# data[].attributes.body
Progression in Design and Technology (DT) extends beyond mere knowledge acquisition to encompass cognitive and practical skill development (Newton, 2005). Ashbee (2021) argues that embedding progression within the curriculum – rather than relying on flawed ‘level descriptors’ – ensures meaningful learning. However, a key tension is balancing skill acquisition with creativity and problem-solving; overemphasising isolated skills can stifle innovation. Effective progression demands structured sequencing, differentiation, and increasing complexity, which requires careful curriculum design to prevent mechanical task completion. While scaffolding and modelling support development, excessive guidance may hinder independence.

Additionally, progression is influenced by external factors such as curriculum constraints and resource availability, which may limit opportunities for open-ended challenges. Teachers must navigate these tensions, ensuring students develop both competence and autonomy. A refined approach to progression should integrate skills mastery with creative application, fostering problem-solving abilities alongside proficiency.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Figure 1 - LEGO Education: Coding Express

# data[].attributes.body
The EYFS Framework (Department for Education, 2024) does not explicitly cover Design and Technology but highlights the role of gross and fine motor development in early learning. Sensory exploration and play support physical, cognitive, and creative development, forming the foundation for problem-solving. While traditional activities like small-world play and tool use enhance motor skills, digital learning (Ogier, 2022) offers personalised, engaging experiences that extend learning beyond physical tasks.

The LEGO Education Coding Express (Figure 1) introduces early coding concepts through LEGO DUPLO bricks, fostering spatial awareness, creativity, and problem-solving. Its structured lesson plans (engage, explore, explain, elaborate, evaluate) reflect the iterative design process seen in DT.

However, while digital tools enhance learning, they should complement rather than replace hands-on experiences. A balanced approach, guided by teachers, ensures digital learning remains interactive, purposeful, and developmentally appropriate.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Figure 16 - Ofsted (2023) Education Inspection Framework

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Figure 17 - Ofsted (2018) Curriculum Quality Model

# data[].attributes.body
Ofsted (2019) seeks to interrogate and establish a coherent evidence base on quality through deep dives into school subjects, assessing Intent, Implementation, and Impact (Figure 16). While this framework aims to ensure curriculum coherence and progression,  Figure 17 outlines the breakdown of intent and implementation, which Ofsted inspectors use to evaluate curriculum quality. Based on the outcomes, inspectors can determine the impact of learning. O’Connell (2020) highlights several limitations. Deep dives place undue pressure on primary schools, particularly smaller ones with fewer than 150 pupils, where subject leaders often manage multiple subjects and struggle to meet growing expectations. When implementing the assessment of curriculum quality, Ofsted (2019) gathers evidence of subjects, topics or aspects from leaders, teachers and children to create an overall judgement. Additionally, the framework relies on inspectors’ interpretations, which can introduce variable judgements, leading to evaluation inconsistencies.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Figure 18 - Placement Schools Intent for History

# data[].attributes.body
Figure 18 presents the placement school’s intent for History, aligned with the National Curriculum (2014a), which aims to cultivate children’s understanding of the modern world. Russell (2016) proposes that history is essential to a broad and balanced curriculum, fostering cultural and societal awareness. However, its effectiveness depends on pedagogical approaches. While Ofsted (2021) highlights the role of careful curriculum planning in ‘effective’ teaching, this assumes equal access to high-quality resources and teacher expertise. Additionally, the content selection outline in the National Curriculum (2014a) provides diverse historical narratives, reducing the risk of dominant viewpoints. While disciplinary skills such as chronology and historical enquiry are essential, their development depends on how history is framed and taught.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Figure 19 - Placement schools progression document for History

# data[].attributes.body
The placement school’s progression document, shown in Figure 19, highlights the disciplinary skills integrated throughout, aiming to build upon prior knowledge while advancing new learning.

Ofsted (2021) emphasises that progression in history requires developing ‘layers’ of knowledge, enabling pupils to construct historical accounts and arguments. Bruner (1963) theorised three modes of representation (enactive, iconic and symbolic), supporting memory retention and cognitive development by allowing pupils to engage with history through active, pictorial, and symbolic learning. While this structured approach helps avoid ‘mental overload,’ its effectiveness depends on how well teachers balance factual retention with historical inquiry.

Planning and sequencing learning should be considered carefully to ensure effective layers of knowledge are formed. As pupils progress through the history curriculum, Ofsted (2021) suggests they should be continuously developing their disciplinary skills.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Figure 2 - LEGO Education: Redesigning to make new objects

# data[].attributes.body
Kidd (2020) emphasises that conceptualising skill progression creates a coherent learning journey, linking factual knowledge with practical application. In EYFS, pupils explore materials and construction informally through play, which this lesson builds upon by introducing structured design and problem-solving—key elements of the KS1 DT curriculum (figure 4). Pupils begin to understand that materials have specific properties and can be adapted to create new objects. Through LEGO Education, the lesson reinforces KS1 DT objectives related to mechanisms, structures, and material properties, integrating basic programming to make the kitchen tools functional and aligning with the KS1 computing curriculum. The structured approach—engage, explore, explain, elaborate, and evaluate—mirrors the engineering design process, promoting logical thinking, collaboration, and digital literacy. However, while LEGO Education enhances engagement and fluency, it must be used critically. Over-reliance on pre-defined components limits creativity, and teachers should balance digital learning with real-world materials to support open-ended problem-solving.

# data[].attributes.body
In KS1, pupils build and program with LEGO components to understand simple concepts. As pupils transition to KS2, the lesson shown in Figure 3 deepens pupil's understanding of technological systems, encouraging more complex applications. For example, programming the motor to move the car or programming a light source introduces mechanical and electrical systems – Key components of the KS2 DT Curriculum (Figure 4). Additionally, it challenges pupils to explore the impact of light intensity, reinforcing iterative design principles and improving functionality. This progression from basic concepts in KS1 to more advanced skills in KS2 reflects the ever-increasing complexity and integration of technology in DT.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Figure 4 - The National Curriculum, 2014a, pp. 181 - 182

# data[].attributes.body
As pupils progress from KS2 to KS3, the complexity of their design tasks increases significantly. In KS3, pupils move beyond simple problem identification to engage in more profound iterative processes, such as diagnosing and addressing issues in a Computer Numerical Control (CNC) machine (Figure 5). This aligns with KS3’s emphasis on designing innovative, functional, and user-centred products (Figure 6). The lesson introduces more advanced mechanical and electrical systems, requiring pupils to apply a higher technical knowledge than KS2. This transition from basic systems to more integrated ones reflects the advancing expectation for pupils to work independently and handle increasingly complex challenges. Additionally, while the lesson encourages collaboration and real-world application, it also highlights the need for pupils to refine their problem-solving and design skills to meet the more advanced expectations at KS3.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Figure 6 - The National Curriculum, 2014b, pp. 89 - 90

# data[].attributes.body
Hope (2006) outlines three key assessment types in DT: diagnostic, formative, and summative. Diagnostic assessment informs planning by identifying prior knowledge and skills, but its effectiveness relies on accurate data collection, which can be time-consuming and inconsistent across teachers (Hope, 2018). While formative assessment is valuable for guiding learning, its dual role as both a tool for progress and a summative record risks diluting its impact, as teachers may prioritise reporting over continuous learning (John, cited in Hope, 2006). Differentiated support frameworks, such as Flinn and Patel's (2016 ) criteria, offer structured assessment; however, they may not fully capture the creative problem-solving central to DT. Summative assessment, like project displays (Figure 7), celebrates achievement but overlooks the iterative nature of design thinking, focusing on final products rather than the learning process. Though integral to teaching and learning, these assessments require balancing accuracy, workload, and pedagogical effectiveness, emphasising the interconnected nature of diagnostic, formative and summative approaches within an ongoing cycle of planning and reflection (Figure 8).

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Figure 8 - Planning and assessment cycle (Hope, 2018, p.134)

# data[].attributes.body
Transcription, the physical act of writing, includes spelling, punctuation, and legibility (Wyse et al., 2018). While Saunders (2015, p. 138) defines it as simply recording thoughts, the National Curriculum (Department for Education, 2014a, p. 13) emphasises writing ‘clearly, accurately and coherently’ for different contexts. Medwell et al., (2012) take a more flexible view, suggesting transcription’s importance varies by purpose and audience. However, Waugh, Jolliffe and Allott (2020) highlight its cognitive burden, arguing that if children focus too much on accuracy, they struggle with content generation. Wyse et al., (2018) support this, noting that transcription demands on early writers can limit their writing output. This tension raises questions about progression. While foundational skills are essential, excessive focus on transcription may hinder higher-order writing abilities. Balancing fluency and accuracy is essential, as reliance on transcriptional skills should decrease over time, allowing pupils to shift focus towards composition and audience awareness.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Figure 9 - Placement school Reception Writing

# data[].attributes.headline
Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) Transcription 

# data[].attributes.subject
Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) Transcription 

# data[].attributes.body
The Early Learning Goals (ELG) for writing (Figure 10) emphasise foundational transcription skills, including forming recognisable letters, spelling words by identifying sounds and writing simple phrases that others can read. These align with Rowe's (2017, quoted in Bearne and Reedy, 2024, p. 322) view of emergent writing as a developmental process where pupils experiment with letter formation and print matching. Vygotsky (1962) describes this transition as moving from "drawing speech" to constructing meaningful words, while Goodman (1986) identifies functional, linguistic, and relational principles as key to early writing. These principles are evident in Figure 9, where a pupil’s shopping list demonstrates word separation, initial sounds, and phonetic representation- key indicators of transcription development. This reflects progression towards the ELG writing outcomes, reinforcing the importance of phonological awareness and letter-sound correspondence at this stage.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Figure: 10 - Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) Statutory Framework, 2024, p.14

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Figure 11 - Placement School KS1 Writing

# data[].attributes.body
The National Curriculum for KS1 builds upon these early skills by introducing explicit spelling instruction, focusing on phoneme-grapheme correspondence, common exception words, and suffix application (Figure 13). Phonological understanding remains central, but pupils begin incorporating morphological and etymological knowledge as they progress. Wyse et al. (2018) argue that spelling instruction should address these linguistic features but be more intensive and explicit for struggling spellers, including those with dyslexia. Figure 11 exemplifies this by showing a child applying split diagraphs during a handwriting task, demonstrating an increasing awareness of spelling rules.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Figure 12 - Placement school Key Stage 2 Writing

# data[].attributes.body
By KS2, transcription skills are refined through the use of prefixes, suffixes, silent letters, and homophones, as outlined in Figure 13. The curriculum emphasises morphological and etymological knowledge, supporting Wyse et al. (2018) argument that proficient spellers rely on sight vocabulary and word structure analysis. The progression from phonetic spelling in EYFS to etymological understanding in KS2 highlights a structured approach to developing transcription skills, ensuring students can spell and write with increasing accuracy and fluency, as seen in Figure 12.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Figure 13 - The National Curriculum, 2014a, pp. 29-46.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Figure 14 - Secondary National Curriculum, 2014b, p.16.

# data[].attributes.headline
Progression into Key Stage 3 (KS3) transcription

# data[].attributes.subject
Progression into Key Stage 3 (KS3) transcription

# data[].attributes.body
The transition from KS2 to KS3 in transcription reflects a shift from foundational spelling and handwriting to refined composition, editing, and rhetorical control. At KS2, pupils develop competence in spelling patterns, morphology, and etymology, ensuring they can effectively apply spelling rules and use dictionaries (Figure 13).

At KS3, transcription focuses on fluency, adaptability, and audience awareness. Figure 14 emphasises writing ‘accurately, fluently, effectively, and at length’ for varied purposes such as describing, narrating, and arguing. This marks a shift from mechanical accuracy to stylistic and structural sophistication, requiring students to select and organise ideas, integrate quotations, and use precise vocabulary.

A key progression is the deepening of drafting and proofreading skills. KS2 introduces spelling conventions, while KS3 demands metacognitive engagement, requiring students to restructure writing for clarity and impact. Teachers scaffold this transition, enabling pupils to develop fluency, independence, and precision in diverse writing contexts.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Figure 20 - Placement Schools Implementation for History

# data[].attributes.body
Forster and Eperjesi (2020) argue that history is primarily learned through active engagement with sources, requiring pupils to behave like historians. However, accessing these sources can be challenging for SEND pupils due to complex content, cognitive load, and reliance on abstract thinking. The placement school (Figure 20) aimed to increase engagement through artefact exploration and historical visitors - methods that Webster and Misra (2015) supported. While these strategies encourage hands-on learning, their effectiveness for SEND pupils depends on how well the content is adapted, such as using simplified language, structured scaffolding, or alternative ways to interact with historical evidence (Ashbee, 2021).

As Hoodless (2008) states, inclusive education requires responding appropriately to different learning needs, but this extends beyond essential differentiation. Boys and Spink (2011) emphasise that true inclusion focuses on individual strengths; however, history often presents barriers for SEND pupils, particularly in chronological understanding and source evaluation. The placement schools focus on repetition, and revisiting previous learning supports accessibility. Differentiation should go beyond additional support and extension tasks- multi-sensory approaches, assistive technology, and visual timetables could further support historical reasoning (Russell, 2016).

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Figure 15 - The Graduated Approach (Goepel, J. 2015)

# data[].attributes.body
Adaptation in education involves modifying teaching to meet diverse learning needs. Wyse et al., (2018, p. 25) describe it as ‘rejecting rote learning in favour of child-centred approaches.’ The Graduated Approach (Goepel, 2015, Figure 15) and Quality First Teaching (QFT) emphasise differentiation as the first step in supporting progress, particularly for pupils with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) (Department for Education, 2015). While DCFS (2008) and Spence (2018) advocate QFT for its emphasis on high-quality, inclusive teaching; its broad approach may risk overlooking the specific needs of individual learners, highlighting the need for targeted support alongside differentiated strategies to ensure meaningful progress for all pupils. As seen on placement, the M.A.T.C.H framework (Modify, Alter, Teach, Change, Help) provides structured adaption strategies, where adjustments can include scaffolding or modifying content complexity. Wyse et al., (2018) support Universal Design for Learning (UDL), advocating multiple embodiments of concepts. While adaption fosters accessibility, over-scaffolding may hinder independence. Teachers must balance differentiation with high expectations, ensuring all pupils engage with the same curriculum while receiving the necessary support to develop writing proficiency.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Figure 21 - Placement Schools Impact for History

# data[].attributes.body
Effective assessment in history should measure both subject knowledge and disciplinary skills; Boys and Spink (2011) highlight that assessment remains an area of weakness, often relying heavily on written work rather than other assessment forms. The placement school (Figure 21) aims to develop pupils ‘reflection on identity and appreciation of diverse historical figures.' However, if there is no variety of assessments, does it truly capture the broader educational aims? Driscoll, Lambirth and Roden (2015) argue that teachers and pupils should act as historians together, evaluating sources and questioning reliability. However, students may struggle with historical interpretation and analysis without clear objectives and varied methods.

Additionally, suppose teachers lack a clear understanding of the purpose of the assessment (Boys and Spink, 2011). In that case, they may fail to effectively plan for progression, leaving pupils without clear indicators of the progress they have made in addition to the progress they have yet to make. A more balanced approach integrating questioning, source analysis, and oral reflections could enhance both engagement and historical reasoning.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Figure 22 - Barnes (2015) different ways of organising Cross-Curricular approaches.  

# data[].attributes.body
Cross-curricular approaches link disciplines through experiences, questions, or ideas (Barnes, 2015), promoting deeper learning and subject coherence (Ashbee, 2021). Kidd (2020) argues that when well-implemented, cross-curricular learning enhances knowledge retention and fosters connections across learning domains. However, Hayes (2010) emphasises that delineating learning boundaries in single-subject teaching allows pupils to gain fundamental skills in key subjects, which cross-curricular approaches may compromise due to the potential rigorous practicalities of planning and implementation. Barnes (2015) showcases seven different ways of cross-curricular approaches (Figure 22); this column will critique two approaches - hierarchical and single transferable subjects – to examine whether cross-curricular learning strengthens understanding or risks compromising subject depth.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Figure 23 - Barnes (2015) Hierarchical Cross-Curricular Learning

# data[].attributes.body
Barnes (2015) identifies the hierarchical approach as a progression from one discipline into another, often prioritising ‘superior’ subjects like mathematics over ‘inferior’ subjects like music (Figure 23). However, this classification is contentious, implying that creative subjects serve only a supporting role rather than offering intrinsic educational value. In practice, the placement school integrates this model by using a music lesson on different genres (for example, rap) to reinforce multiplication skills (e.g., Percy Parker times tables). While this engages pupils and supports inclusivity, it raises questions about subject autonomy.

Kidd (2020) argues that subjects do not exist in isolation, and effective connections strengthen schemas, reinforcing Piaget’s (1971) theory of cognitive development. Figure 24 shows the potential for how physical engagement can enhance learning, linking intellectual and motor development to deepen concentration and coordination. This has significant implications for PE, where active learning strategies can support cognitive function and reinforce conceptual understanding. Kidd (2020) suggests that physical movement enhances engagement and can be a powerful tool for learning. While movement-based learning may be beneficial, subjects like history or literacy may require more reflective, structured engagement. Additionally, positioning PE as merely a supporting subject rather than an integral part of the curriculum reinforces the hierarchical approach, allowing ‘superior’ subjects to remain dominant.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Figure 24 - Placement schools Medium Term Planning for PE

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Figure 25 - Barnes (2015) Single transferable subject learning

# data[].attributes.body
Barnes (2015) defines a single transferable subject as improving learning in a single subject by deliberately applying its perspectives to a range of other curriculum areas (Figure 25), arguing that any subject could share the stage across the standard curriculum to enhance others. This approach suggests learning can become more interconnected, allowing pupils to apply knowledge meaningfully. The placement school Medium Term Planning for PE (Figure 24) provides relatively weak cross-curricular links, showcasing a more subject-oriented nature.

Ashbee (2021) advocated for children to apply knowledge gained in earlier stages and connect it to new learning, creating schemas that allow for application and understanding in diverse situations. This aligns with the principles of a single transferable subject, reinforcing the idea that cross-curricular connections can strengthen long-term knowledge retention. From observation of the lessons (Figure 24) within placement, there is potential for cross-curricular learning within PE. Subjects, in particular Science, Design and Technology (DT), Geography, and Personal, Social, Health and Economic (PSHE) education, provide natural links to PE, reinforcing knowledge through practical application. For example, the Science curriculum (Department for Education, 2014a) highlights the importance of exercise, diet and lifestyle choices, which align directly with PE lessons, creating a focus on physical fitness and wellbeing. Similarly, DT’s focus on nutrition complements PE’s emphasis on healthy living, as pupils engage in activities such as meal planning and linking dietary choices.

Moreover, PE links to Geography’s exploration of physical landscapes- mountains and rivers- through rhythmic gymnastics and balance exercises (Figure 24). Pupils can use shapes and movement to represent the course of a river, developing special awareness and fluidity of motion. Additionally, pupils can combine body shapes and balance to represent various mountain features and formations, fostering teamwork and coordination. By integrating these elements, pupils planned and performed a sequence communicating information about rivers and mountains, effectively merging geographical knowledge with physical expression in PE.

Furthermore, not all subjects are compatible with PE. For instance, art, Religious Education (RE) and Modern Foreign Languages (MFL) lack direct connections to PE. With Art or Dance, creative movement in PE could be loosely associated, although these links do not contribute significantly to core PE objectives. Similarly, incorporating MFL into PE lessons, such as using commands in another language, maybe pressurised, inhibiting subject mastery. Integrating RE through belief systems and spirituality has a limited practical application within a PE context.

Overall, teachers should selectively and purposefully apply cross-curricular approaches, ensuring that interdisciplinary connections support learning rather than being added merely for integration. A well-balanced curriculum must recognise the value of transferable knowledge while maintaining the distinctiveness and depth of each subject.