Keywords: Technology education; Technical solution; Fitness for purpose; Teaching; Learning; Variation theory
PATT 26 Conference; Technology Education in the 21st Century; Stockholm; Sweden; 26-30 June; 2012
Barlex; D. (2011). Dear minister; This is why design and technology is a very important subject in the school curriculum. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal; 16(3); 9-18.
Bj√∂rkholm; E. (2011). Developing technological knowledge in primary school ‚Äď a teacherresearcher collaboration study. In PATT 25: CRIPT 8 conference ‚Äď Perspectives on Learning in Design & Technology Education. July 1-5 2011; London.
Brown; A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences; 2; 141- 178.
Cajas; F. (2001). The Science/Technology Interaction: Implications for Science Literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching; 38(7); 715-729.
Carlgren; I. (2010). `Learning study¬ī as a model for educational `clinical¬ī[paedeutical] research. Paper presented at The World Association of Lesson Studies International Conference; Bandar Seri Begawan; Brunei Darussalam; December; 8-10.
Chatoney; M. (2008). Contemplation and use of technical aids in primary schools. In Ginesti√©; J. (Ed.); The cultural transmission of artefacts; skills and knowledge: Eleven studies in technology education in France (pp. 125-147). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Coles; R. & Norman; E. (2005). An exploration of the role values play in design decisionmaking. International Journal of Technology and Design Education; 15(5); 155-171.
Compton; V. & Compton; A. (2011). Teaching the nature of technology: Determining and supporting student learning of the philosophy of technology. International Journal of Technology and Design education. Retrieved 2011-10-03; from http://www04.sub.su.se:2054/ content/k0v57q33r8562g75/ fulltext.pdf
De Vries; M. J. (2005). Teaching about technology: An introduction to the philosophy of technology for non-philosophers. Dordrecht: Springer.
Fernandez; C.; Cannon; J. & Chokshi; S. (2003). A US-Japan lesson study collaboration reveals critical lenses for examining practice. Teaching and Teacher Education; 19; 171-185.
Frederik; I.; Sonneveld; W. & De Vries; M. J. (2011). Teaching and learning the nature of technical artifacts. International Journal of Technology and Design Education; 21(3); 277-290.
Jones; A.; Buntting; C. & de Vries; M. J. (2011). The developing field of technology education: a review to look forward. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. Retrieved 2011-10-03; from http://www04.sub.su.se:2151/content/ m0011512152471n1/ fulltext.pdf
Kroes; P. (2002). Design methodology and the nature of technical artefacts. Design Studies; 23; 287-302.
Kullberg; A. (2010). What is taught and what is learned: Professional insights gained and shared by teachers of mathematics (Gothenburg studies in educational sciences 293). Doctoraldissertation; Gothenburg: University of Gothenburg. Retrieved 2011-10-03; from http:// hdl. Handle.net/ 2077/22180
Larsson; S. (2009). A pluralist view of generalization in qualitative studies. International Journal of Research & Method in Education; 32(1); 25-38.
Lewis; C. (2000). Lesson study: The core of Japanese professional development. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association; New Orleans; LA; April; 24-28.
Marton; F. (1981). Phenomenography ‚Äď describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science vol. 10; s. 177-200.
Marton; F. & Ling; L. M. (2007). Learning from ‚ÄúThe Learning Study‚ÄĚ. Tidskrift f√∂r l√§rarutbildning och forskning [Journal of Research in Teacher Education]; 1; 31-44.
Marton; F. & Pang; M. F. (2006). On some necessary conditions of learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences; 15(2); 193-220.
Marton; F.; Runesson; U. & Tsui; A. B. (2004). The space of learning. In F. Marton & A. B. Tsui (Eds.); Classroom discourse and the space of learning (pp. 3-40). Mahwah; NJ: Erlbaum.
Ministry of Education; New Zealand. (2007). The New Zealand Curriculum. Retrieved 2011- 10-03; from http://nzcurriculum.tki.org.nz/content/download/1108/11989/file/The-New- Zealand-Curriculum. Pdf
Nuthall; G. (2004). Relating classroom teaching to student learning: A critical analysis of why research has failed to bridge the theory-practice gap. Harvard Educational Review; 74(3); 273-306.
National Agency for Education; Sweden. (2011). Kursplan i teknik f√∂r grundskolan. Retrieved 2011-10-03; from http://www.skolverket.se/ publikationer?id=2641
Oboho; E. O. & Bolton; N. (1991). Matching students‚Äô technological thinking with thedemands of a technological curriculum. International Journal of Technology and Design Education; 4(2); 54-61
Pang; M. F. & Ling; L. M. (2011). Learning study: helping teachers to use theory; develop professionally; and produce new knowledge to be shared. Instructional Science. Retrieved 2012-03-03; from http://www04.sub.su.se:2081/content/402635464724816u/fulltext.pdf