This paper is based on work carried out as part of a research study into the professional practices of secondary design and technology teachers in England. It focused on fostering creativity or teaching for creativity as defined by the Robinson Report (1999, All our futures: creativity, culture and education. London: Department for Education and Employment (DfEE)) for pupils aged 11-14 years. The overall research question that drove this study was ''to what extent can teachers influence the creativity of pupils aged 11-14 years in design and technology lessons?'' The paper provides the basis used to generate a unique theoretical threefeature model or framework that can be used to explore creativity within an educational context. The findings of three investigations in the study are presented in this paper. The first and second investigations looked at what could be learnt from the professional practices of art and design and design and technology teachers and the views of four 'expert' teachers known for their ability to develop the creative potential of their pupils. The data is discussed under emerging themes and it is used to inform specific criteria in the evolving theoretical three-feature model for creativity. The model is then used to analyse the data from the third classroom based investigation and the findings are discussed under the emerging themes to help identify the issues related to fostering creativity within the design and technology classroom. This paper discusses the implications of the research for classroom practice and suggests that, as creativity is a complex, multi-faceted concept and process, the theoretical three-feature model and related criteria evolved in the study provides a sound framework to explore creativity within an educational context. As a tool it helps identify examples of good practice and highlight areas that require further attention by teachers aiming to foster their pupils' creativity. It is suggested 2007 that design and technology teachers have lessons to learn from the practices of their art and design colleagues and 'expert' design and technology teachers. It is concluded that there is a need for greater understanding by teachers of their implicit theories regarding teaching, learning and creativity. A wider use could be made of the breadth of strategies outlined by the 'expert' teachers. This would help address the weakness identified in the school based study and strengthen classroom practice when teaching for creativity.

The tools to help teachers reflect on their professional knowledge are few in number, and often difficult to utilise. This paper reports on a study conducted with both primary and secondary technology initial teacher education students in a number of different countries who were given the same teacher-knowledge graphical framework as a tool to support reflection on their own professional knowledge. We wanted to investigate if, despite the different country contexts, student teachers of technology could take advantage of their experience with graphic visualisation to help them articulate abstract notions such as aspects of their developing teacher knowledge. We discovered that the graphical tool acted as a framework that enabled them to set out their subject knowledge, pedagogical knowledge and 'school' knowledge and was useful in helping them become more self-aware. In this paper, the framework itself is introduced, the way it was presented to the novice teachers is outlined and the relative impact of such 'self awareness' on their understandings, enabled by the framework, is then discussed.

No abstract

This paper will describe an inquiry into the case of a design & technology one-year Postgraduate Certificate in Education (PGCE) trainee's interpretation of their school-based experience in England using the DEPTH approach of subject knowledge, pedagogic knowledge and school knowledge. The following research questions drove the study: (a) What reasons do PGCE trainee teachers give for believing that design & technology should be included in the secondary school curriculum for all pupils? (b) What designing and making assignments did these PGCE trainee teachers teach in the schoolbased experience? (c) How did the trainee teachers perceive these assignments in terms of the subject knowledge required, pedagogy employed and the influence of the school on the nature of the assignment and how it was taught? Data were collected using a free response questionnaire administered to one cohort of 29 secondary design & technology PGCE trainee teachers at the end of the course at a Higher Education Institute (HEI). Analysis of the data involved descriptive statistics. Analysis of the data has revealed that the trainees did not adhere to any obvious orthodoxy for justifying the place of design & technology in the school curriculum and that the current performance culture in schools has a prescriptive effect on their ability to contribute to the design & technology curriculum. Recommendations are made concerning school-HEI partnership activities and further research activities to enhance the scope of future studies.