International Summerconference of Technology Education

Evo, Finland, 04.06.2008 Mart Soobik funded by:

Chairman of the Estonian Association of Technology Education

www.tehnoloogia.ee

The project

- Update stands for Understanding and Providing a Developmental Approach to Technology Education

- aim of the programme is to improve science and technology teaching in Europe in order to appeal young people to technology, especially girls

- new learning material and methods for three-age groups: early, Childhood, elementary school and general education shall result from the project

Advancements to the State of the Art

Professional Education: EXPERTISE

Gymnasium, ages 16-18:DEEPER UNDERSTANDING, KNOW-HOW

Comprehensive School, Higher Grads, 7-9: BASIC UNDERSTANDING

Comprehensive School, Lower Grads, 1-6: INTEREST, BASIC SKILLS (encouragement, problem solving)

Early Childhood Education: CURIOSITY (introducing, experimenting with materials)

Innovative Aspects

- strong focus on early childhood and primary education

- most attitudes are shaped at these ages

- focus on girls, disseminate best practice examples

Girls’Day at a car centre in Soest

Girls’Day at a car centre in Soest, Germany

Girls‘Day – Future Prospects for Girls: Technology professions and crafts are presented to girls from ten years and upward

Fragmentation of technology education

Boys Girls

Professional Education

Comprehensive School, Lower Grades 1-6

Gymnasium

Comprehensive School, Higher Grades 7-9

Preschool education, kindergardens

Aims of the project

- to examine why girls drop out from technology education at different stages of their education

- to create new ways and educational methods to make the image of technology and technological careers more attractive for both boys and girls

- to promote, encourage and mobilise especially girls and young women for engineering and technology both as a career and as active users of modern technology

Early Childhood Education (ECE)

- experiences for younger children focus on play, discovery and exploration

- older children enjoy a focus on more formal and complex experiences (science experiments, construction, design projects: planning, problem solving, applications of learned principles)

Tiny Tots Science Corner

Early Childhood Education (ECE)

- it is important- to encourage children to observe and experience their environment - to stimulate children’s curiosity, creativity and playfulness- to enhance the development of self-confidence of children in their ability to think up and carry out experiments and projects

Gender and Technology Education

- existing role models and attitudes of people around (toy marketing, children’s books and films etc. media, family members, neighborhood, teachers, peers)- connections with the wider community (working places)- self-image and identity- barriers (glass-ceilings) - visible and invisible- segregation by gender in learning situations / teaching

UPDATE Website

- a web-based collaborative environment- collaborative working space for the online editing and compilation of questionnaires and texts- a blog for supporting partner communication and dissemination activities, also participations of schools and children- work package spaces- mailing list- Update portfolio for workpackages 2-4- public part for diverse audiences- http://update.jyu.fi/index.php/

UPDATE Project Partners

14.

UPDATE Project

- practical case study - author: Leena Turja, Department of Early Childhood

Education, University of Jyväskylä, Finland - ROBOT PROJECT FOR PRESCHOOL CHILDREN (at

5 – 6 years old)

Practical case study

The situation in which the observation was made: Science education demonstration class in preschool teacher education program. University of Jyväskylä Spring term 2007'

ROBOT PROJECT FOR PRESCHOOL CHILDREN (at 5 – 6 years old) - Description

Twelve second year teacher students planned, organized and implemented a Robot project for 20 preschool children of a neighbourhood kindergarten visiting with their teachers the science education demonstration classes held in the university campus area. The activity with children took about 2,5 hours and was supervised by the lecturer of science education in early years. This project aimed to encourage both the children and the teacher students to involve in a playful technology activity. The majority of the children as well as the students

were female.

Practical case study

In the beginning the children were introduced and engaged with the idea of planning and building robots by a humorous act representing “a scientist needing visitors’ help in her robot laboratory”.

Practical case study

The planning and the construction of an imaginary robot took place in triads of one student and two children. Some of the students were mainly documenting and assessing the activity. The students wrote afterwards short reports with photos of each triad’s work. The photos taken were shared with the class, the kindergarten and the

families.

Practical case study

In the beginning children discussed with the adult’s guidance about the idea of their robot: for what purposes it will be developed, what are the functionsof the robot, how does it work, with what kind ofenergy does it run etc. The adult put downchildren’s sayings. At this phase the children werealso allowed to look around and get materialsavailable for their constructions. The assumptionwas that children at this age still need this kind ofconcrete help for getting ideas and continuing theirplanning process. Most of the material was recycleone - especially we were pleased to get exitingmaterial from the computer support staff of ouruniversity (parts of old computers etc.). Some ledlights, bulbs, batteries, bulb & battery holders andswitches were bought beforehand. Every robot gotsome kind of electricity. Adults helped especiallywith clueing (hot clue) and electricity. The children were asked to make also drawings of their plans but most of them wanted to start to build their robot along the planning. Many of the descriptions of the

features of the robot were given after the work was ready.

Practical case study

In the end the whole group gathered back into a circle to introduce the robots to each others and to give feedback of their experiences. The robots were taken with into the kindergarten and the teachers were prompt to continue the project with the children.

Practical case study

Examples of the reports (childrens sayings):

Superdog Robo ”Its duty is to take care of domestic work, cleaning and playing with children. This robot speaks the dog-language. The robot has a bag for the garbage. These lights turn on when it’s working by night. The robot moves with four legs like a dog does. You can start it

with this key.”

Practical case study

Lady Cleaning-Dishwashing Robot ”This robot has a snout (trunk) that sucks all the dishes inside itself. The middle part of the robot makes the dishwashing and the clean dishes come out trough the tube in the backside. This robot has four legs that it uses to suck little trash on the floor. The wings on the both sides wipe dust. On the back it has a switch to turn it on. You know it is on when the lights on its back are blinking. There you can also turn it off. The robot notices trash and dishes with its eyes.”

Practical case study

The Power Protector Robot of Jyväskylä ”This robot defends against the enemy. It can also make damage: it can make snowing, melt the snow and even make the ground muddy. This golden plate reflects sun beams and attacks of enemy backwards like a trampoline. The robot uses both gasoline (open and fill the blue bottle) and batteries (for the light).”

Practical case study

Robot Ruttunen ”This is a huge cleaning robot that can be turned on with a key. The key is stored in a key box. The light in its eyes turns on by bushing the swift behind its head. There is a secret box inside its head to hide the wires.”

Practical case study

Robot " This name is just Robot. It can do a lot of things. It is a security guard. It has magnetic ears. The start key can hang on the ear. The computer is inside."

Multinational Project Consortium

- 16 partners from 11 different countries participate

- the research project is funded by the European Comission for the next three years

- UPDATE will be part of the Sixth Framework Programme of the EC

- with € 922,300 for the three years

UPDATE Project Partners and Contact Persons

1. University of Jyväskylä, Finland, http://www.jyu.fi/ Dr. Aki Rasinen, Dr. Marja Kankaanranta, Dr. Leena Turja, Päivi Fadjukoff

2. University of GlasgowUniversity of Glasgow, United Kingdom, http://www.glasgow.ac.uk/ John R. Dakers and Wendy Dow

3. IUFM University Institute for Teacher Training of Aix-Marseille, France, http://www.aix-mrs.iufm.fr/ Prof. Jacques Ginestié

4. "Alexandru Ioan Cuza" University of Iasi, Romania, http://www.uaic.ro/ Prof. Dr. Doina Balahur

5. Ovidius University Constanta, Romania, http://www.univ-ovidius.ro/imim/ Prof. Ph.D. Valentina Pomazan

UPDATE Project Partners

6. University of Tallinn University of Tallinn, Estonia, http://www.tlu.ee/ ; http://www.tehnoloogia.ee/

Mart Soobik, Ene Lind

7. Dortmund University of Applied Sciences, Ada-Lovelace-Mentoring-Association, Germany, http://www.fh-dortmund.de/ Prof. Dr. Sylvia Neuhäuser-Metternich

8. University of Koblenz, Ada-Lovelace-Project, Germany, http://www.uni-koblenz-landau.de/ Dr. Martina Endepohls-Ulpe, Judith Ebach, Prof. Dr. Wolf-Andreas Liebert

9. FCRI Catalan Foundation for Research and Innovation, Spain, http://www.fcri.es/ Dr. Jordi Mas

UPDATE Project Partners

10. Competence Center Technology-Diversity-Equal Chances, Germany, http://www.kompetenzz.de/ Sabine Mellies, Carmen Ruffer

11. Institute of Philosophy at the Bratislava Slovak Academy of Sciences, Slovakia, http://www.klemens.sav.sk/fiusav/index_en.php Prof. Tatiana Sedová

12. University of Education, Vienna, Austria, http://www.phwien.ac.at Prof. Dr. Josef Seiter

13. Regional Institute for Educational Research Marche, Italy, http://www.irre.marche.it Prof. Cristina Pavisic

UPDATE Project Partners

14. Aristotle University, Dept. Of Mechanical Engineering, Greece, http://isag.meng.auth.gr/home.html Prof. Dr.Eng. Kostas Karatzas

15. University Complutense de Madrid, Spain, http://www.ucm.es/ Dr. Jesus Pintor, Prof. Maria Asuncion Peral Cerda

16. IDEC S.A, Greece, http://www.idec.gr/ Xenia Chronopoulou

UPDATE Project workshop

- the last workshop was in France in the Teacher Training University of Aix- Marseille (UIFM), centre in Aix-en- Provence, May 22-24, 2008

- workshop on curriculum content analysis results of Technology Education

- overview of the work produced during the first year by each partner and an overview of the each of the work- packages by the WP leaders

- curriculum analyses carried out in each country- analysis of Technology Education in Estonian General

Education Schools, presented by Mart Soobik- define weak points or aspects of the existent curricula

and educational approach

UPDATE Project workshop

- synthesis and discussions based on the findings, definition of weaknesses and strengths of various curricula also in the light from the findings from WP5

- discussion about the project's next phases according WP6 goal: Restructuring a holistic curriculum

UPDATE Project

Thank you!