Recent Snapshots

Māori Technology glossary

Build your own aeroplane

Understanding the New Product Development Process

Using Techlink

Gingerbread House unit

Combining Technology Programmes

Developing a New Biscuit

Creating a Technology program with Google Apps for Education

Establishing continuity in Year 9 Technology

Chocolate display.

Level: Year 9
School: Heretaunga College

A trial Year 9 Technology course, in which each class was taught by one teacher for four modules, proved so successful that it has been established as part of the school Technology programme.

Year 9/10 Technology

The Technology team at Heretaunga College in Upper Hutt is still in the process of making change to fully implement the Technology curriculum (2007). As part of this, they reviewed the existing Year 9 Technology programme, looking at the knowledge and skills students were learning and how this set them up for progression to Year 10.

The compulsory Year 9 course consisted of four one-term modules – Soft Materials, Hard Materials, Food Technology and General Technology – with students moving on to a specialist teacher for each module. They also took Digital Technologies (DT) twice a week in form class. Timetable constraints meant that Design and Visual Communication (DVC) wasn't offered at this level.

In Year 10, students take Technology as option subjects: DT, DVC and Hard Materials which continue through to Year 13, or Food Technology which is only available up to Year 11 (something HOD Katherine Stokes is keen to change, but at present the timetable can't accommodate Food Technology along with the Hospitality and Food and Nutrition courses offered at senior level).

When Katherine came to the school as TIC Food Technology in 2003, students were doing a Home Economics-type course. Her first priority was to change these courses so that they were meeting the objectives of the then (2003) Technology curriculum. After being appointed HOD in 2007, Katherine's focus has been to get staff working together as Technology teachers rather than in isolation in their specialist areas. She has also organised lots of PLD for the team around teaching the curriculum.

Why change?

The Technology department, as in many schools, had been comprised of a mixed group of teachers. Some were trained to teach other curriculum areas, some didn't have a good understanding of the 'new' curriculum and were struggling with delivery of some aspects, and there was a gradual increase in the number of teachers trained under the new curriculum. This resulted in a Year 9 programme which lacked consistency. Students weren't always getting the same message; some classes did hardly any written work while others were expected to work through the technological process. Although there was a team focus on teaching Technology terminology, this wasn't really coming through in the classroom.

The teachers who were confident in teaching to the curriculum would find in Term 4 that their new students didn't have the level of knowledge they should have acquired after doing three Technology modules. This inconsistency was also evident in assessment. The school awards a Junior Certificate of Achievement to Year 9 and 10 students at the end of the year, based on assessments done each term. Technology teachers noticed that individual results could be quite erratic – a student with an Excellence in Year 9 could get a Not Achieved in Year 10.

The team decided that their priority in making change to the school Technology programme was to ensure that all Year 9 students were being taught the same knowledge and working through the same process. After considering various ways of managing this, they developed a trial programme in which one teacher would deliver all four modules to one class.

Establishing a programme in which teachers would work outside of their specialist area was a radical solution, inspired by Katherine's declaration to the principal several years earlier that "We're Technology teachers; we should be able to teach multi-materials". With no other schools, as far as they were aware, taking this 'one teacher' approach, the team didn't have anyone to consult about the practicalities of working through such a change. Conscious of the risk that students could potentially miss out on important skills in some areas, the four Year 9 teachers were specifically chosen for their confidence in teaching the curriculum and readiness to take on a new challenge. The trial also required support from the rest of the team and from the principal. With teachers enthusiastic and willing to put in the extra effort involved in learning new knowledge and skills, the principal backed the proposed change.

The six Year 9 classes were divided up between the four teachers Their goal was that all Year 9 students finish the year equipped with the knowledge they needed to successfully move on to Year 10, and to make them ready for Year 11 courses including Level 1 Food Technology.

Planning a trial programme

Toy Story display.

The four teachers worked together to plan the programme, with additional input from the rest of the team. They retained the same structure as before – four one-term modules – and adapted units which individual teachers had developed and taught in previous years:

  • Flying Toys (Hard Materials) – students worked with wood
  • Pasta (Food Technology) – developing hand-made pasta
  • Monsters (Soft Materials) – a focus on general textiles, with some hand and machine-sewing
  • Chocolate (General) – creating chocolates, wooden moulds, plastic forms, packaging.

The main objective was consistency – so every class did the same unit, used the same workbooks and completed the same homework tasks and assessment activities. Because they had discussed the programme in detail and written the units and supporting documents together, each teacher was happy with the content and there was some scope for variation. Katherine explains "We have standard units for consistency and to make sure the core work is covered, and each teacher puts her own flair on to it". Students were issued with a Technology workbook for the year, which was kept in the classroom to ensure it was always there when needed.

Teachers also created their own 'starter' activities for each unit. Teacher Renee Stokes had a lot of students mainstreamed from the school's special needs unit, so adapted the work so that they didn't go into as much depth as the other students. She also made a starter activities booklet so that her students would know exactly what they were going to do. This worked well, so during the year the teachers followed suit and developed a starter activities booklet for each unit for anyone who wanted to use it, including relief teachers.

Students started their first lesson with a Technology pre-test, to check what knowledge they brought with them from Year 8, and sat the test again at the end of the year so that teachers could evaluate how much they had learnt over the year. Teachers have noticed a change from earlier years, when new students weren't used to following the technological process, and find that more students arrive familiar with the terminology and have some understanding of the process.

Moderating assessment was relatively straightforward, because teachers had written the units and generic marking schedule together to ensure they were all marking consistently. In their ongoing discussion throughout the year, teachers were enthusiastic about showing each other the great work their students had achieved.

Delivery

Collegial support was a key aspect in successfully delivering the trial programme. Working in new Technology teaching areas was challenging, and everyone appreciated the encouragement and help they received from specialist teachers. Katherine decided that as HOD she should take on what all four considered the biggest challenge – working in the Hard Materials workshop – so that the other three could learn from her experience. She was grateful for assistance in the workshop from the Hard Materials specialists, and teachers with more skills in Textiles. She, in turn, helped others who weren't confident with tools in the Food Technology room. There was also opportunity for some team teaching when the seniors were on study leave.

Teachers were open with their students about their specialist strengths and that they were teaching unfamiliar subjects for the first time. The students responded well to this, and could understand how the technological process was followed the same way each term, no matter what their teacher's expertise and skill level in a particular area.

The Outcomes

The trial programme achieved its purpose – all students had been exposed to the technological knowledge they needed and had worked through the same process. The teachers agreed that after working through the units they felt more confident teaching in different Technology workrooms. Despite the challenge in teaching new subject-specific knowledge and skills, they found that the classroom ran more smoothly than in previous years. Teachers could plan for Terms 2, 3 and 4 based on their existing knowledge of the students – their abilities, the level they were working at, who shouldn't be sitting together, those with special needs – all the things that usually take time with each new intake. Reinforcing the technological process in each module was easier because the teacher knew exactly what her students had already been taught. Renee sums up the advantage of the structure: "Consistency, having prior knowledge of the students, knowing them well and their strengths".

A bonus of the new system was the creation of deeper relationships with parents. The parents of Year 9 students want that level of contact, Katherine says, but it's a connection that Technology teachers aren't usually able to achieve when they only have students for a term. Parent-teacher interviews were more productive because both parties could refer to discussions from a previous interview or school report.

Teachers also found that having one class all year made it easier to work with other school initiatives, such as the school-wide literacy focus in 2011. Each Technology teacher could incorporate literacy strategies/activities in their course knowing that they hadn't already been done in an earlier module.

Tweaking the programme

Pasta display.

In Term 4, pleased with the results of the trial programme, the team decided to repeat it in 2012. After reviewing each unit it was decided that as the course was working well, only minor tweaking was required. The team had hoped to complete changes to Year 9 assessment at that stage too, but is still working on that.

What next?

Having established a successful Year 9 programme, the team is looking at achieving consistency within the Year 10 options. Though pleased with how their trial worked, they aren't complacent about what they have achieved and Katherine notes that fully implementing and assessing the two newer strands of the Technology curriculum "is still a work in progress". Her goals for the future are to review senior Technology courses to ensure they are fully addressing the requirements of the Technology curriculum and to set up Year 12/13 Food Technology courses.

The school as a whole is considering the merits of introducing half-year courses in the senior school. If this goes ahead, Technology teachers would look at projects of differing lengths for full and half-year options.

Worksheets