Abstract
ABSTRACTThe hierarchal status of academic disciplines, what defines valuable or legitimate knowledge and what should we teach our children is a topic of much debate. Amidst concerns of an academic decline, tackling the culture of low expectation and anti‐intellectualism, the need to address social justice, and its by‐product of cultural reproduction, is the focus of current education policy. Set within the UK, this paper presents a critical review of the literature relating to disciplinary knowledge and teaching and learning regimes, specifically seeking to explore the subcultures which exist between design and technology and its associated curricula counterparts that combine to produce science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). The purpose being to proffer an explanation that is supportive in developing an understanding as to why design and technology is perceived by many to be of less value than its STEM counterparts. Situation within a functionalist approach to STEM education policy, findings are discussed in relation to design and technology, which as a subject is caught between the identities of academic and vocational exponents, and it is from this perspective that complex nature and perceived value of design and technology is explored.
Highlights
Set within the United Kingdom (UK), this paper presents a critical review of the literature relating to disciplinary knowledge and teaching and learning regimes, seeking to explore the subcultures which exist between design and technology and its associated curricula counterparts that combine to produce science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM)
The purpose being to proffer an explanation that is supportive in developing an understanding as to why design and technology is perceived by many to be of less value than its STEM counterparts
Situation within a functionalist approach to STEM education policy, findings are discussed in relation to design and technology, which as a subject is caught between the identities of academic and vocational exponents, and it is from this perspective that complex nature and perceived value of design and technology is explored
Summary
Drawing primarily upon the work of Biglan’s (1973a, 1973b), Becher’s (1994) and Bernstein’s (1971a, 1971b, 1975) theoretical view of the curriculum, preparatory work by Bell (2015) sought to establish the position of design and technology as a curriculum subject of value within science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education. He asserts that as a consequence of its vocational orientation the theoretical nature of its academic knowledge base is poorly developed, an issue which is reflective of, and holds parallels with, the disciplinary development within design and technology He goes on to state that true interdisciplinarity occurs only when individual disciplines surrender their discrete axiomatics, and collectively define themselves by reference to a single strategic axiomatic applicable to all. Working from definitions provided by Chynoweth (2009), Jantsch (1972) and Klein (1990, 1996, 2006), it is clear that over 25 years on from its original inception as a subject, design and technology has failed to establish itself as a single discipline This perspective further supports the philosophy as to why as a subject, design and technology is not fully understood by those working outside of compulsory schooling, nor is it recognised as a field in its own right within the academic community and is perceived as subject lower in value than its EBacc (DfE, 2016f) and STEM counterparts. Within those subject’s disciplines considered to be soft/applied the focus places greater emphasis on reflective practice, personal development and knowledge acquisition, adopting a more holistic approach to the development of ideas, innovation, creativity and expression (Table 2)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
