Student’s Attitudes towards Craft and Technology in Iceland and Finland

Gisli Thorsteinsson*, Brynjar Olafsson**, Ossi Autio***
* Associate Professor, University of Iceland.
** Adjunction Design and Craftin, University of Iceland.
*** Senior Lecturer, University of Helsinki.
Periodicity:July - September'2012
DOI : https://doi.org/10.26634/jet.9.2.1949

Abstract

Craft education in both Finland and Iceland originated over 140 years ago and was influenced by the Scandinavian Sloyd pedagogy. Since then, the subject has moved away from craft and towards technology, with the aim being to increase students’ technological abilities. In the beginning, the subject largely focused on the students copying artefacts, using a variety of handicraft tools: the purpose of this was to improve pupils’ manual skills, rather than their thinking skills. Today, however, the focus is also on the development of students’ thinking skills, which enables them to work through the various handicraft processes (from initial ideas to the final product). This work is based on the idea generation of students and is thus expected to increase their self-esteem and ingenuity. This paper is based on a comparative study of students’ attitudes towards craft and technology education in Finland and Iceland, which was undertaken by the University of Iceland and Helsinki University in the years 2011 and 2012. A quantitative survey was distributed to 213 school students and it consisted of 14 questions, which aimed to ascertain students’ attitudes towards craft and technology. A literature review was subsequently completed, in order to examine and compare the origins of craft education in Finland and Iceland. The review highlighted that, despite the origins of craft education in Finland and Iceland being similar, the Icelandic national curriculum placed greater emphasis on design and innovation, whereas the Finnish national curriculum focused on the development of students’ personalities and gender issues. The survey also showed differences in students’ attitudes towards craft and technology education in the two countries: these differences may be explained by differences in the national curriculums and the different pedagogical traditions. However, this finding needs to be examined further through research.

Keywords

Survey, Attitude, National Curriculum, Literature Search, Pedagogical Traditions, Technology Education, Craft.

How to Cite this Article?

Gisli Thorsteinsson, Brynjar Olafsson and Ossi Autio (2012). Student's Attitudes Towards Craft And Technology In Iceland And Finland. i-manager’s Journal of Educational Technology, 9(2), 40-48. https://doi.org/10.26634/jet.9.2.1949

References

[1]. Anttila, P. (1983). Työ ja työhön kasvatettavuus. Tutkimus koulun työkasvatuksesta ja siihen vaikuttavista tekijöistä. helsingin yliopiston kasvatustieteen laitos. Tutkimuksia 100.
[2]. Arffman, I. & Brunell, V. (1983). Sukupuolten psykologisista eroavaisuuksista ja niiden syistä. Jyväskylän yliopisto. Kasvatustieteiden tutkimuslaitoksen selosteita ja tiedotteita 283.
[3]. Autio, O. (1997). Oppilaiden teknisten valmiuksien kehittyminen peruskoulussa [Student's development in technical abilities in Finnish comprehensive school]. Research Reports No. 117. Helsinki: The University of Helsinki, Department of Teacher Education.
[4]. Bennett, C. A. (1926). History of Manual and Industrial Education up to 1870, Peoria: The Manual Arts Press.
[5]. Bennett, C.A. (1937). History of Manual and Industrial Education 1870 to 1917. Peoria IL: The Manual Arts Press.
[6]. Bjerrum Nielsen, H. & Rudberg, M. (1989). Historien om jenter og gutter. Kjonnsosialisering i ett utveckling spsykoli gisk perspektiv. Oslo: Universitetslaget
[7]. Borg, K. (2006). What is Sloyd? A Question of Legitimacy and Identity. Journal of Research in Teacher Education. nr. 2-3/2006. Umea
[8]. Chessin, A. S. (2007). Abrahamson, August. Í Jewish Encyclopaedia. Retrieved 5th April 2011 from http://www.Jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=621&letter=A
[9]. de Klerk Wolters, F. (1989). A PATT study among 10-12 year old students in the Netherlands. Journal of Technology Education, 1(1).
[10]. Dyrenfruth, M. J. (1990). Technological Literacy: Characteristics and Competencies, Revealed and Detailed. In H. Szydlowski & R. Stryjski (Eds.) Technology and School: Report of the PATT Conference (pp. 26-50). Zielona Gora, Poland: Pedagogical University Press.
[11]. Eliasson, H. (Ed.) (1944).Log og reglur um skola- og menningarmol a Islandi sem i gildi eru i marzlok 1944. Reykjavik: Fraedslumalastjornin.
[12]. Fensham, P. (1992). Science and Technology. In Jackson, P. (Ed.) Handbook of Research on Curriculum. New York: MacMillan.
[13]. Framework Curriculum Guidelines (2004). Helsinki: Opetushallitus.
[14]. Kananoja (1989). Työ, taito ja teknologia. Yleissivistävän koulun toiminnallisuuteen ja työhön kasvattamisesta. Turun yliopiston julkaisuja 72.
[15]. Kantola (1997). Gygnaeuksen jäljillä käsityöno petuksesta teknologiseen kasvatukseen. Jyväskylän yliopiston julkaisuja 133.
[16]. Kantola, J., Nikkanen, P., Kari, J. & Kananoja, T. (1999). Through Education into the World of Work. Uno Cygnaeus, the Father of Technology Education. Jyvaskyla University, Institute for Educational Research. Jyväskylä: Jyväskylä University Press, pp. 9 -17.
[17]. Lauren, J. (1993). Osaavatko peruskoululaiset luonnontietoa. In Linnankylä, P. & Saari, H. (Eds.). Oppiiko oppilas peruskoulussa? Jyväskylän yliopisto. Kasvatustieteen tutkimuslaitos.
[18]. Lavonen, J. & Autio, O. (2003). Technology education in Finland. In G. Graube, M.J. Dyrenfurt & W.E. Teurkauf (Eds.), Technology education: International Concepts and Perspectives (pp. 177-191). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang GmbH.
[19]. Layton, D. (1994). A School Subject in the Making? The Search for Fundamentals. In D.
[20]. Layton (Ed.) Innovations in Science and Technology Education (Vol.5). Paris: Unesco.
[21]. Mottier, I. (1986). Context of research, outcomes of the discussion. Report PATT-1 workshop, What do girls and boys think of technology? J. H. Raat and M. J. de Vries (ed). Eindhoven University of Technology.
[22]. Olafsson, B., Hilmarsson, E. & Svavarsson, K. (2005). Greinargerð vinnuhóps - endurskoðun aðalnámskrár grunnskóla í hönnun og smíði. Unpublished Greinargerð.
[23]. Olafsson, B. & Thorsteinsson, G. (2010). Examining Design and Craft Education in Iceland: Curriculum Development and Present Situation. FORMakadmisk, 3(2), 39-50.
[24]. Raat, J. & de Vries, M. (1986). What do Girls and Boys think about Technology? Eindhoven, University of Technology.
[25]. Raat, J. H., de Klerk Wolters, F., & de Vries, M. J. (1989). Pupils' Attitude Towards Technology, UNESCO-monography.
[26]. The Icelandic Ministry of Education (1977). The Icelandic National Curriculum.. Menntamálaráðuneytið, Reykjavík.
[27]. The Icelandic Ministry of Education (1999). The Icelandic National Curriculum.. Menntamálaráðuneytið, Reykjavík.
[28]. The Icelandic Ministry of Education (2007). The Icelandic National Curriculum.. Menntamálaráðuneytið, Reykjavík.
[29]. Thorarinsson, J. (1891). Um kennslu í skólaiðnaði. Tímarit um uppeldis- ogmenntamál, 4(1), 3–20.
[30]. Thorsteinsson, G. (2002). Innovation and Practical Use of Knowledge. Data International Research Conference 2002, 171-177.
[31]. Thorsteinsson, G. & Denton, H. (2003). The Development of Innovation Education in Iceland: a Pathway to Modern Pedagogy and Potential Value in the UK. The Journal of Design and Technology Education, 8(3), 172-179.
[32]. Todd, R. D. (1986). Technology literacy: An international perspective. In Technology Education Symposium No. 8 Proceedings, 63-70. Roanoke VA.
[33]. van der Velde, J. (1992). Technology in Basic Education. In Kananoja, T. (Ed.) Technology Education Conference. Helsinki: The National Board of Education (151-170).
[34]. Vaughn, S. J. & Mays, A. B. (1924). Content and Methods of the Industrial Arts. New York & London: The Century Co.
If you have access to this article please login to view the article or kindly login to purchase the article

Purchase Instant Access

Single Article

North Americas,UK,
Middle East,Europe
India Rest of world
USD EUR INR USD-ROW
Pdf 35 35 200 20
Online 35 35 200 15
Pdf & Online 35 35 400 25

Options for accessing this content:
  • If you would like institutional access to this content, please recommend the title to your librarian.
    Library Recommendation Form
  • If you already have i-manager's user account: Login above and proceed to purchase the article.
  • New Users: Please register, then proceed to purchase the article.