Åke Ingerman, Maria Svensson & Anders Berglund, Shirley Booth, Jonas Emanuelsson

1. Technological systems across contexts: designing and exploring learning possibilities in Swedish compulsory technology education Åke Ingerman, Maria Svensson& Anders Berglund, Shirley Booth, Jonas Emanuelsson Contact: ake.ingerman@gu.se or maria.svensson@ped.gu.se

2. Project nodes

3. Research question Whatdoes it taketolearn, and whatdoes it meantoteach for learning, Technological Systems, theirconstituent parts and the relations betweenthemwhen the systems areembedded in different contexts and encountered in different pedagogicalstructures?

4. Technological systems in compulsoryschool • ‘technological systems’ form an important part of the school subject Technology in Swedish schools, focusing aspects such as components, subsystems, risks, advantages in the context of electricity, internet, transport etc. • Our working definition of technological systems - encompass much of what characterises technology - goal-directed, delivering both to society and to individuals, but have also unwanted effects- may concern detrimental influence on the environment- not tangible, thus less supported by informal learning than other themes in technology

5. Whatdoes it meantolearn and phenomenography • Qualitatively different waysofunderstanding the ’same’ phenomenon – empiricalinvestigations(e.g. Svensson, Zetterqvist & Ingerman 2012) • => possibletoidentifyaspectsof the phenomenoncritical for learning. • => theoryto support how learning comesabout. Variation in dimensions constituted from suchcriticalaspectsnecessarycondition for learning.

6. Dimensions of variation – technological systems • Resource – What the system acts on, in terms of matter, energy and information. • Intention – What can be identified as the system’s intended function (c.f. the intended function of artefacts, de Vries 2005). • Internal structure – How the systems is organised in terms of components, framework of relationships and human agency. • External structure – How the system is organised in terms of how it interacts with the surrounding world, such as other technological, natural and social systems. (Svensson 2011a;b; Svensson & Ingerman 2010; Svensson, Zetterqvist & Ingerman 2012)

7. Three major pedagogicalcontexts • Analysing problems, such as considering how the systemic nature of a particular system changes when a central component or aspect of the framework of relationships changes. Examples are the break of power wires connecting northern and southern Sweden and the merging of the mobile and land-line phone communication systems that is underway. • Working with representations. Examples are the tram time-tables in conjunction with the map of destinations, or a flow chart of normal mail distribution, and diagrams of power usage across different times of the year and times of day. • Experiencing systems, coming into physical as well as conceptual contact with systems. Examples involve visiting central components in different systems, such as airports, sewage works, or inspecting a power generator.

8. Tentative patternsof variation • Based on 1) variation theory design principles(contrast, separation and fusion), 2) empiricaldescriptionsofkeychallenges in understandingcomplex systems, and 3) empiricaldescriptionsofaspectsthatarecritical for learning technological systems in the targetededucationallevel • In each dimension – distinctcontrastbetween systems characteristics and non-systems characteristics

9. Resource • Specificresource in contrastto systems resource • Exemplifyresourcesofdistinct different character – onlymatter, energy or information Matter Information Energy

10. Intention • Specific person seeing the need and ascribingtechnologicalartefacttomeetthatneed • In contrasttorecurrentneed, and establishing a communitytosustain a shared intention

11. Internalstructureof system • Components organisedlinearly • In contrasttocomponentsorganised in a network • Differentiatecomponentsand their relationships – transform and transport, relation to system intention Transformation Transportation

12. Externalstructure • Less central for coreunderstandingof systems • Limits of systems – otherpossible systems (”arbitrary”) • Interactionwithsurrounding – consequences and dependencies

13. Research questions Overall questions: • Whatdoes it taketolearn, and whatdoes it meantoteach for learning, Technological Systems, theirconstituent parts and the relations betweenthemwhen the systems areembedded in different contexts and encountered in different pedagogicalstructures? Specificquestions: • Whatdo students in the lowersecondaryschoolunderstandoftechnological systems in terms oftheirconstituent parts when given opportunitiestoexplore systems in different contexts? • Whatcanteachers offer as a platform for developing a general understandingofTechnological Systems withrecourseto different systems set in different contexts? • HowareTechnological Systems expressed in different contexts in different pedagogicalstructures in the classroom arena?

14. Basic design • Design ofteaching and learning events • Audio and video documentationofsuch events. Focus how learning oftechnological systems manifest in 1) different system contexts 2) different pedagogicalconditions (e.g. Lecture, groupdiscussion, problem solving, praticalwork). • Analytical ”tracing” ofways in whichcriticalaspect manifest in these different context, and putting that in relation tocontent and pedagogicalconditions. Phenomenography and variation theory. • => Outcomeof ”good” waysofteaching and learning technological systems, howsuch learning is constituted and ways in which it manifests in different context (important for e.g. Assessment). Both process and productdescriptions.

15. Conclusion • Towardsthe development of a design for learning technological systems in Swedish compulsory school • Core patterns of variation in four dimensions: - resource- intention- internal structure - external structure • Next step to design detailed teaching and learning events in collaboration with teachers • Followed by the realisation and evaluationofthese events (PATT 2014?) – PCK input for technologyeducation