Fostering design-led innovation capabilities

Fostering design-led innovation capabilities Research conference proceedings of the 2018 DATTArc (Vol 10). Editors: Assoc. Professor Kurt Seemann (Convenor) Professor P John Williams (Chair of Review) Preamble The 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc), previously known as TERC (Technology Education Research Conference) was hosted by Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, 5th to 8th December 2018. The proceedings were jointly published by DATTArc and the Centre for Design Innovation, Swinburne University of Technology. Typically, research proceedings are jointly published by the DATTArc Convenors in partnership with the host research university or research institution. This 10th DATTArc invited national and international teachers and teacher educators of Technology Education to come together between the 5th and 8th of December, 2018 in Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. Supporters and Partners • • • • • • • Convenors Associate Professor Kurt Seemann, and Professor P. John Williams, of the Design and Technology Teachers Association Research Conference (DATTArc) Centre for Design Innovation (CDI), Swinburne University of Technology (SUT), Australia. Faculty of Health, Arts and Design (FHAD), Swinburne University of Technology, Australia. Springer Executive Editor for Education Research Mr. Nick Melchior - Australia Design and Technology Teacher’s Association of Australia (DATTA Aus) Design and Technology Teacher’s Association of Victoria (DATTA Vic) Swinburne Senior Secondary College, Principal Michael O'Brien (SSSC) Acknowledgements Many people have contributed their time and skills to assist the 2018 Biennial International DATTA Research Conference at Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Australia, and the compilation of the proceedings. I wish to personally thank and acknowledge the work by Professor P John Williams, (Chair, Academic Review Board and co-convenor), Pro Vice Chancellor Prof. Hung Nguyen who opened the event representing STEM at Swinburne, and the various supporting staff at Swinburne University of Technology, Swinburne Senior Secondary College, Principal Michael O'Brien, and the Design and Technology Teacher’s Association of Australia and Victoria. I want to thank key support staff including Ms. Fatma Mohammed, Mr. Ryan Malcolm, Mr. Alistair Hart and Ms. Jenny Jiang. Artwork was produced by Dr. Michael lo Bianco. The Welcome to Country was delivered by Wurundjeri Land Council Elder, Uncle Dave Wandinwill. Conference Convenor and Chair of Academic Review: • • Associate Professor Kurt Seemann (Convenor, Conference Director), Founding Centre Director (2013-2018), Centre for Design Innovation, Swinburne University of Technology Professor P John William, (Chair, Academic Program and Review; Master of Ceremony) Director, Graduate Research, School of Education, Curtin University Academic Review Committee: • • • • • • • • • • • • • Prof. P. John Williams, Curtin University, Australia (Chair) Prof. David Spendlove, University of Manchester, United Kingdom Prof. Jonas Hallström Universitetslektor Prof. Thomas Ginner Prof. Kay Stables, Goldsmith College Assoc. Prof. Kurt Seemann, Swinburne University of Technology, Australia (Keynote) Assoc. Prof. Claes Klasander Reader. Steve Keirl, Goldsmiths, University of London Dr. Eva Hartell, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden (Keynote) Dr Angela Turner, Southern Cross University, Australia David Ellis, Southern Cross University, Australia John Barlow, Australian Catholic University, Australia Larry Spry, Uni SA and DATTA SA, Australia Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. iii Scholarly Review Policy Conference: 2018 Biennial International Proceedings of the Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference, Melbourne, Australia. 5-8 Dec 2018 (Vol. 10). Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia: DATTArc and Swinburne University of Technology. All full-papers (4000 to 7000 words in length) and extended scholarly-abstracts (1000-1500 words in length) published herewith in the Scholarly Articles section of the proceedings have been double-blind peer reviewed. Authors were required to either revise, or resubmit their work for a second round of review, in response to referees' recommendations. Submissions were rejected where they were off-topic or not compliant with the quality guidelines provided in the submission portal of http://dattarc.org/. All posters, and presentations accompanied by short abstract submissions in the General Presentations section of the proceedings were copyedited but not peer reviewed. Papers are listed in alphabetical order within their above sections by the surname of the lead author. Citation for proceedings Seemann, K., & Williams, P. J. (Eds.). (2018). Fostering applied design led innovation capabilities. Proceedings of the 10th International Biennial Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc) 2018 (Vol. 10). 5th - 8th Dec 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia: DATTArc and Swinburne University of Technology. ISBN-13: 978-0-6480892-3-0 Citation for paper published in proceedings <Surname1, Initial.>, <Surname2, Initial.>, & <Surname3, Initial.> (2018). <Paper title.> In K. Seemann & P. J. Williams (Eds.), Fostering design led innovation capabilities: Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc). 5-8 Dec 2018 (Vol. 10). Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia: DATTArc and Swinburne University of Technology. ISBN-13: 978-0-6480892-3-0. COPYRIGHT © 2018 Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference jointly with Swinburne University of Technology Attributions: Creative Commons: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ C/o Assoc. Professor. K Seemann, DATTArc Convenor and Conference Director | Swinburne University of Technology | Hawthorne | Victoria | 3122 | Australia | tel: +61 3 9214 4382 | [email protected] WEB SITES http://dattarc.org/ https://apo.org.au/node/269186 Past DATTArc Conferences (prior named TERC) NOTE: In 2016 the Technology Education Research Conference (TERC) was renamed the Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTARC) to better reflect international terminology, and the range of disciplines this field of education typically covers in international and Australian curriculum. 2000 2002 2004 2006 Gold Coast (aka TERC)/Griffith University Gold Coast (aka TERC)/Griffith University Gold Coast (aka TERC)/Griffith University Gold Coast (aka TERC)/Griffith University 2012 2014 2016 2018 2008 2010 Gold Coast (aka TERC)/Griffith University Gold Coast (aka TERC)/Griffith University 2020 2022 Gold Coast (aka TERC)/Griffith University Sydney (aka TERC)/Griffith University Adelaide (aka TERC)/Griffith University Melbourne (DATTArc)/Swinburne University of Technology Coffs Harbour (DATTArc)/Southern Cross University TBA, Go to: http://dattarc.org/ Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. iv Leading academic speakers at DATTArc 2018 Chair of the DATTArc Review Board Prof. P John Williams Prof. Williams is Professor of Education and the Director of Graduate Studies in the School of Education at Curtin University in Perth, Western Australia, where he teaches and supervises research students in STEM and technology education. He is on the editorial board of seven professional journals, and has authored or contributed to over 240 publications. He has chaired the paper review process for four prior conferences and was the Master of Ceremony for DATTArc 2018. Welcome address - Swinburne University of Technology Professor Hung Nguyen Professor Hung Nguyen is the Pro Vice-Chancellor for the Faculty of Science, Engineering & Technology at Swinburne University of Technology. With strong research interests in the contribution of design thinking, and design innovation, Prof. Nguyen supports the end to end expertise in biomedical engineering, artificial intelligence, and neuroscience. He has developed several medical devices for diabetes, disability, fatigue, and cardiovascular diseases. International keynote Dr. Eva Hartell of Sweden Dr. Hartell represented that new breed of design led innovation educators emerging in our field. Speaking to the topic of Assuring the future for Design and Technology by embedding classroom formative assessment, Eva will share her research on affordance in assessment. In 2015, her PhD thesis was among the top 10 read in Sweden. She is currently working with the municipality of Haninge and the KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden. She was appointed the title lector by the Swedish National Agency for Education in 2013. Design Innovation Keynote Assoc. Prof. Kurt Seemann Kurt is the Founding Director of Swinburne’s Centre for Design Innovation (CDI) . He shared his insights of his new project on developmentally appropriate innovation education. Kurt investigates the relationship between people, technology, and the environment as a complex, mutually influencing system. He held the distinguished position of DATTA Victoria's Thinker Online, is a Board Member of DATTA Australia, and has led many successful competitive research projects from ARC and CRC, to Industry Innovations. It was no ordinary dinner night! Professor David Spendlove We were blessed to have as our dinner guest, Professor David Spendlove, Director of Teaching, Learning and Students / Strategic Director of Initial Teacher Education at the University of Manchester. David shared his provocative ideas on Technology Education: no ordinary story that made the dinner tickets well worth while for all. Keynote and Polymath Maddison Miller, Darug woman and archaeologist When it comes to design led innovation and sustainable ingenuity, there is much to learn from the world's oldest living culture. Maddison is a Darug woman and archaeologist at Heritage Victoria. Maddi advocated for broader acceptance and incorporation of Aboriginal knowledge systems in design, urban research, and architecture. Maddi is the co-chair of the Indigenous Advisory Group to the Clean Air and Urban Landscapes Hub of the National Environmental Science Program. Steve Keirl, Reader at Goldsmiths, University of London: Conference Provocateur of international repute. Steve Keirl staunchly advocated that Design and Technology is key to general education. He staunchly resists STEM. He collects washing-up brushes. Steve floated through the research conference presentations and provided critique to assure the big and key issues of the event have us all taking pause to place serious attention to what we were doing versus what we need to do, and what we ought avoid. Dr. Leyla Acaroglu, Keynote screening of Designing Change. Dr. Leyla Acaroglu challenged people to think differently about how the world works. As an award winning designer, UNEP Champion of the Earth, sociologist, and entrepreneur, she developed the Disruptive Design Method and designs cerebrally activating experiences, gamified toolkits, and educational experiences that help people make the status quo obsolete. Her mainstage TED talk on sustainability has been viewed over a million times, enabling positive social change through creative interventions and systems thinking. Peter Murphy. Closing address: The Future of Design and Technology Education Peter Murphy trained as an Industrial Designer in the UK. He worked for retail designers Dollar Rae and cofounded the design consultancy Go 90 in Glasgow. He was part of the 2011 Product Design & Technology VCE review panel, has published teacher support material for VCE Unit 1 PD&T and is the creator of “So You Think You Can Design”. Peter has also been part of the VCAA expert panel charged with reviewing and trialing the national curriculum for Design and Technology. Peter served as President of DATTA Vic in 2015 and 2016 where he helped to develop Design and Technology Week. He was president of DATTA Australia. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. v Table of Contents Introduction and Conference Theme ............................................................................................................ 8 Scholarly Articles 9 In support of authentic research practice by students in design education. ............................................... 10 Deborah Louise Cameron, Anton Oskar Nemme ....................................................................................... 10 Systems Engineering: Identification and fostering of inferential and social skills ..................................... 20 Milorad Cerovac, Kurt Seemann and Therese Keane.................................................................................. 20 Defining a curriculum through activity: Facilitating epistemic autonomy in technology education ......... 29 Andrew Doyle1, Niall Seery2, and Lena Gumaelius1................................................................................... 29 Team designing: A case study in conformity and rationalisation ............................................................... 38 Nigel Bruce Goodwin ............................................................................................................................... 38 Assuring a future for design and technology by embedding classroom formative assessment .................. 46 Eva Hartell................................................................................................................................................ 46 Pedagogies and practices for developing innovation capability: Beyond the AITSL standards ................ 57 Esther Hill1, Therese Keane2 and Kurt Seemann2 ....................................................................................... 57 A proposal for learning of programming focused on IoT ........................................................................... 64 Yuji Kudo1, Toshikazu Yamamoto2, Takenori Motomura3, Jun Moriyama4, Sumi Kazuhiro5, Seiya Takishima6 ................................................................................................................................................ 64 Development of Gaming Materials to Promote Substantial Understanding of Technology ...................... 71 Toshiki Matsuda and Fumiya Kanai .......................................................................................................... 71 How expert technology teachers try to promote students’ creativities. From the results of semi structured interviews. .................................................................................................................................................... 80 Jun Moriyama1, Kaoru Higashida2, Keita Sera3, Masakatu Kuroda4, Mituaki Ogura5 .................................. 80 Development of hydroponics teaching tool for root vegetables................................................................... 86 Masanao Satou1, Toshikazu Yamamoto2 .................................................................................................... 86 Lesson to think about the actual state of energy supply in Japan and future energy use on our living..... 93 Toshikazu Yamamoto, Kimihito Takeno, Kouhei Suzuki ........................................................................... 93 Development and practice of technology education classes based on product disassembly under the conditions of the Japanese Courses of Study............................................................................................... 98 Kento Tsutsumi1, Shuhei Ban2, Chikahiko Yata2 ........................................................................................ 98 Academic Design: Towards a definition in a product design context ........................................................ 107 Roderick Walden1 and Ilpo Koskinen2 ...................................................................................................... 107 Identifying and defining the activities that are maker education: An international view ......................... 115 David Ellis ............................................................................................................................................... 115 Critical Questions, Creative Solutions: How can Initial Teacher Education programs better prepare graduates to understand and teach STEM?............................................................................................... 118 Denise MacGregor, Bruce White, Debra Panizzon, Derek Rogers ............................................................. 118 Lesson Development with the ‘Dyson Engineering Box’ as a Global Teaching Material in Japanese Technology Education ................................................................................................................................ 121 Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 6 Norihiro Mukaida and Chikahiko Yata ..................................................................................................... 121 Progressing the professional identity of pre service Technology Education students. .............................. 124 Deborah Trevallion .................................................................................................................................. 124 From the Living World to Digital Technologies: Programming food and fibre learning experiences for children and young people.......................................................................................................................... 131 Angela Turner and Leanne Cameron ........................................................................................................ 131 Creativity in Design and Technologies education: preservice teachers’ perspectives ............................... 134 Belinda von Mengersen............................................................................................................................ 134 General Presentations 137 Designing Change - A Streamed Video Presentation ................................................................................. 138 Leyla Acaroglu ........................................................................................................................................ 138 Design and Technology Education for, through, about and against design – valuing 4-D approaches. ... 138 Steve Keirl ............................................................................................................................................... 138 Learning Strategies to Support Design for Emerging Manufacturing Methods ....................................... 138 Stefan Lie ................................................................................................................................................ 138 Always Was, Always Will Be – Aboriginal Knowledge and STEM ........................................................... 139 Maddison Miller ...................................................................................................................................... 139 Practice and Evaluation of STEM Education through Elementary School Programming Learning ....... 139 Ayaka Murakami1, Toshikazu Yamamoto2, Takenori Motomura3, Jun Moriyama4, Masakatsu Kuroda5 ..... 139 The Future of Design and Technology Education...................................................................................... 140 Peter Murphy ........................................................................................................................................... 140 A Fact-finding Survey on Student's Information Morals and Security at the Time of Graduation from Junior High School ..................................................................................................................................... 140 Ryoichi Oguma1, Toshikazu Yamamoto2 .................................................................................................. 140 Applied Design Led Innovation: Why D&T is the only subject that can deliver ...................................... 141 Kurt Seemann .......................................................................................................................................... 141 Barriers to commercialization on Botswana's Design and Technology output ......................................... 141 Polokwane Sekonopo ............................................................................................................................... 141 A change in Course ..................................................................................................................................... 142 Larry Spry ............................................................................................................................................... 142 Connecting with Regional members........................................................................................................... 142 Larry Spry ............................................................................................................................................... 142 Problem-based learning in Design and Technology ................................................................................... 143 Brad Walmsley ........................................................................................................................................ 143 Preparing the next generation of technology and design teachers............................................................. 144 Lincoln Gill ............................................................................................................................................. 144 Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 7 Introduction and Conference Theme Fostering applied design led innovation capabilities: how do we know we are doing it better than any other subject? Many people have asked how Design and Technology Education researchers are able to conceptualise and organise their diverse research interests for these and future DATTArc papers? Continuing the 18 years of research tradition championed by Associate Professor Howard Middleton at Griffith University, Technology Education Research Unit (TERU), the Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc) is led and managed by the academic community in collaboration with classroom practitioners from the early years, to primary and secondary education and through to initial and postgraduate Technology Teacher education. Together this biennial research event pools education researchers from internationally diverse backgrounds and disciplines to advance understanding of how societies frame, teach and critique the education of citizens in the fields of Design, Technologies, and related fields of Innovation Development. While in-service school teachers deliver Design and Technologies related curriculum from the early years to year 12, the DATTArc focusses on the future of the field, critiques its assumptions, and directs its investigative efforts to continually foster a sustainable and democratic education. Our theme focused on the role applied design and technological capabilities in education foster and develop human ingenuity and innovation traits among students. This research is typically a multi-disciplinary effort, often drawing upon ‘play based’ and ‘project based’ learning to develop the educated citizen. In this and future DATTArc you will see papers that articulate research: Developmental Research in Technology Education: early years to year 12/13 • Cognitive, social and psycho-motor development with respect to understanding a various aspect of technology education generally and unique within genres of technology. Pedagogy Research in Technology Education : • Effective Teaching and Learning strategies, including formative learning diagnosis and summative learning evaluations (assessments). This includes experiential education research, group learning, online learning, etc. Assistive teaching technology (educational technology and ICT) and the Reggio Emilia aspect of the Technology and Design learning environment. Epistemology Research in Technology Education : • Research on the phenomenology of technology, the form of our field of knowledge: sub-disciplines otherwise known as technacy genres such as digital technology, the technological sciences such as fields of engineering, wood technology, food technology, textiles technology or ceramics technology. Contexts of Technology such as Indigenous Technologies, habitat and technology research, technology choice and climate science education, Technologies and society research, and so Technologies education and (any other field). Comparative Research in Technology Education • Cross-cultural Technology Education Research, Technology and culture research, gender and technology education research. Historical, Theoretical, Ethical and Philosophical Research in Technology Education: • What ought we be teaching, learning and valuing. How ought we understand our history and use it to build a long evolving arch for the depth of our field of learning. Institutional, Political, Policy and Economic research in Technology Education • Trends in technology education (teachers, students, academics), institutional perceptions, the economics of technology education. Technology education in national policies and its rhetoric (discourse analysis). There is much to build and critique in new knowledge and understanding for this area of educational research. In this and all DATTArc conferences we invite research that seeks to reduce ignorance and improve the capabilities of citizens to understand, develop a capacity for informed judgements about, and be engaged agents of innovation, creativity, and critique of the madeworld about them. We invite you to browse the innovative ideas and critiques scoped in these proceedings Sincerely Associate Professor Kurt Seemann, PhD. | Convenor & Conference Director | DATTArc 2018 Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 8 Scholarly Articles This section of the proceedings lists in alphabetical order by the lead author’s surname, all full-length scholarly papers (typically 4000 to 7000 words) and scholarly essays/extended abstracts (typically 1000-1500 words). These papers have been double-blind peer reviewed consistent with international conventions. Authors were required to respond to their reviewers’ critique before having their papers accepted into this section of the proceedings. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 9 In support of authentic research practice by students in design education. Deborah Louise Cameron, Anton Oskar Nemme University of Technology Sydney, Australia Abstract Both the Animation and Product design programs at the University of Technology Sydney share a common goal, with the early teaching focus being engagement with traditional analogue skills. Observational drawing and analysis from life we deem an authentic research tool as it creates a clear and tangible experience between the observer and the subject in three-dimensional space. It also provides the opportunity for a physical and empathetic response to occur. Where students have not been directed to observe from life, we find they rely on the collection of images and video from online sources. The experience of pre-formatted, screen-based observation restricts the possibility of authentic engagement as the chosen subject matter is already pre-designed by a third party. To understand if students identify the benefits of an authentic research experience an experiment with two separate tasks was conducted. In the first task, students were asked to undertake a drawing exercise inside a computer lab with a computer terminal being the only research tool available. We call this the ‘screen-based studio’ (SBS). The second task directed the students to undertake a laboratory exercise where they drew from life, which we call the ‘drawing from life studio’ (DFLS). The goal of these studio exercises was to investigate ways for students to understand that producing innovative work requires stepping out of their comfort zones and engaging in a more challenging and authentic information gathering experience. This paper discusses the results of this experiment. Keywords Authentic research experience, collateral learning, cognition, life drawing, product design, animation, design education, observational research, reflective practice, research methods, experiential learning. Introduction process and subject matter. This need for experience to be authentically educative has been debated for a long time in the literature dating back to Dewey (1938) regarding his thoughts on learning through experience, that “(not) all experiences are genuinely or equally educative” (p. 25). In the year 2018, it is arguable that in production practitioners in the fields of Animation and Industrial Design are entirely tied to the digital realm, however, these However, such digital processes continue to rely on traditional analogue skills and techniques. The authors assert that it remains important for practitioners to strike a balance between digital and analogue design processes to maintain outcomes that draw on authentic experiences and observations of details. Accordingly, the initial focus in our teaching programs has been on traditional analogue skills, drawing, and making, as these are fundamental areas for development of practice. We also observed that it is important for students to spend their limited learning and development time in the course engaged with the best and most authentic research practices to inform their design projects. When the digital experience is used as the sole research tool the respective student is limited by the constraints of their Internet search terms and choice of a browser or social media platform. Their perspective has the potential to become narrowed with little opportunity for authentic experiences beyond the safety of their social and intellectual perceptions of the world around them. Dewey (1938) also explains that “a given experience may increase a person's automatic skill” but even so, it may “narrow the field of further experience” (p. 26). The digital medium as a research tool by itself can be a narrowing device for the growth of further experience. It is very common for students new to tertiary studies to engage with their world perspective through digital mediums. In learning and social interaction, the digital space provides an immediate feedback to the learner’s actions in complete safety and with little mediating steps to negotiate by the student compared to working feedback through image and digital drawing tool access and manipulation on the digital platform. Drawing on online digital images exposes students to a large amount of (potentially unsubstantiated) information in a short period. However, such fast access may also reduce impact negatively on a direct sense of responsibility for the subject in the images downloaded, and foster enough time to critical reflect on authentic engagement in the learning The aim of this paper is threefold. Firstly, to explain the benefits of what we deem authentic research experiences using life drawing as a vehicle for exploration. The term authentic, in this study, is best described as unfiltered, honest, and not involving the perspective of a third party. To explore the multi-facetted benefits of life drawing, we delve into themes such as originality and innovation, collateral learning, the link between emotion and thought, cognition, animate vision and reflective practices, The second aim of the paper is to document the methodology, for the running and recording of a lab-based experiment where students can directly experience for themselves the difference between a screen-based studio (SBS) experience and a drawing from life studio (DFLS) Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 10 experience. The third aim is to collect, present and discuss the survey data provided by participating students. The focus of this discussion concerns their thoughts and feelings reflecting on their participation in the lab-based experiment. Educational context Observational drawing from life was introduced from the inception of the UTS Animation course in 2012 as an integral component of the main studio subject. Anecdotally, we have found that unlike other Design disciplines, students enrolling in the animation degree largely present as fans of animation rather than potential practitioners. This identity is no doubt due to the nature of animation traditionally being viewed in entertainment terms. The active engagement in the fan art world and reproduction of that fan art within studio subjects is a commonly viewed occurrence and presents as a typical drawing experience that students have engaged with before enrolling in the UTS Animation course. This dissociation with the authentic source material and research practice results in less believable, less diverse, and less original design and performance outcomes. Through active participation in observational drawing, the students gain an understanding of best practice in primary research and find originality in the source material. The far-reaching influences drawing from life have included a deeper understanding of design principles, a development of the ability to reflect and a greater level of persistence when working towards the desired outcome. The process becomes a focus and is valued as much as the resulting drawings. In product design at UTS, observational drawing from life is a far more recent inclusion and has not been present in the course for many years. Our first-year students in Product Design undertake a communication-based subject with three distinct modules. Drawing from life, drawing for ideation and measured drawing. This new three-tiered arrangement for analogue drawing skills has been in place since 2016. Drawing from life focuses on learning about human form, ideation focuses on translating new ideas onto the page in an ‘industrial design style’ and measured drawing focuses on the learning of conventions and techniques to represent technical information. Anecdotally, we are starting to see some benefits of this new three-tiered approach with more realistic human features being included in presentation graphics and students understanding that using products often requires manipulation of features and controls with hands and fingers and these interactions can be (and should be) drawn and explored. The drawing from life classes require a high level of concentration and focus. As our students progress through the course, they can translate the focus and attention to detail developed in the life drawing studios across to fieldwork. Students are often asked to undertake research-based activities including ethnographic research where observational drawing and note taking are highly useful recording skills. Having participated in life drawing lab classes places our students in a good position to understand people more effectively, form and their habits. Ultimately, we hope that our students through their own initiative will be better able to design more sympathetic products for society. With an understanding of the importance of drawing from life for the building of drawing skill and as a research tool in both Animation and Product Design, a decision was made to create a pilot study with a small number of firstyear participants to provide an authentic lab-based learning experience for students and to gather data on their research habits, emotional involvement and engagement. Following on, we detail the motives for the creation of this experiment and discuss the results we received. Collateral Learning In tertiary education students benefit from continuity in learning and any newly developed skills and attitudes they acquire need to be carried forward from subject to subject. Notwithstanding this situation, students may continue to compartmentalise their learning experiences and so it is necessary for us to revisit a core set of design skills throughout the undergraduate education programs to refresh their prior learning and make the value of what they have achieved in the past more explicit. We understand that a substantial proportion of what students learn is a collateral consequence of the projectbased learning pedagogies that we install. Validation of effective teaching can be provided when students become emotionally involved and they are incentivised to conduct their own learning activities, which can lie outside the requirements of project deliverables. Dewey (1938) discusses the notion of collateral learning in relation to negate an educational fallacy “that a person only learns the thing he is studying at the time” (p. 48). Perhaps students should be made more aware of the value of collateral learning, Dewey explains that it is far more important in the “formation of enduring attitudes” (1938, p. 48). The role of education and our role as educators should be to prepare students for their future beyond a purely intellectual perspective. Resilience, imagination, curiosity, adaptability, social awareness, and the ability to deal with challenges, are all skills that a student must learn and experience in the relative safety of an education system. For these elements to develop the student will no doubt experience moments of discomfort, insecurity, ambiguity, and confusion when challenged to shift their perspectives and to move out of their comfort zone. The personal control that the digital world offers provides a well-known and safe space to reside. The user generally chooses the information that is required, at a time that suits, normally on their own. At University, screen time most often takes place in familiar internal environments surrounded by other individuals who are all doing the same thing, at the same time, and using the same resources. The opportunities for new experiences and beneficial collateral learning are minimised. By simply removing the screen and physically being in a different real-world environment, students can experience situations beyond their control, with the boundaries of their world expanding as they are exposed to new information and challenges. The resulting collateral learning experience can deepen understanding and knowledge in the individual beyond the prescribed study at hand with this new-found broader perspective also having a positive influence on a student’s digitally based research practice. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 11 The importance of ethnography and reflective practice To promote originality and innovation in students’ working processes it is essential that they find their personal voice and develop an opinion on any number of subject matters. For an individual perspective to be developed it is important that students have an authentic learning experience that engages both their intellect and emotive response. The authentic learning experience that observational drawing provides exposes the students to collateral learning, reflection in action (Schon, 1983), engagement with physical and mental senses and a deeper understanding of the uniqueness of the individual aspects of their world. Referring directly to the primary source material not only provides the students with a solid and authentic starting point on which to base further research, they also begin to develop and understand the importance of this ethnographic approach, and when to use it, if they strive for originality in their work. Ethnography enables a researcher to discover what people “really need, want and do” in contrast to “what they say they need, want and do” (Milton and Rodgers, 2013, p. 21) To Animation at UTS, students participate in observational drawing in the form of field excursions to the zoo, to areas heavily populated with human traffic, to natural history museums, botanical gardens and to other areas of interest such as synthetic industrial structures and food markets. Life drawing classes are also included in the studio subject. On returning to the studio class observational drawings and visual recordings provide the opportunity for reflection on action (Schon, 1983) as these primary source materials are further developed. Secondary research is undertaken using screen-based and library resources with this information being incorporated into the final designs resulting in a believable, (differing from realistic), outcome. In this process, the use of digital information is used to further support and develop the existing source material rather than define it. Schon’s notion that learning can be solidified through a process of reflective practice can be further enhanced by Dewey (1938) here aligning a reflective thinking process with observation. Observation alone is not enough. We have to understand the significance of what we see, hear and touch” (p. 68). As research methods have become more explicit in our subject outlines employing the specific approach to retrieve information or to develop a skill is paramount to foster originality. The timing for a method like observational research within a design project may require careful positioning. A question for students to ask of themselves is ‘when, where and why should a research method be employed’. As Dewey (1933) explains, not only is “knowledge of the (best) methods” important, but so is “the desire, the will, to employ them” (p. 30). Dewey (1933) also refers to three important factors, which are instrumental in being an effective as a learner: wholeheartedness, open-mindedness, and responsibility. The personal viewpoint and experience that students develop during observational drawing can potentially engage these three factors and promote both physical and emotional involvement. It is key for educators to explain to students that there are benefits of an authentic ethnographic approach, where reflection can provide underlying guidance and emotion can be the impetus to be involved in the learning experience. In the next section, we discuss the role of emotion and its relationship with thought. Link between emotion and thought Most first year student’s experience of learning is largely based on intellectual thought, however the opportunity to engage from an emotive level holds many benefits. Firstly, the heart does play a role and students quickly tire and dropout of study if the program does not engage or enrich their interest. Secondly, it challenges the Euro-American view’s strong pervasive concept that emotion is inferior to thought as seen in many educational institutions. On discussing the paired concepts and contrasting terms associated with emotion and thought Lutz (1986), explores some commonly voiced contrasts to be found within this viewpoint, stating “…emotion is to thought as energy is to information; as the heart is to head...as value is to fact or knowledge” (p. 21-22). It is suggested that the we often see the two identities as separate, existing as the positive and negative parts of the self, rather than seeing them as two essential elements required to be in balance to create a singular unified whole. The idea of emotion and thought being “... as the subjective is to the objective; as the physical is to the mental; as the expressive is to the instrumental or practical…” (p. 21-22), Lutz continues the theme that the intellectual mind is often perpetuated as superior and untainted by an emotional response. When emotion is viewed as the less disciplined, weaker part of ourselves we are ignoring the importance of the balance it provides in our learning and risk becoming blind to a true reality. Our belief that both elements are necessary for a complete learning experience is supported by Lutz (1986) when further discussing their distinct roles: “Thought and emotion also share the quality of being viewed as more authentic realities and more truly the repository of the self in comparison with the relative inauthenticity of speaking and other forms of interaction ” (p. 21). If we accept that both thought and emotion together provide a more authentic reality for the individual, it is in our interests to engage students in activities that create an emotive response to support their intellectual learning. By interacting with mind and body the students will have the opportunity for a complete learning experience. Dewey (1938) continues to expresses his appreciation for the usefulness of emotion in creating a desire for students to learn: “The most important attitude that can be formed is the desire to go on learning. If impetus in this direction is weakened instead of being intensified, something much more than lack of preparation takes place. The pupil is actually robbed of native capacities which otherwise would enable him to cope with the circumstances that he meets in the course of his life” (p. 48). Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 12 When an emotive response occurs in conjunction with more traditional forms of intellectual learning, the student is exposed to a more integrated perspective that may provide a deeper learning experience. Cognition The area of study concerning human psychology and the roles that emotion and our cognition play in our behaviour is vast. In the equally vast area of Neuroscience and human cognition, there have been recent discoveries and discussions around the function and purpose of mirror neurons, which have a significant influence on the understanding of action and our three-dimensional world. As observational drawing in any form occurs in a threedimensional world, it would be fair to assume that this immersion alone will provide students with an emotive experience not available through a screen. According to Power (2008) in Character Animation and the Embodied Mind-Brain, “Mirror-neurons have intrinsically social functionality…” and they also “...map the actions of others to corresponding actions on one’s own body without confusing other with self” (Schutz-Bosbach et al., 2006). In addition, “mirror neurons not only underpin action understanding, but they are also involved in understanding the intentions that underlie action” (Freedberg and Gallese, 2007). It appears that when we see a movement or action taking place our mind triggers the same responses in our brain as if we were performing the movement ourselves. When drawing from life we see the model moving in and out of poses. When we see her kneel with the full weight of her body resting on her knees, our mirror neurons trigger the act within our body whilst we remain aware that we are not actually taking that pose. We mirror the feeling and understand it. Lindenberger (2007), Humanities Professor at Stanford on discussing the influence on art, creativity and culture says “recent research on mirror neurons suggests that the imitative capacities...may well account for the development of empathy and the evolution of culture” (p. 17). Students working in the space of observational drawing from life gain an understanding that is both intellectual, (thought) and physical (emotion). This embodied response must reflect “truly the repository of the self” (Lutz 1986, p.21) as no other outcome could. The knowledge gained in this type of learning encourages an individual, empathetic and authentic approach to research and practice as the student is not relying on pre-fabricated imagery and the limitations that presents but rather observation and reflection of their own personal experience. In ‘The Reflective Practitioner’, Schon (1995) states, “The contributions I have found most helpful in this endeavour are those of people whom research functions not as a distraction from practice but as a development of it” (p. ix). It is widely accepted that our cognitive processes are constantly ‘in’ process. The area of our visuospatial working memory, the part responsible for creating mental imagery is no different. It is also believed that humans experience a “cognitive load”, first identified by G.A Miller (1956) and represents, “ the maximum amount of information that can be processed at once.” (p 81-97). Because of this, our mind selects what is important information and what parts are needed at that specific time, simplifying the world around us. “Additionally we do not necessarily store those fragments of information for any length of time, but instead continually re-reference the world, using the world as our storehouse of information rather than the brain.” (Ballard, 1991, p.58) This act of re-referencing our environment creates an updated view of a world that is constantly changing. Apart from having fairly obvious benefits for survival and adaptation, it allows us to experience the same environment multiple times and see and feel something different in each instance. This opportunity is greatly enhanced through the act of observational drawing from life, as life itself is in a constant state of flux. The concept of our mind selecting only the parts that are important is also reflected in our vision. “Linking how we look at things, with our cognition of those things” prompted a theory by Dana Ballard, called Animate Vision. “Animate vision involves the movement of, not just our eyes, but also our head- in fact, our whole body is in constant motion as we visually perceive our environment” (Ballard 1991, p.58). By constantly rereferencing in this way our cognitive load is lessened and the most up to date view of our environment is responded to. When we try to gain a greater understanding of an object the normal response is to touch it, feel the textures, turn it upside down, feel the weight and materiality and to look at it from every angle. This is commonly seen during play with very young children as they discover their world. Animate vision is providing a similar experience... “and allows us to better understand our environment, providing increased capabilities of understanding and creativity.” (Torre 2017, p.107). Students who participate in observational drawing from life actively engage with animate vision, and their visuospatial working memory, making sense of a world that is constantly changing. The opportunity for reflection in action becomes heightened as different approaches and responses are experienced with each task containing new information challenging previously held perceptions. Developing an appreciation for and awareness of the benefits of reflective practice in our students is encouraged in both the Animation and Product Design courses and is discussed further in the following section. Reflective Practice Particularly in design education considerable resources and time are devoted to developing design communication skills in our students. This is predominantly a first-year focus as hereafter there is an evolution into more difficult territory with diverse design projects based around problem-based learning pedagogies and open briefs. Early on it is important to set firm foundations for technical skill development as without this emphasis, students will still be able to think creatively and critically but will be impaired by the absence of the skill set to communicate their ideas with adequate levels of sophistication. Schon (1987) delves into the paradox surrounding learning a new skill or competence by explaining that “a student cannot at first understand what he needs to learn, can learn it only by educating himself, and can educate himself only by doing what he does not yet understand.” Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 13 Research into Dewey and Schon give credence to the necessity for educators to foster and develop a process of reflective thinking in students. Schon’s (1987) reflection in action process can be described as a learning by doing process whereby the student thinks about the actions involved while doing a particular activity as well as reflecting upon how it is being done in order to reshape that process at that moment in time. By contrast, reflection on action (Schon, 1987) is analysis of a task that is undertaken in retrospect. A student will consider how a task might have been executed more efficiently, with more accuracy, more rapidity or with the assistance and input of other knowledge that they have now acquired. Both of these processes occur naturally, however, educators can draw attention to the two learning situations in order to improve learning processes for students. Both of these reflective processes created the theoretical underpinning for the design of the screen-based studio (SBS) and drawing from life studio (DFLS) experiment and the subsequent survey questions to emphasize the reflection on action process. In the future, students may be faced with problems in the "swampy lowland where situations are confusing 'messes' incapable of (a) technical solution" (Schon, 1983, p. 42). With this in mind, future practitioners will need to "make new sense of the situations of uncertainty" (Schon, 1983, p. 61). In this way, the process of reflective practice has substantial benefits as it can develop "a new way of doing something" (innovate), provide "clarification of an issue" (critical thought) and encourage "development of a skill" (build know how) "or the resolution of a problem" (benefit the activity of problem solving) (Boud, Keogh & Walker, 1985). For the individual, reflective practice can introduce a “dialogue of thinking and doing through which [one can] become more skillful” (Schon, 1983, p. 31). For present and future students to adapt to a constantly changing world, it is essential that they develop agile abilities so that they may not only survive or adapt to change but rather be the instruments of change. the length of pose for each individual drawing on their drawing pages. Observations about the drawing output have been summarised in Table 3 in the results section. After the DFLS, in keeping with Schon’s reflection on action approach, the students were immediately provided with seven multiple choice questions via an online survey. In order to provide some validation for these questions we also asked the students to provide a free response to two additional questions concerning terminology used in the survey. These responses consisted of providing definitions in their own words for the terms ‘research method’ and ‘authentic’. Their responses are summarised in the results section. Results The data from the online survey questions has been recorded in Table 1 following. Here the survey questions and responses have been displayed with percentage values bearing in mind that there were ten participants involved in the lab experiment. Methodology In order to gather data for this research paper, we recruited ten first-year students from the UTS Product Design and Animation Programs. A system of two laboratory-based drawing studios was devised with participation being on a voluntary basis. The first studio, a two-hour screen-based studio (SBS) arrangement directed students to make multiple drawings of people via the use of on-screen imagery of their own selection. The only directions given were that students must make multiple drawings and use the media of their choice. A3 paper was provided to standardise the output. As we have an interest in understanding how students conduct this kind of task we asked them to provide information on the various online sources that were used and we have tabulated this data in Table 2 in the results section. After a one-hour break, the students entered a second studio, which focused on drawing from life (DFLS). Here the students were given the task to draw images while viewing a life model that periodically changed into various poses. Here again, the only directions given were that students must make multiple drawings and use the media of their choice. A3 paper was again provided to standardise the output. In addition, students recorded information on Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 14 Table 1: Results of online survey Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 15 Concerning the source images chosen as the inspiration for the drawings made in SBS, we have collated the data provided by our participants in Table 2. Here we can reflect on the number of instances and locations for the inspiration images. Furthermore, the participants knew that the lab-based exercises centred around drawing and so naturally being a study conducted on a voluntary basis it is expected that those who chose to be involved were already interested and enjoyed drawing exercises. Table 2: Inspiration Sources in SBS As mentioned in the methodology section, we felt it was important to consider whether or not students understood the terms, ‘authentic’ and ‘research method’ as these terms populated several of the survey questions. It was surprising that nine out of ten survey responses indicated that the term ‘authentic’ was adequately understood by the participants. The written responses also suggested that the term ‘research method’ was understood by all participants. In the product design program during the first year, there are lectures in our Inside Design Subject, which addresses the concept of research methods and how they can be implemented within a design project. It is clear that this information has been taken onboard and synthesised by those students. In the first year Animation program research methods are also discussed and implemented through various exercises and practices undertaken within the main studio subject. Both of these situations have resulted in the participants being well informed of these terms. In addition to recording the inspiration sources, below in Table 3, we have documented some subjective observations about the drawings themselves based on the studio in which they were created. Discussion We must start by prefacing the discussion of the results of this experiment by stating that the survey sample is small. Ten participants from the first year UTS Product design and Animation programs were involved largely due to the timing of our experiment falling inside the end of session study week. This small sample size would threaten drawing definitive far-reaching conclusions, but as a pilot study it can provide a gauge as to whether a further investigation along the same lines should be conducted. Questions concerning which studio ‘enabled learning more about the features of the human form’, ‘was the most fun’, ‘engaged your senses the most’, ‘provided opportunities for drawing skill improvement’ and ‘represented best practice in learning about the human form’ were weighted definitively in favour of the DFLS. These were the responses we expected, as anecdotally, life drawing classes are universally enjoyed by first-year students across both teaching programs and are very well received in student feedback surveys. Question three, in which studio did you have the most fun?, requires further discussion. Being in a constant state of reflection in action is mentally and physically demanding. Despite these demands and the associated cognitive load when drawing from life, the overwhelming Table 3: Drawing Observations Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 16 response from participants favoured the DFLS. There was minimal (20%) evidence of students having an emotive response to the subject matter in the SBS. If “thought and emotion (also) share the quality of being viewed as more authentic realities and more truly the repository of the self” (Lutz 1986, p.21), the emotive response from drawing from life creates a more engaging learning experience. Question four, in which studio do you feel your senses were the most engaged?, also requires further discussion. In the DFLS environment, a wider sensory experience is available due to the real-world three-dimensional space where interaction is possible. The observer (student) witnesses the action and intent of the subject before and after the pose and therefore understands that the still moment is part of a continuing experience. This inclusion and witnessing of the whole experience creates a more subjective viewpoint, which encourages reflection in action resulting in a more personal and individual outcome. All respondents agreed that during this studio their senses were the most engaged. An engaged student is a student who is learning through a positive experience. The emotive response can be linked to our cognition and helps to develop a deeper understanding of our immediate experience while a positive experience also nurtures a desire for continued learning. The SBS provided the students with a choice of their own subjects to draw, and yet the very nature of viewing a still image on a flat plane presents an opportunity for fixation, duplication with limited understanding of the object being studied, resulting in a lack of authenticity and originality. It can be argued that in this SBS situation, a student’s role becomes more of the ‘passive observer’ rather than an ‘active participant’ more present in the DFLS. Although it can be argued that question 6 has been written in a leading manner, the response from this question was quite compelling and unexpected. ‘Has your participation in these studios enabled your opinion to change how you might conduct your own research activities?’ 50% of the respondents said: “Yes, previously I primarily focused on screen-based research and now I would be more inclined to conduct research from life”. Based on the students' responses and Dewey’s definition it could be argued that the screen-based studio if conducted in isolation can be seen as ‘mis-educative’ in nature. We propose that this type of research experience is where students could spend a significant proportion of their own research time because they value efficiency and convenience over the more emotionally and physically engaging drawing from life experience. By providing students with two closely tied, contrasting lab-based experiences Dewey’s thoughts on ‘miseducative’ and ‘defective learning experiences’ have more chance of being negated. It was intended that having two contrasting studios would facilitate Schon’s reflection in action (learning by doing) process. Coupling the contrasting lab-based experiences with survey questions allows students to immediately reflect on those experiences which would facilitate Schon’s reflection-onaction process where students can come to their own conclusions as what experience is more authentic, educative, useful and best practice. In Table 3 we detailed some of the observations made about the drawing output from each studio experiment and compared them. We observed that DFLS produced a far greater volume of drawing output than the SBS, which might suggest that the experience was more intense and physical. Furthermore, the composition and placement of images on the individual pages were graphically more sophisticated than drawings produced in the SBS. In addition there was less evidence of what one might call ‘overworked drawings’ and more understanding shown of form and proportion. With those comparisons in mind, it is now worthwhile to discuss the inspirational sources for the SBS. In Table 2 we have recorded the inspirational source for drawings made by students in the SBS. Here our expectations were confirmed, ‘Google Image Search’ featured highly with 17 instances (36%) and we make the assumption that some images or keyword searches may have led to finding a useful website with 15 instances recorded (32%). Pinterest also appeared (10 instances or 21%) and this was an unexpected tool for use in this kind of activity. Pinterest does have the feature of selecting images and related topics that it ‘thinks’ you might like through a search algorithm. Here we conclude that efficiency and convenience were driving factors for the above methods of finding an image to inspire a drawing. Instagram and Youtube (2 instances or 4%) were used by fewer students. It was interesting that students did not appear to take advantage of what Youtube has to offer. When used as a study aid for analysis of movement particularly in Animation, video and film footage can be an invaluable tool. For this to occur it is necessary that all action, weight, form and structure are analysed and understood as the form moves through space. A shift in body weight for example, can be appreciated when you see movement from one position to another, and it can be recorded convincingly in a drawing with the understanding that it is one moment of a continuous action. If a still image is duplicated without prior analysis of the movement and forces required to create that movement it can appear flat and unconvincing. In this case the respective student is unlikely to have gone through a thorough process in order to understand the form in three-dimensional space over time (see Figure 5: Participant 5 SBS Output). In Figure 5, participant five has drawn a man jumping in the air. At first glance this drawing may look like a reasonable representation of that action, but when compared to Figure 6 (Participant five’s DFLS output) there is a distinct difference in the visible understanding of form and perspective. Conflicting information regarding the knee direction can be seen in the offside leg. Its relationship to the foot and movement on the bottom of the trousers reflects a lack of understanding of the prior movement, which has led to this point in the action. In Figure 6 the foreshortening of the leg and the direction and volume of the knees are well understood. The figure on the left shows a stretch down the side of the body reflecting a distinct understanding of the contrasting elements of the torso and hips, which is not apparent in Figure 5. This is a result of studying and understanding spatial position and the three dimensionality of the form. It reflects that the student was present and an active participant in the exercise. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 17 Figure 3: Participant 2 SBS output shows a student who has a reasonable skill level in drawing Figure 1: Participant 6 SBS output shows three vertical figures, evenly placed on the page. It is clear that the images have been duplicated from photographs as they are flat, stiff and unnatural. There is no evidence of weight (even in the character standing on one leg) and no twist in the form. The images feel as if they are fixed in time. Surprisingly, the same student has managed to communicate very differently in the DFLS. Despite showing a greater understanding of form, the drawing is overworked with emphasis being on decorative texturing. The figure is flatter than the DFLS example and has a stiffness around the head and shoulder connection as the focus has been taken away from form and into a decorative space. Figure 4: Participant 2 DFLS Figure 2: Participant 6 DFLS output shows three figures in various poses placed in such a way on the page that even the composition hints at movement. It is clear that these were drawn from life and the student was present and participating in a process of sustained observation. The forms are three dimensional, show weight and twist of the body communicating a feeling of force and energy, particularly evident in the figure leaning back with her hands clasped around a raised leg. We not only know, but we feel, the tension in this pose and are aware that if she lets go of her leg, she will fall. Participant 2 DFLS output shows an understanding of fluidity through the form, an understanding of the function of the spine and the connections to body elements. Despite applying less shading to the drawings they are three dimensional in appearance and have a sense of weight, movement and organic structure not visible in the SBS output. Figure 5: Participant 5 SBS output Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 18 Figure 6: Participant 5 DFLS output responsibility for learning and critical thinking allows the students to gain confidence in the selection of the right mix of research methods for a given design project. Development of this attitude to learning not only benefits their time at university but also their future careers. With this in mind, it would be worthwhile to continue this research theme of ‘authentic research’ and implement a further experiment with a significantly larger group of students in order to investigate more thoroughly. References Aldama, F. L. (2010). Toward a cognitive theory of narrative acts. Austin: University of Texas Press. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uts/detail.action ?docID=3443485 Conclusion The evidence suggests that using observational drawing from life as an authentic research method gives students the opportunity to fully engage their cognitive capabilities and provides greater opportunity for beneficial collateral learning and reflective practice. When used in conjunction with screen-based digital resources it balances the information and influences a student absorbs through the creation of a wider learning experience. The student must adapt to an environment and situation of which they have little control. This lack of control exposes students to learning experiences that occur more naturally in realworld situations, which results in life experience and a deeper understanding of the subject, both of which can be brought back into their studio work with positive benefits for the individual and the group. Future Directions We believe this small pilot study focused around the activity of drawing has a wider significance in tertiary education teaching practice. In design education, it is not enough to merely develop a curriculum where we deliver content to students and believe that they will accept our claims of the best practices and processes with which to conduct design projects. The students must experience the best practice in order for them to embrace better processes and to develop their ability for personal critique and reflection. In both programs, we are faced with students being situated in front of computer screens, both in the making of work and researching, where absorbed information can be inaccurate, pre-designed, false, trend driven, full of marketing content, political motives and social commentary. We hope that our students will gather their own authentic research and not rely as heavily on information preformatted and delivered to web-based platforms by third parties. For this to occur it is necessary for students to experience diverse research practices, recognising each for the contribution it may offer and to understand when to execute each one in accordance with the most useful and appropriate stage of a learning task. Boud, D. J., Keogh, R., & Walker, D. (1985). Reflection :Turning experience into learning. New York: Nichols. Dewey, J. (1998). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Dewey, J. (1969; 1938). Experience and education. New York: Collier. Freedberg, D., & Gallese, V. (2007). Motion, emotion and empathy in aesthetic experience doi:https://doiorg.ezproxy.lib.uts.edu.au/10.1016/j.tics.2007.02.003 Lutz, C. (1986). Emotion, Thought, and Estrangement: Emotion as a Cultural Category. Cultural Anthropology, 1(3), 287-309. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/sTable/656193 Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81-97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0043158 Power, P. (2008). Character animation and the embodied Mind—Brain. Animation, 3(1), 25-48. https://doiorg.ezproxy.lib.uts.edu.au/10.1177/17468477080887 34 Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Schön, D. A. (1995). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Aldershot, England: Arena. Schütz-Bosbach, S., Mancini, B., Aglioti, S. M., & Haggard, P. (2006). Self and other in the human motor system doi:https://doiorg.ezproxy.lib.uts.edu.au/10.1016/j.cub.2006.07.048 Torre, D. (2017). Animation: Process, cognition and actuality. New York, NY: Bloomsbury Academic, an imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Inc. This requires initiative and developing an understanding, through experience, that discomfort and challenges are part of the design process. Independently taking Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 19 Systems Engineering: Identification and fostering of inferential and social skills Milorad Cerovac, Kurt Seemann and Therese Keane Swinburne University of Technology, Australia. Abstract This scoping paper draws on a review of the literature, with the aim of exploring how students’ capacity to innovate, can be developed in the Technologies domain of Systems Engineering. Innovation and the need to innovate has generated much rhetoric from business leaders, various State and Federal governments, as well as other agencies such as the Office of the Chief Scientist. The Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians (Barr et al., 2008) places an emphasis on the role that schools through their educators and the curriculum play in building the capacity of students to think and act as innovators and creators of technologies. There is, however, tension between the traditional methods of teaching, and the need to embrace a more interactive mode that encourages 21st century skills of collaboration, communication, critical thinking and creativity (Keane, Keane, & Blicblau, 2016). Technacy, considered as a literacy is concerned with not simply teaching the purely functional skills, but rather, the ability to put technology into a social and environmental context (Seemann, 2009). While literacy and numeracy are critical aspects of educating students, Technacy is the new fluency that must be incorporated in the school curriculum to help develop Australia’s innovative capacity going forward. This paper will explore Technacy in education, and specifically on how the Technacy principles can be applied to the technology genre of design-led Systems Engineering, to assist teachers in developing students’ capacity to innovate. Keywords Technacy, developmental indicators, STEM, innovation, inferential skills Introduction There is a certain level of expectancy of universities to take on the role of key driver of economic development in what is presently known as the knowledge economy (Ciriaci & Muscio, 2014). With the engineering profession expecting new graduates to be “innovators and cultivators of ideas” (Shah, Grebennikov, & Nair, 2015), it is not surprising that increasingly, innovation capabilities are demanded of university graduates in design related fields, such as Product Design Engineering. In Victoria, a key feeder of new undergraduate students progressing from secondary schools into such degrees, come from the Technologies and Design curriculum areas of Systems Engineering and/or Product Design. One view is that the capacity to innovate in the Technologies domain should commence in secondary schools (i.e. students aged from 12 to 17). However, there is currently a gap in the research literature that establish where these secondary school students are at with their innovation capabilities as expressed through the Technologies curriculum area. A further complication is the dearth of literature that offers plausible models and techniques for classroom teachers to observe and identify progression in a student’s innovation capabilities in the developmental domain of “designing and working technologically” (Seemann, 2015b). If we value developing innovation capabilities in engineering education in school age children, then it would be in our favour as educators to have some guiding framework to help appropriately target learning activities. This would help teachers develop and implement Figure 1: Technacy & Innovation Chart Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 20 technological problem-solving concepts that gives just the right amount of challenge to every student norm group as they develop (e.g. develop cognitively, socially, emotionally). Given a technology-based challenge by the teacher, within this normative group we would expect that most students would respond well to the challenge. However, we would also expect that some students would either: (i) easily exceed the challenge requirements, in which case the guiding framework would identify the next level of complexity; or (ii) struggle with the challenge requirements, in which case the conceptual model would assist teachers to diagnose the nature of the students’ struggles. Such conceptual models already exist in literacy, numeracy, and science, where significant discourse around developmental indicators in research literature can be found. In literacy, for example, there are established models for diagnosing developmental indicators for establishing a child’s reading and comprehension levels (State Government of Victoria, 2018). In mathematics the developmental indicators used in the Count Me In Too program series and in Working Mathematically (Centre for Education Statistics and Evaluation, 2018; NSW Education Standards Authority, 2012a) have assisted teachers to program further targeted lessons, while in science the conceptual models around Working Scientifically have aided teachers in guiding students through core concepts underpinning all scientific methods (NSW Education Standards Authority, 2012b). In the Technologies domain a framework does exist, called the Technacy and Innovation framework, which is shown in Figure 1 however this is generic. The Technacy and Innovation framework helps guide the teacher in ways of diagnosing and advancing a child’s general level of knowledge, application skills and innovative attributes in the study and use of technologies. At present there remains a void in educational literature that offers classroom teachers, in the Systems Engineering genre, both useful and practical conceptual models and classroom methods for them to systematically identify, classify, diagnose and develop targeted learning strategies. Such strategies should be capable of fostering within students through their formative years with the capacity to innovate through the act of designing and working technologically. The merits of an appropriate framework in the Technologies area can be garnered from a comparative ‘expert-novice’ research study, which gathered and analysed design behavior data involving first-year university students, graduate students, and practicing (i.e. expert) engineers (Atman et al., 2007). This study identified and analysed the differences in problem scoping and information gathering when the ‘novices’ and the ‘experts’ were each presented with the same design engineering challenge to solve. The outcome of this research generated ideas on how future design engineering courses could be better taught and assessed (Atman et al., 2007). Such a study, complemented by the knowledge that plausible models (e.g. literacy, numeracy) already exist, suggest that an appropriate framework is achievable to help guide secondary teachers of Systems Engineering in the task of identifying and developing students’ design and technology innovation capabilities. The objective is to take the existing Technacy and Innovation framework, and adapt it to the Systems Engineering domain, which would then address the current gap in the research literature. Definitions and Background Creativity, innovation and the need to develop innovative capacity is regularly advanced as a necessity by government, business and other professional leaders, whether through the media, policy documents, or reports such as the Health of Australian Science (Office of the Chief Scientist, 2012) to ensure Australia’s future economic success. The recent report from the Review to Achieve Educational Excellence in Australian Schools (Gonski et al., 2018) adds further support to the growing chorus of voices emphasizing the need to build innovative capacity, starting in the education system. Used interchangeably the term creativity is often and incorrectly, used in place of innovation. A definition offered by Kim (2018, p. 11) highlights the distinction between these two terms “creativity is the process of making something unique and useful, and the successful outcome of this process is an innovation.” This definition aligns with that offered by Cropley (2015) though from an engineering lens, where technological creativity results in the production of a novel item, but innovation results in its exploitation (or uptake). It is worth noting that both creativity and innovation as separate entities are important elements in the teaching of Technology education. Technacy education is built on “a holistic approach to perceiving, teaching, practicing and learning technology in any culture” (Seemann & Talbot, 1995, p. 761). Under the Technacy framework students become future creators and innovators through an emphasis on a holistic understanding and application of technology (Seemann, 2003). Arguably schools, supported by curriculum authorities, should embrace the Technacy framework so that students are ultimately able to develop the skills and experience to make “better informed technical and design decisions” (Seemann, 2003, p. 28), especially as they progress into further studies such as applied design and technology courses. While fluency in literacy and numeracy are positioned clearly at the forefront of the Review to Achieve Educational Excellence in Australian Schools report (Gonski et al., 2018), the need for students to develop their technological literacy is a necessity, given the role that technology and innovation will continue to play. Hence, the authors contend that Technacy should be considered fundamental to the educational needs of students and be recognized as the new fluency that must be integrated within the national curriculum, alongside literacy and numeracy, to develop Australia’s innovative capacity. The term fluency combines two important attributes: mastery and performance (Binder, 2003). For instance, in literacy, fluent readers can read text accurately (i.e. student has achieved mastery) and with expression (i.e. student doesn’t waste time de-coding the significance of each word and hence expression is an indicator of performance). The fluent reader is therefore considered to be literate. Similarly, within the Technacy framework, a technate individual is considered to have gained a mastery of technology tools in such a way, that they can address problems as they arise, and take into account social, Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 21 technical and environmental factors (Seemann & Talbot, 1995). Human capital can be defined as the “knowledge and skills people possess that enable them to create value in the global economic system” (World Economic Forum, 2017, p. 3). Technate individuals who can think critically, creatively and are able to communicate and collaborate, collectively known as the 4Cs (Keane et al., 2016), would contribute to this pool of people known as human capital. Human capital is thus considered critical to the ongoing success of any country’s economy due to its relationship to innovation (Bridgstock, Dawson, & Hearn, 2011). It is our view that schools have an important role in contributing to the development of human capital as part of the process of building innovation capabilities within its students. Fostering Innovation Australia has a long-standing interest in fostering innovation: “At all levels, our society will require creative individuals able to communicate well, think originally and critically, adapt to change, work cooperatively, remain motivated when faced with difficult circumstances, who connect with both people and ideas and are capable of finding solutions to problems as they occur—in short, individuals with the array of skills constituting a well-developed capacity for innovation” (Dow, 2003, p. 5). Various government agencies and educational organisations have also expressed concerns; with a focus on improving STEM education, which is seen as being critical to building the capacity for innovation (Engberg & Wolniak, 2013; National Research Council, 2009; Trust, 2014). The relationship of education and innovation, to Australia’s social and educational systems is used to generate the Global Human Capital Index. The Global Human Capital Index, considered a critical indicator of a country’s productivity and hence its prosperity ranked Australia in 20th position from 130 countries (World Economic Forum, 2017). This isn’t necessarily a bad result when taken in isolation; however, inevitably comparisons are drawn against other jurisdictions, who aim to have similar objectives of ensuring their country’s future economic competitiveness by also focusing on innovation and developing innovative capabilities in the engineering and design domains (Daniel, 2016; Qiu, Cano-Kollmann, & Mudambi, 2017). Fostering innovation should have a flow-on effect by creating new technological breakthroughs and new opportunities for those individuals that have the requisite skills (Brei, Frecker, & Slocum, 2009). Innovation and the closely related term of ‘entrepreneurship’ will play an important role in economic development (O'Connor, 2013); and in doing so, new industries will be created, providing employment opportunities and hence an increase in a nation’s wealth (Langowitz & Minniti, 2007). The starting point for creating the next generation of creators, innovators, and skilled users of technology is to be found in schools. A simple example is to be found with the student from Design Tech High (California, USA), who designed and created heat mapping shin guards that could be used by soccer teams to generate real-time data on player movements (Montgomery, 2017). Another example, and one which embraces the Technacy philosophy, involved the student investigating a sustainable solution for the storage of rainwater on his grandfather’s land, situated in an arid part of central Australia (Seemann & Talbot, 1995). The design needed to be functional as well as reliant upon locally available material to maintain the water storage system in the event of any failure (Seemann & Talbot, 1995). This example emphasizes the significance and importance of including a holistic approach to implementing technological solutions, as the student demonstrated a connectedness with their Indigenous culture and the environment in developing an appropriate and sustainable solution (Seemann & Talbot, 1995). A holistic approach to technologies should be encouraged to complement efforts to develop innovation capabilities. Developing the capability to innovate requires a specific skill-set including collaboration and collaborative problem solving. The ability to connect with other people with specific expertise for a precise purpose is often needed to facilitate with the development of the innovation. The process of interacting, sharing ideas, argumentation, critical analysis and general discourse, enables students to “build a sense of community” (Wendt & RockinsonSzapkiw, 2015). This ‘sense of community’ is an important dimension of technacy, and the focus on the holistic use of technology; that is, “technology and culture are interwoven” (Fleer, 2016, p. 17). To support the teaching of innovation in schools will require students to work collaboratively across many contexts. Some educational jurisdictions have already embedded this skill into their curriculum (Tarbutton, 2018). Take for example Singapore, which has mandated that: “Wherever possible, students should be encouraged to work in teams so that they can sharpen their interpersonal skills, communication skills, self-management skills and collaborative skills. This is the way it is in the real world!” (Singapore Ministry of Education, 2011, p. 3). O’Connor, Seery, and Canty (2018) note that in the Design and Technology classrooms of Irish schools, students are often working collaboratively on creative and innovative activities. The Technacy Framework In trying to develop students’ capacity to innovate, setting appropriate engineering challenges is an important consideration. Technological problem-solving activities in a high-school engineering course can be ‘hit or miss’, depending upon a teacher’s level of experience in implementing such activities (Crismond, 2013), or failing to understand students’ abilities (Schooner, Klasander, & Hallström, 2018). A conceptual model, such as the generic Technacy and Innovation Framework, has the potential to assist teachers in guiding the development and implementation of appropriate strategies and activities that match the developmental indicators of students. Of the limited research that is present in high schools, Schooner et al. (2018) reported problems in the Swedish implementation of the Technologies curriculum. The current iteration of the Swedish curriculum, Läroplan för Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 22 grundskolan (or Lgr11), was implemented in 2011. Lgr11 resulted in updates to their technology subject to include a broader more holistic understanding of technology (Schooner et al., 2018), which appears to embrace the philosophy of Technacy. However, teachers are at present struggling with the assessment of the subject (Hartell, Gumaelius, & Svärdh, 2015), driven by the complexity of understanding technological systems, and a lack of, or limited, teaching tradition in the subject (Schooner et al., 2018). Some of the problems identified within Lgr11 include: Technology curriculum being open to interpretation (Hartell & Strimel, 2018); teachers experiencing difficulty in determining what constitutes understanding at anything beyond a ‘basic’ level (Schooner et al., 2018); and students being inexperienced with the socio-technological and technological literacy aspects of the course (Schooner et al., 2018). This is not surprising as engineering design is considered challenging to teach and assess (Hartell & Strimel, 2018; Hsu, Cardella, & Purzer, 2014); and often the skills and knowledge that teachers attempt to develop in the Swedish classrooms are not connected to the realities of students’ lives (Hartell & Strimel, 2018). The situation in other jurisdictions is unclear, due to the lack of published research. In the USA, STEM is being incorporated into the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) in which “engineering design is raised to the same level as scientific inquiry” (Ames, Reeve, Stewardson, & Lott, 2017, p. 19). But this will not be an easy feat, as these engineering concepts and skills will be embedded within the science discipline, and not as a stand-alone subject, to be taught by teachers who may lack the necessary knowledge and skills to effectively implement the STEM content and skills (Pearson, 2014). With the NGSS mandating science educators integrate engineering content and practices within their curricula, there is concern as to how science educators would be evaluated on “an area in which they had limited exposure and were not adequately prepared to teach” (Love, Wells, & Parkes, 2017, p. 46). The Standards for Technological Literacy (STL), originally published in 2000 by the International Technology Education Association, offers guidance to teacher educators (e.g. need to include engineering design, design process) (Rose, Carter, Brown, & Shumway, 2017). This suggests that the potential of misaligning classroom activities with student developmental preparedness is possible, which would then result in inappropriate challenges being set. In short, the USA could experience similar problems to that reported in the Swedish system; and hence the proposed adaptation of the existing Technacy and Innovation framework could have benefits that extend beyond Australia. The Technacy and Innovation Chart in Figure 1 provides a general framework to assist teachers in setting their expectations of students when undertaking challenges in the technology domain. Horizontally across (i.e. the column progression from left to right) shows the level of complexity of tasks that teachers can set their students. The vertical movement (i.e. row progression up a column) is the developmental indicator of innovation capabilities which the student presents. This row progression (up a column) is the degree to which a student can express their capability to improvise, to abstract, to infer and express their social altruism. Students when they first use technology tend to play with it, and hence would be situated in emergent play of the Technacy chart (Figure 1 bottom left). Emergent play typifies an individual who is a novice, that engages with technology for the purposes of enjoyment. But ‘play’ needs to have some useful function, such as a way of learning in a “less risky situation” (Bruner, 1972, p. 693). The educational psychologist Vygotsky (1978) described play as a supportive context for the development of children’s thinking. Therefore, an argument can be offered for children to have an opportunity to ‘play’ with the technology first, before they can begin to apply the technology to complex problem solving. However, at some stage the teacher will need to set the expectations of what needs to be done with that technology. This is where the teacher should be ‘pushing’/’stretching’ students horizontally across the Technacy chart, as shown in Figure 2, to more sophisticated levels of interaction with the technology. Developmental Abilities and Stretching Students Developmental expectations are critical for teaching efficiently and for presenting students with appropriate challenges in the classroom. If teachers set the wrong expectation of students in their class, teachers will then waste time in trying to wrestle control of the lesson. In this case, the lesson has either been too easy (i.e. better suited for students who struggle with inferential thinking), or too difficult (i.e. better suited for students with higher degree of inferential thinking, and hence higher up the Technacy chart). Figure 3 shows the progression in both teacher expectations (horizontal movement) and student driven (vertical movement) observable indicators of developmental ability. Figure 2: Teacher sets expectations by stretching students horizontally across, from left to right Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 23 Figure 3: Teacher sets expectations (horizontal movement) and students respond (vertical movement) In the classroom the teacher sets the level of complexity of the project or task outcome (i.e. the column progression from left to right across the row). In doing so we are helping to stretch students from ‘emergent play’ to ‘competent consolidation’, and eventually to develop the capability of progressing to ‘sophisticated pioneer’; in essence we are building students’ innovation capabilities (i.e. the vertical movement). The intention of this research is to measure this vertical progression (i.e. inferential thinking when solving novel problems). In doing so we should have the basis from which to stretch the students so that they progress to greater levels of complexity, and with the capability of stretching them to be more like pioneers. To achieve this ‘stretching’ of students’ capabilities to innovate requires teachers to have an appropriate conceptual framework, to help guide them to where they are supposed to be ‘stretching’ students toward and from what base. At present this guiding framework does not exist. The one-size fits all model where students are assessed on whether they meet age or year-based expectations is no longer acceptable if we truly want to develop innovation capabilities. A model based on the Technacy and Innovation framework that can assist teachers is at the epicenter of the research currently being undertaken by the authors. This framework should allow teachers to deliver technological problem-solving challenges that are tailored to individual learning needs, by accounting for the student’s developmental starting point and capability. This should address any disparity in learning outcomes and ensure that ‘strong’ students are challenged, and struggling students are not left unaided. To achieve this, consideration should be given to Vygotsky’s concept of the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) (Vygotsky, 1978), which is the level at which students are unable to complete a task on their own but are able to successfully do so with the guidance of either an adult (e.g. teacher) or a more capable peer (Vygotsky, 1978). The ZPD is relevant when trying to develop the capacity for innovation in students, as it supports a progression pathway by continually stretching and challenging students to ever-increasing levels of abstraction through well-sequenced problem-solving tasks. Realistically this is possible as the ZPD is not dependent upon the child’s age, but their stage of development (e.g. cognitive, social); however, this would ideally require a shift away from the present age-based progression of students in the Australian system. The proposed research aims to develop a conceptual model which would allow teachers to identify appropriate activities to be set, and which align with the students’ developmental abilities. Comparative Hypothetical Scenario The basis for a workable framework could be achieved from the outcome of a comparative investigation involving students at opposite ends of the adolescent stage of development. As children enter adolescence and progress through this developmental stage, thinking undergoes an important ‘qualitative’ change (Moshman, 2004). Consider the scenario where we have two different cohort groups: a Year 7 class (typically aged 11-12) and a Year 12 class (typically aged 17-18). The younger students would only just be showing signs of solving logical problems and abstract thought, as they progress from Piaget’s concrete operations stage to formal operational stage of reasoning (Piaget, 1972). The older students, who should be well entrenched in the formal operations stage, can think abstractly and logically, form hypotheses and solve problems systematically. They would be expected to handle more complicated projects due to having experience in inferential thinking. Now hypothetically, if we were to give each group the same complex challenge to solve in the classroom, then as teachers we are setting the same expectations of the younger students, as we are setting for the older students. The problem becomes evident when we draw upon the developmental literature such as Piaget and Erikson. We would expect that students would present certain qualities such as those presented in Table 1. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 24 Piaget’s cognitive development Year 7 Year 12 Students are only just showing signs of solving logical problems and abstract thought Students can think abstractly and logically, form hypotheses and solve problems systematically requirement (Baines, Blatchford, & Kutnick, 2003; Lwin, Goh, & Doyle, 2012). Over time, as students develop in maturity and social skills it becomes clearer that the level of social interaction is growing in complexity, with students sharing and making sense of their respective ideas to achieve an almost coherent end-product. A teacher observing this latter group of students would observe how they ‘trade’ their ideas. These attributes are necessary, though do not guarantee, achieving the ‘sophisticated pioneer’ state of the Technacy and Innovation model. Proposed Research Project Erikson’s stage of psychosocial crisis Industry vs Inferiority Identity vs Role confusion Social interaction Developing Relatively advanced Table 1: Comparison of some basic developmental characteristics of Year 7 vs Year 12 students Given the complex challenge to complete, the younger cohort would very likely struggle, while the older group, with the benefit of experiences in inferential thinking and working collaboratively, would be expected to handle the complex challenge. These older students should be able to complete the higher end more complex problems, as collaboration has the potential to generate a greater quality of ideas through the ideas-sharing process that arises from their group’s discussions (Littleton & Mercer, 2013). On the other hand, the younger students would be expected to struggle, lose focus, and end up becoming lost and/or disengaged. What we’re now demonstrating is that the younger group doesn’t do well when inappropriate developmental challenges are set. Challenges well above a student’s developmental ability can then feed into the younger student’s emotional state of mind, with them experiencing self-doubt (i.e. feeling inferior) through the negative experiences or failure in trying to complete tasks that are beyond them. Students can develop that mindset, I’m not ‘smart enough’ to do this subject, a mindset that can create a false view of their actual or real ability. The teacher therefore plays a key role in reinforcing a sense of competence, through encouragement and setting appropriate challenges in their lessons. Hence the need for a conceptual model in the technology engineering space. The other consideration is where targeted activities are ‘too easy’, which can have the effect of creating boredom in students, an often reported issue raised in research dealing with ‘gifted education’ (Preckel, Gotz, & Frenzel, 2010). Teachers therefore require the ability to identify when this occurs and why, and then either adapt their instruction or the nature of the tasks (Daschmann, Goetz, & Stupnisky, 2014). Regarding social interaction, children in the upper primary years and into the early high school years are only just beginning to develop the idea of working together. Often these students can be seen physically working next to each other around a table, but the reality is somewhat different. Though one may be given the appearance of students working together, what is really happening is parallel working. There is no real indication of the students interacting, exchanging, categorizing and sorting their ideas into a logical sequence to address the task Much research has focused on students’ cognitive abilities and IQ measurements, as well as the publishing of numerous papers advocating for action to improve student abilities in mathematics and science; whether to improve a country’s standing on various international benchmarking tests, or to ensure an educated workforce (Cheung, Slavin, Kim, & Lake, 2017). However, there is a lack of literature which looks at innovation and develops the capability of innovation. This is the objective of this research. Limited research is presently available on innovation in schools in the Engineering and Design domains, other than what has already been discussed, and certainly not in the Victorian implementation of the Technologies curriculum, Systems Engineering (Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority [VCAA], 2012). The proposed research project will aim to fill a gap in the body of research knowledge that currently exists and will seek to guide teachers on how best to implement technological problem-solving challenges across the high school years. As part of a mixed-method small-scale comparative case study, this study will be looking at two different cohorts, on a dimension of development of a child working technologically. The cohort groups would comprise: Grade 6/Year 7 students, age range 10 to 12 – these students will be progressing from Piaget’s concrete operations to formal operational reasoning, and hence would be expected to only just be developing the ability to abstract and infer; Year 11/Year 12 students, age range 16 to 18 – these students should be ‘clearly’ in the formal operational reasoning stage of Piaget’s cognitive development model. Both groups will be compared on the same measures/techniques in order to generate a reasonable comparison. This difference in age range should permit observations on how the Grade 6/Year 7 cohort who are undertaking a preliminary Systems Engineering style course compare to the Year 11/Year 12 cohort who had previously undertaken a preliminary course but are now considered advanced. Using the same measures, it is expected that the ‘younger’ cohort would be less developed compared to the ‘older’ group who have had more life skills experiences and/or exposure to various technologies. Life experiences have a profound impact on a student’s ability to infer and “comprehend the subtle details that a design ought accommodate for its end users” (Seemann, 2015a, p. 55). Thus, on average, students with more life experience show a greater aptitude for problem solving, critical thinking, and other skill sets. This should help establish that there is a difference in developmental terms. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 25 One of the other aims of this research is to understand the group social capability of a child to trade ideas in a group, as a core quality of innovation is working collaboratively. Both cohorts would be assessed on whether or not a viable solution has been produced. Other measures that will be considered include: the level of social interaction, use of language when communicating, and the level of emotional engagement with the activities and each other. The students’ attitude and behavior during each task should provide an indication of whether they are experiencing difficulties, such as meeting task expectations (Greene, 2018). In short, is the task too difficult. By establishing the existence of observable developmental differences between the two groups, and mapping these observations against the current generic Technacy and Innovation chart, we should be able to scaffold learning for students in the Systems Engineering domain. It should then be possible to set appropriate developmental challenges for students, rather than using a ‘one-size-fitsall’ or ‘hit-or-miss’ approach. For instance, by planning an activity, which is well beyond their developmental ability, we can show that students in the early high school years would struggle, and hence would lose focus and be unable to interact/engage with the task; essentially the teacher has ‘lost them’. It would also allow the identification of those exceptional ‘younger’ students in the earlier years of high school that need to be ‘stretched’, as they will be situated higher up on the Technacy chart (i.e. pushing towards ‘consolidated’/’sophisticated pioneer’) and hence we can show the teacher that they should be capable of handling some of the more complex innovation tasks. By having knowledge of these developmental differences we’ll be able to help teachers better scaffold their lessons. This could manifest itself in the teacher adjusting their level of assistance to better suit the student’s current level of performance, by chunking the tasks, and/or offering some specific strategies to help guide the student. Teachers will also be able to identify situations where students are unwilling to compromise during the ideas exchange by utilizing team-building activities (Greene, 2016), as students need to realise the value and unique qualities (e.g. strengths) that each student brings. Conclusion If we believe the ‘need to innovate’ rhetoric coming from businesses, State and Federal governments, from our Chief Scientist, and other influential organisations; and if we believe the concerns raised regards the ability of schools to develop the capacity of students to think and act as future innovators, then Technacy must be placed on a similar footing as literacy and numeracy within the secondary school system. While plausible conceptual frameworks exist in literacy and numeracy to help guide teachers, such a model in the Systems Engineering domain does not exist, yet this Systems Engineering curriculum area is a key feeder for design related university courses such as Product Design Engineering. Without such a framework in the Systems Engineering genre, it becomes a challenge for classroom teachers to systematically identify, classify, diagnose and develop targeted learning strategies for their students. Consequently, lessons may either fail to ‘stretch’ those students that need to be challenged or overwhelm other students to the point where they become ‘lost’ and disengaged. Conceptual frameworks can provide teachers with practical support in the form of assessment or diagnostic tools to help establish a student’s current level of knowledge, skill and understanding. This acts as important feedback for the teacher who can intervene and take corrective action, to identify the next steps in learning, and maintain the development in inferential thinking, which is a key ‘innovation capability’ quality. The existing generic Technacy and Innovation framework has the potential to be adapted for the purposes of assisting Systems Engineering teachers in developing the innovation capabilities of their students. Acknowledgement The first author would like to express his sincere thanks to the Australian Government for their support of his research via the Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship. References Ames, T., Reeve, E., Stewardson, G., & Lott, K. (2017). Wanted for 21st century schools: Renaissance STEM teacher preferred. Journal of Technology Education, 28(2), 19-30. Atman, C. J., Adams, R. S., Cardella, M. E., Turns, J., Mosborg, S., & Saleem, J. (2007). Engineering design processes: A comparison of students and expert practitioners. Journal of Engineering Education, 96(4), 359-379. Baines, E., Blatchford, P., & Kutnick, P. (2003). Changes in grouping practices over primary and secondary school. International Journal of Educational Research, 39(1-2), 9-34. Barr, A., Gillard, J., Firth, V., Scrymgour, M., Welford, R., Lomax-Smith, J., & Constable, E. (2008). Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians: ERIC. Binder, C. (2003). Doesn’t everybody need fluency? Performance Improvement, 42(3), 14-20. Brei, D., Frecker, M., & Slocum, A. (2009). Time for design innovation. Journal of Mechanical Design, 131(3), 030301. Bridgstock, R., Dawson, S., & Hearn, G. (2011). Cultivating innovation through social relationships: A qualitative study of outstanding Australian innovators in science and technology and the creative industries. In Technology for creativity and innovation: Tools, techniques and applications (pp. 104-120). Hershey: IGI Global. Bruner, J. S. (1972). Nature and uses of immaturity. American Psychologist, 27(8), 687. Centre for Education Statistics and Evaluation. (2018). 'Count Me In Too': The learning framework in number and its impact on teacher knowledge and pedagogy. Retrieved from https://www.cese.nsw.gov.au/evaluation-repositorysearch/the-learning-framework-in-number-and-itsimpact-on-teacher-knowledge-and-pedagogy Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 26 Cheung, A., Slavin, R. E., Kim, E., & Lake, C. (2017). Effective secondary science programs: A bestevidence synthesis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(1), 58-81. Ciriaci, D., & Muscio, A. (2014). University choice, research quality and graduates’ employability: Evidence from Italian National Survey Data. European Educational Research Journal, 13(2), 199219. Crismond, D. (2013). Design practices and misconceptions. The Science Teacher, 80(1), 50. Cropley, D. H. (2015). Chapter 1: Introduction. In D. H. Cropley (Ed.), Creativity in Engineering (pp. 1-12). San Diego: Academic Press. Daniel, A. D. (2016). Fostering an entrepreneurial mindset by using a design thinking approach in entrepreneurship education. Industry and Higher Education, 30(3), 215-223. Daschmann, E. C., Goetz, T., & Stupnisky, R. H. (2014). Exploring the antecedents of boredom: Do teachers know why students are bored? Teaching and Teacher Education, 39, 22-30. Dow, K. L. (2003). Australia’s teachers, Australia’s future: Advancing innovation, science, technology and mathematics. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia. Engberg, M., & Wolniak, G. C. (2013). College student pathways to the STEM disciplines. Teachers College Record, 115(1). Fleer, M. (2016). Technologies for children. Port Melbourne, VIC: Cambridge University Press. Gonski, D., Arcus, T., Boston, K., Gould, V., Johnson, W., O’Brien, L., . . . Roberts, M. (2018). Through growth to achievement: Report of the review to achieve educational excellence in Australian schools. Greene, K. (2016). Collaboration, texts, and teambuilding: Creating opportunities for conversation and understanding. English Journal, 106(1), 13. Greene, R. W. (2018). Transforming school discipline: Shifting from power and control to collaboration and problem solving. Childhood Education, 94(4), 22-27. Hartell, E., Gumaelius, L., & Svärdh, J. (2015). Investigating technology teachers’ self-efficacy on assessment. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 25(3), 321-337. Hartell, E., & Strimel, G. J. (2018). What is it called and how does it work: examining content validity and item design of teacher-made tests. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 1-22. Hsu, M.-C., Cardella, M. E., & Purzer, Ş. (2014). Assessing design. In Ş. Purzer, J. Strobel, & M. E. Cardella (Ed.), Engineering in pre-college settings (pp. 303-314). West Lafayette, Indiana: Purdue University Press. Keane, T., Keane, W. F., & Blicblau, A. S. (2016). Beyond traditional literacy: Learning and transformative practices using ICT. Education and Information Technologies, 21(4), 769-781. Kim, K. (2018). How can parents and teachers cultivate creative climates to help children become innovators? Childhood Education, 94(2), 10-17. Langowitz, N., & Minniti, M. (2007). The entrepreneurial propensity of women. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31(3), 341-364. Littleton, K., & Mercer, N. (2013). Interthinking: Putting talk to work. London, United Kingdom: Routledge. Love, T. S., Wells, J. G., & Parkes, K. A. (2017). Examining the teaching of science, and technology and engineering content and practices: An instrument modification study. Journal of Technology Education, 29(1), 45-65. Lwin, S. M., Goh, C., & Doyle, P. (2012). ‘I’m going to split you all up’: Examining transitions to group/pair work in two primary English classrooms. Language and Education, 26(1), 19-33. Montgomery, K. (2017). Innovation spotlight: Disrupting high school education with design and technology: For students, led by students. Childhood Education, 93(1), 80-81. Moshman, D. (2004). Adolescent rationality and development: Cognition, morality, identity. Psychology Press. National Research Council. (2009). Engineering in K-12 education: Understanding the status and improving the prospects (0309137780). Retrieved from https://www.nsf.gov/attachments/117803/public/1b-Eng_in_K-12_Ed.pdf NSW Education Standards Authority. (2012a). Working Mathematically. Retrieved from https://syllabus.nesa.nsw.edu.au/mathematics/mathe matics-k10/working-mathematically-outcomes/ NSW Education Standards Authority. (2012b). Working Technologically. Retrieved from https://syllabus.nesa.nsw.edu.au/science/sciencek10/content/973/ O’Connor, A. (2013). A conceptual framework for entrepreneurship education policy: Meeting government and economic purposes. Journal of Business Venturing, 28(4), 546-563. O’Connor, A., Seery, N., & Canty, D. (2018). The experiential domain: Developing a model for enhancing practice in D&T education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28(1), 85-99. Office of the Chief Scientist. (2012). Health of Australian Science. Retrieved from https://www.chiefscientist.gov.au/wpcontent/uploads/OCS_Health_of_Australian_Science _LOWRES1.pdf Pearson, G. (2014). Foreword. In Ş. Purzer, J. Strobel, & M. E. Cardella (Ed.), Engineering in pre-college settings: Synthesizing research, policy, and practices (pp. ix-x). West Lafayette, Indiana: Purdue University Press. Piaget, J. (1972). Intellectual evolution from adolescence to adulthood. Human development, 15(1), 1-12. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 27 Preckel, F., Gotz, T., & Frenzel, A. (2010). Ability grouping of gifted students: effects on academic selfconcept and boredom. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3), 451-472. Qiu, X., Cano-Kollmann, M., & Mudambi, R. (2017). Competitiveness and connectivity in design innovation: A study of Norwegian furniture industry. Competitiveness Review, 27(5), 533-548. Rose, M. A., Carter, V., Brown, J., & Shumway, S. (2017). Status of elementary teacher development: Preparing elementary teachers to deliver technology and engineering experiences. Journal of Technology Education, 28(2), 2-18. Schooner, P., Klasander, C., & Hallström, J. (2018). Swedish technology teachers’ views on assessing student understandings of technological systems. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28(1), 169-188. https://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/Documents/vce/technolo gy/SystemsEngineeringSD-2013.pdf Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wendt, J. L., & Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. J. (2015). The effect of online collaboration on adolescent sense of community in eighth-grade physical science. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(5), 671683. World Economic Forum. (2017). The Global Human Capital Report 2017. Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-humancapital-report-2017 Seemann, K. (2003). Basic principles in holistic technology education. Journal of Technology Education, 14(2), 28-39. Seemann, K. (2009). Technacy education: Understanding cross-cultural technological practice. In J. Fien, R. Maclean, & M.-G. Park (Eds.), Work, learning and sustainable development (pp. 117-131). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. Seemann, K. (2015a). Culture in design, technology and environment. In K. Stables & S. Keirl (Eds.), Environment, ethics and cultures (pp. 53-63). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Seemann, K. (2015b). Designing for cultural groups and humanization. In K. Stables & S. Keirl (Eds.), Environment, ethics and cultures (pp. 101-117). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Seemann, K., & Talbot, R. (1995). Towards a holistic understanding of technology teaching and learning among Aboriginal Australians. Prospects, 25(4), 761775. Shah, M., Grebennikov, L., & Nair, C. S. (2015). A decade of study on employer feedback on the quality of university graduates. Quality Assurance in Education, 23(3), 262-278. Singapore Ministry of Education. (2011). H2 Computing Syllabus 9597 Pre-university. Retrieved from https://www.moe.gov.sg/docs/defaultsource/document/education/syllabuses/sciences/files/ preuniversity_h2_computing State Government of Victoria. (2018). Diagnostic assessment tools in English. Retrieved from https://www.education.vic.gov.au/school/teachers/tea chingresources/discipline/english/Pages/date.aspx Tarbutton, T. (2018). Leveraging 21st century learning and technology to create caring diverse classroom cultures. Multicultural Education, 25(2), 4-6. Trust, T. (2014). A call-for-action for improving STEM education. Issues in Teacher Education, 23, 147-150. Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority [VCAA]. (2012). VCE Systems Engineering Study Design. Retrieved from Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 28 Defining a curriculum through activity: Facilitating epistemic autonomy in technology education Andrew Doyle1, Niall Seery2, and Lena Gumaelius1 1 KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden; 2 Athlone Institute of Technology, Ireland Abstract This paper problematises the current status of technology education on curricula internationally. Contemporary understandings from the philosophy of technology are used to depict how technological knowledge differs from more conventional knowledge bases, leading to questions of how technology education can be compared to other areas on the curriculum. Through exploring the interdependence between technological knowledge and technological activity, the need to situate technological activity as the medium of learning in technology education is advocated. In moving beyond the behaviourist approaches evident in technology educations technical heritage, advocating for technological activity as the medium for learning alone may not be sufficient in changing enacted practices. An ontology-based curriculum is proposed as a possible solution to this, where technology educators share a conceptual understanding of what is of importance to the learner, and have the epistemic autonomy to facilitate engagement with technological activity through fluid curricular boundaries. Further to this, difficulties that have traditionally and more contemporarily impeded the actualisation of this perspective on technology education policy and practice are discussed. Central to this is the need for recognition of technology educations unique epistemic identity, as the paper cautions against the comparison with conventional disciplines. Through articulating this unique epistemology and providing a way in which it may be actualised, it is envisioned that this discussion may support policy-makers’ and teachers’ advocacy for technology education and its contributions to general education. Keywords Technology education, epistemology, ontology-based curriculum, technological activity, and, curricular identity Introduction The past number of years has seen significant changes to the ecology of technology education. Having evolved from technical or vocational education, where there was an explicit purpose in the preparation of learners for the world of work (Owen-Jackson, 2015), the subject area is now recognised as holding a “fragile” (Jones, Buntting, & De Vries, 2013, p. 206) position on many curricula internationally. Without a clearly articulated and commonly understood purpose for technology education, the curricular identity of the subject area has been called into question. This is perhaps most evident in the English national context, where an Expert Panel review identified that (design and) technology education has weaker epistemological roots than other subjects, and proposed that it should therefore be removed from the National Curriculum (Department for Education, 2011). Although extensive lobbying from members of the technology education community and supporting organisations and societies prevented this from happening, it is recognised that the subject’s position within English schools remains precarious (Atkinson, 2017). From a curriculum analysis perspective, McGarr and Lynch (2017) problematised the position of technology education within the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) agenda. Here it was identified that technology and engineering hold a lower status to science and mathematics because these subject areas lack a defined content knowledge boundary. This epistemological differentiation between technology education and more conventional disciplines has resulted in the technology education communities’ advocacy for the status of their subject and its position within school curricula. Contentions between the technology education communities advocacy for their subject in the face of education systems which appear to no longer value, or perhaps fail to recognise, the unique contribution of technology to general education form the basis for this paper. With the agenda of supporting technology educators in articulating and facilitating technology education at the level of classroom practice, this paper unpacks technology education from an epistemological perspective in an effort to understand what has resulted in the subject area being conceived as fragile. Following this, we propose an alternative to the conventional epistemic-bound curriculum in an effort to remain true to the nature of technological activity, and emancipate technological activity. In conclusion, through acknowledging the difficulties, emergent and traditional, that may impede the enactment of curricula of this nature, we envision that this discussion may support policy-makers’ and teachers’ advocacy for technology education and its contributions to general education. First however, it is necessary to articulate contemporary understandings of the epistemology of technology education, as doing so is necessary to understand the subject areas curricular identity. An epistemology for technology education For some time there has been recognition that technology education has encountered difficulties in achieving continuity between what is depicted in policy and curricular documents and the reality of enacted practices. This is best exemplified through the evolution of technical education in the English national context, where the introduction of design to technology education shifted the Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 29 epistemology from the acquiring of predetermined knowledge towards an educational model where the emphasis is described in terms of the transferability of concepts, principles and skills between different contexts (Dow, 2014). In spite of clear distinctions between what technology education is not (Dakers, 2014b), articulating the intricacies of what technology education is has proven difficult, with a significant proportion of the technology education rhetoric dedicated to this over the past number of years (Gibson, 2008; ITEA, 2007; Ritz, 2009; Rossouw, Hacker, & de Vries, 2011). The lack of conceptual coherence indicated by the existence of this literature sheds light on the current status of enacted practice, where it has been identified that practices in the subject area have not shifted in alignment with international discourse and policy changes (Banks & Barlex, 1999; Dakers, 2005a; Doyle, Seery, Canty, & Buckley, 2017; Mittell & Penny, 1997). Often referred to as a disparity between the rhetoric and reality of the subject area (Barlex, 2000; Kimbell, 2006; Spendlove, 2015), the need to crystallise the subject area in articulating a consensual understanding of what technology education endeavours to achieve emerges. As an alternative to inevitable curricular reframing, reform or rebranding however, it is first necessary to explore technological knowledge, and consider the context dependency of learning in technology education. As despite the need to crystallise the subject area, the epistemological differences between technology, and science and maths outlined in the introduction suggests that defining the subject area through explicating a body of declarative content knowledge, as is the case with conventional disciplines, may not be appropriate for technology education. The inclusion of design within technology education necessities this alternative perspective, as technological (as opposed to technical) knowledge differs from conventional knowledge bases. Technological knowledge: A perspective on utility In considering the epistemic emancipation of technological knowledge, Houkes depicts a “double demarcation problem” (2009, p. 327). With regard to articulating a taxonomy of technological knowledge, Houkes acknowledges that one must define the context in which the taxonomy is to be defined before knowledge can be categorised. Making both of these definitions results in an idiosyncratic taxonomy, that is, a taxonomy which cannot be translated to alternative contexts is developed, in essence, nullifying the initial objective. A useful way of conceiving this is to consider technological knowledge independent of a specific context, and ask the question; what now differentiates this knowledge from other disciplines of knowledge? It is likely that the remaining knowledge can be more appropriately termed scientific knowledge, as it becomes an expression of the physical world and its phenomenon (Herschbach, 1995). Assertions of the need to support the development of technological knowledge are therefore problematic, as the differentiation between engagement with authentic technological activity and engagement with predetermined technological knowledge raises questions as to whether or not you can explicate technological knowledge for the purposes of writing a technology curriculum. The formulation of technology curricula as bases of declarative knowledge become problematic as (1) it is unclear whether or not this knowledge constitutes technological knowledge, and (2) predetermining relevant declarative knowledge introduces the potential to contort understandings of the nature of technology, in that the subject may be reduced to learning about technology as opposed to doing technology. Although formal declarative knowledge is utilised in technology activity, its application is transdisciplinary in nature and highly context-specific. For example, knowledge from science, agriculture, construction, mathematics amongst countless others can be described as technological knowledge dependant on its usefulness in a particular context. In other words, technology cannot be classified as a conventional discipline, in the sense that a discipline consists of a body of content knowledge. By extension technology education is not a conventional school subject. A particularly useful way of conceiving this is to adopt the epistemological differentiation put forward by Morrison-Love (2016), where ‘transformation’ is considered as the epistemological basis for technology education, in a similar way to ‘proof’ within Mathematics and ‘interpretation’ within Science. In alignment with philosophical perspectives on technological knowledge, and its interdependency with technological activity, the centrality of action to the nature of activity learners engage with within technology education becomes apparent. This perspective on defining technological knowledge through activity is reflective of much of the discourse around the philosophy of technology education. Here, it is widely accepted that the classical philosophical notion of knowledge as justified true belief does not necessarily apply to technological knowledge (de Vries, 2016). Norström (2014) suggests that the main reason for this stems from technological knowledge’s inherent action orientation as technologists are less concerned with whether knowledge is true or not, as it is instead focused on whether the knowledge is successful in guiding actions towards certain goals. This epistemological fluidity, as articulated by Norman (2013) results in an educational context where “the domain of knowledge as a separate entity is irrelevant; the relevance of knowledge is determined by its application to the technological issue at hand. So the skill does not lie in the recall and application of knowledge, but in the decisions about, and sourcing of, what knowledge is relevant” (Williams, 2009, pp. 248– 249). A context for epistemic autonomy The identification of weak epistemological roots by the Expert Panel review of design and technology education in England (Department for Education, 2011) is therefore not unfounded, as technology holds a unique epistemology relative to more conventional disciplines. Although the elective use of declarative knowledge may be perceived as an underdeveloped epistemology, in remaining true to the nature of technology, an agile epistemology is necessitated in technology education. From this, it is important to note that technology education is not conceived in the same way as more conventional subject areas. The articulation of a conventional epistemology would be a disservice to the subject area, as it would likely emphasise declarative content over the ability to engage with technological activity. There are a couple of important points of note here, as the variability of learner experience introduced with teacher and learner epistemic autonomy facilitated Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 30 though fluid epistemological boundaries potentiates vast disparities in teachers’ enacted practices. Firstly, there is a need for a context for technological activity. Although this may appear obvious, the perspective on technology curricula proposed thus far has critiqued the disadvantages of situating technological activity within a specific content boundary. It is not our intention to advocate an unbounded technology education. Kimbell (1994) articulated the traditional progression of tasks in technology education, highlighting the inverse relationship between learner autonomy and a framework of constraints which govern their activities. In theory, as learners progressed through their education, the framework of constraints governing their work would become increasingly looser. Over a period of time, learner procedural autonomy is facilitated as a result of developing the capabilities to operate in a technological context, by the development of foundational knowledge and skills within that specific context. In technical education, this context was most often a specific material, such as wood, metal, food, or in some cases, textiles. Whereas in technical education the development of competencies within this context was viewed as the goal of the subject, as it was in essence the preparations of learners for the world of work, technology education utilises contexts for practice as a means to an end. The educational objective for technology education is therefore not in the recall or application of predetermined knowledge but rather the application of “provisional knowledge” (Kimbell, 2011, p. 7). In other words, technology education objectives are not concerned with specific content knowledge but rather a higher understanding of how to use (unspecified) knowledge and skills to identify and resolve (unknown) problems. As a result of this, a context for technology education, although necessary, is only useful in so far as to prepare learners to engage in a transdisciplinary manner – to transverse contexts. Williams, Lockley, and Mangan (2016) noted that a significant implication of describing the goals of technology education at a conceptual level is that educators no longer have an agreed upon epistemology, without which, continuity in the organisation of topics of inquiry becomes problematic. Despite these concerns, efforts to remain true to the nature of technology as previously outlined necessitate conceptually oriented curricular goals. The concerns highlighted by Williams et al. lead to the second important point of note, without common understandings of the goals of emergent technology curricula there is an increased potential and likelihood for practices to diverge from curricular intentions. As the epistemological autonomy of teachers (and learners) is greatly amplified through epistemologically fluid content boundaries, there is a greater potential for divergences in practices in technology education than more conventional disciplines. Indeed, reflections on the early years of technology education are fraught with examples of the behavioural remnants of technical education (Dakers, 2005b). The paradigm shift necessitated was undoubtedly hindered by the similarities between technical and technology education contexts. Further to this, the epistemological differentiation between learning about predetermined technological artefacts and processes and engaging in authentic technological activity necessitates a significant shift in teachers’ perspectives on capability in technology education. Without a clearly articulated common understanding of the conceptually-oriented goals of technology education, difficulties with balancing a predetermined context on one hand, and the facilitation of epistemic autonomy on the other, in all probability contributed to the subversion to traditional practices. Evidence to support this has been identified throughout technology educations history (e.g. Atkinson, 2000; Banks & Barlex, 1999; Doyle et al., 2017; Mittell & Penny, 1997). Understanding the relationship between conceptually oriented curricular goals and teachers’ pedagogical aspirations for teaching and learning in technology education are therefore of critical importance in understanding the nature of enacted practices in technology education. Acknowledgements of the need to articulate the goals of technology education independent of contexts for learning have resulted in a number of efforts to articulate learning outcomes in the form of higher constructs. Notably here are the concepts of technological capability (Black & Harrison, 1985; Gibson, 2008; Kelly, Kimbell, Paterson, Sexton, & Stables, 1987; Kimbell, 2011) and technological literacy (Dakers, 2014a, 2014b; Gagel, 2004; Ingerman & Collier-Reed, 2011; Petrina, 2000, 2007; Williams, 2009). More recently still, with acknowledgements of the need for learners to be more sociologically aware of the decisions they make when engaging with technological activity, the notion of a disposition towards the subject area has come to the fore. With the disruption of design to what was a well-articulated epistemology in technical education, an increasing emphasis has been placed in the need to consider the ethical component of technological activity (Dakers, 2014b; Keirl, 2018). This has resulted in an articulation of a disposition towards technology, where the need for the learner to balance speculation (what if) and critique (how and why) when engaging with technology education (Williams & Stables, 2017) has emerged as a useful way of articulating what is means to be considered technologically capable or literate. There are significant difficulties associated with consolidating conceptually-oriented goals for technology education, within an agile epistemological boundary, where robustness of delivery is ensured through commonly understood and shared concepts, which transverse contexts. By means of exploring this unique perspective on how a subject may be conceived, the following presents two brief case studies which situate technological activity as the goal of the subject area despite different cultural heritages. Case one: New Zealand Technology education in New Zealand has its roots in the Manual and Technical Instruction act that was passed into law in 1900; technical education was for the children of labourers and farm workers. The subject was viewed as providing these students with the opportunity to incorporate practical, skill-based programs into their schooling, and prepare them for manual trade employment upon leaving school (Milne, 2018). Despite the formulation of new subjects throughout the 20th century, and the introduction of a design focus in the Workshop Craft and Home Economic syllabus in 1986, the emphasis placed on skills-based programs continued and failed to significantly embrace the changing needs of society. As a result of this, technology education was introduced as a Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 31 subject to the curriculum in 1995. With its renewed focus to shift towards embracing the needs of a modern society, technology education in New Zealand was introduced as a mandatory subject for all students from Year one to ten (approx. 5 to 14 years old). With an overall aim of developing students’ technological literacy, this curriculum was based on three strands; technological knowledge and understanding, technological capability, and, technological and society, where technological practice was identified as the vehicle through which students should develop this literacy (Ministry of Education, 1995). In spite of significant successes in terms of student engagement with technology and their ability to take ownership of their own learning, it was noted that the nature of the technological literacy developed as a result of students undertaking technological practice alone, was often limited in breadth and depth (Compton & France, 2007). Compton and Harwood (2008) noted how the constraint of embedding knowledge and skill development within specific technological practice, the overall literacy developed was often very narrow in focus. That is, knowledge and skills developed were highly context dependent with students being unable to transfer understandings into different situations. Findings of this nature led to the realisation that a focus on technological practice in itself was not sufficient and from this, extensive research was undertaken, culminating in the publication of a new technology curriculum in 2007. The aim of the 2007 curriculum was to develop programs that would foster “a broad technological literacy that would equip [learners] to participate in society as informed citizens but also give them access to technology-related careers” (Ministry of Education, 2007, p. 32). With an increased emphasis on the need to support students’ technological practice from a sociological perspective, this facilitated a shift in developing technological literacy that was functional in nature to a technological literacy that was more “liberatory” (Compton & Harwood, 2008, p. 1) in nature. The central focus of this shift at a curricular level was the introduction of a strand which addressed the philosophy of technology: the nature of technology. Technological knowledge was retained as a strand and technological practice was introduced. These three strands are then transposed across seven technological areas: information and communications technology, food technology, materials technology, electronics and control technology, structures and mechanisms, production and process technology, and biotechnology. Case two: Republic of Ireland Technology education in Ireland also shares a technical history, and similar to New Zealand, the systemic conditions of the 1980’s saw the first attempt to intellectualise the subjects. This saw a comparative provision with the more established academic subjects and as such could be utilised to support matriculation to higher education. Despite this, technology education in Ireland does not hold a mandatory status for all learners, and opposed to having one overarching technology education subject, its provision in the Irish context is divided amongst four different contexts. The articulation of the goals for the subject area place the emphasis on developing technological capability (NCCA, 2004). In alignment with perspectives of the centrality of action to enabling technological capability (Kimbell & Stables, 2007), there is a commonality of agenda in supporting ‘design and make’ as a core tenet across the four contexts. Somewhat bound by legacy and heritage, the different contexts for technology in the Irish curriculum are the descendants of vocationally oriented subjects, and at a glance there is very little difference between how they may be perceived. In lower secondary education, where the programme of study is focused on the learner developing as an active citizen, with the focus on managing themselves, maintaining well-being, and having the capacity to utilise and critique information and communications, the proposed suite of technology education subject comprises of; Materials Technology (Wood), Engineering, Technical Graphics and a bespoke Technology subject. The subtly of difference between determinist vocational education and the current subjects is in how they are articulated. For example, there is a significant overlap between Technology, Engineering, and Materials Technology (Wood), in process technology, materials, application of knowledge and problem-solving. However, it is in acknowledging the move beyond technical knowledge and skill acquisition that provides for a more considered and sophisticated subject specification that is centred on the development of a disposition and not only knowledge and skills. Engineering focuses on a specific way of thinking, utilising a cyclical process of action and review. Precision is emphasised as important within this context, and the nature of activity is predicated in the utilisation of knowledge and skills in the process of developing a functional solution. This way of thinking is considered and systematic, focused on achieving the optimal solution to a problem with predetermined design constraints. Technology on the other hand adopts a more ‘black box’ approach to the treatment of this process, a significant shift in disposition. The iterative dialectic that supports the relationship between speculation and critique requires a varied approach to the utility of knowledge and how success is defined with respect to outputs and outcomes. The disposition is governed by utility and not absolutes. This endeavour is supported by thematic assessment briefs and as such requires a ‘what if’ mantra. Shifting across the spectrum from defined execution, through an innovation agenda to a more design capability, positions Material Technology (Wood). The focus on the material, a core element of the subject, may appear restrictive but with a focus on designerly activity and craft education it inhabits an area of provision that develops design and make with a focus on functionality and aesthetics. Appreciation for craft execution and an emphasis on sustainability provide an explicit context for sociologically aware design activity. The agenda here is not to provide an articulation of what is unique about the Irish technology education context, but to explore what is unique about technology education. The division of a conventional school subjects into four different areas likely sounds both complicated and unnecessary. Technology education on the other hand, as exemplified in this example, transverses a variety of contexts, from existing subject cultures predicated on the use of materials, to emerging perspectives such as the seven technological areas identified in the New Zealand case. The point to take from the Irish example is that the shift from a conventional curriculum to a more holistic interpretation of what it means to be technologically Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 32 capable can be done in a multitude of different ways. For that reason, it is important to reiterate that the development of technological capability in different contexts is not bound by content knowledge. This knowledge, although often examined, is primarily utilised as a facilitator to the more higher-order capabilities outlined earlier. This paradigm shift in how technical and technology education are conceived relative to one another is further exemplified through the ongoing discussion to frame the new subjects not as curricula, but as specifications for learning. Conceptual coherence The difficulties associated with shifting the paradigm from technical to technology education that have been observed over the past number of decades (Dakers, 2005a) suggests the need for an alternative way of conceiving technology education. For the perspective of technology education outlined in this article to manifest in practice, there is a need for all members in the educational transaction to understand the reality of technology education. This is of significant concern for the future of the subject area. Of particular interest was recognition in the New Zealand context that defining technology education through activity alone may not be sufficient, as teachers and learners may circumnavigate authentic activity through adopting formulaic approaches to project work (Compton & Harwood, 2008; Harwood, 2014). In response to these findings, the introduction of a strand concerning the nature of technology on the New Zealand curriculum was in essence an effort to shift practices towards more authentic technological activity, one that considers the philosophical and societal implications of actions. It can be argued that the Irish system has mirrored this transition, as although the focus can be interpreted as a shift towards a design based philosophy, this shift has been governed by recognition of the need to evolve technology education beyond hegemonic practices (Dakers, 2005a). Whether technology education is articulated in the context of sociologically aware technological activity, or engagement with design activity, the focus has moved from obtaining predetermined declarative knowledge and skills to situating the learner at the centre of a technological process. This shift can be characterised as a move away from technical education as a discipline, predicated on the development of predetermined knowledge and skills, towards technology education as an ontology, predicated on a consensual understanding of learners’ abilities to actively engage with technological activity, across a variety of contexts. An ontology-based curriculum The disruption of design to technology education necessitates a fluid epistemological boundary. With a fluid epistemological boundary, the ways in which we conceive a school subject need to be reconsidered, as without an epistemic safety net, the potential for teacher and learner activity to diverge beyond conceptual understandings becomes too significant. One possible way to consolidate this is to consider an ontology-based curriculum. An ontology-based curriculum situates a conceptual understanding as the ultimate goal of an educational program, and the contexts and methods by which these goals are achieved are to a degree, at the discretion of the teacher and learner. The ontology-based approach is now commonplace in programming education (Chen, 2009; Chi, 2009), but there is a significant difference between how this is conceived and how technology education is articulated. Within programming education, governing concepts are well defined, and the range of possible routes for the learner is regulated by the nature of the computer programme(s) and associated capabilities. In other words the context is bound. Applying an ontology-based approach to the transdisciplinary nature of technology education is of concern as the quantity of variables introduced by a relatively boundless context, particularly in the later years of schooling, may become too difficult for learners to navigate and for teachers to guide. Furthermore, ensuring continuity of understanding, or ontological position, between teachers should be of concern as the potential for learners to diverge beyond the remit of concepts is likely, and therefore teacher must be constantly aware of this and be equipped to redirect learning to the concept(s) at hand. In considering a shift towards an ontology-based curriculum, the traditional approach to teaching and learning in technical education should be discussed as it still holds place in contemporary practice. Although project-based learning has been criticised to a large degree because of the evidence of teachers and learners adopting ritualistic approaches to technological activity (Kimbell, 2018a; Spendlove, 2012), another perspective is that the perpetuation of these habitual practices by many technology educators may have slowed the encroachment of declarative-knowledge centric practices. In other words, although the hegemonic behaviourist cycle (Dakers, 2005b) undoubtedly stymied the development of technology education practice to align with policy initiatives and international discourse, technology education is perhaps in a better place now than if curricula were reduced to declarative knowledge bases. As evidenced in the New Zealand context, adapting curricula alone is not sufficient in shifting enacted practice, particularly if emerging conceptions of capability can be contorted to fit existing practices and their contexts (Compton & Harwood, 2008). It is therefore important that an ontology-based approach to formulating a curriculum for technology education acknowledge both the ontological and epistemological considerations for practice. Work that has already been conducted in technology education may be of use in facilitating such a transition. For example, utilising a modified-Delphi approach with participants from the international research community, Rossouw, Hacker, and de Vries (2011) identified five main concepts for use in curriculum development in technology education: (1) designing (‘design as a verb’), (2) systems, (3) modelling, (4) resources, and (5) values. Further to this, this study identified researchers’ perspectives on suitable contexts where these concepts may be developed. With the context specificity of technological activity, these overarching concepts are particularly useful in formulating an ontology-based curriculum as they facilitate the shift away from contrived technological activity. The sustainability of a curriculum should also be discussed when contemplating an ontology-based approach for technology education. The fluidity of context facilitated through a holistic understanding of technological activity lends itself to the adaption of new contexts with relative ease. In this sense, teachers (and learners) can adapt practices relative to what they find interesting, such as Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 33 recent developments in a field (Spendlove, 2012) or disruptive technologies (Barlex, Givens, Hardy, & Steeg, 2016). This approach requires the technology teacher to take ownership of the contexts for learning and in the cases where teachers actively engage with these decisions – the potential future-proofing of a technology curriculum. There is no formula for identifying which contexts are appropriate for learning, other than the potential for learners to engage with the ontological position outlined in the curriculum. Facilitated by the concept–context approach proposed by Rossouw et al. (2011), an ontology-based curriculum predicated on malleability of context where content becomes subservient to overarching concepts as learning goals very much aligns with philosophical perspectives on technological knowledge previously outlined. However, there are issues, both contemporary and more long standing, which may serve to perpetuate the disparity between emerging perspectives on the potential of technology education and the actuality of everyday practices. These challenges are discussed in the following section. Activity as a curricular goal in practice Predicating a school subject on the intellectual process embedded in technological activity is quite a departure from the nature of conventional descriptive knowledgecentric disciplines. The primary question which arises from this perspective is whether or not a subject centred on the development of an ontological position in a domaingeneral context should hold the same status within the curriculum as disciplines with a more conventional knowledge base. As noted, the goals of technology education are concerned with the learner’s capability to engage with technological activity, and therefore supporting technological knowledge in the conventional sense of supporting descriptive knowledge cannot remain the primary aim. Enabling the development of technological capability or literacy through facilitating learners’ engagement with technological problems, where they are required to identify and apply relevant knowledge that is not predetermined, has significant implications for enacted practice in technology education. There are a number of perspectives which must therefore be considered when contemplating the introduction of an ontology-based curriculum for technology education. Firstly, perspectives on the performative climate of many educational contexts identified that a neo-managerialist culture has resulted in the marketisation of education across all levels of provision (Lynch, Grummell, & Devine, 2012). Characterised by strides for accountability, systems now purport to measure quantifiable outcomes, most often through the lens of educational assessment. Within this system, efficiency of schooling has come to the fore as both the amount of time ‘spent’ learning and the quantity of learning per unit of time are sought to be optimised. As the focus of technology education lies in the learners ability to select and apply appropriate knowledge rather than to recall explicit knowledge, the degree to which they can be compared to conventional subjects pedagogical and assessment practices is not known. And as noted, it would be inappropriate to manipulate technology curricula and practices to fit the profile of more conventional declarative knowledge-centric disciplines. Perspectives on assessment within such a system, relative to what we know about technology education, are therefore also of importance. With the emphasis on process, in a variety of contexts, the difficulties associated with balancing criteria as is the case with traditional assessment methods has led to assertions of the need to consider a more holistic approach to assessment in technology education (Kimbell, 2018a). Despite significant efforts to reconceptualise assessment within technology education (Kimbell, 2018b; Seery & Canty, 2018), school based assessment remain largely unchanged. It is unclear how appropriate existing assessment systems are to assessing student learning within and ontologybased curriculum. Perspectives on enacted practice remain problematic as translations of an alternative ontological basis into teachers’ practices have proven difficult in the past, as was discussed in the New Zealand case study. Understanding how teachers’ conceive technology education, within the context of an education system and the relationship between these conceptions and enacted practice are an importance avenue for future research. Such research may provide insight into previous curricular reform and inform future directions. Whereas Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) is perceived as a useful mechanism to understand this relationship in most disciplines, the application of this concept to technology education remains problematic. With little consensus as to how PCK is conceptualised, applied or studied in technology education (de Miranda, 2018), recently there has been an emphasis placed on understanding teachers’ enacted practices as a product of their conceptions and PCK, as opposed to either out of context (Doyle, Seery, Gumaelius, Canty, & Hartell, 2018). A fourth perspective which should be considered is the learning sciences agenda. Having gained significant traction over the past decade, questions of the appropriateness of the adoption and application of findings from disciplines with different epistemological and ontological basis have recently begun to permeate the technology education discourse (Phelan, Seery, & Canty, 2018). A particularly useful way of conceiving this is to consider the perspective put forward by Kirschner (2009) in highlighting the difference between learning science (in school) and doing science (as a scientist does). In remaining true to the nature of technology, the interdependence between technological knowledge and technological activity necessitates that learners engage with technological activity, in that they must ‘do’ technology. It is important to emphasise that the position taken herein is not one questioning the potential contributions of the learning sciences but rather a caution against the acceptance of validated findings between disciplines with different epistemological basis. In other words, the need for ecologically situated approaches to studying teaching and learning in the context of technology education becomes apparent. Conclusion Defining technology education through the variability necessitated in activity highlights the need for a common ontological position on how the subject area is conceived. Upholding the ambition to remain true to philosophical Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 34 perspectives on the nature of technological knowledge, in the face of education systems that increasingly value atomised aspects of learning internationally is perhaps the most significant challenge to technology education. Defending the position of technology education without recognising the nature of its epistemology is a futile endeavour, as evidenced by the identification of weak epistemological boundaries in the English national context (Department for Education, 2011). The problem with technology education is not an underdeveloped epistemology, rather an epistemology that is very well developed, but complex when compared with more conventional disciplines, defied through its fluidity while remaining true to conceptual principles. Although the apparent solution to (re)establishing technology educations position on curricula would be to articulate a more conventional epistemology, we advocate that doing so would ultimately serve to the detriment of the subject area. Instead, we propose that stakeholders embrace a fluid epistemology in an ontology-based curriculum as doing so remains true to the nature of technology. The question which arises from this perspective, is whether or not, or indeed for how long, such a subject may survive in the current educational environment? References Atkinson, S. (2000). Does the need for high levels of performance curtail the development of creativity in design and technology project work? International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 10(3), 255–281. Compton, V., & France, B. (2007). Redefining technological literacy in New Zealand: From concepts to curriculum constructs. In J. R. Dakers, W. Dow, & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), PATT-18: Teaching and Learning Technological Literacy in the Classroom (pp. 260–272). Glasgow: University of Glasgow. Compton, V., & Harwood, C. (2008). Discussion document: Design ideas for future technology programmes. Retrieved from http://nzcurriculum.tki.org.nz/content/download/482/ 3705/file/technologydesign-%0Aideas.doc Dakers, J. R. (2005a). Technology education as solo activity or socially constructed learning. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 15(2), 73–89. Dakers, J. R. (2005b). The hegemonic behaviourist cycle. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 15(2), 111–126. Dakers, J. R. (2014a). Defining technological literacy: Towards an epistemological framework (2nd ed.). New York: Palgrave MacMillan. Dakers, J. R. (2014b). New frontiers in technological literacy: Breaking with the past. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. de Miranda, M. A. (2018). Pedagogical content knowledge for technology education. In M. J. de Vries (Ed.), Handbook of technology education (pp. 685–698). Cham: Springer. Atkinson, S. (2017). So what went wrong and why? In E. Norman & K. Baynes (Eds.), Design Epistemology and Curriculum Planning (pp. 13–17). Leicestershire: Loughborough Design Press. de Vries, M. J. (2016). Teaching about technology: An introduction to the philosophy of technology for nonphilosophers (2nd ed.). Dordrecht: Springer. Banks, F., & Barlex, D. (1999). “No one forgets a good teacher!”: What do “good” technology teachers know? Journal of Design & Technology Education, 4(3), 223–229. Department for Education. (2011). The Framework for the National Curriculum. A report by the expert panel for the national curriculum review. London: Department for Education. Barlex, D. (2000). Preparing D&T for 2005 – Moving beyond the rhetoric: The DATA lecture. Journal of Design and Technology Education, 5(1), 5–15. Dow, W. (2014). Implicit theories: Their impact on technology education. In J. R. Dakers (Ed.), Defining technological literacy: Towards an epistemological framework (2nd ed., pp. 149–164). New York: Palgrave MacMillan. Barlex, D., Givens, N., Hardy, A., & Steeg, T. (2016). Modernisation of the school D&T curriculum with special reference to disruptive technologies; a case study of trainee teachers’ responses. In M. J. de Vries, A. Bekker-Holtland, & G. van Dijk (Eds.), PATT-32: Technology education for 21st century skills (pp. 76–85). 23-26th August, Utrecht. Black, P., & Harrison, M. (1985). In place of confusion: Technology and science in the school curriculum. Nuffield-Chelsea Curriculum Trust/National Centre for School Technology. Nottingham: Trent Polytechnic. Doyle, A., Seery, N., Canty, D., & Buckley, J. (2017). Agendas, influences and capability: Perspectives on practice in design and technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-0179433-0 Chen, C.-M. (2009). Ontology-based concept map for planning a personalised learning path. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(6), 1028–1058. Doyle, A., Seery, N., Gumaelius, L., Canty, D., & Hartell, E. (2018). Reconceptualising PCK research in D&T education: Proposing a methodological framework to investigate enacted practice. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-018-94561 Chi, Y.-L. (2009). Ontology-based curriculum content sequencing system with semantic rules. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(4), 7838–7847. Gagel, C. W. (2004). Technology profile: An assessment strategy for technological literacy. Journal of Technology Studies, 30(4), 38–45. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 35 Gibson, K. (2008). Technology and technological knowledge: A challenge for school curricula. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 14(1), 3–15. Harwood, C. (2014). Enhancing student decision making in technological practice: A thesis submitted for the degree of PhD education. Palmerston North: Massey University. Retrieved from https://mro.massey.ac.nz/handle/10179/5494 Herschbach, D. R. (1995). Technology as knowledge: Implications for instruction. Journal of Technology Education, 7(1), 31–42. Kimbell, R., & Stables, K. (2007). Researching design learning: Issues and findings from two decades of research and development. Dordrecht: Springer. Kirschner, P. (2009). Epistemology or pedagogy, that is the question. In S. Tobias & T. M. Duffy (Eds.), Constructivist instruction: Success or failure? (pp. 144–157). New York: Routledge. Lynch, K., Grummell, B., & Devine, D. (2012). New managerialism in education: Commercialization, carelessness and gender. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Houkes, W. (2009). The nature of technological knowledge. In A. Meijers (Ed.), Philosophy of Technology and Engineering Sciences (pp. 309–350). Burlington: North-Holland. McGarr, O., & Lynch, R. (2017). Monopolising the STEM agenda in second-level schools: exploring power relations and subject subcultures. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 27(1), 51–62. Ingerman, Å., & Collier-Reed, B. (2011). Technological literacy reconsidered: a model for enactment. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 21(2), 137–148. Milne, L. (2018). Technology education in the New Zealand curriculum: History and rationale. In M. J. de Vries (Ed.), Handbook of Technology Education (pp. 125–139). Cham: Springer. ITEA. (2007). Standards for technological literacy: Content for the study of technology. Reston, VA. Ministry of Education. (1995). Technology in the New Zealand Curriculum. Learning Media: Wellington. Jones, A., Buntting, C., & De Vries, M. J. (2013). The developing field of technology education: A review to look forward. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23(2), 191–212. Ministry of Education. (2007). The New Zealand Curriculum. Learning Media: Wellington. Keirl, S. (2018). Mitcham’s Fourth: a case for foregrounding volition when framing Design and Technology Education. In N. Seery, J. Buckley, J. Phelan, & D. Canty (Eds.), PATT-36: Research and practice in technology education - Perspectives on human capacity and development (pp. 59–64). Athlone: Technology Education Research Group (TERG). Kelly, V., Kimbell, R., Paterson, V., Sexton, J., & Stables, K. (1987). Design and technology: A framework for assessment. London: HMSO. Kimbell, R. (1994). Tasks in technology: An analysis of their purposes and effects. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 4(3), 241–256. Kimbell, R. (2006). Innovative technological performance. In J. R. Dakers (Ed.), Defining technological literacy: Towards an epistemological framework (pp. 159–178). New York: Palgrave MacMillan. Mittell, I., & Penny, A. (1997). Teacher perceptions of design and technology: A study of disjunction between policy and practice. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 7(3), 279–293. Morrison-Love, D. (2016). Towards a transformative epistemology of technology education. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 51(1), 23–37. NCCA. (2004). Review of technology education in the Junior Cycle. Dublin: Department of Education and Science. Norman, E. (2013). Design epistemology and curriculum planning. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 18(2), 3–5. Norström, P. (2014). How technology teachers understand technological knowledge. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 24(1), 19–38. Owen-Jackson, G. (2015). Learning to teach design and technology in the secondary school: A companion to school experience (3rd ed.). Abingdon: Routledge. Kimbell, R. (2011). Wrong ... but right enough. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 16(2), 6–7. Petrina, S. (2000). The politics of technological literacy. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 10(2), 181–206. Kimbell, R. (2018a). Constructs of quality and the power of holism. In N. Seery, J. Buckley, D. Canty, & J. Phelan (Eds.), PATT-36: Research and practice in technology education - Perspectives on human capacity and development (pp. 181–186). Athlone: Technology Education Research Group (TERG). Petrina, S. (2007). Advanced teaching methods for the technology classroom. London: Information Science Publishing. Kimbell, R. (2018b). Making assessment judgments: Policy, practice, and research. In M. J. de Vries (Ed.), Handbook of Technology Education (pp. 719–733). Cham: Springer. Phelan, J., Seery, N., & Canty, D. (2018). Implications of the learning sciences for the unique intent and remit of technology education. In N. Seery, J. Buckley, D. Canty, & J. Phelan (Eds.), PATT-36: Research and practice in technology education - Perspectives on human capacity and development (pp. 195–200). Athlone: Technology Education Research Group (TERG). Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 36 Ritz, J. M. (2009). A new generation of goals for technology education. Journal of Technology Education, 20(2), 50–64. Rossouw, A., Hacker, M., & de Vries, M. J. (2011). Concepts and contexts in engineering and technology education: an international and interdisciplinary Delphi study. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 21(4), 409–424. P. J. Williams, A. Jones, & C. Buntting (Eds.), The future of technology education (pp. 169–185). Singapore: Springer. Williams, P. J. (2009). Technological literacy: A multiliteracies approach for democracy. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 19(3), 237–254. Seery, N., & Canty, D. (2018). Assessment and learning: The proximal and distal effects of comparative judgment. In M. J. de Vries (Ed.), Handbook of Technology Education (1st ed., pp. 735–748). Cham: Springer. Williams, P. J., Lockley, J., & Mangan, J. (2016). Technology teachers’ use of CoRe to develop their PCK. In M. J. de Vries, A. Bekker-Holtland, & G. van Dijk (Eds.), PATT-32 proceedings: Technology education for 21st century skills (pp. 489–499). 2326th August, Utrecht. Spendlove, D. (2012). Teaching technology. In P. J. Williams (Ed.), Technology education for teachers (pp. 35–54). Dordrecht: Sense Publishers. Williams, P. J., & Stables, K. (Eds.). (2017). Critique in Design and Technology Education. Singapore: Springer. Spendlove, D. (2015). Developing a deeper understanding of design in technology education. In Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 37 Team designing: A case study in conformity and rationalisation Nigel Bruce Goodwin The University of Sydney Abstract Technology teacher education (TTE) programs often strive to develop teamwork skills in TTE students since most design workplaces rely on teams rather than individuals to achieve commercially successful products, systems or environments. This study reports on the consistencies between actual team designing, and subsequent reflections on that designing in the context of a larger action-research project on team designing. Content analysis was used to analyse personal journals completed by 55 students working in 11 design teams over a three-month period. The journal prompts focused on general descriptions of events, affective response to those events, and team functioning (participation, goal setting, decision making). The content of these personal journals was compared and contrasted with transcripts of recordings of team conversations recorded during design sessions. Some significant findings were that all teams overstated the amount and intensity of team interactions, that low and middle performing teams showed a great deal of conformity when describing group functioning and rationalising design decisions, that all teams showed significant convergence (thus reducing the occurrence of conflict); that a range of social loafing effects were identified (but never acknowledged by any team), and that all teams expressed growing frustration over the length of the study and reduced their effort expenditure as a result. Further research is needed on enhanced team training, confronting team behaviours directly through structured reflections on team performance and reconceptualising the nature of the team tasks that are used in TTE programs. Keywords Design, teams, conformity, design decisions Introduction The complexity of modern design means that designers tend to work as part of design teams where specific design expertise is distributed rather than localised. By utilising the individual strengths and knowledge of the members of the team, innovative and productive designs can emerge (Christensen & Ball, 2018). Team members may operate synchronously or asynchronously, be co-located (Christensen & Abildgaard, 2018), operate locally and remotely and at all times of the day (Woods, 1984). In the context of research on groups (a broader concept than teams) in education settings ranging from primary to university levels groups, significant benefits have been found (Johnson, Johnson, & Smith 2014, Gillies, 2016) and confirmed in a number of best evidence syntheses conducted by Slavin (2013) and Slavin, Lake, Hanley, and Thurston (2014). These findings lend weight to the argument that technology teacher education students could benefit from learning experiences built around tasks that require prolonged, scaffolded teamwork. Literature review Introduction There has been a substantial research literature in school and university contexts promoting the value of group approaches to learning. Some of the benefits that accrue from using groups include improved learning, the development of social skills, empathy and altruism, the enhancement of teamwork skills, the deepening of learning, improved test scores and retention of knowledge, and the enablement of lifelong learning (Slavin, 2018). Some of the rationales behind the benefits of groupwork lie in the active, collaborative nature of learning experiences, in the giving and receiving of help, and the necessity for the exercising of important social and communication skills while groups are functioning (Murphy, Mahoney, Chen, Mendoza-Diaz & Yang, 2005). Higher levels of interaction produced by working as a group/team promote enhanced learning too (Johnson, Johnson, & Smith, 2014; Zhu, 2012; Tsay & Brady, 2010), especially when learners can co-construct knowledge (Costley & Lange, 2016; Lange, Costley, & Han, 2016) and build team identity (Litchfield, Karakitapoglu-Aygun, Gumusluoglu, Carter & Hirst, 2018). Promotive interaction reflects positive social interdependence and is considered, in concert with positive interdependence, group processing, and individual accountability, a prerequisite to successful group performance (King & Ganotice, 2013; Johnson, Johnson, & Smith, 2014). Gillies (2016, p. 42) identifies important social skills that promote effective interactions between students. They include: • Actively listening to each other; • Sharing ideas and resources; • Commenting constructively on others’ ideas; • Accepting responsibility for one’s behaviours; • Making decisions democratically. Promotive interactions facilitated by these social skills may, however, be subverted or compromised by other pressures operating within design teams. Problems that directly affect the nature and frequency of interactions and that might occur when using groups include but are not limited to the free rider (Hall & Buzzwell, 2012), and sucker effects (partner effects to social loafing) (Njie, Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 38 Asimiran, & Basri, 2013; Dick, Tissington, & Hertel, 2009), status hierarchy problems (Kilduff, Willer, & Anderson, 2016).) which reduce information sharing (Groysberg, Polzer, & Elfenbein, 2011), and, general social loafing problems (Aggarwal, & O’Brien, 2008; Latane, Williams, & Harkins, 1979). Aggarwal and O’Brien describe social loafing as “a behavior[sic] pattern whereby group members perceive an individual working in a group setting as failing to contribute his or her fair share” (p.256). Some potential explanations for social loafing may include motivation of team members, diffusion of responsibility, group size and expectations of team members. It might also occur when members of a team are not recognised, or their ideas and work are ignored (Dick, Tissington, & Hertel, 2009). Where social loafing does occur, collaborative work of the type found in groups/teams is less effective than individual work of the same type (Mefoh & Nwanosike, 2012). All of these effects are moderated by the maturity of the groups since groups take time to build, become mature, and productive, progressing through a well-defined series of stages (Tuckman and Jensen, 1977). Another related problem that might emerge in teams, but which is seldom canvassed in the research literature is the problem of conformity in groups. This issue is particularly problematic in the context of open-ended tasks where a diversity of views, ideas, and directions are to be encouraged. In these and similar contexts, students rarely provide high-level explanations or engage in highlevel discourse unless they are trained to do so (King, 2002). Even when training is provided, lack of knowledge specific to the tasks being attempted can mediate performance and foster maladaptive practices such as conformity (see for example Kokotovich and Dorst (2016) who report that novice design teams draw on their experiential knowledge but do not move very far from the combinatorial solutions typical of novice designers). Novice design teams lack the experience and knowledge base of experts. According to Cialdini and Goldstein (2004), and Coultas and van Leeuwen (2015), conformity involves team members matching their attitudes, beliefs, and behaviours to group/team norms. Two types of conformity have been proposed by Deutsch and Gerrard (1955). Normative conformity reflects a decision to yield or comply with group pressures because a person wants to fit in, or because the person is scared of being rejected by the team. In contrast, informational conformity usually occurs when a person lacks knowledge and looks to their peers for guidance. It can also result because a person is unclear or unsure about a task or situation. Informational conformity usually results in internalisation where the team member accepts and adopts the views of the other team members. General research on teams demonstrates the benefits of information sharing and elaboration on team performance (Jiang, Flores, Leelawong, and Manz, 2016; MesmerMagnus & DeChurch, 2009). Conforming reduces information sharing by reducing peer-to-peer interactions, by silencing or suppressing other voices. Story telling in the form of sophisticated justifications of designs or extended elaborations of design decisions is another index of productive teams (Learner, 2004). Conformity leads to a small number of team members telling their stories, thus constraining ideas and outcomes. Shared mental models also mediate team productivity through shared cognitive processes, and shared language assets used to communicate key ideas and debate issues (Newell & Bain, 2018). Conformity constrains the development of shared language and ideas by allowing some members of a team to dominate problem discourses. Methodology This research was conducted as part of a larger mixedmethods action research project in a technology teacher education program at the University of Sydney based on a cognitive apprenticeship framework (Collins, Brown, & Newman, 1987) where expert external judges provided advice and feedback on authentic design tasks. The entire second year cohort plus one complete Master of Teaching cohort was randomly assigned into eleven design teams. Participating students were specifically trained in teamwork over a two-day period by consultants from the Australian Institute of Group Leaders Cooperative. The training focused on four dimensions: setting goals (thus fostering ownership of ideas and outcomes), clarifying roles and responsibilities (thus building interdependence), solving problems in team functioning, and interpersonal relations (giving and receiving help, communicating ideas, sharing and building trust). It was characterized by an active, participatory methodology, rather than a lecture format. The advantages that derive from explicit training in teamwork skills has been examined and confirmed in meta-analyses by Salas, Diazgranados, Klein, Burke, Stagl, Goodwin, and Halpin, (2008), and, more recently, by McEwan, Ruissen, Eys, Zumbo, and Beauchamp (2017). This training reinforced previous study in cooperative learning undertaken as part of other compulsory units of study in the four-year undergraduate degree program in which the students were enrolled. Students were quasi-randomly assigned to one of ten design teams, the eleventh being an exclusive M.Teach team. No team had an excess of males over females, but there were some male only teams due to imbalances in the gender ratio in that cohort. In this study students were working as a team (Webb & Palincsar, 1996; Hammar Chiriac, 2011), rather than in a team. Working as a team is characterized by common effort towards a shared goal, the utilization of the collective competence of team members including problem solving, reflection, and the critique and elaboration of ideas. Data gathering All eleven design teams were audio recorded in situ throughout the study using AV equipment provided by the University of Sydney. The recording equipment was placed centrally on tables used during the multiple, 2-hour design sessions. One team was randomly assigned to be video recorded as well. Each recording was transcribed weekly by a professional transcription service. Purposive coding was undertaken by two coders working independently. Codes were derived from a content analysis of the research on design, self-regulation, metacognition, teamwork, and groups. Four broad coding categories emerged from this analysis: Design phases (7 codes), task maintenance behaviours (5 codes), metacognitive behaviours (18 codes), and self-regulatory behaviours (7 codes). Appendix A shows the codes for Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 39 metacognitive behaviours. Coding key words were trialed against the study pilot program transcriptions (conducted in the year prior to the present study) to ensure accuracy and provide practice for the coders. Codings were compared, and any differences in interpretation were arbitrated to resolve differences. Any codings that could not be arbitrated were removed. Personal journals were completed manually in a small exercise book by all participants in the study at the end of each studio session. A series of prompt questions were used to elicit commentary and feedback on cognitive and affective issues related to the functioning and effectiveness of each design team and their general approach to the design briefs. Some questions encouraged reflection on the past functioning of the groups whilst other questions provided an opportunity for students to suggest enhancements to their groups functioning in future design tasks. Students did not share their journal reflections at any time. The journal entries were subsequently digitized for later analysis. The prompt questions appear as Figure 1. Figure 1: Prompt questions completed by all students after each design session. averaged to determine the final scores. A total of four design tasks were used: Rope Spicer, Concourse seat, Watering Can, and Traffic Barrier. Some findings from two of the four tasks and a sample of teams All teams overstated the amount and intensity of team interactions Concourse Seat 49ers (High) (Total metacognitive codings, N=15): Some metacognitive activity evident early (El-ge), middle (EL-ge) and more later (EL-ge) in the task. Evaluation of alternatives (EA-ev) occurred during middle and late stages of design. These interactions were primarily unidirectional with one team member assuming the leadership role (M1) and progressing the design with little input from the rest of the team Claims in journals (amalgamated). Yeah, we started pretty early on this one (M1). Pretty easy really. (M2) Seemed to come out well (F1.) No problems from the beginning. Worked well together on this one. State Rail train good to use [as model]. Great team effort (F2) during this one. Onward (Mid) (Total metacognitive codings, N=26): Team members (M1, M2, F2) progressed the design with a much wider range of metacognitive behaviour shown at the beginning (CO-ro, AP, GP, EA-ev, especially EL-dc, and AN-st) and then focussing more on EL-dc in the middle and later stages. Although there were more interactions between team members most were simple conclusions where team members re-stated earlier conclusions. Claims in journals (amalgamated). Lots of good stuff going on here (F1). I think we found this one easy (M2). Just hope the judges like this one-we put lots into it. Our drawings suck (M1). Once digitized, the individual student reflections were coded independently by two coders. Codings were compared and any differences in interpretation were arbitrated to resolve differences. Overall coding consistency in both the audio transcriptions and journal reflections was determined using Cohen’s kappa since the coding elements were categorical in nature, only two raters were used, and kappa is usually (though not always) considered a conservative statistic of agreement (Strijbos, Martens, Prins, & Jochems, 2006). Since the worstcase Cohen’s kappa for all teams/individuals across all tasks exceeded 0.7, inter-rater reliability was judged as substantial according to Cohen (1960). Teams were judged as high, medium, and low-performing using a modified form of the Australian and British design ward criteria. Judges were product designers with at least 10 years of professional experience. Each judge made their decisions independently and individual scores were Teacake (Low) (Total metacognitive codings, N=20): More metacognitive activity early in design process, especially El-ge, (plus a few EL-dc, CO-ao, CO-mo), but fewer towards the end of the design sessions. Some unprofitable interactions were recorded between the two male team members (M1, M2) trying to progress a design that did not answer the brief. The two female team members remained silent during these interactions. Claims in journals (amalgamated). Seemed to go OK-we talked it over early … not sure about how it will meet the brief (F2). Think we got this one nailed – talked it over (F1) Road Barrier Onward (High) (Total metacognitive codings, N=5) Almost all metacognitive statements were due to M2 (EAev, EL-dc, EL-ge). Very little conversation between team members was evident in this task (the second last task attempted). Claims in journals (amalgamated). M2 Good idea -lets go with that (F1). Still can’t draw to save my life (M1). We talked this one over big time. Yeah, all good (F2). Austin (Med (Total metacognitive codings, N=29): Almost all metacognitive codings occurred at the beginning and middle period of designing. They were focussed on EA-av, EL-dc, and EL-ge. Elaborations did not really progress designs, focussing on the one design Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 40 produced and emending small details only. Claims in journals (amalgamated). Worked this one through pretty well (M2). Thought we covered the brief from the beginning here (F2). No problems with my team (F1). Phantoms (Low) (Total metacognitive codings, N=5). El-ge was the majority coding and this was dispersed over the period of designing. There was so little conversation it was doubtful that a design would emerge. Claims in journals (amalgamated) Went OK (F1). Idea was good so we did not have to change much (F2). We worked pretty well together on this one (M2). Low and middle performing teams showed a great deal of conformity when describing group functioning and rationalising design decisions. Conformity could best be framed by the frequency of participation and when it occurred. Concourse Seat 49ers (High): Conversations dominated by M1 with occasional input from M2. Little contribution at any stage from F1 or F2 apart from simple affirmations or concurrence of opinion. Onward (Med): Some balance of contributions in the early stages from M1, M2, and F2 with nothing from F1. Middle and later conversations were characterised by males dominating conversations with females agreeing and drawing some conclusions. Teacake (Low): Both male members of the team tried to discuss an unworkable design, ignoring the females during this process. Road Barrier Onward (High): M2 dominated the conversation. M1 and F1 and F2 rarely spoke, preferring instead to leave the designing to M2. Austin (Mid): Better balance of conversations during early and middle period of designing. Participation trailed off in later stages with males leading. Phantoms (Low): Little if any conversation occurred between any team member. All teams showed significant convergence (thus reducing the occurrence of conflict) No team sustained interactions on any task. The greatest interactions tended to occur during the early and occasionally middle phases of a design task. It is significant that few, if any teams produced more than one design, preferring instead to develop one idea to completion. Few teams attempted to clarify objectives (CO), analyse the problem statement (AP), or generate hypotheses 9GH or predictions (GP). Since one design was submitted by the design teams, evaluating alternatives (EA) could not occur. Single design approaches led to reduced interactions, information elaboration and storytelling. A range of social loafing effects were identified (but never acknowledged by any team) Social loafing effects can be inferred form the nonparticipation of team members. This was particularly true for many female students who described the unit of study and their experiences as being “Industrial Artsy” because of its focus on product design. This occurred despite the use of a well know female designer as one external judge. All teams expressed growing frustration over the length of the study and reduced their effort expenditure as a result. “Done, thank goodness…”, “That’s enough for this job”, “Let’s get it over with”, “Why are we doing this?” “Boring”, “I am never going to do this when I teach” were some of the general comments on the design tasks. Personal responses became shorter and more cryptic, with some students reverting to simple binary responses to the prompt questions such as “Yes”, or “No” I don’t care” also appeared in some journals. Discussion One method to analyse the inconsistencies between the stated team working habits and those recorded is to understand some of the common problems that teams encounter and how they might affect any decision to participate fully in the study (Hackman, 2002). The first is the absence of collective team identity (CTI) and trust within the team. Although efforts were made to build team identity such as allowing teams the freedom to name and frame their own team, and explicitly training students to work as part of a team (thus developing the interpersonal skills so important in teamwork), it could be argued that there was insufficient time and experience to build a fully functional and robust team identity. Located as they were in a compulsory pedagogy unit inside a technology teacher education program, team members participated inside a temporary team that exerted no influence and elicited no interest outside of the compulsory unit. Data on participation revealed the dominance by males over team functioning, with many females opting to offer confirmatory responses, rather than elaborated or critiquing ones for particular designs. Two indexes often associated with coordinated teams are the presence of story-telling and elaborating and defending ideas/explaining (Learner, 2004). These were more common in the high-achieving groups (but not high in intensity) and noticeably absent from the low-achieving groups in this study. They were also often absent in middle-performing teams. Low-performing team recordings were often marked by long periods of quiet, where no discussion, debate or explanations were observed. Yet, the written reflections recorded after every design session commented on the just the opposite, the presence of good communications about design ideas and debate on appropriate directions for the projects. This pattern of erroneous reporting was consistent across team members. Thus, team members rationalised their practices, even when they knew that had not behaved in the manner they described in their reflective journals. Whether this was a simple coping strategy, an effort to be seen to be going through the teamwork processes is not clear. The growing frustration with the demands of the design tasks, and the judge’s informational feedback clearly frustrated students and teams alike. This might explain the lack of commitment to developing multiple design ideas or elaborating and defending those that were produced. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 41 Communication is another index used to evaluate the effectiveness of teams, with current research suggesting that communication quality is far more important than communication frequency (Marlow, Lacerenza, Paoletti, Burke & Salas, 2018). The two elements of communication quality identified in this study that were most closely associated with high task performance were information elaboration (El-ge, EL-re), and story-telling (AP, GP, AN-us, EA-ju). Only EL-ge appeared in the transcripts for any team on any task. Conflict resolution, difficulties when making decisions, groupthink and lack of participation (through social loafing effects) are other indexes for poor performing teams. These issues can themselves signify conformity problems. By not participating or participating in nonmeaningful ways such as providing binary responses or acquiescing to others’ ideas without challenge, conformity is encouraged. The path of least resistance towards an outcome for each design task, rather than a carefully considered, elaborated, debated and critiqued set of design ideas resulting in a workable and strategized outcome, became the standard approach. The lack of participation of many females in design conversations, their relatively minor contribution to elaborated discussions, and the rationalisation of their behaviours in their personal journals signifies important issues affecting the use of design teams. Collective design efforts yield more creative ideas. Innovative ideas and innovative behaviours require collective reflections (Litchfield, Karakitapoglu-Aygun, Gumusluoglu, Carter & Hirst, 2018). Collective reflections serve to externalise agreed ideas and viewpoints. Collective reflections were seldom seen in low and medium-performing teams in their audio transcripts but were quite common in the journal reflections. Thus, individual members of teams would write about how they discussed ideas and resolved differences in order to advance design concepts. But the audio transcripts (and annotated sketches they produced) revealed otherwise. There are several other potential explanations for the behaviours recorded in this study. One potential reason why the problems detailed earlier occurred may be the perceived complexity of the tasks. Task complexity is considered a moderating variable when assessing team performance (Bowers, Pharmer, & Salas, 2000; Brown & Miller, 2000). According to Baron, Vandello, and Brunsman (1996), task importance affects conformity so students who saw no value in tasks exerted less effort. Research by Ferrari and Psychal (2012) found that social loafing is frequent in low productivity groups, and this phenomenon has been found to negatively influence group performance. Yet social loafing and perhaps even conformity effects can be reduced by the presence of peer evaluations (Aggarwal & O’Brien, 2008), a feature not found in this study. Bond (2005) argues that a normative conformity influence will be stronger when participants make public responses and are face-to-face with the other team members. This was the situation that occurred during the intensive design sessions in this study and raises interesting questions about the potential value of temporary, high-stakes, design teams such as those in this study. Rather than fostering creativity, teams of this type might foster conformity instead. Thus, public responses such as annotated sketches and verbal interaction patterns reveal the effect of normative pressures, whilst private reflections in personal journals allow participants to rationalise their behaviours and more closely align them with how they would want to have behaved, rather than as they actually did. Another possible explanation is offered by Kugler, Kausel, and Kocher, (2012) who argue that teams are more rational than individuals. This raises questions about the utility of using formal design team approaches in classroom contexts where the goal is to promote more creative design. Many of the low performing teams for example, seemed more concerned about completing the task, than performing on the task, e.g., Teacake on the Concourse Seat task. Conformity and creativity are a trade-off according to Nemeth and Staw (1989); the freer people are to deviate from shared expectations, the more likely they are to suggest creative solutions. It is abundantly clear that student design teams are fundamentally different from work teams in that student teams often have “no history, little if any internal hierarchy, and often little supervision” (Wolfe & Powell, 2014, p. 74). Work teams operate as teams with individual specialisation such as those used in training case studies in this study. It could therefore be argued that it was unreasonable to expect the student design teams to function as intended and their concept designs, and personal reflections lend some support to this idea. Status hierarchies clearly emerged in this research. However, my results disagree with those reported by Benderesky and Hays (2016). Status differences were “known” or at least acknowledgement through overt deferment to higher status students during team conversations and acknowledged and reflected in the non-participation of students in active conversations, but not acknowledged in personal reflections as even existing. In some cases, students should not have deferred to their peers since their peers were wrong or did not possess the requisite knowledge. Consistent with Cialdini and Goldstein (2004) who argued that conformity influences tend to be “subtle, indirect, and outside of awareness” (p.591), personal reflections in journals make no mention of conformity pressures at any stage in any team at any time. Thus, team design decisions in this study reflect both the prolonged, elaborate, and critical conversations that can be observed and documented, as well as subtle and largely unseen social influences that lead to conformity and internalisation where students prioritise fitting in over promoting and advancing better design concepts. This finding raises another issue in that knowledge sharing facilitates team performance and intra-group conflicts impairs it (Jiang, Flores, Leelawong, & Manz, 2016). Conformity reduces both information sharing and intra-group conflict, thereby trading off one benefit for another. The general pattern of results demonstrates conformity through informational and normative influences on team performance. The ambiguity of the subject tasks, and the specialised knowledge required to address some of the design briefs led many teams to look to team members who were perceived as having more knowledge appropriate to particular tasks, a special type of informational conformity called minority influence. This led to some members internalising the team beliefs, a cognitive conflict resulting in informational conformity. The rationalising responses to the scaffold questions in the personal journals provides Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 42 good evidence of the extent to which some team members did not even realise what they were doing. Normative conformity was evident in the public compliance and lack of challenge evident in team communications. This motivational conflict may be explained by the lack of knowledge demonstrated by many students in the design teams. This lack of knowledge was made clear in the personal journals, but the normative conformity that then occurred was not recognised. The novelty of the tasks, the lack of experience in designing, the reputation of the judges, and the obvious lack of background knowledge of many of the students may go some way to explaining the willingness of many students to comply with peers they judged to be more knowledgeable. It could be seen as a coping strategy given the time constraints operating in the unit of study too. Students were more concerned about “passing” the subject than earning through it. By rationalising their practices in personal journals, students were able to avoid confronting their actual practices revealed in the audio transcripts. Conclusion The inconsistencies between overt practice in a team setting, and personal reflections made after team designing raise important questions about the utility, value and practices of using team approaches on design tasks such as those used in this study. The obvious disparities in background knowledge between team members, the variable quality and lack of creativity in team responses, the normative and informational conformity and subsequent rationalisation of that conformity despite specific training in interpersonal skills point to the need to conduct further research on why two or more heads are not necessarily better than one (Fender & Stickney, 2017), despite what the extant literature on the benefits of working in teams claims. Part of the answer might lay in the nature of the task teams were asked to do, how they were judged, and how they were constructed and operated as temporary design teams. Professional teams usually consist of a group of people expert in their own fields, each contributing to the development of key components of a design (Schmidt, Montoya-Weiss, & Massey, 2001). Teams in this study did not possess the necessary knowledge and skills as experts and were therefore far more susceptible to the effects of status distinctions and other negative moderators of team performance. A clearer distinction between working “in a team” as against “as a team” needs to be made as well since the evidence is clear on how teams develops over time (Tuckman and Jensen, 1977). More fundamental questions remain over how, when, where and why to use teams in professional technology teacher education programs. Throwing students together and telling them to work as a team simply won’t do. References Aggarwal, P., & O’Brien, C. L. (2008). Social loafing on group projects: Structural antecedents and effect on student satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Education, 30(3), 255–264. Baron, R. S., Vandello, J. A., & Brunsman, B. (1996). The forgotten variable in conformity research: Impact of task importance on social influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(5), 915–927. Benderesky, C., & Hays, N.A. (2016). The positive effects of status conflicts in teams where members perceive status hierarchies differently. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(2), 124132. Bond, R. (2005). Group size and conformity. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 8(4), 331-354 Bowers, C. A., Pharmer, J. A., & Salas, E. (2000). When member homogeneity is needed in work teams: A meta-analysis. Small Group Research, 31(3), 305– 327. Brown, T. M., & Miller, C. E. (2000). Communication networks in task-performing groups: Effects of task complexity, time pressure and interpersonal dominance. Small Group Research, 31(2), 131–157. Cialdini, R.B., & Goldstein, N.J. (2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 591-621. Cohen J. A (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational Psychology Measurement, 20, 37–46. Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1987). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing and mathematics (Technical Report No. 403). BBN Laboratories, Cambridge, MA. Centre for the Study of Reading, University of Illinois. Coultas, J. C., & van Leeuwen, E. J. C. (2015). Conformity: Definitions, types, and evolutionary grounding. In V. Zeigler-Hill, L.L.M. Welling, & T.K. Shackelford (Eds.), Evolutionary perspectives on social psychology (pp. 189-202). Berlin, Germany: Springer. Christensen, B., & Abildgaard, S.J.J (2018). The oscillation between individual and social processes. In the Drs International Conference Proceedings, 2018, pp.1297-1313. Christensen, T., & Ball, L.J. (2018). Fluctuating epistemic uncertainty in a design team as a metacognitive driver for creative cognitive processes. CoDesign, 14, 133-152. Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51(3), 629-636. Dick, R. V., Tissington, P. A., & Hertel, G. (2009). Do many hands make light work? How to overcome social loafing and gain motivation in work teams. European Business Review, 21(3), 233–245. Duriau, V.J., Reger, R.K., & Pfarrer, M.D. (2007). A content analysis of the content analysis literature in organization studies: Research themes, data sources, and methodological refinements. Organization Research Methods, 10, 5–34. Erdem, F., Ozen, J., & Atsan, N. (2003).The relationship between trust and team performance, Work Study, 52, 337-340. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 43 Fender, C.M., & Stickney, L.T. (2017). When two heads aren’t better than one: Conformity in a group activity. Management Teaching Review, 2(1), 35-46. Ferrari, J. R., & Psychyl, T. A. (2012). “If I wait, my partner will do it:” The role of conscientiousness as a mediator in the relation of academic procrastination and perceived social loafing. North American Journal of Psychology, 14(1), 13–24. Gillies, R. M. (2016). Cooperative learning: Review of research and practice. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), 39-54. Goncalo, J. A. & Duguid, M. M. (2011). Follow the crowd in a new direction: When conformity pressure facilitates group creativity (and when it does not) [Electronic version]. Retrieved June 19, from Cornell University, ILR School site: hp://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/articles/528 Groysberg, B., Polzer, J. T., & Elfenbein, H. A. (2011). Too many cooks spoil the broth: How high-status individuals decrease group effectiveness. Organization Science, 22, 722–737. Hackman, R. (2002). Leading teams: Setting the stage for great performances. Harvard Business Review Press: Boston, MA. Hall, D., & Buzwell, S. (2012). The problem of freeriding in group projects” Looking beyond social loafing as reason for non-contribution. Active Learning in Higher Education, 14, 37-49. Hammar Chiriac, E. (2014). Group work as an incentive for learning – students’ experiences of group work. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1-10. Hammar Chiriac, E. (2011). Research on group work in education. New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc. Jiang, X., Flores, H.R., Leelawong, R., & Manz, C.C. (2016). The effect of team empowerment on team performance: A cross-cultural perspective on the mediating roles of knowledge sharing and intra-group conflict. International Journal of Conflict Management, 27(1), 62-87. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (2014). Cooperative learning: Improving university instruction by basing practice on validated theory. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25(3-4), 85-118. Kilduff, G. J., Willer, R., & Anderson, C. (2016). Hierarchy and its discontents: Status disagreement leads to withdrawal of contribution and lower group performance. Organization Science, 27, 373-390. King, A. (2002). Structuring peer interaction to promote high-level cognitive processing. Theory into Practice, 41, 33-40. King, R. B., & Ganotice, F. A. (2013). The social underpinnings of motivation and achievement: Investigating the role of parents, teachers, and peers on academic outcomes. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 23(3), 745-756. Kokotovich, V., & Dorst, K. (2016). The art of ‘stepping back’: Studying levels of abstraction in a diverse design team. Design Studies, 46, 79-94. Kugler, T., Kausel, E. E., & Kocher, M. G. (2012). Are groups more rational than individuals? A review of interactive decision making in groups. Cognitive Science, 3, 471-482. Lange, C., Costley J., & Han, S. (2016). Informal cooperative learning in small groups: The effect of scaffolding on participation. Issues in Educational Research, 26(2), 260-279. Latane, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many hands make light the work: The causes and consequences of social loafing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(6), 822-832. Lerner, G.H. (2004) Collaborative turn sequences. In G.H. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 225–256. Luan, K., Rico, R., Xie, X. Y., & Zhang, Q. (2016). Collective team identification and external learning. Small Group Research, 47(4), 384-405. Marlow, S. L., Lacerenza, C. N., Paoletti, J., Burke, C. S., & Salas, E. (2018). Does team communication represent a one-size-fits-all approach? A metaanalysis of team communication and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 144, 145-170. McEwan D., Ruissen G.R., Eys M.A., Zumbo, B.D., & Beauchamp, M.R. (2017). The effectiveness of teamwork training on teamwork behaviours and team performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled interventions. PLoS ONE, 12(1), 1-23. Mefoh, P. C., & Nwanosike, C. L. (2012). Effects of group size and expectancy of reward on social loafing. IFE Psychologia, 20(1), 229–240. Mesmer-Magnus, J., & DeChurch, L.A. (2009). Information-sharing and team performance: A metaanalysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 535546. Murphy, K. L., Mahoney, S. E., Chen, C. Y., MendozaDiaz, N. V. & Yang, X. (2005). A constructivist model of mentoring, coaching, and facilitating online discussion. Distance Education, 26(3) 341–366. Nemeth, C.J. & Staw, B.M. (1989). The trade-offs of social control and innovation in small groups and organizations. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 22, (pp. 175210). New York: Academic Press. Njie, B., Asimiran, S., & Basri, R. (2013). An exploratory study of the free riding debacle in a Malaysian university: Students’ perspectives. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 22(3), 257–262. Newell, C., & Bain, A. (2018). Building shared mental models, In C. Newell and A. Bain (Eds.), Team-based collaboration in higher education learning and teaching (pp.43-49). Singapore: Springer. Salas, E., Diazgranados, D., Klein, C., Burke, C. S., Stagl, K. C., Goodwin, G. F., & Halpin, S. M. (2008). Does team training improve team performance? A Meta-Analysis". Human Factors: The Journal of the Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 44 Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 50(6), 903933. Schmidt, J.B., Montoya-Weiss, M.M., & Massey, A.P. (2001). New product development decision making effectiveness: Comparing individuals, face-to-face teams, and virtual teams. Decision Sciences, 32, 575600. Slavin, R.E. (2018). Educational psychology: Theory and practice (12th Ed). Boston: Pearson. Zhu, C. (2012). Student satisfaction, performance, and knowledge construction in online collaborative learning. Educational Technology & Society, 15(1), 127-136.Ames, T., Reeve, E., Stewardson, G., & Lott, K. (2017). Wanted for 21st century schools: Renaissance STEM teacher preferred. Journal of Technology Education, 28(2), 19-30. Appendix A Slavin, R. (2013). Effective programmes in reading and mathematics: Evidence from the Best Evidence Encyclopedia. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 24, 383-391. Slavin, R. (2014). Cooperative learning and academic achievement: Why does groupwork work? Anales De Psicologia, 30, 785-791. Strijbos, J., Martens, R., Prins, F., & Jochems, W. (2006). Content analysis: What are they talking about? Computers & Education, 46, 29–48. Tiferes, J. & Bisantz, A.M. (2018) The impact of team characteristics and context on team communication: An integrative literature review. Applied Ergonomics, 68, 146-159. Tsay, M., & Brady, M. (2012). A case study of cooperative learning and communication pedagogy: Does working in teams make a difference? Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10(2), 7889. Tuckman, B. W. & Jensen, M. A. (1977). Stages in small group development revisited. Group and Organisation Studies, 2, 419-427. Webb, N. M., & Palincsar, A. S. (1996). Group processes in the classroom, In D.C Berliner and R.C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology (pp. 841-873), New York: Macmillan. Table 1: Metacognitive behaviour codes Wolfe, J., & Powell, E. (2014). Strategies for dealing with slacker and underperforming teammates in class projects. In Proceedings of the Professional Communication Conference, IEEE International, Red Hook, NY: Curran, pp. 74-81. Woods, D. (1984). Personal communication. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 45 Assuring a future for design and technology by embedding classroom formative assessment Eva Hartell KTH Royal Institute of Technology and Haninge municipality, Sweden Abstract Technology education is by far the most contemporary and rich discipline aiming to prepare learners for the future. It changes rapidly as society changes, while also nurturing historical perspectives. To prepare our youths for the future, technology education must occupy greater space and play a larger role in school to allow every boy and girl the opportunity to flourish, both for themselves and for society. Understanding, developing and supporting this quest is challenging for schools, teachers and researchers. Developing instruction is key, and bridging educational research and practice gives us greater potential to succeed. It is well known that embedding formative assessment into classroom instruction is central to student success; however, this is not as simple as it seems. This article highlights the complexity of embedding formative assessment. Further, by combining theory and practice, it provides some suggestions on how to provide affordances for teachers’ classroom assessment practices to bridge teaching and learning in technology education. Keywords Design and technology education; technology education; engineering education; formative assessment; classroom assessment. Introduction Technology education is by far the richest contemporary discipline aiming to prepare learners for the future. This branch of education changes rapidly as society changes, while simultaneously nurturing historical perspectives. To prepare our youths for the future, technology education needs to gain greater space and play a larger role in school to allow every boy and girl the opportunity to flourish, both for themselves and for society. Supporting and challenging students to exceed their potential and interest in technology is challenging for schools, teachers, policymakers and researchers. The education system plays an important role in providing learning opportunities that enable citizens to grow as human beings and contribute and take part in society. The world goes beyond the classroom; therefore, classroom instruction must invite learners and provide opportunities that go beyond their own interests and domains and drag the world to them. Providing learning opportunities in school is not sufficient. Learning is unpredictable, and students do not learn everything they are taught. Thus, assessment must be embedded within educational settings to bridge teaching and learning and support informed decisions to adjust to what happens in the classroom to better meet learners’ needs. There are several ways to perform assessment. Different persons can undertake assessment for different purposes in different contexts. Though the aims and purposes of assessment may differ, they must include the pupil’s future progress. Teachers often conduct assessments for a variety of purposes: grading, reporting to school authorities and classroom questioning to determine whether to move on to the next phase. This paper focuses on this purpose of assessment, in which evidence of learning is elicited, inferred from and put into action to better meet pupils’ needs: that is, formative assessment. Formative assessment has been found to have a substantial impact on student achievement and is based on the following principles: 1. good teaching starts where the learners are; and 2. students do not learn everything they are taught. Formative assessment is both generic and subject-specific, and it seeks to adapt what happens in the classroom to better meet learners’ needs. When discussing the significant impact of formative assessment on student achievement, timing is crucial (Wiliam, 2009). Formative assessment is more likely to affect student learning when instruction is adapted from inferences of elicited evidence to better meet learners’ needs within minute-to-minute or day-by-day classroom practices: what Wiliam (2009) called short cycle formative assessment. Black and Wiliam’s (1998b) review of formative assessment showed that this type of assessment had largest impact on student achievement and, thus, should be considered formative in its truest sense. This focus on assessment may seem controversial; however, teachers who fail to assess what pupils do cannot determine whether they are contributing to or impeding pupils’ process. Swedish professor Lars Lindström (2006) expanded on this argument by arguing that refusing to assess is a concession to those who argue that no learning takes place. Instead, teachers must elicit evidence of learning and then infer from and act upon these data by adapting what happens in the classroom to better meet students’ needs. Thus, technology teachers, like any other teachers, must engage in assessment. They must draw inferences and conclusions to determine whether their teaching is contributing to or impeding their pupils’ progress. To bridge research and practice, the present paper suggests several short cycle formative assessment techniques Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 46 particularly suitable for technology education and invites readers to try them out in their own contexts. that the creator cannot construct or program, but someone else might be able to now or later. Starting from where the learners are Technology education goes beyond this. The aim of Swedish technology is “helping the pupils to develop their technical expertise and technical awareness so that they can orient themselves and act in a technologically intensive world” (The Swedish National Agency for Education [NAE], 2011/2018, p. 296). By studying technology, pupils should develop abilities that allow them to: Classroom instruction must begin from where students are. This is easy to say, but very complicated to accomplish. Pupils do not learn everything they are taught, and they also learn outside of school. According to Nuthall (2007), students already know approximately 40 to 50% of what their teachers are teaching. Unfortunately, and perhaps not surprisingly, the students in a given class do not all know the same information. This makes it even more difficult to determine students’ current positions in their learning journey. Since learning is so unpredictable, it is not possible to assume students’ starting points based on their prior instruction or expected standards or learning outcomes according to textbooks or curricula. Instead, some sort of qualitative assurance and follow-up is necessary. Instruction should include a process of eliciting evidence and then make inferences to ensure that instruction helps rather than hampers students’ learning progress. Generated evidence and inferences made should be used to better adapt what happens next to meet learners’ needs. Teachers must, therefore, be able to assess students’ aptitudes by effectively using appropriate methods, interpreting evidence of learning and maintaining knowledge of the impacts of assessment practices on students: that is, they must have assessment literacy (Stiggins, 1991; Webb, 2002). This is difficult to accomplish, and simply observing findings and being aware of students’ current understanding or misunderstanding is not enough either. Teachers must also act and apply their findings appropriately in practice: a process that is dependent on purpose and context. However, teachers also need to believe in their capability to accomplish what they set out to do. Specifically, to take action from informed decisions, they need what Bandura (1997) called self-efficacy. Teacher self-efficacy is a strong predictor of success and is highly context-bound and subject-specific (Hartell, 2018); thus, teachers must be situated in a supportive milieu including high affordances for teacher assessment practices, which are necessary to release the power of formative assessment. Technology education Technology education is important for preparing pupils for the future (Teknikdelegationen, 2010). An emphasis on the importance of learning opportunities across education is considered for all students and is particularly important for girls (Skogh, 2001). Instead of only receiving learning opportunities later in schooling, as is often the case with technology education, every child should have multiple opportunities across the education system, especially in primary school. Technology education is both practical and theoretical. It is built around design with big, audacious goals that demand an open-ended question approach and the learning of practical skills and as well theoretical and applied content knowledge. Though the discipline varies across the globe, open-ended design tasks and model making remain elusive. However, while technology may include modelmaking, inventing the wheel or authentic model construction, it might also include developing an existing model further or creating an imaginary app with functions • • • • • Identify and analyse technological solutions based on their appropriateness and function, Identify problems and needs that can be solved by means of technology, and work out proposals for solutions, Use the concepts and expressions of technology, Assess the consequences of different technological choices for the individual, society and the environment, and Analyse the driving forces of technological development and how technology has changed over time. (The Swedish National Agency for Education [SNAE], 2011/2017, p. 299–300) Sufficient instructional time is also important, especially when working with younger students. Benson (2012), Benson and Lunt (2009) and Skogh (2001) all argue that, to gain the courage to try, students require opportunities to engage with technology. Fragmented instruction and a lack of progression within instruction hinder students’ ability to learn technology; thus, multiple opportunities to experiment are crucial for the learning process and for building capability and interest. Regardless of the content of curricula, the interdisciplinary nature of technology education often includes open-ended tasks. It is important to not dismiss pupils’ unusual or open ideas and encourage them discover and explore on the edge. However, teachers must also maintain a balance, as it is crucial to give students opportunities to build their skills and content knowledge. These responsibilities place significant pressure on the shoulders of teachers. Shulman (1987) emphasised that teacher understanding of student misconceptions as particularly important during inquirybased and open-ended activities, making it even more important for teachers to know their content and pedagogy. The importance of teacher discussions and reflection concerning teaching, learning and assessment in technology has been highlighted (Atkinson & Black, 2007; Black, 2008; Blomdahl, 2007; Hartell, 2015, 2017; Klasander, 2010; Moreland, Jones, & Barlex, 2008; Williams, 2011, 2016). However, such environments are very difficult to achieve in general, and they are particularly difficult to achieve in technology education (Hartell, 2015). Embedding formative assessment When the concept of formative assessment entered the conversation, it quickly became a buzzword among teachers, educators, policy makers and even educational vendors. There is substantial evidence that formative assessment may have a significant impact on student Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 47 achievement (Black & Wiliam, 1998a; Hattie, 2009). However, the difficulties relating to formative assessment (e.g. superficial implementation and understanding) are substantial. These difficulties are often forgotten in discussions, resulting in more superficial implementations in classroom practices (Bennett, 2011a; Hirsh & Lindberg, 2015; Levinsson, 2013; Moss & Brookhart, 2009; Torrance & Pryor, 2002; Wiliam, 2009, 2011a, 2011b). To establish a firm understanding of formative assessment, literature stress that teachers need time and space to experiment, discuss and reflect on their work to implement processes and mechanisms for learning assessment and the thinking behind it (Bennett, 2011; Black & Wiliam, 1998b; Wiliam, 2009). Through experimentation during classroom practice, teachers can change their behaviours to adapt to what happens next in their classroom practice and better meet their students' needs. This takes time but there are CPD models that has been externally evaluated and found successful for further details (Leahy & Wiliam, 2010) and (Educational Endowment Foundation, 2018; Hartell, 2015) Working together with others within the profession is key to developing an understanding of learning (see e.g. Harrison, 2009; Kraft & Papay, 2014; Pettersson, 2009). However, in the current environment, planning for teaching and learning is not a priority for technology teachers (Blomdahl, 2007; Hartell, 2013). Instead of focusing on bridging teaching and learning and discussing and trying different things with other professionals, technology teachers spend their time managing institutional weaknesses (e.g. a lack of teaching material and other equipment) and fighting for allocated instruction time. This is a systemic problem and not one that teachers can solve by themselves (Hartell, 2015). These restraining frame factors have been shown to negatively impact teachers’ self- and collective efficacy and well-being (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2010). Therefore, affordances for teachers’ assessment practices need to be enhanced. Affordances refer to the quality of the environment in which teachers are situated. In this context, affordances include time to reflect, plan questions and learning activities, discuss with others, engage in professional development and develop teaching materials, all of which are denied to technology teachers (Hartell, 2015). To bridge teaching and learning, affordances for teachers’ assessment practices must be increased. Teachers should also seek advice from their peers and not be afraid to ask for help. Interestingly, while highly effective teachers are more likely to seek advice from their peers, they are no more likely to be approached for advice than their less effective peers (Spillane, Shirrell, & Adhikari, 2018). Five key strategies Wiliam and Leahy (2015) argued that teachers can move towards formative assessment practices by enacting the following five strategies in their classroom practices; 1. Clarifying, sharing and understanding learning intentions and success criteria; 2. Engineering effective discussions, tasks and activities that elicit evidence of learning; 3. Providing feedback that moves learning forward; 4. Activating students as learning resources for one another; and 5. Activating students as owners of their own learning. All five strategies are equally important; however, the importance and benefits of feedback that moves the learner forward cannot be underestimated. Traditionally, the learner is the student; however, within the educational context, the learner is also the teacher. Therefore, feedback moves from teacher to pupil, from pupil to teacher, from pupil to pupil and, finally, from pupil to teacher. Building on Kluger and DeNisi’s (1996) review of feedback, Wiliam (2015) noted that much feedback actually hinders learning. He emphasised that the only thing that matters is how the receiver reacts to feedback and he identified eight possible responses to feedback, six of which are bad (see table 1). Feedback indicates that performance: Receiver of Falls short of Exceeds goal feedback will goal Change Increase effort Reduce effort behaviour Change goal Reduce Increase aspiration aspiration Abandon goal Decide goal is Decide goal is too easy too hard Reject feedback Feedback is Feedback is ignored ignored Table 1: Reactions to feedback (Wiliam, 2015, p. 103) These reactions are difficult to foresee. A good rule of thumb, according to Wiliam (2009), is that feedback should create more work for the recipient than the donor. This is rarely the case; however, including time in lesson plans for students to work with their feedback increases the likelihood of positive outcomes. When students are not given time to work with feedback, the feedback is likely to be discarded and have no impact on learning (Black et al., 2003). Teachers’ workloads are also of great importance, as formulating feedback takes time and effort, which is wasted if students are not given the opportunity to work with the information they receive. Therefore, another— and perhaps better—approach is less is more. In other words, it is better to keep quiet and say nothing at all than to say an only partially developed thought, which may lead students to think that the teacher does not take their work seriously (Lindström, 2006). Furthermore, students who receive too much feedback can become addicted to feedback, and feedback junkies do not learn as much (Kluger & DeNisi, 1996). Feedback concept has been high jacked in education. However, feedback stems from engineering and from an engineering point of view, it is important to look forward and consider how one can change from a current to a wanted position, as Wiliam (2009) suggested. Hattie and Timperley’s (2007) review of feedback focused primarily on the transmission of information, rather than feedback from an engineering point of view. Still, their review provides valuable insights into what to focus on while formulating feedback. Hattie and Timperley (2017) review suggests that feedback should be focus on levels over which students are in control over (e.g. tasks, processes and self-regulation) and not over self-level (e.g. their Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 48 personality). These suggestions are consistent with the findings of Wiliam (2015) and Lindström (2006). Information should be forward-looking and under the student’s control, creating more work for the recipient than the donor. Furthermore, feedback should be delivered while students are learning, rather than at the end. Feedback is forward-looking: a description of the gap between a student’s current and wished-for position on his or her learning journey. Teachers should make sure that recipients work with the feedback provided. If they do not, giving feedback is a waste of the teachers’ time and effort, since it is likely to be ignored. Teachers should also be upfront about why they have offered specific feedback, since students who know why they have received specific feedback are more likely to exert effort and then turn in their work again especially when telling students that critical feedback is given on the basis of teachers’ high standards and beliefs in their students’ potential (for futher details see Yeager et al., 2014). Wiliam (2015) suggested that teachers who provide grades should not bother with comments, since, when grades are mixed with written comments, comments are discarded and never read. To address these issues, feedback can be given in portions. For example, students can be given written feedback, allowed some time to work through it, and then given a grade. However, I suggest that teachers who follow this approach allow students time to work with the feedback comments before turning their work in again for a grade. Alternatively, a teacher could simply provide a grade and skip the rest. Teachers should not pretend to give students advice on what to do next unless they also give students the chance to change their work. Learning intentions and criteria for success Promoting thinking by encouraging pupils to express themselves and reflect upon their own and others’ ideas demands active teacher participation to challenge students and expand their horizons. This is immensely challenging, since teachers do not always explicate where their students are going, other than forward. Knowing where they are going makes it easier for students to get there, especially when they know what next step to take and which direction (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006). This is of great concern in Sweden, where pupils are often are left on their own in an unreflective doing/making trying to decode the mystery path of learning themselves without guidance and opportunities for reflection (Skolinspektionen, 2014), resulting in a loss of interest and opportunities. However, the direction of forward movement is not always evident. Sometimes, a direction may not be valid; at other times, due to the nature of the technology discipline, a direction may not even be possible to foresee. Regardless, it is crucial for teachers to be clear about what they expect of their students. Such clarity benefits all students, but especially low achievers; thus, it may dramatically reduce the gap between low and high achievers (Jönsson, 2010). Being clear about learning intentions is challenging, since the more precise learning intentions are, less likely they are to mean anything or even be valid for student learning. They may also vary in terms of students’ perceptions of learning intentions compared to teachers’ own expectations. Addressing this discrepancy is crucial to reduce the gap between low and high achievers in their ability to interpret teachers’ criteria for success. Unlike low achievers, high achievers are usually able to interpret what their teachers consider as criteria for success like in Bjurulf (2008) where high achievers had realised and agreed to the silent agreement with teachers that students aiming for higher grades, unlike low achievers, should work alone and to not ask questions. Depending on what a teacher wants her students to learn, the teacher must also choose appropriate tasks. Like the primary teacher who realise that her class had already made Jumping Jacks with their previous teachers. Her pupils’ complaints about making another Jumping Jack made her realise that her objective had not been clearly communicated. The purpose of the activity was to introduce her pupils to reading, interpreting and following blueprints or technical instructions and not to understand the mechanics behind getting Jack’s arm to move, as the pupils had assumed. Clarifying the learning intention, consequences and results of an assessment all increase validity (Newton, 2007; Nyström, 2004). In their investigation of which success criteria teachers emphasise when assessing student work, Hartell and Skogh (2015) that teachers place the most emphasis on the narrative of the design process. However, teachers view task completion as a criterion for success: an approach which can be seen as superficial, but which also stresses the importance of sufficient instruction time for students. Teachers can also post learning intentions on the blackboard and then have the pupils copy them into their workbooks, where they will likely never be reviewed again. Another quite popular (and perhaps more successful) approach involves the use of rubrics. Though rubrics are useful for sharing learning intentions and success criteria (see Brookhart, 2018), they are often written in a teacher-friendly language, such that students and teachers may interpret them in different ways. Exemplars Wiliam (2015) suggests moving towards exemplars instead of rubrics, as exemplars articulate learning intentions in a richer way. Compared to exemplars, rubrics are like reading a review of a wine instead of actually tasting it; thus, by sharing exemplars from different contexts, technology educators can help students explore the true construct more deeply. Teachers may also use a combination: For example, annotated exemplars could give students an understanding of what quality looks like and articulate their knowledge, especially when exemplars of different quality can be contrasted. More work needs to be done here to learn more about how, like wine connoisseurs, technology teachers develop a ‘nose’ for quality. Using exemplars is not cheating; instead, exemplars are valuable for learning, especially in open-ended and problem-solving tasks. Exemplars have been found to reduce students’ cognitive load (Sweller, 1988; Weinstein, Madan, & Sumeracki, 2018), and they are particularly useful for student learning when used as part of instruction. However, the effect of such exemplars on learning depends on learners’ levels of expertise, such that low achievers benefit the most, and the effect on learning decreases as expertise grows. Therefore, evidence suggests that student gain the most when exemplars are presented at Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 49 the beginning of the learning journey (Atkinson, Derry, Renkl, & Wortham, 2000). The following example is from a Japanese secondary technology classroom. Technology teachers used exemplars of circuit boards with different electronic components e.g. diodes, transistors, capacitors and resistors, which former students had designed and soldered to solve different. These exemplars of different quality was used in a dialogue together with their pupils to articulate different quality work in electronics in terms of soldering, design etc. depending on what they were currently focusing on. Learning can be facilitated by digital tools, such as comparative judgement (CJ) software (for details, see Pollitt, 2012). In the context of a teacher education program at the University of Limerick, students were asked to peer assess one another’s work via a cloud-based platform using CJ (Seery, Buckley, Delahunty, & Canty, 2018). Specifically, students were asked to compare two pieces of work, choose which one was better and provide feedback to their peers in an iterative process. Even though, feedback and CJ is independent of each other since feedback can be given without CJ, and CJ can be done without involving feedback. In this particular study the combination of CJ and feedback was explored. Feedback was matched to each exemplar, and students were then given time to work with the feedback and develop their work before handing it in to the teacher for final assessment. The research team was somewhat surprised by the students’ positive response to this intervention, reporting that the iterative process of CJ was valuable for improving their understanding of the nature of technology. The students also reported how valuable they found providing and receiving peer feedback through the CJ process. Following the students’ progression, the authors found that students who did not perform particularly well in the first CJ round made the greatest leaps forward in the second round. This can be interpreted in different ways, results could be due to a ceiling effect but also indicate that low-achieving students benefited more than highachieving students from seeing other students’ work. However, the results from this study may confirm prior work on the usefulness of worked exemplar and would be interesting to investigate further. are seldom used. Time is too valuable for such an oversight. Therefore, it is crucial to shift from data-driven decision-making to decision-driven data collection. There are obvious demands regarding the quality of the questions asked to gather data. According to Wiliam (2011), there are only two reasons for teachers to ask questions: 1. to discover where pupils are to decide on next steps, and 2. to encourage thinking among the pupils. Though open-ended tasks are inherent to technology education, they are blunt tools to discover where students currently are, what they have encountered and what misconceptions they might hold. Instead, Wiliam (2009) suggested revealing misconceptions using elegantly designed multiple-choice questions: so-called hinge-point questions. The use of these hinge-point questions, in which the alternative responses are designed to reveal students’ common misconceptions, may help teachers decide on which step to take next. Hinge-point questions are diagnostic questions that help a teacher check whether students are ready to move on or not and in which direction. Student responses provide the teacher with evidence about what the teacher and students should do next. The rule of thumb is that it should take less than 2 minutes to complete, and 30 seconds to interpret and decide where to go next. Hinge-point questions are challenging for technology teachers to design, as they require knowledge concerning students’ understanding of common misconceptions regarding a particular topic (e.g. electricity). They also require sufficient content knowledge to design the question and interpret student responses. Thus, hinge-point questions are hard to find in in technology education. One example could be: When the switch is closed, which bulb or bulbs will be lit? 1 A. Bulb 1 B. Bulb 2 C. Neither D. Both Figure 1: Assessment for Learning in STEM Teaching, provided by Future Learn. Eliciting evidence of learning As mentioned at the beginning of the paper, learning must start from where learners are, and we cannot assume that students are where they are supposed to be on their learning journey. It is easy to be tricked by students’ smiling faces or frowning foreheads while trying to figure out whether or not they understand. Though students might give the impression of being engaged, this does not always mean they are learning (Nuthall, 2007). Therefore, eliciting evidence of (mis-)understanding by asking questions and designing tasks and activities to discover both understanding and misunderstanding is crucial. Today, a variety of data are collected for a variety of reasons across different levels of the system, but these data 1 This question is from a massive on-line course (MOOC): Assessment for Learning in STEM Teaching, provided by Future Learn. Find out more here:https://www.futurelearn.com/courses/assessment-forlearning-stem Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 50 Students may respond to hinge-point questions by writing their answers on mini-whiteboards; holding up cards with A, B, C or D; or using an electronic device or finger voting. How the evidence is collected is not as important as what inferences can be made. What might the different answers tell a teacher about what his or her students know, partly know or do not know, and how can that inform what happens next in the classroom? It is important to note that hinge-point questions can later be used for evaluative purposes; however, it is important to tell students the purpose of the question when posing it. Encouraging thinking and dialogue In addition to helping teachers determine what direction to move next, Wiliam (2009) argued that teachers should also ask questions to promote thinking. It is important to design activities that elicit evidence in different ways to cater to what a teacher wishes to find out. Activities must also cater to all students’ needs. Everyone involved should understand how the teacher plans to use the evidence he or she collects. Teachers should invite students to become owners of their learning and learning resources for one another by engineering effective discussions and learning activities and inviting students to join discussions, classroom talk and intentional dialogues; promoting risktaking; and incorporating mistakes as learning opportunities (Wiliam, 2013). This is of particular importance in technology classrooms (Black, 2008; Moreland, Cowie, & Otrel-Cass, 2013; Moreland, Jones, & Barlex, 2008; Skogh, 2001). Figure 2: Wonderwall, New Zealand, in 2013. Stressing the importance of giving students sufficient time to explore and consolidate their thoughts and build on their work based on feedback, Benson (2012), Dakers (2007) and Kimbell (2007) highlighted the importance of technology teachers ensuring sufficient time for individual reflection and peer work, allowing students to finish their tasks to their own satisfaction and providing students with opportunities to progress. The structure of lessons, including the embedding of formative assessment for learning, strongly influences how students approach their assignments. It is important to design activities that elicit evidence related to what teachers want to discover and what challenges students’ thinking, as well as to encourage them to share and listen to one another’s ideas in dialogue. Pair and group work are common in technology education activities, especially during practical work. However, managing such work can be somewhat challenging. The following paragraph will provide some practical techniques that may encourage and stimulate thinking and dialogue within and between these groups. The coloured-cup technique can stimulate student talk focused on learning, while also eliciting evidence of learning and common student misconceptions while working with practical work/design activities. In this activity, each group or pair receives three cups: one red, one green and one yellow. While working, the group displays the green cup, indicating that work is going fine. When they feel confused, the students can call for the teacher’s attention but continue to work by showing the yellow cup. Finally, when they are stuck and in need of urgent help, the students display the red cup. Everyone in the group must agree on which cup to show, which, by necessity, stimulates group dialogue. For example, before asking for help, the students must discuss choices, progress Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 51 and problems. Importantly, the teacher is not the only person who can help a group showing yellow or red; instead, a student from another group showing green can come over and assist. Coloured cups can also be used during individual work: For example, two students can share a set of cups and ask their pair mates for help before turning to the teacher. This approach facilitates dialogue among students and allows teachers to take a step back and listen to group discussions from a distance, gaining an overview of what is going on while simultaneously eliciting evidence of learning (and misconceptions) and identifying topics for whole-class discussion. it is the teacher’s responsibility to invite more participation. Both learners and teachers can elicit evidence of learning. Traditionally, the teachers ask the questions and the students respond. However, by inviting students to ask questions, teachers can discover more, not only students’ interests and what they already know, but also what they do not know yet. Question generation can also improve learning (Foos, Mora, & Tkacz, 1994; King, 1991). Pupils can be invited to ask questions individually or in pairs or groups in multiple ways. The following example is from a primary school in New Zealand, in which pupils posted questions on a Wonder wall. Sometimes, the wonder wall was divided into three columns (difficult, easy and interesting), and pupils posted their questions in the columns they found most appropriate. The teachers found this very helpful to both find out what they know already but also where her pupils were just about to take their next step. Include more students in learning and engagement and open up the discussion, making it clear that it is OK if a student does not know the answer or makes a mistake is important. Random response systems may be helpful strategy. One way of implementing a randomised response system is to prohibit students from raising their hands unless they have a question and instead using a randomiser to select students to engage. For example, a teacher could write pupils’ names on lollipop sticks and then pull the sticks out of a container to determine which student will respond (with the option to pass to respond for the moment). When a pupil responds, the teacher can draw an additional lollipop stick. After hearing these two responses, the teacher could ask a third student (or return to the student who first declined to respond) which of the other two answers he or she supports and whether he or she has anything to add to the conversation. The following examples show questions designed to promote thinking that teachers can use to prompt classroom dialogue: Making inferences based on students’ responses and putting these inferences into practice requires planning classroom activities to better meet students’ needs (Wiliam, 2011a, b). Hence, teachers must plan their activities and questions, prepare for possible responses and consider different options for next steps, while also providing sufficient time for students to reflect and respond (Black, Harrison, Lee, Marshall, & Wiliam, 2004; Kimbell, 2007; Leahy, Lyon, Thompson, & Wiliam, 2005) Another technique to get students talking and thinking is to await students’ responses before continuing the discussion. Appropriate wait times invites more students to participate and has been found to boost learning (Rowe, 1986). When teachers introduced a three-to-five-second wait-time, Wiliam, Lee, Harrison and Black (2004) found that students: • • • • • gave longer responses, were more likely to volunteer to respond, were less likely to refuse to respond, were more likely to comment on or add to the answers of other students, and offered more alternative explanations. Responding to a question is a learning opportunity, and it is very important to include every pupil in learning activities. Increasing wait times can encourage more pupils to volunteer to respond and engage in classroom discussion. However, as long as engaging or participating in classroom discussion is voluntary, some students may never participate, regardless of how long the teacher waits. Not all students feel comfortable enough to engage and reveal their mistakes in front of everyone else. Therefore, Wiliam (2011) argued that voluntary response systems (i.e. when students raise their hands to indicate they would like to respond to question) foster inequity and divide the classroom into two groups: one of students who are learning and one of students who are disengaged in responding to questions. This causes a divide in terms of opportunities to learn, as responding to questions is a learning opportunity. In other words, students who decline to answer questions are denied full access to learning. Do you agree with Suzi’s suggestion? How can you improve on Jack’s solution? What can we add to Kim’s answer? Dean said this, and Monica said that. How can we bring these ideas together? Do you think Sarah’s idea will work or not? Why? When I introduce this technique to teacher students or professional teachers attending professional development regarding embedding formative assessment, people tend to raise several questions: What about the quiet and shy students? Do they dare—and do I, as a teacher, dare to force them—to answer? This was also my own immediate response when I first heard about this technique. Unfortunately, there is not one clear answer. However, from experience embedding formative assessment across several schools, I have found that it is not the quiet students who find this approach most terrifying; rather, it is those students who previously volunteered to respond to all the questions who get the most frustrated. Under this new approach, these students do not receive as much attention as they used to and, perhaps more importantly, are forced to answer questions to which they do not know the answer. This makes these students very uncomfortable and, thus, must be taken into consideration and monitored. Ultimately, however, it is only the individual teacher who can decide whether or not to use a particular technique for formative assessment, when to push and when to hold back. That said, it is interesting to see how quickly pupils accept a no-hands-up policy, which they tend to find fairer. For example, in a primary classroom in the Haninge municipality in Sweden, a new pupil joined the class after Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 52 the school year had begun. The teacher provided her with the necessary school material—or, at least, she thought she had. However, when the teacher reached into the lollipop stick container, she discovered a stick with the new girl’s name on it—one that she had not created. It struck her that one of her eight-year-old pupils had made the lollipop stick. As the lesson continued, she found another lollipop stick for the new girl, also written in an eight-year-old’s handwriting. These two pupils invited their new classmate into the classroom in a way that she, as a teacher, had forgotten. The teacher was moved by this confirmation that implementing a no-hands-up-strategy had been successful among her pupils. Conclusion Assessment affects learning. Though teachers’ tacit views of learning influence their teaching, they are more likely to articulate their perspectives when designing assessment tools (Black & Wiliam, 2009; Elwood, 2008; James, 2010). Teachers have great responsibility for pupils’ attitudes and future intellectual development. When teachers articulate (even unintentionally) what is important in their assessments, they shape pupils’ ideas about what will be assessed—which, in turn, influence their studies, their apprehensions about the nature of the subject and what they value. A recent study of teachers’ assessment practices examined teacher-made tests in terms of construct validity (Hartell & Strimel, 2018) and found that there are causes for concern in technology education with respect to construct validity, subject apprehension and gender bias. The tests mediated a limited view of the technology subject and offered strong evidence for construct underrepresentation since these tests contained too much emphasis on traditionally male technologies and an underrepresentation of the modern technology present in young people’s lives. Different constructs and purposes demand different methods of assessment; therefore, assessment literacy among teachers is key, and teachers’ assessment practices must be unpacked even further. Wiliam (2010) argued that, in the pursuit of equity in assessment, construct interpretation is at the heart of validity; therefore, design assessment should begin by defining the construct to assess and then designing an adequate method, not the other way around. The construct of technology may be somewhat defined in some national curriculum; however, there is often room for interpretation. Focusing on teachers’ assessment repertoires could be one way to support construct definition and pupils’ access to fair and equitable assessment. Within the educational context, assessment can be a powerful tool for navigating cognitive and social development. However, like any other navigational tool, assessment needs to be handled carefully to be useful in the educational environment and help bridge teaching and learning. What is specific regarding assessment literacy, and what can be synergised to increase students’ capabilities and interest within technology education? The best ways to build subject-specific assessment literacy in technology education are still undiscovered. Thus, it is crucial to invite school leaders from every level of the educational system to participate in providing affordances for teachers’ assessment practices and embedding assessments to bridge teaching and learning. This is an international need; therefore, international collaboration is important to ensure that every child prospers in technology education. References (EducationalEndowmentFoundation. (2018). Embedding formative assessment: Evaluation report and executive summary. Retrieved from https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/project s-and-evaluation/projects/embedding-formativeassessment/ Atkinson, R. K., Derry, S. J., Renkl, A., & Wortham, D. (2000). Learning from Examples: Instructional Principles from the Worked Examples Research. Review of Educational Research, 70(2), 181–214. http://doi.org/10.3102/00346543070002181 Atkinson, S., & Black, P. (2007). Useful assessment for design and technology: formative assessment, learning and teaching. In D. Barley (Ed.), Design and technology–for the next generation. (pp. 198–215). Whitchurch, Shropshire, UK: Cliffeco Communications. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy. The exercise of control (13th ed.). New York: W. H. Freeman and Company. Bennett, R. E. (2011). Formative assessment: a critical review. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(1), 5–25. http://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2010.513678 Benson, C. (2012a). Conformity or diversity: developing creativity in design and technology in early years. In H. Middleton (Ed.), Explorations of best practice in Technology, Design & Engineering Education. Vol I (pp. 42–51). Brisbane, Australia: Griffith University. Benson, C. (2012b). Conformity or diversity: developing creativity in design and technology in the early years. In H. Middleton (Ed.), Explorations of best practice in Technology, Design & Engineering Education. Volume one (pp. 42–51). Brisbane: Griffith Institute for Educational Research. Benson, C., & Lunt, J. (2009). Innovation and risk-taking in primary design and technology: issues arising from the evaluation of the pilot phase of the curriculum development project ‘Butterflies in My Tummy.’ In E. Norman & D. Spendlove (Eds.), The Design and Technology Association International Research Confer- ence 2009 (pp. 37–46). Wellesbourne: The Design and Technology Association. Retrieved from https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/dspacejspui/bitstream/2134/5093/1/CBensonJLunt.pdf Black, P. (2008). Formative assessment in the learning and teaching of design and technology education: Methods and techniques. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 13(3), 19–26. Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2004). Working inside the black box: Assessment for learning in the classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(1), 8–21. Retrieved from http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&amp;se=gglsc &amp;d=5007120502 Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998a). Assessment and Classroom Learning. Assessment in Education: Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 53 Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74. http://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102 Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998b). Inside the Black Box : Raising Standards Through Classroom Assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139–148. http://doi.org/10.1002/hrm Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5–31. Retrieved from http://eprints.ioe.ac.uk/1119/ Blomdahl, E. (2007). Teknik i skolan: en studie av teknikundervisning för yngre skolbarn. Stockholm: HLS förlag. Retrieved from http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:su:diva-6868 Brookhart, S. M. (2018). Appropriate Criteria: Key to Effective Rubrics. Frontiers in Education, 3. http://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2018.00022 Dakers, J. R. (2007). Incorporating Technological Literacy into Classroom Practice. In M. de Vries, R. Custer, J. Dakers, & G. Martin (Eds.), Analyzing Best Practice in Technology Education (pp. 125– 137). Rotterdam: Sense Publisher. Elwood, J. (2008). Gender Issues in Testing and Assessment. I. In P. Murphy & K. Hall (Eds.), Learning and Practice. Agency and Identities. (pp. 87–101). London: Open University SAGE. Foos, P. W., Mora, J. J., & Tkacz, S. (1994). Student study techniques and the generation effect. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(4), 567–576. Harrison, C. (2009). Assessment for Learning. A Formative Approach to Classroom Practice. In A. Jones & M. deVries (Eds.), International Handbook of Research and Development in Technology Education (pp. 449–459). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Hartell, E. (2013). Looking for a glimpse in the eye: A descriptive study of teachers’ work with assessment in technology education. In I.-B. Skogh & M. J. De Vries (Eds.), Technology teachers as researchers:: Philosophical and Empirical Technology Education Studies in the Swedish TUFF Research School (1st ed., pp. 255–283). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Hartell, E. (2015). Assidere necesse est: Necessities and complexities regarding teachers’ assessment practices in technology education. KTH Royal Institute of Technology. Retrieved from http://www.divaportal.org/smash/get/diva2:788413/INSIDE01.pdf Hartell, E. (2015). Changing education in action in Sweden: The cared-for teacher. Flip the System: Changing Education from the Ground Up. http://doi.org/10.4324/9781315678573 Hartell, E. (2017). Teachers’ Self-Efficacy in Assessment in Technology Education. In M. J. de Vries (Ed.), Springer International Handbook of Education: Handbook of Technology Education (1st ed., pp. 1– 16). Springer. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-31938889-2_56-1 Hartell, E., & Strimel, G. J. (2018). What is it called and how does it work: examining content validity and item design of teacher-made tests. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-018-9463-2 Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. Routledge. Hirsh, Å., & Lindberg, V. (2015). Formativ bedömning på 2000-talet- en översikt av svensk och internationell forskning. Stockholm, Sweden. Retrieved from https://publikationer.vr.se/produkt/delrapport-franskolforsk-projektet-formativ-bedomning-pa-2000talet-en-oversikt-av-svensk-och-internationellforskning/ James, M. (2010). Assessment, Teaching and Theories of Learning. In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and Learning (pp. 47–60). Chippenham: SAGE. Kimbell, R. (2007). Assessment. In M. de Vries, R. Custer, J. Dakers, & G. Martin (Eds.), Analyzing Best Practices in Technology Education (pp. 247– 258). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. King, A. (1991). Improving lecture comprehension: Effects of a metacognitive strategy. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 5(4), 331–345. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and InquiryBased Teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. http://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1 Klasander, C. (2010). Talet om tekniska system : f&#246;rv&#228;ntningar, traditioner och skolverkligheter. Linköping University Electronic Press. Retrieved from http://liu.divaportal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2:395176 Kraft, M. A., & Papay, J. P. (2014). Can Professional Environments in Schools Promote Teacher Development? Explaining Heterogeneity in Returns to Teaching Experience. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 36(4), 476–500. http://doi.org/10.3102/0162373713519496 Leahy, S., Lyon, C., Thompson, M., & Wiliam, D. (2005). Siobhan Leahy, Christine Lyon, Marnie Thompson, and Dylan Wiliam. Quality Assurance, 63(November), 1–7. Retrieved from http://nj.gov/education/njpep/classroom/arts_assessm ent/worddocs/ClassroomAssessment.pdf Leahy, S., & Wiliam, D. (2010). Embedding formative assessment-a professional development pack for schools. London, UK: Specialist Schools and Academies Trust. Levinsson, M. (2013). Evidens och existens Evidensbaserad undervisning i ljuset av lärares erfarenheter. Göteborgs universitet. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/2077/32807 Lindström, L. (2006). Creativity: What is it? Can you assess it? Can it be taught? The International Journal of Art & Design Education, 25(1), 53–66. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 54 Moreland, J., Cowie, B., & Otrel-Cass, K. (2013). Expanding Notions of Assessment for Learning Inside Science and Technology Primary Classrooms (Online). SensePublishers. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-061-3 Moreland, J., Jones, A., & Barlex, D. (2008). Design and technology inside the black boxAssessment for learning in the design and technology classroom. London: GL Assessment. Moss, C. M., & Brookhart, S. M. (2009). Advancing Formative Assessment in Every Classroom : A Guide for Instructional Leaders. Alexandria, VA, USA : Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development (ASCD). NAE, The Swedish National Agency for Education. Curriculum for the compulsory school, preschool class and the recreation centre, 2011 (2018). Sweden. Retrieved from https://www.skolverket.se/publikationer?id=3984 Newton, P. E. (2007). Clarifying the purposes of educational assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 14(2), 149–170. http://doi.org/10.1080/09695940701478321 Nuthall, G. (2007). The hidden lives of learners. Wellington, New Zealand: NZCER Press. Nyström, P. (2004). Rätt matt på prov. Om valideringar av bedömningar i skolan. . Umeå: Pedagogiska institutionen, Umeå universitet. Pettersson, A. (2009). Bedömning- varför, vad och varthän? . In L. Lindström & V. Lindberg (Eds.), Pedagogisk bedömning (2nd ed., pp. 31–42). Stockholm: Stockholm universitets förlag. Pollitt, A. (2012). The method of Adaptive Comparative Judgement. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 19(3), 281–300. http://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2012.665354 Rowe, M. B. (1986). Wait-time: Slowing down may be a way of speeding up! Journal of Teacher Education, 37(January–February), 43–50. Seery, N., Buckley, J., Delahunty, T., & Canty, D. (2018). Integrating learners into the assessment process using adaptive comparative judgement with an ipsative approach to identifying competence based gains relative to student ability levels. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-018-9468-x Shulman, Lee, S. (1987). Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform. Harward Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22. Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2010). Teacher selfefficacy and teacher burnout: A study of relations. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(4), 1059–1069. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.11.001 Skogh, I.-B. (2001). Teknikens värld - flickors värld : en studie av yngre flickors möte med teknik i hem och skola. Retrieved from http://libris.kb.se/bib/8375742?vw=full Skolinspektionen. (2014). Teknik – gör det osynliga synligt Om kvaliteten i grundskolans teknikundervisning. Stockholm. Spillane, J. P., Shirrell, M., & Adhikari, S. (2018). Constructing “Experts” Among Peers: Educational Infrastructure, Test Data, and Teachers’ Interactions About Teaching. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. http://doi.org/10.3102/0162373718785764 Stiggins, R. J. (1991). Assessment literacy. Phi Delta Kappan, 72(7), 534–9. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. Teknikdelegationen. (2010). Vändpunkt Sverige – ett ökat intresse för matematik, naturvetenskap, teknik och IKT, SOU 2010:28. Stockholm. Torrance, H., & Pryor, J. (2002). Investigating formative assessment. Open University Press. Webb, N. L. (2002). Assessment literacy in standardbased urban education setting. In Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association (pp. 1–20). New Orleans, US: American Educational Research Association. Retrieved from http://facstaff.wcer.wisc.edu/normw/AERA 2002/Assessment literacy NLW Final 32602.pdf Weinstein, Y., Madan, C. R., & Sumeracki, M. A. (2018). Teaching the science of learning. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 3(1), 1–17. http://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-017-0087-y Wiliam *, D., Lee, C., Harrison, C., & Black, P. (2004). Teachers developing assessment for learning: impact on student achievement. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 11(1), 49–65. http://doi.org/10.1080/0969594042000208994 Wiliam, D. (2009). Assessment for learning: why, what and how? An inaugural professorial lecture by Dylan Wiliam. Institute of Education University of London. Wiliam, D. (2011a). Embedded formative assessment. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press. Wiliam, D. (2011b). What is assessment for learning? Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37(1), 3–14. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2011.03.001 Wiliam, D. (2013). Feedback and instructional correctives. In J. H. McMillan (Ed.), SAGE Handbook of Research on Classroom Assessment (I, pp. 197–214). Thousands Oaks, USA: SAGE Publications. Wiliam, D., & Leahy, S. (2015). Embedding formative assessment: Practical techniques for K–12 classooms. (1st ed.). West Palm Beach, FL, US: Learning Sciences International. Williams, P. J. (2011). Research in technology education: looking back to move forward. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23(1), 1–9. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-011-9170-8 Williams, P. J. (2016). Research in technology education: looking back to move forward … again. International Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 55 Journal of Technology and Design Education, 26(2), 149–157. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9316-1 Yeager, D. S., Purdie-Vaughns, V., Garcia, J., Apfel, N., Brzustoski, P., Master, A., … Cohen, G. L. (2014). Breaking the cycle of mistrust: Wise interventions to provide critical feedback across the racial divide. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(2), 804–824. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0033906 Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 56 Pedagogies and practices for developing innovation capability: Beyond the AITSL standards Esther Hill1, Therese Keane2 and Kurt Seemann2 1 2 All Saints’ College, Perth Swinburne University of Technology, Australia. Abstract This scoping paper critiques the 2011 Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership Standards (AITSL) for its currency against the innovation agenda. With discourses around innovation taking centre stage in our national agendas on the economy, and hence education, there is a strong focus on developing curricula, programs and opportunities for teachers to advance in themselves, foster in others, and model innovation capability. Recent Federal Government reports recommend that innovation capability be central to all of our major policies and that understanding technologies and being creative should feature strongly in curriculum and teacher development. Innovation capability is varyingly described as the ability of individuals to think originally and critically, adapt to change, work cooperatively and find solutions to problems as they occur. To enact the innovation agenda, teachers will need to engage with, support and lead in the development of the new fluency largely related to technological understanding and creative application. Very little literature guides teachers in what this ‘fluency’ looks like in an educational setting. Technacy education offers a framework to guide this process for teachers just as frameworks for literacy and numeracy have in language and number development. The Australian Professional Standards for Teachers (APST) offer very little direction for teacher education programs and professional development for what technological understanding and innovation capability looks like in their professional practice. This paper offers a critical analysis of the APST with a focus on the discourses that are privileged and the gaps and silences that surround the pedagogies and practices that support innovation capability. Keywords Technacy; innovation; pedagogy; fluency, general capabilities Introduction This scoping paper critiques the 2011 Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL) - Australian Professional Standards for Teachers (APST) for its currency against the innovation agenda through applying a policy trajectory approach to the AITSL Standards (AITSL, 2011). The aim of this paper is to scope the landscape of teacher standards with relation to pedagogies and practices that support the development of innovation capability, a precursor to further research that will be undertaken by the authors. All Australian Early Childhood, Primary and Secondary education systems and sectors are required to implement the Standards. With an emphasis on improving teacher quality and ‘with broad consensus that teacher quality is the single most important in-school factor influencing student achievement’ the APST articulate what teachers are expected to know and do at four career stages: Graduate, Proficient, Highly Accomplished and Lead (AITSL, 2011). In the 2018 report, ‘Key Skills for the 21st Century: an evidence-based review’ (Lamb, Maire & Doecke, 2018) commissioned by the New South Wales Department of Education, the ‘problem’ of the clear need for education systems, schools, teachers needing to develop these key skills yet no school system, “can yet demonstrate a generalised and consistent focus on key skills across schools, subjects and year levels” (Lamb, Maire & Doecke, 2018, p4). This, and many other recently commissioned reports (Department of Education, Science and Training, 2003; Commonwealth of Australia, 2015; Gonski et al, 2018) suggests that: Effective reform is likely to involve approaches that consider teaching standards, assessment, curriculum and instruction, professional development and learning environments … Successful policy implementation needs to be accompanied by strategic investment in building the capacity of all teachers, across school and classroom contexts. (Lamb, Maire & Doecke, 2018, p4) Policy, in the context of this paper is seen as contested, complex and contradictory (Rizvi and Lingard, 2009) and is explored as “text and action, words and deeds, it is what is enacted as well as what is intended” (Ball in Vidovich, 2007, p28 ). The policy trajectory framework draws on both, “critical and post-structural theory where, critical theory informs the analysis of bigger picture patterns of power (in both ‘influences’ and ‘outcomes/political strategies’) and post-structuralism allowing for a multiplicity of different interpretations and enactments of policy (in ‘practices/effects’)” (Vidovich, 2013, p28). With education policy taking centre stage in emerging narratives around the Global Knowledge Economy (OECD, 2014) the APST can be situated within the contested, complex and contradictory space of teaching practice and its supporting policies that are largely geared toward an education that allows for successful competition in a global market. The drivers for education policy can be seen as emerging from within narratives about quality and equity and focus on traditional notions of achievement, standards and the accompanying practices and pedagogies to support ‘performance’. However, recent Australian Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 57 Federal Government reports (Commonwealth of Australia, 2015; Commonwealth of Australia, 2017) recommend that innovation capability be central to all of our major policies and that understanding technologies and being creative should feature strongly in curriculum and teacher development. Innovation capability refers to the ability of individuals to think originally and critically, adapt to change, work cooperatively and find solutions to problems as they occur. Whilst the APST provide clear frameworks and structures to support the quality, equity and performance agenda, the focus of this paper is on critiquing the APST against the innovation agenda. Applying the policy trajectory framework, this paper will firstly explore the global and national influences firstly in the development of the APST and also the emerging influences that impact on the innovation agenda. Secondly it will explore the policy text with a particular focus on the discourses and ideologies embedded within the APST, the message systems about education and learning that are embedded within the policy and the gaps and silences around innovation capability. Thirdly, it will argue, through a brief exploration of the practices and effects observed in a school context, that the currency of the policy is problematic. With discourses around innovation taking centre stage in our national agendas on the economy, and hence education, there is a strong focus on developing curricula, programs and opportunities for teachers to advance in themselves, foster in others, and model innovation capability. Finally, in exploring the outcomes, this paper will argue that the gaps and silences that are evident in the APST, given the innovation agenda, make the enactment of the APST as the basis for building and judging the professional practice of teachers problematic. Whilst the policy constructs a discourse that supports a traditional set of practices to support the agenda performance, equity and accountability, there is a clear need for a set of guidelines, frameworks and practices that support teachers in enacting their role of ensuring students develop innovation capability by the more pervasive discourse of quality assurance and accountability. Influences on Teacher Standards: the quality and equity agenda In critiquing the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers (APST) and exploring the influences on these policies, one focus is on the ways in which teachers’ pedagogies and practices are linked to educational purpose. The quality and equity agenda sees teachers pedagogies and practices being geared toward students’ achievement being mapped against standards and standardised testing with the dominant pedagogies under this agenda being teacher-centric. Global Influences Education policy is increasingly taking centre stage in narratives around the global knowledge economy. Globalisation, with increasingly interconnected and interdependent nations, has seen the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the World Bank become major players in a neo-liberal conception of education in which international comparison and circulation of policy and practice is geared toward competing successfully in a global market (Rizvi & Lingard, 2009). Drivers and influences for APST policy can be seen as emerging from within narratives about the purpose of education being for quality and equity. Conceptions of quality are highly contested with an increasing focus on the marketization of national educational success in the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) testing. Coupled with increasing international accountability due to these measures is the global trend toward devolution and autonomy within schools. Whereas devolution and autonomy have led to conceptions of quality that are contextualised, address social inequities and focus on quality improvements that promote the reflection and development of internal stakeholders; the counter narrative of increasing accountability measures focuses on a limited conception of quality-performance in PISA tests in literacy, numeracy and science. “State, national and international policymakers use these indicators to monitor schools, teachers and students and negatively sanction those who perform below standards” (Anagnostopoulos, Lingard & Sellar, 2016 p 343). With such credence and power lent to the data from PISA tests through local, national and global media, it is not surprising that the conception of quality has such an impact on the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers with its ensuing implications for the implied pedagogies and practices outlined in the APST. National Influences Within this global policy landscape, Australia’s national policy influences with regard to teaching standards are framed by the narratives of education with the purpose of quality and equity. These narratives take centre stage in the 2008 Melbourne Declaration of Educational Goals for Young Australians (MCEETYA, 2008) The Melbourne Declaration seeks to articulate a blueprint for Australia’s education system in ensuring its competitiveness in the global knowledge economy. These goals are: Goal 1: Australian schooling promotes equity and excellence Goal 2: All young Australians become: • successful learners • confident and creative individuals • active and informed citizens (MCEETYA, 2008) . The goals and blueprint of the Melbourne Declaration form the basis of the development of the Australian Curriculum (Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority, 2017), with version 1 initially released in 2010 and, as at December 2016, version 8.3 being the current version of the National Curriculum for all Australians. Discourses about quality and equity are pervasive in the Australian Curriculum with Quality and Equity continuing to be strong drivers for a globally competitive education for young Australians: • Quality – an Australian Curriculum will contribute to the provision of a world-class education in Australia by setting out the knowledge, understanding and skills needed for life and work in the 21st century and by setting Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 58 • high standards of achievement across the country. Equity – an Australian Curriculum will provide a clear, shared understanding of what young people should be taught and the quality of learning expected of them, regardless of their circumstances, the type of school that they attend or the location of their school. (Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority, 2017). It is not surprising that the quality and equity narratives play out in significant ways in the policy text production of the APST. The pedagogies and practices described and implied in the policy text of the APST have a keen focus standards, achievement and attainment- the notion of a quality education and on an equity agenda that is intimately linked to these aims. Influences on the Education for Innovation Agenda In emerging narratives about education with the purpose of developing students’ innovation capability (as opposed to the quality and equity agenda), teachers’ pedagogies and practices need go beyond the traditional Mastery and spaced learning and become more student-centric. Along with the purpose of developing innovation capability (or 21st century skills) are the educational goals of individual and collective wellbeing and of developing learner agency in order to navigate a complex and uncertain world (OECD, 2018, p4). Global Influences through the OECD In the global knowledge economy, the OECD has an increasingly influential role to play in determining the goals, practices and outcomes of education systems. In 2018, the OECD released its framing paper, The Future of Education and Skills: Education 2030 which contains the OECD Learning Framework 2030- a vision and some underpinning principles for the future of education systems (OECD, 2018). Figure 1: The OECD Learning Framework 2030: Work-in-progress The Framework attends to two significant needs in education: the need for broader education goals for individual and collective well-being, “Education needs to aim to do more than prepare young people for the world of work; it needs to equip students with the skills they need to become active, responsible and engaged citizens.” (OECD, 2018, p4). The model above outlines the 2030 framework and includes some important components. Importantly, this model shows the complexity and interaction of Knowledge and Skills with Attitudes and values and the notion of student agency: Students who are best prepared for the future are change agents. They can have a positive impact on their surroundings, influence the future, understand others' intentions, actions and feelings, and anticipate the short and long-term consequences of what they do.’ (OECD, 2018 p5). The framework identifies three important categories of competencies as Transformative Competencies that address emerging needs: • Creating new value • Reconciling tensions and dilemmas • Taking responsibility Creating new value involves, “able to think creatively, develop new products and services, new jobs, new processes and methods, new ways of thinking and living, new enterprises, new sectors, new business models and new social models” (OECD, 2018 p5). Reconciling tensions and dilemmas requires, individuals have to learn to think and act in a more integrated way, taking into account the interconnections and inter-relations between contradictory or incompatible ideas, logics and positions, from both short- and long-term perspectives. In other words, they have to learn to be systems thinkers. “Taking responsibility underpins the other two transformative competencies where, ‘Dealing with novelty, change, diversity and ambiguity assumes that individuals can think for themselves and work with others.’” (OECD, 2018 p5- 6). Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 59 Alongside the 2030 Framework for education with its focus on curriculum, the OECD is researching innovative pedagogies that support these goals and address the identified needs. In the OECD commissioned paper, Teachers as Designers of Learning Environments (Paniagua & Istance, 2018) explores the importance of progressive pedagogies that attend to the shifting needs and aims of education systems. ‘The strong focus on learners acquiring a diverse set of competences requires a correspondingly strong focus on pedagogy’. Further, “If the 21st century competencies are to be systematically developed, rather than being left to emerge by accident, then pedagogy must be deliberately designed to foster these competences” (Paniagua & Istance, 2018, p20). The paper outlines the complexity of understanding pedagogies for multiple purposes and advocates for the active engagement of teachers in a process of innovation and design to address the complex and diverse needs of learners, purposes, competences, “Innovation in pedagogy, like any kind of innovation, takes existing ideas, tools to practices and brings them together in new ways to solve problems when current practice is not adequately meeting needs” (Paniagua & Istance, 2018, p54). National Influences In 2003, the Federal Government’s paper, Australia’s Teachers: Australia’s Future: Advancing Innovation, Science, Technology and Mathematics, (Department of Education, Science and Training, 2003) argued for the importance of developing students’ innovative capacities. methods. Only 1 in 10 teachers has recently participated in professional development to help students to develop generic, transferable skills for future work.” (Commonwealth of Australia, 2017, p27). This year in Australia, states and territory education authorities are engaging with the imperative to ensure that schools develop students’ innovation capability. In NSW, the terms of reference for its extensive review of the curriculum aims to: prepare each student with strong foundations of knowledge, capabilities and values to be lifelong learners, and to be flourishing and contributing citizens in a world in which rapid technological advances are contributing to unprecedented economic and social change in unpredictable ways (NSW Government, 2018). In the ACT, the Future of Education Strategy, released in August, 2018 (ACT Government, 2018) outlines the pillars and principles that will lead to greater student agency, shifts in classroom practice, an emphasis on measuring and reporting on learning progress, not only in academic domains, but also in wellbeing and 21st century skills. In South Australia, the South Australian Certificate of Education(SACE), a qualification that demonstrates that students have completed their final years of schooling, has been modernised and is being reviewed to ensure that the end of schooling strongly promotes, ‘the Australian Curriculum general capabilities (literacy, numeracy, information and communications technology, personal and social, critical and creative thinking, intercultural understanding and ethical behaviour), innovation and entrepreneurship” (South Australia Department for Education, 2018). For students’ innovative capacities to be realised, schools and teachers need to cultivate in students—and themselves model—creativity, imagination, original thinking, open mindedness and critical thinking. Schools and teachers help predispose students to be innovative by motivating them to seek better ways of doing things and helping delineate for them possible forms of exploration and experimentation. Policy Text Production In an already crowded curriculum, the learning experiences needed to foster in students a capacity and predisposition to be innovative cannot simply be added on. These learning experiences must be integrated within, and become a mainstay of, the curriculum. To that end, existing curriculum, school organisation and pedagogy needs to be re-thought and refined to address the ever-changing learning needs of Australia’s young people. Teachers’ capacities to adapt and innovate need to be harnessed to make changes within the curriculum, rather than to expand the curriculum. (Department of Education, Science and Training, 2003) 3. Plan for and implement effective teaching and learning Professional 4. Create and maintain supportive and safe Practice learning environments 5. Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning Fourteen years later, another Federal Government commissioned report, Australia 2030: Prosperity Through Innovation (Commonwealth of Australia, 2017) highlights the same imperative, “Education determines the capability of workers and entrepreneurs, and therefore the economy’s productivity and innovation capacity” (Commonwealth of Australia, 2017, p26). The report points out the gaps in initial teacher education programs and professional learning, “Primary content gaps in professional development include 21st-century skills and pedagogical The APST are divided into the domains of Professional Knowledge, Professional Practice and Professional Engagement, with the following standards being grouped as follows: Professional 1. Know students and how they learn Knowledge 2. Know the content and how to teach it 6. Engage in professional learning Professional 7. Engage professionally with colleagues, Engagement parents/carers and the community Table 1: Australian Professional Standards for Teachers (AITSL, 2011) Framed by a ‘Preamble’, the APST are presented as contributing to the educational goals of quality and equity both directly, the APST: reflect and build on national and international evidence that a teacher’s effectiveness has a powerful impact on students, with broad consensus that teacher quality is the most important in-school factor influencing student achievement’ and, ‘a strong focus on Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 60 improving instruction because of its direct impact upon student achievement (AITSL, 2011). The discourse around teacher effectiveness, quality and student achievement and the references cited in the preamble point to the conception of quality being clearly linked to accountability measures and performance. The Melbourne Declaration (MCEETYA, 2008) is cited in the preamble and further frames the APST as aiming to promote the equity and excellence agendas. Rizvi and Lingard (2010) argue that policy can be conceptualised as attempting to “appease, manage and accommodate” (Rizvi and Lingard, 2010, p9) competing interests; seeking to represent a desired or imagined future; and can be seen as responses to perceived problems. The APST can be seen, broadly as attempting to accommodate the competing interests between quality and equity and the innovation agenda, or the development of innovation capability. Whilst the policy document is largely framed by the discourse of equity and quality, there is a single oblique reference to the Melbourne Declaration’s (MCEETYA, 2008)claim that Australian schooling ensures that all young Australians will become, “confident and creative individuals and active and informed citizens”, a nod to the innovation agenda. As a problem, the APST are conceptualised around the question of how can teacher standards support improved instruction that leads to improved student achievement? The desired or imagined future the APST suggest is one in which the demands for teaching and learning for quality and equity is foregrounded. The policy text that addresses teachers’ pedagogy and practice uses a discourse that can be linked to pedagogical approaches where the teacher organises and controls the teaching and learning process (shown in Table 2) Standard 1 Know students and how they learn Proficient teachers will: • use teaching strategies • structure teaching programs • design and implement teaching strategies and teaching activities Proficient teachers will: • apply knowledge of the content and teaching strategies Standard 2 Know the content • organise content and how to teach • design and implement learning and it’ teaching programs • make selected content relevant and meaningful Proficient teachers will: • set explicit, challenging and achievable learning goals Standard 3 • plan and implement wellPlan for and structured learning and teaching implement programs or lesson sequences effective teaching • select and use relevant teaching and learning strategies • select and/or create and use a range of resources Table 2: Teachers’ pedagogies and practices in the APST (AITSL, 2011) The implication of these statements is that the focus of the learning, the management of the learning process and the length and shape of an ‘arc’ of learning is determined by the teacher (AITSL, 2011). As such, it could be argued that the pedagogical discourse in the APST supports a traditional model of teaching and learning that focuses on disciplinary and procedural knowledge and skills and does not pay attention to the more complex requirements for developing innovation, or other capabilities as outlined in the OECD 2030 framework (OECD, 2018). The language in the APST reflects discourses linked to the purpose of education for quality and equity: standards, accountability, transmission, content, knowledge, achievement, outcomes. Practices and effects The focus of the project scoped in this paper, with further research to be undertaken by the authors, is to observe the pedagogies and practices of teachers when they are engaged in deliberate (rather than ad hoc and incidental) programs to support the development of innovation capability. Some initial unstructured observations are provided below by way of suggesting some initial foci for these studies. These observations are undertaken through unstructured observations of a specific program, Innovat[ed] where students in Year 7, 8 and 10 (12 to 16 years old) in a West Australian Senior Secondary School engage in design led innovation and problem solving in a variety of contexts. The program is supported and led by an interdisciplinary team of teachers with varied teaching backgrounds and experience. The following are the observed tensions/ problems of practice: • Teachers who have been trained to deliver, to structure teaching sequences, to use direct and explicit instruction struggle with the shift from teaching for the known to teaching for capabilities and for students’ ability to attend to novel situations and apply key principles and processes. • The role of the teacher in supporting the development of innovation capability is shifting and dynamic. It involves a flexibility that sees the locus of control shift from Teacher, to individual students, to groups. It involves being a co-designer and a facilitator as well as a teacher. • One of the key attributes for supporting the development of innovation capability is the teacher’s agility in recognising, understanding and applying guided intervention to enable progress. • Along with students having mental models of success and failure linked to the ability to demonstrate understanding of knowledge and competence in key skills, teachers’ feeling of success is also linked to these outcomes. Without a test, and with success criteria often not being met, the lack of success and progress can leave teachers (and students) feeling Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 61 disenchanted. The attributing of value to process (rather than product) and to the demonstration of competencies may play out with the development of measures and the use of frameworks that can be reported against. Teachers in such a program, if they refer to the APST standards for guidance in how to manage and develop themselves with relation to these problems of practice would find very limited assistance. Outcomes The APST describe and scope teachers’ pedagogies and practices that support traditional methods of teaching learning linked to the purpose of education being for quality and equity: standards, accountability, transmission, content, knowledge, achievement, outcomes. The descriptions support a traditional discourse about the role of teachers. Given the global and national agenda to support the development of innovation capability through education, a different purpose to the quality and equity mission, there are gaps, silences and contradictions in the APST. Whilst there are gaps and silences in the APST with regard to teachers’ pedagogies and practices to support the development of students’ innovation capability, the Australian Curriculum (Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority, 2017) is largely silent in describing a developmental continuum of innovation capability. Seemann’s Technacy Framework (Seemann, 2010) provides such a continuum. Technacy is the new fluency that describes “holistic technological problem solving, communication and practice. Technacy is the main art, skill and knowledge of appropriate technologists.” Further, ‘this holistic or interconnected understand of technology teaching and learning for any culture or gender setting is referred to as technacy education’ (Seemann in Fleer, 2016, p15). The Technacy Framework scopes innovation capability through phases of Technacy expectations and complexity from Emergent Play to Sophisticated Pioneer. Figure 1: Technacy & Innovation Chart At the ultimate level, human innovation attributes include: “student is able to communicate well, think originally and critically, adapt to change, work cooperatively, remain motivated when faced with difficult circumstances, connects well with both people and ideas and is capable of finding solutions to problems as they occur, is highly guided by contextual operational parameters —in short, the individual presents an array of skills constituting a well-developed capacity for innovation” (Seemann, 2010) The Technacy Framework provides a clear understanding about the development of innovation capability. Whilst the Technacy Framework is a developmental framework that describes engagement with and increasingly complex facility to innovate with technology, this framework has the scope to be translated to other capability domains such as literacy and numeracy. Given the gaps and silences in the AITSL APST and the need for teachers to understand and be trained to use pedagogies and practices that support the development of innovation capability the Technacy Framework provides a starting point for considering the work of teachers and suggests the need for an accompanying framework for teachers that sits alongside and complements this. Conclusion The APST reflect the expectations for pedagogies and practices of Australian teachers. These pedagogies and practices are linked to educational purposes. The educational purpose reflected in the discourse of the APST and the pedagogies and practices described are limited and teacher-centric. The purpose reflected in the APST is influenced by the national and global agenda of education for the purposes of quality and equity- designed and measured through a content/ skills curriculum, standardised test. The need to develop students’ innovation capability is an emerging purpose for education. Pedagogies and practices for developing innovation capability are not well defined however it is clear that they are: a) more complex than pedagogies for quality and equity (eg Mastery, spaced learning); b) student-centric; c) have educational aims that are beyond academic (Paniagua & Istance, 2018). Pedagogies for developing innovation capability/ competency involve the mobilisation of knowledge, skills, Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 62 attitudes and values through a process of anticipation, action and reflection (OECD, 2018). https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/6 62684_tgta_accessible_final_0.pdf Our Australian curriculum frameworks do not clearly articulate how to develop innovation capability and our current Australian teaching standards are silent on the pedagogies and practices to develop this capability. Research in Technacy Education and the Technacy Framework offers way of understanding innovation capability from emergent play to sophisticated pioneer (Seemann, 2010). MCEETYA. (2008). Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for young Australians. Retrieved from http://www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_resources/Natio nal_Declaration_on_the_Educational_Goals_for_You ng_Australians.pdf A framework for understanding the pedagogies and practices that support the development of innovation capability is needed to redefine how teachers enable and facilitate students to learn in this way. This scoping paper foregrounds the landscape of teachers’ practice as described by the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers and forms the basis for further research to support teachers in the important work of developing students’ innovation capability. References Anagnostopoulos, D., Lingard, B., & Sellar, S. (2016). Argumentation in Educational Policy Disputes: Competing Visions of Quality and Equity. Theory Into Practice, 55(4), 342-351. doi:10.1080/00405841.2016.1208071 Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2017). Australian Curriculum. Retrieved from https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10curriculum/# Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. (2011). Australian Professional Standards for Teachers. Retrieved from https://www.aitsl.edu.au/docs/defaultsource/general/australian-professional-standands-forteachers-20171006.pdf?sfvrsn=399ae83c_12 Commonwealth of Australia. (2015). National Innovation and Science Agenda Report. Retrieved from https://www.innovation.gov.au/page/nationalinnovation-and-science-agenda-report Commonwealth of Australia. (2017). Innovation and Science Australia 2017, Australia 2030: prosperity through innovation, Australian Government, Canberra. Retrieved from https://www.industry.gov.au/sites/g/files/net3906/f/M ay%202018/document/pdf/australia-2030-prosperitythrough-innovation-full-report.pdf Department of Education Science and Training. (2003). Australia's Teachers: Australia's Future. Advancing Innovation, Science, Technology and Mathematics. Agenda for Action. Canberra: Australian Government. NSW Government. Terms of Reference- NSW Curriculum Review. Retrieved from https://nswcurriculumreview.nesa.nsw.edu.au/assets/ docs/nsw-curriculum-review-terms-of-reference.pdf OECD. (2014). Global Forum on the Knowledge Economy. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/sti/global-forum-knowledgeeconomy-2014.htm OECD. (2018). The Future of Education and Skills: Education 2030. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/sti/global-forum-knowledgeeconomy-2014.htm Paniagua, A., & Istance, D. (2018). Teachers as Designers of Learning Environments. Retrieved from https://www.oecdilibrary.org/content/publication/9789264085374-en Rizvi, F. a. (2009). Globalizing Education Policy (1st edition. ed.): Florence : Routledge. Seemann, K. W. (2010). Genre Charts: Mixed Genre- D and T. Retrieved from http://technacy.org/tools/chart/106 South Australia Department for Education. (2018). Education for a Stronger Future: Our Vision. Retrieved from https://www.education.sa.gov.au/department/aboutdepartment/education-stronger-future/our-vision Stephen Lamb, Q. M., Esther Doecke. (2018). Key Skills for the 21st Century: an evidence-based review. Retrieved from https://education.nsw.gov.au/ourpriorities/innovate-for-the-future/education-for-achanging-world/research-findings/future-frontiersanalytical-report-key-skills-for-the-21st-century/KeySkills-for-the-21st-Century-Executive-Summary.pdf Vidovich, L. (2007). Removing policy from its pedestal: some theoretical framings and practical possibilities. Educational Review, 59(3), 285-298. doi:10.1080/00131910701427231 Vidovich, L. (2013). Policy Research in Higher Education: Theories and Methods for Globalising Times. In Theory and Method in Higher Education Research (pp. 28). World Economic Forum. (2017). The Global Human Capital Report 2017. Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-globalhuman-capital-report-2017 Fleer, M. (2016). Technologies for children: Port Melbourne : Cambridge University Press. Gonski, D., Arcus, T. , Boston, K., Gould, V., Johnson, W., O'Brien, L., Perry, LA., & Roberts, M. (2018). Through Growth to Achievement: The Report of The Review to Achieve Educational Excellence in Australian Schools. Retrieved from Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 63 A proposal for learning of programming focused on IoT Yuji Kudo1, Toshikazu Yamamoto2, Takenori Motomura3, Jun Moriyama4, Sumi Kazuhiro5, Seiya Takishima6 1 Ibaraki University, Faculty of Education, Ibaraki, Japan 2 Saitama University, Faculty of Education, Saitama, Japan 3 Nippon Institute of Technology, Saitama, Japan 4 Hyogo University of Teacher Education, Graduate School of Education, Hyogo, Japan 5 Saga University, Faculty of Culture and Education, Saga, Japan 6 Saitama University, Faculty of Education, Saitama, Japan Abstract There is a need to train high-level IT human resources, such as IoT. Based on these social situations, school education is also required to foster the ability to respond to the need. Therefore, in this study, we examined a programming learning process that combines IoT (Internet of Things) to enrich the lives of the people, in order to develop a programming education at junior high school from a multifaceted perspective. Using the MESH as a learning material, we examined teaching processes that focus on enriching people’s lives by using familiar things, in particular on: (1) confirming and debugging a program to make life easier, (2) investigating the procedure of discovery and problem solving in daily life, (3) measuring and controlling a system based on input-output data flows, (4) evaluating processes, improving and correcting of the process of production and results, etc. From the practice, the understanding of IoT mechanism was improved through MESH utilization. It was possible to learn how to use MESH in a short time, and to spend time relating to daily life. Thus, proving that the learners gained basic programming knowledge and skills. Keywords Programming education; IoT; classroom practice Introduction and background The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) announced that it will compel programming education at elementary school from 2020 (Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, 2016). As a background to promote compulsory programming education, there are shortages of human resources in IT, such as web engineers. The Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) announced that there will be shortages of 369,000 and 789,000 of IT human resources in 2020 and 2030, respectively, based on the “IT survey results on the latest trends and future estimates of IT talent” (Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, 2016). IT-related businesses are expected to continue expanding in the future, and it is predicted that the number of IT human resources will not catch up with the expansion. This problem is predicted to occur not only in Japan, but also in other countries, according to a study done by an NPO, Code.org (ITmedia, 2018), which promotes programming education in the United States. The result of the study predicts that there will be a shortage of 400,000 programmers in 2020. Meanwhile, many countries have been promoting programming education. In the United States, a campaign was published at the end of 2013, where former president Barack Obama talked about the necessity of programming education, which became viral afterwards. Furthermore, short programming schools known as “coding boot camps” are increasing rapidly, because having a programming skill is advantageous to find employment. Such schools have about 21.1-billionyen market size in 2015. In addition, even Estonia, a small European country located in the Baltics with a population of 1.3 million people are also putting efforts into programming education and has started programming education from the first grade of elementary school in 2012, which is supported by Microsoft. In addition, promotion of programming education is also ongoing in various countries such as Singapore, UK, Finland, etc. (Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, 2014). Even Japan has been promoted programming education for a while. Firstly, “Measurement and Control by Programming” course was mandatory for technology and home economics subject at junior high schools based on the learning guidelines implemented since 2012. Subsequently, “programming education” was clearly stated in the government's growth strategy announced in June 2013 (Prime Minister's Office, 2013). Among them, “promotion of IT education such as programming education from the stage of compulsory education” is included. As a result of a mandatory programming education at the elementary school level mentioned above, there have been debates on how to proceed at the expert opinion meeting of MEXT. In order to respond to the shortage of IT talent, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (MIC) announced a plan to train one million new IT human resources by 2025 (Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, 2016a). Furthermore, in the Fourth Industrial Revolution, novel economic values are being developed due to the development of ICT. Among them, “IoT” and “AI” are gaining attention, which have become the core of technological innovation. With “IoT”, everything is Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 64 connected to the network, promoting the conversion of all records into electronic data. “AI” is the one that analyzes the data collected by the IoT. In other words, in order to demonstrate AI’s superior performance, the data collected by IoT becomes important (Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, 2017). However, the current IoT usage situation in Japan is hugely lacking compared to that in the United States, and the intention to introduce for 2020 is not limited to the United States, making Japan to be lacking in this matter compared to other countries. As a factor to that, problems such as “unknown usage scenes” in many industries and “inability to train human resources” were mentioned (Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, 2016b). Hosoai et.al. (2014) (Hosoai et.al. 2014) introduced PBL that proposes and materializes an IoT system for university students. According to Ono (2016) (Ono, 2016), together with the advancement of technology, the use of IoT in the socioeconomy setting as a whole is expanding, and the shortage of human resources to open up an IoT society has become a problem. Those previous studies showed that the shortage of human resources to open up an IoT society is a problem, and found that IoT classes are given to university students. However, in previous studies IoT has not been treated as a subject at the level of compulsory education. MESH Tag There are seven types of MESH tags in total. Each tag has an “LED tag” that can produce various colors, a “button tag” of a simple button function, a “human touch tag” that can detect the movement of a person, a “motion tag” that can detect movement, a “brightness tag” that can detect changes in illumination, a “temperature and humidity tag” that can detect changes in temperature and humidity, and a “GPIO tag” that expands the things that can be done by connecting with a motor or the like. From these features, MESH can be considered as an easyto-handle teaching material, even for primary school students. In addition, by using this teaching material, it is expected that we can derive maximum flexibility of elementary school students. MESH Application MESH application is compatible with tablets and smartphones (Fig. 2), and various things can be built in cooperation with the MESH tag. Currently, it is compatible with terminals that have iOS 8.0 or higher and Android OS 5.0 or higher, so there is almost no limitation by the terminal. It is very easy to use, as users only have to drag and drop icons as input and output on the screen from the list at the bottom of the screen and connect the two with a connector. Figure 2: MESH application Based on the policies and circumstances of the above countries, this study aims to consider and propose programming teaching process based on IoT mechanism in life improvements at junior high school level, and verify its effects through in-class practices. Study Contents Features of selected teaching materials MESH (MESH, 2018), the selected teaching material, is a DIY tool kit developed in S company's new business creation program, and by linking the block-shaped MESH tags with various functions wirelessly on a MESH application, it is possible to expand the range in manufacturing, etc. MESH has been used in workshops on events for elementary and junior high school students and workshops for instructors in electronic training classes. However, its use at schools have not yet been demonstrated so far. Figure 1: MESH tag Software tags can also be used in the MESH application, including tablet/smartphone camera functions, logic functions such as switches and timers, sending and receiving emails, as well as cooperative functions that can acquire and transmit information from the Internet. In this way, the application is easy to operate and has a high degree of freedom, making it an interesting teaching material for beginners. In-class practice For the in-class practice, we distributed the content in 3 school periods of junior high school technology / home economics technology field (information technology). The learning goal was set as “to produce things that make one’ s own life more convenient by using MESH.” These are to be able “(3) a. to understand of the mechanism of measurement and control systems, to write safe and appropriate programs, confirming operations, debugging, etc.” and “(3) b. to identify issues, set up tasks, to conceive Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 65 measurement and control systems to materialize information processing procedures based on the flow of input/output data, to think about the process of production and evaluation, as well as improvement and correction of production.”, which are indicated in “D information technology” of Junior High School Study Guidelines (Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, 2018). Specifically, it is aimed at: (1) confirming and debugging a program to make people’s lives easier, (2) investigating the procedure of discovery and problem solving in daily life, (3) measuring and controlling a system based on the flow of input / output data, (4) evaluating processes, improving and correcting of the process and results of production, etc. Period and target In December 2017, we targeted 125 of third-year junior high school students in 3 classes of A junior high school in Saitama City. Teaching process In class, students were expected to become interested in programming while experiencing a two-dimensional impression in MESH application and a three-dimensional impression in MESH tag, and to understand the basic mechanisms of programming. We also focused on learning technical knowledge on automation that is useful for daily life, as well as discovering and solving tasks to enrich people’s lives. and “Produce a power-up sound when it gets dark”. By completing these, students learned how to use MESH. Second school period At the second school period, we evaluated and produced systems using MESH. 7. Examination on methods to enrich people’s lives using MESH. We asked questions about using MESH for familiar things to make life easier, performed group discussions, and included the discussion results in the learning printout. 8. Proposal and consideration of invented automated products. Students checked what they had previously devised in the group, while reviewing their plans by referring to their learning printouts. 9. Organization of operational mechanisms. Students were allowed to fill the operational mechanism of the product that they invented into the learning printouts. After that, they organized which MESH tags to use for which operation. Figure 3: State of production First school period During the first school period, students thought about IoT while looking at life around ourselves. Also, students learned how to use MESH in this lesson. 1. Reality check of students' understanding on automation in life. We thought about familiar products in the students’ life that are known to be automated, whether they know about the term IoT, and the students’ knowledge levels. 2. General explanation about IOT We explained the outline of IoT and the products that use IoT while giving concrete examples. 3. Confirmation of operational status of automated products. We took an example of an automated product in daily life and explained about the structure of the product while students think about it. 4. Outline explanation of MESH. We explained about the mechanism and usage of MESH. After that, we introduced concrete application methods, and presented only one basic case in order not to limit the students' free ideas. 5. Description and exercise of MESH basic operation. As a basic usage of MESH, we prepared a set of MESH tags and one unit of tablet for a group to practice writing a program called “press the button to light up” together. 6. Practice input and output by using MESH. As an exercise task, we practiced on “How to take a picture with the tablet’s back camera when a person is present” 10. Production and operational test. Students built the products using MESH tag and MESH application based on the organized learning printouts. In order for the students to produce their inventions immediately, the MESH tag and the MESH application were connected on the by the instructors. Fig. 3 shows the state of production. Third school period During the third school period, the students evaluated and improved the systems that were produced previously, and presented their work as learning summary. 11. Information sharing through midterm presentation The students’ group projects were presented by using the Jigsaw method. One group presents their results and the other members ask the group questions about the presentation. After that, we discussed about the quality and challenges of other groups. For the presentation a whiteboard was used to explain the project using drawings and illustrations. 12. Production Review Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 66 Following the midterm presentation, we discussed the successes and challenges within each group and included the discussion results in the learning printout. Figure 4: The systems devised by students 13. Measures to solve problems We discussed in the group about what can people do to make life become even more convenient and included the discussion results in the learning printout. After that, the students continued thinking and discussing while using MESH. 14. Production Summary Evaluation of the produced work and the most creative point were written in the learning printouts. In addition, the students rechecked the operation of the product whether it could be operated as desired. 15. Final Presentation Each group presented in front of the entire class. At that time, students discussed about creativity points and other matters that were written in the learning printouts. 16. Learning summary Students confirmed that there are many IoTs in things that are familiar to them. In addition, students discussed on how to make their lives become richer. After that, students wrote their impressions of learning activities using IoT and MESH, which were also included in the learning printouts. Products devised by students to enrich people’s lives Students worked together in groups of four people each. Examples of products that students devised are shown below. A-1: Support system for the elderly, A-2: Tandem system with humidifier, A-3: Security system, A-4: High-tech aquarium system, A-5: Temperature management system, A-6: System using vibration, A-7: System using human experience, A-8: Outdoor and indoor temperature management system, A-9: Crop damage prevention system, A-10: Key remote control system, B-1: Birthday surprise system, B-2: Humidity management system, B-3: Safety system during earthquake, B-4: Laundry stashing system, B-5: Automatic alarm system, B-6: Good-sleep system, B-7: Shutter opening / closing system, B-8: Automatic watering system, B-9: System using button tag, B-10: Enlivening system, D-1: System using human experience, D-2: Parent sensing system, D-3: Heat stroke prevention system, D-4: Security system, D-5: Wake-up system, D-6: Automatic greeting system, D-7: Anti-bear system, D-8: Safety system during earthquake, D-9: Brightness judgment system, D-10: Plant management system, D-11: Automatic system for throwing away garbage. The following are explanations on three common characteristics among the systems. 1. Crop damage prevention system Fig. 5 shows an example of a “crop damage prevention system”, Its system is shown in Fig. 6. Fig. 7 shows the activity diagram of this system. The MESH tags used were a human sensor tag, an LED tag, a brightness tag, and a motion tag. The software tag in MESH application is a speaker tag. The outline of this product is as follows. The system judges the coming of night time by a brightness tag, senses vibration with a motion tag, and senses that an animal passes by the human sensor tag. The system drives out animals using sound from the speaker tag and light from the LED tag. During class discussion, the problem of how to distinguish between animals and people was raised. Figure 5: Program example of a crop damage prevention system Figure 6: Explanation of a crop damage prevention system When grouped based on their similarities, there were life support system (7 groups), security and safety system (5 groups), indoor temperature and humidity management system (4 groups), automation of plant cultivation (3 groups), wake-up alarm system (3 groups), and others (8 groups). The graph is shown in Fig. 4. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 67 Figure 7: Activity diagram of a crop damage prevention system 3. Laundry stashing system Fig. 10 shows a “laundry stashing system”, and Fig. 11 describes its system. The MESH tag used was a temperature / humidity tag, and software tags used in the MESH application were a microphone tag, a speaker tag, an And tag, and a notification tag. The outline of this product is as follows: worsening weather is detected by a temperature / humidity tag, which produces a sound notification. The sound stops when there is a reply from the microphone, and the system stashes the laundry if there is no reply When this system was examined during a class session, there was an opinion about the accuracy of the microphone. Figure 10: Program example of a laundry stashing system 2. Shutter opening / closing system Fig. 8 shows an example of a “shutter opening and closing system”. Its system is described in Fig. 9. The MESH tags used were a button tag, a brightness tag, and an LED tag, The software tags used in MESH application are a notification tag and a speaker tag. The outline of this product is as follows. Pressing the button tag once opens the shutter, and pressing the button tag continuously closes the shutter. The opening of the shutter is judged by a brightness tag, and the system produces a notification if it is opened. When this system was examined during a class session, there was an opinion that the system should also notify when the shutter is closed. Figure 11: Explanation of a laundry stashing system Figure 8: Program example of a shutter opening / closing system Survey Survey questions Figure 9: Explanation of a shutter opening / closing system Survey questions are shown in Table 1. Only in the afterclass survey, the following questions: Q1 “Fun of MESH”, Q2 “Possibility of effective utilization of MESH”, Q3 “Difficulty of creating MESH program”, Q4 “How the lessons were easy to understand” , Q5 “Interests and concerns for IoT”, Q6 “Successful IoT learning using MESH”, are in the format of multiple-choice question with 4 options. The answers were changed to points using the following conversion: A→4 points, B→3 points, C→2 points, D→1 point, and the average was calculated. In addition, Q7 that asks about “① things learned from using MESH” and “② Comments and impressions” has a freeformat style. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 68 The first group is “MESH difficulty level”, and the opinions were classified and organized as “Easy” or “Difficult”. For the second group, “the viewpoint of evaluating and utilizing IoT”, the opinions were classified and organized based on “environmental and safety aspects” and “cost and economic aspects” regarding the point of view when evaluating and utilizing personal IoT. As for the third group, “life becomes more convenient through the use of MESH” the opinions were classified and organized as “enriching people’s lives”, “have problems”, and “there are two sides”. The students’ opinions were shown and considered in the above viewpoints. Table 1: Survey questions Survey Results and Discussion Survey results are shown in Table 2. The average values of survey question 1, “Fun of MESH” and survey question 4, “How the lessons were easy to understand”, are high, at 3.92 and 3.94, respectively. From these, it turned out that junior high school students could enjoy MESH usage classes. In addition, the average results of survey question 5 “Interests and concerns for IoT” and survey item 6, “Successful IoT learning using MESH “, are 3.83 and 3.87, respectively, both of which also indicate high values. From these facts, it has been shown that by utilizing MESH, it is possible to increase interest and concern about IoT and it is possible to learn about it. Furthermore, although the average result for survey question 2 “Possibility of effective utilization of MESH” also has a relatively high value at 3.47, there was an opinion from some students that they could not use MESH effectively to make their lives easier. It is believed that the cause of such opinion is due to the insufficient number of class hours so students did not have enough time to explore further. Table 2: Survey results For investigation of the free-format answers, each of the survey question 7 about “1. things learned from using MESH” and “2. Comments and impressions” was analyzed separately. For the analysis, text mining processing was performed using “KH Coder” (Higuchi, 2018) developed by Kawabata and Higuchi. For text data preprocessing, we corrected the unification of expressions, typographical errors, etc. In the text mining analysis, from the analysis on the extracted words, we calculated what kind of words are expressing things to what extent, confirmed frequent words and contents, and based on these, we set a viewpoint to classify and organize students' opinions. 1. “About MESH difficulty level” We classified and organized how “MESH difficulty level” was perceived. The opinions were “easy (39)” and “difficult (11)”. The “easy (39)” opinions were “easy to use”, “easy to operate”, “easy depending on the difficulty of the system”, etc. The “difficult (11)” opinions were “difficult with a complicated system”, “difficult due to limited functions”, etc. From these results, basically MESH can be easily operated, but it turned out that it can be difficult due to its limitation of function and difficulty of the system to be produced. 2. “About the viewpoint on IoT evaluation and utilization” We classified and organized how the “viewpoint on IoT evaluation and utilization” was perceived. Opinions were “environment and safety aspects (12)” and “cost and economic aspects (18)”. The opinions on IoT evaluation and utilization from the viewpoint of “environment and safety aspects (12)”, were “It is good for the environment because it is possible to build a good system with minimum amount of energy”, “Because it can be operated easily, there is also a danger of being manipulated unknowingly”, etc. As for evaluation and utilization of IoT from the viewpoint of “cost and economic aspects (18)”, there were opinions such as “as we will add more machines with various functions to our lives, there will be an increase in cost”, “since we can reduce mistakes by letting the machines do the work, we can reduce waste”, etc. From these results, although students felt that IoT is superior for the environment and the economy, students pointed out that although it is easy to operate, the dangers and costs of losing are high, and they thought about the advantages and disadvantages of it. 3. “Life becomes more convenient through the use of MESH” We classified and organized how the students perceived “life becomes more convenient through the use of MESH”. The opinions were “enriching people’s lives (60)”, “have problems (11)”, “there are two sides (7)”. In the group “enriching people’s lives (60)”, there were opinions such as “it is possible to live a more comfortable life by making use of MESH”, “it is possible improve those that cause inconvenience in one’s current life”, etc. In the group “have problems (11)”, there were opinions such as “Human touch will be lost if life becomes too convenient”, etc. As for “there are two sides (7)”, there were opinions such as “it makes life convenient, but it becomes a threat when used with malicious intent”, “it is very convenient for enrich people’s lives, but it is necessary to decide up to what extent and put a limit”, etc. Based on these results, we found that students thought that people’s lives can be Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 69 enriched through MESH utilization, but they pointed out that there may be problems arising from being too convenient, and that they are thinking through the viewpoint of life around them. MESH (2018). URL: http://meshprj.com/jp/, (last accessed: January 10, 2018). Conclusion Estimates of IT Talent ~ Report Summary Version ~. pp.6-7. In this study, we proposed a teaching process on programming using MESH in 3 school hours for third grade junior high school students, and carried out in-class practice. The findings obtained in this research are summarized below. (1) Utilization of MESH improved the understanding of the mechanism of IoT. (2) It was possible to learn how to use MESH in a short time, and it was possible able to spare time for daily life. (3) Students showed that they learned basic programming knowledge and skills. Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (2016). Survey Results on Latest Trends and Future Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (2017). “Visions on New Industrial Structure Vision” The Future of Japan to Solve World's Challenges for Everyone. pp.7-11. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (2014). Study on Programming Education in Other Countries. pp.17-253. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (2016). Logical Thinking Ability and Creativity at Elementary School Level. Discrimination of Experts on Development of Problem-Solving skills etc, and Programming Education. pp.1-19. From these results, it can be concluded that in this teaching process, it is possible to let the targeted junior high school students learn the mechanism of IoT, and it can be expected that the method can be effectively used in junior high schools. Based on the results of this research, we will improve the teaching process, and evaluate the method and viewpoint in the future. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (2018). Explanation of teaching guidelines for middle school on technology and home science (public announcement March 2017), pp.5456. URL; http://www.mext.go.jp/component/a_menu/education /micro_detail/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2017/12/27/13870 18_9.pdf, (last accessed: January 11, 2018). Acknowledgement Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications(2016a). Information Communication Council - Second Interim Report (Overview). pp.7. This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP16K04665. References Higuchi, Koichi (2018). KH Coder Index Page, URL; http://khc.sourceforge.net/dl.html, (last accessed: January 11, 2018). Hosoai, S., Ishida, S., Kamei, Y., Ohsako, S., Igaki, H., Ubayashi, N., & Fukuda, A.(2014). PBL for IoT System. IPSJ SIG Technical Report, No. 7, pp.1-6. Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications(2016b). White Paper on Information and Communication. pp.111-127. Ono, Yoshiyuki (2016). Development of an IoT Young Talent Training Program Based on IndustryAcademia Collaboration: Learning Trial of IoT Manufacturing Activity. Japan Industrial Management Association, No. 26, pp.93-96. Prime Minister's Office (2013). Japan Revival Strategy. pp.42-46. ITmedia (2018). ITmediaNEWS. URL;http://www.itmedia.co.jp/news/articles/1302/27/ news029.html(last accessed: January 10, 2018). Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 70 Development of Gaming Materials to Promote Substantial Understanding of Technology Toshiki Matsuda and Fumiya Kanai Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo Abstract Recently, the Japanese government made programming education compulsory at all school levels by revising the National Course of Studies, whereas, earlier, it had been compulsory in technology education alone at the junior high school level. The increasing demand for software engineers to promote information technology (IT) industries has affected this trend. However, because the time for providing technology education to all is limited, the purpose of introducing programming activities should be considered not for vocational education, but as an instructional method to understand the features of IT. We believe that teaching the merits and demerits of IT to students is important in helping them generate ideas to utilize IT and avoid any associated issues. Programming should be taught as a software design method to resolve the aforementioned trade-off problems. Finally, students should be able to consider the merits and demerits of a new IT system and propose methods to decrease the risks of introducing the system in our society. Based on this discussion, we develop a gaming instructional material that enables students to simulate the redesign of a medical IT system as engineers. Students are encouraged to study an artificial intelligence technology as a technique to improve the system and consider various social influences to determine whether they can use it or not. We develop another gaming instructional material to verify the educational effects of the aforementioned game. In addition, we discuss a method for enabling the transfer of learning outcomes by students to evaluate various other technologies. Keywords Information Technology; Programming; Problem Solving Introduction Trend of Making Programming Education Compulsory in the National Curriculum In Japan, programming became a compulsory content of Technology at the lower secondary school level as a result of the revision of the National Course of Studies (NCS) in 1998 (Ministry of Education, Science and Culture 1998). However, since it was one of the contents of information technology (IT) and only approximately 25 school hours were assigned to the study of IT, a few school hours were assigned to programming. The NCS was revised in 2008, following which programming was emphasized more as a topic of measurement and control technology (Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology [MEXT] 2008). Many instructional materials to control light-emitting diode lights or make line-trace cars were supplied, and approximately 10 school hours were allotted for the topic. Recently, some countries or regions, such as England, South Korea, and Singapore, made programming education compulsory at the primary school level (MEXT 2015). In conformance with this trend, the Japanese government started discussions on the expansion of programming education in schools. This movement was supported by the people who believed that Japanese industries would require more artificial intelligence (AI) engineers and data scientists in the near future. As a result, the latest NCS, which was revised in 2017 (primary and lower secondary levels) and 2018 (upper secondary level), introduced programming education topics in Arithmetic and Science at the primary school level and Information Study at the upper secondary school level as compulsory contents and added programming to generate web contents or a network application to Technology at the lower secondary school level (MEXT 2017a, 2017b, 2018). The task force set within the MEXT to introduce programming education in primary schools proposed its objective as the cultivation of programming (or computational) thinking among students. In this context, programming thinking is defined as “an ability to decompose a target activity into a series of primitive movements, represent them by given symbols, and minimize differences between the target and the result by thinking logically” (MEXT 2016). However, if we substitute the term “symbols” in this definition by “mechanical parts” or “electric devices,” this definition can be applied to technology education. Further, mathematics education cultivates a similar ability in students if the term “symbols” does not refer to “program codes” alone. In any case, although the task force claims otherwise, the uniqueness of this proposal implies that the force’s purpose is to teach programming language to students. On the other hand, Matsuda and Kanai (2017) classified the purposes of introducing programming into the school curriculum, which are depicted in Table 1. The principle of this proposal is that the compulsory subjects should focus on citizenship education, whereas the elective subjects should provide vocational education. The reason for introducing programming in primary school curriculum is Matsuda and Sakamoto’s (1991) research evidence that girls in primary schools have a more positive attitude toward computer use than boys once the students gain programming experience; however, Imae et al. (1986) found a difference between boys and girls in terms of the degree of their computer anxiety and how this may influence their future career choices. Purposes of Introducing Programming School Level/Subject (1) Becoming familiar with computers ⇒Primary and interested in the utilization of IT school Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 71 (2) Understanding the basic principles of information processing in computers and networks (including measurement and control) and merits of automatization ⇒Lower secondary school (Technology) (3) Acquiring programming knowledge ⇒Optional and skills subjects (4) Cultivating algorithmic thinking ⇒Mathematics (5) Cultivating students’ attitude toward attending a desirable information society based on understanding characteristics of IT ⇒Upper secondary school (Information Study) * All except case (3) should be offered compulsorily. Table 1: Purposes of Introducing Programming in the School Curriculum* Matsuda (2015a) compared the opinions on informatics education proposed by five different representative groups and pointed out that only the computer science group emphasized the necessity of programming education because they considered informatics education to be the introduction of computer science education in schools to train IT specialists. Based on the objectives of informatics education defined by the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture (1997), it should cultivate an individual’s ability to appropriately utilize IT in problem-solving. Moreover, it should impart citizenship education to enable students to participate in discussions on utilizing IT in our society after understanding the benefits and impact of using IT for various people in the society. Moreover, it should cultivate in students the ability to self-learn new ITs and evaluate whether they contribute to the creation of a better information society. This means that informatics education should be provided as technology education for all. Case (5) in Table 1 is proposed from this viewpoint. Detailed Understanding and Summarized Understanding Matsuda (2017) pointed out the necessity of classifying two different directions of deeper understanding. One is understanding in a more detailed manner, and it corresponds to scientific exploration to clarify black box mechanism in nature. The second type is understanding more systematically, and it is related to the reconstruction of knowledge to promote its transfer. The criticism of programming thinking described above is an example of the latter type of understanding. In Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives (Bloom et al. 1956), levels 4 to 6, that is, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation, correspond to systematic understanding. He indicated that it is also related to Bruner’s (1960) “structure.” importance of choosing the better problem-solving method and reasons why the spreadsheet software was invented corresponds to systematic understanding. In this case, to understand flexibility, data compatibility, and the merits/demerits of packaging, it is better to compare two or more programming languages and spreadsheet software, as well as designing a reusable sheet for any purpose that requires the sorting function. Understanding the direction and possibility of technological advancement based on these activities may provide the framework for future developments in IT. Moreover, understanding the necessity of engineering ethics to avoid a trade-off problem by packaging a technological black box is important. However, it is more effective to provide virtual experiences as part of a gaming instructional material, rather than actual programming exercises, to enable students to learn such things in a limited time. Purpose This study interprets programming as virtually experiencing the design of an information system. Accordingly, we develop a gaming instructional material that prompts learners to consider how the design framework of an information system affects its characteristics and socially influences various people as a result. Moreover, we conduct trial lessons to verify the educational effects of cultivating students’ ability to consider the appropriateness of introducing new social information systems and propose necessary legal systems or devices to be adopted by individuals for their personal safety. In addition, it is necessary to promote the transfer of educational outcomes to other cases where a new technological system, not only concerned with IT but also other technology, is developed and discussions are underway to introduce it in the society. This study develops gaming instructional materials based on the warp and woof model of problem-solving (Matsuda 2015b) and considers additional instructions to promote the transfer of learning outcomes based on the model. Design and Development of a Gaming Instructional Material Design Principles This study utilizes two design frameworks. One is the Goal-Based Scenario (GBS) theory of Schank et al. (1999), and the other is the warp and woof model of problem-solving (Matsuda 2015b; Figure 1). For example, understanding a device to heighten the efficiency of calculation by programming different algorithms of sorting and measurement of computation time in various numerical examples corresponds to a detailed understanding of the device. However, it is hard to transfer this type of understanding to everyday problemsolving. On the other hand, based on a comparison of two different sorting methods by using a programming language and spreadsheet software, considering the Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 72 Figure 1: Teacher sets expectations (horizontal movement) and students respond (vertical movement) GBS specifies the design elements for designing roleplaying-type educational games. In this study, each element was set up as shown in Table 2. Learners play the role of system engineers (SEs) in a company and are assigned the job of improving a medical information system. They are prompted to examine both the merits and demerits of adopting a machine learning method, an AI technology, to heighten the system’s performance; it is noted that the system had hitherto adopted the rule-based algorithm. Moreover, the learners are required to generate an alternative that combines both AI technology and the rule-based algorithm as a trade-off dissolution device. In this activity, they are prompted to consider the characteristics of both the methods and effects of these characteristics on our society when such a system is developed and used on a daily basis. GBS elements Settings in our gaming instructional material Scenario Role System engineers in a company context Cover story Examine both the merits and demerits of adopting AI technology in a medical information system that helps doctors to identify disease names from health checking data in order to heighten its performance Mission Improve the present medical information system Scenario operation According to the warp and woof model of problemsolving Scenario Feedback - Give feedback information components on the learners’ domainspecific knowledge and ways of viewing and thinking about a problem as soon as they reply to a question - Give feedback information about problem-solving activities in the Review process by comparing learners’ log with the model Information Chief: Offer technical advice resources for designing and realizing the system Doctor: Offer medical domain–specific knowledge AI specialist: Offer domainspecific knowledge on AI technology and the simulation to explain its properties in the case of a career guidance system Table 2: Concretion of GBS Elements in Our Gaming Instructional Material The warp and woof model is a model of the problemsolving ability that should be acquired by learners. It helps learners to self-learn the characteristics and social influences of a new technology and consider the merits and demerits of introducing this technology and supports them in identifying necessary devices to heighten the safety of the society and its individuals, as well as carrying out consensus-building activities. The model includes the woof activities (collecting, processing, and summarizing information) of all the processes of warp activities (Goal Setting, Generate Alternatives, Rational Judgment, Derivation of Optimized Solution, and Consensus Building). Based on this procedure, the scenario in the GBS element progresses, and the information resources in the GBS elements correspond with the internal knowledge to be memorized; external knowledge to be referred, if necessary; or ways of viewing and thinking that offer clues for the generation of ideas and checkpoints of judgment. Goal-Setting Process This process consists of two tasks: problem analysis and planning. The outputs of the first task include both the merits and demerits of introducing an information system, their trade-off relationships, and the constraints satisfied by each alternative. If learners have sufficient internal knowledge of several benefits of technology, including IT, they can focus on choosing appropriate merits of the medical information system as the goals of the design and Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 73 consider the demerits as their trade-off relationship. For this purpose, learners must utilize different ways of viewing and thinking, such as “collect and utilize information,” “examine various benefits,” “consider the trade-off relationship,” and then collect information about the purposes and mechanisms of medical information systems. Moreover, they should focus on any merits to improve the present system, as well as summarizing the demerits expected while redesigning the system by considering the trade-off relationships among various benefits. On the other hand, learners having insufficient internal knowledge of benefits are guided to systematically acquire this knowledge by using a chart to generate ideas (Figure 2(a)). They are prompted to concretely express some of the general merits of introducing the information system by using an example (Figure 2(b)) and further improve the medical information system. In addition, they are prompted to consider the issues associated with the trade-off relationships among various benefits to help them systematically understand these benefits. The output of the second task is a work plan. It is different from the first task in that it considers the merits and constraints, rather than results, of the problem-solving process. Moreover, learners are prompted to decide on the term of each important activity in the following processes by considering the prospects of and difficulties encountered in preparing for these activities. The feature of our gaming material is that it specifies a method for learners to acquire technological knowledge while summarizing it in a form of frame (Figure 3) when collecting information about a new technology from an . Learners are asked to choose an appropriate slot to enter the given information into the frame. Moreover, they are prompted to consider the characteristic of the system. Figure 3: Method to Acquire Knowledge Summarizing Information into a Form of Frame Example of Its Use in the Game Name algorithm type (Rule based) Name Meaning AT type (machine learning) Programs written their actions in each case Programs explicitly to construct judgment criteria automatically based on given data Meaning Purpose by To process data as people intend/expect Purpose Mechanism -Decrease demerits of algorithm type (1)branch type (tree of structure) -maximize reliability judgment in given data (2)assessment typeto(number line) -decrease the cost construct optimized rules Merits Mechanism -can explain reasons processes of the output Data construction → and machine learning → check Merits -can -can -can -can execute formulated procedure automatically decrease human bias get reliable results in the expected process automatically if data can becases offered apply to wide range of cases Figure 4: Flow of Simulation for Understanding the Design’s Influence on the System’s Characteristics Figure 2(a): Chart to Generate Ideas (a) Choose a method of making a Data set Let’s use AI type “career guidance system” tuned by learning your data set! DATA SET AI specialist Figure 2(b): Example of Its Use in the Game Score Achievement scores of the past applicants Results (“pass/fail” to each university) Judged by the function constructed by you data set Probability of pass and recommended universities Let’s choose university and enter scores of trial tests Japanese: 100 Mathematics: 90 Science: 80 Social Studies: 82 English: 23 ▼ Choice of University and Faculty: ABC University, Faculty of Engineering (b) Check results Pass Level: E Recommendation: X University, Faculty of Science Pass Level: D Recommendation: ABC University, Faculty of Education Different data sets reduce different results without explanation Generate Alternatives Process The outputs of this process are two or more alternatives for realizing a system. For this purpose, learners must collect information on new technologies for achieving merits by utilizing different ways of viewing and thinking, such as “decomposing a factor into elements,” considering new devices to combine two or more technologies, as well as using new technologies to make an alternative that can simultaneously realize various merits. (c) Compare with results of different data sets Another feature of our gaming material is that it provides a simulation in the case of a “career guidance system” to promote an understanding of the impacts of rule construction for algorithm-type systems and methods of making data sets for AI-type systems. Learners choose a method to make initial data for machine learning (Figure 4(a)) and enter the checked data into the system after finishing the learning process to verify the system’s performance (Figure 4(b)). Through this simulation, they can recognize the differences in the outputs of the system Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 74 according to the methods of making initial data (Figure 4(c)). They perform a similar simulation on methods to construct rule sets for the algorithm-based system, as well. From these activities, they can recognize the differences in characteristics between the systems and, then, ask questions on the social influences of these characteristics to the AI specialist. While generating alternatives of the system design, learners must determine the output values of the system according to the merits that they want to emphasize. In addition, they must choose a method to make the initial data or a rule set. Finally, they are prompted to generate alternatives that combine both the methods to resolve conflicts by trade-off. Rational Judgment Process In this process, learners critically examine the generated alternatives by using the framework of rational judgment (Figure 5). They collect information to set up the checkpoints in the framework before starting rational judgment. If any alternative is found to have an issue, they go back to the Generate Alternatives process and generate improved and/or new proposals. When one or more alternatives with no issues are created, they can go to the Derivation of Optimized Solution process. of the AI method, the former succeeds in building consensus. Review Process In this process, learners review their activities and are prompted to transfer and utilize both their knowledge and ways of viewing and thinking, which they acquired from the gaming instructional material. Their outputs and the ways of viewing and thinking that they used in each process are revealed to them and, then, learners are prompted to self-evaluate the adequacy of utilization of these elements. Subsequently, each process of the model is shown by emphasizing important points using red text, and learners are prompted to check the appropriateness of their self-evaluation. Finally, in order to retain appropriate activity following the warp and woof model, they return to the case of a medical information system and carry out activities to reapply ways of viewing and thinking (Figure 6). Figure 6: Reviewing Appropriate Activity and Required Knowledge in the Tasks in Each Process Question In the case of medical information system the following merits, such as are important. Because AI systems have the following characteristics, such as , AI method is 使った方が良い Figure 5: Framework for the Rational Judgment Process for applying to medical information systems. The merits to introduce medical information system are -Able to judge more [abnormity/disease name] -Able to judge [abnormity/disease name] more reliably -Reasons of judgment are more transparent In above activities, following ways of viewing and thinking must be utilized. examine various benefits ▼ Evaluation of the Gaming Material through Trial Lessons Derivation of Optimized Solution Process Rational Judgment Process In this process, learners must determine the important merits of introducing the medical information system from those set up during the Goal Setting process. For this purpose, they must collect relevant information to determine important viewpoints for reaching an agreement by utilizing different ways of viewing and thinking, such as “choose an appropriate alternative to achieve important merits” and “consider the influence on various people.” Subsequently, they associate the chosen merits with each alternative based on the degree of attainment of these merits. Finally, based on this evaluation, they determine the optimal solution. Consensus Building Process Derivation of Optimized Solution Process In this process, learners explain the optimal solution to stakeholders and request the latter to perform decisionmaking. If the learners’ solution realizes the merit required by stakeholders for the medical information system in the previous process and the learners choose provisions that can convince the stakeholders by considering the demerits In December 2017, we conducted a trial lesson for 21 university students who took the Information Ethics course. Since they had not studied the warp and woof model, we provided them with a printed material, explaining the model and detailing how to apply different ways of viewing and thinking before the trial lesson and prompted them to refer to it during the lesson. In order to investigate the effect of our gaming instructional material, we performed a pre-test and a posttest (Figure 7) before and after providing the material, respectively. The pre-test picked up (1) an automated driving system and (2) a career supporting system, whereas the post-test picked up (3) an automated braking system and (4) a recruiting and salary review system. It is noted that (1) to (3) adopted the free description form, and (4) adopted the multiple-choice form. Hereafter, we refer to both (1) and (3) as automobile systems and both (2) and (4) as personnel evaluation systems. Answers are analyzed based on three viewpoints (Table 3). First, the merits of introducing the system are evaluated according to how extensively they were specialized based on the diagram (Figure 2). Second, the characteristics of the system are evaluated according to the number of slots of the knowledge frame about the information system (Figure 4) that is included in the answer. Third, it is evaluated whether the answer is correct or wrong. If the answer is evaluated as A or B in the previous two viewpoints and does not include any inconsistent Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 75 explanation, it is evaluated as correct. Therefore, we interpreted that a learner who gave a correct answer had clearly understood the relationship among the design, characteristics, and social influence of an information system. Figure 7: Screen Shot Image of the Pre-test Problem (1) Because an automated driving system is it is suitable , ▼ to apply AI method in order to . (2) Because a career supporting system is it is unsuitable , ▼ to apply AI method in order to . ① Merits of introducing ② Characteristics of the the system system based on its design No answer or irrelevant No answer or irrelevant answer ------------Level D answer-----------------Level D Merits in the general Description of the algorithmcontext ------------------- C type system ---------------C Post-test Viewpoi nt③ : Correct/ wrong Pre-test Post-test 1 1 6 2 ○ × 3 11 18 10 2 0 2 pval ue 5% 0 1 ○ × 3 16 18 5 0 1 % pval ue 1 % n.s., not significant. *p-values were calculated by Fischer’s exact probability test; In order to analyse educational effects by focusing on the differences among individuals, we conducted cluster analysis based on the evaluations of three viewpoints in automobile systems (Figure 8). Figure 8: Results of Cluster Analysis Based on Individual Evaluations of the Merits of the general Description information system------ B mechanism and purpose of AI type B Merits corresponding to a Description of the specific system -------- A characteristics of AI type ---------- A Table 3: Criteria for Evaluating the Levels for Viewpoints ① Merits and ② Characteristics As shown in Table 4, the ratios of learners who took A or B in automobile systems increased in two viewpoints, merits, and characteristics. Moreover, the percentage of all the individuals who gave correct answers increased from 10% to 50%. The ratios of learners who took A or B in personnel evaluation systems increased in two viewpoints, merits, and characteristics, as well, although (4) adopted the multiple-choice form. The percentage of all the individuals who gave correct answers increased from 10% to 70%, as well. Based on these results, we conclude that more than half of the total number of learners clearly understood the relationship among the design, characteristics, and social influence of information systems. Table 4: Results of the Evaluation for Pre- and PostTests pval D ue Personnel evaluation systems pA B C D val ue 1 2 3 7 9 % 1 0 2 1 8 pval A B C D ue 8 2 Automobile systems Viewpoi nt① : Merits Pre-test Post-test Viewpoi nt② : Charact eristics Pre-test A B C 4 3 1 3 7 5 8 A B C 2 4 7 pD val ue* n.s. 1 1 1% 5 6 The first branch in the figure corresponds to whether the answer was correct or wrong in the pre-test; the numbers 13, 12, and 14 answered correctly in the pre-test. The second branch corresponds to whether the answer was correct or wrong in the post-test; the learners at the left side (numbers 15, 17, 20, … , and 4) had an effect on our instructional material. Numbers 11, 8, and 18 at the right side fell down their evaluation level, and the remaining six learners did not change their evaluation levels. Therefore, different instructions corresponding to the learners’ previous situations are necessary to improve the gaming instructional material. Utilization of the Problem-Solving Framework and Knowledge in another Information System In order to examine whether the learning outcomes of the developed gaming instructional material can be applied to another problem-solving framework, we developed a new gaming instructional material, in which the problem was changed to a search engine from a medical information system. The main points of difference of the new material from the previous one are as follows: - No clues and advice are provided to assess whether a learner can advance his or her problem-solving activity appropriately by oneself. 8 Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 76 - Since the differences in design method were learned previously, only their explanations without the simulation are provided on demand. - Initially, learners can choose a preferred design method to generate an alternative. The students who had learned the previous gaming material were assigned to study the new material outside school hours, and 19 of the 21 students finished the game. Their logs are assessed as follows. In the Goal Setting process, students who generated more than three merits and were judged at A or B levels according to Table 3 were evaluated as “○,” although the others were “×.” In the Generate Alternatives process, students who did not generate an inappropriate alternative that has inconsistency between a design method and required characteristics to both the methods are evaluated as “○.” However, if the students evaluated as “×” could improve all the inappropriate alternatives in the Rational Judgment process, they were evaluated as “△.” In the Rational Judgment process, students who could remove all inappropriate alternatives that had demerits clarified in the Goal Setting process were evaluated as “○.” In order to judge appropriately, students needed to clarify the demerits that have a trade-off relationship with the merits that they generated; then, the student evaluated as “×” in the Goal Setting process automatically became “×” in this process. In the Derivation of Optimal Solution process, students who chose one or more alternatives and could realize all the merits generated in the Goal Setting process were evaluated as “○.” Students who were evaluated as “×” in either the Goal Setting or Rational Judgment process were automatically evaluated as “×.”Students who were evaluated as “○” in the previous process and generated alternatives that could achieve the merits required by stakeholders were evaluated as “○” in the Consensus Building process. As a result, in the Goal Setting process, 89.5%, 52.6%, and 52.6% of 19 students took A or B, generated more than two merits, and were evaluated as “○,” respectively. This indicated that although students could generate merits by using the chart, they insufficiently utilized the ways of viewing and thinking. In the Generate Alternatives process, 84.2% of all students were evaluated as “○,” and the remaining students were evaluated as “△.” Therefore, they understood the characteristics of both the methods appropriately. In the Rational Judgment process, 9 of 10 students who took “○” in the Goal Setting process were evaluated as “○.” In both the Derivation of Optimized process and Consensus Building process, 36.8% of 19 students were evaluated as “○.” Promoting the Transfer of Learning Outcomes for Utilizing the Model for another Technology A feature of the gaming instructional materials developed in this study is their ability to interpret programming as experiencing the design of information systems. In addition, we realize Matsuda’s (2006) proposal to reform the traditional system of technology education by integrating IT education into it. This integration also extends to the integration of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) subject areas. The core concept of this integration is “transformation,” which promotes systematic understanding technology. Transformation is a holistic idea comprising the ways of thinking necessary to promote analogy and transfer, such as the substitution of words, conversion among mathematical expressions, and scientific laws of various natural factors. A technological idea can be generated by completely using the transformation. The chart shown in Figure 2 is a tool for enabling the learners to do so and, by using similar charts, Matsuda (2011) developed a gaming instructional material for technology education. For example, any specific item can be physically transported from A to B. However, a manufactured product can be delivered by sending an order message from A to B’ and physically transporting the product from B’ to B. This type of transformation between physical phenomena and information should be broadly utilized in our society to resolve the conflicting problems caused by a trade-off relationship. To promote these types of problem-solving, technological knowledge should be understood and acquired in a frame form that helps learners to completely use the knowledge associated with the contexts of problem-solving, purposes, characteristics, principles, merits/demerits, and social influences mutually. Then, technological knowledge may be utilized as the building block for generating various alternative ideas. Matsuda and Satou (2009) pointed out another reason for technology education’s incapability to cultivate students’ problem-solving ability. Since the processes of problemsolving depicted in textbooks were very different among content areas, students could not understand their commonalities. Therefore, they unified these processes to a common process and developed a gaming instructional material to prompt learners to solve various problems based on this material. Moreover, Matsuda (2013) developed a learner model that represents a mechanism to systematically solve technological problems by following the aforementioned process of problem-solving by utilizing ways of viewing and thinking for transformation while understanding and acquiring knowledge in the form of a frame. This model was extended to STEM subject areas as the warp and woof model of problem-solving. This study examined design principles to realize gaming materials based on this model, such as Figure 2, 3, 4, and 5. We expect that the outcomes of technology education may be generalized and utilized in daily life by developing various gaming instructional materials based on this model and adhering to continuous and systematic instructions to promote the utilization of this model with metacognition. Summary and Future Perspectives We considered that the purpose of introducing programming activities should be considered not for vocational education but as an instructional method to understand the properties of IT. Students should develop the ability to consider the merits and demerits of a new IT system and propose methods to decrease the risks associated with introducing the system in our society. To this end, programming should be taught as a software design method to resolve the aforementioned trade-off problems. Based on this discussion, we developed a gaming instructional material to enable learners to simulate the redesign of a medical IT system as engineers. Learners are encouraged to study an AI technology as a technique to improve the system and are asked to consider Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 77 various social influences to determine whether they use it or not. We developed another gaming instructional material to verify the educational effects of the first game. In addition, we discussed a method to promote the transfer of learning outcomes by learners to evaluate various technologies. Since our trial lessons were conducted as a two-hour lesson including a homework exercise, its educational effects were limited and varied between different initial condition groups. However, Technology at lower and Information Study at upper secondary schools are taught for 80-hour and 70-hour lessons, respectively. Therefore, our approach consistent is across various types of technology, and examples will be very effective in building up learning outcomes. This assumption should be verified by developing a series of gaming instructional materials corresponding to a leaner’s achievement level and conducting trial lessons. References Bloom, B.S., Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., & Krathwohl, D.R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals, Handbook I: Cognitive domain, New York: David Mckay. Bruner, J.S. (1960). The process of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Imae, K., Hirata, K., Shimizu, H., Kitaoka, T., and Tajika, H. (1986). Computer Literacy among Elementary and Secondary School Students in Japan. Japan Journal of Educational Technology, 10 (4), 13–21. Matsuda, T. (2017). What Is “Scientific Understanding of IT” and How It Should be Taught? Proceedings of the 10th Annual Conference of Japanese Association for Education of Information Studies (pp. 45–46). Osaka, Japan: Osaka University of Arts. Matsuda, T., and Kanai, F. (2017). Appropriate Purpose to Teach Programming in Information Study and Required Instructional Materials. Proceedings of the 10th Annual Conference of Japanese Association for Education of Information Studies (pp. 109–110). Osaka, Japan: Osaka University of Arts. Matsuda, T., and Sakamoto, T. (1991). Development and Evaluation of a Log-Based Curriculum for Higher Grades Elementary School Informatics Education. Japan Journal of Educational Technology, 15 (1), 1– 14. Matsuda, T., and Satou, H. (2009). Instructional Materials for Cultivating Students' Analogical Thinking Competency in Problem Solving and Their Virtual Lessons to Innovate Japanese Technology Teachers. Proceedings of PATT-2009 (pp. 291–302). Delft, Netherlands. Ministry of Education, Science and Culture (1997). Proposal to Conduct Systematic IT Education in Primary and Secondary Schools, Retrieved June 29, 2018, from http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/shingi/chousa/shotou/ 002/toushin/971001.htm Ministry of Education, Science and Culture (1998). The National Course of Studies for Lower Secondary Schools, Retrieved June 29, 2018, from http://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/shotou/cs/1320061.ht m Matsuda, T. (2006). The Japanese Word "GIJUTSU": Should It Mean “Skills” or “Technology”? In M. de Vries and I. Mottier (Eds.), International handbook of technology education: The state of the art, 227–240. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (2008). The National Course of Studies for Lower Secondary Schools, Retrieved June 29, 2018, from http://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/shotou/newcs/youryou/chu/index.htm Matsuda, T. (2011). Development of e-learning Instructional Material for Promoting Technological Problem Solving Based on “Transformation.” In K. Stables, C. Benson, & M. de Vries (Eds.), Perspectives on learning in design & technology education, 263–268. London, United Kingdom: Goldsmiths, University of London. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (2015). Survey Research on Programming Education in Foreign Countries, Retrieved June 29, 2018, from http://jouhouka.mext.go.jp/school/pdf/programming_ syogaikoku_houkokusyo.pdf Matsuda, T. (2013). Designing a Student Model for Developing e-Learning Materials and Virtual Lesson Games for STEM Education. In P. J. Williams & D. Gedera (Eds.), Technology education for the future: A play on sustainability (pp. 325–331). Waikato, New Zealand: University of Waikato. Matsuda, T. (2015a). Perspectives for Discussing the Next Curriculum of Information Studies. Proceedings of Global-Learn 2015 (pp.197–205). Berlin, Germany, April 16, 2015. Matsuda, T. (2015b). Design Framework of Gaming Materials to Cultivate Problem-Solving Abilities: Differences and Commonalities among STEM Educations. Proceedings of HICE 2015 (pp. 2147– 2159), Honolulu, HI, Hawaii International Conference on Education. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (2016). The Discussion Report on Purpose to Introduce Programming Education in Primary Schools, Retrieved June 29, 2018, from http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/shingi/chousa/shotou/ 122/attach/1372525.htm Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (2017a). The National Course of Studies for Primary Schools, Retrieved June 29, 2018, from http://www.mext.go.jp/component/a_menu/education /micro_detail/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2018/05/07/13846 61_4_3_2.pdf Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (2017b). The National Course of Studies for Lower Secondary Schools, Retrieved June 29, 2018, from Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 78 http://www.mext.go.jp/component/a_menu/education /micro_detail/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2018/05/07/13846 61_5_4.pdf Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (2018). The National Course of Studies for Upper Secondary Schools, Retrieved June 29, 2018, from http://www.mext.go.jp/component/a_menu/education /micro_detail/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2018/04/24/13846 61_6_1.pdf Schank, R.C., Berman, T.R., and Macpherson, K.A. (1999). Learning by Doing. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Volume II), 161– 181. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 79 How expert technology teachers try to promote students’ creativities. From the results of semi structured interviews. Jun Moriyama1, Kaoru Higashida2, Keita Sera3, Masakatu Kuroda4, Mituaki Ogura5 1 National Hyogo University of Teacher Education, Japan 2 Ibaraki City Higashi Junior High School, Osaka, Japan 3 Ph.D program Student, National Hyogo University of Teacher Education 4 Ph.D program Student, National Hyogo University of Teacher Education 5 Research Student of Ph.D program, National Hyogo University of Teacher Education Abstract The purpose of this research is to extract the essence of expert technology teachers’ strategies for promoting students creativity. We carried out semi structured interview to 5 expert technology teachers in Japan, and asked about strategies and intentions of their instruction for promoting students’ creativities. As a result, 32 categories were extracted that could be divided into 4 categories, such as intentions for teaching, lesson planning, implementation, and evaluation. For example, “importance of collaboration”, “relation with intellectual property”, “consideration about constraint of curriculum”, “supporting student’s expression of his/her ideas”, and so on were included in these categories. Keywords Technology teachers; creativity; semi structured interviews ; teaching strategy The purpose of this research is to extract the essence of expert technology teachers’ strategies for promoting students creativity. Thus, components such as integrated problem-solving and technological innovation were added to the new national curriculum, and the new national curriculum regards the promotion of students’ creativity as more important than ever before. A new national curriculum was published in Japan in 2017 (MEXT, Government of Japan, 2017a). At present, preparations for the enforcement of this curriculum are in progress. In the new national curriculum, technology education attaches more importance to technological literacy than ever before. The goal of the new technology education is to foster the following students’ abilities: 1) understand the mechanisms of basic technology and technological inventions and innovations; 2) acquire technological problem-solving knowledge and skills; and 3) evaluate the social role of technology, technological governance (selection, management, and control), and technological innovation (improvement, application, and creation). The learning content of the new technology education consists of “A. Materials and processing technology,” “B. Technology for nurturing living things,” “C. Energy conversion technology,” and “D. Information technology.” Junior high school students take these courses between the seventh and ninth grades as compulsory courses. In problem-solving that students address at the end of the ninth grade, students are to perform integrated problem-solving in combination with multiple content area. The Instructional Gide (Technology and Home Economics) for course of study (MEXT, Government of Japan, 2017b) described as follows: Needless to say, technology education considers the promotion of students’ creativity important in every country and region. The International Technology and Engineering Educators Association (ITEEA) defines technology in the Standards for Technological Literacy (STL) as “human innovation in action that involves the generation of knowledge and processes to develop systems that solve problems and extend human capabilities.” Based on this definition, technology education is basically required in order to stimulate students’ creativity. The STL defines creativity as “the ability or power used to produce original thoughts and ideas upon reasoning and judgment.” M. Csikszentmihalyi argues that creativity has two types: individual creativity and social creativity. Therefore, it is important for creativity in technology education to handle these two different approaches. Regarding individual creativity, from the perspective of increasing the creativity of the individual student, each student is asked to act as a junior engineer and to creatively solve problems during the learning process. Regarding social creativity, students are required to learn the histories, processes, roles, effects, and future prospects of innovation and invention, which have advanced our society and culture, and to understand the importance of technology by experiencing ancestors’ creativity. Through the practical and experiential activities, students can understand mechanisms, roles, and impact of technology. This will make deepen student’s abilities for develop better individual life and the sustainable society by technology. At the same time, promoting the ability to solve the problem properly and sincerely will foster creative attitudes that invent and innovate technology. However, it is difficult to promote students’ creativity in classes where technology education is being taught. Some students cannot develop an idea for creative challenges. Some students lack practical knowledge because of too much creativity. Some students cannot realize their ideas as products or systems, and some students cannot express their ideas in an appropriate way. Teachers must provide Introduction Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 80 various types of support for these students in order to creatively address problem-solving as junior engineers in a class. The Advancing Excellence in Technological Literacy, issued by the ITEEA, describes this matter in “C. Prepare teachers to assist students in becoming effective learners”—which is one of the STL—as follows: Professional development emphasizes the need to establish and maintain productive students-teacher relationships to assist students in becoming effective learners. Teachers gain abilities to develop learning activities that appeal to student interests and challenge students to reflect on practical experiences. Teachers develop strategies that require students to transfer learning to different situations that promote student creativity and imagination. teachers’ strategies were not systematized enough (e.g. Nishiyama 2016, Ozaki 2011). So, we set the aim of this study as elucidating the experienced technology teachers' strategies for promote students’ creativity at junior high schools in Japan. Specifically, semi-structured interviews were administered to teachers whose experience of teaching was longer than 20 years and who had obtained results in terms of fostering students’ creativity, attempting to extract methods through which to support students’ creativity. Method of Research Subjects Based on this description, it is noted that teachers’ instruction and support for promoting students’ creativity are important elements in terms of improving teachers’ specialties in technology education. As “Method 5 Enhancing Creative Thinking,” in Teaching Technology: Middle School, Strategies for Standards-Based Instruction (TT-SSBI), issued by the ITEEA, indicates the following five instructional methods for promoting students’ creativity: Five experienced teachers—who had each grappled with a practice of increasing students’ creativity in technology education in Japan—were subject to the semi-structured interviews (hereinafter referred to teachers A‒E). The profile of each subject is as follows: 1 Allow students the inner freedom to consider new ideas and possibilities. Teacher B: A teacher at a public junior high school who has grappled with a practice using students’ creativity in the field of special needs education and has published the research results, and who has 22 years of teaching experience. 2 Establish a creative laboratory-classroom environment where students are encouraged to think differently and create new solutions. 3 Before students can begin to solve a problem, he or she must know what the problem is. 4 Teach students the art of brainstorming. 5 Avoid or diffuse phrases that kill creativity. The aim of these instructional methods is to provide a learning environment for students and to promote students’ free ways of thinking in terms of problemsolving. These instructional methods lay the foundation for promoting students’ creativity in technology education. Students’ creativity is promoted slowly over a long period of time and cannot be simply fostered using only a formulated methodology. There should be measures in place to promote students’ creativity other than the five instructional methods indicated by TT-SSBI. Also, T. Lewis (2005) pointed out that most young teachers do not have preparation that is sufficient enough to allow them to inject creativity into their teaching in their pre-service training. He said "here is a clear need here for professional development activities aimed at helping teachers see possibilities for introducing creative elements into the curriculum, and into instruction." On the other hand, experienced technology teachers may possess measures for promoting students’ creativity based on their careers in classroom practice over a long period of time. It is expected that knowing how experienced technology teachers have attempted to increase students’ creativity will provide useful information for systematizing these instructional methods. However, in case of Japan, although some good practical examples by experienced teachers were reported, these were only showed as case studies, to Teacher A: A teacher at a private junior high school who made students enter an international robotics contest, and who has 26 years of teaching experience. Teacher C: A teacher at a public junior high school who made students enter a national robotics contest in Japan, and who has 31 years of teaching experience. Teacher D: A former teacher at a public junior high school who created famous instructional methods and educational materials that have been adopted in textbooks, etc., who is at present a university professor, and who has 32 years of teaching experience. Teacher E: A teacher at a public junior high school who studied teaching methods for increasing students’ creativity for a master’s thesis in graduate school, and who has 23 years of teaching experience. Procedure Semi-structured interviews were administered to the five subjects mentioned above regarding teachers’ involvement in promoting students’ creativity. In the semi-structured interviews, the following questions were asked: 1. “How do you think about students’ creativity?” 2. “What type of project have you designed so that students exert their creativity?” 3. “What type of support have you performed in order to promote students’ creativity?” 4. “How do you evaluate students’ creativity?” Using these questions as an opportunity, the subject of conversation was expanded; consequently, the comments Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 81 from the experienced teachers allowed for their ways of thinking to be identified. The interviews were recorded using a digital voice recorder. Six research collaborators discussed and classified the obtained comments. At that time, the comments on their ideas about creativity training were classified into the category “teaching concept.” Similarly, comments on the design of a class meant to draw students’ creativity were classified into the category “instructional design.” Comments on instructions, support, and methods to draw students’ creativity were classified into the category “classroom practice.” Comments on the evaluation of creativity were classified into the category “evaluation.” Finally, comments that did not fall under any of these categories were classified into the category “others.” Comments in these categories were inductively classified into subcategories. After classification, we tried to create a hypothetical model of relationships between teacher's support strategies and student's problem solving process. Results and Discussion Classification of comments From the semi-structured interviews, 156 comments were obtained. These comments were classified into 5 categories. Table 1 shows the classification results. The number of comments in “teaching concept” was 47 (the largest), and its proportion of all of the comments was 36.4%, followed by “classroom practice” (38, 29.5%), ““instructional design” (32, 24.8%), and “evaluation” (12, 9.3%), in that order. solving” (21.3%). Therefore, it was indicated that experienced teachers strongly recognized the importance of increasing students’ creativity as an educational philosophy. Sub-classification of comments in category “instructional design” Comments in the category “instructional design” were subclassified into seven subcategories (B1‒B7). For example, a comment stating that “because the number of my classes for technology is small, I have developed a curriculum while considering the types of restrictions” was subclassified into B1, “examination of restrictions on curriculum.” Similarly, other comments in category “instructional design” were subclassified into B2, “connection with other subjects”; B3, “examination of the relationship between learning contents and our society and daily living”; B4, “examination of materials to be used”; B5, “examination of production methods to be adopted”; B6, “search for themes in order to develop a project”; and B7, “examination of teaching tools to support students’ activities,” in addition to B1. Table 3 shows the ratio of comments in each subcategory to the comments in the category “instructional design.” As shown in this table, the ratio of comments in B2— “connection with other subjects”—was the highest (28.1%), followed by B1, “examination of restrictions on curriculum” (21.9%), and B7, “examination of teaching tools to support students’ activities” (21.9%). Therefore, it was indicated that experienced teachers regarded the connection with other subjects as important teaching strategies, while considering restrictions on curriculum when designing a lesson in order to increase students’ creativity. Table 1: Classification of comments obtained in the semi-structured interviews Subclassification of comments in category “teaching concept” Comments in the category “teaching concept” were subclassified into seven subcategories (A1‒A7). For example, a comment stating that “I consider students’ creativity important, so I have focused on students’ process of problem-solving in my class” was subclassified into A1, “importance of creativity in the process of problem-solving.” Similarly, other comments in the category “teaching concept” were subclassified into A2, “concept of creativity”; A3, “importance of creativity in our society and daily living”; A4, “importance of collaboration in creativity training”; A5, “importance of the user’s point of view in creativity”; A6, “relationship between creativity and intellectual property in our society”; and A7, “importance of increasing students’ creativity,” in addition to A1. Table 2 shows the ratio of comments in each subcategory to comments in the category “teaching concept.” As shown in this table, the ratio of comments in A2—“concept of creativity”—was the highest (38.4%), followed by A1— “importance of creativity in the process of problem- Table 2: Subclassification of comments in category “teaching concept” Table 3: Subclassification of comments in category “instructional design” Subclassification of comments in category “classroom practice” Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 82 Comments in the category “classroom practice” were subclassified into 14 subcategories (C1‒C14). For example, a comment stating that “to foster creativity, I think it is important for me to understand students’ experience of technological activities in their daily living” was subclassified into C1, “understanding the actual situation of each student.” Similarly, other comments in the category “classroom practice” were subclassified into C2, “support for the expression of an idea”; C3, “support for encouraging the creation of an idea”; C4, “idea owing to collaboration”; C5, “respect for students’ decisionmaking”; C6, “setting tasks with a certain degree of freedom”; C7, “instruction which leaves some room for consideration”; C8, “correction of the process of problemsolving”; C9, “support for production”; C10, “breeding a sense of achievement”; C11, “raising awareness of creativity”; C12, “hints and advice”; C13, “exhibition of a basic model”; and C14, “exhibition of reference cases,” in addition to C1. Table 4 shows the ratio of the comments in each subcategory to comments in the category “classroom practice.” As shown in this table, the ratio of comments in C5—“respect for students’ decision-making”—was the highest (18.4%), followed by C6—“setting tasks with a certain degree of freedom” (13.2%). Although the ratios of comments in other subcategories were low, many comments were strongly related to the corresponding subcategory. Therefore, it was suggested that experienced teachers attempted to increase students’ creativity by making the basic problem-solving space wide enough for students to think and judge each task independently. It was also suggested that experienced teachers used various support strategies in order to encourage students to create a new idea, to correct the process of problem-solving, and to increase motivation, instead of relying on a specific support strategy. Table 4: Subclassification of comments in category “classroom practice” Subclassification of comments in category “evaluation” Comments in the category “evaluation” were subclassified into five subcategories (D1‒D5). For example, a comment stating that “I have evaluated learning activities of technology from the four perspectives of knowledge, skills, creativity, and motivation” was subclassified into D1, “setting evaluation perspective.” Similarly, other comments in category “evaluation” were subclassified into D2, “evaluation of completeness”; D3, “evaluation of the process of problem-solving”; D4, “estimation of individual growth”; and D5, “necessity of evaluation,” in addition to D1. Table 5 shows the ratio of comments in each subcategory to the comments in the category “evaluation.” As shown in this table, the ratio of comments in D1—“setting an evaluation perspective”—was the highest (33.3%), followed by D5—“necessity of evaluation” (25.0%). Therefore, it was suggested that experienced teachers set an evaluation perspective using rubrics and attempted to understand the process of problem-solving, estimating individual growth using the evaluation perspective in order to evaluate students’ creativity. Table 5: Subclassification of comments in category “evaluation” Discussion As mentioned above, a total of 33 subcategories could be extracted based on experienced teachers’ involvement in supporting students’ creativity. These subcategories can be used as an analytical framework for lesson studies in the future. When the relationship among the extracted subcategories was identified, it was revealed that experienced teachers attempted to systematically increase students’ creativity beyond the categories of “instructional design,” “classroom practice,” and “evaluation.” We tried to create a hypothetical model of relationships between teacher's support strategies and student's problem solving process by using extracted subcategories. As a result, we reached theoretical saturation with the model in Figure 1. Figure 1 shows a hypothetical model for the above-mentioned relationship. As shown in this figure, experienced teachers strongly considered training for students’ creativity as an educational philosophy. Based on this educational philosophy, experienced teachers prepared teaching materials and tools while considering restrictions on curriculum and the connection with other subjects. The connection with other subjects is thought to include the perspectives of STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) education. In classroom practice, experienced teachers set tasks with a large degree of freedom in order for students to easily exert their creativity, motivating students to understand the necessity of creativity, and respecting students’ individual ways of thinking and decision-making. For students to provide feedback about whether their learning was creative, experienced teachers appropriately established an evaluation perspective. Under such circumstances, experienced teachers paid particular attention to students’ creative processes of problem-solving and individual growth. However, all students were not always creative. In these cases, experienced teachers precisely understood the actual situation and experience of each student and supported students using various strategies, depending on the student. For example, for a student who could not create an idea, experienced teachers taught a method through which to create an idea and encouraged the student to collaborate with other students, exhibiting models and cases. For a student who lacked practical knowledge Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 83 because of too much creativity, experienced teachers encouraged the student to correct the process of problemsolving. For a student who could create an idea but could not realize the idea as a product or system, experienced teachers taught a production method. For a student who could not express an idea in an appropriate manner, experienced teachers supported the student through the process of expressing the idea properly. Using the abovementioned support, hints, and advice, experienced teachers helped students to accomplish the act of problem-solving, and the students were satisfied with their sense of achievement. Thus, the practice of experienced teachers was characteristic of various support strategies, by which they could flexibly cope with students based on the consistent concept of creativity training. Figure 1: Hypothetical model of relationships between teachers’ strategies and students’ learning Conclusion and future tasks This study investigated the activities of experienced teachers in Japan—which were performed to draw out students’ creativity—through the use of semi-structured interviews. Consequently, the practice of experienced teachers was characteristic of various support strategies, by which they could flexibly cope with students based on the consistent concept of creativity training. In the future, using the framework for support explored in this study, we must perform lesson studies and systematize instructional methods by which all technology teachers— including young ones—can appropriately increase students’ levels of creativity. To this end, we must develop a scale of measurement and a versatile education method by which students’ creativity in technology education can be accurately understood. These matters will be the goals of our future tasks. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 84 References (Technology and Home Economics) for course of study. Government of Japan. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996) Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention, New York: Harper Collins. Ozaki, M. (2011) Design-Learning to develop the ability toward planning and creating a proactive life, Journal of the Japan Society of Technology Education Vol.53, No.4, pp.287-292 Lewis, T (2005) Creativity: A Framework for the Design/Problem Solving Discourse in Technology Education, Journal of Technology Education, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp.35-52 Technology for All Americans. (2000a). Standards for Technological Literacy. International Technology Education Association / International Technology and Engineering Educators Association. Nishiyama, Y. (2016) Effective Teaching of Technology and Home Economics for the Development to Abilities and Attitudes toward Planning and Creating a Life, Journal of the Japan Society of Technology Education, Vol.58, No.3, pp.175-181 Technology for All Americans. (2000b) Teaching Technology: Middle School Strategies for StandardsBased Instruction. International Technology Education Association / International Technology and Engineering Educators Association. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sport, Science and Technology (2017a). The Course of Studies for Lower Secondary School. Government of Japan. Technology for All Americans. (2003). The Advancing Excellence in Technological Literacy, / International Technology and Engineering Educators Association. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sport, Science and Technology (2017b). The Instructional Gide Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 85 Development of hydroponics teaching tool for root vegetables Masanao Satou1, Toshikazu Yamamoto2 1 2 The United Graduate School of Education Tokyo Gakugei University, Tokyo, Japan Saitama University Faculty of Education, Saitama, Japan Abstract In junior high schools in Japan teach " biological development " as one of technical education. Among them " biological development " teaches the foundation of agricultural technology. However, in Japan there are issues such as aging of farmers and declining food self-sufficiency accompanying it, and innovation in agriculture is required. Therefore, the plant factory has attracted attention as a new agricultural technology, and it is included in the learning contents also in technical education of junior high school. Therefore, in this research, we developed a nutrient cultivating teaching tool that can nurture root vegetables with the aim of understanding new agricultural technology and fostering innovation ability. Keywords Plant factory, Root vegetables, Teaching material development Introduction Technology education in Japan is set as the technology department only in the three years of junior high school in the compulsory education period (Ministry of Education, Junior High School Course of Study, 2008). Technology education of the first year of junior high school and 35 hours per year in the second grade, is set a total of 87.5 hours of 17.5 hours in the third year. It is the smallest lesson time among the courses set for junior high school. (Figure 1) Figure 2: Learning the contents of the technical department in Japan Figure 1: Study time of each subject at a junior high school in Japan Learning contents of which are defined in the curriculum guidelines to be revised once in about 10 years. Current educational guidelines were revised in 2008. The content of biotechnology development was compulsory from this course of study guidance. (Ministry of Education, School curriculum guidelines during 2008, 2008) The learning contents of the technical department, material processing, living things growing, energy conversion, and a four content of the information. (Figure 2) Biological development was excluded from compulsion at the time of revision of the course of study in 1977, and it was supposed to be compulsory for 31 years. (Ministry of Education, School curriculum guidelines during 1977, 1977)Because it was not covered over the long term, there are problems such as lack of teaching materials and teaching materials, increase of teachers without teaching experience. Especially, in urban schools, farmland for cultivation training cannot be secured, and it is one of the reasons for insufficient learning. (Group All Japan Junior High School Technology and Home Economics Study, 2013) Therefore, development of teaching tools that can carry out cultivation training in indoor is required. Plant factory technology has developed as a technique to cultivate indoors, and plant factories are spreading in Japan since the Great East Japan Earthquake of 2011. More than 400 plant plants are built in Japan in 2015. (Japan Facilities Horticultural Association, 2016) However, the current technology is mainly cultivation of leaf vegetables, expansion of cultivated variety is an issue. Teaching tools to nourish leaf vegetables have also been developed as technical teaching tools, but there are no Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 86 teaching tools to cultivate other kinds of plants. Therefore, in this research, we developed "tea leaf cultivation tea for root vegetables" that enables cultivation of root crops indoors. About technology of plant factory The plant factory, a plant to grow plants environment suitable for the growth of plants by artificially controlled in the indoor. Light necessary for photosynthesis is classified as "solar type" using sunlight, "artificial light type" using artificial light such as LED, "combined type" using sunlight and artificial light together . (MORI, 2015) Using, for example, a sponge instead of soil, grow plants by circulating nutrient solution containing the nutrients required for the growth of the plant. The inside of the factory is a clean room, so we do not use pesticides because disease and pests do not occur. Because it is controlled by a computer, it is possible to efficiently produce a small number of people. It is a technology that enables the production of plants anywhere, such as urban areas, cold areas, desert areas. Therefore, teaching tools that can cultivate varieties other than leaf vegetables are required. Development of hydroponics teaching tools for root vegetables Development of artificial light source for cultivation To grow plants indoors are required artificial light for performing photosynthesis. The light necessary for plant growth is effective for red color with an absorption peak of chlorophyll around 660 nm and blue color around 450 nm which is the absorption peak of cryptochrome or phototropin. (Masamoto TAKATUJI, 2011)Therefore, we developed an LED light source for cultivation using an LED with less power consumption and less heat generation. Tape LED of super high brightness type was used for LED. The tape LED is a tape shape with a width of 8 mm and the LEDs are arranged at 15 mm intervals, and it can be used by cutting it to the required length. (Figure 3) Figure 3: Tape LED In Japan, by accident of nuclear power plant by a large earthquake of 2011, soil is no longer able to production temporarily of agricultural products contaminated by radioactive substances. As a result, facilities using plants factory technology to produce plants are rapidly increasing. Leaf vegetables is about 65% being produced in plant factories, about 31% fruit vegetables, enlarged cultivars there is a problem. (Japan Facilities Horticultural Association, 2016) Learning about bio-cultivation in technical education in Japan The content of biological training learning is defined as follows in the course of study guidance. • How to manage conditions suitable for cultivation of living things and cultivation environment of organisms. • Think about appropriate assessment and utilization of biotechnology-related technologies. • Plan development of living things, cultivate and rearing living things. Specifically, it is necessary that soil, air, water, fertilizer are necessary for plant growth, nutrients such as nitrogen, phosphoric acid and potassium are necessary for fertilizer and it is effective, Learn the importance of work such as pencil core and insect repellent, and evaluate the technology from environmental and economic relationships. In addition, actually grow the plant, are experiencing such as the work that have been learned. Moreover, it is suitable for cultivation of plants using nutrient solution because it is waterproof. The base part is designed in 3D-CAD. (Figure 4) It was manufactured base in the 3D printer (X Co. Ltd.). (Figure 5) Figure 4: Design drawing of LED base part 4 1 1 4 In the school of urban areas is the lack of land in order to experience the farm work. Therefore, it is necessary to cultivate indoors. For example, it is a method of sowing seeds of leafy vegetables on a sponge, placing it near the window and growing with the light of the sun. However, leaf vegetables such as lettuce can be cultivated, leaf vegetables can hardly experience work after germination, so there are problems as practical subjects. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 87 Figure 5: 3D printer Examination of artificial soil and cultivation experiment In order to grow root vegetables, soil is necessary. Soil because taproot unit by adding at the same time moderate pressure when supporting the main root portion is grown. However, the plant factory is a clean room so you cannot use the soil. So soil substitute of is required. Plant factories have higher cultivation costs compared with open field cultivation, so substitutes for soil are easier to manage, and it is necessary to reduce costs by recycling. Also it must be hygienic. Therefore, it was decided to examine the substance to be a substitute for soil. As a candidate, cultivation for the absorbent polymer, plastic ball for a toy gun (BB bullets), perlite, Charcoal of rice husk, was hydro-ball, vermiculite candidate. (Figure. 7) Tape LEDs were placed on the base part made with a 3D printer and 24 cells of red and blue LEDs effective for plant growth and 27 cells of high illuminance white LEDs were placed. (Figure 6) The developed cultivating LED light source was able to secure illuminance of 23000 lux at a distance of 100 mm from the light source. The cultivation LED is 12V, is powered by the 5A AC adapter, it is possible to light up to three cultivation LED with AC adapter one. Elements of consideration were (1) cost, (2) weight, (3) water retentivity, and (4) reusability. Cultivation experiments were carried out using these candidates. In cultivation experiments, candidate materials were placed in containers reusing PET bottles, and cultivation of radish was carried out. (Figure. 8) Radish seeds were sowed on sponge and planted after germination. Nutrient solution Hyponex (N: P: K = 6.5: 6: 19) was utilized diluted to 1000-fold. Figure 7: Soil substitute (candidates) Figure 5: 6 LED light source for cultivation Figure 8: State of cultivation experiment Hydro Ball BB bullet Charcoal of rice husk Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 88 Cultivation experiments were conducted in the vicinity of indoor windows, and the LED light source for cultivation and sunlight were used in combination. Cultivating LED light source was irradiated for 1 day 12 hours using the program timer. (Figure. 9) Figure 9: Program timer Development of cultivation teaching tools From the results of the experiment, for which it has been confirmed using a BB bullet is capable of cultivation of root vegetables, it was decided to develop a hydroponics teaching tools for root vegetables. Assumed cultivation subject to a small root vegetables such as radish, to be easily grown indoors, it was decided to design as compact as possible. The size of the device is designed as a height 150mm, including the inner diameter of the cultivation layer 90 mm, height 120 mm, a nutrient solution jetting unit. This device was divided into two parts, a cultivation layer and a nutrient injection part, and outputted with a 3D printer. Nutrient solution injection unit and the cultivation layer, nutrient solution using a silicon-based caulking agent with waterproof are joined so as not leak to the outside. A silicone tube is attached to the injection port provided in the lower portion of the nutrient solution injection part, and a nutrient solution is supplied from a separately provided nutrient solution tank by a pump. In addition, an air conditioner was used so that the temperature inside the room was kept at 20℃ to 24 ℃. And nutrient solution kept pH and EC constant by exchanging the whole amount once a week. The results of the experiment, we were able to harvest in 29 days after sowing. There was no significant growth difference due to differences in candidate materials. However, objects such as white fungi occurred in charcoal of rice husk and hydroball. Also, objects such as green algae were generated in the polymer absorber and pearlite. (Figure. 10) The nutrient solution was made to eject nutrient fluid from the ejection port which was opened at three positions in the nutrient solution injection part. (Figure. 11 and 12) Figure 11: system conceptual view Figure 10: charcoal of rice husk (left), the absorbent polymer (right) Therefore, rice husk charcoal and hydro ball and absorbent polymer and perlite is inferred that there is a problem in hygiene. Although vermiculite is inexpensively available, it has a heavier weight compared with BB bullets and there are variations in shape, so the problem remains in reuse after collection. Therefore, we decided to adopt BB bullet as substitute for soil. BB bullet is a bullet for a toy gun played by Japanese children, and it is produced as a standard item. The diameter is made φ6 + 0 ~ -0.05mm, weight 0.12～0.43G, a plastic such as ABS resin as raw materials. It can be easily obtained by toy shop or mail order. Since size and weight are specified in the standard, the recovery is easy and hygienic, it can be repeatedly used because there is durable. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 89 Figure 12: Cultivation teaching detail drawing Development of BB bullet retrieval device We developed recovery equipment for recovering BB bullets after cultivation. It devised a retrieval device using an aluminum punching metal of φ6.0mm. Since BB bullet is φ 6 + 0 ~ -0.05 mm, BB bullet is collected by free fall from hole of punching metal. And a mechanism to get rid of such large garbage than the BB bullets. Also, to make BB bullets easier to pass through the punching metal holes, the holes were expanded using a 6.5 mm drill. (Figure 13) Figure 13: BB bullet retrieval device Cultivation using hydroponics teaching tools for root vegetables In the cultivation utilizing the present apparatus, it is necessary to replenish the nutrient solution at the pump because there is absolutely no water retention in the BB bullets. pump is controlled by a timer and is set to irrigate the nutrient solution for 5 minutes per hour. Irrigation amount is 1.5ℓ / min. The amount of light is insufficient only with the LED light source. For this reason it was decided to carry out the installation and cultivation in combination with sunlight the device near a window. In this case it was possible to ensure the illumination of about 50000lux in the day in fine weather. Also, in order to cultivate even in a cold season, we covered the equipment with vinyl so that it can be warmed with a simple heating device. (Figure. 14) Figure 14: Overall view of hydroponics equipment Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 90 Radish was cultivated using this device. For 12 hours from 6:00 am to 6:00 pm, the LED was irradiated and the temperature was controlled to keep the inside of the apparatus at 24 ℃.。We turned off the LED for 12 hours from 6:00 PM to 6:00 AM, and brought up the temperature at about 10 ℃. The nutrient solution was cultivated by making 6 patterns of nitrogen, potassium phosphate, trace elements combination. (Table 1) Pattern 1 (Standard concentration) Pattern 2 (Many nitrogen) Pattern 3 (Manyphosphoric acid, potassium) Pattern 4 (Few-nitrogen) Pattern 5 (Fewphosphoric acid, potassium) Pattern 6 (All-many) Nitrogen Phosphoric acid, potassium Trace elements 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 0.5 1 1 1 0.5 1 2 2 2 Table 1: Combination of fertilizer (blending ratio) Figure 15: Radish harvested in pattern 6 Every week, the nutrient solution was exchanged for the whole amount. As a result of cultivation under these conditions, it was possible to harvest a radish after about 40 days. Harvested radish differed in size by the pattern of nutrient solution. (Table 2) In pattern 5 (Few-phosphoric acid, potassium) and pattern 6 (All-many), relatively large radish could be harvested. (Figure 15) Also, pattern 2 (Many-nitrogen) and pattern 3 (Manyphosphoric acid, potassium), the main root of the radish is small and it is not suitable for edible use. (Figure 16) Pattern 1 (Standard concentration) Pattern 2 (Manynitrogen) Pattern 3 (Manyphosphoric acid, potassium) Pattern 4 (Fewnitrogen) Pattern 5 (Fewphosphoric acid, potassium) Pattern 6 (All-many) Length (mm) Width (mm) Weight (g) 32.6 23.7 14 30.6 10.2 9 25.7 1.5 5 26.8 25.7 16 29.7 36.2 31 49.1 30.1 29 Table 2: Nutrient solution the size of the pattern and radish Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 91 Figure 16: Radish harvested in pattern 3 6. It was confirmed that it is suitable to concentrate nutrient solution, Few-phosphoric acid, potassium or All many. In the future, we will practice lessons using these devices and confirm the effectiveness of the teaching equipment. References Group All Japan Junior High School Technology and Home Economics Study. (2013, 5 25). Nationwide questionnaire survey report on junior high school technology · home economics department. Retrieved from http://ajgika.ne.jp/doc/2013enquete_g.pdf Japan Facilities Horticultural Association. (2016). Large Scale Facilities Gardening · Plant factory survey · Case collection. Conclusion We developed " hydroponics teaching tools for root vegetables " which made it possible to cultivate root vegetables indoors. It summarizes the findings of this study below. 1. To develop LED light source for allowing cultivation indoors, it was possible to secure the illumination of 23000Lux. 2. Consider the artificial soil in order to allow the cultivation of root vegetables, it was confirmed by experiment that it is possible grown in BB bullets. 3. We developed a teaching aid for root nutrients for cultivating root crops with BB bullets. 4. Developed a recovery device for collecting and reusing BB bullets. Japan Facilities Horticultural Association. (2016). Large Scale Facilities Survey on Horticulture · Plant Factory Survey · Business Report Supplement 2. Masamoto TAKATUJI, Y. M. (2011). LED plant factory. Nikkan Kogyo Shimbun. Ministry of Education, C. S. (1977, 7 23). School curriculum guidelines during 1977. Retrieved from https://www.nier.go.jp/guideline/s52j/chap2-8.htm Ministry of Education, C. S. (2008, 3 28). Junior High School Course of Study. Retrieved from http://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/shotou/newcs/youryou/chu/index.htm Ministry of Education, C. S. (2008, 6). School curriculum guidelines during 2008. Retrieved from http://www.mext.go.jp/component/a_menu/education /micro_detail/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2011/01/05/12349 12_011_1.pdf Mori, Y. (2015). Easy plant book. Nikkan Kogyo Shimbun. 5. Cultivation by timer irrigation and confirm that root vegetables can be cultivated. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 92 Lesson to think about the actual state of energy supply in Japan and future energy use on our living Toshikazu Yamamoto, Kimihito Takeno, Kouhei Suzuki Abstract In this research, a lecture was given to college students to understand the energy situation and to think about future energy policy in Japan. The lecture was carried out with the following contents: (1) Implementation of awareness survey on energy and consideration of future energy policy in Japan, (2)Confirmation of the latest Japanese energy situation, (3)Principle and history of geothermal power generation / ocean temperature difference power generation, and issues and future possibilities through comparing usage situation between Japan and the world, (4)Proposal to Japan's energy policy, (5)Implementation of a follow-up survey. Because of the lecture, the target college students showed an understanding of Japan's energy situation. Also, the following opinions were presented. Commercial driving is expected if the possibility that further ocean temperature difference power generation technology advances and cost is reduced, and Japan's geothermal power generation with high potential develops through the realization of policies. Keywords Renewable energy, ocean temperature difference power generation, geothermal power generation, evaluation of technology, Practice of a lecture. Introduction In considering future energy policies, it is necessary to solve the issues concerning economic and stable supply, environmental issues and education for citizens. In 2016 "Annual Report on Energy" announced by Japan Agency for Natural Resources and Energy, after simultaneous suspension of nuclear power generation, it was shown that the reliance on electricity supply by fossil fuels was as high as 88%. In addition, due to the rise in prices and the effects of exchange rate fluctuations, imports of mineral fuels increased significantly compared to before the earthquake, in 2013 it has recorded a trade deficit of 11.5 trillion yen, which is the largest ever in the past (1). Also, in the 4th Energy Basic Plan announced in 2016, supplementing various types of energy to establish a stable energy supply and demand structure and further promotion of renewable energy are described. Furthermore, it is stated that it is necessary to promote understanding of the energy to citizens (2). This research addresses solutions to the various issues of renewable energy policy from the field of technical education. Therefore, the current state of energy education in Japan is introduced below. It is important that next generation children / students and young people, who are responsible for choosing future energy sources, acquire appropriate judgment on renewable energy. Also, to deepen understanding about renewable energy, it is pointed out that it is necessary to think about energy in many ways by learning characteristics of energy other than general solar power generation and wind power generation (3). For renewable energy in Japan, geothermal power generation and ocean temperature difference power generation are particularly effective. Regarding geothermal power generation, geothermal reserves are the third largest in the world due to the volcanic environment (table 1) (4,5). In addition, stable power generation can be obtained regardless of weather, season, day and night. It can be said that ocean temperature difference power generation is compatible with Japan that is a maritime state. In Japan, Okinawa and Ogasawara have high energy density and it can be said that it is easy to find an environment suitable for ocean temperature difference power generation (6,7,8) Although these two energies are important in Japan's energy situation, examples of educational practice with them as themes can only find a few cases listed below. Although it is two important energy in the energy situation in Japan, there are few cases of educational practice that used these as learning contents. Matsuda et al (9) proposed a teaching process linking geothermal energy with geology. This is an example of energy environmental education, which can be an example of scientific knowledge acquisition for future energy selection. Regarding ocean temperature difference power generation, Yamamoto et al. (2010) have reported on efforts to develop teaching tools to be learned through experiments, to raise interest in energy problems and make them familiar (10). This practice can also learn the principle of temperature difference power generation and it can be an example of scientific knowledge for future energy selection. Table 1: Geothermal Resources of Major Countries Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 93 2. and saving was carried out. Figure 1: OTEC projects map Confirming the precedent case, we carried out this study because it is the main objective of acquiring scientific knowledge, that less handling of renewable energy peculiar to Japan is few, it will not be learning for future energy selection. Therefore, in this research, we made college students understand Japanese energy situation, and let us think about future energy policy through case study of renewable energy such as geothermal power generation and ocean temperature difference power generation. Through this practice, the purpose of this research was to explore the future possibilities of Japanese energy education. Research Method In this research, to explore the future possibilities of energy education in Japan, we conducted lesson practice on renewable energy such as geothermal power generation and ocean temperature difference power generation for college students. In addition, we conducted a consciousness survey to analyze the basic knowledge obtained from this lesson practice. Preliminary survey on energy utilization method 3. Explanation of the power generation situation and historical change of electric energy in Japan. The status of renewable energy use before and after the 2011 earthquake was compared and the current situation was explained. 4. Learning the principles and features of thermal power generation, nuclear power generation, wind power generation, solar power generation, tidal power generation, and wave power generation. 5. Learning principles and features of geothermal power generation (Fig. 2). 6. Learning principles and features of ocean temperature difference power generation (Fig. 3). 7. If Japanese prime minister will make policy proposals on energy use, students created proposals based on the lecture content. Survey procedure Applicants of class practice and date of implementation Class practice was conducted in the Japanese national university in November 2017. In addition, the subjects were 112 university students and conducted as lecturers of "Life and Technology" as a so-called liberal arts subject. The lecture time was 90 minutes. Teaching process In the lecture, students learned about the latest Japanese energy situation and various new energies and aimed to be able to have their own ideas about Japanese energy policy. In addition, we surveyed students' attitudes towards energy before and after lecture. The lecture procedure is shown below. 1. The contents of the lecture were explained. Figure 2: Slide of GPG for instruction Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 94 Figure 3: Slide of OTDPG for instruction In this research, to grasp the learning situation of university students, "Interest research on energy" on energy problem was set (Table 2). In addition, we separately confirmed the transformation of student 's perception by setting "Survey on power generation" (Table 3). Interest research on energy items prepared 40 question items, asked about consciousness about energy problem, efforts to solve, knowledge about familiar home electronics, knowledge about sustainable society, etc. This survey was conducted in a four-grade method. The answers in each question item were scored and average and standard deviation were obtained. In addition, a significant difference was confirmed in the t test as to the score before and after the examination. The free description of survey on power generation was only for simple summarization. Survey results Survey results are divided into preliminary and posterior surveys for two types of survey "Interest research on energy " and "Survey on power generation". Results of Preliminary survey results Survey results before lecture of interest research on energy are shown in Table 4. Items with particularly high interest in the survey target (average value is 3.00 or higher) items whose average of the score was less than 2.00 were as follows; Q 13, Q 21, Q 30, Q 24, Q 32, Q 26, Q 20. Because of the preliminary survey, students were interested in energy issues, but confirmed the tendency to become unconscious when becoming more specialized items. Also, because of Q1 of survey on power generation, 59.2% of respondents answered solar power, which was the most frequent. After that, the second was geothermal power generation (34.8%), the third was hydroelectric power generation (34.0%). Q2 Regarding recognition of the type of power generation (multiple answers allowed), there were many subjects who listed existing energy, such as thermal power generation 99.1%, hydraulic power 97.3%, nuclear power generation 95.5%. Also, in question Q3, most students described thermal power generation. It is shown that we understand the current state of Japan strongly dependent on thermal power generation. For Q4, solar power generation (39.2%), hydroelectric power generation (17.9%), nuclear power generation (15.2%) occupied the top three. Table 2: Interest research on energy Table 3: Survey on power generation Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 95 Table 5 summarizes the pre- and post-results of Survey on power generation. For the recognition of the type of power generation (multiple answers allowed) (Q2), it was shown that the response rate recognized geothermal power generation 100%, temperature difference power generation 100%, new energy learned in this lecture. In the current power generation method with a large amount of power generation (Q3), it was shown that all students understand the current state of our country strongly dependent on thermal power generation. Regarding power generation that is superior economically and environmentally (Q4), geothermal power generation was 42.2%, solar power generation was 22.5% and temperature difference power generation was 18.6%, which were the top three items. It was shown that the understanding of the merit of the new energy dealt in this lecture was deepened. Regarding the image of geothermal power generation (Q5), there were a lot of responses to understand its merits and usefulness, such as "environmentally friendly, existence that is responsible for future power generation". On the other hand, there were many comments that questioned the current situation that development is not going on, such as "why we do not invest investment though there are many merits". Regarding the image of the temperature difference power generation (Q6), not only the merit but also economic ingenuity was answered such as "The way to lower the power generation cost as a whole by utilizing deep water other than power generation" is very good. From the above, it seems that this lecture showed that we understood the efforts and outcomes of various new energy being done in Japan. Table 4: Result of interest research on energy The images concerning geothermal power generation and temperature difference power generation, which focused particularly on this lecture, were collected by Q 5 and 6. Regarding geothermal power generation, responses such as "difficult to construct", "not able to generate excessive power", "there are many volcanoes in Japan" were obtained. Regarding temperature difference power generation, responses such as "I heard it for the first time", "I feel easy to make use of the characteristics of the island country" were obtained. Comparison between preliminary survey and postsurvey Survey results of preliminary survey and postsurvey of interest research on energy are shown in Table 5. Significant differences were found in Q24, Q30, Q 32, Q 13, Q21, Q26, and Q20 which showed low values in the preliminary survey. It can be said that the consciousness of wanting to improve in the future has also increased significantly for items with more specialized contents. On the other hand, there were no significant differences between the preliminary survey and the post-survey for Q7, Q10, Q11 and Q35. These items are highly valued from preliminary surveys, and there is a high possibility that they have already been formed in the past learning. Table 5: Results of Survey on power generation Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 96 Conclusion In this research, we made college students understand Japanese energy situation, and let us think about future energy policy through case study of renewable energy such as geothermal power generation and ocean temperature difference power generation. Also, through this practice, the purpose of this research was to explore the future possibilities of Japanese energy education. The results are summarized below. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. We put into practical lecture on the history of energy generation in Japan and the teaching materials of thermal power generation, nuclear power generation, wind power generation, photovoltaic power generation, tidal force / wave power, ocean temperature difference / geothermal power generation, and think about future energy policy. College students have knowledge about energy learned during middle and high school days, but showed that they do not have scientific perceptions of changes in the energy situation after that. In the preliminary survey, college students did not understand the mechanisms and features of ocean temperature difference power generation and geothermal power generation, Japan's advantage. Regarding technically superior ocean temperature difference power generation, many students wished to seek further progress in technology and cost reduction by deep seawater use. Regarding geothermal resources with high reserves, I understood the relationship between the impact on nature and the time and cost between power generation. Students also expressed much opinion that efforts as national policy are necessary. As a result of the investigation of Interest research on energy and Survey on power generation, I got my opinion on the future energy policy of Japan and the interests and interests on them improved. From the above results, it is considered that the implementation of this research stimulated the basic knowledge and interests of university students concerning energy, and it was effective as a lecture at the introduction stage. From now on, we would like to consider improving teaching content and teaching materials through more practices. References 1. Ministry of Finance, International Balance of payments situation Time series data up to 2013， https://www.mof.go.jp/international_policy/reference /balance_of_payments/index.htm 2. Agency for Natural Resources and Energy, Basic energy plan in 2014 www.enecho.meti.go.jp/category/others/basic_plan/p df/140411.pdf 3. Japan Science Foundation, Report of Energy Environment Strategic Research in 2014, http://www.meti.go.jp/meti_lib/report/2015fy/001105 .pdf 4. Fujii Yukio, Sato Hiroshi, Fifty Years under Operation in the Matsukawa Geothermal Power Plant, Geothermal technology, 42(1・2), 5-12, 2017 5. Japan for Sustainability, Geothermal Power: Japan Has World's Third Largest Geothermal Reserves, 60 Percent of Which Can Be Developed, https://www.japanfs.org/en/news/archives/news_id03 5043.html 6. Ikegami Yasuyuki，New Stage of Ocean Thermal energy Conversion from Kumejima in Okinawa (<Special Section>Challenges to Green Energy and ICT in Kyushu) The Institute of Electronics, Information and Communication Engineers, 97(10), 859-860, 2014 Ikegami Yasuyuki，Current Status and Future Prospects of OTEC as New Stage in Japan and Abroad: Towards to the Role as Stable Energy on Renewable Energy，Chemical engineering of Japan 81(9), 468471, 2017 What is OTEC?, OTEC Foundation, http://www.otecsymposium.org/about/what-is-otec/ 9. Matsud Yoshiak, GOTO Masakazu, An Examination of Earth Science Materials from the Standpoint of Energy and Environment Education : Integrating the Teaching of Earth Science and Geothermal Energy， Journal of Energy and Environmental Education 8(1),21-30, 2013 10.Yamamoto Toshikazu, Sumi Kazuhiro, Ikegami Yasuyuki, Development of Educational Material for Energy Study using Thermal Energy Conversion: Teaching Practice using Educational Materials of, Saga University Faculty of Science Faculty of Ocean Energy Research Report,15, 9-12,2010 Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 97 Development and practice of technology education classes based on product disassembly under the conditions of the Japanese Courses of Study Kento Tsutsumi1, Shuhei Ban2, Chikahiko Yata2 1 Hiroshima University Shinonome Junior High School, Japan 2 Hiroshima University, Japan Abstract The Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (JMEXT) devised a new course of study for elementary schools and middle schools in 2017. The syllabus for technology education contains contents like these: “technology of materials and their processing,” “technology of nurturing living things,” “technology of energy conversion,” and “technology of information.” Students are taught these contents though several sub-units to enable them to understand technology concept. First, they learn "technology to support life and society," through which they mainly explore the perspective and thinking style of technology and acquire the relevant knowledge and skills for technological problem-solving. Next, students learn "problemsolving by technology." They are encouraged through the contents of this sub-unit to utilize the knowledge and skills acquired and develop attitudes that allow them to devise and create technology products. Finally, students learn "development and technology of society." The contents of this sub-unit enable students to rethink their lives and societies in accordance with the perspective and thinking style of technology. In the sub-unit "technology to support life and society," interactive learning activity and the examination of technology is encouraged. JMEXT suggests that “interactive means to consider engineering concepts and promote creative thinking through activities such as disassembly of products.” We adopted the "LED sensor light" that is inexpensive and easy to disassemble as teaching material and reported on the results of planning, practicing, and evaluating technology classes that learn the functions and composition of electric circuits. Keywords Middle schools; Disassembly of products; Lesson development; Introduction Qualities and abilities in Japanese education The Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (JMEXT) have devised new Courses of Study (JMEXT, 2017). The JMEXT’s Courses of Study represent an outline of the standard curriculum for elementary and middle schools. The revision of the Courses of Study was based on a global trend that emphasizes the development of generic skills and competences. The qualities and abilities that aim to nurture the entire school curriculum were organized as ‘knowledge and skills’, ‘ability to reason, judge, and express’, and ‘ability to learn and utilization’. ‘Knowledge and skills’ emphasizes what students understand and are able to do, targeting lessons or ‘knowledge and skills’ that students can use. ‘Ability to reason, judge, and express’ focuses on how students use their ‘knowledge and skills’ when faced with an unfamiliar situation in society. ‘Ability to learn and utilization’ aims to cultivate motivation and attitude so that students use their learning in life and in the community, engaging in society and in the world. Learning style in Japanese education JMEXT shows the objectives and content of each subject that has been reorganized according to these qualities and abilities. JMEXT showed ‘subjective, interactive, and deep learning’ as an effort to improve classes to nurture these qualities and abilities for students. ‘Subjective, interactive, and deep learning’ was constructed under the influence of active learning, with particular consideration to relationships with ‘deep learning’, especially based on ‘subjective learning’ and ‘interactive learning’. ‘Subjective learning’ is a form of learning that has interests in learning, associating self-career formation, work tenaciously with prospects and feedback on learning activities to connect next learning. ‘Interactive learning’ broadens and deepens students’ ideas based on collaboration among students, dialogue with others, and pioneering ideas. ‘Deep learning’ means understanding more deeply by relating knowledge to one another, examining information and forming ideas, finding problems and thinking of solutions, and creating based on thoughts and ideas. JMEXT pointed out that ‘deep learning’ is important with regard to ‘the perspective and thinking style’ of each subject in the learning process of ‘acquisition, utilization, and exploration’. ‘The perspective and thinking style’ was prescribed by JMEXT as a particular viewpoint and way of thinking to capture aspects unique to each subject. It was regarded as being key to learning the essential meaning behind each subject and connecting the learning of subjects to society. ‘The perspective and thinking style’ of technology was defined as follows: Technology: Perspective: Grasp phenomena in everyday life and society from the viewpoint of relationship with technology. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 98 Thinking style: Optimize technology with a focus on society’s demand, safety, environmental burden, and economic efficiency. ‘subjective, interactive, and deep learning’ can be arranged as shown in Table 1. Subunit of Japanese technology education Learning process The Japanese technology education curriculum comprises various technologies used in modern society, including ‘technology of materials and their processing’, ‘technology of nurturing living things’, ‘technology of energy conversion’, and ‘technology of information’. These four content units must be learned by all students. Each content unit includes the following subunits, according to which learning items are defined (JMEXT, 2018). Subunit 1: ‘Technology to support life and society’ Aim: To acquire scientific understanding of how technology work; to observe the roles and progress of technology; to notice ‘the perspective and thinking style’ of technology; and to acquire the knowledge and skills necessary for technological problem solving. Subunit 2: ‘Problem solving through technology’ Aim: To use the acquired knowledge and skills for technological problem solving in everyday life and society; to deepen the understanding of technology and proficiency of skills; to develop problem-solving skills through technology; and to nurture attitudes to conceive solutions based on one’s new ideas and understanding. Subunit 3: ‘Development and technology of society’ Aim: To understand the concept of technology by reflecting on the results and processes of technological problem solving; to foster the ability to think about evaluating, selecting, managing, operating, improving, and applying technology according ‘the perspective and thinking style’ of technology; to nurture the attitude to devise and create technologies that can develop the society and the world. Subunit The Learning perspective style and thinking style ‘Understandin ‘Technology To notice ‘interactive g existing to support life (To examine learning’ technologies’ and society’ existing technologies through learning activities) ‘Setting ‘Problem To utilize ‘deep problems and solving (To develop learning’ solutions’ technological through ‘Designing and technology’ problem solving in planning based everyday life on scientific and society understanding through of technology’ learning ‘Making, activities) producing, and nurturing for problem solving’ ‘Evaluation of outcomes’ ‘Perspective of ‘Developmen To ‘subjective solving the t and conceptualize learning’ next problem’ technology of (To think society’ about social development and technologies in the future through learning activities) Learning process of Japanese technology education The learning process of Japanese technology education was defined as ‘Understanding existing technologies’, ‘Setting problems and solutions’, ‘Designing and planning based on scientific understanding of technology’, ‘Making, producing, and nurturing for problem solving’, ‘Evaluation of outcomes’, and ‘Perspective of solving the next problem’. This learning process is developed from the philosophy that the qualities and abilities that aim to nurture technology education are not merely activities to make products; they are proposed by the learning process through which the qualities and abilities of technology education can be effectively acquired by students in activities while using ‘the perspective and thinking style’ of technological thinking, finding problems related to technology in everyday life and society, setting issues and problems, thinking and solving through optimal design, implementing production, producing and nurturing, and evaluating and improving results and solutions. The relationship between this learning process and the subunits, ‘the perspective and thinking style’, and Table 1: Relationship between the learning process and the sub-units. JMEXT suggests ‘interactive learning’ of technology education, where ‘interactive means to consider engineering concepts and promote creative thinking through activities such as disassembly of products’. Therefore, there is a need to examine teaching materials and lesson plans of technology education related to product disassembly. In the history of Japanese technology education, the disassembly and assembly of bicycles and engines has been treated as learning activities. Disassembly and assembly was positioned as a learning activity to acquire and use knowledge and skills through practical training. However, considering the 2017 Courses of Study in Japan, it is necessary to recognize the role disassembly and assembly learning activities have in terms of acquiring the knowledge and skills that are the premise of design and making, producing, and nurturing activities. Product disassembly in worldwide teaching materials Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 99 Purpose The positioning of product disassembly is similar to the teaching materials proposed by the International Technology and Engineering Educators Association (ITEEA). ITEEA (2012) provide EbD-TEEMS™ to elementary curricula, which is designed to serve as a model and teaching resource to develop a meaningful foundation in STEM education. For example, ‘Our world and me’ was part of the proposed sixth grade elementary school curriculum. This teaching tool consists of three units using the framework of 6E Learning by-DeSIGN™ Model. It includes ‘Engage’, ‘Explore’, ‘Explain’, ‘Engineer’, ‘Enrich’, and ‘Evaluation’, for the lesson sequence. Phase ENGAGE EXPLORE EXPLAIN ENGINEER ENRICH EVALUATION Purpose to pique student interest and get them personally involved in the lesson, while pre-assessing prior understanding. to provide students with the opportunity to construct their own understanding of the topic. to provide students with an opportunity to explain and refine what they have learned so far and determine what it means. to provide students with an opportunity to develop greater depth of understanding about the problem topic by applying concepts, practices, and attitudes. to provide students with an opportunity to explore what they have learned in more depth and to transfer concepts to more complex problems. for both students and teachers to determine how much learning and understanding has taken place. Table 2: Phases of 6E Learning byDeSIGN™ Model (Barry N. B (2014)) Product disassembly is done in the ‘Explore’ phase. Its purpose is to learn the typical crank mechanism through reverse engineering of the automata and to develop a viewpoint on design and construction of mechanisms. According to the recommended worksheets (The Homeschool Scientist 2013), ‘Reverse Engineering’ is defined as ‘the science of taking things apart to see how they work’. Through ‘Reverse Engineering’, the aim is to teach students how to design and construct a crank mechanism with the help of an automaton that uses a crank mechanism. In other words, ‘Reverse Engineering’ is considered to be a learning activity that helps students understand the structure and function of the system and, as a result of this learning, students can use their own ideas to design and construct products. The idea of ‘Reverse Engineering’ is similar to the idea of product disassembly presented in the 2017 Japanese Courses of Study. The purpose of this study is to examine technology education classes focusing on the learning activity of ‘product disassembly’ while incorporating international findings, which should be developed in Japanese technology education. We adopted a ‘LED sensor light’ device as teaching material since it is inexpensive and easy to disassemble, and reported the results of planning, practicing, and evaluation of technology classes in which students learn the functions and composition of electrical circuits. Analysis of teaching materials The purpose of this study is to examine technology education classes focusing on the learning activity of ‘product disassembly’ while incorporating international findings, which should be developed in Japanese technology education. We adopted a ‘LED sensor light’ device as teaching material since it is inexpensive and easy to disassemble, and reported the results of planning, practicing, and evaluation of technology classes in which students learn the functions and composition of electrical circuits. Analysis of teaching materials Learning process of Japanese technology education The ‘LED sensor light’ device shown in Figure 1 was used as teaching material. This device can be attached to a door or a drawer, giving them the function of turning the light on or off when they are opened and closed. The size of the main body shown on the left side of Figure 1 is 64 × 31 × 21 mm, and the weight (including the battery) is 31 g. In addition, the extension cord from the main body is approximately 1000 mm, and the size of the object connected by the extension cord is 36 × 11 × 11 mm. The object at the top is also of the same size. These two objects are parts of the sensor and the white LED on the main body glows when they are at or more than 20 mm apart. The recommended power off interval is 5 mm or less. This ‘LED sensor light’ device is sold in the 100-yen shop, ‘The Daiso’, and costs 100 yen (excluding taxes) per piece in Japan. It is easy for junior high school students to grasp their composition. Because it is inexpensive, it has few parts and its structure is simple. Moreover, since ‘The Daiso’ has more than 3000 stores in Japan and 38 stores in Australia, it is easy to obtain this device. The main body and sensor cases are made of ASB resin. The two sensor cases can be easily removed by inserting a precision screwdriver into the gap. When the two sensor cases are opened, it is seen that the reed switch and magnet are arranged as shown in Figures 2 and 3. When the distance between the two cases is small, an electric current flows in the reed switch, and when the distance between the two cases is large, the electric current is cut off. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 100 Figure 1: ‘LED sensor light’ device can be identified. In the circuit, two surface-mounted electric resistors and two NPN-type transistors are soldered, although the LED model number is unknown. Therefore, as measured with an actual machine, the current value is 23 mA, the forward voltage is 2.9 V, and the brightness is about 95 lx when the distance between the LED and the sensor is 150 mm. The circuit diagram of this teaching material is shown in Figure 5 and the parts used are shown in Table 3. Figure 5: Circuit diagram Figure 2: Reed swith Figure 3: Magnet Parts Button battery (LR44) Electric resistor (R1) Electric resistor (R2) Transistor (Q1, Q2) Reed switch (SW1) LED (D) Quantity 3 2 2 2 1 1 Table 3: Phases of 6E Learning byDeSIGN™ Model (Barry N. B (2014)) Function of circuit section Figure 4: Battery box The main body of the ‘LED sensor light’ device is composed of LEDs, batteries, electronic circuits, and so on. The cover of the battery box of the main body slides off and can be removed. As shown in Figure 4, this device uses three LR - 44 (AG 13) in series as power supply. Next, by removing one screwdriver, the transparent cover that diffuses the light can also be removed. By removing the transparent cover, the LED light and electronic circuit R2 is the electric resistor that adjusts the current flow through the LED. When the sensor section distance between the reed switch and the magnet is small, the base voltage of Q1 becomes 0 V, as shown in Figure 5. For that reason, no current flows through the LED. However, although the LED does not glow, the current continues to flow to the reed switch. Therefore, R1 has a very large electrical resistor connected so that the standby current is suppressed to about 0.8 µA. In addition, if the distance between the reed switch and the magnet is large, the reed switch is turned off, and the current flows into the base of Q1. Generally, about 10 mA is required to turn on this white LED with a diameter of 5 mm. Therefore, the current required for the LED to glow is guaranteed by the formation of a Darlington transistors between the transistors Q1 and Q2. Through Darlington transistors, it is possible to obtain a large DC current gain. Usefulness of the ‘LED sensor light’ as a teaching material The ‘LED sensor light’ device uses reed switches for the sensor section, can drawing students’ interests toward learning and learning contents. Students learned the concepts of voltage, current, electric resistance, and simple Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 101 circuits such as flashlights in science classes, and they understood that the flow of electricity was controlled by a switch and corresponded with the ON/OFF command. Therefore, they will assume that light turns on when current flows through a switch. However, as mentioned Process Learning activity Teacher’s objective (◇evaluation) Introduction Ⅰ Activate the LED sensor light and think about its ○To help students confirm that LED lights turn on condition of lighting and how to use it. when the two sensors are far away and they turn off when the sensors are close. Ⅱ Confirm the lesson’s objective. lesson objective】Let us study the electric circuit by disassembling an LED sensor light. Evolution Ⅲ Disassemble the sensor part and understand that the ○To make students contemplate how the reed switch current flowing to the LED is controlled by the magnet and works, and to explain that the distance between the the reed switch. magnet and the reed switch is related to the LED’s light turning on. Ⅳ Disassemble the electric circuit and confirm the pattern ○To instruct the students about the pattern of the of the board connected to the power supply. After electric circuit board and the function of the conductor, confirming, colour the placement of the GND and 4.5 [V] as well as to draw their attention toward the surface on the circuit board pattern in the worksheet. mount. Ⅴ Visualise the flow of electricity from the power supply ○To develop students’ visualisation of the electric flow to the reed switch. Draw a part of the circuit diagram. of the electric circuit. Ⅵ Consider the electricity flowing from the power supply ○To make students create the circuit diagram by first through the LED or transistors. Complete the circuit taking into consideration the LED. diagram. ○To make students understand that the transistor has three electrodes. Ⅶ Observe the electric circuit. ○To point out all parts that make up the LED sensor Write electronic parts not understood in the worksheet. light and, at the same time, to get students to notice that the role of the transistor is unknown. ○To specify the standard current necessary for lighting Ⅷ Consider the flow of current in the electric circuit both the white LED. when the reed switch is ON and when it is OFF. Then, think ○To make students notice that they cannot secure the about the current necessary to light the LED, and predict current necessary for lighting the LED with only the the role of the transistor. reed switch. ○To make students notice that the transistor plays the role of creating a large flow of current. ○To make students confirm that it is possible to create an electric circuit that turns off when the reed switch is Ⅸ Consider the designer’s idea and intention behind the ON. electric circuit of the LED sensor light. ○To make students confirm that it is possible to make a large current flow with a small current by using the transistor. Conclusion Ⅹ Assemble the LED sensor light. ◇Can students think about the idea and intention Reflect on the lessons learned in this class and think about behind the electric circuit by disassembling the the idea and intention behind the electric circuit of the LED product? 【Ability to reason, judge, and express】 sensor light. Table 1: Class plan above, this product glows when current does not flow through the switch. In other words, the students’ thinking and the product’s behaviour oppose each other. If this learning material introduce to the class, the students will be aware of this fact. This fact in an increase in student Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 102 activities, and they will be actively working on understanding unfamiliar electronic circuits. In Japanese textbooks, transistors are handled developmental content or material. Although transistors are well-known and important components, most junior high school students in Japan have not learned about them in detail. However, with this teaching material, it is possible to gain experience while reproducing a part of the circuit with a breadboard or a similar device, since an electronic circuit has few parts and its structure is simple. In particular, it is valuable because it can help students learn about the Darlington connection with constant comparisons to actual products. Based this, it can be concluded that the ‘LED sensor light’ device used in this study is an effective teaching material in junior high school technology classes for the following reasons. (1) It is inexpensive and easy to obtain anywhere in Japan. (2) It is easy to disassemble and assemble quickly as it has few parts and its structure is simple. (3) There are no IC and black boxed parts, making it easy to pay attention to the function of each part. In addition, it is possible to think about the circuit by comparing it with the actual product even if students are not familiar with electronic circuits. (4) By using a reed switch, it is possible to introduce a rift between student thinking and product operation. It is also possible to get students interested and raise questions. Class planning and practice Planning In November 2017, a technology education class based on the disassembly of the ‘LED sensor light’ device was attended by 41 eighth-grade junior high school students in Japan. Students had already learned about the ‘technology of materials and their processing’, as well as the design and construction of the multi rack. Furthermore, students learned about the ‘technology of energy conversion’ and the design and construction of machines using the crank mechanism. disassembling the product. Learning assessment was conducted from the viewpoint of the ‘ability to reason, judge, and express’. The technology education class plan based on the disassembly of ‘LED sensor light’ devices is shown in Table 4. Two students became a learning group and disassembled one ‘LED sensor light’ devices. Teacher replaced the transistor part name with ‘J6’ in the class. When students handled ‘LED sensor light’ devices in class, teacher gave guidance on safety. Practice for junior high school students The details of the technology class conducted in accordance with the plan shown in Table 4 are described below. First, the teacher presented learning activity Ⅰ as an introduction. Specifically, the teacher distributed the ‘LED sensor light’ devices to the students and they pulled out the insulating sheet from between the batteries. The teacher and the students confirmed that the LED was lighting up normally. After that, each student group researched the necessary condition to turn off the LED. Then, the teacher and students concluded that this condition was the distance between the two sensor parts. In learning activity Ⅱ, the teacher stated the lesson objective as: ‘Let us study the electric circuit by disassembling an LED sensor light’. Learning activity Ⅲ focused on the contents of the two sensor parts. Each student group disassembled them using a flathead screwdriver, and confirmed that the magnet and the reed switch were present. After that, the teacher mentioned that the distance between the magnet and the reed switch is related to the LED’s lights turning on. The teacher illustrated the function of the reed switch as shown in Figure 6. Thus, students wrote in the worksheet: ‘When the current flows, the LED switches off. When the current does not flow, the LED lights up’. Students did not learn about electric circuits in technology class. However, they learned about Ohm's law in science class by observing and experiencing the relationship between current and voltage. The objective of the class was to think about the designer’s idea and intention behind the electric circuit by Figure 6: Worksheet on the function of the reed switch Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 103 Figure 7: Three types of electric flows The teacher then gave instructions for learning activity IV. Each student group disassembled the electric circuit using a screwdriver. The product was dismantled into a protective case, an LED, an electric circuit board, a battery box, and a battery cover. The teacher instructed the students to observe the electric circuit part that creates a working of the ‘LED sensor light’. The teacher also explained the pattern of the electric circuit board and the function of the conductor, along with drawing the students’ attention toward the surface mount. Students used paints to colour the placement of the 4.5 [V] and GND in the circuit board pattern in the worksheet. In learning activity Ⅴ, the teacher and students aimed to clarify the diagram of the electric circuit board. As per the teacher's instructions, the students used the pattern of the electric circuit board on the interactive white board and the worksheet, drawing three types of electric flows, as shown in Figure 7. The teacher intended to discuss electric flow gradually, because it would be difficult for students to think of a transistor having three electrodes. After that, in learning activity VI, students combined the parts to three types of electric flows and completed the circuit diagram. At this time, the teacher instructed them to think of the remaining parts like a puzzle. In learning activity Ⅶ, students summarized what they understood and what they wanted to know. There were a few students pondering on the role of transistors. In learning activity Ⅷ, the teacher presented the standard current necessary to light the white LED. The students calculated the current flowing in the electric circuit when the reed switch was ON as well as OFF. The teacher and the students confirmed the lack of a large enough current to turn the LED on with only the reed switch. The teacher then explained that the transistor plays the role of making a large current flow. Figure 8: Worksheet on students’ understanding of ‘LED sensor light’ devices Next, in learning activity Ⅸ, the teacher helped the students confirm that ‘it is possible to create an electric circuit that turns off when the reed switch is ON’ and that ‘it is possible to make a large current flow with a small current by using the transistor’. Then, the students wrote down what they understood in a worksheet, as shown in Figure 8. To conclude, in learning activity Ⅹ, the teacher instructed the students to assemble the ‘LED sensor light’ devices and reflect on what they learned in this class. The teacher asked the students to consider the idea and intention behind the electric circuit of the ‘LED sensor light’ devices. Evaluation To evaluate in accordance with the objectives of the lesson from the viewpoint of ‘ability to reason, judge, and express’, the teacher set the criteria shown in Table 5. Evaluationlevel A Based on the function and properties of the reed switch and the transistor, students can think about the idea and intention behind the electric circuit in relation to the location and method of using the product. Evaluation- Based on the function and properties of level B the reed switch and the transistor, students can think about the idea and intention behind the electric circuit. Evaluation- Students have not reached Evaluationlevel C level B. Table 5: Evaluation Table Evaluation-level B students achieved almost all the objectives of the lesson. Those who did not reach evaluation-level B were assumed to fall under evaluationlevel C. Students were classified under evaluation-level B when they could think about the idea and intention behind the electric circuit based on the function and properties of the reed switch and the transistor. Those students who particularly excelled in evaluation-level B and could think Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 104 about the idea and intention behind the electric circuit in relation to the location and method of using the product were classified under evaluation-level A. As a result, 6 students (14%) were classified under evaluation-level A, 26 students (63%) were classified under evaluation-level B, and 9 students (22%) were classified under evaluation-level C. More than 70% of the students were classified under evaluation-levels B and A, and it was considered that the planning and practice of these technology classes were generally effective. However, since about 20% of the students were classified under evaluation-level C, it was suggested that it was necessary to further consider the lesson plans and lesson development after positioning this lesson as an appropriate unit. Example descriptions of evaluation-levels A, B, and C are shown below. Evaluation-level A Based on the function and properties of the reed switch and the transistor, the student can consider and describe specific examples of intentions to reduce the power consumption of a refrigerator (Figure 9). Figure 9: An example answer description for evaluation-level A Evaluation-level B The student can grasp the function and properties of the reed switch and the transistor, but there is not enough consideration of what action can be obtained by attaching the mechanism to a door. (Figure 10). Figure 10: An example answer description for evaluation-level B Figure 11: An example answer description for evaluation-level C Conclusion Under the conditions of the 2017 Courses of Study, ‘interactive learning’ is considered to be the better learning style for technology education in Japan, as it can help to understand existing technology and develop a technological perspective and thinking style. ‘Interactive learning’ in technology education refers to the need ‘to consider engineering concepts and promote creative thinking through activities such as disassembly of products’. With regards to technology education in Japan, this study conducted the learning activity of disassembly and assembly of products as practical activity, using knowledge and skills such as the process of designing and making products. Therefore, the learning activity of disassembly and assembly of products was not positioned to acquire knowledge and skills about technology. However, according to the 2017 Courses of Study in Japan, it is necessary to position the learning activity of disassembly and assembly as a learning process for acquiring knowledge and skills. As a result, it was suggested that teachers would have to conduct classes using appropriate teaching materials. We adopted an ‘LED sensor light’ device as a teaching material since it is inexpensive, easy to handle, and easy to disassemble, and reported the results of planning, practicing, and evaluating technology classes based on this. The ‘LED sensor light’ device can help students learn the function of transistors and the composition of electric circuits. As a result, 6 students (14%) were classified under evaluation-level A, 26 students (63%) were classified under evaluation-level B, and 9 students (22%) were classified under evaluation-level C. More than 70% of the students were classified under evaluation-levels B and A; thus, it was considered that the planning and practice of technology class were generally appropriate. We believe that future studies will need to consider a unit that appropriately positions this developed lesson. Acknowledgement This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers JP 15H02917, JP 17H00820. Evaluation-level C The student can grasp the function and properties of the reed switch and consider specific designs to enhance the convenience of a washing machine, but there is no mention of the transistor (Figure 11). References Barry N. B (2014) 6E Learning byDeSIGN™ ModelMaximizing informed and inquiry in the integrative STEM classroom, Technology and engineering Teacher,68(4),14-19 ITEEA (2012) EbD-TEEMS™ Grade 1 Agriculture around us Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 105 ITEEA (2016) EbD-TEEMS™ Grade 6 Our world and me The Home-school Scientist (2013) Reverse Engineering Printable Worksheets， https://thehomeschoolscientist.com/reverseengineering-printable-worksheets/ The Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (2017) The Course of Study for Lower Secondary School, government of Japan. The Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (2018) Explanation for The Course of Study of technology education for Lower Secondary School, government of Japan. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 106 Academic Design: Towards a definition in a product design context Roderick Walden1 and Ilpo Koskinen2 1 University of Technology Sydney and 2University of New South Wales Abstract The TU/e 2013 inaugural lecture by Kees Dorst presents the formation of Academic Design as an emerging, new practice that differs from design practice and traditional research practice – a form of design that ‘sits between the field of design practice / problem solving (in the real world) and the field of academic discussion’. Building on his definition, this paper attempts to develop a further definition of the term by studying Academic Design practice at the University of Technology Sydney, which launched its new Integrated Product Design, Honours Course in the School of Design, in 2016. The course has been designed by academics in the Integrated Product Design Program to facilitate self-initiated product design projects with the key objective of setting knowledge directives and applying theoretical frameworks through Constructive Design Research. A case study of a capstone project completed for the Degree is articulated through an operational framework that makes relevant, the role of hypothesis-making and motivational contexts in Constructive Design Research. Further, the presence of the key features of Academic Design demonstrated in the case study, are able to be located and described in terms of this operational framework and other research that explicates certain forms of Constructive Design Research practice, thereby enabling us to move closer toward defining Academic Design. Significantly, the course may represent a workable structure for the conduct of Academic Design in (advanced-level) product design education, and as such, could be extended, through further research, to define Academic Design in other product design contexts. Keywords Academic Design, Integrated Product Design, Design Education, Constructive Design Research Introduction Academic Design, as described by Dorst (2013) centers on the way design differs from other academic disciplines, in terms of problem reasoning and through demonstrating that while 'deduction' and 'induction' are two forms of reasoning that enable scientist to predict real world phenomena; 'abduction', used by designers and engineers, is a form of reasoning that is uniquely solution-focused. A second form of abduction - referred to as design abduction (Dorst, 2013; Koskinen and Dorst, 2015) - is where, the outcome can only initially be described in terms of a type of value and the, so called, 'what' and 'how' must be determined concurrently in order to form a desired outcome. Design abduction is unique to design and is fundamentally, a different way of thinking from that used in scientific fields, including engineering (normal abduction). By mapping design in its practical and academic environments, it is hypothesized that Academic Design, situated between these two areas, has connection to two types of knowledge - practical and theoretical - and typically proceeds by developing models (or 'frameworks'). In an elaboration of Dorst’s concept, Koskinen and Dorst (2015) propose that the development of Academic Design may represent a means of advancing the formation of academic design practice, to be as rigorous as other academic fields. Figure 1 describes the relationship between the components of Academic Design, reproduced from Koskinen and Dorst (2015). Figure 1: Academic Design Academic discussion combines with design practice in the form of a 'model'. The diagram describes the abstraction of the model (in the center of the diagram) to guide the development of new knowledge and innovations that can be physically implemented. Academic Design refers to a new hybrid form of design that combines academic discussion and problem-solving design practices, to frame complex, real-world problems so that both new knowledge outcomes and implementable innovations can be developed. Koskinen & Dorst (2015) propose four distinguishing features of Academic Design: Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 107 1. 2. 3. 4. That Academic Design is situated between the field of design practice / problem solving and academic discussion; with the dual purpose of framing realworld problems and translating academic thoughts and discussion into (experimental) action. Through the 'modeling' of reality, abstracting from everyday problem solving creates a 'new vantage point'. Academic design practice develops models that 'express' new possible futures for the field, while the integration of design and experimental research can lead to new knowledge and radical innovations. That Academic Design is a 'construction' born from the need to improve rigor in design research. Hence it is open to criticism from both 'parents', but particularly from professional practice where it may be perceived as a threat. This must be considered carefully, because, we in fact wish to improve the accountability and relevancy of academic design research within the industry. That Academic Design is neither 'pure research' or 'applied research', but a response to the complex, farther reaching challenges faced by design professions, in more sophisticated ways than conventional practice can allow. In companies seeking to become design-led in their development of technologies, there is a shift from classic R&D (where design follows developments in science and technology), toward a (new) 'D&R' model (where design is required to lead investment in research and technology development. That Academic Design can 'move' in and out of academia. It is essentially nomadic as academic design practitioners have a foot in practice as well as in universities. Academic Design has yet to be fully defined and at the conclusion of their paper, Koskinen and Dorst (2015) concludes with the following questions. • • • • How could/should or will this new practice evolve? How will the other species - professional design and academic practices - adapt? Who will take the lead in the development of academic design? And will specific 'kinds' of academic design arise or should it be envisaged as dynamically adapting to where the issues are - not joined to particular fields of design practice? We address some of those questions in this paper by studying a university design course that reflects the basic ideas behind Academic Design. Product Design Practice as Academic Design One way to answer these questions is by seeing Academic Design as a choice. For instance, self-initiated design relies on (background) experiential knowledge to set aspirations for forward progress (Walden & Kokotovich, 2012: see also Darke on primary generators 1979). In a study on selfinitiated design projects by practicing design consultants by Walden (2015), it was found that the designers own experiential knowledge served as the source to ‘initiating’ the concept, but that the designer needed to develop appropriate domain specific and strategic knowledge to define the project (and the product) and set objectives. In the absence of a client (the definition of a self-initiated design project), industrial design consultants tend to ‘fillin’ those other knowledge ‘gaps’ with the types of information that a client normally provides. That there is some evidence of the ability for designers to complete selfinitiated design projects that are motivated by experiential knowledge, yet made operational by formulating new connections between existing and learned knowledge is noteworthy as a special type of problem formulation. In these studies, knowledge generated in the process of designing remained the property of the designer, however. In contrast in an academically driven, research-based design project, we are interested in knowledge directives and not only exclusively, commercially viable outcomes and would prefer for designers to 'fill-in' (at least some of) those knowledge gaps - with design research and theory. We do not seek to deny acting on motivations formed in the experiential knowledge domain; but to direct its development by integrating appropriate design research and design theory – at first introduced to the student and later sourced by the students themselves. Understanding the unique way design differs from other academic disciplines, through the use of problem reasoning, can provides some guidance at the start of self-initiated design projects that attempt to integrate theory and practice. A necessary vehicle of knowledge production in Academic Design is design work (Koskinen and Dorst, 2015). This notion has its roots in Constructive Design Research, defined as "design research in which construction - be it product, system, space, or media - takes center place and becomes the key means in constructing knowledge." (Koskinen, Zimmerman, Binder, Redström and Wensveen, 2011). Though the projects may be considered a form of "research through design" (Frayling, 1993), we refer to Constructive Design Research, as it offers a clearer and more precise description of the practice we intend to describe in this paper as well as in the classroom. Constructive Design Research explicitly requires the integration of theory to guide practice and denotes the 'central construction' referred to in the definition above, as (typically) a prototype of some form (Koskinen et al, 2011). A recent study of the operationalization of Constructive Design Research identifies that the connection between knowledge and the ‘experiment’ (or the ‘prototyping activity’, as it would be in terms of product design practice) is iteratively developed through critical reflection and refocusing of the hypothesis (Bang, Krogh, Ludvigsen and Markussen, 2012). We use this finding to provide a useful structure for describing the key developmental stages in the following case study. Each prototype in the case study represents a clear refocusing of the hypothesis, critically analysed through the construction an improved iteration of the artifact. The dual outcome objective of Academic Design seems evident in this practice. Example: A New Product Design Course as Academic Design The Integrated Product Design (IPD) Program at the University of Technology Sydney, School of Design, introduced its first Honours Degree Program in 2016. The Honours Degree is a 1-year course (24 teaching weeks) that require students to work on a single capstone project, resulting in a research dissertation (approximately 15,000 Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 108 words long) together with a prototype to be exhibited at the end of the year. The projects are presented to a panel of academics and external industry guests for assessment at key points during the year (mid-way and at the end of year 1; mid-way and at the end of year 2). The Honours Degree is only open to those students who achieve a weighted average mark of 72.5% in a relevant Bachelor (Design) Degree2 or equivalent and is intended to prepare students for design leadership roles in industry or further post-graduate study. All projects are self-initiated and there is no specific design task or theme provided. The Honours Degree and the preparatory Bachelor's Degree have been developed by the IPD staff to improve the academic rigor of design research in connection with design practice. Students must establish and then argue their own basis for pursuing a particular design intervention. The course begins with the intention of providing two things concurrently – (1) an introduction and review of design research literature and (2) an acknowledgement of background knowledge and aspirations of the students. The design research and theory, selected by studio instructors or by the students themselves is interpreted and contextualized in connection with their individual projects, to appropriately achieve the learning objectives of the course, which are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Create designs that innovate meanings and experiences. Challenge product design convention and speculate future human-product interactions. Develop a practice-orientated research methodology for product innovation. Develop the ability to design, plan and craft accurate and appropriately refined prototypes. Become accomplished at using prototyping methods as a central research device. Manage a complex self-initiated design project responsibly and professionally. Use design to engage a wide audience into the cultural dialogue. Prepare excellent communication and presentation of process and designs for all deliverables. A developed aptitude for prototyping of three-dimensional physical models - from rough mock- ups through to more advanced iterations with a level of functionality - has long been a feature of the UTS Product Design Degree as it aligns with the strategic goals of the Faculty, most notably 'technology-led thinking with an emphasis on prototyping' and 'practice-oriented learning' (Lie and Walden, 2015). The course further supports prototyping as a function of Constructive Design Research, in a product design context, by referring to prototyping as a central tool of design research and a core means of building connections between fields of knowledge (Stappers, 2007) and as having the potential to test (even embody) theory as 'physical hypotheses' (Overbeeke et al. 2006). A recent paper by Matthews and Wensveen (2015) also serves to 2 Applicants with a weighted average mark between 70-72.4% can lodge an application and may be offered a place at the Course Directors discretion define the role of prototyping in design research and referring to the descriptions they provide, the Honours Degree most predominately uses prototyping as means to generate research archetypes that are physical embodiments of research concept, understanding or design research space, for expository analysis. However, as can be seen in the case study included in this paper, the prototyping can additionally function (within the same project) as a vehicle of enquiry, where the research contribution is tied to the process of crafting the artifacts, for case analysis (Matthews and Wensveen, 2015). The integration of design and experimental research, to translate academic thoughts into experimental action (in a product design context), is made clearer through the adoption of a Constructive Design Research methodology, supported by literature that defines the role of prototyping in design research. Academic Design as Project: A Case Study The project described here is a capstone project developed in the IPD Honours Degree. The project produced a family of products and many more prototypes that we do not have the space to cover here, so the focus will be on the 'Beanz' Tray product. The project begins with a motivation to explore product-consumer attachment by investigating ways to elevate the meaning of products to people and the communities they live in. Broadly, it is a response to the unsustainable growth of consumerism, but soon focuses on the cultural connections with which we identify through materials, fabrication methods, forms and experiences expressed in certain products. The project is framed around research that suggests that if we design products that are more culturally relevant, they will be more highly valued, kept and maintained; rather than disposed of the moment their utility is superseded. Extending upon research by Schifferstein and Zwartkruis-Pelgrim (2008) the broad, initial hypothesis for the project is that there is a process for appropriating Australian material histories and by doing so, new meanings can be formed that forge a strong and culturally binding consumer-product attachment. The first stage of prototyping is exemplified by the examples shown in Figure 2. Two timber trays for holding small items such as a wallet and keys, were made in exactly the same size, with the same form. One made from a piece of old, weathered timber and the other from a new piece of European beech. The design using recycled timber was machined so that the top edge was left unfinished, exposing the 'silvered' and splintered weathering of the material. Working with recycled timber means accepting that the material may behave in unpredictable ways and reveal imperfections underneath the surface. User testing suggests that those who preferred the recycled timber version were drawn to the product because it shows evidence of a history of past-use in the material, and an appreciation of the fact that each version of the product would be slightly different because control over the behavior of the material during processing is impossible. and/or after successfully passing an interview where they must present a folio of work. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 109 products and different materials, producing a series of outcomes. Part way through the project, the use of leather was decided upon for its ability to be moulded over surfaces, adopting their form and texture (Figure 3). The use of leather in this context is identified as a more appropriate way to invite users to transition from 'consumer' to 'prosumer' based on research by Toffler (1981) where he describes the prosumer as an individual who is both the producer and consumer of the product. Toffler's concept of the prosumer is built upon by Mugge, Schoormans & Schifferstein (2009b) in terms of the way product personalisation can stimulate emotional bonding with products as the product becomes an expression of the owner's identity. Figure 2: Storage Tray in recycled timber / European beech The above images are of two storage trays with exactly the same utility. The one on the left is made from a piece of recycled timber with the silvered and splintered surface exposed at the top. The one on the right from a new piece of European beech, finished in a modern way with smooth edges and surfaces. This introduced the concept of 'rarity' and identified the need to strengthen the sense of embodied memory in the product realisation. The next series of prototypes would explore if an emotional bond might be formed by not only using recycled material but appropriating old items for contemporary use. A new tray was designed using an old timber weatherboard, sourced from an old demolished house previously owned by a member of the designer's family. The 'weatherboard tray' was designed so that particular surfaces were left unfinished to reveal the material history. User testing with this design led to the exploration of strengthening the emotional bond between consumer and product by permitting the user to provide the source material. Building upon the previous research and extending upon it with inspiration from Mugge, Schoormans & Schifferstein (2009a), the hypothesis evolved to become, that there is a co-design process for renewing personal product histories and by doing so, new meanings can be formed that forge a strong and culturally binding consumer-product attachment. The designer conducted many experiments using different historical Figure 3: 'Beanz' Tray The enamel baking tray pictured above was used as the basis to explore the introduction of personal items in the design process. Modifying historical products by machining them was substituted for molding leather over the tray as a means to explore ways of giving the product renewed meaning. The use of leather does not damage the original item but enables personalisation. Additionally, though other materials were tested, such as felt, the leather moulding, facilitates the accumulation of memories through the wear accumulated through recurring interactions (Mugge, Schoormans & Schifferstein, 2005). Through a series of prototypes, user testing and the development of various tools and techniques; not only with this 'tray' series but with other designs, the hypothesis further evolved that there is a co-design process for renewing personal product Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 110 histories through non-destructive replication of features to create new products with enriched meanings that forge a strong and culturally binding consumer-product attachment. The next series of explorations, based on this evolved hypothesis leads to the development of solution concepts that are made up of two (primary) parts: the original (historical) item and new component made of a material that is moulded over the original product (Figure 4). Figure 4: 'Beanz' Tray with Leather Lid Comparative Hypothetical Scenario Experimentation through prototyping, of the evolved hypothesis leads to the above solution concept that uses the existing beans tray product but augments it with a leather moulded lid accessory. The leather moulding is essentially a 'tracing' of the original product. The moulding is then trimmed and finished to augment the original product and renew the product both aesthetically and functionally. At this point in the project, the process becomes central to the nature of the innovation. The moulding method acts as a metaphor for tracing history and through design, selectively determining what area of the original product to mould over (trace), is based on ensuring the moulding can be combined with the original product to augment and renew its meaning. A final and important stage of this project is experimenting with the innovation value of the process, so that it can be replicated across many historical items that carry cultural and personal significance. A series of prototypes were produced that examined a further evolution of the hypothesis: Tracing History is a co-design, co-production process for renewing personal product histories, through non-destructive replication of features, to create new products and product assemblies with enriched meanings that forge a strong and culturally binding consumer-product attachment. This further evolution of the hypothesis recognizes the innovation of the process beyond the augmented product, and its potential value more broadly, to inform the design of new products that reference the old. Figure 5: New Tray with Leather Lid made from 'Beanz' Tray tool. The 'timber loop' used to brace the original enamel tray is further machined and finely finished in American Walnut to act as a base in a new version of the design. The tool becomes the product ending the cycle for this series. The value of the process as a form of 'Tracing History' is given such reverence over the potentiality of the business case, that repeatability is abandoned, in the last ultimate step, by transforming the tooling itself to craft the final version of the product (Figure 5) - a production cycle of two iterations. The first, an assembly that brings together an old, valued item with a contemporary part generated by moulding over (tracing) the original artefact. The second, a completely new product that makes the tooling from the first iteration a base component in a new assembly that uses a second and final version of the moulding. A process that challenges the relationship between design and production. And designs responsibility to culture and history. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 111 A Step Closer to Defining Academic Design? The case study reported on in this paper may represent a form of Academic Design. Koskinen and Dorst (2015), identify four key features of Academic Design that can be found in certain knowledge intensive design projects, that do not seem to be precisely, either practice-oriented design research or industry practice – but some strange new species of design. These features of Academic Design are evident in the case study, though it’s important to describe the presence of these features in connection with design research that explicate certain forms of practice, in order to use the case study as a step closer toward defining Academic Design. The first feature of Academic Design is that it is situated between the field of design practice and the academic discussion with the dual purpose of framing real-world problems and translating academic thoughts into experimental action. New possible futures, innovations and new knowledge are generated through ‘models’ that are formulated through design abduction – a form of problem reasoning unique to design, where the outcome can only initially be described in terms of a type of value and the, so called, 'what' and 'how' must be determined concurrently by framing ‘patterns of relationships’ between the components of the ‘problem’ in order to form a desired outcome (Dorst, 2013). Design Abduction may be a way of making sense of how motivations can be converted into hypotheses in the pursuit of knowledge directives, exposited through experiments or actions that take the form of prototypes in product design practice. The case study project is a self-initiated design project where the integrity of the design intervention must be determined and rationalised by the designer. There is no ‘client’ or ‘brief’ provided at the start. The project begins with a motivation to address the unsustainable increase of consumerism by investigating ways for product designers to improve product-consumer attachment, thereby encouraging people to keep and care for their products rather than dispose of them thoughtlessly or prematurely. This intention broadly represents the nature of the ‘value’ in design abduction. Underlying this motivation is another motivation by the designer to work in a particular way, with particular materials and processes, based on their practical skills and experience. A study of self-initiated design projects (Walden, 2015) identified that aspired ways of working, or aspired practices are necessary forenabling the designer to begin experimenting with ideas.3 The experimental process (the second part of the motivation) provides the means of beginning to address the ‘what’ and ‘how’ parts of the design abduction ‘equation’. Though there is concern that the forms of ‘aspired’ practice may not be best aligned with the ‘value’ being pursued, in this case project, the designer draws upon certain design research to form this alignment. Research by Schifferstein and Zwartkruis- 3 We acknowledge that Academic Design must certainly also manage the practical elements of time and resource constraints, though we cannot delve into how these Pelgrim (2008) on the attachment of gifts that ‘reflect the receivers personal identity’; Mugge, Schoormans & Schifferstein (2007) on the value of the ‘patina of materials aging gracefully’ (additionally supported by Mugge et al. 2005, 2009a & 2009b research on product attachment); and Jung, Bardzell, Blevis, Pierce & Stolterman (2011) on the value of the ‘aficionado-appeal’ evident in products finely crafted in a means familiar to people; integrate to provide a credible reason for exploring the opening hypothesis with hand-crafted timber homewares. It also sets the project in motion as a form of Constructive Design Research that adopts a (stable) prototyping methodology, close enough to industry practices that enables the prototyping to represent a form of research contribution tied to the processing of artifacts (Matthews and Wensveen, 2015), and by extension, a ‘foot’ in the real-world. Therefore, in the critical early stages of the project, there is the construction of a methodology, formulated into a ‘model’ of practice through design abduction that enables the dual pursuit of knowledge directives and real-world innovation of process and products. The nature of this methodology is clearly a form of Constructive Design Research that uses prototyping of product iterations (and challenges production conventions) as a central research device. Further, as a proposed way of operationalizing Constructive Design Research, Bang, Krogh, Ludvigsen and Markussen, (2012) refer to the importance of motivations in forming hypotheses, to set research questions (knowledge directives) and evaluating those directives against knowledge in the evolution of hypothesis, through experimentation (or in our case product prototypes). They identify that motivational contexts come in many forms and (in Constructive Design Research) are more likely to be ‘operationalised’ through a practice-based approached rather than through a theoretical position. One of the motivational contexts they identify in their paper (2012) is an ethical approach combined with a practice based and artistically inclined approach, which closely resembles our case project. Research on the role of hypothesis-making and motivational contexts by Bang, Krogh, Ludvigsen and Markussen (2012) supports the nature of design abduction and the dual-outcome ‘model’ evident in our case study and therefore enables the case study to provide the definition of one form of Academic Design modeled as Constructive Design Research. The second feature is that Academic Design is a 'construction' born from the need to improve rigor in design research. Evidence of this feature in the case study is provided by the learning objectives of the Honours Degree, notably, the objective to use design to engage a wide audience into the cultural dialogue. The requirements for meeting this objective, as explained to the students, was to produce through written dissertation and prototypes, forms of communication that invited new perspectives and discourse from academia, industry and the general public. constraints factor into these projects, within the scope of this paper. We consider this to be a worthwhile topic for future research. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 112 To be accountable to this wide audience, research methods need to be not only rigorous, but modeled to accommodate multiple outcomes, including knowledge outcomes. The third feature is that Academic Design is neither 'pure research' or 'applied research', but a response to the complex, farther reaching challenges faced by design professions, in more sophisticated ways than conventional practice can allow. The case study project does attempt to address an important issue facing society – consumerism and ecological sustainability – both from an economical and cultural perspective. And it attempts this by combining research methods in the way’s Academic Design would require. However, here we potentially find conflict in the features of Academic Design, for if the Academic Design practitioner needs to have one foot in the real-world so that implementable innovations can be produced, does the extent of the ‘reach’ Academic Design hopes to achieve, become compromised if part of the ‘real-world’ problem is how the production and design of products must change for a heathier society. Based on the case we present in this paper, locating Academic Design close to the heart of product design and production processes may only achieve a ‘step in the right direction’ but perhaps not far reaching impact. The fourth feature of Academic Design is that it can move in and out of academia. During the project conducted above, the student employed industry relevant fabrication methods to craft the prototypes (many more than can be shown here) of the project. An innovative process for connecting design intent and production methods have been devised through the project that certainly has industrial application at the same or larger scale. Additionally, the designer has now graduated and found permanent employment as a designer for a leading furniture manufacturing company, on the back of his project. And finally, this project along with twenty others exhibited at the end-of-year graduate exhibition led to the Integrated Product Design Program to be selected for the International Nachtmann NextGen Project. A design initiative that brings university-based design teams and industry together to develop new practices and products. Academic Design as represented in this case study, does have important application and value to the concerns of industry practice and is a demonstration of the ways the project can move between academia and practice. Based on the arguments presented in this section, we propose that the case study does serve to define a form Academic Design in a Product Design and Design Education Context. Academic Design in a Product Design and Design Education Context. The case study can be proposed as a form of Academic Design because it demonstrates the primary features of Academic Design as proposed by Koskinen and Dorst (2015). The project (1) uses Design Abduction as its foundation to model a process to develop both knowledge outcomes and implementable innovation that addresses real-world issues. (2) It combines practical and theoretical knowledge in a functional response to improving rigor in design research. (3) It produces a 'model' (a framework) of value to industry practice - in terms of providing ways to radically innovate – that integrates ‘pure research’ and ‘applied research’ in a new form of hybrid design practice. And (4) it leads to the production of new knowledge that complies with the basic requirements for knowledge generation, stated by Manzini (2009) - knowledge that is explicit, discussable, transferrable and accumulate-able – in connection to the product and process innovation insights that have short-to-medium term application. A result of the project moving between two worlds – academia and industry. The case study presented here may be considered to be rather benign in terms of product complexity. Though the product is a relatively simple construction the development of a form of design process - the model that combines and situates academic discussion and practice – is both sophisticated and the primary outcome. In other UTS Product Design Honours projects, there are some indications that where the research enquiry is centered on the development of an academic design model, that a type of self-regulating stabilisation of variables typically leads to aesthetically refined yet technically simple products. At least in our educational context. In response to the questions about the future of Academic Design, put forward by Koskinen and Dorst (2015), we can only suggest partial answers for two of the four. We consider that based on the successful conduct of the case study presented in this paper, that Academic Design, should continue to evolve from within University-based design programs, though greater attention needs to be given to the practical constraints of time and resources, in relation to the disciplinarity of the Academic Design focus, and the requirement to ensure accountability to industry and professions. And in response to whether specific ‘kinds’ of academic design should arise or if it should be dynamically adaptable, we consider that to be highly dependent on how the resource constraints and related industry scope being addressed, is managed. Conclusion and Further Research We propose that the case study project presented in this paper represents a form of Academic Design. Identification of compatible features of the case study project and other independently conducted research on the nature Constructive Design Research (Koskinen et al. 2011), hypotheses-making, motivation and experimentation in self-initiated Constructive Design Research (Bang, Krogh, Ludvigsen and Markussen, 2012) and the role of prototypes and prototyping in design research (Matthews and Wensveen, 2015), we further hope to provide, through the case study, grounds for defining Though further research is required in this area, it may be that there are specific types of Academic Design because the contexts (as it was in the case study presented here) may be very restricted – not by design – but due to conditions and circumstances beyond the designers control. The significance of this study is that it identifies a bridge between Academic Design and Constructive Design Research that begins to define a possible mode of Academic Design practice. The research presented here may therefore open a potential gateway for defining Academic Design - this strange new species – more completely. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 113 References Bang, A. L., Krogh, P., Ludvigsen, M., & Markussen, T. (2012). The role of hypothesis in constructive design research. Paper presented at the Proceedings of The Art of Research Conference IV. Darke, J. (1979). The primary generator and the design process. Design Studies, 1(1), 36-44. Dorst, K., (2013) Academic Design. Published inaugural lecture at the TU Eindhoven, TU Eindhoven, The Netherlands. Frayling, C. (1993). Research in Art and Design. Royal College of Art Research Papers 1(1):1-5. Jung, H., Bardzell, S., Blevis, E., Pierce, J., & Stolterman, E. (2011). How deep is your love: Deep narratives of ensoulment and heirloom status. International Journal of Design, 5(1). Koskinen, I., Zimmerman, J., Binder, T., Redström, J., & Wensveen , S. (2011). Design Research through Practice – From the Lab, Field, and Showroom. Morgan Kaufmann. Stappers, P. J. (2007). Doing design as a part of doing research. In Michel, R. (Ed.), Design Research Now: Essays and Selected Projects (pp. 81-91). Basel, Birkhäuser. Toffler, A. (1981). The rise of the prosumer. In The Third Wave. Bantam Books. Walden, R.J. & Kokotovich, V. (2012). Supporting Student Learning in Relation to Entrepreneurial Innovation in Self-initiated Industrial Design Major Projects. In: Proceedings of 7th Biennial International Conference on Technology Education Research, Griffith Institute for Educational Research, Australia. Walden, R.J. (2015). Self-initiated design projects: Avenues for implementation and practice. Master’s Thesis. University of Technology Sydney, Australia. Wensveen, S., & Matthews, B. (2015). Prototypes and prototyping in design research. In The Routledge Companion to Design Research (pp.262-276). New York, NY. Routledge. Koskinen, I. K. & Dorst, K. (2015). Academic design. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED15), Vol. 11: Human Behaviour Design, Design Education, Milan, Italy, 27-30 July 2015. Lie, S. & Walden, R. (2015). Evolving a university product design program: An approach for contemporary design practice, Website proceedings of TENZ 2015 (Technology Education New Zealand), TENZ 2015 (Technology Education New Zealand), Hamilton, New Zealand. Manzini, E. (2009). Viewpoint: New design knowledge. Design Studies, Vol. 30(1), 4-10. Mugge, R., Schifferstein, H., & Schoormans, J. (2007). Product attachment and satisfaction: the effects of pleasure and memories. E-European Advances in Consumer Research Volume 8. Mugge, R., Schifferstein, H. N., & Schoormans, J. P. (2005). A longitudinal study of product attachment and its determinants. E-European Advances in Consumer Research Volume 7. Mugge, R., Schoormans, J. P., & Schifferstein, H. N. (2009a). Incorporating consumers in the design of their own products. The dimensions of product personalisation. CoDesign, 5(2), 79-97. Mugge, R., Schoormans, J. P., & Schifferstein, H. N. (2009b). Emotional bonding with personalised products. Journal of Engineering Design, 20(5), 467476. Overbeeke, K., Wensveen, S., & Hummels, C. (2006). Design research: Generating knowledge through doing. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 3rd Symposium of Design Research: Drawing New Territories. Schifferstein, H. N., & Zwartkruis-Pelgrim, E. P. (2008). Consumer-product attachment: Measurement and design implications. International Journal of Design, 2(3). Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 114 Identifying and defining the activities that are maker education: An international view David Ellis Southern Cross University, School of Education Abstract The article reveals that the activities of maker education are not new, but merely an enthusiastic push that has been encouraged by the access and availability of new technologies. Identified activities and terms used to define ‘maker education’ were also represented within more established and nuanced labels of education such as technology education, Design and Technology Education and STEM education to name a few. These connections have established that there is a distinction to be drawn between maker education and other maker movement labels such as ‘tinkering’, and ‘hacking’ in that maker education is ‘inschool’ and considered to be formally embedded into the school curriculum, as opposite to an out-of-school hobby (Hsu, Baldwin, & Ching, 2017). In developing an understanding of ‘maker education’, rather than the ‘maker movement’, maker education activities involved an ecological interaction between students and teachers and relevant stakeholders. The benefits of this interaction have been described to contribute to an overall transformative process. The result is not just the realisation of the ‘made’ artefact, where what has been transformed from the “mind’s eye” (McLaren, Stables, & Bain, 2006) becomes a tangible object, but the transformation of the learner. It is not just the development of ‘relevant’ skills and knowledge viewed from a traditional technical knowledge, vocational foci that are acquired during the making process, but a more holistic transformation. Keywords Design; Make ; STEM, STEAM, Technology Education Extended Abstract Late 2015 and 2016, by invitation of the Chinese Academy of Engineering and the Creative Education Branch of the China Education Equipment Industry Association, identified technology, Design, STEM and STEAM personnel from around the globe were invited to participate in a gathering, resulting in the formation of the World Maker Education Alliance (WMEA). The composition of the Alliance not only included a diverse international and cultural representation, but included the equally diverse roles of participants working in areas such as higher education, both non-government and government organisations, and technology suppliers. Due to the diversity of roles, perspectives and activities that these participants undertake in their daily duties, the purpose of this study was to determine the common elements that define maker education through a greater understanding of the academic pluralism that exists in this educational space, and its relationship with other related areas of education. Using a constructivist approach where "reality is socially constructed" (Mertens, 2005, p.12), a survey distributed to the members of the World Maker Education Alliance was analysed to determine what maker education is, and what maker education looks like from those people who identify as having a relationship with maker education. Open-ended questions from the survey participants were analysed using a summative content analysis. The data was initially coded using an online word cloud tool, then for reliability the data underwent secondary codification, where the responses were manually coded and categorised for interpretation. An online Qualtrics survey used three question to capture the responses from a sample population of seven (n=7) from a target population of 41 members from the World Maker Education Alliance (WMEA). The responses from these three questions were analysed to generate an understanding of what maker education is from the perspective of international people who identify as educators, or contribute to ‘maker education’. To contextualise and support this understanding, knowledge generated from the survey was also compared with, and supported by published peer review articles on maker education, and education activities that involve hands-on engagement with technologies to assist in formulating a definition. The results of the analysis of the data from the three questions in combination with the literature by Martin (2015), and (van Dooren, Boshiuzen, van Merrienboer, Asselbergs, & van Dorst, 2014) indicated that maker education activities involved practical or tactile engagement with materials and resonating with ‘constructionism’ and experiential learning theories (Papert & Harel, 1991; Potter, 2013; Kolb, 1984). The sample population identified maker education as an opportunity where activities encourage students to undertake tactile engagement with technology through a process that facilities a transformation in the learner as they realise tangible artefacts. This interpretation not only aligns with the literature, but also reveals the ‘pluralism’ of maker education in a broader sense as it is aligned with the established, formal, and nuanced labels that relate to ‘maker education’ such as technology education, STEM, STEAM and design and technology education that have, and continue to exist within school curricula. The article reveals that the activities of maker education are not new, but merely an enthusiastic push that has been encouraged by the access and availability of new technologies. Identified activities and terms used to define ‘maker education’ were also represented within more Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 115 established and nuanced labels of education such as technology education, Design and Technology Education and STEM education to name a few. These connections have established that there is a distinction to be drawn between maker education and other maker movement labels such as ‘tinkering’, and ‘hacking’ in that maker education is ‘in-school’ and considered to be formally embedded into the school curriculum, as opposite to an out-of-school hobby (Hsu, Baldwin, & Ching, 2017). As educationalists seek to investigate or tout the benefits of maker education, what appears to be a positive driving force is a realisation, from a pedagogical perspective, of the benefits to the learner taking on the responsibility of a “producer rather than a consumer” (AbD, 2015, p. 1) of education. ‘Excitement’ surrounding the access and application of digital manufacturing technologies, from disciplines outside of technology education have facilitated a realisation that ‘making’ should be revisited. The decommissioning of shop spaces in some schools may have been premature, as the shift from the workshop to the computer lab is shifting back, being repurposed for makercentred activities (AbD, 2015; Dougherty, 2013). In developing an understanding of ‘maker education’, rather than the ‘maker movement’, maker education activities involved an ecological interaction between students and teachers and relevant stakeholders. The benefits of this interaction have been described to contribute to an overall transformative process. The result is not just the realisation of the ‘made’ artefact, where what has been transformed from the “mind’s eye” (McLaren, Stables, & Bain, 2006) becomes a tangible object, but the transformation of the learner. It is not just the development of ‘relevant’ skills and knowledge viewed from a traditional technical knowledge, vocational foci that are acquired during the making process, but a more holistic transformation. According the recognised theorists, opportunities that facilitate ‘experiential’ (Kolb, 1984), or ‘active’ learning (Vygotsky, 1979) empower the individual throughout a journey of engagement as they construct knowledge (Piaget, 1973; Dewey, 1998) in a process that results in the development of an artefact. Positive attributes such as creativity, a sense of connectedness with the community, and a confidence to experiment and fail are developed as students engage with technology and materials in a sociocultural context, exposing themselves to cultural values, and engaging with community needs (Compton, 2009; Odlin & Fleming, 2014). References AbD. (2015). Maker-Centred Learning and the development of self: Preliminary findings of the Agency by Design project. Project Zero, Harvard Graduate School of Education. Retrieved from http://www.pz.harvard.edu/resources/maker-centeredlearning-and-the-development-of-self-preliminaryfindings-of-abd Boom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. New York: Longmans, Green. Compton, V. (2009). Yep-We can do that: Technological response to the curriculum 'needs' arising ... Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 14, 21-36. De Vries, M. (2012). Philosophy of technology. In P. J. Williams (Ed.), Technology Education for Teachers (pp. 15-34). Rotterdam: Sense. Dewey, J. (1998). The essential Dewey. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Dougherty, D. (2013). The maker mindset. In M. Honey, & D. E. Kanter (Eds.), Design, make, play: Growing the next generation of STEM innovators (pp. 7-11). New York: Routledge. Fleer, M. (2000). Working Technologically: Investigations into how young children design and make during technology education. International journal of Technology and Design Education, 10, 4359. Gibson, M. (2018). International Journal of Technology and Design Education. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-017-9430-3 Hardy, A. (2015). What's D&T for? Gathering and Comparing the Values of Design and Technology Academics and Trainee Teachers. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 20(2), 10-21. Hsu, Y. C., Baldwin, S., & Ching, Y. H. (2017). Learning through Making and Maker Education. TechTrends, 61, 589-594. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the Source of learning and development. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Kronberger, N., & Wagner, W. (2007). Keywords in Context: Statistical Analysis of Text Features. In M. W. Bauer, & G. Gaskell (Eds.), Qualitative Researching with text, image and sound (6 ed., p. 303). London: SAGE. Lille, & Romero, M. (2017). Creativity Assessment in the context of maker-based projects. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 22(3). Martin, L. (2015). The promise of the maker movement for education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 5(1), 30-39. Martin, M. (2013). Five Eras of Making and Designing. PATT27 Technology Education for the Future: A Play on Sustainability, (pp. 318-324). Christchurch. Marx, K. (1959). Economic and philosophic manuscripts of 1844 [Translated]. Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing House. McLaren, S. V., Stables, K., & Bain, J. (2006). Creativity and Progression in Transition through assessment for learning in Design and Technology CAPITTAL-DTa report to funders for the Determination to Succeed Division of Scottish Executive. Glasgow. doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.21966.25924 McNaught, C., & Lam, P. (2010). Using Wordle as a Supplementary Research Tool. The Qualitative Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 116 Report, 15(3), 630-643. Retrieved from https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol15/iss3/8/ with hard materials. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23, 69-85. Odlin, S., & Fleming, J. S. (2014). Using Automata to Teach Science Concepts in Technology Education. The International Journal of Science in Society, 5, 13-28. Stemler, S. (2001). n overview of content analysis. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 7(17). Retrieved from http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=7&n=17 Papert, S., & Harel, I. (1991). Situating Constrcutionism. In Constructionism (pp. 1-13). Piaget, J. (1973). To Understand is to Invent: The Future of Education. New York: Grossman. van Dooren, E., Boshiuzen, E., van Merrienboer, J., Asselbergs, T., & van Dorst, M. (2014). Making explicit in design education: generic elements in the design process. International journal of Technology and Design Education, 24, 53-71. Potter, P. (2013). Technologists talk: making the links between design, problem-solving and experiences Vygotsky, L. (1979). The genesis of higher mental functions. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 117 Critical Questions, Creative Solutions: How can Initial Teacher Education programs better prepare graduates to understand and teach STEM? Denise MacGregor, Bruce White, Debra Panizzon, Derek Rogers University of South Australia Abstract Nationally, the importance of STEM education remains under the spotlight, with reports highlighting the increasing demand for STEM graduates and improved teaching in the areas of Science and Mathematics (Marginson, Tytler, Freeman, & Roberts, 2013). The Australian Industry Group (AI Group), Australia’s peak industry body, has repeatedly called for improved schoolIndustry links across primary and secondary schools to lift student participation in STEM-related subjects (Australian Industry Group, 2017). In particular, the AI Group indicated that these school-Industry links require the engagement of secondary teachers for success. However, they concluded that while teachers were keen to engage with industry and that industry welcomed such connections, most teachers were unfamiliar with how to engage with industry and had no training in developing these connections. This was reinforced further in a 2018 report from the Department of Education and Training (DET, 2018), which examined Industry and school links making a series of recommendations about optimising industry-school partnerships. This report highlighted the need for industry to be involved in supporting teachers of STEM-related subjects, stating that: Industry can provide a means for teachers and students to understand the latest developments in STEM careers and experience the kinds of problems professionals are working on. This enables students and teachers to link real world practice to lesson content. (DET, 2018, p. 58) Within this same report, Australia’s Chief Scientist requested industry to connect with Universities to support STEM teacher professional learning. They (Industry) can work with intermediaries such as universities and TAFEs to supply contemporary content or technology that can be incorporated into teacher professional learning (DET, 2018, p. 6) These reports identify the need for schools and industry to connect, with teacher professional learning being considered pivotal for success. This paper proposes that a key time for this to begin is during Initial Teacher Education (ITE) programs. This presentation explores the way in which one ITE program at a South Australian university supported Preservice Teachers (PSTs) to experience industry as a conduit to building industry links. Keywords STEM industry partnerships Initial Teacher Education Background context Teaching for Tomorrow (TfT) – Applying authentic contexts in STEM Teacher education project, was a project that gave final year Science, Design and Technology and Mathematics PSTs an industry experience. Findings from the research on this collaborative project, which was conducted over three years, are discussed using the following three questions as foci: • How can ITE programs prepare graduates to teach STEM with an informed and authentic understanding of STEM? • How can graduates adopt a transdisciplinary approach to planning and teaching in STEM? • How can ITE programs support graduates to be confident in establishing school/ industry partnerships (and why should they?) Methodology Throughout 2017 and 2018, a case study approach was adopted to collect qualitative data from 104 final year PSTs from the subject disciplines of Design and Technologies (N= 64) and/or Science or Mathematics (N= 40) and the 20 companies that participated in the industry experiences. The companies involved represented the areas of defence, food production, advanced manufacturing, textile production and the fashion industry. Data were collected from PSTs through pre and post surveys related to their understanding of STEM. In 2017, PSTs were also emailed six open-ended questions related to the industry experience after its completion. In 2018, an online survey was utilised to collect responses related to the industry experience. Units of work that were created by the PSTs as part of the project were examined for links to the industry experience and STEM connections by the research team (including two of the academics teaching in the course in which the project was undertaken). All industry partners were interviewed post the industry experience and the academic staff involved in the project were also interviewed. Data were de-identified to ensure that there was no connection with the data collection and the coursework. The data were analysed by looking for key themes related to the research questions. The findings presented in this presentation also draw on an independent assessment of the project undertaken in 2017. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 118 Findings and Discussion Critical Question 1: How can ITE programs prepare graduates to teach STEM with an informed and authentic understanding of STEM? Creative Solution: Providing scaffolded opportunities for PST to engage in an industry experience while working in cross discipline teams. Initially, when asked about STEM, the PSTs indicated that it was an acronym and could identify the sub-disciplines and explained and made the connection to future careers and jobs. Only a few mentioned the interdisciplinary nature of STEM within the context of industry. Post their industry experience PSTs demonstrated a much greater awareness of the links between the disciplines of STEM and could provide specific instances of the examples of STEM observed in their experience Dr Derek Rogers, from Saab Australia, one of the industry partners involved in the project, recounts the following insight from one of the PSTs who taught the STEM unit she had developed in her final placement: The pre-service teacher in question highlighted that within her class, a number of the students expressed no interest in STEM, yet the activity developed under the program, construction of a simple drone boat and its use to rescue some plastic ducks (through the use of magnets), not only excited them enough to participate, but they realised they needed simple algebra to solve the problem and proceeded to teach this to themselves. Not only was this a successful outcome for the students but had a large impact on the confidence of the pre-service teacher to teach STEM. Critical question 2: How can graduates adopt a cross disciplinary approach to planning and teaching in STEM? Creative solution 1: Introduce the concept of adopting a cross disciplinary approach to planning and teaching through the TfT project. When asked about what they had learned from their involvement in the industry experience, the key themes articulated by the PSTs were increased knowledge and skills (STEM careers, discipline and pedagogical knowledge), greater understanding of how the disciplines connect with industry, and how to make real life connections. The quote below was typical of the type of responses received from the PSTs I gained knowledge about the industry, how it operates, how industry partnerships can assist with teaching stem and the career pathways that are available in the industry. A STEM unit around robotics and their use of circuit boards has been developed to coincide with the industry placement, which can be used in a classroom and adapted for differing year levels. I am now more aware about how to integrate different subjects into a unit and the importance of design and technology aspect of STEM (Alex). Creative solution 2: Embedding cross discipline collaborations for lecturers teaching in ITE programs and courses Providing an opportunity for PST to observe lecturers from STEM discipline’s teaching and researching together provides a model for the implementation of STEM pedagogies in the classroom. Lecturers involved in the project have also reported a deeper understanding of curriculum connections. Critical question 3: How can ITE programs support graduates to be confident in establishing school/ industry partnerships (and why should they?) Creative solution: Providing a supported and structured process for initial industry engagement partnerships in the courses involved with the TfT project When surveyed about the impact of the project on planning and teaching throughout their final school placement PSTs responses were varied. The majority of PSTs commenced their placement keen to establish industry links or to teach in collaborative ways but set curriculum and projects often prevented full adoption of this approach. However, a number a PSTs were able to introduce content from aspects of the project, for instance one PST stated, I was able to introduce a STEM unit of work that had an electronics connection based on the content of the unit which we had produced for the project. The ability to support graduates to be confident in establishing links is best summarised by industry partner BAE SYSTEMS who stated, Time will tell if aiding students in STEM subjects will be a success but given the results of the PST group we worked with, we are highly confident that this will have a positive outcome. Conclusions Findings from this three -year study suggest that engagement in the Teaching for Tomorrow project has enabled PSTs to develop an authentic understanding of the integrated nature of STEM from an industry and educational perspective, they were also able to develop an understanding of the knowledge and skills required to work in STEM-related fields. The increased confidence of PSTs when connecting to each of the curricula was a critical component as STEM does not have its own curriculum but is embedded throughout as shown in the ACARA (2016) focus for STEM. The PSTs increased ability to articulate what they mean by STEM teaching and learning was something not described explicitly in previous studies but was an important outcome for this project. The Teaching for Tomorrow project provides a framework for authentic university, industry and school collaborations that facilitate the growth of PST knowledge and ability to creativity, confidently and authentically teach STEM. The research will continue and will investigate the longer-term impact of the project on industry partnership and the teaching of STEM in secondary and middle school settings. References ACARA (2016). ACARA STEM Connections Project Report, Retrieved from https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/media/3220/ stem-connections-report.pdf Australian Industry Group (2017). Strengthening schoolindustry STEM skills partnerships, Retrieved from Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 119 http://cdn.aigroup.com.au/Reports/2017/AiGroup_O CS_STEM_Report_2017.pdf Department of Education and Training (DET) (2018). Optimising STEM industry-school partnerships: Inspiring Australia’s next generation – Issues paper, Retrieved from https://docs.education.gov.au/documents/optimisingstem-industry-school-partnerships-inspiringaustralias-next-generation-issues Marginson, S., Tytler, R., Freeman, B. & Roberts, K. (2013). STEM: Country comparisons: International comparisons of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education. Final report. Melbourne, Victoria: Australian Council of Learned Academies. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 120 Lesson Development with the ‘Dyson Engineering Box’ as a Global Teaching Material in Japanese Technology Education Norihiro Mukaida and Chikahiko Yata Hiroshima University, Japan Abstract The James Dyson Foundation (JDF) is dedicated to encouraging young people pursuing technology and engineering education. One of the activity of the JDF supports technology education. One of the ways in which the JDF supports technology education is through the lending of the “Dyson Engineering Box (DEB). DEB is a reverse engineering kit that familiarizes students with the design process of the Dyson vacuum cleaner model by disassembling the model. In the United Kingdom and Japan, technology education lessons using DEB as a teaching material have been conducted. The teachers who intend to borrow the DEB receive documents and data for explaining from the JDF for making a lesson plan. This study purposed to develop and propose technology education lessons using DEB in the Japanese context. We conducted planning and practice of lessons using DEB, results and discussion are based on learning evaluation. From an international perspective, we consider the common teaching materials of the Dyson Engineering Box used in other countries, such as the United Kingdom. Keywords Team1: Technology Education Lesson; Team 2: Common Teaching Materials; Team 3: Disassembling Model. Introduction The James Dyson Foundation (JDF) was founded in the United Kingdom (UK) in 2002 (www.jamesdysonfoundation.co.uk). Since then, the JDF has supported students and young engineers who are learning and studying. Educational support includes lending teaching materials, conducting workshops, holding international conventions, and donating to universities and scholarships (www.jamesdysonfoundation.co.uk. This effort is spreading in the European Union (EU), the United States of America (USA), and Australia. Activity began in Japan in 2006. Since then, the JDF has held lectures and workshops for university students, and it offers workshops and teaching materials to secondary educators (www.dyson.co.jp). One of the teaching materials is the ‘Dyson Engineering Box’ (DEB), which is lent out mainly in the UK, USA, and Japan. In this study, we aimed to develop and propose lesson plans for Japanese technology education using the ‘cyclone vacuum cleaner model’ as a teaching material included in the DEB. We also considered the possibility that this model could be a teaching material for technology education globally. Teaching material: The Dyson Engineering Box Dyson Engineering Box (DEB) The DEB is a leased teaching material. Students disassemble a Dyson machine and learn how the machine works. The DEB can be leased for free based on a schoolteacher’s application. Students can understand the technology used in products by using the VCM (www.jamesdysonfoundation.co.uk). Teachers can borrow materials from the Dyson Foundation for three to four weeks. Examples of technology classes using the VCM The Teacher’s Pack attached to the VCM explains how to use the technology in class. The JDF has issued separate Teacher’s Packs in three countries: the UK, USA, and Japan. We considered the purpose and intention for using the VCM at the junior high school stage in each country. A comparison of Teacher’s Packs is presented in Table 1. Content/Country How to use the VCM and ask relevant questions UK 〇 USA 〇 JAPAN 〇 Learning objectives 〇 〇 × Lesson plans 〇 〇 × Evaluation criteria × × × Sample worksheet × × × Table 1: Comparison of Teacher’s Packs by country It is necessary to provide lesson plans and learning objectives for Japanese teachers, as well as for those in the UK and USA. In addition, it is important to establish evaluation criteria to assess student learning and teaching tools; for example, worksheets would serve this purpose. Develop and propose lessons plans About the Dyson vacuum cleaner model Framework of lesson plans The Dyson vacuum cleaner model (VCM) is useful as a teaching material for disassembling and reassembling a product. The shape and size are the same as those of the actual product, but electrical wiring has been removed in consideration of safety. The VCM relates to the content unit for Japanese technology education ‘technology of energy conversion’. In consideration of the Japanese Courses of Study(Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology 2017), we refer to the UK and Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 121 USA lesson plans and examine their frameworks of ‘Starter’, ‘Main’ and ‘Wrap-up’. Lesson plan for disassembling a cyclone vacuum cleaner Lesson plan for disassembling a cyclone vacuum cleaner is shown in Table 2. Objective: Think about the engineering idea behind the design of the vacuum cleaner through the disassembly of products Learning activities Starter 1. Understand the 10 min. idea behind and the technology of a cyclone vacuum cleaner. Main1 2. Think about the 15 min. air flowing into the vacuum cleaner and the flow of dust sucked into it, ・Disassemble the cyclone parts of the cleaner model. ・Disassemble the body parts of the cleaner model. Main 2 3. Consider the 10 min. specifications of the product from the disassembled parts. ・Think of the functions of disassembled parts. Teacher’s instructions Points instruction of ・Describe the conventional paper pack vacuum cleaner. ・Instruct students to notice what was developed to solve the problems of paper pack vacuum cleaners. ・Instruct students to investigate how cyclone technology is used. ・Instruct to students examine the structure to collect invisible trash. ・Instruct to students consider the flow of air inside the body parts. ・Instruct students to confirm the flow of air from the filter to the outside. ・Ask the some questions. ・Instruct students to think about the product design while observing the parts. ・Clean with a real vacuum cleaner. P Use worksheet 1. ・Pay attention to air flow and dust movement in cyclone technology. P Use worksheet 2. ・Consider how visible and invisible dust is accumulated. P Use worksheet 2. Wrap- 4. Consider the idea behind a up 15 min. cyclone vacuum cleaner. ・Reassemble disassembled parts. the ・Check specifications of the cyclone vacuum cleaner. ・Evaluate the product from various viewpoints. ・Instruct students to use the worksheet and write opinions about product design. ・Confirm that products are being developed based on aspects such as appearance, cost, customers, the environment, safety, size, function, and materials. ・Evaluate according to the description on the worksheet whether the lesson objective can be achieved. P Use worksheet 3. Table 2: Lesson Plan for disassembling a cyclone vacuum cleaner Class worksheets Worksheets 1, 2, 3, and 4 follow the processes presented in the lessons. In worksheet 1, students describe the problem of a paper pack vacuum cleaner, such as the decrease in suction force and the need to replace the paper pack. The teacher advises students that Dyson’s vacuum cleaner is designed with cyclone technology to solve these problems. Regarding worksheet 2, the teacher instructs students to consider the flow of air through the vacuum cleaner’s disassembly and observe the movement of dust. Teachers direct students to notice how dust accumulates in the upper parts and under the cyclone parts. Regarding worksheet 3, the teacher instructs students to think about the specifications of the products from parts that they have disassembled (See Table 5). Concerning worksheet 4, the teacher instructs students to contemplate the ideas behind the product design from various viewpoints through the disassembly learning activity. The description here becomes a learning evaluation. Results of learning evaluation ・Pay attention to the function of and ingenuity behind each part. P Use worksheet 3. The evaluation standards based on the criteria are shown in Table 4. Overall, 38 students (63%) evaluated criterion A; 14 students (24%) evaluated criterion B; and 8 students (13%) evaluated criterion C. Criterion / Standard A B C Notice that products are being developed from various viewpoints to solve problems found in daily life and society. To consider that the product is designed based on the viewpoints of society, the environment, and the economy, along with concrete usage purpose and design conditions. To think that the product is designed based on the viewpoints of society, the environment, and the economy, etc. Can’t think evaluated criterion B Table 4: Evaluation criteria and standards Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 122 Conclusion In this study, we proposed a technology education class using the cyclone vacuum cleaner included in the DEB provided by the JDF. We compared contents of the Teacher’s Packs provided in the UK, USA, and Japan; additionally, we considered the learning framework in the context of Japanese technology education. Based on the learning framework, we prepared lesson plans, worksheets, and evaluation criteria. From the result of learning evaluation, it is necessary to modify and improve the lessons and worksheets to ensure an awareness of product design through product disassembly. Acknowledgement This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers JP 15H02917, JP 17H00820. The James Dyson Foundation Japan (Web Site), https://www.dyson.co.jp/community/pressrelease/201 60401_jdfestablish.aspx (in Japanese) The James Dyson Foundation, Engineering Box Teachers Pack (Web Site) https://www.jamesdysonfoundation.co.uk/content/dam/pd f/FOR%20WEB%20Engineering%20Box%20Teache rs%20Pack%20inside_Single%20Pages_Updated%2 0New.pdf (in UK) http://www.jamesdysonfoundation.com/resources/engine ering-box-teachers-pack/ (in USA) The James Dyson Foundation (2018) Dyson Engineering Box Teacher’s Guide, (in Japanese) The Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (2017) The Course of Study for Lower Secondary School, government of Japan. References The James Dyson Foundation, Our Work in UK (Web Site) https://www.jamesdysonfoundation.co.uk/ Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 123 Progressing the professional identity of pre service Technology Education students. Deborah Trevallion The University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia Abstract If a preservice technology teacher to teach technology education using a holistic approach, then the advancement of their professional identity as a technology teacher will be reliant upon the grasping of essential technology education concepts. This is a part of a larger study, which examines the transition of a pre service Technology Education teacher during their pre service program. It records their journey from their initial identity as a trade worker; tracing their identity, knowledge, skill, values and attitudes development during their first encounter in a school as a pre-service secondary Technology teacher. This study demonstrates how the developing professional teacher identity is impacted within the Technology Foundation Course and identifies the factors causing the greatest change. The focal lens is on the coursework and the authentic activity, including the Technology Day which leads to a solid understanding of Technology Education. It uses personal folio’s, online reflective journaling and interviews as a way to trace the professional identity change and the results are presented using the Logic Framework Model. This paper discusses significant changes in the students’ professional identity and this has significant implication for the training of secondary teachers. Keywords Authentic Learning; Reflective journaling; Concept mapping; Logic Framework Model; Professional identity; Technology Teachers; Technology Education Introduction This study examines the professional identity transition of preservice Technology Education (TE) students during a TE foundation course. The TE foundation course is mandatory for all preservice TE students in their first semester at university. The preservice TE students’ identities were analysed before, throughout, and at the completion of the TE foundation course. Through the professional identity transition, this case study sought to identify the factors that influence professional identity transition. The Logic Framework Model mapped these findings and provided an overview of the change. This paper revisits the aim of the study and the research questions. It draws conclusions from the findings related to the research questions in the study, outlines recommendations for future research and practice, describes the limitations of the study, and draws conclusions. This study investigates the evolution of preservice TE students’ professional identity during a single-semester TE course. This evolution represents the ongoing adaptions within their professional identity from that of a technical worker to a preservice TE student intending to become a TE teacher. Research Questions The research questions explored in this study were: 1. What were the preservice Technology Education students’ professional identities at the commencement of the TE Foundation course? 2. How does the preservice Technology Education students’ professional identity change during the semester-long TE Foundation course? 3. What are the preservice Technology Education students’ professional identities at the conclusion of the course? 4. Which aspects of the Technology Education Foundation course impacted on the professional identity of preservice Technology Education students? Central to this study and these questions are the changes that occur in a preservice TE teacher’s professional identity. These are limited to an understanding of the nature of technology, content and pedagogy. It is often argued that the most important goal of teacher education is to ensure that preservice students acquire and develop their own professional identity (Schulman, 2016) and the conclusions will suggest how this professional identity may be shaped. Methodology The case study used qualitative research to explore changing behaviours, perspectives, feelings and experiences of preservice TE students, in order to identify the factors that have affected their professional identity. This qualitative case study method facilitated exploration of the phenomenon using a variety of data sources. This exploration of the changing professional identity used a variety of lenses allowing for understanding of multiple facets of the phenomenon. The research techniques and tools included concept mapping, reflective journaling, observing and interviewing, within the wider qualitative framework of a case study. Research Design This research design used a multiple case study approach. Case study research assumes that examining the context and other complex conditions related to a case are integral to understanding a case (Yin, & Davis, 2007). The relevant case study data comes from multiple sources of evidence including entry folios, concept maps, reflective journals and semi-structured interviews that are used to triangulate results. The data analysis techniques included demographic and interpretive analysis, relational scoring, Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 124 time series analysis and evaluation using the Logic Framework Model. The Logic Framework Model provided a technique for scrutinizing and undertaking an evaluation of the change in a cause and effect process where the participant’s identity was analysed. The data collected provided extensive evidence to respond to the research questions. The link between the research questions, the data sources and the data analysis are in Table 1. below. This table lists five data analysis strategies – pattern matching, interpretive analysis, relational scoring, and time series analysis, beside links to the data sources associated with each strategy and the use of the Logic Framework Model. Research questions Data Source RQ1. Initial professional identity. *Student entry portfolio *Interview *Initial concept map RQ4. Factors *Online journaling affecting the *Interview professional *Exit concept identity. mapping RQ2. Changes in the *Online reflective professional journaling identity *Interview *Observation RQ3. Final *Online journaling Professional *Interview Identity *Observation Type of Analysis * Demographic data *Pattern matching *Interpretive analysis * Relational scoring *Pattern matching *Time series analysis *Interpretive analysis *Relational scoring *Pattern matching *Time series analysis *Interpretive analysis *Interpretive analysis * Pattern matching * Time series analysis *Interpretive analysis *Interpretive analysis Cross comparison Logic Framework Model ATTRIBUTES Characteristics of initial professional identity. INTERVENTION A list of the activities and resources that influenced the changing professional identity. CHANGES The reactions, assertions and initial changes after the interventions and the interactions. OUTCOMES The professional identity changes at the conclusion of the TE Foundation course Table 1: Linking Data to Analysis to the Logic Framework Model Figure 3: The Logic Framework Model Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 125 Table 2: Linking Data to Analysis to the Logic Framework Model Attributes: The attributes refer to the characteristics of the initial professional identity belonging to the participant informed by research question one. Changes: The changes occur because of the interventions. They are characterised by changes in identity, beliefs, attitudes, thinking and behaviours informed by research question two. Intervention: The intervention is the set of activities that the participant experiences that cause a change in their identity informed by research question four. Outcomes: The ultimate outcomes are the longterm changes that occur after the changes from the intervention informed by research question three. make things. They determined that they would build, in their secondary students, the necessary manufacturing skills needed to prepare them for a future apprenticeship as a tradesman. They each intended to teach these skills using a traditional master and apprentice approach to teaching and learning. Upon entering the preservice TE undergraduate program, the participants were confronted by concepts, ideas and techniques that challenged their understandings and existing professional identity as it related to TE. The findings from Research Question Two - How does the preservice Technology Education students’ professional identity change during the semester-long TE Foundation course - show that the participant’s professional identity changed during the semester-long TE Foundation course. The participants began the foundation course believing they would teach the manufacturing of products to their secondary students using traditional TE teaching strategies. Findings When the TE curriculum introduced them to design thinking and problem based learning in week 2, the students made a small, negligible, move toward contemporary design thinking. This initial move was attributed to the respect and rapport between themselves and their tutor as opposed to taking on new ideas. The findings from Research Question One - What were the preservice Technology Education students’ professional identities at the commencement of the TE Foundation course? - demonstrates the attributes or characteristics that each of the preservice TE students expressed when they entered the TE program. As the students understanding of the coursework increased, in week 4 they experienced school visits where they observed both the traditional and contemporary approach to teaching TE, they also used the design process in a special school to solve a problem. These attributes determined the preservice TE student’s initial professional identity. The eight participants each had industrial work histories where they each had responsibilities relating to the use of high quality skills when making quality products. Whilst each participant came from a different industry and used different materials, their main role involved the manufacturing of products. The preservice TE students took pride in the quality of their workmanship and enjoyed mastering the skills and techniques required in their profession. Each of the participants has previously been given the responsibility for training apprentices in their field who would emulate them, using the tools, skills and techniques that they taught them. They each enjoyed teaching apprentices and thought that teaching children in schools would be a similar experience. The participants expected that they would be teaching children to make quality products at school. They anticipated that they would be able to use their experiences from industry to share the passion that they had from making things out of specific materials. The preservice TE students common values, stemming from their backgrounds, life experience and work history are bound in the joy and satisfactions experienced when making a high quality product that will be used and valued by a client. The research axiology showed that the individuals’ values, built up during their life histories played a major role in who they were and what they thought about TE. It showed that each of the participants started with an understanding that TE would involve them teaching children how to In week 6, the students reflected upon what they learned and what they experienced in their community of practice their values were challenged and their thinking moved along the continuum. In week six, the students planned their own lessons for The Technology Day. This involved making choices about which approaches to use in their first teaching experience. At this point, the students planned lessons that predominantly used the design process. In week 10 the students taught their lessons to students on The Technology Day, this authentic experience resulted in them moving further along the continuum and then in week 12 after appropriate reflection on the semester’s work and The Technology Day, it was seen through the journaling that students were focussed on using design thinking in their approach to TE. The preservice TE student’s professional identity had changed. It had evolved to include changes in beliefs and values. No longer did they focus on teaching solely manufacturing, and the participants used and promoted design thinking and innovation in their classrooms. In addition to this, these changes were documented in the Logic Model Framework. The findings from Research Question Three - What are the preservice Technology Education students’ professional identities at the conclusion of the course? - show the outcomes of the course. They show that, at the conclusion of the course, changes were observed in the participant’s professional identity and in their teaching practice. These are the outcomes which were observed in the lessons they taught and the pedagogy chosen on The Technology Day and in the skills, knowledge and attitudes discussed when Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 126 reflecting in their learning journals. The preservice TE students, at the end of the TE foundation course, demonstrated the attributes or characteristics that each of the preservice TE students expressed when they exited the TE Foundation course. These attributes determined their altered professional identity. They each completed the same coursework and had the similar experiences in authentic communities of practice. Whilst sharing these experiences, each of the participants showed slightly different outcomes. That is, they each agreed that they would use a problem solving, project-based learning approach when teaching TE and their aim was to teach their students to think and enable them to solve a range of problems that they would encounter throughout their lives, but they each understood this in a slightly different way. The preservice TE students retained some of their initial values, including the desire to take pride in the quality of their workmanship and the mastering of the skills and techniques required in their profession but merged these with desire to implement project-based learning. They anticipated that they would still be able to use their experiences from industry to share their passion. Research Question Four asks - Which aspects of the TE Foundation course influenced the professional identity of preservice Technology Education students? These aspects are the interventions that impacted on the participants and effected changes in outcomes related to their professional identity and their teaching practices. The interventions that affected the preservice TE student’s professional identity included the ITE program, including the respect and rapport built between the students and the tutor who were a guided to become a cohesive group. The use of a range of activities and experiences that used authentic activities in a community of practice and the implementation of reflective practice throughout the semester were interventions that contributed to the participants changing identity. When implementing changes in preservice education, these factors need to be included in a foundation course to assist the student to adopt the change. An additional study will determine which factors must be repeated or built upon, later in their education program, in order to support the students enough for them to make the change a permanent part of their teaching agenda. The analysis of these research questions allowed a Logic Framework Model to be synthesised that demonstrates how the professional identity of a preservice TE student evolves as they progress thought a TE Foundation course in their first semester at university. The research questions provided the data for each step in the Logic Framework Model that moved from the participants initial attributes to identifying the intervention that caused changes in their professional identity. The outcomes are evident and reflected in their evolved professional identity and their adapted teaching practices. Summary of Findings This study is based on the understanding that identity is dynamic and static, it is continually being changed and reformed based on experience in their lives and interactions with those around them (Gee, 2001; Leserth, 2013). Identity development is not fixed or linear; it is in a constant state of flux (Britzman, 2003; Bullough, 2005; Flores, & Day, 2006). The more recent understanding of identity is described in terms of a sense of self where identity is relational and is concerned with the sense of similarity and difference between ourselves and others sharing similar goals, aspirations and work opportunities (Beltman, et al., 2015; Gee, 2014; Hosier, 2015). This study has found that developing a unified sense of identity with other preservice TE students provided the study participants with a sense of cohesive professional identity (Hooley, 2007) as they traversed a foundational TE course. A cohesive cohort identity occurs with the detection of similarities associated with the preservice TE students’ life histories, both in family and industry practices that they bring to their educational context. The cohesive identity grows with shared understandings of the subject content knowledge, including the technical knowledge, skills, beliefs and common contemporary approach to teaching TE learned within the TE Foundation course. The detection and acceptance of similarities, further result in the acceptance and validation of their professional identity. As their individual professional identities were renegotiated, their cohesive university cohort, as Gee (2014) endorses, became an important factor in legitimising their professional identity. The participant’s journal reflections recorded this ongoing re-shaping of each students’ professional identity; the changes were gradual but constant as layers of interventions impacted on them. The re-shaping and ongoing modifications of their professional identity throughout the coursework supports the work and findings of numerous researchers who explain that a professional identity is not possessed, but is shaped and reshaped as one progresses through life (Britzman, 2003; Bullough, 2005; Gee, 2008; Flores, & Day, 2006; Flum, & Kaplan, 2012; Hosier, 2015; Leserth, 2013). In this study, the participants were career changers who had significant life histories that were closely linked to work and industry experiences, which combined to play a significant role in building professional identity. Richardson and Watt (2006) explain that these life histories, or the stories that people live by (Clandinin, 2008), would have had an impact on the preservice TE students’ preconceived initial professional identity. In this study, the initial professional identity attributes displayed by each participant showed confidence and pride in the skills that they developed in their industry work experiences that they would bring to share with their school students once they began teaching. This professional confidence is based on the participant’s certainty that their knowledge and skills, learned in the workplace, will be transferrable to their new teaching role (Wenger, 1998). The interconnection between identity, experience and authentic activity in communities of practice is an important one. Identity is formed through a lived experience of participation within a community through engagement with community members (Wenger, 1998). In this study, authentic activities and experiences were included in the TE Foundation course for all preservice TE students. These authentic experiences Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 127 resulted in preservice TE students aligning themselves with the perspectives held by the school community members, promoting a reshaping of their professional identity. The study utilised six qualitative case studies to investigate how preservice TE students’ professional identity evolved and changed throughout the first semester TE Foundation course. Using the Logic Framework Model, this study has identified the influences that have affected the preservice TE student’s professional identity during this period and, in doing this, has recognised the influences that support or inhibit these identity modifications. These influences caused changes in their values and beliefs about teaching TE, changes in their understandings and pedagogy relating to design thinking, the design process, innovation and creativity. There are changes in skills, knowledge and attitudes that are demonstrated in critical thinking, problem solving and project based learning. In a shared cohort identity where peers are respected friends whose beliefs are assimilated within the group, changes also occurred. These changes will result in adapted teaching practices, where design thinking and a contemporary approach to TE is the focus, and an evolving professional identity that has taken on board the contemporary approach to TE. AITSL have implemented a mandatory set of Australian Professional Standards for Graduate Teachers. The graduates’ standards are focused on professional engagement, practice and knowledge. In order to gain employment as a TE teacher, graduates must achieve these standards and, as such, this means they must teach the TE curriculum using design thinking. If preservice TE graduates fail to progress their professional identity, they are unlikely to achieve the graduate standards and may not be employable. Consequently, higher education institutions involved in preparing TE teachers must deliver initial TE programmes that promote change in the preservice TE students’ professional identity. they enter schools. In addition, the results indicate that professional identity change occurred, but it would be beneficial to replicate the study with preservice TE students entering the ITE programme straight from school. This would ensure that the interventions can be applied to school leavers and mature aged preservice TE students who must re-shape their identity due to major curriculum change. This study was carried out at a rural university in Australia with a particular cohort of preservice TE students. Education curriculums in all subject areas are constantly changing, so this study could be replicated in other courses and at other universities in order to promote professional identity change in order to meet AITSL’s graduate standards. The question as to whether this approach to changing professional identity can be used outside the education sphere and in industry in professional development courses must be considered. The study could be adapted, with the principles of valuing life histories and the implementation of a unified identity cohort, authentic activity, mentoring and critical thinking using problem solving, experiential learning and reflection being included. Additional research could follow up on the preservice TE students after completing the TE Foundation course to ascertain whether they retain the changes to their professional identity throughout university and once they commence teaching, or whether they revert to their traditional professional identity. Research investigating how to support preservice TE students’ retention of this holistic approach to TE needs to be planned and implemented to ensure success in ensuring the teaching of TE using a holistic approach. In addition, the findings of this research using the Logic Framework Model may have many applications in other areas of educational research and provide a clear model of change for use across different disciplines. Limitations of the Study The findings from this study suggest that a number of factors previously discussed frames the formation of an identity. Their professional identity is re-formed by the interconnection and the layering of life-influencing factors, such as life histories, university study, activities and interactions within the cohort, working together within communities of practice and school contexts. Developing preservice TE students’ professional identity is a complex, challenging, relational and multifaceted process. Each of the study’s participants successfully combined the influences from their past, their present TE foundation coursework, the initial TE programme and authentic activities within school contexts to develop a powerful social psychology to inform their evolving professional identity. Recommendations for Future Research and Practice This study has reported findings and made conclusions based on the results of a case study of six participants in a single semester TE course. A longitudinal study would be useful to assess whether these changes in professional identity are maintained throughout students’ four years at university. It would be also interesting to see how the professional identity is impacted by teaching practice once As with all studies, there are limitations, however, within this study, the perceived limitations have been minimized. The issue of generalisation is a frequent criticism of case study research, however, this research did not intend to make statistical generalisations, instead its goal was to expand and generalise theories using analytic generalisations. Thus, while the findings emerge from cases with different backgrounds, there are broader understandings to be gleaned from the study. The focus was to achieve transferability of the results and establish meaning. A potential limitation of the research design is that participant responses may be influenced by how they perceive they should respond. This is referred to as the Hawthorne Effect, a process whereby human research subjects change their behaviour simply because they are being studied (Shuttleworth, 2009). In this study, the researcher reduced this by implementing a variety of techniques including Socratic thinking, professional debate, discourse and dialogue both in the classroom and online, in student comments on each other’s blogs before documenting their own reflections in their journals. This discourse allows participants to align their thinking with one or more of a range of views provided in the course. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 128 Whilst these limitations have been identified, they have not threatened the contribution of the study as they have been minimised to ensure the findings from the study are valid and reliable. Conclusion This study examined the professional identity transition of preservice TE teachers during a TE Foundation course in their first semester at university, and sought to identify factors that influenced their professional identity transition. A consideration of the Logic Framework Model demonstrates that preservice TE students enter the initial TE programme with pre-determined ideas and attributes demonstrating their future identity as a TE teacher. The attributes shown in the initial identities were affected by interventions. These included aspects of the initial TE programme, including the TE Foundation course that provides intellectual, academic and social activities and experiences. These interventions resulted in changes in thinking, understandings and teaching that demonstrated an evolved professional identity embracing a contemporary approach to TE. The demonstrated professional identity change moved from one that focused on a traditional, didactic, masterand-apprentice approach to a contemporary professional identity that focuses on a holistic approach to TE. This contemporary identity aligns with the approach promoted in The Australian Curriculum: The Technologies, which utilises a holistic approach incorporating design thinking (ACARA, 2015). In the world where change is the constant, TE curriculum reform is the norm. Many TE teachers continue to resist these changes, resulting in a fragmented schema of TE (Williams, 2012) whereby preservice TE students and new graduates find it difficult to clearly define what TE entails, to locate their situational professional identity (Hamilton, & Pinnegar, 2015) and to implement the expected curriculum changes (O’Connor, & Scanlon, 2005) and graduate standards that AITSL (2010) have produced. To prevent this from occurring, preservice TE teachers need to embrace change and reconcile internal conflicts in order to evolve their professional identity. The findings from this study provide a pathway for tertiary technology educators to begin this important process. In conclusion, this study showed that the pathway that preservice TE students follow when facing change that confronts existing values and beliefs. The ontology and support of initial values and beliefs are essential. Those who are facing conflicting values and ideals and undergoing identity challenges because of an altered TE curriculum may resist using the ideas promoted in the new curriculum. To help promote professional identity change, the strategies that support the evolving professional identity include valuing the TE student’s life history, building a rapport between students and tutors and between students that contributes to a unified identity theory. In the coursework, the preservice TE students need to experience mentoring, authentic activities in a community of practice. These strategies need to be presented to the students, as an option and they must be provided with opportunities to reflect and evaluate their use without being told what to think. They each must reflect upon and evaluate their learning as they contemplate their changing professional identity. At the beginning of a foundation course, taking the time to get to know and understand each of the students is essential to their success. To find out about their background, life experiences and their existing values, the tutor must understand where the students are coming from by listening closely to their personal contributions. The tutor must respond by providing positive reinforcement and an explanation of how the TE preservice life history can be used to contribute to learning in the classroom. A rapport must exist between the students within the class and between the tutor and the students in order to build an environment that is conducive to a social constructivism situation. Students who share common characteristics, beliefs and values are encouraged to work together and share their existing and evolving values. When working together using cooperative and collaborative learning the preservice TE students will work together to help build a unified group identity where students respect each other and share developing opinions as they evolve throughout the semester. In the planned coursework, mentoring is used to evolve professional identity. The respect built with the tutor and between students allows ideas and challenges to be shared, considered and discussed as their professional identity evolves. When planning the coursework, in order to evolve the professional identity authentic activity needs to be included because authentic activity allows the students to relate learning to the classrooms in which they will be working. Authentic activity within these programs needs to be taught within a community of practice. This allows the preservice TE students to observe evaluate new concepts, comparing them with traditional approaches that are used. This challenges their thinking as they link the outcomes of the observed activities to their thinking. If identities are to evolve, the students need to use the concepts in a classroom without fear of retribution and with no marks being allocated. The preservice TE students must be encouraged to risk using new processes and trial them before evaluating their teaching practices. To consider possible identity changes and changes in teaching activity it, all preservice TE students must reflect upon their authentic learning activities in their community of practice. These reflections when shared with their respected mentors and group members evaluate and synthesise change to their professional identity. In conclusion, when designing a foundation course that is aimed at introducing a new concept or evolving the preservice teacher identity it is essential to include: a sharing and valuing of their current values and understandings, the building of a professional rapport between students and tutor and students, observations and reflections on traditional and contemporary approaches used in communities of practices, the provision of authentic learning opportunities where students have the opportunity to experiment and trial new concepts with change paradigm being implemented before evaluating the success of the lesson. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 129 References Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2015). The shape of the Australian curriculum. Australian Government Publishing Service. Canberra. Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2016). Australian National Curriculum. Retrieved from http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/technologies/ introduction Australian Institute for Teaching & School Leadership. (2010). Draft National professional standards for teachers. Retrieved August 24, 2016, from http:// aitsl.edu.au. Australian Institute for Teaching & School Leadership. (2016). The Australian professional standards for teachers. Retrieved from http://www.aitsl.edu.au/australian-professionalstandards-for-teachers. Beltman, S., Glass, C., Dinham, J., Chalk, B., & Nguyen, B. (2015). Drawing identity: Beginning pre-service teachers’ professional identities. Issues in Educational Research, 25(3), 225 -237. Britzman, D. (2003). Practice makes practice: A critical study of learning to teach (2nd ed). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press Bullough, R. (2005). The quest for identity in teaching and teacher education. In G. Hoban (Ed), The missing links in teacher education design (pp. 237-258). Dordrecht: Springer. Clandinin, D. J. (2008). Attending to changing landscapes: Shaping our identities as teacher educators. Keynote paper presented at Australian Teacher Education Association (ATEA), Teacher educators at work: What works and where is the evidence? Sunshine Coast, Australia. Flores, M., & Day, C. (2006). Contexts which shape and reshape new teachers’ identities: A multi-perspective study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22(2), 219232. Flum, H., & Kaplan, A. (2012). Identity formation in educational settings: A contextualized view of theory and research in practice. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 37(3), 240-245. Gee, J. P. (2001). Identity as an analytic lens for research in education. Review of Research in Education, 25, 99-125. Hamilton, M. L., & Pinnegar, S. (2015). Knowing, becoming, doing as teacher educators: Identity, intimate scholarship, inquiry. Bingly, UK: Emerald. Holland, D., & Lave, J. (2009). Social practice theory and the historical production of persons. Action: An International Journal of Human Activity Theory, 2, 115. Hooley, N. (2007). Establishing professional identity: Narrative As curriculum for pre-service teacher education. The Australian Association for Research in Education International Educational Research Conference, Sydney. Hosier, D. (2015). How childhood trauma can lead to adult identity problems. Childhood trauma recovery. New York: Routledge. Lerseth, K. A. (2013). Identity development among preservice teacher candidates. Graduate Theses and Dissertations. Paper 13200. O’Connor, K., & Scanlon, L. (2005). What I do is who I am: Knowledge, skills and teacher’s professional identities. Australian Association for Research in Education Annual Conference, University of Melbourne. Richardson, P. W., & Watt, H. (2006). Who chooses teaching and why? Profiling characteristics and motivations across three Australian Universities. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 34(1), 2756. Sheridan, L. (2016). Examining changes in pre-service teachers’ beliefs of pedagogy. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), Article 1. Shuttleworth, M. (2009). Examining research bias: The Hawthorne Effect. Retrieved 25 October, 2016 from https://explorable.com/hawthorne-effect Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Williams, P. J. (2012). Research in Technology Education: Looking back to move forward…again. International Journal of Technology and Design Education March, DOI: 10.1007/s10798-015-9340-1. Yin, R. K., & Davis, D. (2007). Adding new dimensions to case study evaluations: The case of of evaluating comprehensive reforms. In G Julnes, & D. J. Rog (Eds), Informing Federal policies for Evaluation Methodology New direction in program evaluation 113:79-93. San Franscisco: Jossey Bass. Gee, J. P. (2014). How to do discourse analysis: A toolkit. New York: Routledge. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 130 From the Living World to Digital Technologies: Programming food and fibre learning experiences for children and young people Angela Turner and Leanne Cameron Southern Cross University Abstract The backdrop to this paper is based on the new Australian Curriculum on Technologies that contains two subject contexts: Design and Technologies (Design Thinking) and Digital Technologies (Computational and Systems Thinking). While the basis for the Australian Curriculum was to create uniformity across states and territories, there is autonomy for States and Territories to continue to offer existing syllabi. For example, the NSW Technologies Mandatory Years 7-8 curriculum content and the NSW K-6 Science & Technology Syllabus have been redesigned to align with the new Australian Curriculum. A key theme includes ‘paddock to plate’ learning contexts. Initially, this article reports on the implementation of an interdisciplinary teaching program, written in collaboration between SCU researchers and primary school teachers in rural New South Wales, Australia. The research responded to an expressed school aspiration to foster a greater understanding of food sustainability in a cross-cultural setting as being integral aspects of a holistic learning program. We also explore the transfer of ideas from this project to the Digital Technologies learning domain and how it might translate into the Secondary context. Our collective analysis elicits an examination of assumptions about pedagogy and our collaboration explores the broader meaning and potential for garden-based programming in creating digital solutions. This is important because there are very little resources on food and fibre available in this subject area. The STEM in the Garden project provides unique insight and potential for offering empowerment for students to develop as enterprising, ethically and ecologically driven designers. Keywords Curriculum; Food and Fibre; Digital Technologies Background The relationship between food sustainability and the health of the populace has been identified as a national priority, and reflected in the new Australian Curriculum. The Technologies key learning area — Design and Technologies (Design Thinking) and Digital Technologies (Computational and Systems Thinking) promotes food sustainability and digital systems as learning foundations (Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority, [ACARA], 2015). The expectation to design programs that support these subjects has resulted in teachers requesting professional learning, particularly on new digital technologies. Professional learning is a new teaching accreditation requirement for all Australian teachers at all career levels. Introduction We explore the idea of building on recent interdisciplinary research undertaken with primary schools in rural New South Wales, Australia. “STEM in the Garden” responded to an expressed school aspiration to foster greater understanding on food sustainability through authentic cross-cultural food learning experiences using non-native, and foods native to Australia (Bush Tucker). A Year 5/6 STEM educational program was developed with teachers. Students learnt to identify, compare and predict plantgrowing conditions across three different geographies through Science (Fair Test), Technology (digital microscopes and robotics), Engineering (DNA extraction) and Mathematics (collecting, displaying and analysing data). The project benefited teachers as a platform for professional learning according to the Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL) Australian Professional Standards for Teachers. Our collective analysis elicits an examination of assumptions about pedagogy and our collaboration explores the potential for garden-based programming on creating digital solutions in secondary schooling. This is important because there is insufficient food based teaching programs that support the new F-10 Australian Curriculum — Technologies, specifically for the Digital Technologies context. The proposed project aims to enrich teaching and learning practice through engagement on sustainable food production domains incorporating digital solutions. This is reflected in the new NSW syllabus Objectives on developing student knowledge and understanding of: • • • how traditional, contemporary and advancing technologies are used when designing sustainable products and solutions; how data is used in the development and automation of digital solutions; the role of people and technologies in developing innovative solutions for preferred futures (New South Wales Education Standards Authority, 2017 p 13). Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 131 Digital Technologies are currently reshaping our workforce, moving from traditional to more enterprising work approaches that disrupt physical boundaries. These advances signify benefits for Australian society as an enabler for more effective and efficient collaborations with other countries (Committee for the Economic Development of Australia, 2015). through appropriate tool applications — this is known as being ‘technate’ 4(Seemann, 2009; Turner, 2013). Technologies are heavily influenced by Purpose and Context parameters. Framing complex interdependencies can be identified through human agency, tools and material/ecology bridging elements. Relevant literature Methodology Preferred futures Creating preferred futures underpins the Technologies curriculum. Based on Richard Slaughter’s work on Foresight Studies, social construction, politics and economic driver relationships as change agents over time, are key to project a rationale for sustainable futures. Backcasting “what has gone before” is necessary in order to design a preferred future that is sustainable (Slaughter, 1999, pp. 151). This is not to be confused with predicting the future but rather imagining the future, the types of technology future society will need, social changes the new technology may cause and the possible nature of that future technology. Technologies are heavily influenced by Purpose and Context parameters. Framing these complex interdependencies can be identified through human agency, tools and material/ecology bridging elements. The methodology allocates two settings of engagement for participants: Food sustainability Sustainable food production systems are crucial to the wellbeing of Australian communities in terms of employment, and lifestyle diversity. Yet the food industry operates in challenging and erratic weather conditions that affect the security of nutrient rich soil (Qureshi, Hanjra, & Ward, 2013). Students in tomorrow’s world must possess the ability to make informed decisions on a range of food and water security issues. Therefore “education in local food production is an important priority at all ages and stages of education” (New South Wales Government, 2014, p.18) to attract ‘next generation’ farmers who will have the capacity for making sustainable long-term decisions concerning food supply. Why Digital Technologies are important Fostering sustained knowledge of Digital Technologies empowers students to shape change by influencing how contemporary and emerging information systems and practices are applied to meet current and future needs. A deep knowledge and understanding of digital based information systems enables students to be creative and discerning decision-makers when they select and use systems to manage information and data to conceptualise preferred futures. The Digital Technologies context provides students with practical opportunities to apply design thinking as innovative developers of digital solutions (ACARA, 2015a). Clarifying sustainable food futures Informed, capable citizens in the 21st century will need to be literate and numerate, and increasingly digitally and technologically literate. Design innovation theories bridge this gap for teachers in fostering new frames of ‘thinking and doing’ (inside and outside their own domain) and supports critical engagement with the environment 1. 2. The embedding of food sustainability perspectives in curriculum delivery through the employment of computational and systems thinking; The development of an effective Digital Technologies teaching program targeting Stage 4 students to enhance student learning on complex food sustainability challenges. Naturalistic Inquiry is proposed for the research (Lincoln & Guber (1985). A Purposive approach will be used as the sampling method as this supports empirical data tied to a specific setting rather than representative or random sampling methods. Teachers and students will be invited to participate. Results Expected. 1. 2. 3. Enhanced capacity of students to backcast and foresight preferred futures on sustainable food production scenarios; Increased competencies and dispositions such as thinking, communicating, personal futures, social responsibility and world futures; Increased student awareness on agriculture and sustainable food production through the employment of digital technologies. Significance of research Literature on digital technologies commonly emphasises computer science, information systems, software engineering and project management as intellectual underpinnings, yet a common frame to untangle these technological complexities is under-developed. Applying a common frame through bridging elements provides the teacher with a method to organise and classify complexity — critical for authentic project planning efficiencies and assessment. Conclusion 4 The ability for an individual to think and work creatively and displays competencies in technological problem solving, experimentation and communication. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 132 The research supports the work of schools and develops partnerships between the school and higher education sectors. It appreciates inquiry into what works well, so schools can learn from successful experiences. The proposed research will benefit education professionals by enhancing the quality and rigor of knowledge and practice on food and the digital technologies learning space. Acknowledgement Design Management Symposium: Design-Driven Business Innovation, Shenzhen, China, pp. 323-330. Committee for the Economic Development of Australia (CEDA). (2015). Australia’s Future Workforce? Retrieved from https://goo.gl/sZCXBv Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. STEM in the Garden funded through a Rural and Remote Education Network grant $19,000.00 New South Wales Government. (2014). Agriculture industry action plan: Taskforce recommendations to government. Retrieved from http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/00 06/535056/agriculture-industry-action-plantaskforce_recommendations.pdf References New South Wales Education Standards Authority (NESA). (2017). Technology Mandatory: Years 7 & 8 Syllabus. Retrieved from https://goo.gl/McwsZh Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2015). Australian Curriculum: Technologies. Retrieved from https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10curriculum/technologies/ Qureshi, M., E., Hanjra, M. A, & Ward, J. (2013). Impact of water scarcity in Australia on global food security in an era of climate change. Food Policy, 38, 136145. Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2015a). Design and Technologies: Sequence of content F-10 strand: Knowledge and understanding. Retrieved from http://docs.acara.edu.au/resources/Design_and_Techn ologies_-_Sequence_of_content.pdf Seemann, K. (2009). Technacy Education: Understanding Cross-cultural Technological Practice. In J. Fien, R. Maclean & M. G. Park. (Eds.), Work, Learning and Sustainable Development Opportunities and Challenges (pp. 117-131). Bonn: UNESCOUNEVOC Springer. Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (2012). Australian Professional Standards for Teachers. Retrieved from https://www.aitsl.edu.au/teach/standards Slaughter, R. (1999). Futures for the third millennium: Enabling the forward view. Australia: Prospect Media Pty Ltd. Ballantyne-Brodie, E., Wrigley, C., Ramsey, R., & Meroni, A. (2013). Design LED innovation to rejuvenate local food systems and healthy communities: An emerging research agenda. Paper presented at the 2013 IEEE Tsinghua International Turner, A. (2013). A critical examination of food technology, innovation and teacher education: A Technacy Genre Theory perspective. (Doctor of Philosophy PhD), Southern Cross University, Coffs Harbour. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 133 Creativity in Design and Technologies education: preservice teachers’ perspectives Belinda von Mengersen Australian Catholic is Abstract Of the many skills Design and Technologies teachers are required to awaken and develop in students, the capacity to simply think is perhaps the most fundamental. And for independent, resilient thinking, creativity is just as important as critique. Yet creative thinking in the design process is rarely explicitly taught (Harris, 2016, p. 3), either to students or the teachers who instruct them. Unless students can think flexibly and practise the capacity to innovate and broaden their perspectives, they will be unable to adequately ‘imagine and design in response to “preferred futures”’ (ACARA). And the literature of both the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) and the International Baccalaureate (IB) – plus, more broadly, the society in which students will live and work – require them to do so. It is therefore imperative that we move beyond the assumption that creative thinking is innate. Creativity theory (Harris, 2016; Runco, 2007, 2014) suggests that creative thinking can be explicitly communicated, fostered and practised. However, this imperative suggests that familiar dichotomies must be dismantled, including what Martin and Owen-Jackson describe as an ongoing discipline debate: ‘Is design and technology about making or knowing?’ (2013). This debate purports that in Design and Technologies (D&T), propositional knowledge may be prioritised over procedural knowledge (theoretical and conceptual design knowledge vs practical making skills and tacit knowledge) or vice versa. However, Martin and Owen-Jackson conclude that not only are these types of knowledge inseparable, they actually inform one another (2013, p. 71). The debate is echoed in the notion of critical and creative thinking styles as mutually exclusive, and also the ‘art (right-brain thinking) or science (left-brain thinking)’ polarity (D. A. Edwards, 2008). But instead of becoming mired in such semantic inquiry, our aim must be practical: to cultivate the capacity for ingenuity and imagination in D&T teachers. This project examines creative thinking tools and strategies, their use and value, and where in design processes they are being employed. Initial findings indicate that creative thinking skills cannot be assumed and that tools themselves often need to be redesigned, at least subtly, for the most effective use in D&T education. Keywords Creativity, creative-thinking, design-thinking, critique, critical-thinking What do you mean by design development? To those with a Design and Visual Arts education background, awareness of creativity and the thinking and making practices which sustain it is innate. From this perspective, the dearth of creative confidence in Design and Technologies students – and the surprisingly common query, ‘What do you mean by design development?’ – are astonishing. But further reflection confirms that regardless of the domain, creative fluency must not be assumed, but instead actively cultivated, evolving gradually through design and visual arts pedagogical practices: open-ended design briefs, dialogic studio-based teaching, selfreflection, creative writing, playful experimentation and critique. Rather than by instinct, creativity unfolds through opportunities and nurture: chances to ‘practice creative thinking, support for creative behaviour, and modelling and valuation of creative thinking and creative behaviour’ (Runco, 2014, p. 204). Design and visual arts programs foster creative confidence through open-ended dialogic and experimental, experiential, cyclic constructivist pedagogy: ‘signature pedagogies’ which enable creativity, balancing dialogue, action, critique and reflection (Sims & Shreeve, 2012). As D&T educators, we cannot assume our students have this creative self-awareness. Instead, we must consciously adapt our pedagogical approaches to enhance creativity. Many D&T students also lack selfefficacy in creativity and design, and this constrains them enormously. They commonly present one final design only or, if urged, three versions of one design with inconsequential differences. This lack of creativity compromises the entire design process: often, students doggedly force their original design to work, even with less-than-optimum materials and techniques. Instead of investigating multiple solutions through trials, tests and sampling, students reverse-engineer design documentation, backfilling what they feel the assessor expects to see (Runco, 2014, p. 184). Furthermore, genuinely creative students feel their creativity is unrewarded by normative design and technologies assessment structures. Even worse, they explain, their creative potential is constrained by the process. It has been suggested that the reverse-engineering of documentation and the resulting ‘sanitised’ version is the consequence of an assessment structure which prefaces the design ‘process’ instead of ‘processes’, plural. By contrast, creativity practices in design and visual arts are deliberately fostered through experimental studio work, illustrating the vital relationship between thinking and doing. It is this praxis – sympathy between evaluating and crafting – which is urgently needed in D&T education. Pedagogical approaches enhanced with creativity theory and practice would support both teachers and students as they explore this new approach. Design futures require creative and critical speculative thinking This paper proposes an alternative pedagogical approach to creativity early in design processes, aiming to restore independent thinking through imagination. Assessment models must now focus on the overarching graduate attribute of ‘futures thinking’ and speculative design thinking – the capacity to be creative and adapt to a future world which we can only imagine. In D&T education, this Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 134 means developing the capacity to imagine design futures (Fry, 2009) which focus on ‘creating things that matter’ (D. Edwards, 2018) through meaningful (Verganti, 2016) ‘value-driven’ design (Verganti, 2009). Creativity is profoundly reliant upon imaginative capacity, and enables speculative thinking: it involves the boundary-pushing, rule-breaking and materials-testing that real innovation depends on. Speculative thinking is empowering, and rewards creative risk. To this end, the research project below asks students to design their own creativity tools. The purpose is making the tools more specific and subjective, underpinned by the principle that creativity and design are not objective practices and that students’ attitudes towards creativity matter (Runco, 2014, pp. 185186). Combining Critical and Creative thinking Why is creative thinking imperative to Design and Technologies curricula? Almost without exception, the literature focuses on critical thinking. Yet these two should be inseparable: the dual arms of De Bono’s theory of lateral thinking (1977), they, in combination, underpin methodologies of both creative and critical pedagogies. Further, creative and critical thinking skills are placed together under general capabilities in both the Australian Curriculum for Design and Technologies (ACARA), and the International Baccalaureate (IB) which asserts that D&T students must develop ‘strategies for creative and critical thinking’. IB literature also spells out that ‘creative tension between theory and practice is what characterizes design technology within the DP sciences’ (IB). As well as enabling innovation, creative thinking is crucial for Design and Technologies: we explicitly require students to think beyond their present lived experience, imagining and designing in response to ‘preferred futures’ (ACARA). And yet recent publications and professional development offerings focus on computational and systems thinking, when we should be recasting creativity and analysis as collaborative interlocutors. Design and Technologies’ focus on developing critical thinking tools may issue from the need to ensure criticality in the discipline. Whilst this is being robustly debated and thoughtfully integrated (Williams & Stables, 2017), creativity’s capacity to inform design and partner with critique has been profoundly underestimated. And while initial findings suggest that it does require attention and practice, many creativity theories mirror a design process methodology. Thus, once the integration process begins, similarities become more apparent, and students are able to more clearly articulate their own meta-analysis. To support this, we must reconsider the use and application of creativity strategies, asking which are used, how they are used, and at which stages in design processes. Doing so will illuminate the relationship between creative and critical thinking, enabling tools to be adapted and newly developed for the most effective use in D&T education. Redesigning creativity: Developing a personal toolkit To research students’ aptitude for creative practices, a mixed year three/four cohort of pre-service education students was given an assessment based on identifying, researching, interpreting, critiquing and redesigning a set of four creativity tools. When the task was introduced, they were puzzled by the term ‘creativity’ and, even after clear definition of its educational context, appeared ill-equipped for the necessary conceptual thinking. Students were only broadly familiar with mind-mapping and brainstorming, tools which creativity researchers suggest often inhibit divergent thinking in educational contexts (Runco, 2014, p. 189). The majority of students struggled to think beyond brainstorming tools until other models were introduction and the assessment was scaffolded by Bloom’s Taxonomy. Bloom’s Taxonomy did, however, enable them to gain traction with the task. A project of this kind of actionresearch (Klein, 2012; McAteer, 2013) aims to observe students’ attitudes towards creativity tools in D&T education, and document, analyse and reflect upon their responses, perspectives, specific creativity tool examples, and outcomes (or redesigned versions). The research goal was to enable students to develop and test a set of personal (Runco, 2014, p. 172) creativity tools to facilitate the (plural) ‘processes of designing’ (Stables, 2015, p. 24) rather than a restricted or formulaic design process. Established creativity models can be problematic, because they embody someone else’s intuitive or organic creative process. Being highly subjective, a particular tool may work brilliantly for its creator yet still require modification or reinterpretation by the next user. Research questions underpinning the task: • • • • • How can creativity and imaginative thinking be further enabled in Design and Technologies? What if Design and Technologies students designed their own creativity tools? Would tool design enhance metacognitive (Runco, 2014, p. 200) awareness of creativity? Could the subjective curation involved in the design/redesign process enhance students’ understanding of creativity tools? Can creativity be cultivated through the experimental use of design and visual arts ‘signature pedagogies’ in Design and Technologies education? . Aim: To develop creativity skills and awareness, avoiding formulaic creativity models and design processes by asking students to design/redesign their own; and to develop a conceptual design project that acts as a creativity intervention. Design brief given to students: Develop a personal creative thinking tool kit with four creative thinking tools; then evaluate, test and redesign these tools using Bloom’s Taxonomy. Initial findings: Initial findings were disconcerting because they simply illuminated the magnitude of the problem in this cohort. With limited understanding of creativity and ability to apply creativity tools, most students were unable to extend design thinking and enhance creative design development. Students failed to show increased inclination for application of creativity methods or improved understanding of the value of creative design development practices in design. Of 100 students, only 6 developed an Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 135 authentically ‘redesigned’ set of personal creativity tools. The remaining 94 either (a) simply regurgitated or described existing tools and/or (b) demonstrated a simplistic application of the pre-existing tool. These figures highlight a typically constrained approach to creativity and emphasise the urgency of change. It is important to note these 6 students were higher achievers in the group academically and that they were already considered more genuinely creative in their approach to design thinking than their peers. This outcome suggests that a creativity intervention at this stage of the degree with senior students was, unfortunately, largely unsuccessful. One might conclude that this intervention was either too little too late or that students either ‘get it’ or don’t. Moving forward, the research only serves to emphasise the urgent need for creativity pedagogies, ideally throughout the course of study, via a holistic program approach in D&T which nurtures and models creative practices. Where to from here? Creativity, in Design and Technologies education, is mostly an assumed skill. For example, though students are often instructed to design three alternatives to a given problem, creativity tools are not explicitly taught, nor approaches modelled. Students are familiar with various hackneyed creativity tools, and assume they know how to use them: but these imprecise and generalised practices almost always fail to inspire cognitive challenge or risktaking. By contrast, creativity thrives in environments which foster students to think beyond their known experience, transcending clichés and one-dimensional adaptations. ‘What is required in education today are learning systems that are responsive to constant flux,’ Seely Brown writes. Further, he argues, such systems should ‘embrace a theory of learning to become’ (Seely Brown, 2010). These findings indicate the urgent need for a new category or type of knowledge in Design and Technologies education that moves well beyond a dichotomy of making or knowing; instead including conceptual, procedural, professional (ALTC) and speculative knowledge. This speculative aspect of design knowledge would embrace design ‘futuring’ (Fry, 2009) through creativity, imagination and socio-critical design thinking. Creativity and its innovative solutions are not the work of narrow, design- or assessment outcome-driven thinking. Rather, Design and Technologies students must take experimental risks, and confidently follow their own pathways, enabling disruptive, meaningful, value-driven, and future-focused design thinking. And it is the capacity to understand and develop their own creative processes which will make this possible. References ACARA. Australian Curriculum: Critical and Creative Thinking. ALTC. Graduate Skills: learning and teaching graduate skills. Retrieved from http://graduateskills.edu.au/ Edwards, D. (2018). Creating Things That Matter: The Art and Science of Innovations That Last: Henry Holt and Company. Fry, T. (2009). Design futuring : sustainability, ethics, and new practice (English edition.. ed.). Oxford and New York: Berg. Harris, A. (2016). Creativity and Education: London : Palgrave Macmillan UK : Imprint: Palgrave Macmillan. IB, I. B. Design Technology. Retrieved from https://www.ibo.org/programmes/diplomaprogramme/curriculum/sciences/design-technology/ Klein, S. R. (2012). Action Research Methods Plain and Simple (1st ed.. ed.): New York : Palgrave Macmillan US : Imprint: Palgrave Macmillan. Martin, M., & Owen-Jackson, G. (2013). Is design and technology about making or knowing? In G. OwenJackson (Ed.), Debates in Design and Technology Education (pp. 64-73). London and New York: Routledge: Taylor & Francis Group. McAteer, M. (2013). Action Research in Education. In. Retrieved from http://methods.sagepub.com/book/action-research-ineducation doi:10.4135/9781473913967 Runco, M. A. (2007). Creativity theories and themes : research, development, and practice. Amsterdam Boston: Elsevier Academic Press. Runco, M. A. (2014). Creativity : theories and themes : research, development, and practice (2nd ed.. ed.): London, England : Academic Press. Seely Brown, J. (2010). Forward: Education in the Creative Economy. In M. A. Peters & D. Araya (Eds.), Education in the Creative Economy. New York: Peter Lang Publishing. Sims, E., & Shreeve, A. (2012). Signature Pedagogies in Art and Design. In N. L. Chick, A. Haynie, & R. A. R. Gurung (Eds.), Exploring More Signature Pedagogies: Approaches to Teaching Disciplinary Habits of Mind (pp. 55-67). Sterling, Virginia: Stylus Publishing. Stables, K. (2015). Environment: Contributions of Design and Education to the Sustainment of Planet Earth. In K. Stables & S. Keirl (Eds.), Environment, Ethics and Cultures: Design and Technology Educations' Contribution to Sustainable Global Futures (Vol. 13, pp. 15-32). Rotterdam/Boston/Taipei: Sense Publishers. Verganti, R. (2009). Design-driven innovation : changing the rules of competition by radically innovating what things mean. Boston, Mass.: Boston, Mass. : Harvard Business Press. Verganti, R. (2016). Overcrowded : designing meaningful products in a world awash with ideas: Cambridge, MA : The MIT Press. Williams, P. J., & Stables, K. (Eds.). (2017). Critique in design and technology education: Springer. Edwards, D. A. (2008). Artscience: Creativity in the PostGoogle Generation: Harvard University Press. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 136 General Presentations This section of the proceedings lists in alphabetical order all keynote presentations, posters, and other general presentations that were accompanied by a title and where provided a short abstract. These presentations were not subjected to double-blind peer review but were peer-selected and copyedited. Such presentations held topical and participatory value for delegates. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 137 Designing Change - A Streamed Video Presentation Leyla Acaroglu Business: https://www.leylaacaroglu.com/store Abstract Sustainability provocateur and cultural protagonist Dr Leyla Acaroglu challenges people to think differently about how the world works. As an award-winning designer, UNEP Champion of the Earth, sociologist, and entrepreneur, she developed the Disruptive Design Method and designs cerebrally activating experiences, gamified toolkits, and unique educational experiences that help people make the status quo obsolete. Keywords Keynote Address (pre-recorded) Design and Technology Education for, through, about and against design – valuing 4-D approaches. Steve Keirl Goldsmiths, University of London Abstract This paper offers an investigation of the ways in which design education, through Design and Technology (D&T), can be rich, holistic and empowering for all students, teachers and society alike. The paper will first set out an educational context for D&T that is assumed to be democracy-serving, environmentally defensible and of value to all. It will then open up the ways that design can be ‘educationally engaged’, that is, at once helping students to learn and teachers to teach by applying four different understandings of design curriculum and pedagogy - for, through, about and against design. (This invites speculation on a 4-D approach where the ‘D’ stands open to interpretation). Since design itself is never ‘right’, totally satisfactory, or uncontested so, it is argued, must be any related design pedagogy or curriculum. Thus (after Ihde) design can be conceived in ‘multistable’ ways that engage all four understandings to the benefit of a common good. Keywords Invited Speaker. Designated Provocateur. Holistic design and technology education; curriculum and pedagogy; ethics; common good Learning Strategies to Support Design for Emerging Manufacturing Methods Stefan Lie University of Technology, Sydney Abstract This paper describes a design project implemented in tertiary design education to aid students in developing strategies to design products to be produced with emerging manufacturing methods. Prior to the emergence of advanced manufacturing technologies, such as 3D printing, the rate at which mainstream manufacturing methods changed was gradual. This in turn gave the teaching of manufacturing methods to product design students a clear and constant direction. However, 3D printing technologies are developing and maturing faster than mainstream manufacturing can keep pace with, which means that teaching students strategies to design for them need to be more future focused. A design project titled ‘Design Augmentation’ was developed and implemented with 2nd year students studying Integrated Product Design at the University of Technology Sydney. The project required students to select an existing product or part thereof and augment it with 3D printing as the manufacturing method in mind. The results demonstrate, that the project helped them to understand and articulate the fundamentally different design methods required between a traditional manufacturing method and 3D printing. The significance of the project is that it proposes important learning strategies for future designers to be better equipped to adapt to the rapidly changing manufacturing landscape. Keywords Product Design for Additive Manufacturing; Tertiary Design Education; Future focused manufacturing Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 138 Always Was, Always Will Be – Aboriginal Knowledge and STEM Maddison Miller Heritage Victoria Abstract Maddison Miller is a Darug Womanand Archaeologist living in Melbourne. Maddi is the co-chair of the Indigenous Advisory Group to the Clean Air and Urban Landscape Hub of the National Environmental Science Program. Maddi works at Heritage Victoria and has been responsible for projects such as the Thomas Mill community excavation. She is a member of Indigenous Architecture and Design Victoria, advocating for Indigenous place making in the built environment. Maddi tells us “Australia is an incredibly diverse continent and this notion of it being one country is relatively new... From Broome to Melbourne there are very different ecologies and experiences, but one thing every mob shares is a deep understanding of the environment and how to exploit that environment to sustain community and culture... I look at what our ancestors and old people were doing and realise they were scientists, architects, engineer-sand mathematicians. These are things we’ve always been doing and should continue to have a voice in. I think it’s really important to listen to Aboriginal voices and recognise the way they would use the landscape, use space and their ways of life because it’s really applicable to today.” Keywords Keynote Address Practice and Evaluation of STEM Education through Elementary School Programming Learning Ayaka Murakami1, Toshikazu Yamamoto2, Takenori Motomura3, Jun Moriyama4, Masakatsu Kuroda5 1 Azuma Elementary School, Gunma, Japan Saitama University, Faculty of Education, Saitama, Japan 3 Nippon Institute of Technology, Saitama, Japan 4 National Hyogo University of Teacher Education, Japan 5 Ph.D program Student, National Hyogo University of Teacher Education 2 Abstract Learning about Computer Programming is adopted in the new national curriculum of elementary schools in Japan as part of the movement of the STEM education. However, the National Curriculum indicates programming as a learning activity in Mathematics, Science, and Integrated Studies. There is no subject related to technology and engineering in the elementary school curriculum yet. Therefore, the purpose of this research is to conduct a lesson in mathematics which aims to connect mathematics and engineering through programming as a learning activity. A lesson on “addition, subtraction” in arithmetic was conducted for the second year elementary school students. rogramming was conducted using 3*4 cell worksheets with arranged numbers and programmed by adding and subtracting according to the teaching material from starting point to the end. As a result of this learning activity, through programming, students understood that technology is connected to mathematics. The prior and after investigations showed that students had shown active participation and interest in programming. An evaluation by observers of the lessons was also conducted. The research showed that the students acquire basics of programming comparatively in a short time and the students enthusiastically deal with it when guided for multiple solutions. From the above results, it was identified that this learning activity is appropriate for promoting understanding of programming to lower grades students in elementary schools, and the effect as STEM education was evaluated. Keywords Programming, Arithmetic, Elementary School Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 139 The Future of Design and Technology Education Peter Murphy President, Design and Technology Teachers Association of Australia Abstract Peter Murphy is President of DATTA Australia, a member of the DATTA Victoria committee and STEM Leading Teacher at Northcote High School in Melbourne. He is a member of the Victorian Tech Schools Advisory Panel, and has published teacher support materials. Peter trained as an industrial designer in his home city of Glasgow, then relocated to Melbourne in 2009, where he studied Secondary Teacher Education. Throughout his career, Peter has been a passionate advocate for the Design & Technologies learning area, and has developed a number of initiatives designed to engage with students, colleagues, school leaders, tertiary education, government and the wider community – all with the aim of shouting loud about the progressive, challenging and relevant nature of our curriculum. In 2011, Peter created So You Think You Can Design as an extra-curricular competition for VCE students at Simonds Catholic College. This has continued to grow, first as a Victorian challenge, and in 2017, as an Australia-wide event. His other initiative, Design & Technologies Week has also expanded from a Northcote High School project to become a National initiative. Keywords Keynote Address A Fact-finding Survey on Student's Information Morals and Security at the Time of Graduation from Junior High School Ryoichi Oguma1, Toshikazu Yamamoto2 1 2 Doctoral Course,The United Graduate School of Education, Tokyo Gakugei University Saitama University, Faculty of Education, Saitama, Japan Abstract Software that prevents normal use of computers and carries out illegal actions causing harm spreads at a pace of about 3 million programs per month, and the threat related to information security is becoming more and more serious. In addition, the number of victimized children caused by incidents on the Internet has been increasing every year. In response to such social phenomena, in the curriculum which will be newly implemented starting from 2020 an emphasis has been placed on the contents of learning about information morals and security in junior high school classes related to technology/home economics (technical field) as well as to computer science. According to previous research, studies on teaching methods regarding information morals and security and beginning of school year surveys have been sufficiently conducted. However, it was found that no surveys have been conducted when all studies at junior high schools are completed. Therefore, in this research, we have conducted a fact-finding survey of the scale of 1,000 students at the time of their graduation from junior high school with an aim of understanding the current situation and problems of teaching about information morals and security at the stage of completion of compulsory education. As a result of the fact-finding survey, it became clear that there is a lack of knowledge on the means of insuring information security. Keywords Information Morals; Information Security; Junior high school students. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 140 Applied Design Led Innovation: Why D&T is the only subject that can deliver Kurt Seemann Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne Australia. Abstract This keynote will position the unique and essential educational contribution that only Design and Technology can provide. The world we make defines us: so we better make good decisions! Increasingly, applied design led innovation capability is a sought after new generation skill-set combining creativity and technical knowledge required for both industry and community life. From emergent play to sophisticated pioneering capabilities, this keynote examines: • • What must be the reformed vision for design and technology education that assures its future as a necessary and highly invested field of learning? How can design and technology assert itself as the lead provider of applied design led innovation capability? A capability that uniquely develops the integrated mind and fosters innovation attributes that last a pupil’s lifetime. Keywords Keynote Address. Developing innovation capabilities, technacy education. Barriers to commercialization on Botswana's Design and Technology output Polokwane Sekonopo University of Botswana Abstract Industrialization has been identified as a prerequisite for modern development and in a bid to industrialize the Botswana government found it fit to introduce Design and Technology subject as a precursor to industrialization. Its introduction at middle and high school levels was intended to produce learners who will be able to power the local economy by creating employment or being absorbed by local SMEs. However, little to no success has been registered in the national economy, and without any drastic implementation measures, no positive outputs will be registered. Prior local Design and Technology programme modifications also did not achieve intended objectives. Whilst a lot of expenditure is spent on the programme as compared to other school subjects, there is a risk that the lack of returns on investments might make the government to discontinue the programme. This paper seeks to identify some product (artefacts) outputs from the University of Botswana’s industrial design programme (which trains Design and Technology teachers) and dissect them to identify the missing link to their commercialization. The missing link, which the government can address to get returns from its investment. The paper is based on a qualitative approach with a conveniently selected sample to enable ease of accessibility to the works. Keywords Commercialization; artefact; design; technology; manufacturing Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 141 A change in Course Larry Spry Design and Technology Teacher’s Association of South Australia Abstract The intent of the presentation is to analyse the implementation of a different mode of delivery in regards to teaching and learning a Course in Design and Technologies at a Tertiary level. Faced with a change in the structure and content for the Masters of Education [MMET] courses for 2018 as a team we designed and created a new 7-week intensive teaching and learning program for MMET students in D&T. The course centred on the application and implementation of “flipped classroom approach ”The flipped classroom is a reversal of traditional teaching where students gain first exposure to new material outside of class, usually via reading or lecture type videos, and then tutorial time we assimilate that knowledge through strategies such as problemsolving, discussion, debates and 'hands on' practical activities. In this mode of operation students have the opportunity to put the theory from the information videos/readings into practice in the tutorials and the focus on the 4S Conceptual Framework for classroom (Background basics - Williams, David (Williams, David, 2013) management that centres on 4 intersecting & dynamic domains that are considered support effective management of the learning environment ,so as to provide support for teaching D&T in the primary classroom. The presentation explores the program structure and content, reviews MMET student engagement in the course content and highlights student outcomes for discussion and review. Keywords Design and Technologies, teaching and learning, Tertiary education Connecting with Regional members Larry Spry Design and Technology Teacher’s Association of South Australia Abstract This presentation reviews a PD process implemented in 2018 that focussed on supporting involvement of our isolated regional members in curriculum development in Design and Technologies, establishing effective networks between regional and city educational sites & to support innovative and current practice in the teaching and learning of D&T in the secondary setting. The "West Coast and Northern Areas D&T Hub Group" have been meeting on an annual basis for decades now. Each year a school hosts visitors in the regional area to come a share ideas, link with colleagues and connect with DATTA SA representatives and make connections as a network of schools and communities. DATTA SA has always been a part of the 3-day event with Executive members attending, presenting updates of curriculum development, workshop and updating pedagogy practices especially around WPS aspects. Through the support of the grant of $4000 from Educators SA to enable the planning, hosting and release of teachers for the event 30 teachers attended the 3-day event. This was a great opportunity to connect with Executive members, share ideas in relation to curriculum, programs and approaches to teaching, support programs such as F1 in schools and submarine program , focus on sTEm and flipped classroom approach to teaching & learning. This presentation reviews a successful planning process and highlights the key components in relation to networking and reviews the significant role Associations play in promoting learning areas Keywords DATTA, Associations, networking, Design and Technologies, learning, networking Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 142 Problem-based learning in Design and Technology Brad Walmsley Queensland Curriculum and Assessment Authority Abstract This paper provides a synopsis of the conceptual framework that lead to the development of the problem-based learning pedagogical framework and problem-solving processes to be implemented in Queensland general Technologies subjects including, Aerospace Systems, Design, Digital Solutions, Engineering and Food and Nutrition. Problem-based learning is described as an active, constructivist process that incorporates the use of open-ended or ill-structured problems as a stimulus for student learning (Hung, 2006; Savery & Duffy, 2001). Ill-structured problems are defined as being complex, having no one correct solution or solution path, and requiring students to comprehend and apply a breadth and depth of knowledge and cognitive skills during problem-solving (Hung, Jonassen & Lui, 2008; Savery, 2006). The Australian curriculum recognises seven general capabilities that underpin the successful participation of young people in 21st century living and working environments. It is argued, that these capabilities are evidenced and developed by the knowledge, skills, behaviours and dispositions that students use as they interact with complex and changing circumstances (acara, 2018). Problem-based learning places students in problematic real-world situations where they utilise critical and creative thinking skills, behaviours and dispositions such as reason, logic, resourcefulness, collaboration, adaptability, resilience, flexibility, imagination, innovation, reflecting, evaluating and communicating in order to develop solutions that acknowledge considerations of personal, social, ethical, environmental and sustainability impacts. Walmsley (2009) provides support for the conceptual basis for the development of the Queensland Technologies pedagogical framework and for the inherent complexity of the teacher-student interactions that maintain a balance between teacher support and student problem-solving. Keywords Problem-based learning; problem-solving; higher-order thinking; teaching strategies Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 143 Preparing the next generation of technology and design teachers Lincoln Gill Charles Sturt University, Australia. Abstract Charles Sturt University’s (CSU’s) Bachelor of Education (Technology and Applied Studies) prepares students for a career as a secondary school technology teacher. There is significant demand for teachers qualified in technology and applied studies. Delivered online and at CSU’s Wagga Wagga campus, this four-year degree offers flexibility and access to a career as a technology and applied studies teacher. Charles Sturt University’s (CSU’s) Bachelor of Education (Secondary) – Industry Entry prepares industry experts seeking to share their knowledge with the next generation for a career as a teacher. Building on the knowledge and skills they have acquired in a relevant industry or profession, they learn how to translate this area of expertise into the context of secondary teaching. Offered online, this course provides both flexibility and access for those from an industry background looking to venture into teacher education. This course can also be studied on campus. Course Link: https://study.csu.edu.au/courses/teaching-education/bachelor-education-technology-applied-studies Keywords Technology education; teacher preparation; Charles Sturt University \ Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Design and Technology Teacher’s Association Research Conference (DATTArc): 5-8 Dec. 2018, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria, Australia. p. 144