Document Type

Article

Publication Date

2001

DOI

10.21061/jte.v13i1.a.5

Publication Title

Journal of Technology Education

Volume

13

Issue

1

Pages

59-71

Abstract

Laboratory instruction has long been a cornerstone of technology education pedagogy. The French realized the potential for technical laboratory instruction within general education in 1865 (Bennett, 1926). By the 1880s, the United States also realized the benefits of the technical laboratory for general education (Anderson, 1926). Despite these early roots and the continued practice of utilizing laboratory instruction within technology education, there is little research to support this teaching method. McCrory (1987) noted that there were no studies on laboratories (excluding machine safety) or new technology education equipment during the period 1980-1986. Laboratory studies during the period 1987-1993 concentrated on curriculum and did not focus on new instructional methods and strategies (Zuga, 1994).

The adoption of modular technology education has only heightened the need for research on laboratory instructional methods. Since the middle of the 1980s, modular technology education has grown considerably. Brusic and LaPorte (2000) found that almost half of the technology education teachers they surveyed in Virginia taught in some type of modular lab. Despite such emerging research, opinions concerning the merit of modular technology education, especially commercially created packages, dominate the field of technology education. To address these opinions, this study investigated whether the preference for a conventional or modular laboratory is influenced by the learning style of the teacher.

Original Publication Citation

Reed, P. A. (2001). Learning style and laboratory preference: A study of middle school technology education teachers in Virginia. Journal of Technology Education, 13(1), 59-71. doi:10.21061/jte.v13i1.a.5

Download

Share

COinS