Despite numerous and painful setbacks in his crusade to alert the country to the importance of Design and Technology education he has refused to surrender. Keep going James!

This article in the Telegraph provides a wonderfully articulate argument to government. Better still James Dyson has been asked to advise the government on these areas:

Click to download the full PDF here

We need more advocates like the James Dyson and his  foundation. Website here

Design and Technology started well before 1989. I and others wrote a Mode 2 examination in the 1970s despite the awarding body saying it was not mainstream and there would be no demand. Before that the Schools Council produced a booklet called “Problem solving through the use of materials”.  The subject became compulsory in 1989 but has suffered from a shortage of appropriate teachers, a rigid examination system which was too tightly controlled by government and a reluctance to challenge both teachers and students. There is really excellent world class work out there in schools but it is achieved by working around the constraints.

In the 70s and 80s the subject advanced dramatically because teachers were in control (see Assessing Technology by Richard Kimbell OU Press) supported by Mike Ive, HMI, father of Jonathon Ive, the Apple chief designer. Mike Ive is most proud of introducing D&T into primary schools but he also fought hard to spare the subject from the dead hand of political interference and inappropriate examination frameworks. I was a student of Mike Ive – he was very young too!

If you’re reading this James a few suggestions:

• Ask for D&T to be taken out of the current assessment structure. Free it from the dead hand of conformity and political interference.
• Focus on D&T competencies i.e. energy, persistence, problem solving, materials, making/organisational skills, enterprise, collaboration, creative thinking and assess achievement of those attributes not prescribed lumps of knowledge. Allow any material or technology to be used and do not prescribe the approach.
• Assess holistically via peer, public  and teacher/facilitator judgement. Keep it simple, I have a model for this too. A failed product should not necessarily mean a failed assessment – that’s life. Technology allows us to compare and index standards globally
• Use technology to support all involved – collaborative working and assessment. The model’s here.
• Involve real clients and real experts in the process. An example from something I began earlier.
• Mingle students with real designers and technologists – Trevor Baylis visited and inspired two of my able students to start design and technology careers.

Be bold, take a risk – we desperately need that!

.

“Although there are other backbenchers with scientific backgrounds, Dr Huppert is the sole MP to have practised past PhD level, specialising most recently on DNA structures.

He said it was a real concern that the Commons – which is full of career politicians, lawyers and economists – lacked scientific expertise. Dr Huppert, a fellow of Clare College, Cambridge, argued that all MPs should be obliged to take a short science training course, covering areas such as how research is conducted, numeracy and the use of statistics.” The Independent

Julian Huppert

We have a Civil Service, Judiciary and Legislature which, to use fashionably blunt Prime Minister speak, are technically ignorant. Very few and I stress, very few, have a STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering Maths) background.

If an unqualified electrician carries out electrical installation work they can be awarded a prison sentence. Some have been, even though no injuries resulted. Yet key decisions for our country are often taken by people who are ill equipped to understand the subject matter and its significance. Our history is peppered with bad political decisions on science and technology – are we surprised? We are famous both  for our creative genius and sadly,  for allowing others to reap the profit from it.

If this all seems like a rant please read on.

In the last ten years or so I was privileged to attend a number of Parliamentary Science and Technology Committee meetings in the Commons and in Portcullis House. One of those centred on the crisis over expert evidence in court cases. Helena Kennedy was the main speaker. The case of Roy Meadows was discussed in some detail.  I found the discussion chilling. Roy Meadows had provided and opinion based on a flawed understanding of statistics – an area in which he did not have expertise.  The error he made was not noticed by the defence even though it was fundamental. Those who attended the meeting included lawyers and politicians. They admitted and expressed concern about the narrow background not only of lawyers but also of the legislature.

Dr Ian Gibson M.P. for Norwich, prior to the last election, had an academic research background similar Dr Julian Huppert.  Ian Gibson also had similar views to Julian Huppert and gave the 2006 Owers Lecture.

Julian Huppert we desperately need your expertise and energy to bring about change. We hear many MPs demand that Shakespeare and the Kings and Queens of England should be taught in schools but few who fight the corner for STEM subjects.

You are right Julian, MPs who demand that doctors, teachers and electricians are properly qualified should set an example by  passing a competency test themselves. Their SATs results should be also be published for the electorate to see!

Kate Sim explained her work with robotics as part school teacher and part Open University lecturer. The audience were grateful that there are still teachers like Kate who have found their way around the many constraints of finance, curriculum and formulaic testing to inspire students to world class achievements.

A question asked of Stephen Heppell when he proposed a computer science course; “Where will we get the teachers?” “Exactly”, was his reply.

.

.The discussion started with low spirits both Kate and Stephen highlighted what many of the audience knew, that computing and technology education needed for the 21^st century is damaged and under threat. However the fact that the system is under so much strain, and predicted by Stephen to eventually collapse, offers hope as growing pockets of innovation develop here and across the world. At a time when we are constantly reminded about the threat from terrorists, financial collapse and climate change it appears we should be grateful that there are subversives in education. They, Stephen argued, offered hope and pragmatic solutions.

The key points were focused around the inappropriate curriculum, testing and ‘quality control’ and attitudes communicated to girls in a variety of ways. Why is Lego in the boys’ section of ToysRUs? All of this restrictive mixture was considered to be compounded by a risk-averse culture.

Illustrations were given of ICT examination courses which supplant practice with theory and do not reflect the real world of computer technologies.

.

Ian Sillet raised the problem of risk aversion  in education

Ian Sillet raised the issue of risk aversion which was taken-up by Richard Green directorof DATA. Richard described how, very recently, a keen and capable young female teacher had carefully developed an interest and capability in systems and control in her school and approached her headteacher to ask if she could offer it at GCSE level. The headteacher refused on the grounds that it was a ‘difficult’ exam and risked the schools’ league table status.

.

Richard Green of DATA described how ‘Systems and Control’ was considered difficult and threatened league table positions

Kate Sim had earlier explained how she had only been able to finance her robotics activities by exploiting short term funding for the gifted and talented.

The debate continues but hopefully not too long before the country awakens to threat highlighted by Stan Owers and realises that to combat terrorism, global warming and computer dependent financial systems requires the practical, creative and problem solving skills of engineers.

Tweet Mobile pic

The Owers Lecture is sponsored by Oracle

Derek Wenmoth points out an Albatross, the bird of good omen, and I share his frustration at being becalmed.

He says, “But consider the following…

• a global shortage of skilled science and maths teachers means that we’ll never be able to staff all of our schools with specialists in these areas (and other areas besides!)”

We are on a planet which is mostly covered in water but still we cry drought when we are in the wrong place.

Derek raises the opportunity that technology provides to alleviate the drought.  I just wanted to expand on the HOW.

In the ‘Connate Model’ (combined in one) outlined in my blog post here I describe how the model is centred on the examination system. That is for two key reasons. Most teachers are involved in some external assessment process with their students. Insisting that communication, including some assessments,  happens in one place ensures that teachers have a purpose and are regularly engaged in the online community. It also serves another purpose it allows teachers to identify and communicate with others who can support students in specific ways. That same platform could be used by teachers and students for sharing expertise.

Computer education, for example, in the UK is in a dire state. In 2005 there were 7242 students sitting (815 were female) A Level computing exams. By 2014 that is predicted to drop to around 1500 and all of them will be male, based on figures released by the Joint Council for Qualifications (JCQ).

It ‘s wasteful to have one teacher to one school with the skills necessary to alleviate the drought when the thirsty are scattered around them. Even more unforgivable is the fact that other experts working day to day in that area of knowledge are only a mouse click away.

All this is obvious when pointed out but that still needs a mechanism for it to happen. It needs that utility, a common national or international grid which all can self manage and exploit.  If the grid is to endure it must be like the internet and have many interconnected nodes ensuring that the network remains robust even when one node fails. Many government initiatives along these lines are innately fragile because they are short term and localised. We need boldness and soon.

One final point, Derek raises the topic of Higher Education. The ‘Connate Model’ suggests participants could be rewarded with qualifications which recognise their expertise and the extent to which they share it. HE has to change too. Most degrees are instruments of selfish endeavour they reward students for what only they know not for how well they share and exploit that understanding. Radical change in H.E. regulations, systems, assessment and attitudes is needed.

Teachers often receive little or no subsequent training which, given the pace at which IT develops, means their knowledge soon becomes outdated. And because there is no mechanism by which teachers can continuously learn and communicate with one another, it is hard – except perhaps within the largest schools – for teachers to share experience and ideas.

THE FUTURE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY IN UK SCHOOLS,
McKinsey & Company, March 1997

Little has changed. We still have a CPD regime which employs an ineffective and wasteful model. A model which many research projects continually remind us fails to embed innovations. As society in general embraces technology to achieve change, education is not, despite millions of pounds of investment.

IDeA the Improvement and Development Agency for local government has established a secure  online communications system which offers a range of features to enable users to form and communicate with their own groups. If only this were to be employed by education professionals it would empower them to lead their own development. A tool to change the approach from top down to bottom up – the way research tells us it needs to be.

Yes, there are tools like this being used, but only by a few, and with only short term funding. They are fragile and the informal ones, using existing free communication tools, are really not the answer when confidential discussions may be stored on servers anywhere in the world. Nor is there a coherent structure for the  various elements which can be readily recognised and understood by users.

It needs the vision of a government to commit to the adoption of a UTILITY for the whole education service as suggested by the 1997 McKinsey report.

If it can be done for local government it can be done for education.

That alone will not kick start the activity. We need to move to ensure that all teachers use the tools not by coersion but because it improves their working lives and reduces burdens.

So what stops that happening? There is simply no requirement to use ICT despite all the investment. It is still possible for schools to, largely, duck the issue and continue as before.

How many awarding bodies offer fully online assessment systems?

By shifting assessment procedures online all teachers would have a need to log-on. Link that to the UTILITY and reward teachers for collaborating and then we have a true purpose which will drive the engagement.

“Teachers will not take up attractive sounding ideas, albeit based on extensive research, if these are presented as general principles which leave entirely to them the task of translating them into everyday practice—their classroom lives are too busy and too fragile for this to be
possible for all but an outstanding few. What they need is a variety of living examples of implementation, by teachers with whom they can identify and from whom they can both derive conviction and confidence that they can do better, and see concrete examples of what doing better means in practice.”
Inside the Black Box, Raising Standards Through Classroom Assessment, Paul Black and Dylan Wiliam

The UTILITY could address the need identified in 1997 and enable teachers to collaborate at their convenience and with whom they choose. Fully developed, to include access to academics and government, it would also enable a truly democratic approach to flourish. It would require institutions such as subject assocations and government agencies to adapt as the profession gained direct access to legislators and academics.  Some would still have a role others would be rendered irrelevant.

The 1997  McKinsey report was right, the tools are now available.  Who has the vision to commit?

More background here

There were a number of presentations including one by Steve Dale who has been a key developer of the IDeA knowledge management community. The IDeA KM platform employs a number of web 2 tools but in a secure environment. Crucially it is capable of finding individuals and communities with specific interests. If only that tool was used by the education service! Yes, web 2 tools are being used but they are scattered and fragile because they largely depend on volunteers or short term funding. I fear for an education service that hopes to innovate using such ad hoc arrangements.

Engaging teachers in a collaborative KM tool is essential and I argued that the examination system holds the key to not only ensuring teachers use ICT but it makes interaction unavoidable.

My presentation focused on CPD achieved by teachers collaborating online. I’ll let the PowerPoint available here tell the story. a

Other reports from Sarah Jones and  Richard Millwood

The term ‘killer application’ is perhaps overused but this one deserves the accolade. Core education NZ have created a very powerful tool which allows the whole school to ‘hold a mirror’ up to itself.  Carefully developed over 8 years it is currently being employed in hundreds of New Zealand schools and attracted considerable interest in the UK in the past month. The information it generates, with minimal time input, is displayed in a straightforward and readily understood way. I found it simple to use, yet very powerful, it enables users to identify the key points to address without time consuming interpretation, that’s done for you. I was genuinely impressed, even after allowing for my bias.
Dr Julia Atkin explains how she has employed 20 years of experience in this field to structure this sophisticated evaluation tool EPS2.0

More Details here

The ‘English disease’ was diagnosed by Stan Owers as “A failure to recognise the importance of manufacturing and the creative and intellectual challenge offered by careers in industry”. This year’s Owers’ lecture placed the engineering diploma under the microscope.

The event was far more than a comparison of symptoms. A wide range of experts from Government, education, technology and engineering contributed to debate after listening intently to stimulating and informative presentations by Jamie Tuplin and Pete Williamson followed by an excellent commentary in response from Mick Waters, Director of Curriculum at the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority.

Jamie Tuplin argued that diplomas offered an exciting alternative to A levels. He reported that many of those taking ‘A’ level before embarking on degree courses would have failed the functional skills requirements of the diplomas. “Existing level 3 ‘vocational’ courses have sometimes failed our young people by not supplying them with a full set of functional skills that would allow them to succeed in H.E.”

Pete Williamson added to the positive news by reporting that diplomas were attracting students who would otherwise have been lost to full time education. He lamented continuing misconceptions about diplomas, which, he insisted, are a combination of the academic rigour of GCSE’s or ‘A’ levels combined with the practical learning of a vocational qualification. Applied learning – “the best of both worlds”

Mick Waters asked, “Which English disease?” In his role he sees several, including snobbery surrounding manufacturing and engineering; stereotyping particularly women and engineering; constant references to the previous golden age of education and claims of falling standards over time.

He added that another issue afflicting diplomas was “If it’s new it must be bad”, a continual reaction to innovation in education which is the opposite of that to new engineering products. A view, thankfully, not shared by Oxford and Cambridge universities which have recently announced that they will accept the engineering diploma as an entrance qualification.

The lively discussion which followed identified a range of issues attitudes and approaches to technology, engineering and manufacturing and agreed that in Britain we continue to ‘take the rewards but disparage the means’ in respect to these areas.

English and history teachers could include study of the biographies of famous engineers which would help to highlight the impact they have had in creating the Britain of today.

The audience recognised the diplomas’ innovative features in assessment and curriculum but still felt more needed to be done. Marilyn Leask of Brunel University described engineering and problem solving activities as a ‘performance’ which should be assessed as such. Others supported this by demanding that teachers be trusted to assess the subtleties of ‘performance’ in applied learning. Increased acceptance of mixed media as evidence for assessment was also proposed, particularly, the use of interviews or vivas which would make plagiarism very difficult.

To overcome the misconceptions about engineering and technology Mick Waters suggested schools could have units in shopping centres or manufacturing and design facilities, or that these facilities could be attached to schools. Mick was also disappointed by the lack of engineering & manufacturing facilities in new facilities constructed under the Building Schools of the Future initiative.

Videos and Transcripts Here

Notes:

Jamie Tuplin of Barking and Dagenham local authority began with an oversight of all the diplomas programmes in the Barking and Dagenham local authority. He described a complex network of institutions and agencies working together.

Pete Williamson of the Warren School, Barking and Dagenham, provided a valuable insight into the reality of teaching the engineering diploma.

Mick Waters, Director of Curriculum at the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority responded to the speakers with an insightful exploration of the issues they raised.

Supported by Oracle UK and held at the London Oracle HQ – November 12th 2008

Organised by Core Education UK, this event was the fourth annual Owers Lecture. For more information see www.core-ed.org.uk/tools/

Photo Left to right: Jamie Tuplin, Stan Owers, Mick Waters and Pete Williamson

Core Education UK is offering six sessions at ULearn 08 in Christchurch New Zealand

1,700 educators from New Zealand and further afield descend on Christchurch New Zealand to take part in this massive event over three days from October 7th – 10th 2008.

Core Education UK is represented by Richard Millwood, Sarah Jones and Malcolm Moss and is presenting at five taster sessions:

‘New Theories of Learning in Practice’

‘Creating Reflective Practitioners’

‘Innovation in Assessment’

‘International Collaboration and Enterprise’

‘Patterns for Online ?Community of Inquiry’

and a session to tie it all together:

‘Towards a Connate Approach’

Will they overcome the ‘English disease’ which sees vocational and practical learning as less worthy and improve the status, number and quality of recruits into industry generally?

What can we do to help the engineering diploma overcome our society’s failure to recognise the intellectual and creative challenge demanded by careers in industry?

Dr Stan Owers’ thesis addressed the reasons for previous failure and this lecture series is designed to maintain a focus on the action that should be taken to rectify it. The format includes two short focused presentations by our guest speakers followed with a response by Mick Waters leaving ample time for discussion.

Pete Williamson of the Warren School, Barking and Dagenham, will provide valuable insight into development of the engineering diploma and the challenges of teaching it.

Jamie Tuplin of Barking and Dagenham local authority has oversight of all the diplomas programmes in his authority and is working with the related agencies

Mick Waters, as Director of Curriculum at the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority is charged ‘to develop a modern, world-class curriculum that will inspire and challenge all learners and prepare them for the future’. Mick will respond to the presentations of the guest speakers.

For further background information, please visit www.core-ed.org.uk/tools/lecture-2008.html

If you would like to attend please email enquiries@core-ed.org.uk by Wednesday 17^th September. Attendees will be sent more details nearer the event.

This lecture is supported by Make Your Mark in association with Enterprise Week 2008 www.enterpriseweek.org.uk

Sponsored by, and held at, The Oracle HQ London

]]> http://ideasfarm.net/?feed=rss2&p=35 0