Garden wind-ornaments
Class: Year 8
School: Oamaru Intermediate School
Category: Teaching strategy
Technology at Oamaru Intermediate School has undergone substantial change since the introduction of the New Zealand Curriculum (2007), the result of intensive PLD undertaken by the whole Technology team. Teachers are enthusiastic about their progress in delivering the curriculum and the increased job satisfaction it has brought them.
In 2011, home gardens in Oamaru have been enhanced with the addition of wind ornaments, the work of Year 8 students. In a trial unit, the students were asked to produce a decorative item for the garden and created individual wind-powered outcomes. As well as providing decorative outcomes, this unit represents the huge changes one teacher has made in his progress towards fully implementing the Technology curriculum, and the increased satisfaction both teacher and students now experience in their work.
Hard Materials Teacher Russell Cundall was still at school when he decided he wanted to be a Woodwork teacher and took the 'trades route' to achieving this. After working through a carpentry apprenticeship and gaining his Trade Certificate, Russell worked on the Waitaki Power development project then for the Rangiora Council. During this time he achieved Advanced Trades Certificates then moved on to study at Christchurch College of Education Technology Centre. Russell says he particularly enjoyed his teaching practice at an intermediate so applied for a position teaching Woodwork and Metalwork at Oamaru Intermediate in 1987, where he has continued to teach.
Over the next 20 years, teachers of Woodwork/ Metalwork/Home Economics experienced major changes as they moved from teaching the traditional Manual programme to Design Technology in 1987 and then to Technology in 2003. The 'new' Technology curriculum was introduced in 2007.
[To read about these changes see Don Ferguson's paper Development of Technology Education in New Zealand Schools 1985-2008 ]
Over this period Russell made changes to his teaching, incorporating, for example, more design work to meet the requirements of Design Technology. During these years of curriculum change there was no focused Technology PLD in the school – the Technology teachers didn't have in-class observations and although they met together they didn't really work as a team. Russell admits he didn't explore the demands of the 2007 curriculum, with its emphasis on processes and terminology. His students were getting the Hard Materials skills they needed, producing successful outcomes and enjoying the subject so the curriculum appeared as something remote, rather than an essential element of teaching Technology.
Nevertheless, Russell, together with his colleagues in the Technology department, made an effort to meet the requirements of the Technology curriculum and incorporated the 'new' Achievement Objectives in his planning. In reality however, all four teachers were continuing to teach the same programmes which meant their students were not completely following the technological process nor learning the language of Technology. The catalyst for real change appeared in the form of newly appointed TIC Technology and Deputy Principal Deidre Senior. On starting at the school in 2008, Deidre visited the Technology classrooms and questioned teachers about what the curriculum meant. During discussions, the team agreed that none of them, including Deidre, had a thorough understanding of the curriculum and that they were all teaching in isolation rather than as a Technology team. This led to a commitment to fully implement the Technology curriculum in their school and a two-year PLD contract with National Technology Professional Development Facilitator Cheryl Pym.
See Techlink case study Implementing the Technology curriculum.
As a result of this PLD, Russell, along with his colleagues, made whole-scale changes to his 2010 programme so that students learnt Technology knowledge and terminology while working through the technological process. Year 7 students worked on a trial unit in which they developed wooden salad servers. Each student created an individual design and functional modelled it in MDF to evaluate its effectiveness before producing a final outcome in macrocarpa. The focus of this unit was to embed the technological process and to introduce technological modelling, both understandings and skills. The unit worked well and Russell notes that you need to capture student interest and make a unit applicable to them, so that they can relate the Technology knowledge they learn to what they're doing. The unit was repeated in 2011 and extended to allow students the opportunity to develop a second kitchen utensil in acrylic instead of wood.
The Year 8 students created cup trays which had to be a standard length, due to timber constraints, but were made individual through their designing of the cup handles. During this process the students made sketches, card templates and functional models of their handle to ensure that the tray could conveniently carry cups.
In 2011, Russell trialled a Year 8 Garden wind ornaments unit with a focus on the Brief Development, Planning for Practice and Outcome Development and Evaluation components of the Technological Practice Strand at Level 4. The Intermediate students were given a brief asking them to 'design and build a wind-powered product that will enhance our backyard'. They developed the brief by considering why they were making the ornament, who they were making it for and where it would be used. Most students made their ornament for home, but some created it with a specific recipient in mind.
After considering the physical and functional attributes of their intended outcome, the students sketched four design ideas for a propeller then selected and tested their preferred one. This meant they could think creatively but also look at the practicality of their ideas before going any further. Student Ashley Gaze says she liked the idea of a heart-shaped propeller but that when she considered the practicalities of constructing it, including the difficulty of using the available wood which was too thin for her needs, she decided on a basic 'paddle' shape instead.
The students also sketched four ideas for the body of their ornament. Student Mackenzie Skene first came up with a hammer design but after assessing this idea decided instead to represent her name and designed an 'M'. Her final design incorporated a V shape at the bottom of the M but, after discussing it with Russell, she realised this wouldn't sit on the stand and changed it to a square shape instead.
The students modelled their design in cardboard and copied it into their workbooks, then used the cutting, drilling and sanding skills they had practised to make a functional model in MDF, painted because their final outcome would be painted to make it waterproof. They then designed the body section of their ornament. Ashley says she came up with a few ideas but none of them particularly appealed to her and she decided she might find it easier if she created a garden ornament for somebody. She chose her grandfather (although he didn't act as client because the present was planned as a surprise) and as he "likes clowning around" Ashley decided on a clown theme. Cutting around the clown's hands was the hardest part for Ashley because it was "a bit fiddly" and she needed a bit of assistance "but everyone was willing to help". Although most of the class put their propellers on the side of their ornament, Ashley felt this wouldn't work with her design and put it on the top of the clown which, she says, worked well.
Mackenzie reports that having learnt how to use most of the tools in Year 7 it wasn't difficult to pick up new skills such as how to use the brace and bit, and although she had to work carefully to ensure she didn't cut too much off, the construction stage went smoothly. The best part, she says, was seeing her design turned into a finished outcome. When evaluating their final outcome, each student had to consider whether theirs was fit for purpose and ask a classmate for stakeholder feedback. Russell brought a small electric fan to class so that students could ensure their ornament turned in the wind as planned.
The Garden wind ornament unit worked so well that Russell decided to repeat it in 2012. When discussing the changes he has made, Russell says that now he and his colleagues are working as a team they are more easily able to teach the knowledge in the Technology curriculum, and that with a shared focus on terminology they can more easily pass that on to the students. "The result of all the work and programme changes is that I've found my teaching more meaningful and richer, with the focus on the curriculum concepts and the skills that students have developed in creating their outcomes".
As the intermediate Year 8s developed their garden wind ornaments, the client school Year 8 students also worked on a trial unit in which they carved a patu that was unique to them. This unit reveals another side of Russell's journey in professional development – the change to include culturally appropriate content. While holidaying in Wellington, Russell had visited the Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa where he was inspired by the Māori designs in the collection. As he read a school journal article about another school's experience in making patus, [Connected 3, 2000, ISBN 0 478 23754 5] Russell realised "My kids could do this" and developed a unit with a focus on the cultural aspects in Technology.
The structured support Russell and the team received through their PLD has resulted not only in programme change but in a new enthusiasm for their teaching. In making the move from traditional woodwork teaching in the isolation of the workroom to teaching Technology as part of a team, Russell says he feels revitalised and is committed to delivering the Technology curriculum.
RSS Feed
