I think we have all had students in our class that “suffer” a bad case of the “can not’s”. The kids who can’t cut that, can’t find that, can’t put that away, can’t get that out. And we are busy, and the class is waiting, so we grab it for them, cut it for them, put it away for them. I am guilty of it. You?
The thing is, their helplessness is where the learning starts. If that is the hurdle they are facing, that is the first one to practice jumping over.
As a Design teacher in a PYP environment, my role has evolved to its current focus on developing and building upon skills within a design thinking context. Some of the focus is on skills building: can you cut? drill? saw? code? program? construct? Some of the focus is on developing a progression of understanding based on trial and error following our Think-Make-Improve cycle. Kids are in and out in 60 minutes or less, twice every 8 days. So how do I structure our time to plan for:
- skill building
- and inclusion?
Here’s one idea:
We have an upcoming unit in which G2 students are shoe designers, designing the perfect shoe based on their client’s needs. Students need to find out what these needs are, design a pair of shoes, get feedback on their design, iterate, create a prototype, feedback/iterate, present final sample and receive feedback. As it is written, the unit is pretty structured with each new part being revealed to the students as we move along together.
Logistically, it is a good(ish) idea but I am not sold on it. I can already picture the bottlenecks, the processes that need big hands helping, the stress (for kids and teachers!). Skills wise, the kids will get to cut with the coping saw, pattern, construct, tape. Process wise, they will learn to interact with a ‘client’ and put their needs ahead of their own as the designer. How can this be achieved in a different way?
Honestly, I am not sure. I want kids to be autonomous. I want them to do more than “feel like” they have choice and voice. I also want to honor the work that was done before me in getting our design program where it is at, while at the same time helping to move it forward.
For this unit, I am going to focus on PROCESS over PRODUCT – something I have always been a big fan of (since 2012!)
I want to introduce the roles of client and designer.
I want to re-introduce the cyclical nature of design (Think – Make – Improve).
I want to include a new element to our cycle: SHARE
I want to offer a “play day” where the kids have time to play with the tools and materials we will use for prototyping.
(It has not escaped my attention that the above is all my thinking, my choosing).
What about the kids? What do they want? Where is their agency? Where is their voice in this? And, to come back to the beginning of this post, am I reinforcing the idea of the helpless student by deciding so much of what goes on, for them?
How can I rework this unit so it is worthy of our time together?
I feel that I may be on the edge of organizing a way of thinking, making, improving, sharing, that is empowering. But I am not there, yet. Do I need to ditch the “shoes” and focus on the client/designer roles? History tells me, that the prototyping can become challenging/messy when opened up to different product prototypes, but we can do challenging and messy, right? Even writing this has me thinking of the benefits of sharing the relationship roles, the prototyping tools and materials, and the iteration cycle, and then stepping back, sans overarching banner of “Shoes”. I don’t know…yet.
Watch this space.
Maybe, to honor my students I will avoid the habit of falling for what is already in place, and instead, stand up for something that is different? I just have to figure out what that ‘something different’ is.
3 thoughts on “Stand Up for Something Different”
Hey Sonya, this sounds a lot like the adaptation of the D school wallet project that we just did. We altered it and transformed it into a pencil case project working between art and G5 homeroom classes. Great mini unit and a perfect stepping stone to design as empathy.
I think it probably evolved from the D-school wallet project. How did your unit turn out? And how do you feel about the unit in light of learner agency? I think the shoes/wallet/pencil case idea is a good one as (you say) a stepping stone to building empathy as a designer and leaning into roles of designer and client, but in terms of agency? How can that be added in the mix?
Yeah. I’m probably with you. The degree of agency is incremental. We were looking at it as a stepping stone towards the exhibition, and an opportunity to get a really tight experience of a design cycle through an empathy-driven lens. For that, it served well.