IRVING-BELL, DAWNE

McLain, Matt

WOOFF, DAVID

English

Edge Hill University Research Information Repository

PATT37 ConferenceDr Dawne Irving-Bell, Matt McLain and David Wooff Presented by David WooffUniversity of Malta3rd-6th June 2019Re-designing Design and Technology Education: A living literature review of stakeholder perspectives@The_DT_Geek@DesTech2013@belld17Introduction • Within the UK design and technology is in serious decline• There is limited solid research base from which to build• This paper could be viewed as call to action by the UK design and technology community Uptake inthe SubjectNewTeachers?Pre-Service Teachers Starting Training in Relation to National Targets (November 2018)NewTeachers?Do WeHelpOurselves?STEM  vs  Design and TechnologyMaker Movement = Computer Science?Old(er) Technology vs New TechnologyAssessing Products rather than knowledge or skillsOutsiderPerceptionsWoodwork / Metalwork / Technical Drawing / Cooking / SewingLow Quality Outcomes = No Success = No LearningLack of “Academic” StatusExpensiveOften for those considered to be less academically ableHow toReverseThis?Albert Einstein is widely credited with saying, “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results”.The Research Question What is design and technology fundamental purpose; why should it exist? and irrespective any barriers, what should a re-imagined design and technology curriculum ‘look like’?Participants and Approach• UK based study drawing upon the perspectives of UK Design and Technology ‘royalty’ • Informed by grounded theory (to enable concurrent data collection with analysis informing subsequent phases)• A living document, this is the start of the conversation Analysis and Presentation of DataDesign and technologyactivity: ideation,realisation and critiqueAnalysis and Presentation of DataDesign and technologyactivity: ideation,realisation and critiqueDiscussion Design and technology activity (ideating, realising and critiquing) Disentangle the data in order to bring to the fore common insights and understandings:• Curriculum intentions (knowledge, experience and learner dispositions) • Tensions (materials and the STEM agenda)Discussion Design and technology curriculum intentions: experience, knowledge and dispositionCurriculum intentions and ‘non-negotiable’ common groundDiscussionSpanning all participant responses, a series of desirable dispositions for learners emerged. Participants felt strongly that the subject should seek to develop attributes including team building, communication (including the extrapolation of ideas) and collaboration. Resilience, and the development of an ability to take informed risks and engage in ‘proud failures’ was also cited by participants. Discussion A second emergent category, experience, relates to what learners ‘do’ (i.e. what they experience) within the subject, what is important to know. Participant responses include reference to authentic approaches to problem solving, context and an awareness of human needs and wants within a technological society. The third category, knowledge, extends beyond the boundaries of the subject and relates to participant perceptions of a broader body of knowledge. Dimensions of knowledge considered were, by the learner in relation to political and global agendas, knowledge for action and situated knowledge, within the context of other subject disciplines. Tensions? A number of commentators, including the National subject association, have discussed the relevance of design and technology as a subject for the 21st century within the context of STEM. However, irrespective of the participants background or material area during analysis we were surprised that in discourse responses made little or limited reference to STEM Text in hereRather than seeking to reclaim, re-name or re-frame, throughout we have sought to avoid a focus on repairing the subject, which we believe would potentially result in a make do and mend approach to the development of a revised curriculum.Challenging current and historic understandings of design and technology: A working modelConclusionsNext stepsIn the spirit of the living document approach which has been adopted for this work we welcome contributions from the community, and invite the open critique, adaption and development of this paper. In turn drawing from those new, additional perspectives it is our intention to continue to maintain communication, and to keep the conversation growing. AcknowledgementsWe would like to thank all of those who responded to our call for their perspectives on the future of design and technology education. Without the community’s full engagement this starting point for further discourse would not be possible, hence the support and encouragement received from the community has been very much appreciated.  Dr Dawne Irving-Bell, belld@edgehill.ac.uk @belld17Matt McLain, M.N.McLain@ljmu.ac.uk @The_DT_GeekDavid Wooff, David.Wooff@sunderland.ac.uk @DesTech2013PATT37University of Malta3rd-6th June 2019Thank you for listeningQuestions? 

Re-designing Design and Technology Education: A living literature review of stakeholder perspectives:PATT37 Conference Presentation

https://research.edgehill.ac.uk/ws/files/37934075/PATT37_Presentation_Paper51_.pdf

Re-designing Design and Technology Education: A living literature review of stakeholder perspectives:PATT37 Conference Presentation

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Edge Hill University Research Information Repository