Teaching Elements and Principles of Bridge Design - International ...

APRIL 2005 Volume 64, No. 7 

Teaching Elements and 

Principles of Bridge Design 

Also: Where to Get a Degree 

in Technology Education 

www.iteawww.org

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

APRIL 2005 

Volume 64, No. 7 

Publisher, Kendall N. Starkweather, DTE 

Editor-In-Chief, Kathleen B. de la Paz 

Editor, Kathie F. Cluff 

ITEA Board of Directors 

Anna Sumner, President 

George Willcox, Past President 

Ethan Lipton, DTE, President-Elect 

Doug Wagner, Director, ITEA-CS 

Tom Shown, Director, Region 1 

Chris Merrill, Director, Region 2 

Dale Hanson, Director, Region 3 

Doug Walrath, Director, Region 4 

Rodney Custer, DTE, Director, CTTE 

Michael DeMiranda, Director, TECA 

Patrick N. Foster, Director, TECC 

Kendall N. Starkweather, DTE, Executive Director 

ITEA is an affiliate of the American Association for the 

Advancement of Science. 

The Technology Teacher, ISSN: 0746-3537, is published 

eight times a year (September through June with combined 

December/January and May/June issues) by the 

International Technology Education Association, 

1914 Association Drive, Suite 201, Reston, VA 20191. 

Subscriptions are included in member dues. U.S. Library 

and nonmember subscriptions are $80; $90 outside the U.S. 

Single copies are $8.50 for members; $9.50 for 

non-members, plus shipping—domestic @ $6.00 and 

outside the U.S. @ $17.00 (surface). 

Email: iteacomm@iris.org 

World Wide Web: www.iteawww.org 

Advertising Sales: 

ITEA Publications Department 

703-860-2100 

Fax: 703-860-0353 

Subscription Claims 

All subscription claims must be made within 60 days of the 

first day of the month appearing on the cover of the journal. 

For combined issues, claims will be honored within 60 days 

from the first day of the last month on the cover. Because 

of repeated delivery problems outside the continental United 

States, journals will be shipped only at the customer’s risk. 

ITEA will ship the subscription copy, but assumes no 

responsibility thereafter. 

The Technology Teacher is listed in the Educational Index 

and the Current Index to Journal in Education. Volumes are 

available on Microfiche from University Microfilm, P.O. Box 

1346, Ann Arbor, MI 48106. 

Change of Address 

Send change of address notification promptly. Provide old 

mailing label and new address. Include zip + 4 code. 

Allow six weeks for change. 

DEPARTMENTS 

2 ITEA Online 

3 In the News and Calendar 

5 You & ITEA 

9 IDSA Activity 

17 Resources in Technology 

23 ITEA/NASA-JPL Learning Activity 

FEATURES 

6 Teaching Elements and Principles of Bridge Design 

Discusses bridge construction as a popular classroom activity, emphasizing the 

basic principles of tension, compression, and counterbalance. 

Charles Beck 

12 Where the Women Are: Research Findings on Gender 

Issues in Technology Education 

Research findings about gender issues in technology education, including a 

Self-Check Questionnaire. 

W.J. Haynie, III 

28 Standards Article: A Proactive Approach to 

Technological Literacy 

This article suggests that a proactive approach to advocating technological literacy 

is important in changing the greater public’s misconceptions of what it means to 

be technologically literate. 

Katherine Weber 

31 2005 Directory of ITEA Institutional Members 

36 Mastering the Essentials for a Career in Technology 

Education 

An engineer/inventor lists the key areas of competency young technology education 

teachers should be developing while still in college. 

Harry T. Roman 

Postmaster 

Send address change to: The Technology Teacher, Address 

Change, ITEA, 1914 Association Drive, Suite 201, Reston, 

VA 20191-1539. Periodicals postage paid at Herndon, VA 

and additional mailing offices. 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER

ITEA ONLINE 

Editorial Review Board 

Co-Chairperson 

Co-Chairperson 

Dan Engstrom 

Stan Komacek 

California University of PA California University of PA 

Steve Anderson 

Nikolay Middle School, WI 

Stephen Baird 

Bayside Middle School, VA 

Lynn Basham 

MI Department of Education 

Jolette Bush 

Midvale Middle School, UT 

Philip Cardon 

Eastern Michigan University 

Michael Cichocki 

Salisbury Middle School, PA 

Gerald Day 

University of MD-ES 

Mike Fitzgerald 

IN Department of Education 

Tom Frawley 

G. Ray Bodley High School, NY 

John W. Hansen 

University of Houston 

Roger Hill 

University of Georgia 

Angela Hughes 

Morrow High School, GA 

Laura Hummell 

Manteo Middle School, NC 

Frank Kruth 

South Fayette MS, PA 

Ivan Mosley, Sr. 

Jackson State University 

Don Mugan 

Valley City State University 

Terrie Rust 

Oasis Elementary School, AZ 

Monty Robinson 

Black Hills State University 

Andy Stephenson 

Scott County High School, KY 

Greg Vander Weil 

Wayne State College 

Steve Waldstein 

Dike-New Hartford Schools, IA 

Scott Warner 

Millersville University of PA 


Des Plaines, IL 

Eric Wiebe 

North Carolina State Univ. 

Editorial Policy 

As the only national and international association dedicated 

solely to the development and improvement of technology 

education, ITEA seeks to provide an open forum for the free 

exchange of relevant ideas relating to technology education. 

Materials appearing in the journal, including advertising, 

are expressions of the authors and do not necessarily reflect 

the official policy or the opinion of the association, its 

officers, or the ITEA Headquarters staff. 

Referee Policy 

All professional articles in The Technology Teacher are 

refereed, with the exception of selected association activities 

and reports, and invited articles. Refereed articles are 

reviewed and approved by the Editorial Board before 

publication in The Technology Teacher. Articles with bylines 

will be identified as either refereed or invited unless written 

by ITEA officers on association activities or policies. 

To Submit Articles 

All articles should be sent directly to the Editor-in-Chief, 

International Technology Education Association, 1914 

Association Drive, Suite 201, Reston, VA 20191-1539. 

Please submit photographs to accompany the article, a 

copy of the article on disc (PC compatible), and five hard 

copies. Maximum length for manuscripts is 8 pages. 

Manuscripts should be prepared following the style specified 

in the Publications Manual of the American Psychological 

Association, Fifth Edition. 

Editorial guidelines and review policies are available by 

writing directly to ITEA or by visiting www.iteawww.org/ 

F7.htm. Contents copyright ©2005 by the International 

Technology Education Association, Inc., 703-860-2100. 

NEW ON ITEA’S WEB SITE 

The Technology Teacher e 

Automatic Processing of Digital Images: Learning Automation 

Techniques in Adobe Photoshop Image Editing Program 

Describes how students of graphic communications can benefit from 

learning digital imaging automation techniques. 

Milos Krsmanovic 

Also available online: 

Innovation Station—Your Gateway to 

Children’s Engineering 

Please join ITEA’s newest learning 

community—elementary educators interested in 

bringing out every student’s creative ability to design, 

build, tinker, and construct. Innovation Station was created for teachers 

who want to get their students actively involved in learning. No special 

requirements are necessary other than having a passion for teaching. 

Innovation Station (IS) is a teacher’s resource to get answers, learn 

about new ideas, become aware of “what works” with other teachers, 

and much more. 

Try this new learning community. There is no cost! Join the teachers 

who are pursuing excellence in elementary teaching and learning. Go to 

www.iteawww.org/LearningCommunities/InnovationStation/IS.html 

to subscribe. 

Application to Present in Baltimore - 2006 

The Application to Present at ITEA’s 68th Annual 

Conference in Baltimore, MD is now available 

online at http://tp1.clearlearning.com/ 

hshealey/ITEA2005.tp4. The conference will be held March 23-25, 2006. 

Applications must be electronically received by June 15, 2005. 

www.iteawww.org 

2 April 2005 • THE TECHNOLOGY TEACHER

NEWS AND CALENDAR 

IN THE NEWS & CALENDAR 

What Happened With 

Education in the Latest 

National Budget? 

The following quick summary was 

provided in The Washington Post by 

writer, Michael A. Fletcher: The 

administration is requesting $56 

billion for the Education Department, 

a cut of half a billion dollars, or 0.9 

percent, from fiscal 2005—the first 

reduction in overall federal education 

spending in a decade. The budget 

would eliminate the Perkins loan 

program, which provides low-interest 

loans to low- and middle-income 

college students. The budget would 

use those savings to increase 

spending on Pell grants, which 

provide college grants to low-income 

students, and raise the maximum 

award $100, to $4,150. In all, 48 

education programs would be 

terminated, including those providing 

college-readiness training to lowincome 

high school students and 

federal vocational education 

initiatives that the White House said 

are not performing well or duplicate 

other federal efforts. Some of the 

savings would be used to increase 

spending in several programs, 

including $1.5 billion to extend 

federal No Child Left Behind testing 

and accountability requirements into 

the nation’s high schools. 

ITEA’s current efforts are to continue 

to be a part of larger coalitions that 

are seeking science, technology, 

engineering, and mathematics 

(STEM) funding and to support 

continued funding for the vocational 

community. ITEA will continue to 

educate its members and other 

interested colleagues in procedures 

to gain more funding at the state 

level. Selected states are having 

successes with funding, and all are a 

result of the members being active in 

communicating with their elected and 

appointed representatives or officials. 

ITEA’s efforts included a March 

Legislative Symposium in conjunction 

with the Triangle Coalition for 

Science & Technology Education. 

Information can be found on ITEA’s 

Web site—www.iteawww.org. 

ITEA’s 2005 Kansas City Conference 

will have programs that address 

legislative issues and strategies that 

have proven success at the state 

level. 

For more information or assistance 

with legislative issues, contact 

itea@iris.org or call 703-860-2100. 

New German 

Translation 

of Standards 

There is a new 

German 

translation of 

Advancing 

Excellence in 

Technological 

Literacy: Student Assessment, 

Professional Development, and 

Program Standards (AETL) (ITEA, 

2003). Standards für eine allgemeine 

technische Bildung 2 is now available 

from Gerd Höpken, Susanne 

Osterkamp, and Gert Reich (Hg.), 

2004, 180 Seiten, zahlreiche 

Abbildungen, Best.-Nr. 385, ¤ 20,00, 

ISBN: 3-7883-0385-9. 

ITEA Placement Service 

Did you know that ITEA provides a 

placement service for its members? If 

you are considering a job change or 

looking for a qualified technology 

educator, ITEA is your connection to 

positions in technology education. 

ITEA individual members can place 

their resumes on the ITEA Web site 

free of charge for two months, and 

schools, colleges, and universities 

can post position openings for $100 

for one month or $175 for two 

months. 

Check out ITEA’s Placement Service 

in “Members Only” at 

www.iteawww.org. You will find 

many new position announcements 

and resumes. Forgot your password 

for Members Only? E-mail 

iteambrs@iris.org. 

Summer Opportunity 

Building on the successes of last 

year’s inaugural teacher’s institute, 

this year 24 teachers will have an 

opportunity to learn about teaching 

wireless technology literacy, micro 

controllers, robotics basics, and 

bringing space technology into their 

classrooms during two American 

Radio Relay League (ARRL) Education 

and Technology Program teacher’s 

institutes to be held at ARRL 

headquarters in Newington, CT on 

June 13-17 and August 1-5. 

The theme of this year’s program is 

Make the Science of Radio Come 

Alive, and participating teachers can 

expect to work hard at the institute. 

Each 8 to 5 day is filled with lectures, 

hands-on activities and 

demonstrations, building, 

programming, robotics competition, 

and of course, time is set aside to 

operate W1AW. The first three days 

of the institute include instruction on 

how to teach wireless technology, 

day four is on microcontroller basics, 

and the finale is how to teach basic 

robotics. The class materials are a 

mix of basic theory coupled with 

pedagogical (teaching) strategies the 

teachers can use immediately when 

they return to their classrooms. 

Each teacher will receive his or her 

own resource library of relevant ARRL 

publications, instructional kits offered 

by the Education and Technology 

Program, the course materials for 

“What is a Microcontroller,” and the 

“BOE-BOT” Robot kit. 

THE TECHNOLOGY TEACHER • April 2005 3

NEWS AND CALENDAR 

If you are a teacher who is interested 

(licensed or not), or if you know of a 

teacher who could benefit from the 

teacher’s institute, contact Mark 

Spencer, ARRL Education and 

Technology Program Coordinator, 225 

Main St., Newington, CT 06111, 860- 

594-0396, mspencer@arrl.org 

for more details and the application 

procedures. The applications to 

attend the institute are due by May 

15, and the 12 slots for each of the 

two institutes will be filled on a firstcome, 

first-served basis. 

"More Students, Higher 

Prices, Tougher 

Competition" 

The National Alliance of State 

Science and Mathematics Coalitions 

has shared the following article 

regarding trends in higher education: 

The Wall Street Journal identifies 10 

trends in higher education that bear 

watching in coming years. Among 

them: 

• Tuition will continue to rise, partly 

in response to reduced state 

funding to public institutions and 

bidding wars among private 

institutions for hotshot professors. 

• Financial aid based on merit will 

continue to gain in popularity as 

colleges compete for the brightest 

students. 

• Colleges will look increasingly to 

distance learning and competency 

assessments to ease classroom 

crowding. 

• As universities seek to 

differentiate themselves, they will 

mix the liberal arts with science 

and technology to create new 

interdisciplinary studies. 

• More colleges will emphasize the 

quality of their teaching. 

SOURCE: Wall Street Journal, 31 

January 2005 (p. R04), 

www.wsj.com (subscribers only) 

CALENDAR 

April 3-5, 2005 

The 67th Annual ITEA Conference and 

Exhibition, “Preparing the Next 

Generation for Technological 

Literacy,” will be held in Kansas City, 

MO. With an entirely new schedule, 

including expanded registration and 

resource booth hours, several new 

networking/social events, and, yes, 

even a free lunch, the Kansas City 

conference promises to be one of the 

most exciting in years. Visit 

www.iteawww.org for the most upto-date 

details. 

April 11-16, 2005 

The Department of Education, 

partnering with the National Science 

Foundation and other U.S. 

government agencies and scientific 

societies, is sponsoring Excellence in 

Science, Technology, and 

Mathematics Education Week 

(ESTME Week). Details can be found 

at www.estme.org. 

May 5, 2005 

Space Day national celebration in 

Washington, DC—the culmination of 

the yearlong “Return to the Moon” 

Space Day events. Full details and 

registration forms are available on the 

Space Day Web site at 

www.spaceday.org. 

May 18-20, 2005 

DeVilbiss, Binks and Owens 

Community College have teamed up 

to present a Spray Finishing 

Technology Workshop in Toledo, OH. 

Two Continuing Education Units will 

be awarded to participants in this 

intensive three-day program. 

Attendees should be involved with 

industrial, contractor, or maintenance 

spray finishing applications, or spray 

equipment sales and distribution. For 

additional information, call 800-466- 

9367, ext. 7357, e-mail 

sprayworkshop@netscape.net, or 

visit the Web site at www.owens.edu/ 

workforce_cs/index.html. 

June 24-28, 2005 

The 5th International Primary Design 

and Technology Conference, 

Excellence through Enjoyment, will be 

held at the Quality Inn, Hagley Road, 

Birmingham, England. The conference 

will be hosted by CRIPT (Centre for 

Research into Primary Technology). 

The conference will include research 

papers, case studies, practical 

workshops, visits to primary schools, 

and displays of resources. The 

Conference Language is English. For 

additional information, contact 

Professor Clare Benson, CRIPT, UCE; 

Fax: +44 121 331 6147; 

clare.benson@uce.ac.uk. 

June 28-July 2, 2005 

The National Technology Student 

Association (TSA) conference will be 

held in Chicago, IL. Visit 

www.tsaweb.org for additional 

information. 

June 28-July 2, 2005 

The National TECA Leadership 

Conference will be held in 

conjunction with the National TSA 

Conference at the Sheraton Chicago 

Hotel & Towers in Chicago, IL. All 

TECA members are invited to attend. 

Contact your TECA advisor for 

information. 

List your State/Province Association 

Conference in TTT, TrendScout, and on 

ITEA’s Web Calendar. Submit conference 

title, date(s), location, and contact 

information (at least two months prior 

to journal publication date) to iteapubs@iris.org. 


YOU AND ITEA 

YOU & ITEA 

ITEA Launches 

Elementary Learning 

Community 

Please join ITEA’s newest learning 

community—elementary educators 

interested in bringing out every 

student’s creative ability to design, 

build, tinker, and construct. 

Innovation Station was created for 

teachers who want to get their 

students actively involved in 

learning. No special requirements 

are necessary other than having a 

passion for teaching. 

Innovation Station (IS) is a teacher’s 

resource to get answers, learn 

about new ideas, become aware of 

“what works” with other teachers, 

and much more. Subscribers are 

welcome to participate in 

discussions pertaining to teaching 

techniques that help with learning 

about the basics in education, go 

where standards-based materials 

are being implemented, and see 

how others effectively use 

manipulative activities that don’t 

exceed your capability as a teacher. 

Join the teachers who are pursuing 

excellence in elementary teaching 

and learning. Go to 

www.iteawww.org/Learning 

Communities/InnovationStation/ 

IS.html to subscribe. It’s FREE! 

New ITEA 

Publications Catalog 

The 2005 ITEA Publications Catalog is 

now available online at 

www.iteawww.org. Browse the 

catalog for all the 

latest ITEA gift 

items and 

publications. 

Additionally, take a 

look at the new 

addenda to 

Standards for 

Technological 

Literacy: 

• Measuring Progress: A Guide to 

Assessing Students for 


• Realizing Excellence: Structuring 

Technology Programs 

• Planning Learning: Developing 

Technology Curricula 

• Developing Professionals: 

Preparing Technology Teachers 

Also included is information on 

grants, scholarships, and awards. 

Check out the 2005 Publications 

Catalog today! 

NCLB News: 

International Studies 

Show Mixed Results 

Among U.S. Students 

The latest results of two major 

international studies present a mixed 

picture of the academic abilities of 

American students. In the 2003 

Trends in International Mathematics 

and Science Study (TIMSS), 

American fourth- and eighth-graders 

significantly outperformed many of 

their international peers. While 

eighth-graders—including boys, girls 

and minority students—improved 

their scores compared to past TIMSS 

studies (1995 and 1999), scores for 

fourth-graders remained static in both 

subject areas. 

In the 2003 Program for International 

Student Assessment (PISA), U.S. 

ninth- and tenth-graders (15-yearolds) 

performed below the 

international average in math literacy 

and problem-solving. This lag among 

high school students, says President 

Bush and U.S Secretary of Education 

Margaret Spellings, underscores the 

need for annual learning assessments 

for all students in Grades 9-11. Under 

the No Child Left Behind Act, such 

assessments currently apply only to 

students in Grades 3-8. 

The PISA results were released in 

December 2004 by the Paris-based 

Organization for Economic 

Cooperation and Development. A 

report on America’s PISA results, 

published by the U.S. Department of 

Education’s National Center for 

Education Statistics (NCES), is 

available at 

http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pisa, or by 

calling 1-877-4ED-PUBS with 

identification number ERN3787P, 

while supplies last. 

The 2003 TIMSS report is the third 

release since 1995 from the 

Amsterdam-based International 

Association for the Evaluation of 

Educational Achievement. For NCES’ 

report on the U.S. TIMSS results, 

visit http://nces.ed.gov/timss, or call 

1-877-4ED-PUBS with identification 

number ERN3791P, while supplies 

last. Source: U.S. Department of 

Education, The Achiever, [February 1, 

2005]. 


TEACHING ELEMENTS AND 

PRINCIPLES OF BRIDGE DESIGN 

FEATURE ARTICLE 

Charles Beck 

Bridge construction is a popular 

classroom activity. However, the 

basic principles of tension, 

compression, and counterbalance are 

not always clearly represented and 

defined. The common materials used 

to construct model bridges, such as 

straws, toothpicks, Legos, and 

building blocks, are often too flexible 

or stationary to demonstrate the 

principles that keep bridges upright 

and functional. If the basic principles 

are not clearly demonstrated, 

students will fail to understand how 

bridges are able to support heavy 

loads. Upper elementary and middle 

school students can design simple 

models that demonstrate the 

essential elements and basic 

principles of bridge design. 

ITEA Standards 

Designing model bridges addresses 

several of ITEA’s Standards for 

Technological Literacy (ITEA, 

2000/2002). For example, by 

identifying basic elements and 

principles of bridge design, students 

develop an understanding of the 

“attributes of design” (Standard 8) 

and “engineering design” (Standard 

9). Students “select and use 

constructive technologies” (Standard 

20) when they design model bridges 

and test their ability to support loads. 

Most states have Instructional 

Frameworks or Standards that require 

classroom teachers to expose their 

students to the basic physical 

principles of engineering and 

technology. Based on the 

By designing model bridges, students can 

begin to appreciate how engineers construct 

elements that produce tremendous force, 

such as arches and cables. 

Figure 1: Arch Bridge Construction Principles and Elements 

constructivist theory to learning, 

students need to design models to 

understand these principles. 

Materials 

The drawings illustrate two common 

types of bridges—the arch and the 

suspension. The arch bridge (see 

Figure 1) may be constructed from 

Styrofoam or wooden wedges. Paper 

clips or cotter pins are used to secure 

the abutments. To prevent the 

wedges from wobbling, they should 

be about two inches in thickness. 

The suspension bridge (see Figure 2) 

is constructed from balsa for the 

towers, deck, and anchorages. The 

illustration shows short side decks 

and cable spans. The students may 

want to lengthen the side decks and 

their cable spans to resemble an 

actual suspension bridge. The cables 

and suspenders are made from paper 

clips linked together. In order to show 

tension, the deck should only be 

1/16” to 1/8” in thickness. The tower 

framework is about 1/4” in thickness. 

The paper clips or pins must pass 

through the abutments and 

anchorages and into the baseboard. 

Students may use glue or paper clips 

to secure the tower cross beams to 

the uprights and the foundations to 

the baseboard. It should not be 

difficult to push paper clips through 

balsa. These materials are available 

in most arts and crafts supply stores. 



Figure 2: Suspension Bridge Construction Principles and Elements 

Students should be encouraged to 

experiment and problem-solve with 

the elements. For example, they 

should experience what happens 

when loads, such as toy cars or metal 

weights, are placed on the bridges, 

and the paper clips are removed from 

the abutments and anchorages. They 

will observe how the wedges collapse 

from the outward compression, and 

how the towers lean and the deck 

sags from the tension. If the deck is 

cut in half, the tension on the cables 

and towers will become more visible 

when a load is placed on the deck. 

The suspension bridge illustration 

shows how each half of the deck is 

supported by a pair of cables. 

Bridge Principles 

The arch bridge must counterbalance 

a great deal of compression, whereas 

the suspension bridge must 

counterbalance a tremendous amount 

of tension. Figures 1 and 2 illustrate 

how the arch and suspension bridges 

are subject to the following three 

principles: 

• Tension—pulling force that tends 

to stretch an element. In a 

suspension bridge, the center 

span deck is pulling downward on 

the center span cables. 

• Compression—pushing force that 

tends to shorten an element. In an 

arch bridge, one wedge presses 

the wedge next to it. The 

abutments must withstand the 

outward compression or force of 

all the wedges. In a suspension 

bridge, the cables press down on 

the towers. 

• Counterbalance—connecting 

elements that provide opposing 

forces. In the arch bridge, the 

abutments provide a 

counterbalance to the outward 

compression of the wedges. In 

the suspension bridge, the 

anchorages provide a 

counterbalance to the tension 

pulling on the cables. 

Bridge Elements 

The three main elements for the arch 

bridge include: 

• Wedges—tapered elements that 

interlock and compress each other 

• Abutments—ground level 

supports to withhold outward 

compression 

• Scaffolds—temporary supports 

for positioning and holding 

wedges 

The six main elements for 

constructing the suspension bridge 

include: 

• Cables—staying elements to 

support the deck and load 

• Towers—vertical elements for 

hanging cables 

• Suspenders—elements for 

linking the cable to the deck 

• Anchorages—elements to 

counterbalance cable tension 

• Foundations—elements used to 

hold towers in position 

• Deck—surface element for load 

crossing 

Bridge Construction 

Given a bridge illustration with 

measurements, students should be 

able to construct a model similar to 

the drawing. Students should be able 

to cut the materials safely using a 

coping saw. Construction becomes a 

cooperative learning experience if the 

students work in small groups of 

three or four members, with each 

member assigned a particular bridge 

element. 

The illustration of the arch bridge 

suggests 12 wedges. The wedges can 

be colored to represent two adjacent 

spectrums or rainbows placed end-toend. 

The two wedges at the top 

should be red, with one orange wedge 

on each side, followed by yellow, 

green, blue and violet at the base. 

Two or three students working 

together should be able to position the 

wedges. The students should try 

constructing the arch bridge with and 

without a scaffold. If the scaffold fits 

the bottom of the arch, it should help 

to hold the wedges in place until the 

arch is completed. 

Learning Assessment 

Student learning may be assessed 

based on three skill categories: 

cooperative, psychomotor, and 

cognitive. For cooperative skills 

assessment, the teacher may use an 

observation sheet to record how well 

the team members work together and 

problem-solve to construct a standing 

bridge. In addition to the teacher’s 

observation of psychomotor skills, 

the students should evaluate each 

team’s bridge construction based on 

a point system. Points are awarded 

based on how well each element 

fulfills its purpose, and how well the 

bridge demonstrates each principle. 

In regard to cognitive skills, the 

following set of questions will help to 

assess the students’ understanding of 



the elements and principles of bridge 

construction. The questions may be 

assessed informally, such as a class 

review session. A more formal 

assessment could be a worksheet 

requiring written responses and/or 

labeling elements and principles on a 

drawing (see illustrations). 

• Why are the wedges tapered so 

that the narrow ends are facing 

downward? 

• Why is it important to secure the 

abutments before constructing 

the arch? 

• How would a scaffold beneath the 

wedges be helpful in constructing 

the arch? 

• What happens to the towers 

when you disconnect the cables 

from the anchorages and add a 

deck load? 

• How do the abutments serve to 

counterbalance the compression 

of the wedges? 

• How do the anchorages serve to 

counterbalance the tension on the 

cables? 

• How do the suspenders help the 

cable to support the deck and 

load? 

• What happens to the center span 

deck when you disconnect the 

cables and add a deck load? 

• Why is it important to secure the 

anchorages and foundations before 

connecting the cables? 

Conclusion 

As an additional learning activity, 

students should research bridge 

technology on the Internet and view a 

video on bridge design. The PBS 

series on “Building Big with David 

Macaulay” (Macaulay, 2000) provides 

a video on “Bridges” from ancient 

times to present day. It helps to 

address the role of bridges in society 

and the influence of bridges on 

history, while also addressing ITEA 

Standards 6 and 7 (ITEA, 2000/2002). 

By designing model bridges, students 

can begin to appreciate how 

engineers construct elements that 

produce tremendous force, such as 

Vision + Commitment = Success 

arches and cables. They soon realize 

why these forces must be stabilized 

by counterbalancing elements, such 

as abutments and anchorages. After 

experiencing the principles of tension, 

compression, and counterbalance, 

students can apply this understanding 

to other monumental structures, such 

as towers, tunnels, and domes. 

References 

International Technology Education 

Association (2000/2002). Standards for 

Technological Literacy: Content for the 

Study of Technology. Reston, VA: 

Author. 

Macaulay, D. (2000). Building Big with 

David Macaulay. Boston: WGBH Videos. 

Charles Beck is 

Professor of 

Education at 

Framingham State 

College, Framingham, 

MA. He can be 

reached via e-mail at 

c.s.beck@ 

verizon.net. 

This is a refereed article. 

ITEA would like to thank Paxton/Patterson for their vision 

and commitment to technology education and to building 

a stronger association. Through the partnership and 

support of Paxton/Patterson, ITEA has received over 750 

new Professional members since June 1, 2004. 

THANK YOU Paxton/Patterson! 


IDSA 

From IDSA 

Using Storyboarding Techniques to Identify Design Opportunities 

Kevin Reeder, IDSA 

The movie industry heavily relies on 

storyboards as an effective way to 

visually describe the process of a 

movie. The storyboard visually 

describes how the movie flows from 

beginning to end, how the characters 

are interacting, and where transitions 

and/or gaps exist in the storyline. 

The storyboard is an effective tool in 

industrial design as well. A storyboard 

visually describes how users will 

interact with the product from start to 

finish and depicts the individual steps 

in that process that need further 

examination and analysis. This 

detailed examination leads to 

innovative product solutions that 

successfully address a greater amount 

of the users’ needs and expectations. 

In the classroom, when students 

employ storyboards, they are better 

able to understand the complexity of a 

product’s use and visualize areas for 

improvement. 

When students employ storyboards, they 

are better able to understand the complexity 

of a product’s use and visualize areas for 

improvement. 

This article discusses storyboarding in 

terms of its value in communicating 

what the designed product will do and 

how people will interact with it. It will 

also discuss storyboarding as a tool 

for identifying opportunities for innovation. 

The article will use examples 

from student course work to support 

its premise and offer a project that 

employs the same techniques for use 

in the classroom. 

Storyboards 

Through research activities, industrial 

designers understand how people 

interact with existing products. 

Storyboarding these activities allows 

the designer to visualize the user’s 

needs and interactions throughout the 

process of using a product. In this 

way, designers can focus on and 

resolve difficult steps in completing a 

task while designing for the whole 

process. For instance, students at 

Georgia Tech recently designed a 

medical delivery cart for a hospital in 

Atlanta. Through research and 

storyboarding, the students were able 

to visualize and juggle the design 

issues of storing medication, charging 

power sources, moving through 

crowded spaces, and dispensing 

medication. Solutions offered bases 

with wider sections, swiveling, 

retractable surfaces, and latch-on 

shelves while still presenting an 

appropriate image, and a solid 

structure within a manufacturing 

budget. Through this project the 

students were better able to 

manipulate the myriad of design 

issues that needed to be addressed in 

order to design a superior medical 

delivery cart. 

Storyboards can also be used to help 

designers identify opportunities for 

innovation. The operational process 

Figure 1. A photographic storyboard constructed by team members, B. Ng and J.R. Gunderson, enacting the medical delivery process. 


for a common electrical kitchen 

product may be: 

1. Remove the product from storage 

2. Plug the power cord into the outlet 

3. Turn it on 

4. Complete the task 

5. Turn it off 

6. Remove the power cord from the 

outlet 

7. Clean the product 

8. Replace the product to storage 

IDSA 

The process may be prioritized to 

step number 4, “Complete the task.” 

By storyboarding this process, the 

designer can visualize and develop 

solutions for a step in the process 

that is not prioritized and perhaps not 

addressed by competitive products. 

In this manner, the new product 

surpasses market expectations by 

offering more than “complete the 

task” to the consumer. As an 

academic exercise, students can 

visually understand how the priority 

of the Design Objectives may change 

through the process of using the 

product. For example, in step 1, 

storing the power cord may be an 

important issue, while in step 4, cord 

storage has no importance. 

An example of employing visual 

storyboarding as a means to achieve 

innovation is shown in Figure 2, 

Lunchbox Storyboard. In this 

example, the designer addressed the 

stable market of lunch boxes, where 

change and innovation are limited to 

product graphics or surface 

materials. In this case, the designer 

storyboarded the process of 

commuting to the office with a 

lunchbox and briefcase. By 

addressing this issue in general and 

in particular, the designer was able to 

generate several innovative product 

solutions that address potentially 

new market segments in professional 

lunch boxes. 

Figure 2. The Lunchbox Storyboard examines the possible uses. 

Constructing Visual Storyboards 

Visual Storyboards are exploration, 

analysis, conceptualization, and 

communication tools and, as such, 

can be constructed in several ways. 

Movie storyboards are often handdrawn 

for speed and visualization of 

the story and action. For industrial 

designers, both photographic and 

hand-drawn methods are acceptable. 

Photographic recording (film, digital 

camera/video) of the research 

activities provides detailed images 

that can examined and presented 

digitally or as a printed hardcopy. In 

cases where photo documentation is 

not appropriate, recording role-playing 

exercises can help the design team to 

formulate questions for further 

examination (see Figure 1). Handdrawn 

methods are most appropriate 

when quick examination and 

conceptualization are the goals. It is 

important to note that hand-drawn 

storyboards are not limited by the skill 

of the designer and, as such, a stick 

figure is as valid a communication 

image as an artistically rendered 

figure. Regardless of the media, the 

storyboard allows the designer to 

examine the individual steps while 

remaining aware of the overall 

process. 

A Toothbrush Storage 

Device Project 

This project is constructed to 

encourage students to examine an 

apparently simple process in order to 

develop supportive products. 

Brushing teeth is appropriate for this 

project because students are familiar 

with the process and it can be 

delineated photographically or by 

hand drawings. Whatever the media, 

the goal is to study the process in 

fine detail in order to find a step that 

is best supported by hardware. 

To begin, the students, in groups of 

two or three, should write/record 

their personal processes of brushing 

teeth in a step-by-step fashion and 

share this with the group. The group 

then compares the different 

processes, with particular emphasis 

placed on individual variations. In 

doing this, students will, hopefully, be 

encouraged to share personal 

experiences and gain an 

understanding of the different uses 

for the new product. With this 

information, the design team is ready 

to construct the storyboard. 

The group will decide to either sketch 

the process in perspective or multi- 


view projection (stick figures are 

sufficient) or to record the process 

photographically. Both methods have 

benefits. If sketching the process, the 

storyboard can be constructed from 

the personal processes described 

above. Photographically, a digital 

camera or digital video camera can 

easily record the step-by-step 

process of each member. At this 

point, the storyboard becomes a 

design tool. The design group scours 

the storyboard searching for 

instances where a new product 

would enhance or support the 

process. For instance, the group may 

find that an inconsistent placement of 

the toothpaste causes frustration 

among the people preparing to brush. 

In this case, a storage device that is 

designed to retain the toothpaste 

(considering the variation in 

toothpaste packages) and encourage 

consistent placement of the toothpaste 

may be a really innovative, 

blockbuster of a new product idea. 

The final step in the project may be 

to build a model of the product idea 

and test it at each group member’s 

home. It is helpful to record the 

results and compare this to the 

storyboard. The model can be built of 

foamcore, plastic sheet, or thin wood 

panels as the goal is to test the idea, 

not to produce the product. The 

project could expand to include 

prototyping the new product based 

on the results of the test model and 

also expand to include a short 

production run to test on a larger 

group of potential users/consumers. 

Conclusion 

Storyboarding is a valuable tool to 

industrial designers and even more 

valuable to industrial design students. 

The technique encourages designers 

to examine, analyze, conceptualize, 

and communicate the different steps 

that constitute the interaction of a 

product to the person using it. 

Storyboarding can help student 

designers to better understand the 

broad scope of product development 

as well as the value of designing the 

details while still considering the 

overall objective for the product. 

Kevin Reeder, IDSA, 

is an assistant professor 

in the 

Industrial Design 

Program at the 

Georgia Institute of 

Technology. He 

can be reached via e-mail at Kevin. 

reeder@arch.gatech.edu. 

Get to Know an ITEA Member 

Brian Lien 

Technology Education Teacher, Princeton High School 

Cincinnati, Ohio 

What is your favorite thing about being a technology teacher? 

My favorite thing about being a technology education teacher is being able to teach the 

higher and lower achieving students in the same class and seeing them work together to 

solve problems. I really enjoy seeing my students understand a math or science concept in a 

way that they never had in their math or science class. Because I teach high school, I enjoy 

watching the students grow and mature. As they become older and wiser, they delve deeper 

into the classes they take. This gets me excited and helps me stay fresh with what I am teaching. 

Why did you join ITEA? 

I joined ITEA because, as a college student, I had a wonderful college professor who taught me that if I wanted to be 

treated like a professional I had to act and dress like a professional. When I began teaching, I met several teachers who 

were members of ITEA. Because of them, I became actively involved and took on leadership roles. I’ve benefited by 

meeting many wonderful people. These people have become lifelong friends and valuable sources of information. 

Please share your favorite teaching tip. 

Good parental contact is the best teaching tip I can offer. Prior to the beginning of each class, I send a letter to my 

students' parents informing them of my teaching philosophy, expectations, and classroom rules. I also tell my parents 

that, if we work together, we will have a great year. I send home grades each week. I also send a postcard home once 

a quarter highlighting something positive about their child. Because of this, I get great parental support. 

Want to communicate with Brian? He can be reached at blien@princeton.k12.oh.us 


WHERE THE WOMEN ARE: RESEARCH FINDINGS ON 

GENDER ISSUES IN TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION 


W.J. Haynie, III 

This article reports some research 

findings about gender issues in 

technology education and relates 

some actual events that cause 

concern for our profession. It also 

includes a Self-Check Questionnaire 

that teachers and other professionals 

can use to examine their own 

behaviors and speech patterns, 

which could be turning females away 

from their classes or our profession. 

It is hoped that understanding some 

of the perceptions of women in the 

profession may help us all make it a 

more comfortable environment for 

females. 

Prior to 1980, the industrial arts 

curriculum failed to attract many 

female students or teachers, but 

there were some early indicators that 

the more contemporary technology 

curriculum would be more appealing 

to females (Cummings, 1998; Hill, 

1998; Sanders, 2001; and Zuga, 

1998). Simultaneously, due to 

changes in society, women were 

more accepted in traditionally maledominated 

professions, and standards 

of acceptable behavior in crossgender 

social interactions were 

redefined (Foster, 1996; Haynie, 

1999; Stevens, 1996; and Wolters & 

Fridgen, 1996). Still, few women 

enter technology education even 

today. Sanders (2001) noted that, 

despite some gains in diversity, 

“technology education is still taught 

mostly by middle-aged white men”— 

the troubling question is: Why? 

Background 

The small body of professional 

literature concerning the lack of 

Once investigations discover issues to 

address, the profession can make the 

changes needed to attract and retain more 

female students and teachers. 

women in technology education, the 

need for more women, and the 

historical reasons and potential 

factors keeping females out has been 

spotty but useful (ITEA, 1994; 

Liedtke, 1995; Markert, 1996; 

Silverman & Pritchard, 1996; 

Trautman, Hayden, & Smink, 1995; 

and Volk & Holsey, 1997). Most of 

this literature, however, consists of 

opinion papers, library research, and 

journal articles; there is very little 

original or data-driven empirical 

research on gender issues in 

technology education. 

What research is needed on women’s 

issues in technology education? 

Markert (1996) indicated that 

educators should note a wide 

assortment of behaviors they display 

(possibly unknowingly) that “create a 

chilly classroom or null academic 

environment for their female 

students” (p. 28). These behaviors 

must be identified and changed 

because “Speeches and reports that 

extol the benefits of gender equality 

are nothing more than empty rhetoric 

if they are not followed up with 

commensurate action” (Akubue, 

2001, p. 71). The empirical research 

conducted thus far, though helpful in 

identifying issues and demonstrating 

that more studies are needed, has 

done little to solve the problem. 

Rigorous quantitative and qualitative 

study is needed. Once investigations 

discover issues to address, the 

profession can make the changes 

needed to attract and retain more 

female students and teachers. More 

and more, funding agencies such as 

NSF are demanding clear results from 

empirical research as the basis for 

spending their money. The works 

discussed here help to lay such a 

foundation that could be used to seek 

funding for further work. 

Recently, two research efforts have 

shed some light on gender issues in 

technology education (Haynie, 1999, 

& 2003). The 1999 effort was a 

survey based upon hard data that 

provided a basis for further research. 

The 2003 study was termed a “Quasi 

Ethnographic Interview Approach” in 

its title. That was an apt identifier 

because it did report data collected 

via interviews, but there were 

variations from traditional 

methodology. In that article, the 

author claimed that the triangulation 

required to draw useful conclusions 

was achieved via the survey, the 

interviews, and his own purposeful 

observations since 1966 (when he 

first developed interest in this topic). 

Methods and Findings of Two 

Related Studies 

In general terms, the methods of the 

1999 study consisted of a survey of 



technology education professionals at 

the 1997 Technology Student 

Association conference. Of 150 

instruments distributed, 95 were 

completed (63% response rate). 

Thirty-nine women and 56 men 

participated in the survey. The survey 

consisted of 52 items intended to 

determine respondents’ perceptions 

on issues or situations. Each 

statement was followed by a 

continuum that respondents marked 

with an "X" to indicate their 

perception (Mueller, 1986). Readers 

who desire details of the specific 

methods and findings are encouraged 

to read the full report in the Journal 

of Technology Education (Haynie, 

1999), which is available online at 

http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/. 

The findings of the 1999 survey 

(Haynie) included: “(1) all technology 

education professionals should regard 

the school environment as a setting 

that requires a more conservative 

demeanor than society at large, (2) 

they should realize that their colleagues 

are likely a little more conservative than 

the values implied by contemporary 

society, (3) they should be sensitive to 

constantly monitor the appropriateness 

of their own actions and adjust them 

according to the reactions of others, 

and (4) should treat all persons with 

respect and fairness—judging them on 

their performance and ignoring all other 

potentially divisive factors.” (p 39) 

The second effort was qualitative 

research based on ethnographic 

interview technique. The researcher 

followed guidelines in a classic work 

by Spradley (1979) for conduction of 

fruitful ethnographic interviews. Borg 

and Gall (1989), Burgess (1985), 

Goetz and LeCompte (1984), and 

Merriam (1988) were also consulted 

for help with design of the study and 

instrument. A paper instrument was 

used to record data, and the 

interviews were tape recorded. To 

make the participants feel valued 

(Spradley, 1979) and to allow for a 

lengthy interview in comfort, the 

interviews were conducted 

individually in restaurants during a 

meal or dessert. Twelve women from 

various perspectives within the 

profession were interviewed. TTT 

readers desiring to know more about 

the demographics of the informants, 

details of the instrument, and a full 

discussion of the methodology are 

directed to the complete 14-page 

report in the Journal of Technology 

Education (Haynie, 2003). (Note: This 

journal is available in hardcopy and 

also online at http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ 

ejournals/JTE/ .) 

In the interviews of the 2003 study, 

the women reported the following 

perceptions: a basic comfort level 

and improvement since the 

curriculum change toward computers 

and away from heavy industry; a 

perceived difference between older 

and younger men in the profession— 

a few of the older men were 

perceived to hold outdated or biased 

views; and a field historically 

dominated and governed by an “old 

boys club” with conformist values— 

more mature women felt they were 

pioneers who broke new ground 

when they entered this field. 

The news was generally good. 

Despite a few negative comments 

and examples, overall the informants 

reported that they felt very 

comfortable most of the time in 

technology education (TE), students 

respect them, they wish more girls 

would take courses and consider a 

TE profession, and most men make 

appropriate efforts to insure their 

comfort. Actions the profession could 

take to increase enrollment of 

females and attract more female 

teachers include: equity camps, 

online courses that permit lateral 

entry teachers to prepare without 

abandoning jobs or children, 

technology camps, lateral entry 

opportunities for a second career in 

TE, high visibility events such as TSA 

and standards research efforts, and 

possibly affirmative action efforts to 

attract women. 

In answer to other questions in the 

interviews, one informant pointed out 

that there are no females on the 

current ITEA Board (at that time) and 

that the few who served before were 

“alone.” In most instances, though, 

the women felt that professionals in 

technology education correctly 

recognized the expected language 

and behavior patterns in cross-gender 

relationships, and they acted 

accordingly. One woman followed 

this by saying there are no “skeletons 

in the closet” to find. Some questions 

attempted to find out the degree to 

which females advocated for 

themselves and others in various 

situations. In one of these items, 

when asked how they manage 

situations in which students crossed 

the line of decency, most informants 

agreed they would reprimand 

students who used derogatory terms 

in description of homosexuals, or 

commented on another student’s 

body type or sex appeal. 

There were, however, reports of 

isolated negative events. Actual 

offensive events experienced 

included: 

• “At an ITEA conference, a former 

classmate hugged me too closely, 

clinging in the presence of my 

spouse.” 

• “At a conference an older man 

made a comment about the ‘good 

looking woman’ and it made me 

feel like a token instead of a 

valued professional.” 

• “One professor frequently made me 

feel like I stood out; it was isolated 

to only one person but it was 

obvious to everyone. I do not think 

he even knew he was offending 

me.” 

• “One former faculty colleague 

used offensive language 

frequently. Another actually made 

a sexual advance.” 

• “A man whom I seldom see except 

at conferences is a close hugger 

and sometimes makes ‘fresh’ 

comments. I believe he thinks he is 

being cute or funny—I try to avoid 

him.” 



• “At the national conference I was 

talking to a salesman at an 

exhibitor’s booth and a male 

colleague barged in, grabbed the 

salesman’s hand, and drew him 

away as if I were not even there. 

It made me feel that I was not 

taken seriously.” 

• “Personally, I have not had lots of 

bad experiences, but other 

females have been coddled or 

minimized, and we could 

encourage and mentor females 

better.” 

When given an open-ended 

opportunity to speak about things that 

make them feel uncomfortable in our 

profession, the women who responded 

noted: Inability of the profession to 

define ourselves to others; technical 

challenges (i.e. fix the sander); 

isolation—I’m the only TE teacher at 

the school; rift between traditional 

industrial arts (IA) and modern TE 

teachers; there is a glass ceiling 

preventing advancement, but it may 

not be gender-specific; lack of broad 

technical experience; and age—I’m 

the youngest teacher at my school. 

Obviously, some of these concerns are 

not gender-specific and many new 

teachers would share them. 

The next question asked “What is the 

best thing about working in TE?” 

Several highlights of the responses 

included: 

• Feeling needed and that the 

subject is important (2). 

• Fun (5), Variety (3), Exciting (2), 

Creativity (2). 

• The people and the curriculum. 

• Family atmosphere. 

As confirmation of the survey and 

interview results through observation 

(to provide triangulation) the 

researcher felt compelled to also 

report (in the 2003 study) two recent 

events that he witnessed that he 

believed illustrated uncomfortable 

treatment of women by men in our 

profession. Both were in public 

forums at professional conferences in 

Table 1. A Self-Check Questionnaire 

Actions & Perceptions 

Score 

1 Do I avoid gender stereotypes in my speech? 0 1 2 3 

2 Do I chastise students who generalize by gender? 0 1 2 3 

3 Do I expect the same performance from girls & boys? 0 1 2 3 

4 Would I want my daughter in a class like mine? 

5 Do I actively take note of others’ perceptions? 0 1 2 3 

6 Do I avoid patronizing statements to & about females? 0 1 2 3 

7 Do I avoid statements about peoples’ appearance? 0 1 2 3 

8 Would my daughter feel comfortable with statements I make 

in class? 0 1 2 3 

9 Do I avoid statements with sexual & salacious content? 0 1 2 3 

10 Do I avoid jokes with sexual & salacious content or innuendo? 0123 

11 Would I want my daughter’s teacher to tell the jokes I tell in class? 0 1 2 3 

12 Do I actively seek opportunities for females in TE? 0 1 2 3 

13 Do I avoid statements that undermine the dignity of those 

who differ from myself in any way (gender, race, culture, sexual 

orientation, others)? 0 1 2 3 

14 Would I want my daughter treated as I treat the girls in my class? 0 1 2 3 

15 Would I want my wife or mother treated as I treat my female 

colleagues? 0 1 2 3 

16 Do I actively help colleagues become sensitive to gender-related 

issues? 0 1 2 3 

17 Would my wife, mother, or daughter approve of my actions and 

statements in these matters? 0 1 2 3 

Total Score:_________ 

Key for Self Rating 

0 No, never, poor, well below 

average 

1 Sometimes, less than average for 

our society 

2 Yes, OK, about average for our 

society 

3 Often, good, more than average for 

our society 

Interpretation of Scores 

< 13 There is a serious problem to 

solve, people’s feelings are 

hurt 

14 - 21 There is lots of room for 

growth, females may often 

feel uncomfortable 

22 - 30 You are contributing to the 

problem somewhat, try to 

improve & grow 

31 - 42 Basically OK, but examine 

your low score areas 

> 43 Share your positive 

perceptions with colleagues, 

but you are not perfect either! 

We all have room for 

improvement. 



which a leading member of the 

organization made an inappropriate 

and embarrassing comment from the 

podium. In one of the events a man 

at the podium giving an award made 

reference to the male recipient 

spending time at “Hooters” (a 

restaurant chain that proudly flaunts 

its exclusive employment of 

provocatively clad young women as 

waitpersons). (Note: Since the 

original draft of this report, the author 

has heard two more Hooters stories 

from the podia of national 

professional meetings in TE). In the 

other event the chair forgot a 

woman’s name and called her 

“Marilyn.” When informed of his 

mistake, he said, “I got her confused 

with Marilyn Monroe.” The blonde, 

professional, female guest hid her 

dismay gracefully, but later 

responded to an apology from the 

researcher: “Thanks for your remarks. 

I think you are right on the money 

about these sorts of episodes having 

the effect of holding back progress 

toward [technology education] 

becoming a truly inclusive, civil, and 

progressive professional field.” 

Perhaps her response, as an outside 

observer, best summarizes a key 

finding of this work. How many 

women have a similar impression the 

first time they meet technology 

education professionals? 

Rate Yourself on Sensitivity to 

Gender Issues 

Though Table 1, presented here, was 

not a part of the research studies 

discussed in this article, it is 

presented so that teachers and other 

professionals may reflect on how 

they may be perceived by female 

students and colleagues. The 

research clearly shows that most 

men in TE treat females with respect 

and avoid making them feel 

uncomfortable; does the atmosphere 

in your classroom invite females? The 

Self-Check Questionnaire will also 

help female colleagues insure that 

they are encouraging girls in their 

classes and other female colleagues. 

It may be helpful for females to 

consider the other side of the coin 

(male perspective) and for all 

professionals to consider the 

perceptions of persons from any 

marginalized groups. 

Conclusions 

Now let’s return to the formal 

findings of the research studies 

reported here. There were no 

contradictions in the findings among 

the three sources of triangulation: 

Observations (36 years), the 1999 

survey, and the 2003 interviews. 

Women are generally well accepted 

and comfortable in the technology 

education profession, but there are 

some problems that make them feel 

isolated, patronized, minimized, 

conspicuous, or otherwise 

uncomfortable. Many of the problems 

leading to these feelings of isolation 

are due to the attitudes and actions 

of a small minority of men within our 

profession who hold outdated views. 

These problems will best be 

eliminated if more women are 

encouraged to enter the profession 

and advance to positions of 

leadership in which they may serve 

as role models. The general manner 

in which men and women interact in 

the profession is healthy and normal 

within the context of our current 

social mores and standards of 

behavior. Men within the profession 

should be careful to avoid comments 

that call attention to the gender of 

female students or colleagues. We 

should all emphasize the abilities and 

attributes that make all people 

valuable within the profession. The 

evolving nature of the curriculum, 

coupled with retirement of some key 

older men who hold the most biased 

viewpoints, will slowly work to 

reduce the frequency of negative 

events and make the profession more 

attractive to women. More evidencebased 

research by other 

professionals is needed on these and 

related topics. 

References 

Akubue, A. I. (2001). Gender disparity in 

third world technological, social, and 

economic development. The Journal of 

Technology Studies, 27(2), 64-73. 

Borg, W. R. & Gall, M. D. (1989). 

Educational research. New York: 

Longman. 

Burgess, R. G., ed. (1985). Strategies of 

educational research: Qualitative 

methods. Philadelphia: Falmer. 

Cummings, J. (1998). Foreword. In B. L. 

Rider (Ed.), Diversity in technology 

education (pp. iii-v). New York: 

Glencoe. 

Foster, W. T. (1996). Technology, the arts, 

and social constructivism: R2D2 meets 

Degas. In R. L. Custer & A. E. Wiens 

(eds.), Technology and the quality of life 

(pp. 239-272). New York: Glencoe. 

Haynie, W. J. (1999). Cross-gender 

interaction in technology education: A 

survey. Journal of Technology 

Education, 10(2), 27-40. 

Haynie, W. J. (2003). Gender issues in 

technology education: A quasi 

ethnographic interview approach. 

Journal of Technology Education, 15(1), 

15-29. 

Hill, C. E. (1998). Women as technology 

educators. In B. L. Rider (Ed.), Diversity 

in technology education (pp. 57-75). 

New York: Glencoe. 

Goetz, J. P., & LeCompte, M. D. (1984). 

Ethnography and qualitative design in 

educational research. Chicago: Aldine. 


Association. (1994). ITEA strategic 

plan: Advancing technological literacy. 

Reston, VA: ITEA. 

Liedtke, J. (1995). Changing the 

organizational culture of technology 

education to attract minorities and 

women. The Technology Teacher, 

54(6), 9-14. 

Markert, L. R. (1996). Gender related to 

success in science and technology. The 

Journal of Technology Studies, 22(2), 

21-29. 

Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research 

in education: A qualitative approach. 

San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 

Mueller, D. J. (1986). Measuring social 

attitudes. New York: Teachers College 

Press. 

Sanders, M. (2001). New paradigm or old 

wine? The status of technology 

education practice in the United States. 


35-55. 

Silverman, S. & Pritchard, A. M. (1996). 

Building their future: Girls and 

technology education in Connecticut. 


41-54. 


Spradley, J. (1979). The ethnographic 

interview. New York: Harcourt Brace 

Jovanovitch. 

Stephens, G. (1996). Technology, crime & 

civil liberties. In R. L. Custer & A. E. 

Wiens (eds.), Technology and the 

quality of life (pp. 345-380). New York: 

Glencoe. 

Trautman, D. K., Hayden, T. E., & Smink, J. 

M. (1995). Women surviving in 

technology education: What does it 

take? The Technology Teacher, 54(5), 

39-42. 

Volk, K., & Holsey, L. (1997). TAP: A 

gender equity program in high 

technology. The Technology Teacher, 

56(4), 10-13. 

Wolters, F. K., & Fridgen, J. D. (1996). The 

impact of technology on leisure. In R. L. 

Custer & A. E. Wiens (eds.), 

Technology and the quality of life (pp. 

459-500). New York: Glencoe. 

Zuga, K. F., (1998). A historical view of 

women’s roles in technology education. 

In B. L. Rider (Ed.), Diversity in 

technology education (pp. 13-35). New 

York: Glencoe. 

W. J. Haynie, III, 

Ph.D. is an associate 

professor at North 

Carolina State 

University, Raleigh, 

NC. He can be 

reached via e-mail at 

jim_haynie@ncsu.edu. 

This is a refereed article. 

AD INDEX 

Autodesk............................C-3 

CNC/Mastercam.................C-2 

Goodheart-Willcox 

Publisher..........................39 

Kelvin Electronics.................35 

LaserBits..............................34 

Paxton/Patterson ...................8 

Pitsco ..................................39 

SolidWorks Corporation .....C-4 



RESOURCES IN TECHNOLOGY 


Wheels and Tires 

John M. Ritz, DTE 

Automobile wheels (rims and 

hubcaps) have been catching the 

eyes of car enthusiasts for years. 

Designers have used their creativity 

to make better products both 

structurally and aesthetically. 

Hubcaps were one of the early 

aesthetic accessories added to 

wheels to hide the nuts used to 

fasten the wheels onto the vehicle. 

Later, MAG wheels (originally made 

of magnesium alloys to take on a 

spoke effect) were developed to 

increase the strength and sporty 

appearance of the wheels. Both are 

found in the current market; many are 

replaced with fads held by automotive 

enthusiasts. Some believe that the 

wheels and tires are the most visible 

styling statement beyond the 

automobile’s color and shape. This 

Resources in Technology will look at 

automotive wheels and tires. 

Humans learned early that simple 

tools could make their work easier. 

Heavy objects, e.g., rocks, trees, 

boats, could be rolled by wedging 

small logs under them and pushing or 

pulling. No doubt this is where the 

concept of the wheel developed. 

History has shown that early wheels 

were more easily made by fastening 

planks together instead of using one 

piece of heavy wood. Later, spoke 

systems were developed to lighten 

the weight of the wheels while 

maintaining strength. Tires were 

added to the wheels to increase 

useful life and to make the ride less 

bumpy. 

Today’s vehicles that ride on land, 

roadways, and railways, are all 

developments or extensions of the 

early two-wheeled cart. The structure 

Understanding the numbers on the sides of 

tires might lead to longer life tires and 

improved driving safety. 

or propulsion of the vehicles has 

changed, but the basic concepts of 

moving a load or people have stuck 

to the basic vehicle concept. Today, 

no vehicle is more of a necessity 

than the automobile. Driving is a rite 

of passage for teenagers in 

developed countries. 

Automotive Wheels 

Early automotive wheels were no 

more than bicycle wheels. These 

spoked wheels had metal tires or 

rims to increase their life. Because of 

durability and automobile weight, 

solid rims were designed. These 

were forged and welded together. 

Today, wheels are either made of 

steel or other metallic alloys. 

Traditional steel rims are forged and 

welded together. Alloy wheel 

construction is undertaken in three 

manufacturing methods. Forged 

wheels, thought to be the best 

manufacturing technique, are made 

by taking an alloy billet (solid piece of 

material) and compressing it through 

heat and pressure. This produces a 

very strong, lightweight wheel. Low 

pressure cast wheels are made by 

pouring molten metal into a mold that 

is the shape of the desired wheel. 

Counter pressure casting, the third 

way to produce automotive wheels, 

uses a vacuum to pull the hot metal 

into the mold. This method reduces 

the presence of air voids in the 

formed metal. 

Specialty wheels are everywhere in 

the automotive market. Storefront, 

magazine, and newspaper ads show 

how wheels can change the looks of 

your automotive product. Many try to 

personalize their vehicle with a new 

set of wheels. Spinners are a current 

fad and catch your eyes when they 

continue to spin after the vehicle 

comes to a stop. If you are in the 

market for new wheels or tires, some 

knowledge and research can prove to 

be helpful in buying products that not 

only look good, but also increase the 

performance of your ride. 

Manufacturers recommend that 

replacement wheels and tires on 

automotive products be matched with 

those from the original design 

specifications. With the increased 

concentration on looks and 

performance, people want to make 

their vehicles look special. Some are 

plus- or minus-sizing their wheels and 

tires to enhance looks and 

performance. It is common to see 

larger diameter wheels placed on 

customized cars with low profile tires. 

Trucks are adding all-terrain and mud 

tires for off-road performance. Experts 

in the after-market wheel and tire 

business recommend that the overall 

size of replacement wheels should not 

exceed three percent of the 

manufacturer-specified wheels and 

tires. If this size is exceeded, 

problems can occur with proper 

transmission shifting, which will 



decrease fuel efficiency. Braking can 

also become a problem, since many 

systems are assisted with 

programmed on-board computers and 

antilock braking systems (ABS). 

Although wheels are important in the 

functioning of the automobile, most of 

the development in the suspension of 

automobiles has been in the tires that 

we ride upon. 

Automotive Tires 

The first pneumatic (inflatable) tire, 

used on bicycles, was developed in 

1845 by Robert Thomson 

(http://en.wilipedia.org.wiki/Tire). Its 

design provided a better ride, but it 

was abandoned. This tire had a 

canvas inner tube and a leather outer 

tire. It was hard to fit and retain the 

air to keep the tires inflated. 

Two names that are found in the history 

of tire technology are Charles Goodyear, 

who invented the vulcanization of rubber 

in 1844, and John Dunlap, who 

patented the pneumatic tire with a 

rubber outer tread in 1888 

(http://en.wilipedia.org.wiki/Tire). 

Early tires were made of natural 

rubber. Because of demand, a 

substitute was developed that is 

petroleum-based. It is known as 

synthetic rubber. Today, experimentation 

is being done with 

nanomaterials (very small engineered 

materials). These could increase the 

life of the tire. However, with all 

technologies, we need to consider 

what the nanomaterials may do after 

manufacture. The nanomaterials that 

wear off on the roadway could get 

washed off the road and end up in 

agricultural products. These may then 

be consumed through the food chain. 

across the tire to resist puncturing and 

also keep the tires flat so that there is 

improved road contact. Performance 

tires also have cap plies (extra layers 

of polyester cords) to keep the belts in 

place at high speeds. 

The sidewalls of the tire provide for 

structural integrity. When the 

automobile rounds corners, the 

sidewalls add lateral stability and 

keep the tire from collapsing. The 

sidewalls also protect the body plies 

and provide stability so the tire beads 

can keep contact with the wheels 

and prevent air loss. 

The tire beads are the steel rods that 

keep the tire in contact with the rim 

(wheels). The beads are covered with 

rubber to provide wheel-to-tire 

contact strength and lock the air into 

the tire when inflated. 

Tread is the tire surface that runs on 

the road. It is made of synthetic and 

natural rubber. Wear bars are also 

built into the tire’s tread. They are 

rubber bars that run perpendicular to 

the tire tread. When the tread of the 

tire runs thin from usage, they indicate 

to the owner or maintenance person 

that the tires need to be replaced. The 

bars are set at 1/16th of an inch from 

the base of the tread. When the 

indicator appears across the tire, the 

tires need to be replaced because 

there is not enough tread remaining to 

provide proper road traction. 

All of these components, belts, plies, 

sidewalls, and tread, are assembled 

in a tire-building machine. The tire 

assemblers build the tire in the 

machine. After the parts are put 

together, the tire is referred to as a 

green tire. The tire then needs to be 

heated and pressurized. This ensures 

the tire components are held strongly 

together. The tire curing process is 

known as vulcanizing. Besides 

holding the tire together, this process 

puts the tread pattern on the tire 

along with the printed information, all 

the numbers, words, and symbols, on 

the outer sidewalls of the tire. 

What the Numbers Mean 

If you are in the market to purchase 

replacement tires for the family’s car, 

you might be confused by what you 

read on sales ads or what the sales 

person tells you. All tires should 

match on an automobile, unless the 

sizes are changed through 

manufacturer’s design. Some 

performance cars have larger wheels 

and tires on the rear for improved 

traction and stability. Following is a 

description of a sample set of tires 

with most of the numbers on the tire 

sidewall explained. See Figure 1 and 

the accompanying photographs. 

Tire Construction 

Tires are made in a composite manner 

(layer built upon layer). There are 

various materials that are held 

together with the vulcanized synthetic 

rubber. The body of the tire consists 

of several layers of plastic (polyester) 

cords, steel-belts, bead bundles, and a 

synthetic rubber body and tread. 

Many tires have steel belts that 

reinforce the tire. These belts wrap 

Figure 1. There is more information included on the sidewall of a tire than we may realize 

other than raised white letters and the tire size. Information such as the U.S DOT (Department 

of Transportation) code, recommended tire pressure, tread wear rating, temperature and traction 

grades, tire ply composition and material and number of plies, and other details. 



For example, the high performance 

tires on a Chrysler Crossfire are 

P225/40ZR18 and P255/35ZR19. Note 

that the front and rear tires are of 

different sizes. The P stands for 

passenger tires. LT stands for light 

truck and T stands for temporary 

(undersized spare tires). The 225 and 

255 indicate the width of the tire from 

sidewall to sidewall. This 

measurement is in millimeters (mm). 

This size is important for proper rim fit. 

The 40 and 35 are referred to as 

aspect ratio, the percentage of the 

tire width to the height measured 

from the bead to the top tread. A 35- 

aspect ratio for the 255 tread width 

mentioned above would be a side 

wall height of 76.5 mm. 

Z is the tire’s speed rating. Table 1 

lists various speed ratings. For the 

tire being described, its 

recommended top speed is 149 

miles/hour (mph) or 240 

kilometers/hour (km/h) and over, a 

top speed rating. R indicates that the 

tire is a radial (plies running 

perpendicular to the tread). 

Table 1. Tire Speed Ratings 

Q 99 mph (160km/h) 

R 106 mph (180 km/h) 

S 112 mph (180 km/h) 

T 118 mph (190 km/h) 

U 124 mph (200 km/h) 

H 130 mph (210 km/h 

V 149 mph (240 km/h 

W 168 mph (270 km/h) * 

Y 186 (300 km/h mph)* 

Z 149 mph (240 km/h) and over) 

*For tires with a maximum 

speed capability over 149 mph, 

tire manufacturers sometimes 

use the letters ZR. For those 

with a maximum speed 

capability over 186 mph, tire 

manufacturers always use the 

letters ZR (NHTSA). 

Figure 2. The wheel and tire assembly shown on this 2004 Ford Escape SUV are selected 

for their performance, handling, and economy. SUV’s tires are generally larger to 

accommodate off-road driving conditions. However, typically SUVs are infrequently driven 

off-road, so tire tread designs are less aggressive and favor highway driving conditions. 

Standard tires for a Ford Escape are 

P235/70R16, Figure 2. Note the 

speed rating is not in the tire size 

description. However the tire sidewall 

does contain the following notation, 

104T. The 104 indicates the tire’s 

load rating, which translates to 900 

kilograms (kgs) or 1984 pounds per 

tire. This would mean the total 

vehicle weight, SUV plus its contents 

(people and load), should not exceed 

7936 pounds or 3600 kilograms. The 

more weight you have, the more 

pressure is exerted onto the tires. 

Excessive weight can cause 

structural damage to the tire and 

subsequent failure. Tables are 

available to translate the load index 

of the tire, e.g., www1010tires.com/ 

tiretech.asp. The T in the Escape’s 

printed tire information indicates the 

tire is rated for 118mph. For the 

Crossfire’s tires described in Figure 3, 

the load index was listed as 92 or 

1389 pounds (630 kgs) per tire. 

In addition to these specifications, 

tire sidewall printed information also 

includes its tread wear, traction, and 

temperature ratings. These are found 

in a continuous notation and are 

determined by the U.S. government 

at its National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration testing track in Texas. 

The index used is the Uniform Tire 

Quality Grading (UTQG) rating 

system. It tells the consumer the 

relative performance of the tire; it is 

not exact since people drive 

differently and on different types of 

roads. The index can be located at 

www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/testing/UTQ 

G/pages/TireRatings.cfm. 

Tread wear provides a number to 

determine the life of the tire 

compared to other similar tires. The 

rating is determined after 7200 miles 

of driving on the Texas test track. The 

higher the rating number, the longer 

you can expect the tire to last. It is 

not a precise number, but relative to 

the wear on other tires in controlled 

conditions. A 500-rated tire should 

last twice as long at a 250-rated tire. 

Although relative, the rating is 

important in comparative shopping. 

Traction ratings are also determined 

by the government on the test track. 

Traction ratings are AA, A, B, or C. 

AA is the top rating. It is a 

measurement of the ability of the tire 

to stop the vehicle in a straight line 

on wet roads. The tests are based on 

performance at 40 mph with the 

brakes locked. 



Figure 3. The Chrysler Crossfire is a high performance sports vehicle that emphasizes 

luxurious styling, speed, handling, and cornering capabilities. This product was designed 

and tested for speeds up to 150mph. The tire and wheel assemblies include forged alloy 

rims and ZR-rated tires. Additionally, this vehicle features different sized tires on the front 

and rear of the vehicle to improve handing and cornering with P225/40ZR18 on the front and 

P255/35ZR19 on the rear. 

The temperature ratings range from A, 

B, or C. They again are measured 

indoors in a controlled environment on 

a simulated road wheel test stand. The 

ratings are gauged on 30-minute 

successive runs. The temperature 

indication ratings measure the tire 

speed where heat from friction would 

cause the tire to fail. “A” ratings 

withstand the temperature generated 

on the wheel machine at 114mph. B 

ratings are gauged at 99mph, while C 

ratings are gauged at 85mph 

(www.1010tires.com/tiretech.asp). 

Other sidewall markings include season 

ratings (MS for all seasons, AT for all 

terrain, and M+S for mud and snow), 

tire manufacturing date, manufacturing 

site, and tire inflation pressures. 

NHTSA reported that the Firestone 

Wilderness ATX tires, the ones that 

led to consumer lawsuits of Ford 

Explorer and Firestone in 2001, were 

rated as B for traction and C for 

temperature (www.dot.gov/affairs/ 

nhtsa5101.htm). So, although price is 

important to consumers, 

understanding the numbers on the 

sides of tires might lead to longer-life 

tires and improved driving safety. 

Wheel and Tire Care 

There are many products on the 

market advertised to clean wheels. 

Besides road grime, brake dust also 

accumulates on the wheels. When 

you purchase specialty wheels, learn 

the metal (alloys) from which they 

are manufactured. When you 

purchase your wheel cleaning 

detergents they need to be 

appropriate for the metal used to 

manufacture the wheel. Usually the 

car washing soap you are using to 

wash your car will not cut the brake 

dust. Do not use extra strong 

household cleaners if the wheel 

manufacturer recommends against 

this. It could mar the finish of your 

wheels. Also, clean one wheel at a 

time, since the sun can dry cleaners 

and make them hard to remove. 

Car wax can be applied to nontextured 

wheels and it will assist in 

the cleaning process. Specialty 

sprays can be purchased from 

automotive stores that will also repel 

brake dust and road grime. 

Tires should be visually inspected to 

insure a safe ride. Some learn to look 

at their tires each time they enter 

their car. Others do this at regular 

maintenance intervals. Visual 

inspections can show excessive 

wear, puncture materials that may 

have lodged themselves in your tires, 

or low air pressures. Catching 

problems early can extend the life of 

tires and prevent flats from 

puncturing objects. 

Maintaining proper air pressure in 

tires is important for proper wear. A 

recent NHTSA survey found that 

about 30% of cars and light trucks 

have at least one tire under inflated 

by 8psi or more. 

(www.nhtsa.gov/cars/testing/utqg/) 

Tires do lose pressure over time from 

the changes in heat, both from 

driving and the atmosphere. Improper 

inflation of tires can cause excessive 

and irregular wear, poor vehicle 

handling, and decreased gas mileage. 

Improper tire pressures can result in 

tire failure. Visual inspection can 

usually identify problems. A quality 

air gauge should be used to check 

correct tire pressures. Tires should be 

checked when they are cold, since 

driving warms the tires and increases 

their pressure. The optimum 

pressures are located on the sidewall 

of the tires and also in the owner’s 

manual. Some newer models of 

automobiles have electronic sensors 

and circuitry, which display lights on 

the instrumentation if tire pressure is 

low. Also remember to check the 

pressure of your spare tire. Nothing is 

more irritating than having a flat tire 

and then finding the spare is also flat. 

Balancing of tires is undertaken when 

they are installed. They can come out 

of balance because of wear or in the 

original manufacturing process (tires 

can be heavier where the circular 

tread is cohered to complete the 

circle). Tires may be balanced on or 

off a vehicle. Two types of balancing 

are static and dynamic. Dynamic 

balancing is accomplished by spinning 

the wheel assembly on a balancing 

machine at highway speeds and then 

adding the necessary wheel weights 

to counteract any imbalance. 

Typically, out-of-balance wheels will 

“bounce” or “wobble.” A balancing 

machine marks the spot in the circular 

tire where it is the heaviest. The 

balancing weights are put on the 

opposite side from where the tire/ 

wheel is the heaviest. When you 

replace tires, this is when balancing 

usually occurs. Visual inspection should 

note if the weights used for balancing 

fall off and need to be replaced. If the 

tires do not have unusual wear or 

create vibrations felt in the steering 

wheel, they probably do not need 

rebalanced during tire rotations. 

Since tires wear differently in the 

front and rear due to weight 



distribution, turning, and traction, 

they should be rotated at regular 

intervals. A good way to build this 

into your maintenance schedule is to 

have the tires rotated at every other 

oil change (6000 to 7500 miles). 

When you have a new set of tires 

installed on your vehicle, wheel 

alignment should be checked. The 

vehicle is aligned at manufacture, but 

it can get out of alignment (wheels 

running parallel to each other) by the 

wheels hitting other cars, curbing, or 

deep holes. When the wheels are out 

of alignment they cause unusual 

tread wear and handling and can 

damage the suspension of the 

vehicle. So to increase the life of your 

tires, it is important to get the 

alignment corrected if you notice 

unusual tire wear or driving handling. 

Using a proper maintenance 

schedule, tires can last for the 

mileage at which they are rated. It is 

not uncommon to get 50,000 miles 

on a set of tires that are rated for this 

mileage by keeping the tires properly 

inflated and rotated on a schedule. 

Government Involvement in the 

Tire Industry 

Safety ratings are important to 

consumers. As with all technology, 

consumers cannot be knowledgeable 

on all topics. Technology education is 

the school subject that should provide 

much of this knowledge and a 

consumer attitude that you can learn 

about new technologies by conducting 

consumer research. Governments 

assist citizens in many technical 

areas. Tire technology is one such 

area. Because of potential injury to 

consumers and others, the U.S. 

government established the National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration 

and its Uniform Tire Quality Grading 

(UTQG) rating system. It is involved in 

the rating of new tires and also 

follows up if drivers are reporting 

incidents with current tires and other 

vehicle system failures. 

It is important that there are 

“watchdog” government groups, 

because the proper research may not 

go into the post-manufacturing 

performance of consumer products. 

Many tires and other consumer 

products are being manufactured in 

other countries. What are the driving 

conditions and automotive 

requirements in these countries? 

How do they align with what is 

needed in your country? 

Today many tire manufacturers are 

partnering with Chinese companies 

because of lower material and labor 

costs. Chinese companies are also 

trying to produce their own lines of 

internationally accepted tires. They 

may succeed. However, as increasing 

automotive products enter the 

market, countries and/or companies 

may not be responsible for the 

performance quality of their 

manufactured products. This is why 

we need the government involved— 

consumer protection. 

Government is also involved in the 

proper disposal of tires. Because of 

their composition, it is hard to recycle 

tires. Many have been dumped and 

catch on fire. This causes toxic fumes 

and carbon black smoke. Disposal 

fees are imposed by the government 

and passed onto consumers by the 

tire retailers. These fees are used to 

aid in research to find better ways to 

dispose of the tires. 

Learning Lab Activity 

Research and discussion of wheels, 

tires, and their maintenance can be a 

valuable learning experience. 

Following are some viable technology 

literacy activities. 

1. Have students bring in the 

sidewall information from their 

primary vehicle’s tires. Determine 

speed, load, tread wear, traction, 

and temperature ratings. Discuss 

if any students were surprised 

with the tire performance 

indicators as compared to the 

car/truck model. Write vehicle 

models and tire markings on the 

board for comparisons. 

2. Shop online for tire pricing ads. 

Remember to look into the overall 

tire ratings and compare prices. 

Students might have to visit the 

Web pages of the tire 

manufacturers to check on details 

of the tire performance criteria. 

3. Have students research wheel 

cleaners by visiting automotive 

departments and stores. Discuss 

the cleaner information they found. 

4. Use Car Builder or Truck 

Builder computer software 

programs to design a car or truck. 

Explore how changing wheel and 

tire sizes can increase or decrease 

vehicle performance, such as 

speed, handling, and ride comfort. 

Summary 

Automotive wheels and tires require 

knowledge to understand their 

specifications and use. While the 

durability and useful life of tires have 

increased substantially over the last 

several decades, in all probability you 

will purchase a number of vehicle 

tires over your lifetime. Knowing how 

they are made and what the numbers 

mean will assist you in making 

informed and intelligent consumer 

purchasing decisions. Basic tire 

maintenance such as tire air 

pressure, balancing, and rotation can 

extend the useful life of tires and 

maintain their safety, performance, 

and handling features. 

References 

10 10 Tires.Com (2004). Tire & wheel tech. 

Retrieved December 20, 2004, from 

www1010tires.com/tiretech.asp 

Tyson, R. (October 2001). NHTSA 

announces initial decision that 

additional Firestone wilderness AT tires 

have a safety defect; Firestone agrees 

to recall those tires, NHTSA 51-01. 

Retrieved January 6, 2005, from 

www.dot.gov/affairs/nhtsa5101.htm 

Wikipedia. (2004). Tire. Retrived December 

20, 2004, from 

http://en.wilipedia.org.wiki/Tire 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration. (2004). Tire ratings 

database lookup results. Retrieved 

January 9, 2005 from 

www.nhtsa.dot.gov/cars/testing/UTQG/ 

pages/TireRatings.cfm 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration. (2004). Tire safety. 

Retrieved January 14, 2005 from 

www.nhtsa.gov/cars/testing/utqg/ 

John M. Ritz, DTE is 

professor and chair at 

Old Dominion 

University, Norfolk, 

VA. He can be 

reached via 

e-mail at 

jritz@odu.edu. 


APPLICATION TO 

PRESENT AT 

ITEA’s 68th Annual Conference 

Baltimore, MD 

March 23-25, 2006 

Theme: Living in a World with Smart Technology 

All technology education professionals are invited to participate in the 68th annual ITEA conference as a presenter 

or chairperson. Those wishing to participate must complete the application form available online. The application 

deadline is June 15, 2005. 

We have moved from a society where human ingenuity and tools were used to obtain basic wants and needs to 

one of more sophistication where tools now think, interact, and respond. Because of the power of today’s 

technological processes, society and individuals need to decide what, how, and when to develop or use various 

technological systems. Since technological issues and problems have more than one available solution, decisionmaking 

should reflect the values of the people and help them reach their goals. Such decision-making depends 

upon all citizens, both individually and collectively, acquiring a basic level of technological literacy—the ability to 

use, manage, and understand technology. This conference will address many of the above issues and problems, as 

we seek to live in a world with tools that think. 

The Conference Program Committee is seeking presentations, related to the theme, that: 

• Promote content connections with other fields of study. 

• Encourage active and experiential learning. 

• Provide the basis for developing meaningful, relevant, and articulated curricula at the local and state/provincial 

levels. 

• Are developmentally appropriate for students. 

• Develop a common set of expectations for what students should learn in the study of technology. 

Proposed presentations must address one or more of the following conference theme strands as defined by the 

definitions from Standards for Technological Literacy: 

Strand 1 - Nature of Technology 

Strand 2 - Technology and Society 

Strand 3 - Design 

Strand 4 - Abilities for a Technological World 

Strand 5 - The Designed World 

All presenters must be active members of ITEA by June 15, 2005. Presenters must also register for the 

conference. Go to www.iteawww.org for membership and conference registration information. ITEA does not 

provide honorariums or cover travel, registration fees, conference expenses, etc. 

Application deadline is June 15, 2005. 

To submit an online application form, go to 

http://tp1.clearlearning.com/hshealey/ITEA2005.tp4

DESIGNING NATURE’S WAY 

You have won a new 

car—any new car 

you want! What kind 

of car do you pick? 

Do you want a racy 

sports car, with a 

powerful V-8 engine, 

6-speed 

transmission, power 

convertible top, 

navigation system, 

polished aluminum 

wheels, and premium sound system with in-dash 6-CD 

player with MP3? Or maybe you’d rather have a roomy 4- 

wheel-drive sport utility job that could take you out in the 

wilds where no other car could go. Or how about a nice 

luxury sedan that could take you and your family on long 

trips in quiet, air-conditioned comfort and safety? 

There’s an automobile for just about any type of 

transportation need (or dream) you can imagine. Auto 

designers make a list of needs and wants that a particular 

type of driver (or buyer) might have, then design a car, 

truck, or SUV that will sell . . . and, they hope, delight the 

buyer. 

But, of course car designers don’t start from scratch each 

year. They take parts of the previous years’ designs that 

worked well (such as the engine, transmission, brake 

system, and the particular materials used for each type of 

part), then add new features or change things slightly to 

try to improve the finished product. So, in theory, 

automobiles should get better and better all the time. For 

the most part, they do. But at some point, designers will 

run out of new ideas to make the car better and more fit 

for any particular driver’s requirements. 

A Different Kind of “Designer” 

In the case of cars and other engineered objects, humans 

go about the design process in a very intentional way. 

They pretty much know what they are aiming for. They 

know how to test their designs to see if they will work in 

the real world. However, in the case of nature, the 

environment and the “laws of the jungle” make up the list 

of requirements that living things must meet, as well as 

the “tests” that they must pass in order to survive. For 

example, in order for an animal species to survive, 

individuals must be able to find, eat, digest, and 

metabolize food; find and drink water; protect themselves 

from predators and harsh weather; and reproduce, passing 

along their successful characteristics to their offspring. All 

the “design accessories,” such as eyes, nose, ears, teeth, 

claws, hooves, spots, stripes, fur, or fancy feathers, 

contribute to the success of the “design.” 

The plants and animals we know (and are!) today are the 

offspring of billions of generations. If each generation had 

been an exact copy of its parents, then no changes in the 

instructions for the design, the “blueprint,” would ever 

occur and there would be only one “species” of living 

thing and it would never change. But changes in the 

blueprint do occur very frequently. Mistakes are made in 

the copying process. Harsh environmental influences, such 

as solar radiation and toxic substances, knock out or 

distort parts of the blueprint so the design cannot be 

copied exactly in the next generation. These changes in 

the instructions are called mutations. Most mutations 

result in “design flaws” in the next generation. But a few 

mutations actually result in improvements. The resulting 

offspring are a little more successful at surviving and 

reproducing than their cousins, and so pass on the 

mutation to more offspring, thus changing the species the 

tiniest bit to make it better adapted to its environment. 

Lessons from Nature 

Sometimes engineers and inventors look to nature for 

inspiration. For example, how do animals solve the 

problem of getting from one place to another? Well, nature 

has come up with all sorts of legs, fins, flippers, wings, 

pseudopods, undulating muscles, and so on. (It took 

humans, however, to come up with wheels and roads.) 

Given billions of years and billions of “trial and error” 

experiments over billions of generations, natural processes 

have produced living things that have solved many other

complex problems in very effective and efficient ways that 

humans would probably never have thought of. 

Humans cannot think of every possible approach to a 

problem. Human invention seems to be limited by what has 

been done before and by our own brains’ wiring that makes 

us want to create things that “look right” and fit into some 

pigeonhole or category that we already know about. Nature 

itself doesn’t have categories and fixed notions of things. 

Nature is limited only by the laws of physics. So why can’t 

humans use something like those same natural processes 

and experiments to design new things? 

Well, trial and error is not really a very efficient way to 

design something. It’s much better to use your brain and 

try to figure out what kind of design would work best 

before you go to all the trouble to build it and test it to see 

if it would work in the real world. 

Evolution in Fast-forward 

But what if we could give the “trial and error” design job to 

a very powerful computer? Suppose we want to design a 

new kind of mousetrap. We first have to tell the computer 

about mice and the laws of physics, so it will know what is 

physically possible out here in the real world (as opposed 

to inside the computer). Then we tell the computer what 

we want the mousetrap to do. In other words, we think of 

a test the computer can run inside itself: the mousetrap 

must attract a mouse, then trap it without the mouse being 

able to carry the trap away or escape. Oh, and we don’t 

want to hurt the mouse—just catch it and relocate it from 

the city to the country. Then the computer could be 

programmed with a list of materials or tools (and their 

characteristics) that the computer could use to create the 

mousetrap: plastic, glass, wood, metal, cheese, etc. 

To give the computer a bit of a head start, we come up 

with quite a few designs of our own. We feed them (that 

is, the exact measurements, materials, and other 

characteristics) into the computer, and let the computer 

run its mousetrap testing program on them. The computer 

then takes the several designs that did the best, scrambles 

up their characteristics a little, then generates a new set of 

designs: Mousetrap Generation 

#2. The computer then runs 

the same test on this batch of 

designs to see which 

mousetraps would do the best 

job. It then picks out several of 

the best designs, mixes them 

up a little, and spits out another 

bunch of mousetrap designs: 

Mousetrap Generation #3. The 

computer continues testing, 

picking the best performers, 

mixing up their traits, and creating yet another generation 

of designs over and over and over. Eventually, maybe after 

a million generations, one mousetrap passes the test 

perfectly and no further designs can do any better. The 

perfect non-destructive mousetrap! The computer prints 

out the design specifications, real people build and test it in 

the real world, and it works! But what does it look like? It 

just might not look like any mousetrap anyone has ever 

imagined before! 

An “Out-of-the-Box” Antenna Design 

It is as computers have become very fast and very 

powerful that designing “nature’s way” has become 

practical. Engineers at NASA’s Ames Research Center in 

Silicon Valley, California, have used the technique of 

evolutionary computation, also called artificial evolution, to 

design a tiny communications antenna to be used in the 

three small TV-sized satellites of the Space Technology 5 

(ST5) mission. Many random designs were tested in a 

computer—or, actually 35 computers working together. 

The computer judged their performance against certain 

goals for the design: efficiency, a narrow or wide broadcast 

angle, frequency range, and so on. 

As in nature, only the best performers were kept, and these 

served as parents of a new generation. To make the new 

generation, the traits of the best designs were randomly 

mixed by the computer to produce fresh, new designs— 

just as a father and mother’s genes are mixed to make 

unique children. This new generation was again tested in 

the computer simulation, and the best designs became the 

parents of yet another generation. 

This process was repeated millions of times, until one best 

design emerged that wouldn’t improve any further. With 

today’s fast computers, millions of generations can be 

simulated in only a day or so. 

The result: an excellent antenna with an odd shape no 

human would, or could, design. 

Tiny communications 

antenna designed by a 

computer using artificial 

evolution for Space 

Technology 5 spacecraft.

Antenna, shown 

installed on ST5 

spacecraft, uses less 

power, gives more 

reliable coverage, and is 

easier to fabricate than 

the best antenna 

designed by humans for 

this spacecraft. 

May the Best Face Evolve! 

We will see how the computer simulates biological 

evolution and the laws of natural selection in the following 

activity. You may be familiar with “smileys,” sometimes 

called “emoticons.” These are groupings of punctuation 

marks on the computer or typewriter to create tiny faces 

with smiles, frowns, winks, etc. These are often used in e- 

mail messages to let the reader know the writer is making 

a joke or is happy or unhappy about something. In this 

activity, we will put punctuation mark “eyes” and 

“mouths” together randomly in an attempt to weed out all 

but the best “face” combination for the purpose of 

communicating a certain emotion. 

Break the class into groups of four players for this activity. 

(An additional group of one, two, or three will work.) 

Create a set of eight Image Cards for each group. To 

create the Image Cards, photocopy the last page of this 

article, preferably on light card stock, and cut along the 

lines. Each card has two lower face halves (mouths) and 

two upper face halves (eyes). Make a photocopy of the 

Design Card shown on the next to last page of this article 

for each player. In addition, for each group of four players, 

make three enlarged copies of the design card. For Part IV, 

an overhead projector, chalk board, or white board would 

be useful. 

The first step is to set a design objective. As a class, 

decide what emotion you wish your final design to 

communicate. Choose a feeling or emotion such as 

indifference, surprise, joy, sadness, confusion, pain, anger, 

boredom, fear, excitement, sleepiness, innocence, guilt, 

thoughtfulness, etc. 

I. INDIVIDUALLY, EVOLVE A DESIGN WITH TWO 

CARDS 

1) Each person picks a pair of Image Cards. 

a) With the Image Cards face down on the table, each 

individual in the group picks two Image Cards at 

random to form a two-card set. 

2) Use these cards to generate a design. 

a) Place one card vertically (“portrait” orientation) on 

a tabletop. 

b) Place the second card horizontally (“landscape” 

orientation) on top of the first, aligning the mouth 

semicircle on the second card with the eye 

semicircle on the first one behind it to form a facial 

expression. 

c) Note how well the face from this pair matches the 

objective emotion. 

d) Rotate the “mouth” (top) card to try the other 

mouth semicircle with the eye semicircle on the 

bottom card. 

e) Note how well this face matches the objective 

emotion. 

3) Evaluate designs and select the better fit. 

a) In Sector I of a Design Card, write the eyes number 

and mouth letter of the better match in the boxes 

and draw the symbols in the face circle. 

4) Generate a second design. 

a) Reverse the pair of Image Cards, placing the 

second card vertically (doesn’t matter which 

“eyes” are up) and the first card horizontally on top 

of it (doesn’t matter which “mouth” is up). Repeat 

Steps 2c – 2e. 

5) Evaluate and select the better fit. 

a) In Sector II of the Design Card, write the eyes 

number and mouth letter of the better match in the 

boxes and draw the symbols in the face circle. 

6) Select the better design. 

a) Compare Faces I and II with the objective emotion. 

b) Check (√) the small circle next to the better 

matching face. 

7) Generate new designs. 

a) In Sector III, write the eyes number of Face I and 

the mouth letter of Face II. 

b) In Sector IV, write the eyes number of Face II and 

the mouth letter of Face I. 

c) Draw the corresponding faces in each sector. 


a) Compare Faces III and IV with the objective 

emotion. 



9) Select the best design from your image card set. 

a) Compare the checked faces with the objective 

emotion. 

b) Add a second check (√√) in the small circle next 

to the better matching face. 

c) This is the best design that your image card set 

has produced.


II. AS A GROUP, GENERATE A NEW, IMPROVED 

DESIGN TO BETTER FIT THE OBJECTIVE 

1) Evolve a new design from the group’s completed 

Design Cards. 

From the completed Design Cards of any two players, 

one person in the group records both double-checked 

designs on one of the enlarged Design Cards, where all 

can see, as follows: 

a) In Sector I, write the eyes number and the mouth 

letter of the first double-checked design. 

b) In Sector II, write the eyes number and the mouth 

letter of the second double-checked design. 



a) Compare Faces I and II with the objective emotion. 

The whole group can vote on which design is 

better. 



3) Evolve new designs. 

a) In Sector III, write the eyes number of Face I and 

the mouth letter of Face II. 

b) In Sector IV, write the eyes number of Face II and 

the mouth letter of Face I. 



a) The group can compare Faces III and IV with the 

objective emotion and vote on which is better. 



5) Select the best design of these image card sets. 

a) As a group, compare the checked faces with the 

objective emotion and vote on which is a better 

match. 

b) Add a second check (√√) in the small circle next to 

the better matching face. 

c) This is the best design evolved from multiple Image 

Card sets. 

6) Repeat Part II, Steps 1 through 5 with the two 

remaining players in the group. If there is only a 

single player remaining, enter only the player’s 

double checked selection, draw it, and check it. 

7) Evolve the group’s optimum match to the design 

objective from its card deck. 

With the third Design Card, summarize the previous 

two Design Cards in the same way and, as a group, 

vote to select the optimum design. 

III. EVOLVE THE BEST DESIGN FOR THE CLASS 

1) The teacher draws a Design Card on the board. 

2) Evolve the better of two groups’ designs. 

Using an overhead projector (if available), and the final 

best Design Cards from any two of the groups, repeat 

Part II to evolve the better design. The whole class can 

vote on which designs are better. 

3) Evolve the better of another two groups’ designs. 

Repeat Step 2 with another two groups’ best designs. 

4) Evolve the best design. 

Continue in this way evolving better designs until all 

groups’ designs have been “tested” and the single 

optimum match to the design objective has been found. 

IV. CHOOSE ANOTHER DESIGN OBJECTIVE 

Choose another design objective with a different feeling or 

emotion and you can evolve a totally new and different result. 

Find Out More 

The Space Technology 5 mission is part of NASA’s New 

Millennium Program, whose job it is to find and test out in 

space the new technologies that will be needed in future 

space missions. For more about artificial evolution, see 

http://ic.arc.nasa.gov/projects/esg. For more about Space 

Technology 5, see http://nmp.nasa.gov/st5. For an 

animation that helps explain how ST5’s antennas send 

pictures through space, go to http://spaceplace. 

nasa.gov/en/kids/st5xband/st5xband.shtml. 

Design Card 

This article was written by Diane Fisher, writer and 

designer of The Space Place Web site at 

spaceplace.nasa.gov. Alex Novati drew the illustrations. 

Thanks to Gene Schugart, Space Place advisor, for activity 

concept. The article was provided through the courtesy of 

the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of 

Technology, Pasadena, California, under a contract with the 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

A PROACTIVE APPROACH 

TO TECHNOLOGICAL LITERACY 



“Technological literacy 

is vital to individual, 

community, and national 

economic prosperity.” 

(ITEA, 1996, p.6) 

With the increasing complexity of 

technology, it is important for each 

citizen to be able to make informed 

decisions about the technology that 

he or she uses. This article suggests 

that a proactive approach to 

advocating technological literacy is 

important in changing the greater 

public’s misconceptions of what it 

means to be technologically literate. 

The article further suggests several 

practical activities that technology 

education teachers may use while 

advocating technological literacy to 

students, parents, administration, and 

the community. 

In the public there seems to be 

widespread misconception that 

being technologically literate 

means being able to use 

computer or information 

technologies proficiently. 

The Public Misconception 

In the public there seems to be 

widespread misconception that being 

technologically literate means being 

able to use computer or information 

technologies proficiently (Rose, 

Gallup, Dugger, & Starkweather, 

2004). If a researcher polled school 

districts to explore what technology 

means to the administration, one may 

interestingly discover that many 

responses would include computers, 

computer networks, and the Internet. 

The fact is that many school districts 

have spent large amounts of money 

on implementing or installing 

educational technology and other 

technological devices to assist 

teachers in teaching. In many cases, 

administrators or teachers outside of 

technology education are deluded 

that elaborate, district-wide 

technology initiatives that teach 

students how to use educational 

technology are teaching them about 

technology (NAE & NRC, 2002). 

The National Academy of Engineering 

and National Research Council joint 

report, Technically Speaking, states, 

“only one unit in the U.S. Department 

of Education, the Office of 

Educational Technology, promotes 

the use of technology as a teaching 

tool, but not the teaching of 

technology” (NAE & NRC, p. 58, 

2002). One must acknowledge that 

computer skills are important to each 

citizen who lives in a technological 

society, but as illustrated in the 

report, technological literacy (TL) is 

more complex, encompassing three 

interdependent dimensions: (1) 

knowledge; (2) ways of thinking and 

acting, and (3) capabilities. With this 

in mind, each technology education 

teacher must advocate a holistic 

awareness of the dimensions of TL to 

his or her students, fellow faculty, 

administration, and community. 

Being Positive and Proactive 

In the book, The 7 Habits of Highly 

Effective People, Stephen Covey 

(1989) illustrates what it means to be 

proactive. Covey states: 

Proactive people focus their 

efforts in the Circle of 

Influence. They work on the 

things they can do something 

about. The nature of their 

energy is positive, enlarging 

and magnifying, causing their 

Circle of Influence to increase 

(p. 83). 

Although the premise of Covey’s 

book is personal change, his 

description of what it means to be 

proactive is applicable to educational 

initiatives. Many technology 

education teachers are frustrated 

with the greater public’s 

misconception of what it means to be 

technologically literate. One would 

hope that if each technology 

education teacher takes Covey’s 

proactive approach to heart, focusing 

his/her energy on changing the 

attitudes and perceptions toward TL 

within his/her local community, the 

collective effort will reshape the 

greater public’s understanding of TL 

to be more holistic. 

The federal No Child Left Behind Act 

(NCLBA) is making it even more 

dificult for states to distinguish the 

broad world of technological literacy 

from education technology literacy, 

by mandating that states have every 

child technologically literate by the 

2005-2006 school year—but not 

outlining what constitutes 

technological literacy (Emeagwali, 

p. 17, 2004). 

Technological Literacy and NCLB 

Many states are unaware of the 

differences between educational 

technological literacy and 

technological literacy and have 

initiatives focused entirely on using 

computers and electronic gadgetry 

(Emeagwali, 2004). With the 

implementation of the NCLB 

legislation and the reallocation of 

funding, many technology education 

teachers are fearful that evolving 

demands placed on the academic 

success of students, as well as the 

uncertainty of what constitutes 

technological literacy, will negatively 

impact technology education 

programs. Although this may be true 

in some school districts, technology 



education teachers can be proactive 

by creating innovative ways to 

educate individuals about the 

complexities of technological literacy. 

More importantly, teachers can also 

be proactive by informing individuals 

who are responsible for mandating 

NCLB policies that technological 

concepts are present in academic 

standards (i.e., mathematics, 

science, and language arts, as well 

as history, and geography), which are 

often not found in corresponding 

curricula (NAE & NRC, 2002). 

Each technology education teacher 

should grasp this as an opportunity to 

devise creative ways to educate 

community members and 

administrators about how these 

technological concepts are delivered 

effectively in the technology 

education classroom. Interestingly, if 

successful this also opens a “back 

door” for teachers to educate local 

administration about the holistic 

dimensions of TL. 

Students as an Alliance for TL 

There is no one sure model, method, 

or strategy for advocating TL. Each 

demographic area has different 

educational needs, and access to 

technology varies. However, every 

teacher can start with those they 

know best—his/her students. If 

students are excited about what they 

are learning, they may be a teacher’s 

greatest advocates when introducing 

the holistic meaning of technological 

literacy to parents and the 

community. 

Educators can empower students 

with what they learn in the 

technology education classroom by 

involving them in educating parents 

and the community about TL. For 

example, 

1. Put students in groups of 4-5. 

2. On a note card ask students to 

write a definition of TL. 

3. After each student has finished 

writing his/her definition, he/she 

is to share his/her work with the 

others in the group. 

4. The students are required to write 

a group definition of TL. 

5. Ask each group to read its 

definition. 

6. Write the definitions on a piece of 

chart paper. 

7. As a class, create a final 

definition. 

8. Debrief the students by 

discussing any of the three 

dimensions that may have been 

overlooked in the definition. The 

terminology in the definition 

should be relevant to the students 

but also include the dimensions of 

knowledge, ways of thinking and 

acting, capabilities. 1 

After students have grasped the 

meaning of technological literacy, 

introduce reasons why being 

technologically literate in the twentyfirst 

century is so important. Table 1 

outlines potential standards-based 

activities that involve students in 

targeting specific audiences (parents, 

the community, and administration) 

in creating TL resources. 

Table 1. Communications activities for advocating technological literacy 

Target 

Audience 

STL Benchmarks 2 

Activity 

Design Considerations 

Dissemination 

Parents 

Community 

Faculty and 

Administration 

STL 17 – J 

The design of a 

message is 

influenced by such 

factors as the 

intended audience, 

medium, purpose 

and nature of the 

message. 

STL 17 – N 

Information and 

communication can 

be used to inform, 

persuade, entertain, 

control, manage, 

and educate. 

Create a brochure for 

parents that defines TL 

and the importance of 

being technologically 

literate. 

Design and create a 

poster that that will 

describe TL so that 

community members 

will understand what it 

entails. 

Create a brochure that 

will describe TL so that 

other teachers and 

school board officials 

will understand what it 

entails. 

Who is the audience? 

What misconceptions may parents have 

when they think of TL? 

What needs to be included in the message 

to make it stronger and in turn have an 

impact on parents? 


What misconceptions may the community 

have when they think of TL? 

What needs to be included for the message 

to have a stronger impact on the 

community? 


What misconceptions may teachers and 

school board officials have when they think 

of TL? 

What needs to be included in the message 

to make it stronger and in turn have an 

impact on the teachers and school board 

officials? 

• Parent/teacher 

conferences 

• PTA meetings 

• School Open Houses 

Bulletin boards: 

• Within the school 

• At local retail and 

grocery stores 

• At local businesses 

• In health clinic 

waiting rooms 

• Faculty lunchroom 

• School Board 

meetings 

• Faculty mailroom 

1 Activity adapted from an activity used in the TACKLE (Technology Action Coalition to Kindle Lifelong Equity) Box Institute, UW-Stout, Menomonie, WI, 

2000. 

2 From International Technology Education Association (2000/2002) Standards for technological literacy: Content for the study of technology. 


Table 2. Electronic communications activities for advocating technological literacy 

STL Benchmarks 3 

Mode of 

Communication 

Activity 

Dissemination 

STL 17 – J 

The design of a message 

is influenced by such 

factors as the intended 

audience, medium, 

purpose and nature of the 

message. 

Video 

Design and produce a five-minute video 

that dispels misconceptions about TL 

and emphasizes why it is important to 

be technologically literate. 

• Where available, broadcasted through 

school announcements 

• Broadcasted on local community news 

channel 

• Play video as part of the technology 

education introduction to incoming 

middle school students 

STL 17 – N 

Information and 

communication can be 

used to inform, persuade, 

entertain, control, 

manage, and educate. 

Web site 

Design and create a simple Web site 

that dispels misconceptions about TL, 

emphasizes why it is important to be 

technologically literate and contains 

resources about TL. 

• Seek permission to post Web site on 

school, district and local community 

Web sites 

STL 17 – P 

There are many ways to 

communicate 

information, such as 

graphic and electronic 

means. 

PowerPoint 

Presentation 

Design and create a PowerPoint® 

presentation that dispels 

misconceptions about TL, emphasizes 

why it is important to be 

technologically literate and describes 

21st Century job skills. 

Presentation could be used during: 

• Technology education introduction to 

incoming students 

• At PTA meetings 

• Faculty Meetings 

• School Board meetings 

• School Open House 


Dependent on the level, interests, and 

the technology that is accessible to 

the students, other modes of 

communication could be used to 

convey the important TL message to 

the community. In Table 2, potential 

standards-based electronic 

communication activities are outlined. 

Many teachers may already be doing 

similar activities as those listed in 

Tables 1 and 2. Creating an alliance 

with students is one approach 

teachers may use to promote TL, but 

there are other successful 

approaches teachers across the 

discipline have used to market TL. An 

excellent venue to share ideas, 

materials, and resources is through 

the International Technology 

Education Association’s (ITEA) 

IdeaGarden listserv. In sharing ideas 

at a national level, each teacher can 

be proactive in choosing the 

suggested materials that would have 

the greatest impact on his/her 

demographic area. 

“ALL persons must be 

knowledgeable of their 

technological environment so 

they can participate in 

controlling their own destiny” 

(ITEA, 1988). 


and the Future 

As society is becoming increasingly 

dependent on technology, each 

citizen must be technologically 

literate. Standards for Technological 

Literacy (ITEA, 2000/2002) states, 

“corporate executives and others in 

the business world, brokers and 

investment analysts, journalists, 

teachers, doctors, nurses, farmers, 

and homemakers all will be able to 

perform their jobs better if they are 

technologically literate.” A TEAM 

(Together Everyone Achieves More) 

effort may reshape the public’s 

perception that technological literacy 

is important for everyone, even 

individuals not pursuing or practicing 

a technical craft or career. 

References 

Covey, S. (1989). The seven habits of 

highly effective people: Powerful 

lessons in personal change. New York: 

Simon & Schuster. 

Emeagwali, S. (2004). Concerned that 

technological literacy is being narrowly 

interpreted. Techniques, 79(8), 16-17. 


Association. (2000/2002). Standards for 

technological literacy: Content for the 

study of technology. Reston, VA: 

Author. 


Association (1996). Technology for all 

Americans: A rationale and structure for 

the study of technology. Reston, VA: 

Author. 


Association, (1988). Technology: A 

national imperative. Reston, VA: Author. 

National Academy of Engineering & 

National Research Council. (2002). 

Technically speaking: Why all 

Americans need to know more about 

technology. Washington: National 

Academy Press. 

Rose, L.C., Gallup, A.M., Dugger, W. E., & 

Starkweather, K.N. (2004). The second 

installment of the ITEA/Gallup poll and 

what it reveals as to how Americans 

think about technology. The Technology 

Teacher 64(1) (Insert). 

Katherine Weber is a Design and 

Technology teacher who taught in the 

United States. She is also a curriculum 

writer and gender equity consultant/trainer 

for technology education 

programs. She is currently residing in 

Guelph, Ontario, Canada and can be 

reached via e-mail at tekteach@hotmail.com. 

3 From International Technology Education Association (2000/2002) Standards for technological literacy: Content for the study of technology. 



2005 DIRECTORY OF 

ITEA INSTITUTIONAL MEMBERS 

For further information contact the 

appropriate faculty member. 

LEGEND 

DEGREES 

1 Bachelor’s Degree 

2 Master’s Degree 

3 Fifth Year Program 

CONNECTICUT 

Central Connecticut State University 

1 

Technology Education 

1615 Stanley St. 

New Britain, CT 06040-4010 

860-832-1850 

www.teched.ccsu.edu 

delaura@ccsu.edu 

Dr. James DeLaura 

2 

3 

4 

A 

B 

D 

E 

ILLINOIS 

Chicago State University 

Technology and Education 

9501 S. King Dr. ED 203 

Chicago, IL 60628 

773-995-3807 

www.csu.edu/TechnologyEducation/ 

s-gist@csu.edu 

S. Gist 

1 

2 

5 

6 

7 

A 

B 

D 

F 

4 Sixth Year Program 

5 Advanced Standing Certificate 

6 Doctoral Degree 

7 Continuing Education Seminars/ 

Workshops/Conferences 

FINANCIAL AID OFFERED 

A Undergraduate Scholarships 

B Research Assistantships 

C Teaching Assistantships 

D Scholarships 

E Fellowships 

F Other 

ALABAMA 

Alabama A&M University 

PO Box 448 

Normal, AL 35762 

256-372-5573 • FAX 256-372-5564 

tdixie@aamu.edu 

Dr. T. C. Dixie 

AUSTRALIA 

Griffith University 

1 2 6 7 

Vocational, Technology & Arts Education 

Messines Ridge Rd., Mt. Gravatt 

Queensland 4111 

www.gu.edu.au/school/vta/bteched/home.html 

m.pavlova@griffith.edu.au 

Dr. Margarita Pavlova 

FLORIDA 

St. Petersburg College 


6605 5th Ave. N. 

Gibbs TE-105B 

St Petersburg, FL 33710-6801 

1 7 

727-341-4296 • FAX 727-341-4691 

www.spcollege.edu/webcentral/acad/ 

bachelors/educinfo 

Loveland.Thomas@spcollege.edu 

Dr. Thomas R. Loveland 

GEORGIA 

Georgia Southern University 

Teaching and Learning 

PO Box 8134 

Statesboro, GA 30460-8134 

912-871-1549 

calexand@georgiasouthern.edu 

Dr. N. Creighton Alexander 

The University of Georgia 

Department of Workforce Education 

223 River’s Crossing Building 

Athens, GA 30602-4809 

706-542-4503 • FAX 706-542-4054 

www.uga.edu/teched/index.html 

wickone@uga.edu 

Dr. Robert Wicklein 

IDAHO 

University of Idaho 

1 

1 

2 

2 

Department of Industrial Technology 

ITED Bldg. 

404 W. Sweet Ave. PO Box 444021 

Moscow, ID 83844-4021 

208-885-6492 

www.uidaho.edu 

ited@uidaho.edu 

James M. Cassetto 

3 

3 

5 

5 

1 

6 

6 

2 

7 

7 

4 

A 

A 

7 

B 

B 

A 

C 

A 

D 

D 

D 

F 

F 

F 

E 

Illinois State University 

Department of Technology 

Campus Box 5100 210 Turner Hall 

Normal, IL 61790-5100 

309-438-3661 • FAX 309-438-8628 

www.tec.ilstu.edu 

mkdaugh@ilstu.edu 

Dr. Michael K. Daugherty 

INDIANA 

Ball State University 

Department of Industry & Technology 

Applied Technology Building 

Muncie, IN 47306-0255 

765-285-5642 FAX 765-285-2162 

www.bsu.edu/web/iandt/te 

jwescott@bsu.edu 

Dr. Jack W. Wescott, DTE 

Indiana State University 

Industrial Technology Education 

College of Technology 

Terre Haute, IN 47809 

800-468-5236 • FAX 812-237-2655 

web.indstate.edu:80/ite.home 

tchgilb@isugw.indstate.edu 

Dr. Anthony F. Gilberti 

Purdue University 

1 


401 N. Grant St. Knoy Hall 

West Lafayette, IN 47907-2021 

765-494-1101 

www.tech.purdue.edu/it 

latif@purdue.edu 

Dr. Niaz Latif 

1 

2 

2 

5 

6 

6 

1 

7 

1 

7 

2 

A 

2 

A 

6 

B 

A 

B 

A 

C 

B 

C 

B 

D 

C 

D 

C 

F 

D 

E 

E 



IOWA 

University of Northern Iowa 


1222 West 27th St. 

Cedar Falls, IA 50614-0178 

319-273-2561 • FAX 319-273/5818 

www.uni.indtech.edu 

mohammed.fahmy@uni.edu 

Dr. Charles Johnson 

KANSAS 

Fort Hays State University 

Technology Studies Department 

600 Park Street 

Hays, KS 67601-4099 

785-628-2718 • FAX 785-628-4267 

www.fhsu.edu/tecs 

fruda@fhsu.edu 

Dr. Fred Ruda 

Pittsburg State University 

Department of Technology Studies 

1701 S. Broadway 

Pittsburg, KS 66762 

620-235-4371 • FAX 620-235-4020 

www.pittstate.edu 

jiley@pittstate.edu 

Dr. John L. Iley 

KENTUCKY 

Berea College 


CPO 2188 

Berea, KY 40404 

1 F 

859-985-3033 x5501 • FAX 859-986-4506 

www.berea.edu/tec/tec.home.html 

Gary_Mahoney@Berea.edu 

Dr. Gary Mahoney 

Eastern Kentucky University 1 


521 Lancaster Ave. 

307 Whalin Technology Complex 

Richmond, KY 40475-3102 

859-622-3232 • FAX 859-622-2357 

www.technology.eku.edu 

ed.davis@acs.eku.edu 

Dr. William E. Davis 

MAINE 

University of Southern Maine 


37 College Ave. 

Gorham, ME 04038-1088 

207-780-5440 • FAX 207-780-5129 

walker@usm.maine.edu 

Dr. Fred Walker 

1 

2 

6 

1 

1 

7 

2 

2 

1 

A 

7 

7 

2 

B 

A 

A 

7 

2 

C 

C 

C 

A 

F 

D 

D 

D 

D 

MANITOBA, CANADA 

Red River College/ 

University of Winnipeg 

Teacher Education 

2055 Notre Dame Ave. 

Winnipeg, MB R3H 0J9 

204-632-2300 • FAX 204-697-9465 

www.rrc.mb.ca 

kproctor@rrc.mb.ca 

Kurt J. Proctor 

MARYLAND 

University of 

Maryland-Eastern Shore 


11931 Art Shell Plaza-UMES Campus 

Princess Anne, MD 21853-1299 

410-651-6468 • FAX 410-651-7959 

www.umes.edu 

llcopeland@mail.umes.edu 

Dr. Leon L. Copeland, Sr. 

University of 

Maryland-Eastern Shore 

MD Ctr for Career and Technology Education 

1425 Key Highway 

Baltimore, MD 21230 

410-659-5332 • FAX 410-659-7629 

www.umes.edu 

gfday@umes.edu 

Dr. Gerald F. Day 

MASSACHUSETTS 

Fitchburg State College 

Industrial Technology 

160 Pearl St. 

Fitchburg, MA 01420 

978-665-3255 

jalicata@fsc.edu 

James Alicata 

Framingham State College 

Christa McAuliff Center 

100 State St. 

Framingham, MA 01701-9101 

508-626-4050 

rgriffin@fc.mass.edu 

Raymond T. Griffin 

Lemelson-MIT Program 

1 

2 

1 

3 

Lemelson-MIT InvenTeams 

MIT School of Engineering 

77 Massachusetts Ave., E60-215 

Cambridge, MA 02139 

617-253-3352 

www.inventeams.org or web.mit.edu/invent 

jschuler@mit.edu 

Joshua Schuler 

1 

2 

6 

2 

3 

7 

1 

7 

5 

1 

A 

3 

A 

6 

2 

B 

7 

C 

7 

7 

C 

A 

D 

A 

B 

D 

D 

F 

D 

C 

E 

MICHIGAN 

Eastern Michigan University 

Business & Technology Education 

14 Sill Hall 

Ypsilanti, MI 48197 

734-487-4330 • FAX 734-487-7690 

www.emich.edu/public/bted/ 

Phillip_Cardon@emich.edu 

Dr. Phillip L. Cardon 

MINNESOTA 

Bemidji State University 


1500 Birchmont Dr. 

Bridgeman Hall 234 

Bemidji, MN 56601 

218-755-2997 • FAX 218-755-4011 

www.bemidjistate.edu/IT 

ehoffman@bemidjistate.edu 

Dr. Elaine Hoffman 

St. Cloud State University 

Environmental & Technological Studies 

720 – 4th Ave. S. Headley Hall 203 

St. Cloud, MN 56301-4498 

320-308-3235 • FAX 320-654-5122 

www.stcloudstate.edu/ets 

schwalle@stcloudstate.edu 

Dr. Anthony E. Schwaller, DTE 

MISSOURI 

Central Missouri State University 

1 

Department of Career and Technology 

Education 

Grinstead 235 

Warrensburg, MO 64093-5034 

660-543-4452 • FAX 660-543-8031 

www.cmsu.edu/cte 

byates@cmsu1.cmsu.edu 

Dr. Ben Yates 

MONTANA 

Montana State University 

2 

Department of Education 

118 Cheever Hall 

Bozeman, MT 59717 

406-994-3201 • FAX 406-994-6696 

www.montana.edu/wwwad 

sedavis@montana.edu 

Scott Davis 

3 

1 

4 

1 

2 

1 

5 

1 

2 

7 

2 

7 

2 

6 

A 

5 

A 

7 

7 

B 

7 

B 

A 

A 

C 

A 

C 

C 

C 

D 

B 

D 

D 



NEBRASKA 

Wayne State College 

Department of Technology and Applied 

Sciences 

1111 Main St., Benthack Hall 

Wayne, NE 68787-1600 

402-375-7578 • FAX 402-375-7565 

www.academic.wsc.edu/bst/ 

laclaus1@wcs.edu 

Dr. Larry Claussen 

NEW JERSEY 

The College of New Jersey 

Department of Technological Studies 

PO Box 7718 

Ewing, NJ 08628-0718 

609-771-2543 • FAX 609-771-3330 

www.tcnj.edu/~tstudies 

karsnitz@tcnj.edu 

Dr. John Karsnitz 

NEW YORK 

The College of Saint Rose 

392 Western Ave. 

Albany, NY 12203 

518-454-5279 

Dr. Travis Plowman 

State University of 

New York at Oswego 


Washington Blvd. 209 Park Hall 

Oswego, NY 13126-3599 

315-312-3011 

www.oswego.edu/tech 

gaines@oswego.edu 

Philip Gaines 

NORTH CAROLINA 

Appalachian State University 


Kerr Scott Hall 

Boone, NC 28608 

828-262-3122 

www.tec.appstate.edu/ 

hoepflmc@appstate.edu 

Dr. Marie Hoepfl 

1 

2 

1 

7 

2 

1 

A 

7 

2 

1 

B 

A 

7 

2 

C 

B 

A 

A 

D 

C 

D 

C 

F 

NORTH DAKOTA 

University of North Dakota 


PO Box 7118 

Grand Forks, ND 58202-7118 

701-777-2249 

clayton.diez@mail.business.und.edu 

Dr. C. Ray Diez 

Valley City State University 


415 Winter Show Rd. SE Ste. 3 

Valley City, ND 58072-4031 

701-845-7444 • FAX 701-845-7245 

www.teched.vcsu.edu/ 

don.mugan@vcsu.edu 

Dr. Don Mugan 

OHIO 

Bowling Green State University 

Visual Communication and Technology 

Education 

College of Technology 

Bowling Green, OH 43403-0301 

419-372-2437 • FAX 419-372-6066 

www.bgsu.edu 

lhatch@bgnet.edu 

Dr. Larry Hatch 

Kent State University 

School of Technology 

117 B Van Deusen Hall 

Kent, OH 44242-0001 

330-672-2040 

www.tech.kent.edu 

lzurbuch@kent.edu 

Dr. Lowell S. Zurbuch 

The Ohio State University 

1 

2 

Technology Education Section 

1100 Kinnear Rd. Rm 100 

Columbus, OH 43212-1152 

614-292-7471 • FAX 614-292-2662 

www.teched.coe.ohio-state.edu 

post.1@osu.edu 

Dr. Paul E. Post 

3 

6 

1 

7 

1 

2 

A 

1 

1 

2 

7 

B 

2 

7 

6 

A 

C 

A 

A 

A 

B 

D 

C 

D 

C 

C 

E 

OKLAHOMA 

Southwestern Oklahoma 

State University 


100 Campus Dr. 

Weatherford, OK 73096-3098 

580-774-3162 • FAX 580-774-7028 

www.swosu.edu/tech/ 

gary.bell@swosu.edu 

Dr. Gary Bell 

KISS Institute for Practical 

Robotics 

1818 W. Lindsey Bldg. D, Suite 100 

Norman, OK 73069 

405-579-4609 • FAX 405-329-4664 

www.botball.org 

cstein@kipr.org 

Catherine Stein 

PENNSYLVANIA 

California University of 

Pennsylvania 

1 2 7 A 

Applied Engineering & Technology 

250 University Avenue 

California, PA 15401 

724-938-4085 • FAX 724-938-4572 

www.cup.edu 

komacek@cup.edu 

Dr. Stanley Komacek 

Millersville University 1 2 7 

Department of Industry & Technology 

PO Box 1002 

Millersville, PA 17551-0302 

717-872-3316 • FAX 717-872-3318 

www.millersville.edu/~itec/ 

itec@millersville.edu 

Dr. Perry R. Gemmill 

RHODE ISLAND 

Rhode Island College 1 

Educational Studies/ 

Technology Education Program 

600 Mt. Pleasant Ave., HBS 222 

Providence, RI 02908 

401-456-8793 

www.ric.edu/fsehd/ 

cmclaughlin@ric.edu 

Dr. Charles H. McLaughlin, Jr 

1 

2 

7 

2 

A 

7 

C 

7 

B 

A 

A 

D 

F 

D 

F 

D 

North Carolina State University 

Mathematics, Science & Technology Education 

Box 7801 

Raleigh, NC 27695-7801 

919-515-1748 • FAX 919-515-6892 

ced.ncsu.edu/mste/tech_index 

jim_haynie@ncsu.edu 

Dr. William J. Haynie 

1 

2 

6 

7 

B 

C 

D 

Ohio Northern University 

Department of Technological Studies 

Room 208 Taft Memorial Building 

Ada, OH 45810 

419-772-2170 • FAX 419-772-1932 

www.onu.edu/A+S/techno/ 

d-rouch@onu.edu 

Dr. David L. Rouch 

1 

7 

A 

D 

SOUTH CAROLINA 

Clemson University 1 2 

Leadership, Technology, and Counselor 

Education 

G-01 Tillman Hall 

Clemson, SC 29634-0725 

864-656-7647 • FAX 864-656-4808 

www.hehd.clemson.edu 

wpaige@clemson.edu 

Dr. William D. Paige 

6 

C 



SWEDEN 

Linkoping University 

Centre for School Technology Education 

CETIS Campus Norrkoping 

Norrkoping SE 601 74 

Stockholm 

www.liu.se/cetis 

thomas.ginner@cetis.liu.se 

Dr. Thomas Ginner 

TEXAS 

Texas State University-San Marcos 


601 University Dr. 

San Marcos, TX 78666-4616 

512-245-2137 

www.swt.edu/acad_depts/tech_dept/index. 

html 

rh03@swt.edu 

Dr. Robert B. Habingreither 

The University of Texas at Tyler 

Department of Human Resource 

Development and Technology 

3900 University Blvd. 

Tyler, TX 75799 

903-566-7310 • FAX 903-566-4281 

www.uttyler.edu/technology/ 

proberts@uttyler.edu 

Dr. Paul Roberts 

University of Houston 

Center for Technology Literacy 

304 Technology Bldg. 

Houston, TX 77204-4021 

713-743-4091 

www.texastechnology.com 

jdmoore@uh.edu 

Julie Moore 

1 

2 

1 

7 

7 

2 

A 

B 

7 

A 

D 

F 

Utah State University 

Engineering and Technology Education 

6000 Old Main Hill 

Logan, UT 84322-6000 

435-797-1795 

www.engineering/ete/usu 

mthomas@cc.usu.edu 

Dr. Maurice G. Thomas 

VIRGINIA 

Old Dominion University 

Occupational and Technical Studies 

Norfolk, VA 23529-0498 

757-683-4305 • FAX 757-683-5227 

www.lions.odu.edu/dept/ots 

jritz@odu.edu 

Dr. John M. Ritz 

Virginia Polytechnic & 

State University 

1 

2 


144 Smyth Hall 

Blacksburg, VA 24061-0432 

540-231-6480 • FAX 540-231-4188 

www.teched.vt.edu 

msanders@vt.edu 

Dr. Mark Sanders 

1 

1 

5 

2 

2 

6 

6 

5 

7 

A 

7 

A 

B 

A 

B 

C 

B 

C 

D 

C 

D 

E 

E 

F 

Virginia State University 

1 

2 

Engineering, Engr Technology, Ind Educ and 

Technology 

P.O. Box 9033 1 Hayden Dr. 

Petersburg, VA 23806-0001 

804-524-5551 • FAX 804-524-6087 

www.vsu.edu 

pyoung@vsu.edu 

Mr. Posey R. Young 

University of Wisconsin-Stout 

School of Education 

Menomonie, WI 54751 

715-232-5609 • FAX 715-232-1441 

mcalisterb@uwstout.edu 

Mr. Brian McAlister 

WYOMING 

University of Wyoming 

Casper College Center 

125 College Drive 

Casper, WY 82609 

307-268-2400 • FAX 307-268-2416 

www.uwyo.edu/uwcc 

woodward@uwyo.edu 

Renee Woodward 

5 

6 

7 

A 

B 

C 

D 

1 

E 

A 

UTAH 

Brigham Young University 

School of Technology 

Room 230 SNLB 

Provo, UT 84602 

801-378-6496 • FAX 801-378-7519 

www.et.byu.edu/tte/ 

steve_shumway@byu.edu 

Dr. Steven Shumway 

1 

2 

7 

A 

C 

D 

Southern Utah University 

Department of Integrated Engineering and 

Technology 

351 West University Blvd. 

Cedar City, UT 84720 

435-586-7986 • FAX 435-865-8077 

www.btc.suu.edu 

wittwer@suu.edu 

Dr. Richard Wittwer 

1 

7 

A 

D 


MASTERING THE ESSENTIALS FOR A CAREER IN 

TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION 



Prologue 

In this article, I shall endeavor to set 

an ideal, a personal wish list if you 

will, for what I believe are the key 

areas of competency young 

technology education teachers should 

be developing while still in college. 

Not being an educator in the 

traditional sense, I write from the 

perspective of an engineer and 

inventor who has spent considerable 

time interacting with the educational 

community. In this paper, I profess 

by default to be a member of “the 

tech ed school of hard knocks” and a 

long-time devotee of tech ed 

principles and practices. 

I hope you find my thoughts both 

relevant and challenging, appreciating 

the perspective from which they 

originate. 

The Wish List 

There is no priority or preference 

inherent in this listing of preferred 

competencies. They are the 

requisites I have personally compiled 

over the years based on my 

experiences. I have tried to group 

them for convenience. 

Some Basics for Action: 

Definitions and Distinctions 

Being able to clearly draw 

distinctions between the definitions 

of science, technology, and 

engineering would be ideal. Our 

society often blurs the lines between 

these important terms. Tech ed 

teachers should see clearly the 

distinctions. Science is about 

discovery, while engineering is about 

application in the real world. 

Technology is the know-how to make 

what we want from what we have 

(resources) and is the main creative 

Over 60% of the annual growth in our 

nation’s economy is directly attributable to 

scientific and technological advances. 

tool of the engineer. Engineering and 

tech ed share much common 

ground—the human designed 

world—achieved in a benign, 

beneficial, and cost-effective manner. 

Most definitely, the links to 

engineering must be brought into the 

tech ed classroom. 

Because of the close relationship that 

tech ed has with engineering, wouldbe 

tech ed teachers should have 

some form of interaction with 

working engineers as well as a 

sense of their profession and the 

problem-solving regimen used by 

engineers in their daily work. A study 

of the history of engineering and its 

roots in ancient times would be of 

significant value. Most, if not all, of 

the seven wonders of the ancient 

world were largely engineering feats. 

Students should be familiar with 

great engineers of the world and 

their contributions. The first man on 

the moon was an aeronautical 

engineer! Five U.S. presidents were 

engineers (can you name them?). It is 

highly likely that a good portion of the 

students that tomorrow’s tech ed 

teachers influence will become 

engineers, and best that engineering 

be discussed at the K-12 level. 

It is also imperative that tech ed 

teachers fully understand that 

technology long preceded science. 

There are thousands of years of 

successful tool-making behind such a 

premise; but formal science as we 

recognize it today is a mere 500 

years old. Technology is the mortar 

between the bricks of science, the 

empirical glue that holds the 

structure together. 

Good Communications 

The basis of all academic, and 

eventually corporate performance, is 

good communication. This bedrock 

skill set comes in both oral and written 

form and should span the gamut from 

short thematic writing to a fully 

researched project paper complete 

with formal footnotes, references, and 

bibliography, to the development and 

presentation of original work via formal 

slide formats followed by Q&A. Ideally, 

I would also recommend that tech ed 

career aspirants be able to respond to 

extemporaneous speaking challenges 

too. A powerful way to drive this 

message home to would-be tech ed 

teachers is to grade their work twice, 

once for its “technical” rigor and once 

for its “communications clarity.” That 

would do the trick of reinforcing the 

importance of good communications. 

All tech ed teachers should have 

numerous opportunities during their 

undergraduate experience to 

participate in and lead team problemsolving 

exercises. It is important to 

gain extensive experience with how 

this powerful educational tool should 

be used in the classroom. In my 

observations, this technique is what 

sets apart the tech ed experience from 

activities in which other teachers 

partake, and it is the fundamental 

reason why tech ed is successful in 

integrating the curricula. 

The Value of Mathematics 

It is not sufficient to be good at math. 

Tech ed teachers must be able to 

apply it, respecting it as another tool 

that helps them understand, quantify, 

and bound the world for their students. 

The ability to estimate, ballpark, and 



use mathematics to place designs 

and potential solutions in perspective 

is paramount for a tech ed teaching 

career. Our globally competitive 

world runs on mathematics as it does 

on fuel. Tech ed teachers, regardless 

of the grade levels at which they will 

ultimately be teaching, should be able 

to appreciate the value of 

mathematics and articulate its 

importance in classroom activities 

and design challenges. They should 

be comfortable manipulating 

mathematics symbols, able to draw 

conclusions from its application, and 

trusting of the directions it indicates 

in their designs. It should become 

second nature to tech ed teachers to 

reach out for the mathematics tool. 

A Physical Feel of the World 

Computers are simply knowledge 

amplifiers, devoid of any creativity or 

insight save that imbued them by 

their programmers. A good tech ed 

teacher has sufficient grounding in 

first principles to be able to have an 

intuitive feel for the “rightness” of 

solutions, whether computer-derived 

or otherwise. This comes with 

frequent exposure to problem-solving 

regimens, confidence honed through 

success and constructive criticism, 

and a frank analysis of design failure. 

Computers are tools, not arbiters of 

“rightness”—and they most certainly 

should not be the image that springs 

to mind when someone says the 

word “technology.” Their output is to 

be as critically reviewed and weighed 

as any other data/information. 

As a minimum, would-be tech ed 

teachers should be able to explain 

and demonstrate with mathematics: 

• Simple machines and their 

ubiquitous presence in real life. 

• The force over distance action. 

• Hydraulics (Pascal’s principle). 

• How transformers work. 

• AC versus DC current. 

• The difference between power and 

energy. 

• Simple airplane flight, and fluid 

flow (Bernoulli’s principle). 

Brain-Based Research 

In light of the remarkable findings in 

the area of brain-based research, the 

tech ed teacher of tomorrow should 

be knowledgeable and versed in the 

classroom implications of this work, 

specifically the ability to: 

• Apply head and hands learning 

paradigms as needed. 

• Assemble balanced classroom 

student teams for design 

challenges. 

• Teach in a Socratic style, 

coalescing answers to classroom 

challenges. 

• Conduct open-ended, team-based 

exercises. 

• Teach solution methods to multidimensional 

problems in a multidisciplinary 

manner. 

Technology and Our National 

Culture and History: 

Understanding Our Nation’s 

Technological History 

We did not attain the status of most 

technological nation on the planet by 

accident. There is a rich history with 

definite phases of key technologies 

that mark and define the growth and 

transformation of our society, from 

revolutionary times to the present. 

They are: 

1800-1850: Canals, steam power, 

textile manufacturing. 

1850-1900: Railroads, steel, the 

emergence of natural gas, water, 

telephone, sewage, and electric 

utilities. 

1900-1950: Electric power, 

automobiles, hydropower, chemicals, 

mass media, communications, and 

R&D labs. 

1950-2000: Computers, electronics, 

aerospace, pharmaceuticals, nuclear 

power, a national highway system, 

TV and biotechnology. 

A tech ed teacher should have a good 

grasp of what those defining phases 

were and how they influenced our 

society. 

The Technology-History-Economy 

Triad 

Because we live in a free market 

economy and expect profit for our 

hard work and ingenuity, this has 

made all the difference in both our 

technological creativity and optimism 

for the future. Our technology, 

history, and economy are inextricably 

intertwined. Any attempt to separate 

them will detrimentally alter our 

world-recognized penchant for 

ingenuity and out-of-the-box thinking. 

Capitalism and its ability to influence 

creativity, markets, and 

entrepreneurship was built into our 

national Constitution from the very 

beginning—the very fuel a fledgling 

new nation would need to tame its 

frontiers. Over 60% of the annual 

growth in our nation’s economy is 

directly attributable to scientific and 

technological advances. It is the very 

essence of our high standard of 

living. To effectively discuss the 

benefits of technology, a tech ed 

teacher must recognize the 

importance of the technology-historyeconomy 

triad. 

The Value of Infrastructure 

Every day, vital services are delivered 

to our homes, making it unnecessary 

for us to arrange for the availability of 

these resources or expend personal 

time and energy to gather or attain 

them. I am speaking of the 

infrastructure/services such as water, 

electricity, telephone, natural gas, 

sewerage, cable, and satellite TV. In 

the last few years, there have been 

major changes to the telephone and 

electricity infrastructure (cell phones, 

home PC use, deregulation of 

electricity, distributed generation 

sources, etc.). New technological 

advances have totally re-shaped 

these infrastructures. What a fertile 

area for study and what it portends 

for the future! Students often take 

these infrastructures for granted, and 

should be studying the origin, history, 

use, and growth of these essential 

community-based services. 

Competent tech ed teachers should 

be able to bring the value of these 

services to their classrooms and 

arrange for students to creatively 

explore and understand them. 

Technology, Ecology, and Man 

The internalization of environmental 

costs and impacts on the way 

business is conducted has been a 

significant achievement over the last 

40 years. All major projects are 

required to divulge the potential 

environmental impacts of their 



execution. Inherent in this paradigm 

are powerful learning activities that 

the modern tech ed teacher should 

be capable of articulating in the 

classroom. Students should be 

challenged to evaluate and debate 

the environmental pros and cons of a 

variety of technologies. Here are 

some representative technologies a 

tech ed teacher should be well 

versed in and prepared to discuss 

and stimulate debate around: 

• Trains and rail transportation 

• The automobile 

• Electric power generation 

• Biotechnology 

• Micro miniaturization of 

electronics/nanotechnology 

• Nuclear power 

• Solar energy 

Invention and Innovation: The 

Innovation Process 

The creation of new products and 

services should be viewed and 

respected for the multi-dimensional 

challenge and multi-disciplinary 

solution process that it is. I know of 

no better way to naturally integrate 

the curricula than to have students 

engage in frequent, open-ended 

design challenges. Tech ed teachers 

should grasp that: 

• Innovation equals invention + 

market thrust. 

• Technical and non-technical 

aspects of a problem must be 

resolved and blended. 

• High quality questions tend to yield 

high quality, and more robust, 

solutions. 

• Planning a new product is as 

important as attempting to execute 

implementation. 

• Innovation is inherently an iterative 

activity. 

• An arsenal of creativity techniques 

can be used to generate possible 

solutions. 

• Out-of-the-box thinking is always in 

vogue. 

• The unique perspective often wins 

in the marketplace. 

• Innovation is a high-risk process, 

and failure is common. 

Intellectual Property 

In the globally competitive 

marketplace, what a company knows 

is as important as what it owns. 

Aspiring tech ed teachers should: 

• Know what patents are. 

• Be familiar with how inventors 

keep log books. 

• Have been involved in invention 

challenges in both team and 

individual settings. 

• Know how to search patents on 

the Internet. 

• Be able identify both past and 

current inventors and what they 

have accomplished. 

• Be aware of the economic value of 

patents. 

Invention 

A tech ed teacher should be prepared 

to use the invention experience as a 

true curriculum integrator. Requests 

for invention related in-class talks 

and teacher in-service seminars has 

kept me busy for the last five years. 

It is a highly popular topic as it 

engages the head and hands of the 

students and allows them to 

participate in open-ended, teambased, 

exercises. Aspiring tech ed 

teachers should: 

• Understand how marketplace 

wishes for new products and 

services jump-start the invention 

process. 

• Conduct exercises in class 

whereby student inventors learn 

how to compile their thinking in an 

inventor’s log book. 

• Appreciate how, along with the 

invention logbook, inventors 

compile their strategies about how 

to market their inventions. 

• How selecting and staffing the 

invention team is as important as 

creating the invention (here the 

teacher should be able to mix head 

and hand learners for maximum 

effect). 

• Be able to freely identify and 

discuss famous U.S. inventors and 

their accomplishments. 

• Document the growth of various 

technologies that have had a major 

influence on American life (light 

bulb, electronic circuit 

miniaturization, personal 

computer...etc.). 

• Use timelines to show how various 

inventions influenced each other 

and other segments of society. 

Technical Career Considerations 

Skill Sets For Success 

There are definable skill sets for 

success in the twenty-first century 

workplace. Most of them are directly 

related to the seismic shift away 

from a machine to an information 

economy, one where great value is 

placed upon higher-order thinking 

skills. A competent tech ed teacher 

should be able to take the key skills 

listed below and relate them back to 

work being done in the classroom on 

a daily basis: 

• The ability to connect and 

interrelate subject matter 

• Good oral and written 

communication skills 

• Logical and intuitive analytical 

skills 

• Planning and organization skills 

• Interpersonal and team player skills 

• Being able to turn ideas into reality 

and to manage that process 

• Understanding markets and what 

customers want 

• The capability to learn and re-learn 

effectively and efficiently 

The Benefits of a Technical 

Career 

Tech ed students, like all others, 

require career guidance. The tech ed 

teacher should be able to articulate 

the benefits of a technical career and 

relate them back to classroom 

activities. Specifically, the tech ed 

teacher should be able to discuss 

how a technical career path: 

• Relates to other careers. 

• Influences starting and long-term 

average salaries. 

• Requires life-long learning. 

The tech ed teacher should also be 

able to present: 

• Examples of well-known Americans 

who have pursued technical 

careers. 



• Reference books/Web 

sites/resources for students to use. 

Epilogue 

Here then is my wish list for tech ed 

teacher success. It is based upon 35 

years of industrial research and 

engineering experience, combined 

with numerous interactions with K-12 

teachers and students, and the 

teaching of graduate engineering 

courses at the New Jersey Institute 

of Technology—my alma mater. It 

also reflects my long-time association 

with the Technology Educators 

Association of New Jersey (TEANJ) 

and my good friends and colleagues 

at The College of New Jersey. Of 

late, my published freelance 

educational papers and articles have 

exerted a powerful influence on my 

opinions, as has my chairmanship of 

The New Jersey Inventors Hall of 

Fame. 


is a Technology 

Development and 

Transfer Consultant 

at the Public 

Service Electric 

& Gas Company 

(PSE&G) in Newark, NJ. He can 

be reached via e-mail at 

harry.roman@pseg.com. 

Make it 

Happen! 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Call today for a free catalog 

or visit our on-line catalog. 

1-800-323-0440 

www.g-w.com 

custserv@g-w.com 

GOODHEART-WILLCOX PUBLISHER 

18604 West Creek Drive 

Tinley Park, IL 60477-6243 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Some kids dream about about driving driving cars. cars. 

Others dream dream about about designing designing them. them. 

Autodesk Design Academy. 

The math and science curriculum kids can’t get enough of. 

By engaging students in real-world projects, you can make learning science and math relevant— 

and fun! It’s easy with Autodesk® Design Academy, the comprehensive pre-engineering and 

pre-architecture program for high school students. With a flexible curriculum and affordable 

purchasing options, it’s never been easier to give your lesson plan a boost. 

For a FREE sample curriculum or to learn more, visit www.autodesk.com/ada 

© 2005 Autodesk, Inc. All rights reserved. Autodesk is a registered trademark of Autodesk, Inc., in the USA and/or other countries. All other brand names, 

product names, or trademarks belong to their respective holders.

One kind of experience. Countless opportunities. 

“As a technical school, we need to have equipment and software that are 

industry standard. Without teaching the CAD software that’s industry 

standard, we’d be doing a disservice to our students.” 

Tom Matuszak, Teacher 

McCann Technical School 

Skills USA Gold Medal Winner 

With SolidWorks, you can give your students the experience they'll need to 

succeed in today's job market. SolidWorks is the standard in mainstream 

3D CAD and is preferred by most engineering design companies. Fair, affordable, 

and consistent academic pricing makes it easy to implement the SolidWorks 

Education Edition in your engineering technology program. What’s more, we 

provide free teacher training, lesson plans, and student courseware. When it 

comes to giving your students project-based experience that will help them 

compete, there's only one word to remember. SolidWorks. 

Solidworks Education Edition software is available from 

authorized software resellers. To locate a SolidWorks 

reseller in your area, call 1-800-693-9000, 

or visit the SolidWorks website at 

solidworks.com/education 

SolidWorks is a registered trademark of SolidWorks Corporation. All other product names are trademarks or registered trademarks 

of their respective owners. SolidWorks Corporation is a Dassault Systèmes company. ©2004 SolidWorks Corporation. All rights reserved.

Teaching Elements and Principles of Bridge Design - International ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?