Making Minds: Why Pupil Centred Practical Work, Creates Exceptional Learners

Pupil centred making in a school workshop, represents excellent education because it brings together agency, creativity, embodied learning, problem-solving and authentic design practice, in ways that few other subjects can match. When students take ownership of their ideas and make decisions about materials, processes and outcomes, they develop a strong sense of agency. Research on motivation, such as the work of Deci and Ryan (2000), shows that autonomy is a key driver of engagement and long-term learning. In Design and Technology, this autonomy is expressed through planning, experimenting, evaluating and refining, which helps students see themselves as capable designers. Hardy (2018, 2020) argues that this sense of ownership is central to the identity of D&T as a subject.

Pupil centred making, also supports embodied and experiential learning. Cognitive science research, including Wilson (2002) and Kirsh (2013), demonstrates that physical interaction with materials deepens understanding by linking sensory feedback with conceptual reasoning. In a workshop, students learn through touch, resistance, trial and error and iteration. Kimbell (2011) describes this as thinking in action, a defining feature of design capability.

Another reason pupil centred making is powerful is that it develops high level problem solving. Unlike subjects with single correct answers, D&T requires students to navigate open ended challenges, balance constraints and justify decisions. Barlex (2015) notes that this mirrors real engineering and design practice, making D&T a uniquely authentic learning environment. Students must adapt to unexpected failures, evaluate trade-offs and make informed choices, all of which strengthen their analytical and creative thinking.

The iterative nature of making, also builds metacognition. Students constantly reflect on what is working, what needs changing and why something has failed. This aligns with Schön’s (1983) concept of the reflective practitioner, where learners reflect both in action and on action. Such reflective habits support self regulated learning and long term independence.

Resilience is another key benefit. A workshop is one of the few places in school where failure is normalised and even expected. Prototypes break, mechanisms jam and joints fail. Dweck’s (2006) work on growth mindset, highlights the importance of productive struggle and D&T provides this in a structured and meaningful way. Students learn that improvement comes through persistence and iteration.

Pupil centred making is also inclusive. Research on multi-modal learning, such as Jewitt (2008), shows that practical, visual and spatial modes of expression, allow a wider range of learners to succeed. D&T values practical intelligence, visual reasoning, creativity and collaboration, making it a subject where diverse strengths can flourish.

This approach also aligns closely with real world design and engineering practice. Modern design culture relies on user centred thinking, prototyping, iteration and material exploration. Organisations such as the Design Council and Engineering UK, emphasise these skills as essential for future careers. Pupil centred making mirrors these practices, giving students an authentic introduction to how designers and engineers work.

Finally, pupil centred making creates memorable and meaningful learning. Students remember what they make. The sensory and emotional richness of workshop learning, creates strong memory anchors, as described in Kolb’s (1984) experiential learning theory. The pride of producing a functioning product, reinforces self efficacy and long term engagement.

In conclusion, pupil centred making in a school workshop, is excellent education because it integrates agency, creativity, embodied learning, resilience and authentic problem solving. It reflects contemporary understandings of how people learn and mirrors the practices of real designers and engineers. As a result, it stands as one of the most powerful pedagogical approaches available within the school curriculum. As V.Ryan states, practical work is as academic as design and it is more useful for the vast majority of pupils (‘skilful, academic practical work’).

V.Ryan - World Association of Technology Teachers - Feb 2026

References:

Barlex, D. (2015). Writing on authentic design challenges in D&T education.

Deci, E., and Ryan, R. (2000). Self-Determination Theory and the role of autonomy in motivation.

Dweck, C. (2006). Research on growth mindset and productive struggle.

Hardy, A. (2018, 2020). Work on D&T teacher identity, curriculum breadth, and design capability.

Jewitt, C. (2008). Research on multimodal learning and diverse modes of representation.

Kimbell, R. (2011). Research on design capability and iterative making.

Kirsh, D. (2013). Work on embodied cognition and thinking through doing.

Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning theory.

Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner.

Wilson, M. (2002). Research on embodied cognition and physical interaction in learning.

Ryan. V. (2021). Design & Technology - What Went Wrong - Can It Recover?