Abstract
The paper describes aspects of a larger study that explored what did happen as opposed to what should have happened for eight students on a BA Design and Technology course in a college of higher education. To seek the actual rather than the desired, an ethnographic methodology was used to minimise the influence of any prescribed view of design and technology. The data source was interviews, conducted with students over the four years of their course.
Two analytical ‘tools’ emerged during the study and certain facets of the process of analysis are illustrated in the paper through one respondent's use of one of the tools. The outcome of this analysis exemplifies a central outcome of the study, that respondents experience tension between the intention of making change to the made-world through designing and the intention of making change to themselves through learning.
The paper concludes with a critical examination of the methodology and examines this conflict of learners' intentions in the design and technology education literature.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Archer, B.: 1991, ‘The Nature of Research into Design and Design Education’, in J. Smith (ed.), IDATER 91, International Conference on Design and Technology Education and Curriculum Development, University of Loughborough, Loughborough.
Baynes, K.: 1990, ‘Alice in Design and Technology Land’, Design and Technology Teaching 23(1), 38-42.
Baynes, K.: 1994, ‘Personally Speaking...’, Primary Data: Journal of the Design and Technology Association 3, 4.
DES (Department of Education and Science): 1988, D&T Working Group, Interim Report, HMSO, London.
Elliott, J.: 1989, ‘Educational Theory and the Professional Learning of Teachers: An Overview’, Cambridge Journal of Education 19(1), 81-101.
Elmer, R.: 1966, Whose Need?: A Study of Reflective Practice of Eight Students on a BA (Hons) Design and Technology Course, unpublished PhD thesis, University of Reading, UK.
Ely, M.: 1991, Doing Qualitative Research: Circles within Circles, Falmer, Basingstoke.
Hammersley, M. & Atkinson, P.: 1983, Ethnography: Principles in Practice, Tavistock, London.
Johnsey, R.: 1995, ‘The Design Process - Does It Exist?’, International Journal of Technology and Design Education 5, 199-217.
Kelly, A. V., Kimbell, R. A., Patterson, V. J. & Stables, K.: 1987, Design and Technological Activity: A Framework for Assessment, Assessment of Performance Unit/HMSO, London.
Kimbell, R. A., Stables, K., Wheeler, T., Wosniak, A. & Kelly, V.: 1991, The Assessment of Performance in Design and Technology, Assessment of Performance Unit/HMSO, London.
Kimbell, R. A., Stables, K. & Green, R.: 1996, Understanding Practice in Design and Technology, Open University, Milton Keynes.
Layton, D.: 1991, ‘Science Education and Praxis: The Relationship of School Science to Practical Action’, Studies In Science Education 19, 43-79.
Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M.: 1984, Qualitative Data Analysis: A Source Book of New Methods, Sage, Beverley Hills.
Parlett, D. & Hamilton, M.: 1975, ‘Evaluations as Illumination’, in D. Tawney (ed.), Curriculum Evaluation Today: Trends and Implications, Macmillan Education, London.
Schon, D.: 1987, Educating the Reflective Practitioner, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Siedman, I. E.: 1991, Interviewing as Qualitative Research, Teachers College, New York.
Stables, K.: 1993, ‘Who are the Real Clients in School Based Design and Technology Projects?’,in J. Smith (ed.), IDATER 93, International Conference on Design and Technology Education and Curriculum Development, University of Loughborough, Loughborough.
Tesch, R.: 1990, Qualitative Research: Analysis Types and Software Tools, Falmer, London.
Weitzman, E. & Miles, M. B.: 1995, Computer Programs for Qualitative Data Analysis, Sage, California.
Wolcott, H. F.: 1994, Transforming Qualitative Data: Description, Analysis and Interpretation, Sage, London.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Elmer, R. Probing intentions of design and technology students. International Journal of Technology and Design Education 8, 221–240 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008849619254
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008849619254