Designing the Best: A Review of Effective Teaching and Learning of Design and Technology

  • Valerie Wilson
  • Marlene Harris
Article

Abstract

The role of Design and Technology (D & T) in schools in England is changing. As from September 2002, D & T will no longer be compulsory from age 14, but students will have a statutory entitlement to opt to study the subject. These proposed changes have renewed policy-makers' interest in a subject, which was first introduced into the National Curriculum in England and Wales in 1990. It provides the immediate context for a review of the literature published in English on Design and Technology commissioned by the Department of Education and Skills. Four databases were searched: the British Education Index (BEI), Educational Resources Information Centre (ERIC), PsychInfo, and Current Educational Research in the UK (CERUK). This article draws from the findings of the review and focuses in particular on two questions: How can D & T be delivered effectively and what enhances learning and teaching in D & T? The reviewers conclude that the factors which enhance effective learning and teaching of D & T include: adequate equipment and accommodation, appropriate curriculum content and teaching methods, up-to-date continuing professional development for teaching and management support to allow teachers to implement innovative practices. In addition, they suggest a research agenda, which could inform future research in D & T.

D & T effective teaching and learning England schools 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Anning, A.: 1994, ‘Dilemmas and Opportunities of a New Curriculum: Design and Technology with Young Children', International Journal of Technology and Design Education 4(2), 155–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atkinson, S.: 1998, ‘Cognitive Style in the Context of Design and Technology Project Work', Educational Psychology 18(2), 183–194.Google Scholar
  3. Atkinson, S.: 2000, ‘Does the Need for High Levels of Performance Curtail the Development of Creativity in Design and Technology Project Work?', International Journal of Technology and Design Education 10(3), 255–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barlex, D.: 2001a, ‘New Media in Technology Education: Using a Web-site to Support a Community of Practice', in I. Mottier & M. de Vries (eds.), New Media in Technology Education: Proceedings: [Pupils' Attitudes Towards Technology] PATT-11 Conference, March 8–13, 2001, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, 25–30, <http://www.iteawww.org/PATT11/PATT11.pdf>.Google Scholar
  5. Barlex, D.: 2001b, ‘Young Foresight', in I. Mottier & M. de Vries (eds.), New Media in Technology Education: Proceedings: [Pupils' Attitudes Towards Technology] PATT-11 Conference, March 8–13, 2001, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, 31–34, <http://www.iteawww.org/PATT11/PATT11.pdf>.Google Scholar
  6. Barlex, D. & Welch, M.: 2001, ‘Educational Research and Curriculum Development: The Case for Synegy', Journal of Design and Technology Education 6(1), 29–39.Google Scholar
  7. Benson, C. & Johnsey, R.: 1998, ‘The Long-term Effects on Schools and Staff of In-service Courses for Teachers of Primary Design and Technology', The Journal of Design and Technology Education 3(1), 16–25.Google Scholar
  8. Benson & Raat: 1995Google Scholar
  9. Breckon, A.: 2001, ‘DfEE/DATA CAD/CAM in Schools Initiative: The Designing and Making Revolution in Design and Technology Education', The Journal of Design and Technology Education 6(2), 161–166.Google Scholar
  10. Breckon, A.: 2000, ‘Marconi Electronics and Communications Technology (ECT) Project in Secondary Schools', The Journal of Design and Technology Education 5(3), 234–238.Google Scholar
  11. Burgess, S.: 1998, ‘Effects of Group Composition on Individual Learning/Performance in Design and Technology: A Case Study Approach', The Journal of Design and Technology Education 3(3), 201–208.Google Scholar
  12. Davidson, M., Lunn, S. & Murphy, P.: 2002, ‘DATA International Research Conference', 51–55, DATA, Wellesbourne.Google Scholar
  13. Davies, L.: 2000, ‘Design and Technology's Contribution to the Development of the Use of Language, Numeracy, ICT, Key Skills, Creativity and Innovation and Thinking Skills', The Journal of Design and Technology Education 5(2), 166–170.Google Scholar
  14. Davies, T.: 2000, ‘Confidence! Its Role in the Creative Teaching and Learning of Design and Technology', Journal of Technology Education 12(1), 18–31.Google Scholar
  15. Davies, L., Jupe, J. & Perry, D.: 2000, ‘No Bits-No Nothing', The Journal of Design and Technology Education 5(1), 52–54.Google Scholar
  16. De Vries, M.: 1996, ‘Technology Education: Beyond the "Technology is Applied Science" Paradigm', Journal of Technology Education 8(1), 7–15.Google Scholar
  17. Denton, H.: 1994, ‘Simulating Design in the World of Industry and Commerce: Observations from a Series of Case Studies in the United Kingdom', Journal of Technology Education 6(1), 16–31.Google Scholar
  18. Department for Education & Skills (DfES): 2002, 14–19: Extending Opportunities, Raising Standards. Green Paper (Feb 2002), DfES, London.Google Scholar
  19. Department of Education and Science (DES)/Welsh Office: 1988, National Curriculum Design and Technology Working Group: Interim Report. [The Parkes Report.] HMSO, London.Google Scholar
  20. Graham: 1993Google Scholar
  21. Harding, J.: 1997, ‘Gender and Design and Technology Education', The Journal of Design and Technology Education 2(1), 20–26.Google Scholar
  22. Hargreaves, D.: 1998, Creative Professionalism: The Role of Teachers in the Knowledge Society, Demas, London.Google Scholar
  23. Harlen, W. & Malcolm, H.: 1999, Setting and Streaming: A Review of the Literature, SCRE, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  24. Harris, M. & Wilson, V.: 2003, Designs on the Curriculum? A Review of the Literature on the Impact of Design and Technology in Schools in England, DfES, London. (WEB ADDRESS)Google Scholar
  25. Hennessy, S. & Murphy, P.: 1999, ‘The Potential for Collaborative Problem Solving in Design and Technology', International Journal of Technology and Design 9(1), 1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hennessy, S. & McCormick, R.: 1994, ‘The General Problem-solving Process in Teaching Education: Myth or Reality?’ in F. Banks (ed.), Teaching Technology, Routledge/Open University Press, London.Google Scholar
  27. Huber & Eppler: 1990Google Scholar
  28. Johnsey, R.: 1995, ‘The Design Process: Does It Exist: A Critical Review of the Published Models for the Design Process in England and Wales', The International Journal of Technology and Design Education 5(3), 199–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Johnsey, R.: 1997, ‘Improving Children's Performance in the Procedures of Design and Technology', The Journal of Design and Technology Education 2(3), 201–207.Google Scholar
  30. Johnsey, R.: 1998, Exploring Primary Design and Technology, Cassell, London.Google Scholar
  31. Kimbell, R.: 1994, ‘Progression in Learning and the Assessment of Children's Attainments in Technology', International Journal of Technology and Design Education 4(1), 66–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kimbell, R.: 1996, ‘The Role of the State in your Classroom', The Journal of Design and Technology Education 1(2), 99–100.Google Scholar
  33. Kimble, R.: 1997Google Scholar
  34. Kimbell, R.: 2000, ‘Creativity in Crisis', The Journal of Design and Technology Education 5(3), 206–211.Google Scholar
  35. Kimbell, R. & Perry, D.: 2001, Design and Technology in a Knowledge Economy, Engineering Council, London.Google Scholar
  36. Kimbell, R., Stables, K. & Green, R.: 1996, Understanding Practice in Design and Technology: Developing Science and Technology Education, Open University, Buckingham.Google Scholar
  37. Lee, J. & Todd, R.: 2001, ‘Developing Outcomes within the CAD/CAM in Schools Initiative: A Rapid Prototyping Project in Schools', The Journal of Design and Technology Education 6(3), 262–171.Google Scholar
  38. Levinson, R., Murphy, P. & McCormick, R.: 1997, ‘Science and Technology Concepts in a Design and Technology Project: A Pilot Study', Research in Science and Technological Education 15(2), 235–255, <http://www.iteawww.org/PATT9.pdf>.Google Scholar
  39. Mayo, S.: 1993, ‘Myth in Design', International Journal of Design Education 3(1), 41–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. McBrien, R.: 1996, ‘Using a Published Scheme for Key Stage 3 Design and Technology', The Journal of Design and Technology Education 1(1), 74–77.Google Scholar
  41. McCormick, R. & Davidson, M.: 1996, ‘Problem Solving and the Tyranny of Product Outcomes', Journal of Design and Technology Education 1(3), 230–241.Google Scholar
  42. McNair, V., Dallat, J. & Clarke, R.: 2000, ‘Effective Teaching: Questioning Teachers' Interactions with Pupils in Technology and Design', in E. Norman & P. Roberts (eds.), IDATER 2000: The International Conference on Design and Technology Educational Research and Curriculum Development, Design and Technology, Loughborough University, Loughborough, 128–133.Google Scholar
  43. Murphy, P. & Hennessy, S.: 2001, ‘Realising the Potential-And Lost Opportunities for Peer Collaboration in a D & T Setting', International Journal of Technology and Design Education 11(3), 203–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Norman, E. & Roberts, P.: 1992, The Nature of Learning and Progression in Design and Technology', In J. Smith (ed.), IDATER 92: The International Conference on Design and Technology Educational Research and Curriculum Development, Loughborough University, 9–14.Google Scholar
  45. Office for Standards in Education (OfSTED): 2001, Ofsted Subject Reports 1999/00. Primary Design and Technology, Ofsted, London.Google Scholar
  46. Office for Standards in Education (OfSTED): 2002a, Primary Subject Reports 2000/01: Design and Technology, Ofsted, London.Google Scholar
  47. Office for Standards in Education (OfSTED): 2002b, Secondary Subject Reports 2000/01: Design and Technology, Ofsted, London.Google Scholar
  48. Paechter, C.: 1993, ‘What Happens When a School Subject Undergoes a Sudden Change of Status?', Curriculum Studies 1(3), 349–363.Google Scholar
  49. Penfold, J.: 1988, Craft Design and Technology: Past, Present and Future, Trentham Books, Stoke-on-Trent.Google Scholar
  50. Perry, D., Davies, L., Booth, A. & Sage, J.: 1998, ‘The Future for Advanced Level', The Journal of Design and Technology Education 3(2), 154–161.Google Scholar
  51. Ritchie: 1995Google Scholar
  52. Roden, C.: 1995, ‘Young Children's Learning Strategies in Design and Technology', in J. Smith (ed.), IDATER 95: The International Conference on Design and Technology Educational Research and Curriculum Development, Loughborough University, 21–27.Google Scholar
  53. Roden, C.: 1997, ‘Young Children's Problem-solving in Design and Technology: Towards a Taxonomy of Strategies', The Journal of Design and Technology Education 2(1), 14–19.Google Scholar
  54. Roden, C.: 1999, ‘How Children's Problem Solving Strategies Develop at Key Stage 1', The Journal of Design and Technology Education 4(1), 21–27.Google Scholar
  55. Rutland, M. & Pepper, L.: 2000, ‘Information Communication Technology (ICT) in Secondary Design and Technology Teaching: A Study of Partner Schools Linked to a Postgraduate Initial Teacher Education Course', in E. Norman & P. Roberts (eds.), IDATER 2000: The International Conference on Design and Technology Educational Research and Curriculum Development, Loughborough University, 171–179Google Scholar
  56. Shield, G.: 1996, ‘Formative Influences on Technology Education: The Search for an Effective Compromise in Curriculum Innovation', The Journal of Technology Education 8(1), 50–60.Google Scholar
  57. Slavin, R. E.: 1990Google Scholar
  58. Smithers & Robinson: 1992Google Scholar
  59. Spendlove, D.: 2001, ‘Gender Issues: Assessing Boys as Underachievers', The Journal of Design and Technology Education 6(3), 202–206.Google Scholar
  60. Squire, M. & Morris, M.: 1999, ‘Technology Teaching for the 21st Century: The ScanTEK Approach', The Journal of Design and Technology Education 4(2), 161–165.Google Scholar
  61. Stables, K.: 1992aGoogle Scholar
  62. Stables, K.: 1997, ‘Critical Issues to Consider When Introducing Technology Education into the Curriculum of Young Learners', Journal of Technology Education 8(2), 50–65.Google Scholar
  63. Stenhouse, L.: 1975, An Introduction to Curriculum Research and Development, Hinemann, London.Google Scholar
  64. Tufnell, R.: 1997, ‘Designing Multimedia Resources for Design and Technology', The Journal of Design and Technology Education 2(3), 259–263.Google Scholar
  65. Twyford, J. & Jarvinen, E.: 2000, ‖The Influences of Socio-cultural Interaction Upon Children's Thinking and Actions in Prescribed and Open-ended Problem Solving Situations: An Investigation Involving Design and Technology Lessons in English and Finnish Primary Schools', International Journal of Technology and Design Education 10(1), 21–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Valerie Wilson
    • 1
  • Marlene Harris
    • 1
  1. 1.Scottish Council for Research in Education CentreGlasgow UniversityEdinburghU.K.

Personalised recommendations