Textiles in D&T: Evolving Views and Vital Insights

Subscriber-only episode

In this episode of Talking D&T, I reflect on my recent conversation with Dawn, a textile specialist making significant contributions to design and technology education. I consider the insights gained from our engaging discussion about Dawn's journey from the textile industry to her current role in shaping D&T curriculum and practice.

I examine Dawn's evolving perspective on textiles within D&T education, noting her shift from advocating for a standalone GCSE qualification to recognising the value of integrating textiles more holistically into the broader D&T curriculum. This prompts me to consider the importance of being open to changing our views as educators and professionals.

Drawing from our chat, I highlight the nuances of textile design and its unique challenges, emphasizing the need for curriculum designers and policymakers to truly understand the materials and processes involved. I share how Dawn's insights reveal potential pitfalls when there's a lack of specialist knowledge in curriculum development.

Throughout my analysis, I return to a crucial question: What's the true aim of D&T education? I consider how we can best develop students' D&T capability and their ability to engage critically with the made world.

For both experienced D&T teachers and those new to the field, this episode offers valuable perspectives. How might we apply these ideas to our own practice and advocacy for the subject? How can we ensure that all aspects of D&T, including textiles, are properly represented and understood in curriculum development?

Let's continue this important dialogue. How have your own views on D&T education evolved over time, and what's sparked those changes?

Acknowledgement:
Some of the supplementary content for this podcast episode was crafted with the assistance of Claude, an AI language model developed by Anthropic. While the core content is based on the actual conversation and my editorial direction, Claude helped in refining and structuring information to best serve listeners. This collaborative approach allows me to provide you with concise, informative, and engaging content to complement each episode.

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

Alison Hardy: 0:06

I've been reflecting on the conversation I had with Dawn, but I really enjoyed that conversation. It's just been so fascinating throughout this series talking to a whole variety of people from different backgrounds. But you know, dawn was a particular standout one for me in terms of her experience and where she'd come from and what she brought to the table around design and technology. But I've known Dawn not too long about a year. It's my colleague, sarah, that works with Dawn more, with Sarah being a textile specialist. And what's been really interesting to see and I think it happens for a lot of us in design and technology is that as she's become more immersed in the world of design and technology and she she admits you know she's not, admits nothing to admit, she acknowledges that you know she's not come from an education background, she's a textiles specialist and boy is she a textile specialist. She's not a design and technology or textiles teacher specialist but she is about in terms of her materials knowledge and her design knowledge and experience around that field of anything related to the use of textiles. And what was interesting that she reflected on in that conversation is how she's moved from a position of the only way forward is a standalone qualification at GCSE for textiles to yeah, that's an ideal, it's a wish, but actually maybe that's not realistic and actually in terms of thinking of the benefit to children and design and technology in a broader sense, that actually what we need is a greater emphasis on textiles or a greater awareness, greater understanding of textiles as a material to design with and to solve problems with and to respond to context with, than it is about having something standalone. And I really liked the way that she openly reflected on this sort of transition of her views over time through conversation and talking with others in the design and technology community. And so I suppose, firstly, it makes me wonder how often do any of us do that? Do we openly acknowledge that our views have developed, moved and that we've reflected from one very firmly held position to one that may be more balanced, more pragmatic, more realistic or in keeping with the whole essence of design and technology, rather than lessons of design and technology, rather than holding on to the things that we see as part of our identity? And I think that comes, if I look back to um Carrie Pachter's papers, around subcultural retreat.

Alison Hardy: 3:16

I think this idea about design and technology teachers and those in the design technology community coming into the subject can be into working the subject with their own experiences, their own identity, but all of which are valid and to be recognized. But we as individuals need to recognize those, acknowledge those and also see where they might be holding us back or fixing us in a position and those of us who are seeing others come in, who come in from a different position, acknowledging that and seeing that as well. And that very much aligns with some of the findings I made in my research around the value of design and technology about how our history excuse me, our experience, our views of education, our cultural experiences, our experience, our views of education, our cultural experiences, our family experience if we were out of education, our experience when we were in schools about design and technology, it all shaped what we valued about the subject and we need to acknowledge that when we come to the table, whether it's immediately, we acknowledge it or later on as we reflect on what we're bringing. So these very pertinent discussions that are happening at the moment in England, particularly around the position and status of the subject and the curriculum review that's going on. So that leads me to my second point that I think Dawn made really well and we had quite a discussion about it in the material that they've handled, responded to moulded, shaped, used as their kind of primary material. So they really understand the very nature of textiles and the subsets within that around fashion, costume design, furniture, upholstery, interior design, all the many, many and that's been really superficial in my discussion or my listing of different specialisms within that. You know there are some sort of specialisms to this overarching area of textiles. That you know there are some sort of specialisms to this overarching area of textiles. So if the people who are writing the specifications or writing the curriculum or making decisions about the resources don't truly have an understanding or appreciation of textiles and what it means to design and develop and make and critique things that are made with using textiles, they use language incorrectly, have an incorrect perception.

Alison Hardy: 6:21

I remember somebody, sarah, relating a story to me of somebody saying well, you can use 2D design. You know 2D design, the name's in the title of the software. I mean, I'm not criticising 2D design, I think it's when I was teaching I felt it was a really good software package appropriate to schools to use, but that's another story. But that's another story. Sarah's saying that we can use 2D design to do drawings of garments.

Alison Hardy: 7:00

Garments fit around a three-dimensional shape the body. So you can't draw that two-dimensionally because you can't show the shaping of the material, because what it is around, textiles it's taking this flexible. To some extent. Different materials are more flexible than others. Compliant is that the right word material that is generally two-dimensional and making it three-dimensional through shaping it in different ways and shaping it in very different ways, and you would say a sheet plastic or a piece of timber, and people writing specifications, curriculum exams, need to understand that and appreciate that. So I think there's really something there to explore as we're thinking about shaping the curriculum, about the language that is used, and I think that comes from both directions and we we can't try and fit square pegs into round holes and maybe use the same language, but there are some similar concepts around it and there is much to learn and I'm going to come back to that.

Alison Hardy: 8:05

I think the foundation of conversations around what's right and what's wrong to be in and what's out of the design and technology curriculum and the specification, the terminology we have to come back to. What's the aim of the curriculum? What's the intent? Where are we trying to lead children? To teach them, to fill them with knowledge and skills. Um, that helps them do what well? It's their dnt capability and I think we all within the dnt community, and particularly design and technology teachers and people who are trying to shape the curriculum, have to have a really clear understanding about what is the purpose, what's the intent, what are children growing in in design and technology? It's design and technology capability and their ability to critique and engage with the made world. That's my view. There we go. Those are my thoughts on Dawn's conversation with me, which I really enjoyed. I hope you did too. If you've got any thoughts, any comments or any feedback, as ever, come back to me. Thanks for listening.