology curriculum. Research in Science and Technology Education, 17(2), 139-15.
5. Barak, M., & Doppelt, Y. (2000). Using portfolio to enhance creative thinking. The Journal of Technology Studies, XXVI (2), 16-25.
6. Barak, M., & Maymon, T. (1998). Aspects of teamwork observed in a technological task in junior high schools. Journal of Technology Education 9(2), 3-17.
7. Barlex, D. (1994). Organizing project work. In Banks F. (Ed.), Teaching technology (pp. 124-143). London: Routledge.
8. Cajas, F. (2000). Technology education research: potential directions. Journal of Technology Education, 12(1), 75-85.
9. Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction. Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453-494). Lawrence Erlbaum, NJ: Hillsdale.
10. Cross, A., & McCormick, R. (1986). Technology in schools. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
11. Department of Education. (1995). Technology in the national curriculum. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office.
12. De Vries, M. J. (1994). Technology education in Western Europe. In D. Layton (Ed.), Innovations in science and technology education (pp. 31-44). Paris: UNESCO.
13. Glaser, R. (1992). Expert knowledge and processes of thinking. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Enhancing thinking skills in the sciences and mathematics (Vol. 5, pp. 63-75). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
14. Greeno, J. G. (1997). On claims that answer the wrong questions. Educational Researcher 26(1), 5-17.
15. Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In: N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Ed), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105-117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
16. Hennessey B. A., & Ambile T. M. (1998). The conditions of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of creativity: Contemporary psychological perspectives (pp. 1-38). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
17. Hill, A. M. (1997). Reconstructionism in technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education 7, 121-139.
18. Hoepfl, M. C. (1997). Choosing qualitative research: A primer for technology education researchers. Journal of Technology Education 9 (1).
19. International Technology Education Association (ITEA). (2000). Standards for technological literacy: Content for the study of technology. Reston, VA: Author.
20. Johnson, S. D. (1995, Spring). Will our research hold up under scrutiny? Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 32(3), 3-6.
21. Johnson, S. D. (1997). Learning technological concepts and developing intellectual skills. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 161-180.
22. Lewis, T. (1999). Research in technology education-some areas of need. Journal of Technology Education, 10(2), 41-56.
23. Lewis, T. (2000). Adopting standards for technology education. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 38(1), 71-90.
24. Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
25. National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
26. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
27. Resnick, L. (1987). Education and learning to think. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
28. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.
29. Roth, W. M., & Bowen, G. M. (1993). An investigation of problem framing and solving in a grade 8 open-inquiry science program. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 3(2), 165-204.
30. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Research, 15, 4-14.
31. Sternberg, R. J. (1998) A three-faced model of creativity. In R. J. Sternberg, (Ed), The nature of creativity: Contemporary Psychological Perspectives (pp. 125-147). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press 125-147.
32. Thomas, J. W., Mergendoller, J. R., & Michaelson, A. (1999). Project-based learning: A handbook for middle and high school teachers. Novato, CA: Buck Institute for Education.
33. Zuga, K. (1999). Thoughts on technology education research, Conference on Advanced Discussions on Technology Education Research, American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), project 2061, December, http://www. project2061.org/technology