Swimming
bags
Case
study of classroom practice
This material was produced by the Royal Society of New Zealand (RSNZ)
under contract to the Ministry of Education in 2000 and 2001. It was written
to assist teachers and schools in their delivery of the technology/ hangarau
curriculum statements. The project was jointly coordinated by personnel
from the Technology Education New Zealand (TENZ)
and National Association of Māori Mathematicians, Scientists and Technologists
(NAMMSAT) networks. Monitoring and evaluation of the material was carried
out by a national project advisory group.
|
Introduction
Swimming Bags is a unit planned and delivered by the teachers of Rimu
Syndicate at Rangikura School in Porirua. It was seen as a way to capitalise
on a genuine opportunity that arose as part of the day-to-day programme.
The teachers had in mind that their long-term plan required them to cover
production and process technology. Their developing understanding of technological
practice enabled them to recognise an opportunity to produce bags for
the annual swimming lessons at the local pool. The project was facilitated
by Angela Christie (Adviser, Technology and Technology Education) and
published as a full case study in the DELTA series of technology resources
distributed by the Royal Society of New Zealand. This summary is extracted
from the material published.
Development
of the swimming bags unit, from a teacher's perspective
Background
The children in our syndicate are aged between 6 and 9 years. There
are 78 children in the open plan syndicate from varying ethnic backgrounds
and with varying English ability. This is our second DELTA unit. Our
first had involved a large number of cooperative activities this unit
lent itself to more individual decision making and problem solving.
We encouraged children to justify their choices in discussion with their
peers and adults. We had noted a developing awareness in the children
of their own ability to make decisions, justify them, and to be ready
to make changes. The nature of this unit was such that the responsibility
for selecting and developing suitable bags was the children's.
Prior to "Design me a home" we had involved the children in
a variety of activities designed to develop the background knowledge
necessary to successfully understand and complete the task. However
in this unit the children were quickly able to identify the need for
a good quality swimming bag and could outline the initial steps we should
take.
The children were enthusiastic about the prospect of making their own
swimming bags.
Questions
– this was done in a rally table in pairs
- Why do we have swimming bags?
- What problems have we had before with our swimming bags?
- What could we do so we don't have problems this time?
Ideas
were collated
We showed the children 10 different bags and in pairs they chose four
to critically analyse in terms of suitability for their swimming bag.
They drew the bag, stated whether they considered it suitable for use
as a swimming bag, and justified their reasons. They could identify useful
features of each bag in relation to their understanding of what makes
a good swimming bag. As a class, we discussed our findings and developed
a list of requirements for a good swimming bag. The requirements included
that it be strong; open easily and close securely; big enough to hold
togs, towel, goggles, and hairbrush; waterproof; easily recognised; have
strong handles; be easy to carry; have no holes; and wouldn't rip.
From this list of requirements, each child identified what they considered
to be the most important features in a swimming bag and developed their
own set of criteria.
Together we discussed and listed what we would need to do to make a swimming
bag. Some of the children's ideas included: know what features we need,
design it, find out how will we make it, how will we cover the costs of
the materials needed, what kind of material will we use, how will it be
made, will we need help from experts, we need to work out the steps that
we will need to take, how can these bags be made in a day.
As a result of our discussion, we compared what we were intending to do
with what we accomplished in "Design me a home". The children
identified similarities in both examples of technological practice.
 |
The children drew and labelled initial designs for their bag. They talked
about their design with others and decided which was the most suitable
design. They were required to justify their decision.
Choosing fabric – the children tested a range
of fabrics for suitability and they discussed the outcomes and chose
the most suitable fabric in terms of the criteria we established –
that is it's strong, waterproof, solid, easy to sew, and bendy. The
children wrote at least three reasons to justify their choice of fabric
and design. We made a list of the notions we would need to make the
bags and where we could buy them from.
The children concluded it would be a good idea to get expert help for
ideas on how to make bags. We faxed Leather Goods Ltd to ask them for
their help.
Over the next few days, we explored examples of production and process
technology in the community. One group visited Konev Leather Goods and
reported back to the syndicate. Others read and discussed a recent newspaper
article about the manufacture of kites. Other examples of process and
production technology were found in Part 1 and 2 journals. This included
Zoodoo, Carrot Country, glass blowing, picture frames,
and Happy Hens. We encouraged the children to look for similarities
in the processes involved in each example and our own bag making process
by drawing and illustrating flow charts.
|
The children made a mock-up of their chosen design out of newspaper. They
established the dimensions of the bag by estimating the size of the togs
and towel, measuring and cutting out the mock-ups, and checking it against
folded togs and towel. When they completed their mock-ups they tested
them to see if swimming gear fitted and to see if handles were in the
right position and were long enough. They considered the placement of
pockets and the necessity and practicalities of fancy detailing.
When the children shared their mock-ups it became obvious to them that
there were several designs in common.
Teachers modelled drafting a pattern and children with similar bag shapes
considered the amount of fabric available and developed a common pattern
in paper. Some children were able to draft their own patterns.
During this session we guided children by questioning and encouraging
them to develop solutions to problems as they arose.
The children then shared and critically analysed their mock-ups. They
identified the good and bad features of their own mock up and considered
any changes needed. Many children realised the importance of making careful
measurements so the parts of the bag would fit together. At this point,
it was necessary to discuss cost, sewing notions, that is, zips and buttons,
and consider the constraints of mass production.
|
During this discussion the children established that the costs of zips
would be too expensive and they could go rusty. The children were aware
that funds were limited and they took this into consideration as they
made modifications to their mock-ups. We talked about a variety of options
for closing bags such as velcro, drawstrings, and domes.
We discussed the importance of coming up with a simple manufacturing process.
One way of doing this would be to manufacture similar bag shapes and components
at the same time.
The children remembered we had used Brian's expert help when we developed
zoo enclosures and realised we would have to organise some expert help.
We needed a suitable way of setting up a production line and sewing the
bags. Children offered their parents' expertise and teachers contacted
them with details. The children's experience at the Konev Leather Goods
was invaluable in establishing a production line.
We aimed to have two production days and we outlined what we would need
to do to be ready for them which included; contacting sewers, buying the
fabric, cutting out the fabric, buying the sewing needs, organising the
machines, and having the room set up ready to begin production.
|
By now the children had chosen the fabric colours they wanted, including
a high fashion colour after being introduced to this idea at Konev Leather
Goods. The children decided a high fashion colour would help them tell
their bag apart from other children's bags. Being able to identify their
own bag was an important criteria and then children incorporated their
individual ideas and prepared designs for their logo.
Each child had a piece of fabric measuring 1.5 metres x 50 metres, which
had been measured out by the teachers. Working with a buddy they laid
out the pattern pieces on the fabric then they drew around the pattern
with chalk, rather than pinning it on. We found many children had difficulty
pinning the pattern to the fabric. Working with a buddy and using chalk
enabled them to be independent. They also had to identify which was the
right and wrong side of the fabric.
Each child labelled their pieces of fabric with sticky labels and held
them together with a pin until production day. This was a useful management
strategy.
The factory was set up with eight machines in a semi circle. The labelled
trays of bag parts, handles, and pockets, were arranged near the machinists.
All handles and pockets were prepared for final assembly. This efficient
method of organisation was something we had seen during our visit to Konev
Leather Goods.
|
Over the three production days, children from each class worked with
their expert machinist to direct the completion of their final product.
The children were really proud of their final products and wanted to
show them to their parents and friends. A fashion parade was decided
upon for the parents. The parade incorporated aspects of the manufacture
such as design drawings, mock-ups, fabric samples, and the final products.
At the conclusion of the parade parents were invited to ask questions
and teachers took time to explain and answer questions on technology
education.
|
