Much has been written about the inherent link between D&T and Science, particularly since the introduction of the STEM Programme. This paper reports on findings from other research studies, and describes experiences of staff difficulties and misunderstandings between subject areas. It notes ‘gaps’ in the curriculum between subjects.

The study reported on in this paper sought to address these gaps through the implementation of a curriculum development project. Pupils learn scientific knowledge around heat transfer and complete product analysis activities, prior to designing their own product that requires applying this gained knowledge.

Having trialled the project with two mixed ability Y9 classes, the main outcome was that pupils enjoyed the link between the subjects being made explicit to them. Reinforcing the theory behind heat transfer and linking it to products meant the majority of pupils understood the theory better.

The paper concludes by reflecting on the appropriateness of the resources used, the responses that pupils provided. It considers developments for teachers delivering similar content in the future.

You can submit your papers to the editors for approval and display on the site now.

Send Your Paper »

About IDATER »

Send Your Contribution »

Whilst the online event will begin mid-2012 there will be an event at Loughborough University bringing contributors together later in the year. It will be possible to leave comments on the individual contributions on the IDATER Online site, as well as contributing at the University event.

Comments on the proceedings will be welcome and we look forward to receiving your feedback.  For those who were able to participate, we hope that you found the conference beneficial and interesting, and, if you are looking at the Conference Proceedings, that you find something of value to you.   The current active conference is on ‘Action Research’ and plans are being made for the Electronics and Interaction Design Conference later in the year.  Further information  about  these can be found in the videos and contact details in the postings if you would like to participate.

This presentation aims to look at how practitioners can use action research as a tool to take control of, develop the design and technology curriculum and make it work. I define action research as small scale, usually collaborative, research by practitioners into their own curriculum and practice. It is usually cyclical and designed with an awareness of the advantages, limitations and procedures of such small scale research.

Action research, however, offers far more than simply small scale research within the confines of individual schools. With the right support it can web out in a synergetic manner and build a rigorous understanding of our subject and pedagogy at a national level through the principles of grounded theory as proposed by Glaser and Strauss (1967). Such a „ground-up‟ approach to evidence-based planning can have many benefits beyond the immediately obvious. Practitioners will realise the flexibility they have to explore; they will collaborate more; learn from each other; value each other more; morale should rise and, of course, pupil learning experiences should be more positive. The presentation will firstly consider the national (UK) context of design and
technology education and teachers‟ reaction to it. I call for support for a far stronger school based research culture designed to web out and feed upwards. I outline a typical action research project trajectory and consider possible specific methodologies including how some of the main limitations of action research can be managed. Finally I look at the importance of publishing via professional and academic journals, such as the D&T Association journals, plus web based econferences such as IDATER on-line. If this is done more effectively the webbing of information and discussion acts to build theory, improve practice and can, ultimately, influence national policy.

The objectives of the paper are to support the conduct of action research by teachers-as-researchers and, thereby, contribute towards the development of (1) design educational practice and (2) the ‘ideas cultures’ inhabited by teachers. The emergence of conceptual distinctions relating to design education over the past 25-30 years is
indicated. These are seen as signs of significant paradigmatic shift and of a nascent language of discourse. The Design field is distinguished; attention is drawn to the status of cognitive modelling; to an academic framework that might be helpful in developing a knowledge base in Design; and to differing approaches to research inquiry. The nature, and particular appropriateness to practitioners, of action research is explored. Some ‘big’ topics – not always seen as having immediate relevance to everyday pedagogy – are then introduced and considered. These, were they better appreciated, are seen as being potentially beneficial to the ‘ideas culture’ and the pedagogic quality of the design educational community.

This paper is part of a larger study that aims to improve our understanding on how children make decisions while working with design and technology activities. This paper discusses the research methodology employed in the study. The survey was conducted through an action research approach and the paper explains and justifies the reasons why such an approach is appropriate for research in design and technology education, and particularly within the Cypriot educational system.

Introduction

The study attempts to explore how design and technology teachers in Cyprus support decision-making skills in their teaching, the opportunities that are included in the Cypriot curriculum and books, and what strategies children follow in order to take their design decisions in practice. Although the emphasis of the main study is on children’s decision-making strategies, the teachers’ role and the impact of the Cypriot national curriculum is also examined. The focus of the study is to understand the existing practice that is used in Cypriot Gymnasia (which corresponds to KS3  in UK) on the issue of decision-making. A graphical form of the framework of the study based on the literature review and the research questions is presented.

I think it would be fair to say that I come here today as a passionate advocate of Action Research. It has provided me with the means whereby, over the years, I have researched and developed my practice as a teacher, first in inner city primary schools and, more recently, in higher education.

My own very positive experiences of engaging in action research as a way of developing my own teaching led me, in turn, to explore ways of supporting students in using an action research approach to their own professional development (e.g. Green 1997). Over the years, this involvement has developed along two distinct routes.

In the initial teacher education course for primary students we have developed a final year module where students use an action research approach to developing some aspect of their practice. They undertake this in the term after final teaching practice, when they are free from the anxieties of assessment, and go back the same classroom in order to develop an aspect of their practice which they regarded as ‘problematic’ during that final teaching practice.

In addition, I have spent several years teaching the dissertation modules of the part-time, In-Service ‘M.A. in Action Research’ which has been taken by practising teachers in primary and secondary schools as well as lecturers in further and higher education. Again, the focus is on the development of personal practice whether in a classroom context or in a staff development role.

This Keynote Address could perhaps have been titled:

“What kind of research is appropriate to the study of education through Design and Technology?”

or even:

“What should be the priorities of an International Design and Technology Educational Research and Curriculum Development Conference?”

Strictly speaking, I should be better able to answer such questions at the end of this Conference rather than at the beginning. Nevertheless, there is value in setting out principles in advance of the event. Over the next two and a half days, I am hoping that we will all hear answers, or tentative answers, to questions about Education and Design and Technology posed at all levels of generality and particularity. In order for each of us to put such contributions into context, it may be useful to remind ourselves where we have got, so far, in our understanding of the four key ideas in the title of the conference, that is: Design, Technology, Educational Research and Curriculum Development. In particular, we need to remember how the meanings of these terms are qualified when they are used in combination. This will help us to appreciate the continuing development of Design and Technology, not only as a curriculum subject, with an extensive body of practical knowledge to be taught and examined within specific timetable slots, but also as an educational discipline with theoretical underpinnings having implications for the whole curriculum.