Food in the School Curriculum: A Discussion of Alternative Approaches

  • Marion RutlandEmail author
Reference work entry
Part of the Springer International Handbooks of Education book series (SIHE)


This chapter examines the historical background to the teaching of food in England and the current situation with its removal from technology education (D&T) for pupils aged 14–18 years. Specific reference will be made to what children should know, understand, and learn about food and how, and where, it could be taught in schools.

The concept of food technology within D&T is explored as an intellectually challenging subject based on an understanding of the properties of food in order to design and make food products. This approach ensures that pupils develop basic practical cooking skills underpinned by a scientific, technological, and nutritional understanding of food. Increasing concern regarding obesity in England has highlighted cooking as a necessary “life skill,” resulting in the introduction by the government of a new examination for 16 year olds outside D&T focused on learning “cooking skills” and the elimination of food from D&T for pupils aged 14–18 years.

It is suggested that food teaching has an important role in the school curriculum and concludes that, due to its complex and broad nature and varying aims and objectives, a range of professional people and organizations should be involved in deciding how and where the various elements should be taught in schools and the world outside school. The chapter questions the approach of addressing all agendas for food in one curriculum area, if it is to achieve its full potential as a significant and major contributor to our children’s preparation for their life in the twenty-first century. It advocates considering the relevance to the situation currently found in England and exploring an international perspective on food education in the school curriculum.


Food School curriculum Food technology Cooking Life skills Employment 


  1. Arthur, W. B. (2009). The nature of technology. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
  2. Barlex D. (2014). The case for food technology within D&T. Accessed 17 July 2016.
  3. DATA. (2004). Annual survey. Wellesbourne: D&T Association.Google Scholar
  4. Davies, M. (1981). An investigation of home economics teachers’ interest in the contributory areas of the subject. London: Journal of Consumer Studies & Home Economics, 5, 148–155.Google Scholar
  5. DES. (1978). Curriculum 11–16: Home economics. London: DES.Google Scholar
  6. DES. (1985). Home economics from 5–16 curriculum matters 5. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  7. DES. (1987). Craft, design and technology from 5–16. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  8. DES. (1988). National curriculum design and technology working group: Interim report – The Parkes report. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  9. DES. (1990). Technology in the national curriculum. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  10. DfE. (1995). Design and technology in the national curriculum. London: HMS.Google Scholar
  11. DfE. (2013). Design and technology. Programmes of study for key stages 1–3. London: Department for Education.Google Scholar
  12. DfEa. (2014). Reforming GCSE and a level subject content consultation. London: Department for Education.Google Scholar
  13. DfEa. (2015). Food preparation and nutrition GCSE subject content. London: Department of Education.Google Scholar
  14. DfEb. (2014). Cooking and nutrition. Draft GCSE subject content. London: Department for Education.Google Scholar
  15. DfEb. (2015, July). Reformed GCSE and a level subject content consultation. London: Department for Education.Google Scholar
  16. DfEc. (2014). Design and technology draft GCSE subject content. London: Department for Education.Google Scholar
  17. Eggleston, J. (1992). Teaching design and technology. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Government Office for Science. (2007). Foresight, tackling obesities: Future choices – Teacher’s guide (Vol. 4). London: HMSO. file:///F:/Springer%20book/Teacher%20Guide%203%20Foresight%20report.pdf.Google Scholar
  19. Lean, M. (2006). Fox & Cameron’s food science, nutrition & health (7th ed.). London: Hodder Education.Google Scholar
  20. Mathieson, A. (1979). Home economics – The future. The Journal of Consumer Studies and Home Economics, 3, 205–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. McGowan, L., Caraher, M., Raats, M., Lavelle, F., Hollywood, L., McDowell, D., Spence, M., McCloat, A., Monney, E., & Dean, M. (2015). Domestic cooking and food skills: A review. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition. doi: 10.1080/10408398.2015.1072495
  22. Newton, D. (1990). Does the home economist have a place in the national curriculum technology? Design and Technology Teaching, 23(1), 23.Google Scholar
  23. Nuffield Home Economics Project. (1982). London: Hutchinson & Co (Publishers) Ltd. doi:
  24. Ofsted. (2006). Food technology in secondary schools (HMI 2633). London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  25. Ofsted. (2008). Education for a technologically advanced nation design and technology in schools 2004–07 (Reference no. 070224). London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  26. Ofsted. (2011). Meeting technological challenges? Design and technology in schools 2007–10 (Reference no. 100121). London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  27. Owen-Jackson, G., & Rutland, M. (2016). Food in the school curriculum in England: Its development from cookery to cookery. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 21(3), 63–73. Scholar
  28. Penfold, J. (1988). Craft, design and technology: Past, present and future. Stoke-on Trent: Trentham Books.Google Scholar
  29. Rutland, M. (1997). Teaching food technology in secondary schools. London: David Fulton Press.Google Scholar
  30. Rutland, M. (2006). The inclusion of food technology as an aspect of technology education in the English school curriculum. In M. J. de Vries & I. Mottier (Eds.), International handbook of technology education: The state of the art (pp. 273–284). Rotterdam: Sense.Google Scholar
  31. Rutland, M. (2008, July 2–4). Licence to cook: The death knell for food technology? In E. W.L. Norman & D. Spendlove (Eds.), The design and technology association international research conference. Wellesbourne: Design and Technology Association, Loughborough University.Google Scholar
  32. Rutland, M. (2009). An investigation: Is there a need to modernise the secondary school food technology curriculum? Report for the Design and Technology Association. Wellesbourne: Design and Technology Association.Google Scholar
  33. Rutland, M. (2010, July 7–9). Food technology in secondary schools in England: Its place in the education of a technological advanced nation. In E. Norman & D. Spendlove (Eds.), The design and technology association education and international research conference 2010; D&T – Ideas worth sharing (pp. 103–109). Wellesbourne: Design and Technology Association, Keele University.Google Scholar
  34. Rutland, M., & Barlex, D. (2009, June 30–July 2). The politics of food: Inside and outside school. In E. Norman & D. Spendlove (Eds.), The design and technology association international research conference. Wellesbourne: Design and Technology Association, Loughborough University.Google Scholar
  35. Rutland, M., & Owen-Jackson, G. (2015a). Food technology on the school curriculum in England: Is it a curriculum for the twenty-first century? International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 25(4), 467–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rutland, M., & Owen-Jackson, G. (2015b). Preparing to teach food technology. In G. Owen-Jackson (Ed.), Learning to teach design and technology in the secondary school (3rd ed.). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  37. Rutland, M., Barlex, D., & Jepson, M. (2005). Designing in food technology – A curriculum intervention strategy in a one year design & technology postgraduate teacher training course’. In Inspire and educate DATA International Research Conference (pp. 153–160). Sheffield: Sheffield Hallam University.Google Scholar
  38. Turner, A. (2013, December 2–6). The utility of genre theory in technology education: A case study into food technology teaching. In J. Williams & D. Gedera (Eds.), Proceedings of Technology Education for the Future – A Play on Sustainability: 27th Annual Pupils Attitude Toward Technology Conference (pp. 482–490). Christchurch: Southern Cross University.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EducationUniversity of RoehamptonLondonUK

Section editors and affiliations

  • Moshe Barak
    • 1
  1. 1.Ben Gurion University of the NegevBeershebaIsrael

Personalised recommendations