Updated - 22 October 2018
Copyright - G P Sagar 2015
Introduction
“Every rise in the quality of the work men do is followed, swiftly and inevitably, by a rise in the quality of the men
who do it.”
LP.Jacks (2)
Our Society has always held craft subjects at arms length!
Prominent people throughout the ages have raised concerns, but who will listen?
‘On Education’
“We
are
in
pain
to
make
them
scholars
but
not
men!
To
talk,
rather
than
know,
which
is
true
canting.
The
first
thing
obvious
to
children,
is
what
is
sensible;
and
that
we
make
no
part
of
their
rudiments.
We
press
their
memory
too
soon,
and
puzzle,
strain
and
load
them
with
words
and
rules,
to
know
grammar
and
rhetorick,
and
a
strange
toungue
or
two,
that
it
is
ten
to
one
may
never
be
useful
to
them,
leaving
their
natural
genius
to
mechanical
and
physical
or
natural
knowledge
uncultivated
and
neglected;
which
would
be
of
exceeding
use
and
pleasure
to
them
through
the
whole
course
of
their
life.
To
be
sure,
languages
are
not
to
be
despised
or
neglected.
But
things
are
still
to
be
preferred.
Children
had
rather
be
making
of
tools,
and
instruments
of
play,
shaping,
drawing,
framing,
building
etc;
than
getting
some
rules
of
propriety of speech by heart; and those also would follow with more judgement, and less trouble and time.”
Introduction
Having
been
involved
with
the
subject
development
during
a
long
period
of
time,
from
the
latter
half
of
the
1970s
through
to
1990,
both
professionally
at
the
coal
face
and
at
national
level
within
the
Institute,
I
claim
to
be
justified
in
cataloguing
events, and of course I include numerous personal anecdotes.
From
its
very
inception
the
subject's
position
within
the
curriculum
has
been
nothing
else
but
stormy
right
up
until
the
present day where it's very existence is very much on the brink.
The
last
five
decades
has
seen
nothing
in
the
way
of
stability
within
the
educational
system,
and
today
even
less
so.
With
each
successive
government
there
comes
a
new
ideas,
or
more
to
the
point,
a
regurgitation
of
old
practices
which
are
in
line with the political ideals of the moment.
Children's
education
has
become
a
tool
for
the
politicians
with
very
little
real
thought
given
to
sound
and
stable
education
for
our
young
people.
After
all,
the
politicians
who
constantly
argue
about
the
social
needs
of
the
system
are
in
fact
products
of
the
system
themselves.
This
is
a
classic
example
of
the
Hegel
(and
Churchill!)
saying,
you
learn
from
history
that you learn nothing from history.
It
has
suffered
ridicule
from
colleagues
within
the
academic
areas,
it
has
been
sneered
at
by
politicians
it
has
been
downtrodden
by
the
elite,
has
been
totally
ignored
by
the
educationalists
and
because
of
this
has
been
under
appreciated
by
society
at
large.
In
consequence,
our
universities
because
of
their
very
nature
and
position
in
our
social
structure
must
be
responsible
for
the
way
things
have
developed.
Their
adherence
to
the
philosophies
of
old,
and
the
indoctrination
of
students, has moulded a large part of society resulting in an ever deepening division.
All of these factors have totally ignored the crucial role it plays in the moulding of the major world
I
remember
so
many
colleagues
who
in
the
past
worked
tirelessly,
and
professionally,
to
advance
their
skills
and
capabilities
in
order
to
give
pupils
the
best
possible
education
in
this
area
of
the
curriculum.
It
hurts
somewhat
when
comments
are
made
belittling
the
old
approaches
because
at
that
time
true
successes
were
being
made
and
pupils
were
being
enthused
and
encouraged
towards
appropriate
careers.
As
one
who
cuthis
teeth
in
the
sixties
and
seventies
I
knew
many of these people and I am prompted to pursue this project in order that all their excellence is not forgotten.
When
I
look
around
today
I
see
a
failing
society
on
a
downhill
spiral,
not
least
by
its
attitude,
and
appreciation
of
the
made
world.
Neither
also
its
concept
of
quality
in
support
of
their
efforts,
and
morals.
Much
of
what
I
describe
is
also
well
catalogued
in the Bible whether we like it or not.
is
true
that
there
remains
a
proportion
of
the
population
committed
to
improvement
and
moving
forward,
but
the
life-style
of
the
masses
leaves
much
to
be
desired.
Professor
Thring
highlighted
the
pending
problems
and
results
in
his
book-The
Engineers
Conscience
-
see
chart.
As
Design-Technologists
we
are
in
a
unique
position
to
educate
our
children
in
the
real
understanding of the made world, but how can this happen if we are not ourselves in tune with it.
am
sick
and
tired
of
hearing
and
seeing
individuals
trash
the
work
and
the
teaching
of
the
past
within
our
subject
area
,
particularly
in
their
drive
to
attain
a
certain
elitism.
Some
serious
thinking
has
to
be
done,
and
changes
made,
before
it
really
is
too late. The current state and results are evidence that we have
Many
things
have
changed
since
I
went
to
school
in
a
South
Yorkshire
Secondary
Modern/Technical
School.
It
was
certainly there that I developed my enthusiasm for the made world, and kindled a desire to design and make things.
My
recollection
is
of
boys
(it
was
boys
only
until
it
turned
Comprehensive)
eager
to
get
into
the
workshop
and
make.
This
was
so
true
of
so
many
of
the
schools
of
the
time.
Seeing
the
things
that
had
been
made
by
the
senior
boys
encouraged
a
feeling
of
'I
want
to
make
that'!
It
was
not
however.
the
object,
but
the
feeling
of
possibility
that
fuelled
the
excitement.
That,
together with teachers who enjoyed what they did, led to the successes I have experienced and seen.
Sadly
things
seem
to
be
spiralling
down
along
with
the
attitudes
in
society.
The
concept
of
young
people
learning
to
make
things
is
being
put
on
the
back
burner
with
a
chunk
of
their
education
being
lost.
The
'desire
to
create'
being
completely
ignored.
Professor
Thring's
chart
is
an
attempt
to
communicate
graphically
what
is
happening
at
the
moment.
The
real
question
now is 'can it be reversed'? or does no-one really care?
Early beginnings
Quaker
schools
introduced
practical
subjects
into
their
curriculum
as
early
as
1850
in
order
to
equip
some
of
their
students
for
society of the time. Read 'Bailey'.
It
took
many
years
before
educationalists
would
accept
this
sort
of
subject
as
anywhere
legitimate
in
the
educational
spectrum.
No-one
could
see
any
value
in
it.
Even
to
quite
recently,
in
one
school
the
handicraft
teacher
was
not
allowed
into
the
staff
room. He had to be with the caretaking and grounds staff.
Sadly
there
has
always
been
a
social
in-acceptance
of
the
subject
in
schools
as
it
has
not
been
regarded
as
on
the
same
plane
as
'academic'
subjects.
This
fact
is
born
out
today
by
the
balance
of
the
school
curriculum,
and
sadly
the
attitude
within
today's
society.
This
document
is
put
together
in
an
attempt
to
create
a
clearer
understanding
of
Design
&
Technology
as
a
curriculum
element.
After
many
years
there
still
exists
little
real
understanding
of
it
among
educationalists,
politicians,
parents,
and
the
public-at-
large.
Using William Penn’s quote ‘On Education’ as my starting point, I can progress to the present day and ask “what has changed?”
There
is
a
considerable
history
attached
to
the
Design
&
Technology
subject
relating
to
its
development
and
place
within
society
and
the
school
curriculum.
Dogged
with
constant
argument
from
all
quarters
of
education,
and
existing
between
extremes
of
enthusiasm
and
intentional
distruction.
For
something
which
is
so
close
to
our
very
existance
it
is
very
difficult
to
conceive
as
to
why there has been, and still is, so much trouble surrounding it.
For
Many
years
the
development
of
the
subject
was
largely
in
the
hands
of
enthusiastic
teachers
and
their
involvement
in
the
professional
association.
It
was
not
until
the
mid
80's
that
those
in
Government
began
to
take
action
to
centralize
thinking
by
engineering the demize of the said professional associations.
For
the
early
years,
handicraft
teachers
were
treated
very
much
as
second
class
citizens
within
schools,
in
fact
in
some
prestigeous
schools
they
were
not
allowed
in
the
Common
Room
(Staff
Room),
and
had
to
have
their
break
with
the
maintenance staff.
My
credentials
for
making
the
following
statements
stem
from
a
lifetime
in
education
including
two
Terms
as
National
President
of
the
'Educational
Institute
of
Design,
Craft,
and
Technology'
(1983-84
and
1986-87),
and
a
good
number
of
years
serving on the national executive.
Much
of
the
developmentof
this
subject
was
generated
by
the
teachers
themselves
through
regular
meetings
and
a
common
enthusiasm.
Some
people
in
government
are
quite
stupid
Taking
away
the
independence
of
the
Inspectorate.
Fearful
of
the
autonomy
of
teachers. Government thinking it knows better.
Qualifications eventually.
Social
attitudes
have
been
very
divisive
with
a
blatant
looking
down
on
practical
subjects,
his
has
partially
led
to
the
ever
increasing
North
South
divide
within
the
country
because
the
North
always
relied
on
industry
and
therefore
schooling
and
training was very much directed to this need.
Educationalists
through
the
ages
have
ignored
this
area
of
education
through
probably
the
own
ignorance
and
educational
snobbery. Consequently it has been left to the practitioners to forge appropriate developments.
Little
thought
has
ever
been
given,
even
now,
to
the
real
educational
value,
and
the
learning
potential
that
exists
within
this
educational
area.
Today
we
turn
our
hair
out
at
what
we
perceive
to
be
serious
lack
of
education
within
our
people,
but
the
very
subjects
which
can
also
these
needs
are
being
denied
to
our
students,
and
what
is
allowed
is
constantly
being
watered
down.
Throughout
my
teaching
career
I
have
witnessed
first
the
attitudes
of
government
parents,
colleagues,
and
the
wider
society to these subjects where you get your hands dirty.
Nothing
in
our
society
today
encourages
children
into
the
skill
of
making
decisions
our
considering
the
results
of
their
actions
- anticipation of the future - wisdom.
Nothing
in
our
society
today
encourages
children
into
the
skill
of
making
decisions
our
considering
the
results
of
their
actions
- anticipation of the future - wisdom.
For
many
years
an
argument
has
raged
as
to
the
merits
between
craft
and
design
based
-
quite
ridiculous
a
both
work
together.
Sadly
those
who
have
done
the
most
arguing
have
not
paid
any
real
attention
to
the
finer
points
or
fundamental
qualities of what children actually learn. There is a very big difference between what is taught and what is learnt.
Early
Man
had
the
ability
to
record
his
exploits
on
cave
walls
.
Why
do
we
today
find
this
form
of
communication
which
is
timeless so difficult .
Also,
early
man
had
the
ability
to
solve
simple
problems,
as
do
monkeys
in
this
day
and
age.
There
is
a
very
serious
lesson
to
be learnt here.
As with many aspects of education the subject has been dogged with empire builders - people making names for themselves.
We
hear
so
much
from
numerous
sources
that
‘they
must
be
taught’
or
‘we
must
teach
them’!
Surely
the
focus
must
be
on
how much and how efective they learn.
It
is
very
easy
for
anyone
to
associate
the
practical
curriculum
with
vocasional
directions
in
later
life,
which
sadly
is
the
case
too much in the past. The real point is missed by most people including ‘the experts’.
Without
any
doubt,
the
problems
we
have
experience
in
the
acceptance
of
craft
subjects
within
the
curriculum
stems
from
social
attitudes
towards
the
practical
pursuits
in
life
and
society.
Even
now
the
perception
remains
that
those
who
work
with
their
hands
are
somewhat
lowly
compaired
to
the
rest.
The
ever
existing
conflict
between
academia
and
the
rest.
The
class
structure.
Even
now
in
2014
we
hear
phrases
on
the
television
of
‘The
working
class
people
of
the
North’
and
‘white
working
class boys compaired to the rest of the group’.
Throughout
the
history
of
craft
education
there
has
been
a
fundamental
problem
regarding
its
perception
by
the
general
public.
This
of
course
is
something
which
is
perpetuated
by
the
education
system
itself,
and
here
I
would
lay
the
blame
fairly
and squarely with the public school culture and universities.
One
very
great
concern
based
on
my
life-long
experience
is
that
we
are
on
a
downward
spiral.
I
am
told
this
is
not
so
-
but
what of the evidence.
The Educational Value is Far Deeper !
Design & Technology, or as in the past Craft Subjects, must not solely be associated with the producing of Industrtal Fodder!
The
most
neglected
aspects,
and
miss-understandings,
regarding
this
subject
area,
are
the
learning
processes
for
the
pupil
and
student
.
Where
most
other
subjects
require
mostly
the
sole
acquisition
of
knowledge,
children
are
required
to
work
with
abstract
concepts,
whilst
develop
skills
requiring
accuracy,
dexterity
in
the
use
of
tools,
together
with
patience
and
emotional drive to bring a practical solution to a successful end.
The
in-house
argument
regarding
the
older
style
of
craft
teaching
compared
with
the
current
concept
of
Design
and
Technology is very much a distraction owing to a great deal of ignorance regarding the educational complexity of each area.
The
bottom
line
is
that
children
learn
a
great
deal
from
the
processes
contained
in
this
subject
compared
to
those
in
other
areas of the curriculum.
This
area
of
human
pursuit
has
always
had
a
difficult
ride
owing
to
the
attitudes
and
perception
of
our
Society.
Today
the
battle
between
the
‘so
called’
academics,
and
the
practical
field,
rages
just
as
intensely
as
it
did
centuries
ago.
We
can
in
fact
trace
as
far back to the days of Plato to understand why Society is so divided in our Western civilization.
However,
not
only
Plato
had
something
to
say
about
how
people
should
be
perceived,
other
prominent
personalities
have
contributed to the argument on both sides of the camp.
The
tragedy
is
that
a
division
has
become
entrenched
In
our
society
which
has
affected
how
successfully
we
educate,
and
any
reversal
process
Is
unthinkable.
A
look
at
educational
history,
and
its
links
to
the
once
successful
manufacturing
and
crative
base of our country, can give a clue as to what is needed today.
The
situation
today
is
probably
far
worse
than
it
ever
has
been
as
witnessed
through
the
ever
increasing
spiral
down
of
our
social capability, and the increasing rise in unrest and dissatisfaction amongst our population.
There
seems
to
be
very
little
vision
Or
planning
by
our
government.
With
each
new
government
comes
a
new
answer
to
education’s
problems,
but
each
time
ther
is
failure.
Will
they
ever
see
that
any
solution
has
to
come
from
a
much
greater
depth
of understanding?
Of
course,
there
has
always
been
a
political
pressure
on
this
subject
owing
to
its
expense
as
it
is
always
undoubtedly
been
the
most
expensive
subject
within
the
school,
the
necessarily
smaller
class
sizes
which
again
has
always
been
an
issue
for
school
resources,
and
the
difficulties
with
regard
to
examinations
because
of
the
nature
of
the
design
based
syllabuses
being
somewhat unquantifiable.
The
government
took
exception
to
the
notion
of
teachers
taking
the
initiative
and
engineered
the
demise
of
the
teacher
led
organisations, to be replaced with what we have now in the form of the design and technology Association.
Many
things
have
changed
since
I
went
to
school
in
a
South
Yorkshire
Secondary
Modern/Technical
School.
It
was
certainly
there that I developed my enthusiasm for the made world, and kindled a desire to design and make things.
My
recollection
is
of
boys
(it
was
boys
only
until
it
turned
Comprehensive)
eager
to
get
into
the
workshop
and
make.
This
was
so
true
of
so
many
of
the
schools
of
the
time.
Seeing
the
things
that
had
been
made
by
the
senior
boys
encouraged
a
feeling
of
'I
want
to
make
that'!
It
was
not
however.
the
object,
but
the
feeling
of
possibility
that
fuelled
the
excitement.
That,
together with teachers who enjoyed what they did, led to the successes I have experienced and seen.
Sadly
things
seem
to
be
spiralling
down
along
with
the
attitudes
in
society.
The
concept
of
young
people
learning
to
make
things
is
being
put
on
the
back
burner
with
a
chunk
of
their
education
being
lost.
The
'desire
to
create'
being
completely
ignored.
Professor
Thring's
chart
is
an
attempt
to
communicate
graphically
what
is
happening
at
the
moment.
The
real
question now is 'can it be reversed'? Or does no-one really care?
The Design and Technology Association has found the need in its last two company reports to state that -
“D&T is under threat”
“D&T is also facing the
worst shortfall in recruitment into initial teacher training of
any subject across the curriculum. D&T”
“for too many
people, remains a subject which is both chronically
undervalued and widely misunderstood”.
DATA Reports - 2013 - 2014
It is partially because of these factors and comment that I have decided to commit these historical observations to ‘paper’.
A constant cry from DATA is “Design & Technology is a New Subject”!. After twenty six years?
Reading the various reports and comments, the decline of Design and Technology is critical and almost inevitable. What has
happened? Are people happy with this? Where is the dynamism of the subject leaders of years ago?
This belief is at the heart of the problems because in reality Design and Technology as it is now known is simply a further
development of a subject which was in the process of change over a number of years, driven by ordinary teachers.
Design & Technology
The Craft/Design/Technological subjects have enjoyed a long history, but in these recent times there has been attempted
fundamental change of the whole ethos and philosophy regarding their very existence in the curriculum.
At one end of the spectrum you have the educators who claim that D&T as it is now called is a ‘New Subject’ divorced from
its predecessors, whilst at the other end we have a society who now do not have a clue what it is all about. For this we only
have to read the Design & Technology Association’s end of year reports for the last couple of years or so.
There seems to be a collective denial, and rejection of the work teachers and educationalists did in the past.
Publicised comments such as -
“In too many places the subject is still identified with its craft roots and the low academic status that is often associated with
practical/technical/creative subjects”.(Trustees’ Report and Financial Statement 2014)
And
“Gone are the days of making products with no real purpose, just to demonstrate and teach skills”.(Page 24 D&T Practice Issue 1 2015)
- demonstrate a serious ignorance of the work done in the past, and to an extent are offensive to those of us who were in
‘the thick of it’ at the sharp end.
Following these remarks by the ‘Professionals’ of today, my task is to put the record straight on behalf of all the ordinary
teachers who gave so much personal time, and were so deeply involved in the development of the subject for the benefit
of the students they taught.
‘Design and Technology’ is not a ‘New Subject’ -
it is merely the result of continued change and development which began in the 1960’s through the
workings and collaboration of members of the EIDCT (previously the Institute of Craft Education).
The real problem has been the obsession of those in the profession who have been ‘hell-bent’ on its
status within the curriculum as an ‘academic’ subject to satisfy their own grievances. The focus has
been to drop the word ‘Craft’ from any subject title - many meetings being held, and disproportionate
effort expended, on this one particular topic.
I have the records, material, and experience to back up my comments which I make with confidence
and accuracy.
- Personal Work Index Page
- Sophie's Egg
- The Marlin Trophy
- Rose Bowl
- Silver Cup
- Music Stand
- The Gilchrist Bowl
- Silver Golfing Marker
- Walking Stick Handles
- Turnery Work
- Other Silver Work
- Platinum Ear Drops
- General Woodwork
- The Pararule
- Oliver's Money Box
- Rings and Ring Making
- Bracelets
- Necklaces & Pendants
- Box Making
- Oak Kitchen
- Jonas Feilding Presentation
- Building / Renovation Project
- Communion Set Repair
- History of Craft Education
- Preface
- Introduction
- Setting the Scene
- Towards Design and Technology
- Historical Aspects
- The Plato Gap
- Kill the Skill
- The Colleges and Teacher Training
- The Professional Association
- The Quaker Influence
- Where Are We Now
- Personal Reflections
- Acknowledgements and Resources
- Notes
- Timeline
