http://www.teeap.org/blog/?p=22 The Official News Blog of TEEAP Thu, 15 Apr 2010 14:00:59 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 http://www.teeap.org/blog/?p=22#comment-8 Michael Ziegler Tue, 12 Jan 2010 01:52:44 +0000 http://www.teap-online.org/blog/?p=20#comment-8 I do not support the name change. I still like the name Industrial Arts more than Technology Education. It is not important what we call it but how we teach it. Do we provide the students with varied and interesting learning one that they will elect to enroll in. Isn’t it true that schools close programs more times because they can not find teachers certified to teach them? We worry too much about political correctness and public relations. If we have a good program, administrations will notice and students will take our classes. Let’s not change the name again! I do not support the name change. I still like the name Industrial Arts more than Technology Education. It is not important what we call it but how we teach it. Do we provide the students with varied and interesting learning one that they will elect to enroll in. Isn’t it true that schools close programs more times because they can not find teachers certified to teach them? We worry too much about political correctness and public relations. If we have a good program, administrations will notice and students will take our classes. Let’s not change the name again!

]]> http://www.teeap.org/blog/?p=22#comment-7 Jared Bitting Thu, 07 Jan 2010 16:25:13 +0000 http://www.teap-online.org/blog/?p=20#comment-7 Educating our membership is of the utmost importance. Then again, they have to be willing to learn and make the changes necessary. When I say change, some mean drastic changes, when in fact minor changes can bring Industrial Arts to Technology Education. It is all in the how you teach it and what you teach, not in what kind of room you teach it in. Educating our membership is of the utmost importance. Then again, they have to be willing to learn and make the changes necessary. When I say change, some mean drastic changes, when in fact minor changes can bring Industrial Arts to Technology Education. It is all in the how you teach it and what you teach, not in what kind of room you teach it in.

]]> http://www.teeap.org/blog/?p=22#comment-6 Edward J. Frescoln Wed, 06 Jan 2010 02:16:25 +0000 http://www.teap-online.org/blog/?p=20#comment-6 I am in agreement with Tanners concerns. Even though we changed our subject area name from Industrial Arts/ Industrial Education to Technology Education, many in our profession remain far removed from Technology Education content and methodology. We must devise a plan that would indeed support our membership. In-service training, Governors Institutes, whatever is necessary to educate our membership, so that we are supporting more than a name change. I believe any and all dialogue in regard to this proposal is most healthy for our membership... I am in agreement with Tanners concerns. Even though we changed our subject area name from Industrial Arts/ Industrial Education to Technology Education, many in our profession remain far removed from Technology Education content and methodology. We must devise a plan that would indeed support our membership. In-service training, Governors Institutes, whatever is necessary to educate our membership, so that we are supporting more than a name change. I believe any and all dialogue in regard to this proposal is most healthy for our membership…

]]> http://www.teeap.org/blog/?p=22#comment-5 Tanner Huffman Tue, 05 Jan 2010 04:00:19 +0000 http://www.teap-online.org/blog/?p=20#comment-5 Taking a devil's advocate stand, are we prepared to deliver true engineering education K-12. We are expecting our members to teach engineering concepts that they are not trained to teach. Keep in mind, we are claiming that we are the T&E of STEM yet very few of our teachers have any experience with specific engineering analytic knowledge content(principles, concepts, computational skills using formulas or simulation software, as well as experimental and research methods). It is true that some of us teach parts of engineering curriculum and our main point my be that we teach the engineering design process(EDP). However the EDP is a generic concept with several forms. Some are 7 steps, some even 11 steps or more. Also, is the EDP that unique as to separate itself from the the Technical Design Process? If we accept that we are the T&E of STEM, then we as an organization must be ready to support our membership in fulfilling the "E". Engineering by Design may be an answer to this problem. There have been efforts by PDE through past Governor's Institutes to fill this engineering content void. Thoughts? Taking a devil’s advocate stand, are we prepared to deliver true engineering education K-12. We are expecting our members to teach engineering concepts that they are not trained to teach. Keep in mind, we are claiming that we are the T&E of STEM yet very few of our teachers have any experience with specific engineering analytic knowledge content(principles, concepts, computational skills using formulas or simulation software, as well as experimental and research methods). It is true that some of us teach parts of engineering curriculum and our main point my be that we teach the engineering design process(EDP). However the EDP is a generic concept with several forms. Some are 7 steps, some even 11 steps or more. Also, is the EDP that unique as to separate itself from the the Technical Design Process? If we accept that we are the T&E of STEM, then we as an organization must be ready to support our membership in fulfilling the “E”. Engineering by Design may be an answer to this problem. There have been efforts by PDE through past Governor’s Institutes to fill this engineering content void. Thoughts?

]]>