THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY WORKFORCE:

A CONTEMPORARY CHALLENGE FOR

TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION
Rodger W. Bybee
Technology education must be seen as
Kendall N. Starkweather,
DTE, CAE fundamental to achieving workforce compe-
tencies, especially when the competencies
In tbe past decade tbere bas emerged
a new urgency for tecbnology educa-
tion. The need, expressed in numerous
include critical thinking, solving semi-
reports, centers on the global econo-
my and the fact tbat tbe United States structured problems, and reasoning.
is losing its competitive edge, Witb
some consistency, tbe reports warn
tbat our tecbnological superiority may
be at risk. For example. The American
Competitiveness Initiative (2006) sug- children for the world they will live cation as an important means of
gests that technical progress may in?" He answers the question in a resolving the problems. However,
account for as mucb as one-balf of tbe chapter entitled "The Quiet Crisis," seldom have we seen technology and
economic growtb of the U,S. since According to Friedman, "The education combined, as in technology
World War II (p, 4), Rising Above the American education system from education. We think this is a situation
Gathering Storm, a 2006 report from kindergarten through twelfth grade that has been overlooked for too long.
tbe National Researcb Council, identi- just is not stimulating enough young
fies tbe top actions tbat federal policy people to want to go into science, So, the technology education commu-
makers could take to enbance the math, and engineering" (p, 270), nity is left with the fundamental ques-
science and technology enterprise so Friedman makes this bold statement tions: What should be done to address
tbat tbe United States can success- about science and technology educa- the quiet crises and what changes are
fully compete, prosper, and be secure tion in America: required in our purposes, policies, pro-
in tbe global community of tbe grams, and practices? It is one thing
twenty-first century (p, 3), Because it takes fifteen years to to proclaim the need to change, and it
create a scientist or advanced is quite another to provide specific
Recently, popular books bave engineer, starting from wben tbat recommendations for criticai compo-
addressed tbemes associated witb tbe young man or woman first gets nents of the educational system.
U.S, position in tbe global economy hooked on science and math in ele-
mentary school, we should be The discussions by the federal govern-

T
and the need for improving education,
Thomas Friedman wrote one of the embarking on an all-hands-on-deck, ment, business and industry, and pop-
most popular books. The World Is Flat no-holds-barred, no-budget-too- ular autbors reveal a perspective tbat
(2005), Friedman bas a compelling large, crasb program for science tecbnology educators bave known for
premise: Tbe international economic and engineering education immedi- some time: Tbe global economy is
playing field is level, bence bis use of ately, Tbe fact tbat we are not largely driven by technological innova-
tbe metapbor—tbe world is flat. The doing so is our quiet crisis. tion. One reasonable extension of this
"flattening" has resulted from informa- Scientists and engineers don't proposition is that the United States
tion technologies and associated inno- grow on trees. They have to be needs engineers. Another implication
vations that have made it technically educated tbrougb a long process, is that all citizens need higher levels of
possible and economically feasible for because, ladies and gentlemen, technological literacy. Our main argu-
U,S, companies to locate work "off- tbis really is rocket science ment is simple and straightforward.
sbore," for example, call centers in (p, 275), Whether the need is for more engi-
India, Friedman argues tbat a flatter neers or better educated citizens,
world will benefit all of us, tbose in We bave intentionally pointed out acbieving bigher levels of technologi-
developed and developing countries. technology as one of the disciplines cal literacy is an imperative for all
About balfway through the book, identified as a major factor influencing nations, and K-12 education must
Friedman asks the educational ques- economic progress. The various play a significant role. But, what
tion, "Have we been preparing our reports also consistently identify edu- is the appropriate response? What

THE TECHNOLOGY TEACHER • May/June 2006 27

 direction can technology educators
derive from the perspectives and
recommendations presented by
groups closely aligned with technolog-
ical innovation and interest in the
T
economy?
Table 1: Reports Reviewed
The Problem for Technology
Education Achieve, Inc, and National Governors Association. (2005), America's high
schools; The front line in the battle for our economic future. Washington,
Although there are many reports, all DC: Authors,
with varied recommendations, there
still is a need for specific recommenda- Achieve, Inc. and National Governors Association. (2005), An action agenda
tions that answer the question: How for improving America's high schools. 2005 National Education Summit on
should K-12 technology education High Schools, Washington, DC: Authors,
respond to the growing crises?
Achieve, Inc, (2005), Rising to the challenge: Are high scbool graduates pre-
With support from the Office of Science
pared for college and work? A Study of Recent High School Graduates,
Education, National Institutes of Health,
College Instructors, and Employers, Washington, DC: Peter D, Hart
Biological Sciences Curriculum Study
Research Associates/Public Opinion Strategies,
(BSCS) convened an expert panel and
facilitated the synthesis of key recom-
American Electronics Association (AEA), (2005), Losing the competitive
mendations from twelve major reports
advantage? The challenge for science and technology in the United States.
from business, industry, government
Wasbington, DC: Authors.
agencies, and associated groups (see
Table 1), We focused tbe process on
Barton, P, (2002), Meeting the need for scientists, engineers, and an
recommendations for K-12 science and
educated citizenry in a technological society. Princeton, NJ: Educational
technology education and used a
Testing Service,
framework that resulted in recommen-
dations for different dimensions of the
Business-Higher Education Forum (BHEF), (2005), A commitment to
K-12 system. This article presents
America's future: Responding to the crisis in mathematics B science
results that specifically apply to tech-
education.
nology education.
Business-Higher Education Forum, (BHEF), (2005), Building a nation of
The General learners: The need for changes in teaching and learning to meet global
Recommendations challenges.
The general criteria for selection of the Business Roundtable, (2005), Tapping America's potential: The education for
reports included: representation of innovation initiative. Washington, DC: Authors.
multiple organizations, inclusion of a
broad perspective, and presentation of Coble, C, & Alien, M. (2005), Keeping America competitive: Five strategies to
recommendations for education. improve mathematics and science education. Denver, CO: Education

T Tbe synthesis process identified broad

areas of commonality that included
educational themes: workforce com-
petence, career awareness, equity and
excellence, technology education, and
Commission of the States,

Committee for Economic Development. (2003). Learning for the future:

Changing the culture of math and science education to ensure a competi-
tive workforce. New York, NY: Author,
systemic alignment.
The Secretary's Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills (SCANS), (2000),
Not surprisingly, the review clarified Learning for a living: A blueprint for high performance. A SCANS Report
the following categories as the educa- for America 2000, Washington, DC: U,S, Department of Labor,
tional components that should be
empbasized: teachers and teaching, Task Force on the Future of American Innovation, The knowledge economy:
content and curriculum, and assess- Is the United States losing its competitive edge? Benchmarks of Our
ments and accountability, Innovation Future, February 16, 2005,

Tbe main goal, common to all reports,

was a prepared twenty-first century
workforce, Tbe indicator tbat K-12
science and tecbnology education is
attaining this goal is higher levels of

28 May/June 2006 • THE TECHNOLOGY TEACHER

student achievement for higher
numbers of students. The metrics are
those familiar to the education commu-
nity: the results on National
Assessment of Educational Progress
I science and tecbnology education—
teacbers and teaching, content and
curricula, assessments and accounta-
bility. Stated in less neutral and more
value-laden language, we need bigb
T Specific Recommendations
for Technology Education
From time to time, it is important for
an educational community sucb as
(NAEP), Trends in International quality teacbers, rigorous content, technology educators to pause, gather
Mathematics and Science Study coberent curricula, appropriate class- good ideas, and redirect efforts
(TIMSS), Program for International room assessments, and general toward those that are consistent with
Student Assessment (PISA), and state accountability that align with our most its strengths, matched to the most
assessments. The reports identified a valued goals. pressing contemporary challenges,
number of cross-cutting tbemes tbat and hold some promise of long-term,
related to the findings and recommen- One finding in this effort was disturb- large-scale, fundamental improvement.
dations. Viewed as a whole, these ing. Almost without exception, the
themes provide an answer to the ques- reports mentioned the critical role of The framework used for synthesizing
tion: What is unique about tbis reform science and technology in the econo- recommendations reflects a number of
of education? Policies, programs, and my. But seldom did the reports specif- fundamental commitments and views:
practices should address: workforce ically address technology education. Tbe major educational goal of our
competencies, career awareness, equi- Literacy and mathematics were the work is a prepared twenty-first
ty issues, and technology, as well as leading disciplines, and we have to century workforce,
science and systemic alignment. account for that. But, technology edu-
cation must be seen as fundamental Tbe metric for evaluating tbe degree
What were the broad areas of com- to acbieving workforce competencies, to wbich we achieve the goal is higher
monality across tbe reports? Not sur- especially when the competencies levels of student achievement.
prisingly, tbe reports and experts include critical thinking, solving semi- Achieving the goal will take long-term
identified components at tbe core of structured problems, and reasoning. changes in educational policy, school
This sounds much like the abilities of programs, and classroom practices.
technological design.

Table 2: Types of Reform Initiatives in Technology Education

Purpose Programs

Purpose includes aims, goals, and rationale. Programs are the actual materials, textbooks, software.
Statements of purpose are universal and abstract, and and equipment tbat are based on policies and devel-
apply to all concerned witb reforming technology edu- oped to acbieve tbe stated purpose. Programs are
cation. Preparing the twenty-first century workforce is unique to grade levels, disciplines, and types of tecb-
an overreaching educational purpose. Achieving tech- nology education. Curriculum materials for K-6 tecbnol-
nological literacy is a purpose statement for technology ogy and a teacber education program are two
education.

Policies
examples of programs.

Practices
T
Policies are more specific statements of standards. Practices describe tbe specific actions of the tech-
benchmarks, state frameworks, school syllabi, and cur- nology educators. Practice represents the unique and
riculum designs based on the stated purpose. Policy fundamental dimension, and it is based on educators'
statements are concrete translations of the purpose understanding of the purpose, objectives, curriculum.
and apply to subsystems sucb as curricula, instruction. scbool, students, and their strengths as teachers.
assessment, teacher education, and grade levels within
technology education. Specification of the knowledge.
skills, and attitudes required to improve technological
literacy in all grades is an example of policy. Standards
for Technological Literacy is a statement of policy
specifications.

THE TECHNOLOGY TEACHER • May/June 2006 29

 The design of the framework is consis-
tent with the aim of advancing reform
and the perspectives of various audi-
ences with responsibility for acbieving
that aim. We propose four basic types
T Reviewing tbe twelve reports present-
ed a challenge. Difficulties centered on
the fact that most recommendations
did not neatly fall into the framework.
Rather, the experts had to decide
T education. The expert panel had to
make inferences about policies, pro-
grams, and practices. Tables 3, 4, and
5 use the aforementioned framework
to present results from the synthesis
of reform initiatives characterized by which recommendations were purpos- effort for teachers and teaching, con-
the terms: purpose, policies, programs, es, policies, programs, or practices. tent and curricula, and assessments
and practices, Tbese dimensions of For the most part, the various reports and accountability.
reform are described in greater detail had presented clear purpose state-
elsewbere (Bybee, 1997; 2003), Tbis ments for education; e,g,, improve K- Many of the recommendations for
framework applies to different initia- 12 science and technology education, teachers and teaching, content and
tives tbat will ultimately enhance stu- ensure that teachers have adequate curricula, and assessments and
dent learning (see Table 2), knowledge and skills, improve teacher accountability sbould not be surprising

Table 3: High Quality Teachers and Teaching

Purpose Programs
Teachers have adequate knowledge and skills to • Resources and support are allocated for continued
improve student achievement in technology. professional development.
• Professional development is aligned with curricula
and assessment.
• Dpportunities for technology teachers to work in
business and industry.

Policies Practices
• Districts hire technology specialists for elementary • Teacbers incorporate skills and abilities in
schools. tbeir teaching.
• Districts have qualified technology teachers for • Teacbers incorporate technology concepts in
secondary schools. the curriculum.
• Differentiated pay for qualified technology teachers. • Teachers incorporate awareness of technology-
related careers.

Table 4: High Quality Content and Curricula

T Purpose
Curricula have engaging, challenging, and relevant con-
tent based on the technology standards.
Programs
• Districts adopt and implement instructional materials
appropriate for elementary and secondary schools.

• Districts implement an evaluation program to deter-

mine the effectiveness of technology curricula.

Policies Practices
• Districts develop adoption criteria for high-quality • Teachers implement curriculum materials with high
curricula. fidelity.
• Districts provide materials, equipment, and facilities • Teachers receive feedback on tbeir use of materials.
for curricula.
• School boards, administrators, and parents learn
about tecbnology curricula.

30 May/June 2006 • THE TECHNOLOGY TEACHER

 Table 5: High Quality Assessments and Accountability

Purpose Programs
Assessments incorporate twenty-first century • Assessment results are available at classroom,
workforce knowledge, skills, and abilities. school, and district levels,
• Professional development for school personnel to
understand assessment results and make instruc-
tional decisions.

Policies Practices
• Require use of "sbort cycle" tests tbat align with • Teachers and administrators use assessment data to
state assessments, identify needs for improvement across the system.
• Districts use assessment data to monitor and adjust cur-
ricula, professional development, teaching, and testing.

for the technology education commu- omission of technology in K-12 school Britton, E,, De Long-Cotty, B, & Levenson,
nity. In a very real sense, the recom- programs. When business and indus- T, (2005), Bringing technology educa-
mendations emphasize the "core" of try began recognizing tbe role of edu- tion into K-8 classrooms: A guide to
curricular resources about the designed
education and underscore the basics cation and tbe need for a competent
world. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin
of educational reform. Based on prior and capable twenty-first century
Press,
work, the technology education com- workforce, tbe importance of technol-
munity should be well poised to pur- ogy education increased yet further. Bybee, R, W, (1997), Achieving scientific
sue tbese recommendations. We refer literacy: From purposes to practices.
to results from ITEA's Tecbnology for Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann,
These external forces have heightened
All Americans Project and reports the need for technology educators to Bybee, R, W, (2003), Achieving technolog-
such as Developing Professionals: respond constructively to the contem- ical literacy: Education perspectives
Preparing Technology Teachers (ITEA, porary challenges. More than at any and political actions. In Martin, G, and
2005), Planning Learning: Developing time in our history, technology is posi- Middleton, H, (Eds,), Initiatives in tech-
Technology Curricula (ITEA, 2005), nology education: Comparative
tioned in international assessments
perspectives, pp, 171-180, El Paso,
and Realizing Excellence: Structuring such as the Program for International
Texas: Technical Foundation of
Technology Programs (ITEA, 2005), Student Assessment (PISA), the NAEP America,
There are, of course, other resources; Science Framework for 2009, and in
see, for example, Britton, et al (2005) the numerous reports discussed in Domestic Policy Council and Office of
and TeachEngineering,com (ASEE, this article, A few leaders in the tech- Science and Technology Policy, (2006),

T
2005), nology education community have American competitiveness initiative:
Leading the world in innovation.
assumed responsibility for these philo-
February 2006, Washington, DC,
Technology educators should use the sophical and political positions. Now,
STL standards (ITEA, 2000/2002) as it is time for the profession to International Technology Education
embrace these efforts and improve our Association, (ITEA), (2000/2002),
the content for curriculum reform and
programs and practices—sbowing Standards for technological literacy:
student assessment. There is a clear Content for the study of technology.
need for model programs that exempli- tbis country tbe critical role of tecbnol-
Reston, VA: Author,
fy the skills and abilities of a twenty- ogy education as a major contributor
to tbe twenty-first century workforce. International Technology Education
first century workforce.
Association (ITEA), (2005), Developing
professionals: Preparing technology
Conclusion References teachers. Reston, VA: Author,
More than at any time in recent histo- American Society for Engineering International Technology Education
ry, technology education has emerged Education (ASEE), Association (ITEA), (2005), Planning
to an important role in American edu- TeachEngineering.com. A searchable, learning: Developing technology curric-
web-based digital library populated ula. Reston, VA: Author,
cation. The emergence of economic

1
with standards-based K-12 curricula
issues and the essential role of tech- International Technology Education
that engineering faculty and teachers
nology in the global economy bave can use to teach engineering in K-12 Association (ITEA), (2005), Realizing
highlighted the often too glaring settings. excellence: Structuring technology
programs. Reston, VA: Author,

THE TECHNOLOGY TEACHER • May/June 2006 31

 Meade, S, D, & Dugger, W, E, (2004), •
Reporting on the status of technology 1
education in the U,S, The Technology 1
Teacher, 64(2), 29-33,
National Academy of Engineering &
National Research Council, (2005),
Assessing technological literacy in the
United States. Draft Report.
National Research Council (NRC), (2006),
Thank you! ^Sfl 1—\^
Rising above the gathering storm:
Energizing and employing America for a
brighter economic future. Washington, Al Amato Van Hughes
DC: National Academies Press, Ken Amos Laura J, Hummell
Pearson, G, & Young, T, (2002), Patrick Angel Stan Komacek
Technically speaking: Why all Jeff Bachus Tony Korwin
Americans need to know more about Rachel Baxter Mark LeFeber
technology. Washington, DC: National James Belgrave Ethan Lipton, DTE
Academy Press, Jared Bitting Peter Olesen Lund
Rose, L, C, Gallup, A,M,, Dugger, W,E, & Pam Brown, DTE Mike Madison
1 Starkweather, K,N, (2004), The second Linda Chambers David McGee, DTE
1 installment of the ITEA/Gallup poll and Craig Clark, DTE Randy McGriff
1 what it reveals as to how Americans Larry J. Claussen Paul McNeary
1 think about technology. The Kathie Cluff Chris Merrill
1 Technology Teacher, 64(1) ^-U. Charles Corley, DTE Doug Miller
Scotty Davis Barbara Mongold
Staci Davis Jim Mongold
1 Rodger W. Bybee is Trent Davis Mellissa Morrow
Executive Director of William E, Davis Julie Moore
the Biological Katie de la Paz Lauren Olson
Sciences Curriculum Michael A. DeMiranda Steve Price, DTE
1 H | H ^ ^ r i l Study, a non-profit Ed Denton, DTE Ed Reeve, DTE
1 I ^ T O B M f f J organization that Bill Downs John Ritz, DTE
1 develops curriculum materials, pro- Donald Downs Joe Sargent
Bill Dugger, DTE Joe Scarcella
1 vides professional development, and
Dan Dudley Peter Sewert
1 conducts research and evaluation for Eric Elder David W, Shabram
1 the science education community. He Dan Engstrom Rodney Stanley
1 can be reached via e-mail at Mike Fitzgerald Kenneth Starkman
1 [email protected]. Pat Foster Kendall Starkweather, DTE
Lori Fritzsche Phillip Steinberg
1 ^^^^^^^H Kendall N Curtis Funkhouser Andy Stephenson, DTE
Kendall Gadd Anna Sumner, DTE
1 ^ V ^ ^ ^ l Starkweather, DTE,

T
Michael S. Gembar Ron Vickers
Hpih]a^| CAE is Executive Darrell Green Doug Wagner
•nab^H Director of the Joan Haas Gary Wynn, DTE
^^^^9^1 International Dale Hanson Ben Yates, DTE
^A_X^^I Technology James Hardin Ron Yuill, DTE
Education Association. He can Ben Herzog
be reached via e-mail at
itea @iteaconnect. org. For your generous support of the
Foundation for Technology Education.
Special thanks go again to
Andy Stephenson, [DTE for his tireless
efforts on behalf of the Foundation!

32 May/June 2006 • THE TECHNOLOGY TEACHER

1