Introduction
The National Curriculum is currently under review. Programmes of Study are likely to be updated for the Year 2000
and beyond. According to QCA and ACCAC, changes will be evolutionary with modifications being based on sound evidence.
We need to maintain our Nation's leading position in the development of design and technology. NAAIDT strongly believes
that D&T should be a compulsory subject for all pupils from 5 to 16. Organisations like DATA and TEP have successfully
promoted our subject at the highest levels and it is our responsibility to ensure that these initiatives are reflected in
ongoing improvements in the classroom.
Key Stage 1 and 2
Minor changes could be made to programmes of study related to designing at Key Stage 1, and to knowledge and understanding
at Key Stage 2, by removing separate statements on quality, and products and applications and integrating these aspects into
the designing and making sections. Greater use of ICT within D&T should be expected at KS2. All of these aspects are endemic
to good design and technology teaching and should feature throughout schemes of work. A stronger relationship with the Science
curriculum could result in some aspects of physical science being taught in a design and technology activity to promote teaching
and learning via practical activities. Overall the revised order should be consistent with the QCA Breadth and Balance document
and the exemplar scheme of work that has just been published.
Key Stage 3
Although the programmes of study at Key Stage 3 are well established, there is room for greater clarity and focus.
Reversing the order of statements 1a and 1c, for example, and removing the word 'disassembly', would give product
analysis its proper place as the starting point for many design and technology activities. References to materials
should be clarified including making it clear that it is not necessary for pupils to work with all materials throughout
the whole key stage. This would enable schools to concentrate on ensuring progression in designing and making regardless
of materials used; reduce the need for 'rotational' courses; and promote greater continuity between Primary and Secondary
schools in the type and scope of activities pupils experience. Greater emphasis needs to be given to developing the
application of systems and control; ICT and CAD/CAM within the key stage.
Key Stage 4 and 'A' Level
This evolution could also result in significant gains for the type of courses at Key Stage 4 and A level.
Although the increasingly popular current A level courses are 'product design' centred the most recent courses being
piloted look backwards by implying focused material approaches. This is not a sound basis for product design;
inhibits the development of systems and control, and would lead to significant staffing and group size issues
in schools. Recently published revised criteria have recognised these problems. The model for Key Stage 4 suggested below
represents an evolutionary step for GCSE design and technology. This structure provides continuity from Key Stage 3 to A level
and GNVQ pathways and would reduce the range of GCSE syllabuses needed in design and technology. All pupils would study a common
core of fundamental elements and knowledge of designing and making, followed by an emphasis and application in either product
design or systems and control. Students following a product design course would be able to work in whatever materials are made
available within the school. Syllabuses in this area would be able to reflect and keep pace with the rapid developments in new
materials and production processes.
|  |  |
The way forward
This model suggests a way forward for Design and Technology at Key Stage 4. The review of the National Curriculum
provides an opportunity for the subject to progress, moving away from historic 'comfort zones' and towards a curriculum
for the 21
st century which equips pupils with the necessary skills, knowledge and understanding that they will need.
The major benefits of this model would be a) a more cohesive curriculum with a clear common core; b) fewer D&T syllabuses
without any loss of the flexibility for pupils to work with a variety of materials and components; c) improved comparability
between different GCSE course examinations and; d) greater clarity and credibility for the subject in the eyes of parents, employers,
and higher education.
