Shaping D&T: Reflections on Evolution vs Revolution

In this reflective episode of Talking D&T, I explore the key themes and insights that emerged from my 26-part series on shaping design and technology education. Drawing from my conversations with educators, researchers, and industry experts throughout 2024, I examine the ongoing debate between evolution versus revolution in D&T education.

One fascinating thread running through many of my discussions was the crucial role of teacher voice in curriculum development. From my conversations with Amanda Mason and Ciaran Ellis about the Redesigning D&T project to discussions with international colleagues about different approaches worldwide, it's clear that teachers must be at the heart of shaping the subject's future.

I examine how the shift from local authority support to multi-academy trusts has transformed teacher collaboration and professional development. This transition raises important questions about how we support and empower D&T teachers to conduct research, share insights, and contribute to the subject's development.

For D&T educators, this episode offers a chance to reflect on the broader conversations shaping our subject. Whether you're teaching in a primary classroom or leading a department, these discussions about curriculum evolution, assessment methods, and the balance between traditional skills and new technologies directly impact your practice.

As I look ahead, I encourage you to consider your role in shaping D&T education. How might you contribute to these ongoing discussions within your own setting? What changes would you like to see in the subject, and how can we work together to achieve them?

I'd love to hear your thoughts on how we can collectively strengthen D&T education while maintaining its core purpose of developing creative, technical, and practical expertise in our learners.

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.

Chapters

• 0:06 Reflections on Design & Technology Education
• 6:57 Challenges and Future of Design Education

Transcript

Alison Hardy: 0:06

you're listening to the talking dnt podcast. I'm dr allison hardy, a writer, researcher and advocate of design and technology education. In each episode I share views, news and opinions about dnt series. After 26 episodes interviewing a wide range of people, this is now it and it's timed quite nicely with the end of the call for evidence for the curriculum and assessment review that's been going on here in England. That was last Friday that that closed.

Alison Hardy: 0:45

I started this series knowing that it was likely with the change of government that there would be a curriculum review of some sort, that there'd been lots of discussions in the previous 12 to 18 months about the nature of design and technology and, as I referred to in the first episode, the report that came out from the Design Council about the future of design education and I was a signatory on that and had some work mentioned in that, which is a real privilege to be part of that group. And from there I invited lots of people who were in that group and other people as the episodes grew to come and contribute and come and talk to me about their thoughts about the shape of design and technology. So it's been really interesting for me to reflect on that series and all of those conversations as I compiled my own response to the call for evidence, which I submitted at five past nine on Friday, when the deadline was midnight, which is kind of probably quite usual for me, but actually it was quite interesting because it meant that I could look at other responses. The Design Council and the Design and Technology Association and the National Society for Education and Art and Design had pulled together a collective response which I added my name to as a signatory, although I didn't fully agree with everything that was in it, but I was able to look at that and other responses. The collaborative work I'd done with higher education reflect on these episodes and also reflect on my own research about the value of design and technology and the deep, deep dive I did into what the literature says about what makes excellent curriculum and teaching, assessment and resourcing in design and technology. That I've done between 2022 and 2023. So I was able to draw on all of that and the many conversations that I have with teachers and colleagues about design and technology that have really led to me shaping my own view, and my view of the subject changes all the time and it has done over this series, but I wanted to reflect on some of the key messages or the key ideas that came out, where people agreed and disagreed. This started out as about a 10 episode thing and has turned into a 26 episode series Quite substantial. So let's just have a think about some of the things and some of the people that I talked to along the way.

Alison Hardy: 3:03

A really recurring theme was about evolution versus revolution of the subject. I'm really of the evolutionary group. I think teachers in the UK are tired, stressed, undervalued and there's a real issue around attrition, retention, recruitment into the subject. So I think we have to be pragmatic and take that interview into perspective when we think about what might be the shape of design and technology. And I am on teacher's side in terms of thinking about how they're supported and how you who are listening are supported. So I feel like they are supports. I'm talking out and sort of being patronizing and I don't mean that at all, but I think that's really important is to think about the people who will teach the subject and it will continue to teach the subject and come into it, not just what the children will experience. So that's part of the reason why I think about evolution versus revolution, and the other thing is is. I think there is a good research base around the subject, that actually the aims and the intent of the subject are articulated in the research. So where would we be starting from if we had an evolution now?

Alison Hardy: 4:19

David Spendlove, who I interviewed really early on in the episode and you know david's got very strong views about we need to rethink and we need a dnt 2.0 and him and I have talked about that several times in the podcast and he's contributed to a book that I did with eddie norman talking about this, this. You know this isn't anything different to hear david's view about something radical. I don't agree. But that's where there is this joy for me of having these discussions. I think David's got some really interesting insights to think about and I think having that breadth I mean David's a great thinker. So I think having those conversations has been really interesting for me and thinking about what it means. David's a big advocate of design thinking and what that is in design and technology which makes it different to other subjects that maybe claim or do use design thinking. So I go back and have a listen to David's challenging view. He always challenges me but it's not where I sit. I think it's about evolution and revolution and revolution and I think what I'm hearing from the curriculum review when I've gone along to events and read publications. I think that's where that's sitting, but who knows, I don't know any more than anybody else.

Alison Hardy: 5:41

Several episodes talked about the importance of teachers shaping curriculum development and I had Amanda Mason and Kieran Ellis on about their experience with the redesigning D&T project and they've done some really exciting work and we're looking forward to publishing some of that in the new year on the podcast maybe on a separate podcast, but also on Archer Exchange to get people thinking about what teachers are saying about the subject. I think the shift in England from local authority support to multi-academy trusts has changed how teachers collaborate and support each other and I think that needs to be reflected in how the subject is shaped and develops. It's really interesting that the research community of the subject in England is greatly depleted with the changes to teacher education and to funding that's available for research. So actually supporting colleagues in multi-academy trusts to do research, with the changes to teacher education and to funding that's available for research, so actually supporting colleagues in multi-academy trusts to do research, to investigate, to reflect on, to try things out and report it and share it, I think is really important. So I think that's one way the subject will continue to be shaped. And again, that's something that I really believe in is enabling teachers to do research on their own practice and then to share it, and so that begins to shape what we all think about design and technology not necessarily that we have to concur with it.

Alison Hardy: 6:57

You've already heard me saying about where I agree and disagree with David Spendlove. I think it's healthy to have those debates and discussions, but if we don't put things out there to debate and discuss, then we just become an echo chamber or things get left unsaid or unchallenged. So I think that's that's something that really came out as well about teacher voice and empowerment. And then something that's close to my heart came out from many of these about what we think is the value and the purpose of the subject. Now I read things sometimes online. I think, oh, I don't think you're talking about the aims of the subject or the aims of the curriculum for design and technology. I think you're talking about its value, how people value it differently, and I've done several episodes talking about my research about the value of D&T and in 2025, I'm going to go back to that research for some events that I'm running to use that as a way that we can help people reflect on what they value about the subject. But I think there are lots of things that we need to talk about about the way the subject needs to move on from making products to considering ethics, sustainability and user needs, and I know much of that came out in people's responses to the curriculum review. But it is that shift.

Alison Hardy: 8:07

Designer technology as I wrote in the edge report about shaping the, the subject and learning from the past has got part of its heritage not all of its heritage in craft and in making. But that's not the absolute core, I believe, of the subject. Yes, we teach children to make and create so they have a physical resolution or a 2D resolution that they see on a screen, but actually at the heart of it to me is around ethics, sustainability, empathy and understanding people, and I think if you read Steve Curl's chapter in the Learn to Teach Design and Technology book, you'll get more of a sense of that and also what Mike Martin writes about values and design and technology. So I think we should be careful about, when we talk about value purpose, that we're not conflating that with the curriculum intent and purpose. I'm just going to take a pause here because my dog has just appeared at the door because it's kind of his tea time, but he'll have to wait. Anyway, back to this.

Alison Hardy: 9:04

I had quite a few people on who were speaking about perspectives from different countries. I talked to Beth about Wales and I talked to Scott about America. I'd hoped to have some other colleagues on, but that kind of didn't happen. But I've got some stuff online that I'll share in the show notes about where you can read about what's happening in Ireland, for example, and South Africa. So I think that it's useful to have those insights and these other countries do provide valuable comparisons.

Alison Hardy: 9:34

But there are some similar underlying challenges about resources, around recruitment of teachers, about retaining teachers, and then there are different approaches that work in those different countries that are applicable to what happens in England, but there are others that aren't. And if I reflect on the curriculum from Wales and Scotland, their intention of their whole curriculum is is based on a very different ideology of the. The England curriculum around being knowledge rich, whereas there is more around cross-curricular, around creativity and around skills. So not everything is transferable from one country to another and America. They tend to only teach the subject from elementary, from the age of 11 onwards. There's some in primary school. But what was fascinating there is how some of it's taught in primary schools by librarians, because that's where the equipment goes. But also the funding model there is is much different. I'd encourage you to go back and have a listen to what Scott has to say.

Alison Hardy: 10:40

And then, finally, some of the challenges that we have. So one of them that was a recurring thing which I've already mentioned, is about teacher teacher recruitment, retention and attrition. I think we have a real issue there. I think that needs some research. I'm hoping maybe somebody might want to do some research around this, some deep conversations with teachers who are in or who have left or are considering coming in and at different points in their career, of when they left and why they left. I think resources and funding will continue to be a constraint and I think teachers have that ability to work around that, but they have to work with awarding bodies and curriculum developers to think about well, we don't have that kit. So what works? What works for us that still keeps the intent of design and technology, and then that leads on to this need to balance tradition with new technologies and approaches, which is underpinned by funding, but there are calls that we need to be moving with the times.

Alison Hardy: 11:36

We do have the word technology in the subject's title. Some would argue it shouldn't be in there. Some would argue to have engineering. I still think we need to retain the subject title, but it is in there. Around technology. Do we need to retain the subject title, but it is in there.

Alison Hardy: 11:49

Around technology. Do we have to have new technologies all the time in the classroom? Do we have to have access to them? Does that create inequality? Are we actually, then, challenging some of the basic ideas about sustainability and ethics when we keep replacing kit? Does it lead to challenges where we don't have technicians to help support with that technology? But these are things that we need to challenge. And if we still continue to do so much work that involves using hand tools, how useful is that, particularly if there are some people arguing well, we need to learn how to use hand tools because it's about handling the material. I do understand that, but the game there needs to be a balance and it's about handling the material. I do understand that, but again, there needs to be a balance and it's about coming back to thinking about what the intention of the subject is.

Alison Hardy: 12:35

And then, finally, we did talk about assessment methods and the non-examined assessment which people might refer to as coursework if you're listening internationally about whether they work and whether they're fit for purpose. One of my big arguments is the coursework element in the exams in England take up a huge amount of time when teachers actually don't have too much contact time with teachers. Is that right? Why are we privileging assessment over learning? So there was lots to think about. What do I hope for?

Alison Hardy: 13:08

I hope that the conversations I've had here do give people food for thought. They do debate, they do disagree, they do agree or not, and that they raise those, that they're open about those. There's been some conversations online in different forums. That's been kind of veiled, but I'd rather things were out in the open. Um, and public doesn't mean you have to share all of your views publicly. Maybe I do too often, but I think having those conversations um, and I think that my hope is that this curriculum and assessment review that's happening in England at the moment will continue to be transparent.

Alison Hardy: 13:42

I have a real belief in that, but my hope is that we do consolidate around what the intention of the subject is in terms of its curriculum nature, and that we can then have flexibility. Or teachers can have flexibility based on what they have their schools, their resources, their subject content knowledge that they have, that they can build the subject as they see fit in their location with their young people, with their children that are teaching. And my future hope is also that we continue to pioneer the way in the UK that is so often not done in other parts of the world, where design and technology is taught from primary right through to secondary, which to me underpins its idea that it's part of a general education for all children, that it's not for some, that it is for all, and I think that's another key thing. And then that leads me on to thinking about being for all and about equity. I've written about how do we do race in D&T with colleagues and had other voices involved in writing that chapter.

Alison Hardy: 14:47

I still think this is tokenistic in many areas that we need to do more than having designers of colours, so designers of colour represented on walls and in discussions. I think it is about understanding how design is done in different places and how it's seen and how values emerge, dependent maybe on culture or background or location, and understanding those different cultural views and cultural history actually adds a richness and includes people rather than excludes. And as somebody who is white, I don't think that's necessarily for me to be leading on, but also I don't think I should be relying on my colleagues of colour to take the lead on that, but I do think it calls for more of a, you know, a real interrogation around that. I think we've got so far, but I think there is further that we can go. And again, that was a call in the curriculum and assessment review around protected characteristics of gender, ethnicity and so on, and I think I think we need to have more of these debates and I think it needs to go beyond representation of designers but actually into curriculum, into who's leading the subject, who's teaching the subject and how that's made inclusive rather than exclusive.

Alison Hardy: 16:06

I think there's been some fantastic research internationally around this. Ulrika Sultan has been on the podcast talking about gender in design and technology. You know, from a very, very deeply thought out and research, interrogated position. That is more than let's just do activity that we think are boy friendly or girl friendly, to include them into subject, and I think we have gone beyond that in the subject, but I think there is more to be done in that and I think as a subject we can lead the way in addressing this idea of exclusion and inclusion in the subject, because we are designers by nature and I think having empathy and understanding, coming alongside people, is part of our richness.

Alison Hardy: 16:49

And so that takes me back to that earlier comment about teacher voice and empowerment, about coming alongside teachers, empowering you, who have the control in the classroom. You have the power in the classroom to make the difference, to think about how you're shaping the subject and the consequence of that, and how you have the power in the classroom to make the difference, to think about how you're shaping the subject and the consequence of that, and how you have the agency to do that with the capacity you have. And bless you the energy you have, because it's hard, and I really do say to teachers you know you really are at the cutting edge and you do lead on this, so having your voice in thinking about how we shape design and technology is absolutely essential. Anyway, thank you very much for listening. I kind of feel you feel I've um sort of touched some deep thoughts there about what I think about the subject. Um, I've shared and I've you know. This isn't about me saying what we should be doing, but I'm sharing about some of the thoughts that people have shared. It's been a real privilege to talk to so many people. Next week's episode is a final one in Pat 40 series, which I did much earlier in the year. It's one that I recorded with Simone earlier in the year and I'm really excited to post that, and then there'll be one more episode before the end of 2024. Thanks for listening.

Alison Hardy: 18:06

I'm Dr Alison Hardy and you've been listening to the Talking D&T podcast. If you enjoyed the podcast, then do subscribe on whatever platform you use, and do consider leaving a review, as it does help others find the podcast. I do the podcast because I want to support the D&T community in developing their practice, so please do share the podcast with your D&T community community. If you want to respond to something I've talked about or have an idea for a future episode, then either leave me a voice memo via speakpipe or drop me an email. You can find details about me, the podcast and how to connect with me on my website, drallisonhardycom. Also, if you want to support the podcast financially, you can become a patron. Links to speakpipePipe Patreon and my website are in the show notes. Thanks for listening.