Changes in Craft Education
A Case Study on General Education in Latvia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7577/formakademisk.5422Keywords:
Craft education content, craft products, craft techniques, design and technology education, general education.Abstract
In Latvia, the aim, content, and name of the subject of craft education have changed several times. The most recent transformation to “craft education” has been made following the general education reform, which has been gradually implemented since 2020. This study aims to investigate how the purpose and content of craft learning in Latvian comprehensive schools have changed as a result of this reform in comparison to the previous period. A qualitative study was carried out by analysing normative documents and interviewing design and technology teachers (N = 9) with at least 10 years of experience. The document analysis shows that the goal of teaching craft education has shifted from using craft as an opportunity to improve the quality of the living environment through creative involvement in techniques to producing valuable objects for oneself and society through the design process. The most significant change in the content is that craft is taught through the design process. Moreover, every pupil learns all the techniques; previously, students chose textile or woodwork and metalwork techniques from grade 5. According to the interviews, the skills acquired in each technique are at a lower level compared to the previous period, as the number of hours allocated to each technique does not allow pupils to pay in-depth attention to the tasks. The products made by the students have also become more straightforward. Finally, more time is spent on idea generation, planning, and evaluation.
References
Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
Eglīte, I., Gribusts, E., Kaļva, P., Slišāne, A., Veita, L., Žīgurs, U., Barbara, L., & Mārciņš, J. (2019). Dizains un tehnoloģijas 1.-9. klasei: Mācību priekšmeta programmas paraugs [Design and technology for grades 1–9: Model basic-education programme]. Valsts izglītības satura centrs. https://mape.skola2030.lv/resources/174
Ihatsu, A.-M. (2002). Making sense of contemporary American craft. University of Joensuu.
Johansson, M., & Andersson, J. (2017). Learning situations in Sloyd ‒ to become more handy, dexterous and skilful. Techne Series – Research in Sloyd Education and Craft Science A, 24(2). https://journals.oslomet.no/index.php/techneA/article/view/1875
Kampuse, A., & Valsts Izglītības satura centrs (2010a). Mājturība un tehnoloģijas 5.–9. klasei ar izvēli koka un metāla tehnoloģijās: Pamatizglītības mācību priekšmeta programmas paraugs [Home economics and technologies for grades 5–9 with choice of wood and metal technology: Model basic-education programme]. Valsts izglītības satura centrs. https://www.visc.gov.lv/lv/media/2701/download
Kampuse, A., & Valsts Izglītības satura centrs (2010b). Mājturība un tehnoloģijas 5.–9. klasei ar izvēli tekstila tehnoloģijās: Pamatizglītības mācību priekšmeta programmas paraugs. [Home economics and technologies for grades 5–9 with choice of textile technology: Model basic-education programme]. Valsts izglītības satura centrs. https://www.visc.gov.lv/lv/media/2704/download
Kampuse, A., & Valsts Izglītības satura centrs (2014). Mājturība un tehnoloģijas 1.–4. klasei: Pamatizglītības mācību priekšmeta programmas paraugs [Home economics and technologies for grades 1–4: Model basic-education programme]. Valsts izglītības satura centrs. https://www.visc.gov.lv/lv/media/2698/download?attachment
Kröger, T. (2016). Diverse orientations in craft education: Student teachers’ conceptions and perceptions. Techne Series – Research in Sloyd Education and Craft Science A, 23(1). https://journals.oslomet.no/index.php/techneA/article/view/1445
Latviešu literārās valodas vārdnīca [Dictionary of the Latvian Literary Language]. (n.d.). Rokdarbi [Handicraft]. Retrieved April 4, 2023, from https://llvv.tezaurs.lv/rokdarbi
Lepistö, J., & Lindfors, E. (2015). From gender-segregated subjects to multi-material craft: Craft student teachers’ views on the future of the craft subject. FormAkademisk, 8(3). https://doi.org/10.7577/formakademisk.1313
Likumi. (2006). Ministru kabineta 2006. gada 19. decembra noteikumi Nr. 1027 “Noteikumi par valsts standartu pamatizglītībā un pamatizglītības mācību priekšmetu standartiem” [Republic of Latvia Cabinet Regulation No. 1027 adopted December 19, 2006, “Regulations regarding the state standard in basic education and the subjects of study standards in basic education”]. https://likumi.lv/ta/id/150407/redakcijas-datums/2012/01/06
Likumi. (2013). Ministru kabineta 2013. gada 6. augusta noteikumi Nr. 530 “Noteikumi par valsts pamatizglītības standartu, pamatizglītības mācību priekšmetu standartiem un pamatizglītības programmu paraugiem” [Republic of Latvia Cabinet Regulation No. 530 adopted August 6, 2013, “Regulations regarding the state standard in basic education, the subjects of study standards in basic education, and model basic-education programmes”]. https://likumi.lv/ta/id/259125
Likumi. (2014). Ministru kabineta 2014. gada 12. augusta noteikumi Nr. 468 “Noteikumi par valsts pamatizglītības standartu, pamatizglītības mācību priekšmetu standartiem un pamatizglītības programmu paraugiem” [Republic of Latvia Cabinet Regulation No. 468 adopted August 12, 2014, “Regulations regarding the state standard in basic education, the subjects of study standards in basic education, and model basic-education programmes”]. https://likumi.lv/ta/id/268 342/redakcijas-datums/2019/09/01
Likumi. (2018). Ministru kabineta 2018. gada 27. novembra noteikumi Nr. 747 “Noteikumi par valsts pamatizglītības standartu un pamatizglītības programmu paraugiem” [Republic of Latvia Cabinet Regulation No. 747 adopted November 27, 2018, “Regulations regarding the state basic-education standard and model basic-education programmes”]. https://likumi.lv/ta/id/303768
Niedderer, K., & Townsend, K. (2014). Designing craft research: Joining emotion and knowledge. Design Journal, 17(4), 624–648. https://doi.org/10.2752/175630614X14056185480221
Owen-Jackson, G. (2015). Design and technology in the secondary school. In G. Owen-Jackson (Ed.), Learning to teach design and technology in the secondary school: A companion to school experience (3rd ed., pp. 7–17). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315767956
Pipere, A. (2016). Primāro datu ieguves metodes [Methods of collecting primary data]. In K. Mārtinsone, A. Pipere, & D. Kamerāde (Eds.), Pētniecība: teorija un prakse [Research: Theory and practice] (pp. 212–283). RaKa.
Pöllänen, S. (2009). Contextualising craft: Pedagogical models for craft education. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 28(3), 249–260. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1476-8070.2009.01619.x
Pöllänen, S. (2019). Perspectives on multi-material craft in basic education. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 39(1), 255–270. https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12263
Pöllänen, S., & Urdziņa-Deruma, M. (2017). Future-oriented reform of craft education: The cases of Finland and Latvia. In E. Kimonen & R. Nevalainen (Eds.), Reforming teaching and teacher education: Bright prospects for active schools (pp. 117–144). Sense. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-917-1_5
Rönkkö, M. L., Mommo, S., & Aerila, J. A. (2016). The teachers’ views on the significance of the design and craft teaching in Finland. Design and Technology Education, 21(2), 49–58. https://ojs.lboro.ac.uk/DATE/article/view/2112
Sederevičiūtė-Pačiauskienė, Z., Valantinaite, I., & Žilinskaitė-Vytienė, V. (2020). From handicraft to technologies: Historical development of handicraft education in general schools in Lithuania. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 16(1), Article em1805. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/109659
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Māra Urdziņa-Deruma
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
- The author(s) must manage their economic reproduction rights to any third party.
- The journal makes no financial or other compensation for submissions, unless a separate agreement regarding this matter has been made with the author(s).
- The journal is obliged to archive the manuscript (including metadata) in its originally published digital form for at least a suitable amount of time in which the manuscript can be accessed via a long-term archive for digital material, such as in the Norwegian universities’ institutional archives within the framework of the NORA partnership.
Readers of the journal can print out the published manuscripts under the same conditions as apply to the reproduction of physical copies.
Cited by
