Scoodies, tog bags and Technological Products
Level: Year 7
School: Tauranga Intermediate
Teacher: Jo Young/Charlotte Hazlitt
Category: Teaching strategy
Multi-materials Technology Teacher Jo Young teaches the Technological Products component of the Technological Knowledge strand as her Year 7 focus area within a team-wide Technology programme – see Techlink Teaching Snapshot Creating a Programme of Learning. This focus is on teaching the concepts about materials and their performance properties and does not need to be linked to students' Technological Practice, but Jo finds that linking the two makes it easier for her students to understand.
In 2010, Jo delivered different units to her Year 7 classes in their five 80-minute lessons, both of which involved a project with outcomes where the performance properties of the materials used were important.
Some classes worked on the Scoodies unit (PDF, 147kb) with Jo and Waikato University student teacher Charlotte Hazlitt. The students were asked to design a scoodie (scarf and hood combined) using a material suitable for keeping their head and neck warm. Other classes, who did the Waterproof Bags unit (PDF, 435kb), were given the scenario "We are surrounded by water and use it for recreation – design and make a bag to carry your wet togs, wetsuits, etc." These contexts reinforce the Technological Products focus and students look at both the performance properties of their own outcomes and of a wide range of Technological Outcomes.
Jo and Charlotte gave the students a range of materials (such as polar fleece, elastic, nylon and calico) to examine. They gave them a lot of sample pieces, not any finished products, so that when the students explored the properties of the materials they weren't distracted by the product itself. By feeling, smelling (and in some cases tasting!) each piece of material, the students gained an understanding of its subjective ("this feels nice") and objective ("it's waterproof") properties. They discussed the suitability of each material for different situations – such as in the snow or to keep things dry – and looked at what the material does and how it does it. The students identified the performance properties of, for example, polar fleece and how it would keep them warm (warm air is trapped within the material).
After exploring materials through samples, the students examined materials within products. Jo provided a range of products and the students identified the materials used in those products. However, she found that when they were asked to identify the properties of the materials the students tended to identify the attributes of the product rather than the performance properties of the materials. Students identified, for example, a pencil case as being made from plastic and that it was able to hold pens and pencils (the functional attribute of the pencil case) rather than saying that the pencil case was made from plastic and that the plastic is appropriate for this because it is strong and light (performance properties of the material).
Jo thinks that her questioning and the layout of the worksheet caused this confusion – she had asked "What does it do?" and "How does it do this?" but the students took 'it' as being the product, not the material. Jo has changed the questions so that they more directly look at materials and their performance properties. Her new questions include "When could you use this material?", "Where could you use this material?" and "In what product could you use this material and why?". She makes use of a range of examples related to the context of the unit.
Jo realised that she also needed to separate the two activities initially, because the students needed more focus on materials alone and their performance properties. Only when they had a good understanding of this would she move on to products and have the students identify which materials, according to their performance properties, were most suitable for each product.
Jo thinks carefully about the range of products she provides for the students to examine. She tries to choose products made of more than one material, such as a stapler (made of plastic because it is strong and light, with rubber on the base which is elastic and soft, and metal in the mechanism). She also selects some products where the materials from which they are made are critical to performance – a pencil case could be constructed from fabric, wood, plastic, metal, etc. whereas something like a spatula needs to be made from particular materials for hygiene and cleaning purposes.
Next steps
Jo plans to expand her students' knowledge of Technological Products through a variety of tasks. When they have considered the performance properties of materials from looking at the samples, Jo will ask the students to suggest how these materials might be used before she gives them the actual products, using questions such as 'What are the performance properties of plastic?' and 'What would that make it good to use for?'
She has also designed an activity in which students are provided with material samples and cards with images of products on them. The students will choose a material (e.g. calico) then turn over a card which will show a product (e.g. a bicycle) and answer the questions – "Is this the best material?" "Why or why not?" "What is a better material?". Jo points out the importance of having actual samples and not just words or images of materials, as the students need to be able to feel the material. The order in which the game is done is also important, because if the students choose a product first they are likely to just grab a material sample that fits rather than carefully considering its performance properties. Jo will also use an online interactive game that lets students test the properties of different materials. See Techlink Resource Review Bitesize.
Scoodies Workbook (PDF, 51kb)
Teacher comment
This unit reinforced the importance of discussion and questioning in a Technology classroom, especially when exploring new concepts such as performance properties. Revisiting and changing the questions ensured the students gained the correct conceptual understandings about performance properties. Students were encouraged to use descriptive words (such as soft, thick, fluffy, rough) when identifying performance properties of materials. This use of subjective properties helped guide them towards more objective descriptions and testing (such as hard, conductive, waterproof). See Indicators of Progression. Ensuring that the products shared with students were ones they had a personal interest in, such as a long-board skateboard, led to a much greater exploration of the product, and its materials, than would have otherwise occurred. This meant the students were more engaged in the class discussions and also led to a greater understanding of the importance of material performance properties.
Facilitator's comment
Selena Hinchco, Resource Development and Facilitation Year 7-10 Technology Project
Jo and Charlotte chose a class context – in this case scoodies and waterproof bags – where there were clear links to her focus curriculum component, Technological Products. Scoodies, for example, are a Technological Outcome where material choice and an understanding of the properties of materials are very beneficial. However, she soon realised that if she only integrated the Technological Products concepts into the students' Technological Practice of making scoodies, that student understanding of these concepts could be lost. While the context of scoodies helped reinforce the Technological Products concepts and provided excellent links, she also provided her students with activities that allowed them to explore a wide range of materials and products, and their related performance properties and therefore develop their conceptual understandings. Jo is keen to include a wider range of material samples, including ingredients and resistant materials. Jo's strategies can be found with other teaching strategies within the Techlink Strategies for Engaging Students resource.
RSS Feed
