TD&T130 Why its a no from me

This is a follow on from Tuesday's episode with more detail about why I made the suggestions I did to the Design Council event about what can be done to develop and improve D&T in England.

Episode transcript

If you like the podcast, you can always buy me a coffee to say 'thanks!'

Please offer your feedback about the show or ideas for future episodes and topics by connecting with me on Threads @hardy_alison or by emailing me.

If you listen to the podcast on Apple Podcasts, please take a moment to rate and/or review the show.

If you want to support me by becoming a Patron click here. 

If you are not able to support me financially, please consider leaving a review on Apple Podcasts or sharing a link to my work on social media. Thank you!

Transcript

Ep129 Why its a no from me

[00:00:00] So thanks for subscribing to the podcast and this is my sort of expansion on what I was saying about when I went and visited the Design Council meeting to talk about, what was happening in design and technology and what we could do to support and develop the subject. Their main real agenda was around, um, putting together arguments that could be used to lobby the government to support the subject in a more proactive way.

[00:00:25] And there have been a lot of things going on and people may well be aware of the D& T Reimagined. Well, the re imagined D& T from the Design Technology Association and the contribution from Pearson's about suggesting a new curriculum, the work I'm doing with teachers about designing a D& T curriculum for delivery in schools.

[00:00:44] So there's kind of things like that going on. And we also know that, excuse me, the exam boards are also keen to engage in a wider conversation about the content. So that was the sort of the context, um, of what I was presenting. But there were a couple of things that I talked about in the podcast that came out on Tuesday, about, that I wanted to expand on to give some more sort of background information and some maybe other things that people might want to think about a bit further.

[00:01:12] So, I've not been backwards in challenging the idea that we need a new national curriculum. Um, I, I've, I've said quite clearly my position is that I don't think that will happen and I don't think it needs to happen and I don't think this is the right time for it to happen. So let's take, let's take each of those.

[00:01:30] So I, I don't think, I don't think it's what is needed to happen, um, because I think teachers are under a lot of pressure in schools. Um, I, I look at the way schools are judged and the performance measures and that's what school senior leaders understandably look to, to respond to. And if design and technology doesn't have that pressure of expectation from things like Progress 8 at GCSE, which is a, particular performance measure that's used in England, so for those international listeners who are catching up on this, um, that's something that's used that kind of includes D& T potentially, but it's a school's choice.

[00:02:12] So it's external measures that are having an impact on what schools are focusing on and what teachers time is taken up with. So actually, to me, it's more that the performance measures And the expectations and the beliefs about the value of design and technology and the support for teachers that is needed and introducing a new curriculum.

[00:02:33] Some teachers who are experienced, who have got that support of school senior leaders, that time on the timetable in primary. might feel that, yes, we could take on a new curriculum, but many teachers, from what I've heard, and from the research that I've read, and those that I've spoken to, it would be, it would just be too much to take on board.

[00:02:55] So that's, that's one level, a very pragmatic thing, but the thing that comes from my research that says that new curriculum is difficult to implement is around the fact that People value design and technology in different ways. And what I've noticed from my research is that people who operate, as I called it in the last podcast, that macro level, that national level, seem to focus very much on the economic value of the subject.

[00:03:25] You know, what contribution, if somebody does design and technology, what contribution does that have to their own personal income and career development, and also what does it have to the country's? sort of profit and gain their GDP. Unfortunately, we don't have a lot of evidence about that, but that's, that's me kind of digressing.

[00:03:44] So going back to this point, this macro level is about this ideology that a school, what children learn in a school, what qualifications they gain, need to have a direct correlation with, um, future income, future financial benefit for the individual and the country. The problem is we don't, we don't have that evidence.

[00:04:02] But the other thing is, is we have to realize that that ideology is actually quite particular to England, about that's what education is for at government level. So this is where things are looked at, you know, what's, what's the return on the investment and the return on the investment in England in terms of the government is always done by You know, pounds, how much money.

[00:04:25] So, when we are tapping into that mantra of what contribution is the subject making to the economy, we are reiterating that government ideology and that way of measuring. And if we look at other countries, even within, um, the Dominion of the UK, Wales and Scotland don't have those same, uh, judgement measures.

[00:04:47] Although, that may, that may well change, but they don't. And other countries... don't have that judgment measured so far, so much as we do here. And so, to the difficulties, we kind of caught ourselves in a trap of, you know, we're trying to sell the subject because it makes a contribution to the economy, but we don't have any evidence for it.

[00:05:06] So, until we get any evidence for it, well, then we're just on a repeat cycle of almost failure in times to, in trying to lobby. But we do need to understand what it is. that government are looking for in terms of this return on investment. But that's, that's the position that they will come at in designing a curriculum and wanting to support a curriculum and thinking about how it contributes to individuals and societies life chances and, and, and choices, particularly around income.

[00:05:36] And then if you go to the MESO level and you look at a school and you look at a If you're in England, a group of schools, a trust, then you look at what those senior leaders are looking for from a curriculum and from a school subject. Well, there's a very pragmatic, they're looking for good results, they're looking for value for money, and design and technology is an expensive subject, but they're also looking they are insuring their curriculum which is much more driven now at primary is broad and balanced.

[00:06:08] And so where for the school senior leaders does Design and Technology fit in with that? What is it that Design and Technology is offering that the other subjects don't? And I think again one of the The common paths that we go down here is we talk about that design and technology is a subject that is good because it helps other subjects be applied like maths and science.

[00:06:30] Again, we have to think back to the ideology of the government and the ideology of a curriculum and then what Ofsted are coming in and looking at. So again, for people outside England, Ofsted is an arm of the government. They might say a non government arm, but their details are on the government website.

[00:06:47] Um, that's. is a regulatory body around schools that come in and around the education system more broadly. So it's not just around schools at all, but they come in and they make judgments about schools and they publish a report. And those reports have a huge amount of sway. But Ofsted are looking for reports, looking at schools and looking at broad and balanced curriculum.

[00:07:08] So, and they're looking at the ideology around the uniqueness of a school subject. So if we talk about design and technology being there because it supports other subjects and we're not looking at the uniqueness. And a lot of the subject. And we have to think about that uniqueness of the subject when we're trying to talk to people at that MESO, that regional local school level, to try and talk to them about the subject.

[00:07:32] And then if we go down to the classroom and we go to the D& T teacher, A D& T teacher has very different views and values about what design and technology is for, which may slightly align with what. Government and the school is looking for, but because of their history in the subject, they will come with a very different values driven view of, of what the subject's about.

[00:07:56] So if you start to bring in a new curriculum and they tend to originate or be driven by government, they might start and be lobbied out from different directions, but that's where they come from. Any curriculum redesign tends to be a whole curriculum design across all subjects. So why would there be one around design and technology?

[00:08:18] But even if there was or there wasn't, it would have to be sanctioned and approved by the government whether it's a new qualification or a new curriculum. It would have to fit with the ideology of the government, the return on investment, long term careers. It would then have to be taken on board at the school level.

[00:08:34] Why would they want to take on a new qualification or a curriculum? What's it going to offer or make the subject any more unique than it was before? Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. Because we want to think about what are the drivers that are happening there, what school leaders looking for about a subject like design and technology.

[00:08:51] And then if it comes down into the classroom, how are those teachers going to interpret and take that on board? So, so that's one of my reasons why I think a nationally designed curriculum, a nationally designed qualification at this stage, if we don't understand those three levels and what people value about the subject, then we, We're on a kind of a hiding to nothing really.

[00:09:12] We're on a, you know, well, what, what are people, um, going to benefit from, from bringing in this new curriculum. And that's not even including the cost of bringing in a new curriculum or a qualification that a school would have to take on board in terms of releasing staff, training time, and so on. So, so those are kind of like my, my two big things really that came out from me at the design council was.

[00:09:36] Nationally designed curriculum. We've had problems. We've had seven before. Why is a new one going to be any different? I don't think there's the appetite in government at the moment. We're coming up to a general election in the next, I think it's 12 to 18 months. So any seismic change in education isn't going to happen around a school subject.

[00:09:53] I don't think at the moment. And because of the cost that it's incurred with that, that's less likely to happen. And then also because a new curriculum would be sold at this national level in a different way to be sold at school, would need to be sold in a different way to school and to classroom level to bring it on board, to bring it into fruition.

[00:10:14] And, and I don't think there's the appetite. I don't think there's the funds in school. I don't think teachers have the capacity. And I don't mean that teachers aren't capable of, I just mean that in terms of the capacity, in terms of so many different things happening in schools and what schools are having to deal with.

[00:10:30] I mean, I was out with some teachers on Friday. Yeah, they're very fortunate position. They've got new builds. None of them are facing this crisis of the buildings. Um, potentially falling or collapsing because of the quality of the concrete. But if you're a school that is, you've got all that to deal with in your budget.

[00:10:46] So, you know, idealized world. Yeah, maybe some schools could cope with it, but not all. And if the values aren't understood at each level, then we are going to struggle to bring in a new national curriculum. Then one of the other things that was talked about is, is higher education and how higher education doesn't seem to value design and technology.

[00:11:08] Um, at A level, as much as it used to, it's not a requirement on any, if many, courses, um, for degree level. So why is, why is that happening? Well again, we're kind of caught in a loop. So excuse me, there's been a decline in the number of GCSEs taken, you know, number of people studying GCSE D and T. It's kind of well documented.

[00:11:26] Then that has a knock on effect. to the decline in the number of pupils doing A level. We've got an issue with teacher recruitment. And so we've got more and more teachers teaching out of context, out of their subject area. And, um, Claire Vickery, my doctoral student, is doing some research about this around what's it like for teachers in design and technology who are teaching out of their subject area.

[00:11:50] And it is a really big issue. So therefore you don't have the subject knowledge and the expertise. So you've got fewer teachers, you've got more teachers teaching D& T who aren't subject knowledge experts, you've got a recruitment crisis, we're not getting enough D& T teachers in, and Again, some of those coming through don't necessarily have that breadth or depth of knowledge that you need for teaching A level.

[00:12:13] It's an expensive subject at A level. Recruitment might not be great because we've got fewer coming through at GCSE. So there's less children doing it at GCSE, therefore fewer doing it at A level. Therefore, if you are a university with a design department that is under pressure to recruit numbers to your undergraduate and you are putting in there as a requirement, A level design and technology, you're kind of cutting your nose off there because there aren't the numbers coming through to apply for your course, you've got A level D& T.

[00:12:48] So that's why higher education, that's one of the reasons why higher education are not putting A level D& T on as a requirement to be taught for applicants to come with. Another reason is, and this is what I hear um, across the HE sector in design courses, is that And again, the pressures that teachers are under in terms of results and such is that they're finding that the students coming through from A Level Design and Technology haven't had agency in their own work to design, to resolve problems.

[00:13:25] They've become very driven and focused on waiting to be told what to do next. And that happens for all sorts of reasons. We can even look back down to early years of secondary, late primary, as the knock on effect of some of the curriculum design that has that. And so students are coming through that design and technology route, are maybe having some of their designerly skills, their creativity, clipped along the way because of the way GCSEs and A levels are being interpreted.

[00:13:56] with the best will in the world by teachers, by communities. And so that actually becomes a turn off for universities wanting to recruit the best of the best onto their courses. So it's kind of like, it's kind of like two fold. Um, some things are outside of a teacher's control in terms of the numbers coming through, if you've got a knock on effect at GCSE and teacher recruitment.

[00:14:20] But some of the things are within a teacher's control. In terms of what happens in the classroom and what the, what the students are doing in GCSE and A level design and technology. Now, I know I can get a backlash from that and I fully expect a backlash from that. And I think one of the issues around those qualifications is about the content.

[00:14:45] And this is something I didn't talk about in Tuesday's podcast, um, and it is something that exam boards are aware of, is that the amount of content that is within the GCSE is kind of almost so overwhelming that it's very difficult for teachers to give space in the... in the limited timetable time that they have, right, because let's recognize that GCSE D& T probably doesn't have the same amount of time as it used to have, or that it does have with other comparably sized qualifications within a school.

[00:15:20] And so if you're thinking, I've got to get the children through this content, I don't have the time to do that in such a way that they're learning it as part of a contextual design or some creative work, then yes, I think that also then has a knock on effect. And so I do think the GCSE specs are more what needs to be looked at.

[00:15:43] And I've got some thinking about that that I'm going to talk about in a future podcast about how we might be able to think about restructuring the GCSE content and A level content in such a way that still has the rigor. But doesn't have all of those individual segments detailed. So that's some more detail from my podcast from Tuesday.

[00:16:05] Um, I hope you found that a little bit more thought provoking. Um, obviously Tuesdays was kind of like the headline. I gave some more detail, but here I'm now starting to give a little bit more detail about the background to some of my... arguments and the background to some of the reasons why decisions are made that have a knock on effect on the uptake of GCSE and A level design and technology.

[00:16:27] Anyway, that's all for now. Thanks ever so much for subscribing and thanks for taking the time to listen.