home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
Resource Library: Multimedia
/
Resource Library: Multimedia.iso
/
hypertxt
/
msdos
/
montana0
/
jnq.010
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1993-03-10
|
20KB
|
376 lines
Journal of Technology Education Volume 4, Number 1 Fall 1992
A Comparison of Principles of Technology
and High School Physics Student Achievement Using a
Principles of Technology Achievement Test
John Dugger and David Johnson
Society has traditionally taken the position that
education is a primary means of achieving national goals.
Unfortunately, we have never collectively agreed upon "what
kind" of education is needed--general or vocational. The
present K-12 public educational system in the United States
is comprised of general and vocational education tracts.
Historically, one of the goals of vocational education
has been to provide entry-level job skills. In contrast,
general education, as the title implies, has attempted to
equip students for living or for further education. In
preparing students to enter the workforce, vocational
education can provide an opportunity to obtain hands-on
experiences with many of the theoretical concepts presented
within the general education classes. Many secondary
education students, however, never take vocational courses
because they do not view them as relevant to college
preparation (Meier, 1991). Conversely, many vocational
education students are not taught the theoretical
mathematics and science concepts that are needed to cope
with a rapidly changing society.
Vocational education has been considered a separate
discipline within the broad context of education and has
been in continuous competition with general education for
students and resources. Vocational education has been
concerned with providing people with gainful employment
after graduation. A "Blue Collar" affiliation is
considered undesirable by those students wanting to attend
college or obtain further education. The unfortunate
outcome is that the average high school graduate is
"nonfunctional" in our modern society (Cummins, 1989).
If education is designed to help the individual attain
self-fulfillment in a technologically complex,
work-oriented society, then education must be a synthesis
of both general and vocational education. Anything less
jeopardizes the individual's opportunity for
self-fulfillment.
A knowledge of how to integrate mathematics and
science into technology is a necessity in today's society
and those individuals who cannot function at that level
will effectively be disenfranchised from participating
fully in our national life. In fact, those citizens not
educated in science will be unable to make informed
decisions regarding such issues as nuclear energy,
radiation, and pollution (The National Commission on
Excellence in Education, 1983).
Many Iowa high school vocational education programs
provide minimal exposure to anything beyond basic
principles of mathematics and science. Consequently,
students choosing the vocational rather than general
education track run the risk of not obtaining an adequate
mathematics and science background. They will be incapable
of comprehending the technologically complex society of the
1990s and beyond. This common occurrence might be avoided
by establishing a stronger relationship between general and
vocational education programs at the high school level.
Newly approved federal legislation has been designed
to improve existing vocational programs by strengthening
the linkage with general education in the areas of
mathematics and science. The Carl D. Perkins Acts of 1984
provided considerable emphasis on the importance of
mathematics and science principles within vocational
education programs, and was seen as a positive step toward
better academic relationships between vocational and
general education programs. The newly approved Carl D.
Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Education Act of
1990 became law on September 25, 1990. In signing this
law, President George Bush authorized $1.6 billion in
federal funds to improve:
...educational programs leading to academic and
occupational skills competencies needed to work in a
technologically advanced society (Section 2).
The Perkins Act of 1990 holds considerable opportunity
for both vocational and general education in building and
reinforcing what Erekson and Herschbach (1991) refer to as
"strategic partnerships." These collaborative efforts can
be instrumental in providing educational programs which
integrate vocational and general education concepts, making
them relevant in today's technological society.
One promising development designed to infuse general
education mathematics and science concepts into the high
school vocational education curriculum is entitled
Principles of Technology (PT). This program was developed
by the Center for Occupational Research and Development
(CORD) in Waco, Texas in the mid 1980s to supplement
vocational offerings in secondary programs.
PRINCIPLES OF TECHNOLOGY--PURPOSES AND DESCRIPTION
The PT program is a two-year, high school course in
applied physics, made up of fourteen units, each
investigating an important principle. The content for each
module is specified in Figure 1. Each of the individual
fourteen concept modules is studied within the context of
electrical, mechanical, fluid and thermal energy systems.
FIRST YEAR CONCEPTS
Force
Work
Rate
Resistance
Energy
Power
Force Transformation
SECOND YEAR CONCEPTS
Momentum
Waves and vibration
Energy conversions
Transducers
Radiation
Optical systems
Time constraints
FIGURE 1. Principles of Technology Concepts
The physics concepts are taught within a laboratory
setting, which allows students to obtain both theory and
hands-on application of each principle. The students
enrolled in the PT program are from the vocational
education track and not typically enrolled in physics
courses. For the most part, PT courses in Iowa are taught
by industrial technology teachers. In Iowa, industrial
technology education is included under the vocational
umbrella. The primary benefit of the PT curriculum is the
emphasis on application skills using mathematics and
science concepts.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
Since the State of Iowa had invested heavily in the
Principles of Technology program through vocational
education, it was important to complete a summative
evaluation of this program. The amount of achievement
gained by students based on exposure to the first year
Principles of Technology program was of interest to the
State of Iowa and program developers. Since the program
was designed to cover basic physics concepts, it was also
important to compare the gain with any gain that was due to
exposure to a basic high school physics class.
Accordingly, the purpose of this study was to compare
student achievement regarding certain basic physics
concepts between students who had completed first year
Principles of Technology and students who had completed
high school Physics.
METHOD OF STUDY
The methodology employed in this study included
population and sampling procedures, instrument development
procedures, data collection, and data analysis. A pre-test
post-test control design was utilized with two treatment
groups. The following figure depicts this design.
Principles of Technology T1 X1 T2
Physics T1 X2 T2
Control T1 T2
T1 = Pre-
T2 = Post-
X1 = PT Treatment
X2 = Physics Treatment
FIGURE 2. Research Design Model
POPULATION AND SAMPLE
The population for this study was all secondary
vocational programs in Iowa where Principles of Technology
was offered. With more than 50 sites of implementation,
Iowa was a good location for the study. The sites were at
various stages of implementation. Sixteen sites had offered
the program for two years or more. In order to obtain a
better estimate of the effectiveness of the program, only
sites that had offered the program for at least two years
were utilized. Therefore, the sample included these 16
Iowa sites.
Of these sites, 14 programs were being taught by
industrial technology education teachers who had
participated in one two-week workshop to prepare for
teaching the Principles of Technology. The remaining two
sites were taught by certified Iowa high school physics
teachers. During the data collection for the first year
programs, one program taught by an industrial technology
education teacher failed to complete the study. Therefore,
the sample for this study consisted of 15 Iowa high schools
where Principles of Technology and physics were taught as a
part of the regular curriculum.
INSTRUMENT DEVELOPMENT
The procedure involved the generation of a test item
bank covering all objectives for the first seven units or
the first year of Principles of Technology. Conversations
with many people involved with the course suggested that
during the first year only six units could be covered
rather than seven. Therefore, the questions on the
instrument were limited to only those first six units. The
item bank was generated by participants and project staff
at Iowa State University during the summer Principles of
Technology workshops. Multiple items for each objective
were generated. These items were then examined by the
project staff and modified to improve clarity and assure
good testing procedure. Five secondary physics teachers
and one community college physics instructor were hired to
revise items as necessary to standardize terminology that
may differ in Principles of Technology materials and Iowa
high school physics materials. It was determined that a
number of terms differed and where differences existed,
both the Principles of Technology term and the term found
in typical physics textbooks or materials were used.
These items were then formed into 40 question unit
tests and administered at the 15 sites. An analysis of the
six unit test yielded degree of difficulty scores for each
item and the degree to which each item correlated with the
total unit score. This information was utilized in the
selection of items to be included in the overall first year
Principles of Technology instrument. This instrument
consisted of 120 questions and covered each of the six
units.
DATA COLLECTION
The data collection phase involved two steps. The
first step was the administration of the pre-test, a form
of the 120 question instrument developed in the previous
phase. The second step was the administration of a
post-test at the end of the academic year at each of the 15
sites.
The two treatment groups included students enrolled in
a Principles of Technology first year class and students
enrolled in a high school physics class at each of the 15
sites. The control group consisted of students who were
enrolled in neither the Principles of Technology nor
physics, but had a similar male-female ratio and similar
achievement on the Iowa Test of Educational Development
(I.T.E.D.) as the students enrolled in the Principles of
Technology class.
The pre-test data were collected during the first two
weeks of September. The post-test data were collected
during the first two weeks of May. The relatively early
post-test data collection was necessary since many seniors
complete their coursework during this time.
DATA ANALYSIS
The data analysis procedures included both an item
analysis of the pre-test and post-test results along with a
one-way analysis of variance of the treatments and control
groups. The results of these analyses are reported in the
next section.
RESULTS
The focus of this section is on the achievement
measures for both the pre-tests and post-tests for all
three groups. Pretest and post-test scores are listed for
all groups in Tables 1 and 2.
TABLE 1
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PRE- AND POST-TEST SCORES FOR TREATMENT
AND CONTROL GROUPS
---------------------------------------------
Pretest Post-test T
Mean N Mean N
(SD) (SD)
--------------------------------------------
PT 47.80 257 80.14 139 20.0*
(11.30) (17.16)
Physics 55.07 275 65.77 136 9.3*
(12.07) (16.33)
Control 37.78 135 36.45 83 0.942
(8.62) (10.94)
--------------------------------------------
*P<.01
The higher mean pre-test by the physics students
suggests that science achievement may be initially higher
in this group.
The number of subjects taking the post-test was
reduced significantly when compared to the pre-test
numbers. Follow-up calls to the sites indicated that many
seniors were not available during post-test administration.
It was discovered that many Iowa schools release their
seniors up to three weeks prior to the end of the semester.
Normal class attrition was also a factor.
The Principles of Technology students scored
significantly higher than the other two groups on the first
year post-test. Although the physics group displayed a
gain, it was not nearly as great as the gain for the PT
students. Pre-test, post-test, and levels of significance
for each of the three groups are listed. A significant
increase in student achievement was one outcome of exposure
to the first six Principles of Technology units.
IMPLICATIONS
Based on Principles of Technology pre- and post-test
results, it appears that exposure to the first six units of
the Principles of Technology results in significant student
achievement gains regarding basic physics principles. It
appears reasonable to conclude that the methodologies
employed by this very structured program are appropriate
for the content covered. If one assumes that the content
is necessary and useful for the majority of the students,
then most school districts should seriously consider the
Principles of Technology as an offering for a wide range of
students. This is consistent with the claim that PT was
designed for students that fall between the 25th and 75th
percentiles.
Although never intended to replace Physics, the
Principles of Technology first year course does a
significantly better job in increasing student achievement
regarding basic physics concepts as defined by the
Principles of Technology program. One must exercise
caution in drawing inferences regarding the two programs
since physics also is responsible for covering higher level
concepts that are not considered basic and may be
considered non-intuitive.
One may conclude that the Principles of Technology
does an excellent job in addressing the objectives as
listed at the beginning of each unit. The test questions
used for the pre- and post-test were drawn from these
objectives.
Several questions remain however:
1. How will students who have completed Principles of
Technology perform on standardized physics achievement
tests?
2. If Principles of Technology is taught entirely by
certified physics teachers, will the student
achievement scores increase or decrease?
3. Can the repetition of subsystems (mechanical, fluid,
electrical, and thermal) be useful when organizing high
school physics content?
References
Meier, R. L. (1991). Participation in secondary
vocational education and its relationship to college
enrollment and major. Journal of Industrial Teacher
Education, 28(2), 47-60.
Cummins, A. J. (1989). Let the revolution begin.
Industrial Education, 78(9), 4.
The National Commission on Excellence in Education.
(1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for
educational reform. Washington, DC: U.S. Government
Printing Office.
Erekson, T. L., & Herschbach, D. (1991). Perkins act of
1990 has key provisions for technology education.
School Shop, 50(8), 16-18.
________________
John Dugger is Associate Professor and Chair and David
Johnson is Assistant Professor in the Department of
Industrial Education and Technology at Iowa State
University, Ames, IA.
Copyright 1992, Journal of Technology Education
ISSN 1045-1064. Permission is given to copy any
article or graphic provided credit is given and
the copies are not intended for sale.
Journal of Technology Education Volume 4, Number 1 Fall 1992
