Abstract
While it is not unique to technology education, this field has a the problem. We sometimes inappropriately use the definite article to falsely imply uniqueness. At other times, listeners or readers may incorrectly infer uniqueness because we have used the even when we did not mean to imply uniqueness. At first, definite article usage may seem a silly, petty, and empty concern: surely there are bigger and more important issues for our attention. Actually, inappropriately communicating uniqueness with the is better classified as a symptom than a problem; an underlying problem here is our understanding. Our language choices can communicate an inaccurately narrow connotation. Where this is unintentional, greater awareness of language use specifically attending to this problem may be a solution. Technology education seems to be a profession that has embraced dogma. There is a creed stating “this we believe...” from a premier association (ITEA, n.d.). Why is there such a need to believe? Why do we have difficulty deferring judgment and admitting alternatives? Can we overcome the appeal of comfort brought by satiating our need to believe?
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21061/jte.v21i2.a.2 | Journal eISSN: 1045-1064
Language: English
Page range: 10 - 20
Published on: May 22, 2010
Published by: Virginia Tech
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
© 2010 Jim Flowers, published by Virginia Tech
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons License.
