1
Matthew Soboloski
The Current Status of Graduate and Undergraduate programs in Technology Education
TED 502 Fall 2003
Introduction
Over the past 20 years the shift from Industrial Arts to Technology Education has created a problem in
defining the status of graduate and undergraduate programs. One problem that exists is the use of terms in defining
Technology Education programs. It is valuable to the profession to understand these terms and conditions that define
Technology Education programs. In defining the status, this study looks at; 1. The number, location, and graduates
of schools that offer Technology Education according to the CTTE Guidelines; 2. Size and expertise of staff. 3.
Curriculums , goals, courses, definitions, and nature of laboratories; 4. Trends and problems. This study will help
future students in selecting an appropriate institution for the study of Technology Education and help those already
in the profession determine the current status of Technology Education.
History of undergraduate in IA/TE
Throughout time people have been passing down trade and technical skills to their young. Through the use
of apprentice and craftsman, master crafts man, and journeymen, students could learn skills they wanted in a more
effective manor. Through the development of our society they needed a better way to teach, and produce more in a
smaller amount of time. This led to the development of education in manual training, manual arts, practical arts,
vocational education, and industrial arts, which is now called Technology Education. These skills were passed to
next generation. (Seefeld, 1961). stated the first school to implement manual training in to its curriculum of teacher
education was Oswego State Normal School, under the leadership of Edward A. Sheldon in 1861. By the end of the
century other schools followed suit, such as the Norman school at Bridgewater, Massachusetts; Whitewater,
Wisconsin; New Britain, Connecticut; San Jose, California; and Trenton, New Jersey. By the 1960’s and 70’s the
profession was flourishing because of federal funding being placed into the programs. There was a higher need for
teachers as schools expanded and mandatory education became a law.
2
History of graduate study in IA/TE
The Teachers College of Columbia University in July 1896 was the first college to offer a graduate level
course in Practical Arts or Industrial Arts. The course title was “Manual Training in Elementary and Secondary
Schools” and was taught by Professor Charles A. Bennett. This course was offered in the field of education at
Columbia and was not a major course of study. Through the help of students and staff, Columbia helped structure
the graduate level instruction of Industrial Arts throughout the country. One of the first major universities to offer a
masters degree program in Manual Arts was the University of Wisconsin (Buffer, 1979).
As schools developed the need for more professional teachers increased. The problem was the profession needed to
develop strategies for teaching and common objectives for programs in schools. In the attempt to bring the
profession to a respected status, the demand for a post- bachelor education was needed for research of many of the
problems. By the 1930’s the requirement for a masters degree was needed for teaching. There is no evidence that
suggests that a masters degree is required to enter the profession although some state departments of education and
local school systems require that a teacher earn a masters degree to obtain a permanent certification and tenure
(Buffer, 1979).
Number of Schools
The current number of institutions that offer Technology Education as a major course of study in
undergrad/graduate work, according to the Industrial Teacher Education Directory, is 114. This Directory only
listed the institutions that were approved by; CTTE/ITEA Guidelines. The deciding factors that had convincing
evidence of a major in Technology Education was the major course of study names, a variety of terms were used in
the directory that lead to the assumption that the institution did in fact offer a major course of study in producing
Technology Education teachers. The following terms were used as major course of study descriptors in producing
Technology Education teachers; Technology Education, Industrial Education, Industrial Technology/Education,
Industrial Arts Education, Industrial and technical Education, Industrial Arts, Industrial Arts Teacher Education.
One major term that was avoided in the numbers of Technology Education institutions was industrial technology,
unless it was included in a school of education that produces teachers and certifies in Technology Education.
Schools that offer Industrial Technology as a major are not included in this research because their intent is not to
become teachers, although the content is similar, the professional development of education is not included.
3
Table 1 shows the breakdown of terms used and number of institutions using that term to specify their major course.
This information was extracted from The Industrial Teacher Education Directory (2001-02 40th Edition) and put in
to spreadsheet form.
.Table 1
Major degree terms
# of schools using term
Technology Education
Industrial & Technical Education
Industrial Arts Education
Industrial Arts
Industrial Technology Teaching
Industrial Technology Education
Industrial Education
Industrial Arts Teacher Education
Technology & Industry Education
Total
73
3
5
6
1
14
10
1
1
114
In the last twenty years, Industrial Arts has shifted to Technology Education. This is why there are so many
definitions that define a Technology Education program with the term industry in them. One true way that would
define a Technology Education program is through current curriculum, which should be aligned with the Jackson’s
Mill project (Snyder, J. & Hales 1981), A Conceptual Model for Technology Education (Savage, E. & Sterry, L.
1990), and Technology for all Americans project (1996 ITEA).
Technology Education Course Approval
For a program to be recognized by ITEA/CTTE, they must meet their rigorous program standards they
approved in 1987 and revised in 1992, and 1997. Institutions must submit a program review document with three
sections, not to exceed one hundred and forty pages. The three sections include

cover sheet, which provides general information; name of institution, address, chief compiler; date; date of
visit; phone number, name of programs to be reviewed, classification, and a checklist of materials included.

Matrix of program standards, institutions must provide evidence of program standards met and their ability
to deliver the material.
4

Appendix of supporting documentation such as syllabi, course descriptions, and unique information as
listed on the matrix.
After the program document is reviewed a follow up visit takes place. Program approval guide lines component
areas include; philosophy, mission and goals, nature of program, content of technology, developing, managing
and evaluating a technology education program, and methods of curriculum development.
Visit http://www.ncate.org/standard/new%20program%20standards/itea%202001.pdf
for a complete list of program standards.
CTTE Brochure 1 states advantages for getting the program approval.

Assures the public that technology education programs have met rigorous standards.

Links curriculum to national standards.

Encourages quality assurance in education.

Establishes common professional standards

Assures accountability for quality technology education teaching.

Gains recognition among collages and university.

Professional respect form out side the field

Increases in resource allocation

Advertising and marketing tool

Image tool

Improved job placement for graduates in programs
Number of Graduates
In 2001-02 of the 114 schools offering a major course of study in Technology Education they graduated
716, undergraduates with a bachelors of science or arts in education. Sixty-eight of these schools also offer a masters
degree of MA or MS or Med, which totaled 203, and doctorates in Technology Education which totaled 13.
Table 2 Shows a list of Institutions by name, and alphabetizes by State to show location and number of graduates
with a masters and bachelors in 2000-01.
5
State/University
Arizona
Northern Arizona University
Arkansas
University of Arkansas
University of Arkansas at Pine Buff
California
Fresno State
California State University
Humboldt State
San Francisco State
San Jose State
Colorado
Colorado State
Connecticut
Central Connecticut State
Florida
Florida International
University of South Florida
Georgia
Georgia Southern
University of Georgia
Hawaii
University of Hawaii
Idaho
University of Idaho
Illinois
Chicago State University
Eastern Illinois University
Illinois State University
University of Illinois
Western Illinois
Indiana
Ball State
Indiana State
Purdue
Iowa
Iowa State
University of Northern Iowa
Kansas
Fort Hays State
McPherson Collage
Pittsburg State University
Kentucky
Berea Collage
Eastern Kentucky
Morehead State
Murray State
Northern Kentucky
Grambling State
Louisiana
Northwestern State
# of Masters
BS-8
BS-3
BS-0
BA-2
BA-2
BS-2
BA-5,
BA
MA-0
MA-11
BS-5
Med
BS
MS
MS
BS-5
BSEd- 5
BS-7
MEd-4
MEd-6, EdD-0
Bed-7
MEd-1, EdD-0
BS-4
MS-5, MEd-16
BS
BS-4
BS- 17
BS-0
BS-2
MS
BS-11
BS-6
BS-9
MA-5
MS-0, Phd-0
MS-3, Phd-0
BS-63
BA-20
MS-2, Phd-1
BS-2
BS
BS-6
BS-1
BS-8
BS-2
BS-0
BS
BS
BS-0
MEd-0, PhD-2
MS-5
MS-3
MS-0
6
University of Louisiana de Lafayette
Maine
University of Southern Maine
Maryland
University of Maryland Eastern
Shore
Massachusetts
Fitchburg State
Michigan
Andrews University
Central Michigan
Eastern Michigan
Northern Michigan
Western Michigan
Minnesota
Bemidji State
St. Cloud University
University of Minnesota
Mississippi
Jackson State
Mississippi State
Missouri
Central Missouri State
College of the Ozarks
Southeast Missouri State
Southwest Missouri State
University of Missouri
Montana
Montana State
Montana State University Northern
Western Montana Collage
Nebraska
Peru State College
University of Nebraska
Wayne State College
New Hampshire
Keene State
New Jersey
Kean State
Montclair State
College of New Jersey
New Mexico
New Mexico Highlands
New York
New York City Technical College
New York University Washington
Square
State University College at Buffalo
State University of New York
College at Oswego
North Carolina
Appalachian State
BS-0
BS-1
BS-0
BSEd- 1
MEd-7
BS-0
BS-2
BS-6
BS
BS
MA-2
MS-3
MA
MA
BS-9
BS-13
BS-4
MS-4
MS-0
MEd-4, PhD-0
BS-0
BS-0
MSEd-3
BS-3
BS-1
MS-2
BSEd
BS-0
BS-9
BS-0
BS
BS
BS
BS-10
BS-4
BSEd-4
MSEd
ME-0, PhD-3
MS-3
MA
MS-3
BS
BA
BS-7
BS-20
MA-8
MEd-0
BA
MA
BSEd-6
BS
MSEd-0
MA, PhD-
BS-10
BS-71
MS-3
MS-17
BS-6
MS-22
7
Elizabeth City State
North Carolina Agricultural &
Technical State
North Carolina State
North Dakota
University of North Dakota
Valley City State
Ohio
Bowling Green
Kent State
The Ohio State University
The University of Akron
Oklahoma
Northeastern State
Northwestern Oklahoma
Southwestern Oklahoma
Oregon
Oregon State
Pennsylvania
California University of
Pennsylvania
Millersville University
Rhode Island
Rhode Island College
South Carolina
Clemson University
South Carolina State
South Dakota
Black Hills
Tennessee
East Tennessee
Middle Tennessee
University of Tennessee
Texas
Abilene State
Sam Huston State
Southwest Texas State
Texas A&M
Utah
Brigham Young
Southern Utah
Utah State
Virginia
James Madison
Norfolk State
Old Dominion
Virginia Tech.
Virginia State
Washington
Central Washington
Eastern Washington
Walla Walla College
BS
BS-3
MS-6
BS-36
MEd-3, EdD-0
BS-3
BS-1
BS-6
BS-4
BS-14
BS
MA-8
MA-3, MEd-2, PhD-2
MS, PhD-0
BS-1
BS
BSEd-4
MS
MSEd-0
BS
EdM
BS-42
MEd-0
BSEd-35
MEd-4
BS-8
MEd-4
BS-3
BS-9
MEd-0
AS-10, BS-12,BSE-5
BS
BS-2
BS-2
MS
MST-0
MS-2
BSEd-1
BS-3
BS-0
BS-0
MA-2
MEd-0,MST-8
MS-0, EdD-0
BS-17
BS-9, BA-2
BS-7
BS-1
BS-2
BS-8
BS-11
BS-0
BS-6
BS
BS-0
MS-4
MS-4
MS-5
MS-2, PhD-0
MEd
8
Western Washington
West Virginia
Fairmont State
West Virginia University
Wisconsin
University of Wisconsin-Platteville
University of Wisconsin-Stout
Total 114
BS-4
MEd-0
BA
MA-13
EdD-4
BS-2
BS-21
716
MS,MA,MEd-203,
PhD,EdD-13
Size and expertise of staff
Staff listed in the schools above range from Professor, Associate Professor, Assistant Professor, and
Instructor. The degrees held by the staff in these institutions range from EdD, PhD, MS, MA, DIT, BVE. The
average size of staff of each department is 11.32 (Industrial Teacher education directory 01, 02) The institution with
the largest size staff is Central Missouri State University, with 53 in the Department of Technology.
Henak, R. (1991) Showed the model structure for a undergraduate major in Technology Education is 48
semester hours of general education, 54 semester hours of technical competences, and 29 for the professional
education structure. The strength of a program can be analyzed from three components. The strength of these
components would be a good place to start when deciding if a program at an institution was of top quality. These
components include philosophy, technical competencies courses, and professional education.
The first component of a strong program relies on philosophy. Philosophy of programs state why
Technology Education is taught and the importance of it. It guides the choice of objectives taught. Philosophy holds
the programs together and is the focal point in which every educational decision is made. An institution with a
strong rational or philosophy statement would also reflect a strong program in Technology Education. Philosophy is
the driving force behind a program. Good rational or mission of programs focus on preparing capabilities of teachers
in Technology Education. It is important that the technology programs be responsive to the demands of changing
technology and its impact on society. Philosophy should reflect the goal of producing top quality teachers and
making sure that they are technologically literate.
Technical competence is the second component of a strong program. The problem of developing a structure
for technical subject matter is a difficult one as technological subject matter is very diverse and complex. A lasting
structure must rely on under guiding principles and elements rather than on the point of practice. Most programs
require 48 credit hours of instruction in technical competencies.
9
Henak, R. (1991) described a visionary profile of the technical content that should be included in teacher
preparation. He noted that
"the thrust of the content and activities [of the technical component] is on helping students
understand impacts, processes, and outputs of present-day technical subsystems used in
contemporary industry" (p. 11).
Henak identified a 48 credit-hour technical component for industrial/technology education teachers. He grouped
these technical competencies into biotechnology, communication, construction, manufacturing, and transportation.
Courses range from 100 level which are general to 400 levels which are specific. Programs should offer 18
semester hours of 100 level technical competence courses which include: Introduction to technology, design
processes, communication, construction, manufacturing, and transportation. The should also offer 21 semester
hours of 200 and 300 level courses which include, names such as material processing systems, production systems,
graphic communications, electronics communications, designing and engineering structures, construction of
structures, energy processing systems, and transportation systems. Nine semester hours of 400 level courses should
include, courses such as designing transportation systems, manufacturing enterprises, community planning, mass
communication, controlling technological systems, future technologies systems, intergraded systems, and
interdisciplinary systems.
These courses should offer problem solving related activities that relate to real life
situations. The students should be put in to real life problems that are related to technologies, to understand the
social concept for when problems present themselves.
The third component is, professional education, which is the science of teaching. Professional
education helps students of Technology Education programs to become better teachers. The needs of future
generations are different. They require higher levels of education to be competitive in the future. Henak, R. (1991)
states the professional education component should have these goals for future teachers, Develop an understanding
for the nature of teaching, develop a philosophy of teaching, instructional strategy, use of instructional technology,
abilities to solve educational problems, contribute to professional organizations, develop future orientation, and
develop a habit of life long learning, which helps to develop a positive self concept.
To achieve these goals students are recommended to take 29 credit hours of professional educational courses.
Courses should include child growth and development, educational psychology, foundations of education, lab
10
management strategies, and methods of Technology Education, student teaching, and a verity of curriculum
courses. Curriculum courses should include, selecting and the organization of content, what is important for the
student to learn, structure of knowledge, professionalism, and assessment courses.
Curriculum
As this research brings up the topic of curriculum, there are many course titles, goals, and definitions in
programs of Technology Education throughout the United States. First we must define curriculum. Curriculum is a
large topic and is hard to define in one definition. Some would say it is the process of structuring content for the
purpose of teaching. Others say it is the arrangement of subject matter for a discipline. Curriculum courses in
Technology Education structures the content for teaching the subject matter. Courses should be offered in the
department to refine the structure taught by professionals in the field. The top four definitions used by institutions to
define what curriculum is (K. Zuga, 1991)




The process of arranging content for the purpose of teaching.
A course of study involving arrangement of subject matter,
All of the activities of the school in which students are engaged,
Analysis of community needs, subject matter, and the environment.
Curriculum goals in programs are numerous. Goals echo the philosophy of the institutions, and many
institutions have different philosophies. The curriculums should prepare students for teaching Technology Education
in the classrooms. Most goals reflect the definitions in some way. Technology Education curriculum goals should
involve activity development in writing objectives, creating innovative teaching strategies, methods, developing
courses, developing philosophy, understanding student learning styles, and develop curriculum changes from IA to
Technology Education. Zuga's (1989) seminal research on relating the goals of technology education with
curriculum planning identified major curriculum design categories:
“Curriculum design and development in technology education has centered around these five
categories: (a) technical performance or processes; (b) academic focus on the specific body of
knowledge relating to industry and technology; (c) intellectual processes that concentrate on
critical thinking and problem solving; (d) social reconstruction through realistic or real world
situations; and (e) personal, learner-centered focus on individual needs and interests”
Curriculum courses in Technology Education should focus on how to deliver technical competencies to
students. Some courses especially those with an orientation toward the delivery of content, focus on educational
11
practices, linking theory and practice to working and learning environments. A wide verity of course names are
offered in the area of curriculum for technology education. Most institutions require that students take between three
to nine credit hours of curriculum courses in Technology Education.
Zuga (1991) examined only curriculum related courses required in industrial/technology teacher education
programs. She noted that 56% of the programs required only one course in curriculum development, while 31%
offered two curriculum courses. Her research also indicated that 44% of the professional courses were not offered
exclusively to industrial/technology education majors, but were taught to a combination of vocational education
students including agriculture education, trade and industrial education, family and consumer science, business
education, and marketing education.
Course names reflect the goals and definitions stated earlier. Courses’ names include, but are not limited to:
Introduction to Technology Education, Teaching Methods Technology, Curriculum Methods and Assessment for
Technology Education, Technology for Elementary School Children, Implementing Technology Education,
Planning Technical/Vocational Laboratories, Middle School Technology Education, Field Experience, Activities in
Technology/Vocational Education, Curriculum Technology/Vocational Education, Evaluation in Technology,
Course Construction, Advanced Curriculum, Methods and Assessment for Technology, Curriculum Development
for Technology.
Nature of Laboratories
All of the programs in Technology Education researched had some sort of technology laboratory required
in the program. This was not surprising due to the nature of the field. Most of the laboratory courses were offered at
the undergraduate level. Due to the large content area of the field laboratories had a wide variety of options through
the programs. Polette (1991), when discussing how to compose a curriculum plan, noted that traditionally the
technical content of industrial/technology teacher education was composed of woodworking, metalworking,
electricity/electronics, automotive mechanics, graphics, and mechanical drafting. He concluded that although
contemporary program content should include these technical skills, the contemporary focus should shift to include
knowledge and skills used in communications, construction, manufacturing, and transportation.
12
The nature of the laboratories mirror the technical courses taught in them. The nature of laboratories is
shown in Table 3. The research was conducted through technical courses offered by institutions that offered a major
in Technology Education from the Industrial Teacher Education Directory 01-02 edition. Due to the nature of the
courses it is assumed that they would be taught in a laboratory type setting which would show the make-up of the
laboratories. Table 3
Trends & Problems
Nature of Laboratory
# of lab types
Manufacturing
75
Mechanical Drafting
68
Electricity /Electronics
64
Construction
49
Transportation
48
Communications
42
CAD
38
Power & Energy
36
Graphics
29
Computer Applications
25
Materials Processing
20
Design
20
Woodworking
19
Robotics
17
Plastics
16
Metalworking
10
Hydraulics /Pneumatics
6
13
Historical trends from 1970-1990 in enrollments have shown a decline in Technology Education as a
major. Volk, K (1993) reported number of schools offering a major degree in TE/IA in 1970 was 203, number of
students receiving a bachelors degree in IA/TE was 6,368, and number receiving a masters degree was 1767, and
number of students receiving a doctors was 83. He also reported that in 1990, the number of schools offering a
major in IA/TE was 174, number of students receiving a bachelor’s degree in IA/TE was 1,790, number of students
receiving master’s degree was 650, and numbers for a doctor’s degree was 50. My study reports that in 2001-02
there are 114 schools offering a program in IA/TE there were 1312 bachelors degrees received, and 203 masters
degrees received and 13 doctors’ degrees. There are many factors that contribute to the decline of Technology
educators. One major factor is the shift from Industrial Arts to Technology Education. Miller R (1989) stated:
Needless to say, by now, everyone realizes that the changing of a name means there are some problems. The
recruiting of young men and women into the teaching profession is difficult enough these days, but the changing of
the name into something else makes it even harder to recruit when you have to tell the prospective professional that
the name of the profession he/she is interested in has changed its name and direction. (p. 14)
Another factor for decline in enrollment is the influence on technology related non-teaching careers such as
Industrial Technology, and engineering. Volk, K (1993) stated: The creation and expansion of non-teaching
programs such as industrial technology has been recognized for its instrumental role in shaping the scope and
emphasis of IA/TE teacher preparation programs. As discussed by Sinn (1989), the history and evolution of
industrial technology programs was based on industrial arts education. The development of non-teaching IT options
were due to faculty and administrative action at various institutions. Oaks and Loepp (1989) indicated this shift
away from teacher preparation programs was a result of a desire by IA/TE-based departments to continue
enrollments, while serving a new diversified population with different career goals. In this manner, students who did
not enter the teaching profession after degrees in IA/TE were targeted in these new programs. Programs through out
the nation have a variety of avenues for technology related students. Majors like Industrial Technology, Technology
Management, Technology, Computer science, Engineering technologies, and many more take away numbers from
Technology Education and the profession. Rudisill (1987) noted the chaos and conflict caused by the factionalism
between IA/TE and IT programs. He indicated technology educators no longer control the technical content courses,
14
making the implementation of new recommended curriculum difficult. In this way, the IT spin-off from teacher
education programs usurped the original program's mission and power.
Outlook for the future
Recent trends in Technology Education show a decline in enrolment. K, Volk (1995) said: As a result of
this analysis, it was estimated that if the downward trend continued, the demise of the technology teacher
preparation profession would occur near the year 2005. A strong need to be technology literate remains in today
society. Therefore, a need for future technology educators will always remain. With the retirement of the baby
boomers there will be plenty of job vacancies to be filled. The need for new recruiting strategies must not be over
looked. K.Volk, (1995) Said:
The likelihood that the demise of the technology teacher preparation programs will occur around
the year 2005 is not without potential revision. First, economic incentives might encourage more
young people to enter the technology education teaching profession, as public awareness responds
to teacher shortages. Second, through political action via education departments, the importance of
technology education being a required subject for all secondary students may develop. Already
this has happened, with the state of Maryland leading the way. Finally, from students' experience
derived through innovative technology education programs, a true desire to teach the subject for
personal satisfaction, interest and motivation may develop.
Technology is always changing and the ability to change philosophical beliefs has been shown in the history of the
field. We should look back and examine why the field was flourishing in the 60’s and 70’s. Is it because of the
change in content, nature of courses, or the change in name that made this trend so dangerous? One important
element to consider is "What is being done right, in those few technology teacher preparation programs that are
succeeding? (Volk, K 1995)” The field must stay in line with national standards and be ready to adapt to future
standards when needed, while bringing back the traditional courses that spark student interest.
With the increase of non-teaching fields in technology, schools may have an obligation to rethink the
direction of their programs K. Volk (1995) University faculty housed in many programs will more likely shift their
research and publication focus to non-teaching industrial technology areas; a reflection of their increased interests
and responsibilities.
Conclusion
15
The status of undergraduate and graduate programs in Technology Education is at a low when compared
to the Industrial Arts era. Still the Industrial Arts programs are declining and the shift seems to be to non-teaching
fields in technology. The lack of funds to higher education and need of funds to support these IA/TE programs
results in the closing of programs. The need to incorporate Technology Education into general education is an
important issue. Technology Education, if looked upon as a general education course in schools, the mandatory
existence would be beneficial. If the need of teachers in the field remains then the influx of students into programs
will increase raising the status of graduate and undergraduate Technology Education Programs.
Bibliography
Bottrill, P. (1991). How should we prepare teachers for design and technology education.
The Technology Teacher, Volume 51number 1, 3-8.
16
th
Buffer J.J, 1979, 28 Yearbook, Industrial Arts Education: Retrospect, Prospect,
Graduate Education in Industrial Arts 290-322
Henak, R. (1991). Elements and Structure For a Model Undergraduate Technology
Teacher Education Program. CTTE Monograph 11.Reston, VA: Council on Technology Teacher
Education.
Lewis, T. (1994). Education and work for the year 2000: The choices we face and
implications for technology teacher education. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 31(4),
40-56.
Lewis, T. (1993). Reform of technology teacher education: A study of the perceptions of
industrial teacher educators. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 30(2), 6-29.
Lewis, T. (1992). The nature of technology and the subject matter of technology
education: A survey of industrial teacher educators. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education,
30(1), 5-30.
Polette, D. (1991). Planning Technology Teacher Education Learning Environments.
Reston, VA: Council on Technology Teacher Education
Savage, E. & Sterry, L. (1990, Sept/Oct). A conceptual framework for technology
education - part 1, The technology teacher, 50, [1], Reston, VA: International Technology
Education Association.
Seefeld, K 1961, Tenth Yearbook Graduate Study in Industrial Arts, Development of the
Collegiate School Industrial Arts, 65-83
Snyder, J. & Hales, J. (n.d.). Jacksons Mill industrial arts curriculum theory. Charleston,
WV: / West Virginia Department of Education.
Rogers G, E, 1996 The Technical Content of Industrial/Technology Teacher Education
Journal of technology education Reston, VA: Volume 8, Number 1 - Fall
Rudisill, A. E. (1987). Technology curricula: Chaos and conflict. Journal of technology
teacher education
Volk K S. Enrollment Trends in Industrial Arts/Technology Teacher Education From
1970-1990 Journal of technology teacher education.
Wright J (1991)., CTTE Monograph 12, The Essential Elements of a Quality Graduate
Technology Education Program.
2001-02 Industrial Teacher Education Directory 40th edition ITEA/CCTTE GoodheartWilCox Company.
The Technology for all Americans Project, A rational and structure for the study of technology
1996 International Technology Education Association
17