Teacher Background Information 

  • Target group: Years 5–6
  • Primary focus: Year 6
  • Learning area: Technologies (Design and Technologies)
  • Sub-strand: Materials and Technologies
  • Curriculum: Australian Curriculum Version 9.0,  Qld

The project aligns with the Years 5–6 Design and Technologies achievement standard. Students investigate community needs, explain how materials affect design decisions, communicate ideas using technical and graphical methods, develop project plans, safely produce solutions and evaluate those solutions against criteria that include sustainability (QCAA, 2023). 

Knowledge & understanding: 

 

 

- AC9TDE6K01:

Students explain how people working in design and technologies occupations consider competing factors, including sustainability, when designing products, services and environments.

Students:

  • investigate how designers create inclusive wellbeing environments
  • consider the sometimes competing requirements of privacy, supervision, accessibility, comfort, cost and sustainability
  • explain how the calm space responds to the needs of Year 6 students
  • justify decisions using research, student voice and information gathered from the proposed site
  • recognise that a successful solution must balance social, environmental and practical factors.

- AC9TDE6K05:

Students explain how the characteristics and properties of materials, systems, components, tools and equipment affect their use when producing designed solutions.

Task-specific elaboration:

Students:

  • test materials for strength, flexibility, texture, durability and sound absorption
  • compare reclaimed, recycled and commercially produced materials
  • select materials suitable for seating, privacy, storage and sensory features
  • explain why particular materials are safe, washable, durable or sustainable
  • select appropriate tools and construction techniques for creating a scale prototype.

Processes and Production Skills:

 AC9TDE6P01 – Investigating

Students investigate needs and opportunities for designing and determine the materials, components, tools, equipment and processes required to create a solution.

Students:

  • conduct a site and sensory audit
  • measure the proposed area and identify fixed features
  • gather anonymous student voice
  • investigate light, sound, movement, texture, privacy and accessibility
  • test possible materials
  • develop an evidence-informed design brief.

AC9TDE6P02 - Generating and communicating

Students generate, iterate and communicate design ideas, decisions and processes using technical terms and graphical representation techniques, including digital tools.

Students:

  • generate at least three distinct calm-space concepts
  • communicate ideas through annotated sketches and floor plans
  • use measurements, scale, labels, keys and appropriate design vocabulary
  • respond to user-perspective and surprise-constraint cards
  • use peer and teacher feedback to revise their preferred design.

AC9TDEP03 - Producing 

Students select and use suitable materials, components, tools, equipment and techniques to safely create designed solutions.

Students:

  • construct a physical scale model or teacher-approved digital model
  • select materials that represent the intended features of the real space
  • measure and cut materials accurately
  • follow safety procedures when using tools and adhesives
  • allocate production roles and work collaboratively.

AC9TDE6P04 -Evaluating 

Students negotiate design criteria, including sustainability, to evaluate design ideas, processes and solutions.

Students:

  • establish criteria for safety, accessibility, sensory support, privacy, supervision, sustainability and practicality
  • use a decision matrix to compare design concepts
  • conduct scenario-based prototype tests
  • evaluate whether the prototype meets, partly meets or does not yet meet each criterion
  • use evidence and feedback to make at least two purposeful improvements.

AC9TDE6P05 -Planning and Managing 

Students develop project plans that consider the resources required to create designed solutions individually and collaboratively.

Students:

  • develop a project and production plan
  • identify required materials, tools, processes and safety procedures
  • allocate team responsibilities
  • establish production steps and timeframes
  • monitor progress and adjust their plan when challenges occur.

 

Learning theories used in the PBL task

The table below demonstrates how Bloom’s revised taxonomy and Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences are incorporated throughout the Pause, Place & Planet project. Students progress from remembering and understanding key concepts to applying knowledge, analysing evidence, evaluating solutions and creating an original calm-space design. The activities also provide varied opportunities to learn and communicate through language, measurement, visual design, physical construction, collaboration, reflection, sound investigation and environmental decision-making. These approaches are used to broaden participation and provide multiple ways for students to demonstrate learning, rather than categorising students according to fixed learning styles. Individual and collaborative tasks, templates, teacher modelling, peer feedback and design conferences further scaffold students as they progress towards greater independence.

This framework demonstrates that students engage with increasingly complex thinking while accessing the project through varied modes. Bloom’s revised taxonomy supports cognitive progression from remembering to creating (Krathwohl, 2002), while Gardner’s framework encourages varied opportunities for participation and expression (Gardner, 2011). These approaches are strengthened through Universal Design for Learning, which recommends multiple means of engagement, representation, and action and expression (CAST, 2024).

 

References

Albion, P., Campbell, C., & Jobling, W. (2022). Technologies education for the primary years (2nd ed.). Cengage Learning Australia.

CAST. (2024). CAST Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 3.0. https://udlguidelines.cast.org/

Canva. (2020). Canva. Canva. https://www.canva.com/projects 

Gardner, H. (2011). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences (3rd ed.). Basic Books.

Kokotsaki, D., Menzies, V., & Wiggins, A. (2016). Project-based learning: A review of the literature. Improving Schools, 19(3), 267–277. https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480216659733

Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2

Queensland Curriculum and Assessment Authority. (2023). Years 5–6 band Design and Technologies: Australian Curriculum Version 9.0—Achievement standard aligned to content descriptions. https://www.qcaa.qld.edu.au/downloads/aciqv9/technologies/curriculum/ac9_tech_design_yr5-6_as_cd_alignment.pdf

 

Project Based Learning Reflection

The Pause, Place & Planet project is underpinned by Project-Based Learning (PBL) because students undertake sustained inquiry into the authentic problem of creating an inclusive and sustainable calm space for their school. Rather than receiving a predetermined solution, students investigate the site and users, generate alternatives, make decisions and produce a prototype for an authentic audience. Student voice, collaboration, critique, revision and the public design pitch reflect recognised features of effective PBL. Kokotsaki et al. (2016) argue that successful PBL depends on authentic tasks, student autonomy, collaboration, scaffolding and regular feedback. These elements are deliberately embedded through the anonymous student survey, collaborative design teams, teacher conferences, gallery walk and prototype-testing process. However, authenticity alone does not guarantee deep learning. Without structured checkpoints, students could focus on the appearance of the model rather than the relationship between evidence, material properties and design decisions.

Design Thinking further structures the inquiry through the stages of empathising, defining, ideating, prototyping and testing. Students empathise by investigating sensory and accessibility needs, define the problem through their design brief, generate multiple concepts, construct a prototype and use feedback to make purposeful improvements. This iterative process reflects Razzouk and Shute’s (2012) description of Design Thinking as an analytical and creative process involving experimentation, modelling and solution refinement. A limitation is that the project’s seven-to-ten-hour timeframe may restrict meaningful iteration. Consequently, feedback checkpoints must be carefully scheduled so revisions remain evidence-based rather than cosmetic.

The project is also informed by constructivism and experiential learning, as students construct knowledge through site investigation, material testing, model-making and reflection (Albion et al., 2022). Vygotsky’s (1978) Zone of Proximal Development is evident through teacher modelling, templates, peer collaboration and design conferences. These supports are gradually withdrawn as students become more independent. Bloom’s revised taxonomy guides cognitive progression from understanding material properties to applying measurements, analysing user needs, evaluating prototypes and creating a justified solution (Krathwohl, 2002). Universal Design for Learning strengthens inclusion through visual, written, oral, physical and digital ways of accessing and demonstrating learning (CAST, 2024).

Assessment as learning provides an important basis for both student and teacher reflection. Students use success criteria, decision matrices, feedback and testing records to monitor and improve their work. As a preservice teacher, I would similarly examine student portfolios, observations and reflections to determine whether my scaffolds promoted independence, whether all voices were represented and whether feedback produced genuine design improvement. This evidence would guide revisions to the project, making assessment part of continued professional learning rather than simply a judgement of the final product (Earl, 2013).

 

References

Albion, P., Campbell, C., & Jobling, W. (2022). Technologies education for the primary years (2nd ed.). Cengage Learning Australia.

CAST. (2024). CAST Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 3.0. https://udlguidelines.cast.org/

Earl, L. M. (2013). Assessment as learning: Using classroom assessment to maximize student learning (2nd ed.). Corwin.

Kokotsaki, D., Menzies, V., & Wiggins, A. (2016). Project-based learning: A review of the literature. Improving Schools, 19(3), 267–277. https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480216659733

Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2

Razzouk, R., & Shute, V. (2012). What is design thinking and why is it important? Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 330–348. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312457429

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.