Tuesday 17 November 2015

Why universities should take notice to what’s happening at GCSE level in schools: the fly, the spider and the bird



Universities have a key role to play in the secondary school curriculum; with recent announcements about the Ebacc, schools feeling the financial pinch and difficulties in teacher training recruitment I think its essential that they engage with what is happening in schools at subject level. These are my views about the perfect storm that design and technology is findings itself in and what the consequences of this might be at HE level. 

Applying to any course students must have some prior experience or qualification. It’s rather like the old lady who swallowed a menagerie to catch a fly:
  • To apply to a design related degree they (usually) must be studying a design-related A level, such as D&T, and have a portfolio to bring to interview (the bird);
  • To study A level D&T they (usually) must have studied GCSE D&T an achieved a C grade or above (the spider);
  • To study GCSE D&T year 9 pupils must have achieved a certain mark/ behaved in a particular way/ shown a clear aptitude for D&T (the fly).

Although in this situation nothing is being swallowed, but a lack of nourishment could lead to extinction or at least being placed on an endangered list.

The fly

The GCSE D&T ‘fly’ is caught in a perfect storm.
  • As was reported in the summer, there has been a dramatic and steady decline in the number of pupils studying D&T at GCSE since 2004. At the time I didn't think the changes to league table measures and the introduction of the Ebacc were a reason for this. but after Nicky Morgan set the target that 90% of pupils will be studying the Ebacc I've changed my mind.
  • D&T is not part of the Ebacc (a measure of success for schools and pupils), along with other creative subjects including art and design, music and drama.
  • School budgets are being cut and D&T is expensive.
  • The national data on pupils’ achievement in D&T, as reported by Diana Choulerton in the summer, reveals that pupils’ achievement in D&T is below of that made in other subjects.
  • Recruitment of trainee D&T teachers has been dire this year.

So with no teachers to teach it, no money to teach it, low achievement rates and it’s not part of the new ‘measuring system’ the situation for the fly is looking rather dire.

The spider

With the potential of less pupils studying D&T at GCSE, there will be fewer pupils who are qualified to study A level D&T.
I’m already picking up from D&T teachers that schools are cutting A level D&T from their curriculum, even though the results from these departments is outstanding. 
Not all applicants will study A levels, some will have BTECs, usually studied at further education (FE) colleges. Recent news items about FE’s funding crisis could impact on this route into HE design and creative courses.

The bird

In 2012/13 8.9% of undergraduates were enrolled on a Creative Arts and Design degree. Within this broad category are courses such as product design, fashion, architecture and computer gaming design, many of which  that do require either A level D&T and/or a portfolio to be brought along to interview.
With no A level D&T or portfolio from the coursework this bird could develop some characteristics akin to a dodo. But then these are the creative subjects and they should have a creative solution.
I think it’s time that universities began to look more closely at the potentially far reaching impact of the Ebacc focus in schools, even though these pupils are more than four years away from entering university.

Possible next steps:
  • Get involved in schools, link u with D&T departments;
  • Advise on D&T curriculum developments;


Wednesday 4 November 2015

D&T in schools: its value to children today and tomorrow


Yesterday’s Ebacc announcement from Nicky Morgan could be seen as another nail in the coffin for design and technology (D&T); on top of the reducing budgets, teacher recruitment crisis and changing exam specifications this means that D&T teachers are having to defend their subject to parents, pupils, head teachers and MPs.

So why is D&T an essential part of a broad and balanced curriculum?

This seems a simple opening question to ask new trainee teachers, but it is less straightforward to answer. Even in official documents and within the D&T community there is disagreement and contention. I’ve come to the conclusion that these different perspectives about the value of D&T are part of the subject’s vibrancy, but we need to harness them into a cohesive structure that defines the value of D&T.

Defending D&T

Over the past two years I’ve interviewed people about why they think D&T is a valuable school subject. In my initial study I talked with D&T teacher trainers (people like me) and trainee D&T teachers, and from these two groups I was able to integrate their values into a list of 22 different values of D&T (in the table below).

The two groups agreed that D&T is a subject that can be of value to an individual child whilst in school and studying D&T, and when they leave school. But they also said that D&T is of value to society.

In the table I’ve split the values into two types and compared which values each group had. The two types are:
·       the value to children whilst they are at school
·       the value to children and society outside (and after) school.

I’m not claiming these values are the definitive values of D&T but they do show the variety of values people have of D&T. It also shows the different values just two groups have of D&T.


Values
D&T teacher educators
Trainees

The value of D&T for children whilst they are at school
  
1
Activity of designing

2
Alternative to academic subjects

3
Designing for future needs and opportunities
4
Examination and questioning of the made world

5
Freedom to take risks and experiment
6
Helps the understanding of human beings' position & existence
7
Identifying problems to be solved

8
It is fun and enjoyable

9
Learn from evaluating personal success and failure
10
Learning happens through using brains and hands together
11
Meaningful activity of solving real problems with real solutions
12
Personal ownership of decisions and actions
13
Provides a practical purpose for other school subjects

14
Using raw materials to make a product

The value of D&T to children (and society) outside school and when they have left school 

15
Become aware of the economic impact of technological developments
16
Considers the ethics of technological development
17
Contributes to the nation's industrial and economic competitiveness

18
Develops the skill of creativity
19
Develops the skills of autonomy and collaboration

20
Empowers society to act to improve the world
21
Learn practical life skills

22
Learning of vocational skills and techniques that open doors to careers
Table 1: Comparing values of D&T teacher educators and trainee teachers by type

Using these values to defend D&T

Steve Keirl (2007) reminds us that ‘D&T teachers periodically find themselves offering some sort of defence of the subject’ (p.550) - my research could help D&T teachers, and its many advocates, celebrate D&T’s strength and defend its contribution to a school’s curriculum.

As D&T implements changes to the curriculum, GCSE and A level, I think it is important that we have continue to debate the value of D&T. This series of values could form part of that discussion and provide a framework for that debate.

In D&T departments each teacher could rate these values in order of importance and compare. Departments could discuss their agreements and disagreements. Further conversations could ask ‘How do pupils know why we think is important?’ ‘How do we show our values of D&T in our lessons? School senior leaders could also join in the discussion, comparing their values with the D&T teachers.

By understanding the values held about D&T by different groups of people, such as parents and senior leaders, we may come to a collective understanding about the many reasons why D&T should be taught in schools.

This series of values does have a limitation; currently it only represents the values of the two groups discussed here. The next version will include the opinions of others including pupils, D&T teachers, school senior leaders and parents.

References

Keirl, S., 2007. The politics of technology curriculum. In: D.Barlex, ed., Design and technology for the next generation. Whitchurch, England: Cliffeco Communications, pp. 60-73

This blog post is a shortened version of an article in Design and Technology Education: An International Journal


Wednesday 28 October 2015

How have D&T departments responded to the new national curriculum?

Can you spare a few moments to complete a questionnaire and maybe a follow up interview?

A group of 6 students at Nottingham Trent University who are studying Childhood Studies have been commissioned by me to undertake some research. I’ve asked them to find out ‘How have D&T departments responded to the new national curriculum?’.

Your responses will help us at NTU prepare our trainee D&T teacher by giving them up to date information on what is happening in schools.

The survey can be found here: http://www.smartsurvey.co.uk/s/6O5OS/

All of your responses will be kept confidential - they won’t even tell me who has replied!

Thanks,

Alison

Wednesday 26 August 2015

Numbers taking GCSE D&T continue to decline - why?

Why has the number of teenagers taking design and technology GCSE dropped?

Alison Hardy, Nottingham Trent University

There has been a worrying decline in recent years in the number of teenagers opting to take design and technology (D&T) at GCSE. While the results of exams in maths, English and science lead the headlines, other, more practical subjects rarely get a mention – even though they are falling towards a crisis.

D&T GCSE entries are down yet again this year. Since 2000, when D&T stopped being a compulsory GCSE subject, there has been a steady decline in the number of pupils achieving a GCSE in the subject.

Once D&T was the most popular optional subject at GCSE, now it is less popular than religious studies, history and geography and with the ascendancy of computing and art and design (which is separate from D&T). Who knows where it might be in 2016?

Some D&T teachers have argued that entry numbers are falling because of the focus on the Ebacc – a performance measure that requires students to take five core GCSE subjects including maths and a science.

But that doesn’t stack up. The downward trend has been happening for more than ten years and other non-Ebacc subjects have not suffered a decline. This year religious studies has nearly 300,000 entries, its highest level since 2002 and music was up by 2.2% to nearly 50,000.

Another possible explanation is how well pupils do in D&T. Diana Choulerton, lead inspector for the subject, reported that typically higher ability pupils make less progress in D&T than most other subjects. As schools are now measured on a pupils' progress in eight subjects, there is a pressure on school leaders to guide pupils to choose GCSE subjects where they will do well – and avoid D&T.

Not just cushion covers and bird boxes

One of the problems it that D&T has an image problem. Is it a practical subject, teaching life skills? A vocational subject? Or is it an academic subject?

It only became known as D&T in 1990 with the introduction of the National Curriculum. Before then it comprised several subjects including cooking, dressmaking, technical drawing, woodwork and metalwork, where children made bird boxes, cushion covers and scones. However, some schools made strides to change this by teaching home economics and craft, design and technology.

My recent research shows there continues to be significant confusion as to the purpose of the subject. Today many parents and adults still see D&T as this practical life-skills subject, and in some schools children are making the same things their parents made at school.

Parents see it as a non-academic subject that doesn’t belong alongside subjects such as science, history, and languages. And this is one the biggest challenges facing D&T: in some schools it hasn’t evolved into a modern subject, fit for the 21st century.

I wrote this article earlier in the week for The Conversation. It only summarises a few of the reasons why the numbers have dropped - it is complex but I think these are the headlines - what do you think?

Does D&T matter?

Both the Royal Academy of Engineers and the Design Council consider D&T to be a vital subject for growth in their industries. The need for those with science, technology, engineering and maths qualifications is regularly in the news and high on the government’s agenda. Companies such as the James Dyson Foundation are trying to influence what is taught in D&T lessons.

Yet the current GCSE is still a disjointed subject made up of different GCSE strands which are described by the materials the pupils use in the lessons: such as food technology, textiles technology, electronic products or resistant materials.

But from 2017, there will be a new D&T GCSE taught in schools. In this reformed “single title” GCSE – which won’t be split up into the different strands – pupils will learn how to use a broader range of materials than they do currently, where they primarily use only their one chosen category of material, such as textiles.

There will also be a brand new food preparation and nutrition GCSE, taught as a life-skill and preparation for a career in the food industry. D&T will be a qualification that provides children with an understanding about how they can bring about change in the world through good design. It will also be an essential qualification for careers and work-related skills, not just life skills.

However, the reduction in school budgets could scupper this attempt to solve the subject’s image problem. D&T is an expensive subject, and the materials, machines and equipment schools need are comparable in cost to science subjects. For a headteacher who is between a rock (league tables) and a hard place (reduced budgets), D&T is an easy target for cuts.

In this context, D&T teachers need to radically rethink what they teach. The new GCSE means that children could be designing products that address modern issues related to health, developing communities and protecting people, using robotics and smart materials. A challenge – but D&T teachers are creative. Hopefully this means we will see an end to the bird box and cushion cover.

David Barlex, educational consultant, and director for design and technology at the Nuffield Foundation, provided advice for this article.

Alison Hardy is Lecturer in Design and Technology Education at Nottingham Trent University

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.