By Emma Smith, Primary STEM Teacher
In my Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) classroom, we use the engineering design cycle all the time, asking a question, imagining a solution, designing, making and testing it, then repeating the process. This normalises a multiplicity of responses, encouraging creativity, resilience and application of knowledge, with the fun of making a mess in the process!
I find the engineering design cycle to be a useful analogy for curriculum making, which is also an iterative (and sometimes messy!) process of questioning, designing, classroom practice and reflection. This process will be illustrated with examples from a Critical Collaborative Professional Enquiry (CCPE), exploring engineering equity, which I recently undertook for my MSc in Professional Education and Leadership at the University of Stirling.
Questioning
Curriculum making must begin with consideration of the “knowledge, skills and attributes … required for educating the human to be a participant in a complex and pluralistic modern society’” (Priestley & Xenophontas, 2021 p. 5). My CCPE was informed by research showing gender inequities persist in engineering careers and girls’ stereotypes that STEM careers are “not for them” are fixed by the age of 12 (Archer & Dewitt, 2017; Capobianco et al., 2012). I therefore began with the question: “In what ways do primary engineering experiences encourage girls to consider engineering as a career?”
Designing
For the children to experience the disciplinary knowledge of engineering within STEM, develop their physical skills, and their belief in self-as-engineer, they were initially asked to draw a picture of an engineer doing engineering work, so I could gain an understanding of their preconceptions. A female engineer was invited in to talk about her job and to provide a positive role model. Using the engineering design process, the children were then challenged to identify a problem on the playground and to work in groups to design and model a possible solution, with the engineer returning halfway through their project to give feedback and to help refine their ideas. The children then had the opportunity to present their work at the school’s annual STEM showcase and finally, they completed the ‘Draw an Engineer’ task again.
Putting into practice
The aim of this enquiry was to encourage girls in particular to imagine themselves as engineers in the future, so the lessons were created using an imaginative and creative play pedagogy (Hughes, 2012). By creating models and drawings of their ideas, all the children acted as engineers during their lessons. They were also able to step into the role of engineer at the STEM showcase, where they presented their work as equals, alongside STEM professionals.
Reflecting
Through reflection on the data produced through this CCPE, I realised that, despite a small rise in the number of children now considering engineering as a career, this wasn’t the whole story. I began to understand their models and pictures as their “voice”, communicating what was important to them in their playground. The children wanted to have fun, but also to protect nature and take care of their shared outdoor space. The scope of the enquiry was broader than my initial focus on careers had allowed for and encompassed not only the disciplinary knowledge of engineering, but children’s funds of knowledge about their playground (Moll et al., 2009) alongside the opportunity to experience a role through imaginative play. In their reflections on the project, some children spoke about their understanding of engineering as being “to help people” and to “solve problems”, showing the potential of engineering education to provide the knowledge, skills and attributes necessary to act in community and create positive change now.
Iterating
Although the CCPE only lasted eight weeks, the understandings I gained from it continue to inform my curriculum making. I now start from the question: “In what ways does STEM education support children’s democratic participation and Learning for Sustainability within their community?”, aiming to create contextualised learning experiences that offer insights into other places, times and ways of being, thus providing “windows and mirrors” for the children I teach.
These learning experiences are structured around ‘Big Questions’, linked to the class topic, that the children work to answer over the course of a term. Examples of these Big Questions are: “What do we want a future Alloa to look like?”; “How can we be a voice for nature at our school?”; and “How is Fairtrade fair”?” Over a series of lessons, the children are taught the knowledge and skills, and practise the attributes, that they will need to answer the question. In the three cases above, the children respond by creating a future Alloa model with explanatory letter to our MP and MSP; taking photos of wildlife in our school grounds and creating a short nature documentary; and making a giant T-shirt using repurposed fabric that tells the story of cotton from field to shop to be displayed in community spaces.
Exploring curriculum making through an engineering mindset has taught me that, despite 18 years of teaching experience, there is still space – and imperative – to make mistakes and to learn from them. The joys and challenges of curriculum making lie in the fact there is always more than one right answer. It has been a privilege to explore these answers alongside the children that I teach, learning from each other, and working together, to create a fairer and more democratic way of being, both now and in the future.
References
Archer, L. and DeWitt, J. (2017) “Gender, girls and science aspirations,” Understanding Young People’s Science Aspirations. Routledge, pp. 111–135. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315761077-12.
Capobianco, B.M., French, B.F. and Diefes-Du, H.A. (2012) “Engineering Identity Development Among Pre-Adolescent Learners,” Journal of engineering education (Washington, D.C.), 101(4), pp. 698–716. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2012.tb01125.x.
Hughes, B. (2012) Evolutionary playwork: reflective analytic practice. 2nd ed. Taylor and Francis. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203873830.
Priestley, M. and Xenofontos, C. (2021) “Curriculum making: key concepts and practices,” In: Biddulph J & Flutter J (eds.) Inspiring Primary Curriculum Design. Unlocking Research. London: Routledge.
About the author
Emma Smith is a primary science, technology, engineering and maths (STEM) teacher at Redwell Primary School in Alloa. She has particular interest in equity, sustainability and curriculum development within primary STEM.