Planning for Progression: Understanding D&T Capability

Subscriber-only episode

In this episode, I delve deeper into the concept of D&T capability, building on my previous discussion of Kimbell and Stables' work. I explore how different researchers and practitioners have approached this fundamental construct in design and technology education, particularly focusing on its development through carefully planned teaching and learning.

Drawing on works by Doherty, Huxtable and Murray, as well as Gibson, I examine how D&T capability grows through the intentional integration of different types of knowledge - procedural, conceptual and practical - within authentic contexts. One of the fascinating aspects we explore is how this capability isn't something we can directly observe, but rather a construct we've developed specifically for our subject.

I discuss the critical role of systematic planning in developing pupils' D&T capability, emphasising that it's not merely about having engaging projects, but about understanding how each learning experience builds upon previous knowledge and skills. This might particularly interest colleagues grappling with curriculum planning and progression.

For those teaching in schools or involved in D&T education policy, I highlight the importance of creating supportive learning environments that encourage reflective practice - a theme I'll explore further in future episodes when discussing signature pedagogies.

Whether you're teaching in a well-equipped workshop or working with limited resources, these insights can help shape your approach to developing pupils' D&T capability. What strategies are you currently using to build this capability in your classroom? I'd love to hear your thoughts and experiences on how you're planning for progression in your context. 

Book chapter: "Planning for Capability and Progression in Design and Technology" by Doherty, Huxtable and Murray 

Research work: K Gibson, "Technology and technological knowledge: a challenge for school curricula," Teachers and Teaching Volume 14, 2008, pages 3 to 15.

Learning to Teach Design and Technology

Design And Technology Capability (MESH Summary)

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

in my previous episode I talked about d&t capability, primarily drawing on the work of richard kimbell and kay stables, and richard in particular was involved in the development of the original version of the national curriculum, the working party documents, and he spoke about just you know, in that document spoke about design and technology capability and in their work Kay and Richard were assessing design and technology capability and how you know and how not not necessarily how it progresses over time, but you know divine devising different methods of assessing D&T capability. There hasn't been a huge amount of work on what this construct is, d&t capability, and I say it's a construct because it's not something that we can see. It's something that's been created for this subject, d&t capability. It's not used anywhere else. Capabilities are used in other subjects. Geography does quite a lot on capabilities in terms of geo-capabilities. I think they might actually call them geo-capacities, but I've talked with some people involved in that and there is a lot of similarity in this capacity, this capability growing over time.

Alison Hardy: 1:22

So I thought in this episode I'd draw on a couple of other pieces of work that have mentioned D&T capability and what it is that they particularly focus on. The first one from Huxtable no, have I got the right Huxtable, doherty and Murray. That was in a book that's one of the precursors to the Learning to Teach Design and Technology book. There's a chapter called Planning for Capability and Progression in Design and Technology. So it's a very practical book. It's aimed at practicing D&T teachers and particularly new teachers, and what they talk about in particular is this key aspect of developing D&T capabilities has to involve effective planning, so having clear objectives. So if we're thinking about developing it over time, think about a unit of work that that unit work has. You know, this is just good practice clear learning objectives, relevant tasks and appropriate resources and support. But also that that is just one brick element in building this wall, this road, whatever we want to call it as a metaphor of pupils dnt, and they go on to say that it has to be structured. These different bricks in this path, this wall, are deliberately chosen and placed and structured progression ensures that students' learning experiences build on what they've done previously and their previous knowledge and skills. Now, previous and prior doesn't necessarily mean that it was in a previous unit of work. It could have been learned five minutes ago, it could have been learned the last lesson, but it's about it being really clear in terms of the planning that's. That's something that they emphasize over and over again that their text is very practical but is talking about as being very deliberate in our planning for children's progression.

Alison Hardy: 3:31

So, whilst there's a huge amount of stuff out there about a number of different projects that schools can adapt, modify from all sorts of different sources, the expertise and the professionalism of the teachers comes from. If they understand what design and technology capability is, then they can plan effective, authentic learning activities that develop pupils learning and so design technology capability over time. And so this key thing is about planning. All right, so it's not about oh, here's a project, we could do that because we have the resources. It's actually thinking about how is this developing pupils' ability? All right, and it's systematic. Now, like Gibson and Gibson is actually a journal article and it's a much more theoretical paper but both of these emphasise the importance of integrating knowledge within those hands-on projects, those design and make projects not all design and make that's a pedagogy episode that I'm going to come on to but they all agree on the importance of integrating design and technology knowledge procedural, conceptual, with practical application and that practical application is done through an authentic context. Okay, and that has to be done to develop pupils capability. So again it's it's understanding how dnt capability grows over time, drawing on, as I said in the last episode, this growing toolbox of knowledge, and that knowledge might include procedural knowledge, conceptual knowledge, practical knowledge. You know all sorts of different things, but the teachers have planned that over time. This is not about assessment. This is about teaching and pupils learning and their D&T capability growing.

Alison Hardy: 5:40

Another key aspect that aligns with Kimberley and Stable's work that comes from Doherty, huxtable and Murray is about creating a supportive learning environment that facilitates students' reflective practice. And that takes me into thinking that in a future episode, when I'm talking about pedagogy, I'll be reflecting on some of Kay's and Matt McLean's work about signature pedagogies that are used in design and technology that facilitate this reflective practice. So all of this is really key. So there's lots of what I'm saying here is there's lots of building blocks for teachers to think about. It's complex, it's really complex, planning a curriculum.

Alison Hardy: 6:18

So thinking about these different building blocks of knowing what we mean by dint capability, knowing how you're planning to build that over time, how hands-on activity, design and make or whichever type of key overarching approach is used develop their capability over time and what prior knowledge and skills they're drawing on to be able to do that. Because the the context that they're working in, the authentic context, is going to be a complicated, a complex, a wicked problem okay, and they're going to need knowledge and skills to be able to respond to that. And, as usual, at the center of this is that it's hands-on. Now, what that hands-on looks like, whether that's in a design studio, a workshop, a textile space, a food space well, that's up to the resourcing within the school. Or whether it's a, a cam output you know, a cad drawing. That that's up to the school. About thinking about how they're developing those skills as well and that knowledge. But it's all about this, this realisation of what there is that they're doing over time. You know what the children are doing in terms of designing, responding, drawing on their knowledge to produce a resolution, and that allows their dnt capability to develop over time.

Alison Hardy: 7:45

I mean it's it is complex and over the next few weeks we want to talk about some of these different building blocks and what some of the key literature says. So, as your subscribers, you'll get a list of um, this key literature. Um, it's not all publicly available. I can't make it publicly available, but at least you know what the references are. So if you can get access to them, they will help you with your thinking. Anyway, let me know what you're doing around de-integrability, what your thoughts are. I'm always happy to have discussions about this. I've written about this in the Learn to Teach books. I've talked about this before. I think it's a construct that we don't talk about sufficiently in design and technology. I think it's at the very heart and that's what the research says the very heart of what the intent is. The curriculum intent is for design and technology education. Thanks for listening.