Student's final solution design
CP1001: Developing an Alternative Multi-materials programme
Abstract
Student's final solution design
Reference: CP1001
Classroom Practice: Years 11/12
Title: Alternative Multi-materials Programme
Duration: Whole year
Overview: The Alternative Multi-materials programme was developed so that Year 11/12 students unsuited to the mainstream Technology classes could still benefit from Technology education. The focus was on providing students with the opportunity to succeed through technological practice which gave them ownership of their projects and motivated them to complete work.
Focus Points:
Background ...
Mt Roskill Grammar School is a multi-cultural decile 4 school in Auckland with approximately 2, 300 students. All Year 9 students take one Technology subject each term (Materials, Graphics, ICT and Food), which they can then select as options in Years 10-13 (Although the Food department concentrates on Food and Hospitality in the senior school, instead of Technology).
Although the school features highly in academic rankings in New Zealand, English is not a first language for 70% of the students, and for some is not even a second language, so English literacy is often quite limited. Many of these students come from more conservative backgrounds where boys are directed into Technology and girls into catering/hospitality courses, so few girls take Technology after Year 9.
In previous years, the Technology department had run alternative workshop courses for students unable to cope with the more academic course, which also catered for students who were poor performers and those with very limited English. These courses tended to focus on woodwork and students made small items such as boxes and mirrors. As it was mostly boys who were steered into the Alternative programme, the projects were designed to appeal to them.
These students didn't usually question the value of the skills they were being taught, and were likely to be discouraged from doing so. They had limited opportunity to gain NCEA credits, and the skills credits they did attain tended to be focussed on achieving perfection, rather than valuing testing and 'trying a different way'.
HOD Technology Michele Heywood was concerned that these students were missing out on the technological literacy that they would need to function at their most effective level in society, and were instead being taught skills for the workplace which involved them in working on repetitive projects. She points out that technological literacy within the New Zealand curriculum is intended for all students to access regardless of background or previous learning.
Michele believed that these students were capable of doing Technology and decided it was "time to step up and prove this" in term 1 2007. The Year 11 Multi-materials class was particularly big that year and some students were already struggling by Week 2, so she started planning an alternative course to cater for their needs.
Michele Heywood: "If, when their literacy skills are quite limited, we can give students some Technology skills and build up enough credits to get them to the next level, we can benefit their chances of future employment. Many of our students stay in this area working in manual jobs where employers tell us they want skills or thinkers - if we can give them thinkers with skills then hopefully we'll give them what they need and make the students a little bit more employable".
Pre-planning
The Alternative Multi-materials programme was established two weeks into term 1 due to the large number of students unable to cope with the demands of the Year 11 Multi-materials course, particularly in the large classes that year. While it was clear to teachers that they were struggling, these students hadn't opted for the existing Alternative course because they didn't think that they needed it. As the finalised school timetable was already operating, Michele taught this class because she was the only member of the department whose timetable allowed it.
The new course would cater for Year 11/12 students unable to cope with the academic demands of the mainstream courses, with a poor school performance record or limited Technology experience, with poor literacy, or immigrants with limited English. Some of the students who were guided into Technology – "because they're good with their hands", hadn't taken the subject in Year 10 and in some cases, says Michele, were completely out of their comfort zone.
Before planning the course content, Michele considered the students in the class, their previous Technology education, their skills and their understanding of technological practice. For planning purposes she made the assumption that anyone new to the school lacked that understanding. Michele talked to her students about their interests and possible education/career pathways and found that most had no idea of what was possible for them – they expected to be told what they should do and few had the required credits to go beyond secondary education.
Despite this, Michele was reluctant to base the course on providing students with lots of credits on the grounds that it devalues the subject. Skills units, she says, are useful for students with a clear idea of where they want to go but restrictive for those who need a wider range of experience. Flexibility in the programme would allow students to take Achievement or Unit Standards where appropriate. Michele says that Technology offers good, varied learning opportunities where the students take responsibility for their outcomes. Her programme aimed to re-establish (or establish) an enthusiasm for learning, to foster interest and to keep students in class because they want to be there.
Another planning factor was student (non-)attendance. School, Michele comments, is a part-time activity for some, who consequently miss valuable lessons and require teacher time outside of the normal lesson structure. She examined student attendance statistics and structured the course so that teaching of skills/knowledge was done on the days that most students were likely to attend. Periods when students were most likely to be absent (such as late Friday afternoon) were reserved for the workshop time that they particularly enjoyed.
Michele presented this timetable to the class as information about the intentions of the next lessons, rather than as a punitive measure. Writing was established as an integral part of the lessons, with the class sometimes 'rewarded' and told they would do practical work that day instead. She wanted to create an atmosphere of trust and respect instead of, as often occurs, reacting to problem behaviour by allocating more written work in place of practical.
The programme evolved throughout the year and Michele notes that because people generally had lower expectations of these students it gave her more flexibility to try out different things. She based it on the Technology curriculum, in contrast to the old-style vocational course, with the aim of equipping students for the future and opening up more career paths for them.
The course was structured as two classes – beginning with a Year 11/12 class for Year 11 students and Year 12s who hadn't done Technology before, which would run as a Level 1 class. The following year these students could move on to a Year 12/13 class which would operate as a Level 2 course. This structure allows more flexibility in placing students in the class best suited to them and where they would have more opportunity to achieve.
Delivery
The Alternative class was taught as a Technology programme along the same lines as the NCEA classes and students could be assessed for Unit or Achievement Standards if they appeared likely to meet the criteria. However, the course was very teacher-directed and the class worked as a group, discussing things together with Michele, so most students were assessed by her rather than for any relevant standards.
Although students did less individual analysis than in the NCEA class, the focus throughout the year was on giving them input into the process instead of telling them what to make and how to make it. Involving students in decision-making processes added more take-home value to their final outcomes.
The programme content was not completely planned in term 1, but evolved. As the students worked through each unit Michele evaluated learning and decided what was required next. The class was Multi-materials but Michele incorporated some electrical/electronics work into it, because some students had moved to it from her Electronics class and also to satisfy her enjoyment of her own teaching area.
The year began with a preparatory lesson on working with tools, and then moved on to a Toolbox unit – an introductory/revisory unit covering safety in the workshop, cutting, filing, sanding and finishing skills. The class discussed aspects of technological practice, such as brief development, as a group and developed their brief together in class. Michele made up 'fill in the boxes' worksheets for students to complete and add their own details. Some preferred to talk to her about what they wanted and get help in writing it up as a brief.
Students were encouraged to talk to their families as stakeholders and to use any previous skills learnt out of the classroom (holiday jobs, working with Dad on a building site, trying things out at home) in their projects. She needed to ensure that skills acquired from outside experiences were accurate but didn't want to discredit student experience, so emphasised the safety aspect when reinforcing skills. "It is important to recognise skill regardless of how it is gained, and an opportunity to suggest how skills such as spray painting can be better channelled!"
In term 2 the class worked on a Stool unit which focussed on planning and in which students considered the properties of materials and the processes involved in working with them. The skills focus in this unit was construction (students learnt to make mitre joints and cut grooves for slide mechanisms), and design (focussing on decoration and symmetry).
Michele had developed the 13-week Lamps and Lighting project specifically for the Alternative programme, to use skills students already had and to introduce other skills they would need. She originally planned to incorporate some electronics, but this wasn't feasible within the time frame so Michele modified her original plan to an electrical project in which students learnt how to wire plugs for their lamps. There was a lot to get through in the unit and it continued beyond the planned 10 weeks into term 4. Some students were still working on their projects in Week 14. These students were introduced to the next project with the rest of the class, but then were allowed time to finish their lamp, so that they could start a new unit with a clear mind and sense of achievement.
At the beginning of the project students examined lamps Michele had brought in (a realisation for some that lighting can be more than bulbs in the ceiling) and took them apart to see how they worked and to discuss possibilities for their own projects. Students generated some ideas on what they'd like to make and Michele talked with them about existing class/individual skills and what was feasible in the allocated time.
Students were encouraged to think about what they needed to learn, where they could go for ideas (such as home) and to discuss their project with their families as stakeholders. In the end, although they weren't directed that way, they made similar projects because one enthusiastic boy designed particular features that the other students liked and incorporated into their individual projects, which Michele says resulted in work which was quite good.
The class was taught to use the metal lathe, to turn aluminium and nylon to make a connecting/adjustable ball joint, and the wood lathe for turning the stem of their lamps. Michele had to closely supervise some students while they operated the machinery but this was manageable because the class had been kept to a relatively small 15 students. Students enjoyed working on the wood lathes, which Michele attributes to it being more forgiving of error, as well as the satisfaction they get. They also liked the metal lathe but this required a lot more accuracy than wood, where a mistake can be fixed and retained as part of the final product.
Welding was also popular but Michele was surprised that students didn't really like using the gas cutter, perhaps because they were a little bit nervous of it as it was new to them and setting up the gas torches for cutting requires precision. Students were happier using a plasma cutter because it was easier and there weren't any flames.
Students also looked at wiring protocols, safety and codes of practice during the electrical component of the unit, and completed their lamps by decorating them - carving, staining and polishing.
Michele notes that, as in many schools, access to workshops can be problematic or some teachers may have particular skills which she wants her students to learn, so she had to teach them to work with different 'managers' in these situations. The course entailed students learning multiple skills which Michele referred to as 'testing ideas', to highlight that they wouldn't necessarily choose to incorporate all of these in their project and to ease the stress for students who couldn't manage a particular skill.
Students who attended each lesson completed their lamps well before the deadline so were able to start on an optional project in which they made a coffee table or a small tape-dispenser (which provided an opportunity to experiment with the plasma cutter, welding and turning).
Michele: "It's important that, whatever work they do, students have a wide range of skills. My philosophy is to teach them as many things as possible and over a wide range, so that when they are out on the job they can start specialising. It's not my task to teach them job skills, I teach them thinking and practising different skills. Some of them make assumptions about careers based on their father's occupation but might, for example, actually be better at welding than working in wood. You can help them identify a better direction to utilise their strengths".
Outcomes
Students in the Alternative class were happier - they felt better about themselves when they weren't struggling in a class where others were coping, and enjoyed being able to work at their own pace and without huge expectations on them, while some were just pleased to be in a group with their friends. Staff report that they haven't noticed any stigma attached to the fact that students are in the class.
Michele says that students clearly enjoyed the work because they kept turning up to class, a good indicator in this sort of group, and kept on task when in the classroom. One student who hadn't finished his project came back in 2008 because he wanted to complete it. While students are unlikely to tell a teacher that they like a class, Michele would get feedback from other people about how much they enjoyed it.
At the beginning of the year Michele had identified one difficulty as being the need, because of the limited NCEA credits offered, to justify the benefits of the programme through other achievements. However, student success in their class work and outcomes more than met this need. She says that previous students gained credits but didn't necessarily learn much more than the skills, but this group also learnt a lot of the background thinking in Technology, and could understand why details such as briefs or specifications are important.
Management of the programme was very teacher-dependent. There was huge pressure on Michele to be in class and any lessons using a relief teacher (despite good school support in placing the 'right' teacher) knocked the routine and meant more work for her to compensate when she was back in class. Nevertheless, she found that that teaching Technology units did make classroom management easier. Students had ownership of their own project and worked at their own pace so had a sense of control over their outcome and valued it, and this was emphasised by the interest from home in the project. The working relationship between students was much better and students would redo something rather than "nick" someone else's, as used to happen previously.
Michele: "The thinking students learn in Technology can make a difference between being the guy working on the shop floor being told what to do all the time and being the supervisor. Just because they're not good at some subjects, it doesn't mean they can't be that thinker who's got enough initiative. And I think most of those students showed they could do quite a bit of thinking when given the opportunity".
Michele says that that structuring the course around student attendance, and planning her teaching for those periods when most students were there, worked successfully, although she found it hard because she prefers working in a more flexible way. Having an established routine, with particular days reserved for theory or practical work, was advantageous for these students, who tend to be a bit lost if left to structure their own work.
One problem the school has identified is that a lot of parents don't come into school because their perception or experience is that they'll be told that their children are misbehaving. Students in this class were encouraged to (and did) talk to their families about their projects and for some parents the consequence of this positive feedback from school led to their taking more interest in what child was doing at school and achieving.
Parents presented with the lamps were proud of their children's achievements and Michele says one family was astounded when (after she'd driven him up the road to make sure it arrived) they saw their son's work. They hadn't thought he could make something like that and clearly didn't recognise the skills he had developed, because they hadn't seen any of his products at home before. In previous years students often didn't bother taking their completed objects home from school.
At the 2007 TENZ (Technology Education New Zealand) conference, Michele presented a workshop on the Alternative Multi-materials programme and how she had incorporated Technology teaching within it.
What next?
Most of the students opted to continue in the Alternative Multi-materials programme in the following year, and the two that dropped out only did so because their timetable didn't have space for Technology as well as the extensive ESOL study they required.
Developing a new programme when school had already started inevitably meant that it wasn't planned as thoroughly as Michele would have liked. As the course evolved throughout the year she discussed with students what they would do, how well things had worked and what needed to be 'fixed' for the following year. In 2008 she explained to the new class what had been done before and why some aspects had been changed.
The 2008 class worked on a new programme, and some of the 2007 unit was incorporated into the mainstream Multi-materials programme. Michele says that the Alternative Multi-materials students again responded well to the structure and stability of the course, and that while they found it difficult coping with relieving teachers they learnt to adjust to the change "Basically, as long as they knew what was going on, they were comfortable."
Michele is keen to offer more engineering to the Year 12/13 class but doesn't have the teaching skills within the department at this point.
The course has continued with the same teacher in 2009, and has concentrated on helping students work towards developing useful work skills and building up "CV data” to show their accomplishments. Some external provider training was introduced into the programme when students did some work with Site Safe.
Michele Heywood: "Every year we make programmes for the students we're actually getting in front of us, as opposed to having a programme and just teaching it. We look at who we've got, what they need and where we can take them. It makes it harder to plan but easier to teach, and the Alternative class has probably been the one I've enjoyed the most because I got a lot of satisfaction in getting them somewhere at the end, whereas the boys in Electronics were going to get there anyway, regardless of who their teacher was. It was full-on teaching – I didn't want to take a day off because if they got a reliever it took me three days to get them back on side."