Abstract
Using language adequately within technology tasks is part of technological literacy. However, this can be challenging for students, and a teacher may need to help students to master aspects of domain specific language that matter for the task at hand. In this study, a curricular design was developed through a series of trials, with the aim to arrive at general principles for a pedagogy that helps students to write about an engineering (electronics) design. The curricular design was theoretically anchored in ‘genre pedagogy’. The interventions were carried out by one experienced teacher in one course, during three consecutive cycles of trialling and improving the curricular design. The resulting design principles for teaching to write about (engineering) design are concerned with: a relevant, complete and feasible focus on language; scaffolding the writing process; procedures for teacher support. For each of these, specifications are described.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abrahams, I., & Millar, R. (2008). Does practical work really work? International Journal of Science Education, 30(14), 1945–1969.
Barlex, D. (2007). Assessing capability in design & technology: The case for a minimally invasive approach. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 12(2), 49–56.
Brinton, D. M., Snow, M. A., & Wesche, M. B. (1989). Content-based second language instruction. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Christie, F. (1998). Science and apprenticeship, the pedagogic discourse. In J. Martin & R. Veel (Eds.), Reading science: Critical and functional perspectives on discourses of science (pp. 153–178). London: Routledge.
Cummins, J. (1979). Cognitive/academic language proficiency, linguistic interdependence, the optimum age question and some other matters. Working Papers on Bilingualism, 19, 121–129.
de Vries, M., & Meijers, A. W. M. (2013). Beliefs, acceptances and technological knowledge. In M. de Vries, S. O. Hansson, & A. W. M. Meijers (Eds.), Norms in technology (pp. 55–65). Dordrecht: Springer.
Ellis, R. (2009). Task-based language teaching: Sorting out the misunderstandings. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 19(3), 221–246.
Friese, S. (2012). Qualitative data analysis with atlas.ti. London: Sage.
Hajer, M. (2018). Teaching content through Dutch as a second language—How ‘Language Oriented Content Teaching’ unfolded in mainstream secondary education. Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics, 7(2), 246–263.
Halliday, M. A. K. (Ed.). (2004). The language of science. London: Continuum.
Hand, B., & Prain, V. (2012). Writing as a learning tool in science: Lessons learnt and future agendas. In B. J. Fraser, G. K. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 1375–1384). New York: Springer.
Holmberg, P. (2009). Tid att lära genre. Utvärdering av “språket i skolans ämnen och skolans ämnen i språket” (Time to learn genre. Evaluation of “the language in content areas and content in language”). Gothenburg: Resurscentrum för mångfaldens skola.
Kimbell, R., & Stables, K. (2008). Researching design learning: Issues and findings from two decades of research and development. Dordrecht: Springer.
Love, K., & Humphrey, S. (2012). A multi-level language toolkit for the Australian curriculum. The Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 35(2), 173–191.
McKenney, S., & Reeves, T. (2012). Conducting educational design research (1st ed.). New York: Routledge.
Norström, P. (2014). How technology teachers understand technological knowledge. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 24(1), 19–38.
Rose, D., & Martin, J. R. (2012). Learning to write, reading to learn: Genre, knowledge and pedagogy in the Sydney school. Bristol: Equinox.
Schleppegrell, M. (2004). The language of schooling. A functional linguistics perspective. Mahwah: LEA.
Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to adolescents: Rethinking content-area literacy. Harvard Educational Review, 78(1), 40–59.
Short, D., Vogt, M. E., & Echevarria, J. (2011). The SIOP model for teaching science to English learners. Boston: Pearson, Allyn & Bacon.
Smit, J., Bakker, A., Van Eerde, D., & Kuijpers, M. (2016). Using genre pedagogy to promote student proficiency in the language required for interpreting line graphs. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 28(3), 457–478.
van Dijk, G. (2018). Het opleiden van taalbewuste docenten natuurkunde, scheikunde en techniek: Een ontwerpgericht onderzoek, with a summary in English (educating language sensitive teachers in physics, chemistry and technology: A design-based study). (Ph.D., Utrecht University).
van Dijk, G., & Hajer, M. (2017). Teaching the language of technology: Towards a research agenda. In M. J. De Vries (Ed.), Handbook of technology education (pp. 537–549). Dordrecht: Springer.
Wellington, J., & Osborne, J. (2001). Language and literature in science education. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Wray, A., & Perkins, M. R. (2000). The functions of formulaic language: An integrated model. Language and Communication, 20(1), 1–28.
Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th edn.). London: Sage.
Funding
This research was funded by the University of Applied Sciences Utrecht.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Not applicable.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Availability of data and material
Available to editorial board on request.
Code availability
Not applicable.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
van Dijk, G., Hajer, M., Kuiper, W. et al. Design principles for language sensitive technology lessons in teacher education. Int J Technol Des Educ 32, 971–986 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-020-09622-w
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-020-09622-w