Home

Teachers Resources

Schemes Of Work

SmartBoard SOS

Classroom management

I have files I want to share

Problem Setting in Design and Technology - A Personal View

Though there appears to be little research done in this area, there does seem to be two distinctive methods of approach.  Traditionally there is the 'handicraft method' which suggests that learning is skills based, where each child produces an identical artifact and is usually taken through the skills of making that artifact in a step-by-step manner.  The end result is normally a number of practical pieces of work all rigidly assessed on the criteria of how well the child has followed the teacher's plan. This method, as it is relying on very basic learning may be little more than learning by rote. The second method in contrast, would be at the other extreme and is a first principle approach. This is where children are working from the need to solve specific problems perhaps self generating the problem, designing a solution, using craft skills as a means to an end rather than as an end in themselves.

These views are extreme ends of the spectrum. Some may want to argue that the step-by-step approach should only be used initially to acquaint children with tools and processes to give them a better understanding of the possibilities in construction techniques. When designing and facing problems from first principle, the child needs to be literate in constructional techniques and therefore be able to design with constructional literacy.  The danger here of course is that the child may fail to link constructional techniques with first principle problem solving, or may have failed at first principle problem solving because of the lack of constructional literacy.  It does seem that this is a dilemma in terms of introducing DT problem solving.

When visiting schools, it appears that problems are being set in the main, using one of the following techniques which appear to be at opposite ends of the problem setting spectrum:

• Children work step by step from a given plan. The plan in a number of cases - I’m afraid to say - is the teachers own design. Basic constructional skills are taught. Little if any design in this approach.
•  
• First principle. The child is asked to explore and investigate a context where a design and make solution is required, then to generate their own brief. A problem with this approach is that many children have not been given sufficient grounding in designing and do not have an armoury of constructional techniques to aid them in the solving of practical design solutions.

Learning within Design and Technology needs to be staged so that children are given problems to solve at a level with which they can cope. We do not normally find high diving being taught before the person can swim, yet we do tend to find DT problems being set to children who have not been given sufficient experience in designing/making skills to allow them to successfully solve such problems. An intermediate approach, which is evident in some schools, moves the children in a structured framework which is aimed towards the ultimate goal of children being able to work from first principles. This method I would call “core based”. Here the child is given part of a problem already solved, this forms a core, i.e., for younger children, a simple string puppet where the child would be given the basic construction and then asked to design the character by decorating and clothing the puppet. The child may also be asked to work in collaboration with others to write a play including their puppet as a character, and then to produce a theatre in which to stage the play.

Solutions to this type of problem can be complex or simple and can marry into and build upon the level of existing constructional literacy with an assurance of success implicit in a well designed 'core'.  As the child becomes literate in both the designing process and in constructional techniques, the given core can diminish. (See diagram)

Many children appear to enjoy working in the practical DT workshop environment. The “core based” approach encourages this. It can introduce children to making skills in the building of the “core”. Simultaneously, the design process is begun in the problem solving part of the project, this allows children to design using as designer, the armoury of constructional skills learnt from the core.

The problem solving process needs considerable monitoring, particularly for children who are acquiring designing skills, however this “core based” approach allows the teacher to monitor design work within the problem solving aspect of the project while the children are engaged and motivated in the practical skills acquisition stage - the “core”.

                                                   Projects
Core    - as children gain in expertise the core is diminished
Design - as the core diminishes the child's design input increases until the                           children are able to generate their own problem to be solved.

It is the aim of this approach that ultimately the child will have acquired sufficient design and make skills from core based projects to generate their own problems to solve, and thus become autonomous learners, armed with the practical design and make skills to solve, make, test and evaluate the problem they have initiated.

Some examples of “Core Based” projects

Question & Answer Game

Children were asked to build a container (the core) to hold a Question & Answer Game. While the children were working on the skills involved in making the container, they were simultaneously asked to build a game. The game should be played by two children, while on a long journey. The game should fit into the container. When the question is answered correctly, a light comes on. The emphasis of their design problem was to ensure that the child answering did not just get the correct answer by memorising the circuit positions. The circuit must be able to be easily altered to overcome this. The game was also required to have a theme.

With this approach, children can be involved in workshop activities, while also being engaged in design work. The children’s designs can be monitored by the teacher before they are acted upon. At the same time an armoury of constructive skills and constructional design literacy is being built up by the child.
                                              
Boat - A Double Barrel led Core

• To design the hull of a boat - this could be material based                                             
• i.e. To teach plastic skills - vacuum forming - for example, working in sheet metal with the use of developments, was the main constructional skill.
•  
• While working on the hull, the second part of the problem which would need careful task setting and monitoring by the teacher, is for the child to design a means to power the boat.

                                               
Clock Project

The core is now diminishing relying on much more design work from the child. The project was set after the children had built up a range of constructional literacy from previous “core base” projects.

The core for the clock project was the clock mechanism. The children had to find their own context for the clock and to then develop their own design brief, after initial research. The amount of design input and problem definition is much greater with the core input being smaller.
                                               
The First Principal

Photostress Analyser

The Photostress Analyser was a project where the child identified the problem - the need to test shapes for stress. After identifying the problem, the child had to design, make, test and evaluate a successful solution based upon the previous experience gained with earlier “core based” projects.
                                               

John Durrell
UNIVERSITY OF GREENWICH

  Schemes of work

  Contact Us