Page 85 - Standards for K-12 Engineering Education

Standards for K-12 Engineering Education?

70 STANDARDS FOR K–12 ENGINEERING EDUCATION?

Erickson (2002) described a concept as an organizing idea that is timeless, universal, abstract and
broad, represented by one or two words, and examples of which share common attributes.
Conceptual knowledge can be “thought of as a connected web of knowledge, a network in which
the linking relationships are as prominent as the discrete pieces of information” (Hiebert and
Lefevre, 1986, p. 3-4).
st
Erickson (2002) argued that attempting to “teach in the 21 century without a conceptual
schema for knowledge is like trying to build a house without a blueprint” (p. 7). Bransford and
Donavon (2005) concurred, arguing that the clarity of the core concepts of the discipline “is
required if students are to grasp what the discipline—history, math, or science—is about” (p.
576). Teaching for conceptual understanding requires that the core concepts that organize the
knowledge of experts also organize instruction. Donavon and Bransford (2005) concluded that
this approach to teaching has two parts: “(1) factual knowledge (e.g., about characteristics of
different species) must be placed in a conceptual framework (about adaptation) to be well
understood; and (2) concepts are given meaning by multiple representations that are rich in
factual detail” (p. 6). Thus concepts do not stand alone but “take on meaning in the knowledge-
rich contexts in which they are applied” (p. 6).
According to Bransford et al. (2000), in order to “develop competence in an area of
inquiry, students must: (a) have a deep foundation of factual knowledge, (b) understand facts and
ideas in the context of a conceptual framework, and (c) organize knowledge in ways that
facilitate retrieval and application” (p. 16). They added that this “will require both a deepening of
the information base and the development of a conceptual framework for that subject matter” (p.
17). In addition, conceptual frameworks allow for greater learning transfer because they give
students opportunities to apply what they have learned to new situations and to learn related
information more quickly. Tennyson and Cocchiarella (1986) outlined an instructional design
approach to conceptual teaching. They characterized the process of teaching concepts as
threefold: (a) establishing a connection between the to-be-learned concept and specific necessary
knowledge; (b) improving the formation of the conceptual knowledge by elaborating further the
schematic structure of relational concepts; and (c) improving development of procedural
knowledge skills. This approach to instruction means there is “a need to establish criteria for
delineating the content boundaries of a concept” (Sigel, 1983, p. 243).

McCormick (1997) argued that when “concepts are introduced in school, they are not
transmitted to students, but students will attempt to fit them to the models or concepts they
currently have” (p. 148). This constructivist view of conceptual learning challenges teachers
introducing technological activities to identify the possible knowledge requirements of
technology tasks, ascertain students’ relevant prior knowledge, and provide adequate support for
conceptual development. Activities such as design, modeling, problem solving, system
approaches, project planning, quality assurance, and optimization “are all candidates for
technological procedural knowledge, and can be found across many technologies whatever their
specific context” (McCormick, 1997, p. 144). However, the specific context is important in the
development of technological knowledge because it requires specific domain knowledge. For
example, problem-solving skills are “dependent upon considerable domain knowledge”
(McCormick, 1997, p. 146), not simply procedural knowledge. In addition, “it is the possession
of conceptual knowledge that makes possible the effective use of the procedural knowledge of
problem solving” (McCormick, 1997, p. 149).

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.