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.
