Technology for All Americans Project (TfAAP)

Technologically Literate Citizens - Why The Study of Technology Should Be Mandatory

The term “technological literacy” refers to one's ability to use, manage, evaluate, and understand technology (ITEA, 2000/2002). In order to be a technologically literate citizen, a person should understand what technology is, how it works, how it shapes society and in turn how society shapes it. Moreover, a technologically literate person has some abilities to “do” technology that enables them to use their inventiveness to design and build things and to solve practical problems that are technological in nature. A characteristic of a technologically literate person is that they are comfortable with and objective about the use of technology, neither scared of it nor infatuated with it. Technological literacy is much more than just knowledge about computers and their application. It involves a vision where every person has a degree of knowledge about the nature, behavior, power and consequences of many aspects of technology from a real world perspective.

So who should be technologically literate today and in the future? Because we live in a world that is influenced by and controlled with technology, everyone should have a level of technological literacy. How can one become technologically literate? The best way is to have every student in Grades K—12 in schools today to undertake a study of technology by taking technology education and other subjects that teach about technology. The in-depth content for what every student should know and be able to do is documented in the International Technology and Engineering Education Association's (ITEA) Standards for Technological Literacy (STL). A belief presented in STL is that all citizens in the future can and should become technologically literate.

ITEA's mission is to promote technological literacy as an essential and basic part of education that everyone needs. ITEA created as part of its effort the Technology for All American's Project (TfAAP), which was funded in the United States by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) from 1994 to 2005. Some significant publications that TfAAP produced during its existence were Standards for Technological Literacy: Content Standards for Technological Literacy (STL) which contained 20 standards that documented what every student should know and be able to do in order to be technologically literate, and Advancing Excellence in Technological Literacy: Student Assessment, Professional Development, and Program Standards (AETL), which served as companion standards to STL. Other support documents that were produced by TfAAP include four addenda (that address improving student assessment, developing standards-based educational programs and curriculum, and developing teachers as professionals in the study of technology), which provide more detailed directions on how to best use STL and AETL. Finally, TfAAP produced significant publication titled Technology for All Americans; A Rationale and Structure for the Study of Technology in 1996 and did a comprehensive rewrite of this document in 2005.

The power and promise of technology can be further enhanced if all people are technologically literate in the future. Anything short of this may jeopardize our ability to be competitive in the world marketplace and to solve human and other problems through the wise use of technology.

October 1994 - September 2005

The Technology for All Americans Project (TfAAP) progressed through three Phases, collectively spanning eleven years. Most of this time was devoted to the careful research,* writing, and refinement necessary to develop* a succession of interrelated publications. The publication developed during Phase I provided a foundation for the technological literacy standards,* which were developed in two parts during Phase II and Phase III. The companion publications containing the technological literacy standards provided the basis for the additional documents developed and published during the latter part of Phase III. Completion of each publication was a critical step towards the standards-based reform* of technology education* in the United States.
 
Advisory Groups provided expert* council to TfAAP during each phase of the project. Members of the Advisory Groups had backgrounds in standards creation, infusion, and implementation.* During regular meetings, members discussed issues relative to the design,* development, dissemination, implementation, and promotion of document content. Sustaining the vision* of the International Technology Education Association (ITEA) and TfAAP, that all students can and should become technologically literate, was a key contribution of the advisory groups.

Writing teams provided detailed input in fashioning the initial drafts of each document, reviewing them repeatedly during document refinement, and adding strength and quality to the final publications. Writing team members included classroom teachers, supervisors, technology teacher educators,* administrators,* curriculum* developers, and representatives from mathematics,* science,* technology,* and engineering.*
 
Throughout the project contributors (including TfAAP and other ITEA staff members) authored articles, presentations, and additional supporting materials. These materials reported on project progress, summarizing the key publications or aiding in the implementation of document content in laboratory-classrooms.* 

*TfAAP was initiated and administered by ITEA, and funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).
* Consult the Condensed Glossary for the applicable meaning(s) of the denoted term(s).

Phase I of the Technology for All Americans Project (TfAAP)* lasted from October 1994 to September 1996. During that time, TfAAP focused on developing and refining a document entitled Technology for All Americans: A Rationale and Structure for the Study of Technology, commonly referred to as Rationale and Structure.

Early in Phase I, The National Commission for Technology Education was appointed to serve in an advisory capacity to the TfAAP staff. The TfAAP staff also had the able assistance of writing consultants during the preparation of Rationale and Structure.

Prior to its 1996 publication, Rationale and Structure underwent an extensive review and validation process by over 500 practitioners of technology,* science,* mathematics,* engineering*, and others.

Rationale and Structure laid the philosophical foundation for the structure* and study of technology* in K-12 laboratory-classrooms.* The document defined technology and discussed the power* and promise of it. It further articulated* the need to develop* technologically literate citizens and the essential role of education in achieving that goal. Additionally the document presented a framework identifying what every student should know and be able to do in order to develop into a technologically literate citizen.

Rationale and Structure provided a basis for the subsequent development of Standards for Technological Literacy: Content for the Study of Technology and its companion publication, Advancing Excellence in Technological Literacy: Student Assessment, Professional Development, and Program Standard, developed during Phase II and Phase III respectively of TfAAP.

Completion of Technology for All Americans: A Rationale and Structure for the Study of Technology (Rationale and Structure) ended Phase I of the Technology for All Americans Project. The document is available for review in read only, PDF format in TfAAP Publications. Note that Rationale and Structure was revised in 2005 (please see Phase III of the project).

Phase I Project Participants (1994-1996)

TfAAP Staff

Directors
Dr. William E. Dugger, Jr., DTE, Project Director
Dr. Richard E. Satchwell, Assistant Project Director
 
Support Staff

Jodie Altice
Elizabeth Chabala
Lisa Driscoll
Michelle Griffith
Jeff Meide
Lisa Thorne

Visiting Scholars
Dr. Laverne Young-Hawkins, Associate Professor, Texas A&M University
Dr. Hidetoshi Miyakawa, Associate Professor, Aichi University of Education, Aichi, Japan

Advisory Members of The National Commission for Technology Education

G. Eugene Martin, Chairperson
J. Myron Atkin
E. Allen Bame
M. James Bensen
Gene R. Carter
Robert A. Daiber
James E. Davis
Paul W. DeVore
Ismael Diaz
William E. Dugger, Jr.
Frank L. Huband
Thomas A. Hughes, Jr.
Patricia A. Hutchinson

Thomas T. Liao
Franzie L. Loepp
Elizabeth D. Phillips
Charles A. Pinder
William S. Pretzer
John M. Ritz
Richard E. Satchwell
Kendall N. Starkweather
Charles E. Vela
Walter B. Waetjen
John G. Wirt
Michael D. Wright

Writing Consultants

William Pretzer, Coordinator
Robert A. Daiber
Paul Devore

Franzie L. Loepp
Walter B. Waetjen
Michael D. Wright

The primary focus of Phase II of the Technology for All Americans Project (TfAAP) was to develop content standards* for the study of technology,* which were built upon the foundation outlined in Technology for All Americans: A Rationale and Structure for the Study of Technology (Rationale and Structure), developed during Phase I of the project. Phase II took place over four years (1996-2000) and involved thousands of individuals worldwide. It culminated in the publication of the document entitled Standards for Technological Literacy: Content for the Study of Technology, commonly called STL, in 2000. STL was reprinted in 2002.
 
In addition to advising TfAAP staff on best practices in standards development, the Phase II Advisory Group offered specific advice on how technology education* can be taught as a core subject of inherent value as well as an integrated* subject within other content areas.
 
TfAAP utilized three Writing Teams during Phase II: one team focused on the standards for Grades K—2/3—5, a second team focused on the standards for Grades 6—8, and the third team focused on the standards for Grades 9—12. Each team had an appointed Leader and Recorder.
 
Eight formal drafts of STL were developed and reviewed before a final draft was prepared in Autumn 1999. Significant among the reviewers were two important agencies of the National Academy of Sciences: the National Research Council (NRC) and the National Academy of Engineering (NAE). Both NRC and NAE gave STL a positive review. NAE strongly supported implementing the standards* nationwide as a result of their involvement in the review process. It is noteworthy to recognize that this was the first time NAE supported a publication it did not write.
 
STL is NOT a curriculum.* It identifies a common set of expectations for what should be learned in Grade K—12 laboratory-classrooms* to ensure the effective, comprehensive study of technology across grade levels.* STL articulates content for the study of technology — the progression of facts and concepts that must be presented to students and understood by students as well as the abilities students should be able to demonstrate at specific grade level* assessment* checkpoints — to ensure that all students ultimately develop into technologically literate citizens. Technological literacy should be understood as the ability to use, manage, understand, and evaluate technology.
 
In addition to acquiring cognitive knowledge that integrates concepts from other educational disciplines, STL requires that students develop skills* through hands-on* participation in laboratory projects, thus acquiring the ability* to apply both knowledge and skills to the real world.
 
The standards articulated in STL were completed during Phase III of TfAAP by the development of a companion document entitled Advancing Excellence in Technological Literacy: Student Assessment, Professional Development, and Program Standards (AETL).
 
Completion of Standards for Technological Literacy: Content for the Study of Technology (STL) ended Phase II of the Technology for All Americans Project. The document is available for review in read only, PDF format in TfAAP Publications.

Phase II Project Participants (1996-2000)

TfAAP Staff 

Dr. William E. Dugger, Jr., DTE, Project Director
Pam B. Newberry, Assistant Researcher, Project Manager & Contributing Writer
Melissa Smith, Editor
Stephanie Overton, Publications Coordinator
Constance Moehring, Volunteer Librarian & Researcher
Crystal Nichols, Administrative Assistant for Office Operations

Advisory Group

Rodger Bybee
Thomas Hughes, Jr.
George Nelson
Linda Rosen

James Rutherford
Kendall Starkweather
Gerald Wheeler
William Wulf

Writing Teams

Grades K—2/3—5 Subteam

Jane Wheeler, Leader
Michael Wright, Recorder
Clare Benson
Kristin Callender
Linda Hallenbeck

Jane Hill
Stephan Knobloch
Connie Larson
Kathy Thornton

Grades 6—8 Subteam

Franzie Loepp, Leader
Brigitte Valesey, Recorder
William Ball
Barry Burke
Denise Denton

Michael Hacker
Chip Miller
Tonia Schofield
Leon Trilling

Grades 9—12 Subteam

Rodney Custer, Leader
Anthony Gilberti, Recorder
Robert Daiber
Jeffrey Grimmer
Norman Hackerman

Michael Jensen
Michael Mino
Scott Warner
George Wilcox

The final phase of the Technology for All Americans Project (TfAAP), Phase III, began in 2000 and concluded in 2005. During the first three years of Phase III, TfAAP developed Advancing Excellence in Technological Literacy: Student Assessment, Professional Development, and Program Standards, commonly called AETL, to complete the only set of technological literacy standards* for use in the U.S. AETL was, and is, intended as a companion document to Standards for Technological Literacy: Content for the Study of Technology (STL), which was published at the end of Phase II of the project, and upon which AETL was based. The standards* in AETL outline the means through which STL should be implemented* in K—12 laboratory-classrooms.*
 
The development of AETL involved hundreds of experts in the fields of technology,* mathematics,* science,* engineering,* and other disciplines.* During Phase III, TfAAP depended on an Advisory Council and three Writing Teams to assist in document development. The three writing teams each focused on one area of the AETL standards. Each team had an appointed Chair and Recorder.
 
Three formal drafts of AETL were developed and reviewed before a final draft was prepared in Autumn 2002.
 
AETL contains three separate but interrelated sets of standards. The student assessment* standards describe effective technological literacy* assessment* practices to be used by teachers. The professional development* standards delineate criteria* to be used by teacher educators,* administrators,* and supervisors in assuring effective* and continuous* in-service* and pre-service* education for teachers of technology. The program standards detail effective, comprehensive educational requirements to be used by teachers, administrators, and supervisors in promoting the development of technological literacy for all students.
 
During the development of AETL, the TfAAP staff also worked closely with the Council for Technology Teacher Education (CTTE) and the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) to provide assistance in the development of ITEA/CTTE/NCATE Curriculum Standards. Many of the jointly developed standards in this publication were based on STL and chapter 4 of AETL, subtitled “ Professional Development Standards.”
 
Additionally, TfAAP devoted much of its time during Phase III to implementing STL, which had been completed in 1999, printed in 2000, and was reprinted in 2002. Among other things, the International Technology Education Association (ITEA) and its project, TfAAP, trained six Specialists to give presentations and workshops* around the country on interpreting and implementing STL. More information about the Specialists is available through the TfAAP Resources section.
 
To enhance the work done by TfAAP, ITEA obtained additional funding to conduct surveys, enabling TfAAP to gain perspective on “What Americans Think About Technology.” Dr. Lowell Rose, Emeritus Executive Director of Phi Delta Kappa, served as a consultant to guide survey question development, and a committee of question writers provided valuable input. ITEA partnered with the Gallup Organization to conduct a survey of 1,000 households in the United States. The ITEA/Gallup Polls were conducted in 2001 and again in 2004. The 2004 Gallup Poll validated the findings of the 2000 Gallup Poll. The questions asked, results, and other materials pertinent to the two surveys is available for review through TfAAP Publications.
 
The publication of Advancing Excellence in Technological Literacy: Student Assessment, Professional Development, and Program Standards (AETL) in 2003 completed TfAAP’s core goal of identifying and delivering a complete set of technological literacy standards, but additional work was still needed.
 
While STL and AETL together constitute a complete set of educational standards for technological literacy, they do not contain specific strategies for implementation. To bridge this gap, and in response to needs indicated to ITEA by states, ITEA charged TfAAP with developing four Addenda to the standards. These practical guides provide descriptions, examples, processes, and adaptable worksheets to assist educational professionals in using the standards at state, district, or classroom levels. Development of the Addenda began in 2003 and continued into 2005.
 
The Addenda to the Tecnological Literacy Standards include:

• Realizing Excellence: Structuring Technology Programs - This publication is intended to help educators implement the program standards in chapter 5 of AETL.
• Measuring Progress: Assessing Students for Technological Literacy - This resource assists teachers plan and implement standards-based* student assessments for technological literacy. It is based on the student assessment standards in chapter 3 of AETL.
• Planning Learning: Developing Technology Curricula - This document provides teachers and other curriculum* developers with a multi-step approach to developing and revising standards-based technology curricula, complete with suggestions and worksheets. It relies heavily on the content standards in STL and, in keeping with the backwards design model, on the student assessment standards in chapter 3 of AETL.
• Developing Professionals: Preparing Technology Teachers - This addendum offers guidance for those who plan, implement, and/or evaluate* the standards-based education of teachers of technology. It is based on the professional development standards in chapter 4 of AETL.

During Phase III, TfAAP staff also meticulously reviewed Technology for All Americans: A Rationale and Structure for the Study of Technology, (Rationale and Structure), which had been developed during Phase I of the project. As a result, Technological Literacy for All: A Rationale and Structure for the Study of Technology was developed. It constitutes a major rewrite that enhances and updates the material in Rationale and Structure considerably, expanding upon information included in the original document. The revised document also includes several new sections.
 
Completion of the four Addenda and Technological Literacy for All: A Rationale and Structure for the Study of Technology concluded TfAAP’s work. The project ended in October 2005.
 
Advancing Excellence in Technological Literacy: Student Assessment, Professional Development, and Program Standards (AETL) and Technological Literacy for All: A Rationale and Structure for the Study of Technology are both available for review in read only, PDF format in TfAAP Publications, as are sample pages from each of the Addenda.

Phase III Project Participants (2000-2005)

TfAAP Staff

Dr. William E. Dugger, Jr., DTE, Project Director
Shelli D. Meade, Assistant Project Director and Editor
Lisa Delany, Senior Research Associate
Crystal Nichols, Administrative Assistant for Office Operations
Pam B. Newberry, Project Manager

Participants in the Development of AETL (2000-2003)

Advisory Group

Rodger Bybee
Rodney L. Custer
Elsa Garmire
Gene Martin
Linda Rosen

James M. Rubillo
Gerald Wheeler
Pat White
Michael Wright

Writing Teams

Student Assessment Standards

Rodney L. Custer, Chair
Robert Wicklein, Recorder
Joseph D'Amico
Richard Kimbell
Mike Lindstrom

Charles Pinder
Steve Price
James Rice
Leonard Sterry

Professional Development Standards

Michael Daugherty, Chair
Anna Sumner, Recorder
Marie Hoepfl
Ethan Lipton
Pamela Matthews

Diana Rigden
Anthony Schwaller, DTE
Jack Wescott
Jane Wheeler

Program Standards

Mark Wilson, Chair
Pat Foster, Recorder
David Bouvier
Barry Burke, DTE
Michael De Miranda
Joan Haas
Steve Shumway
Doug Wagner
Gary Wynn, DTE