Category: Primary education

A new book for Earth Day: Taking A Close Look at Microfibres

Author Education and Childhood Research Group | Posted on

Earth Day (22 April 2026) saw the launch of a new children’s book, Taking a Close Look at Microfibres. Co-created by school pupils and researchers from UWE Bristol’s Science Communication Unit (SCU) and Education and Childhood Research Group (ECRG), the book supports children and teachers to explore an often invisible aspect of air quality: airborne microfibres.

The book is part of the Schools Under the Microscope project, a child-led citizen science project that invites pupils aged 9–14 to take part in real environmental research. Through hands-on investigation, creative inquiry, and collaboration with university researchers, children from England and Wales helped generate new knowledge while shaping an engaging educational resource for use in schools.

Exploring what’s in the air we breathe

While microfibres are increasingly well documented in water systems, far less is known about fibres in the air we breathe – particularly in school environments. The Schools Under the Microscope project set out to explore whether established citizen science methods, previously used in homes, could work meaningfully in classrooms.

Following an initial pilot with 90 pupils at May Park Primary School, Bristol the project expanded to include around 400 children across four schools. Together, pupils designed investigations, made predictions, prepared petri dishes, and positioned them around their schools for a two‑week sampling period. After collection, pupils used microscopes to count fibres, while researchers at UWE Bristol carried out further analysis and shared findings back with the schools.

This marked the first time data on airborne microfibres has been collected within school environments, offering valuable insights into both indoor air quality and the potential of citizen science in education settings.

Learning through participation and enquiry

The findings showed that microfibre levels in schools were similar to those found in homes, including a mix of natural and synthetic fibres – some even matching the colours of school uniforms. More importantly, pupils and teachers reported high levels of engagement and enjoyment throughout the research process.

The team found that although air pollution is often invisible, it becomes meaningful through hands-on activities.

From research to a children’s book

Children’s questions, observations, and reflections directly shaped the storyline and content of Taking a Close Look at Microfibres. The book is designed to open up discussion rather than provide simple answers, encouraging curiosity, critical thinking, and dialogue about environmental issues that affect everyday life.

Page from the book, Taking A Closer Look at Microfibres.

The illustrations were created by Luci Gorell Barnes, a socially engaged artist and arts-based researcher. Recycled plastics, fabrics, card, and paper were used to make the images – all materials known to shed microfibres. These materials were scanned and transformed into digital collages, visually reinforcing the book’s themes of materiality, pollution, and reuse.

The book is accompanied by free teacher notes and ten lesson plans, supporting cross-curricular learning in science, geography, citizenship, and sustainability education.

Launching on Earth Day – and beyond

The project also connects with wider work at UWE Bristol around sustainability and social justice. The research team is partnering with the Global Goals Centre to support the Better Uniform Campaign, which seeks to develop a more socially and environmentally just system for school uniforms across Bristol.

Access the free book and resources

Schools, teachers, and partners can access a free e‑copy of Taking a Close Look at Microfibres with resources for lessons and learning.

The team

Dr Margarida Sardo, Dr Ben Williams, Dr Verity Jones and Jacqui Warner.

Education, curriculum reform and the canary in the mine

Author Education and Childhood Research Group | Posted on

By Dr Sarah Whitehouse, Programme Leader for the International Doctorate in Education, and Senior Lecturer : Education and Humanities

I was reflecting on a keynote lecture delivered by Caroline Daly at the UCET (Universities’ Council for the Education of Teachers) conference in November 2025. In her address, Daly offered a powerful metaphor for the current education system, suggesting that education is often treated like “a canary down a mine.” Too frequently, when outcomes are uneven or disappointing, attention is directed towards pupils or teachers – the canary – rather than towards the wider education system that shapes what is possible. This framing invites a necessary shift away from individual blame and towards systemic critique.

This observation resonates strongly in the context of the recent Curriculum Review led by Becky Francis, which raises fundamental questions about curriculum content, curriculum making and equity. The review marks a notable shift in emphasis and sits in contrast to developments in the other three nations of the United Kingdom. As someone who has taught in Wales, and who has experienced the rapid pace of policy change within its education system, I am particularly interested in how curriculum reform – whether radical or incremental – creates both opportunities and challenges for teachers.

The Welsh context offers an important case study. The rapid introduction of the Curriculum for Wales has afforded teachers significantly greater freedom to design locally responsive, bespoke curricula. In principle, this represents a progressive move away from prescriptive content towards professional trust, creativity and innovation. Teachers are positioned as curriculum makers rather than curriculum deliverers, with greater scope to respond to local contexts and pupil needs.

However, recent research by Estyn and the Wales Institute of Social and Economic Research, Data and Methods (WISERD) suggests that this increased autonomy is not without risk. Their findings indicate that the new curriculum may be exacerbating existing inequalities, particularly in relation to attainment and access to disciplinary knowledge in some subjects. While some schools and teachers are thriving within this flexible framework, others are struggling to ensure coherence, progression and equity.

A key tension emerges here. Many teachers in Wales have not historically been prepared – through initial teacher education or ongoing professional development – to act as curriculum designers. Innovation requires time, subject expertise and sustained support, yet these resources are unevenly distributed across schools. At the same time, schools continue to be held accountable through inspection and assessment systems that have not fully adapted to the scale and ambition of curriculum reform.

This raises critical questions for curriculum change more broadly. Freedom and flexibility alone do not guarantee equity. Without systemic investment in teacher education, subject knowledge and collaborative curriculum development, innovation risks deepening rather than narrowing inequalities. Daly’s metaphor reminds us that if the canary is struggling, the problem may not lie with the canary at all—but with the conditions of the mine.

Building capacity, community, and climate literacy – reflections from the CCPERN January meeting

Author Education and Childhood Research Group | Posted on

By Dr Verity Jones, Associate Professor in Education

The Climate Change Primary Education and Research Network (CCPERN) began 2026 with an energising and thought‑provoking meeting that reaffirmed why this community matters so deeply. Bringing together teachers, researchers, practitioners, and organisations committed to sustainability education, CCPERN continues to offer a vital space for sharing practice, fostering collaboration, and exploring the urgent challenges facing climate and sustainability learning in primary education.

Our January meeting welcomed two speakers whose work, though distinct in focus, revealed powerful synergies: Kate Colechin, from UWE Bristol’s careers and widening access team, and Mark Whittaker, headteacher at a North Yorkshire primary school. Together, they helped us consider not only what children need to learn about climate change, but how education systems can better prepare young people for a rapidly changing world.

Green careers and early aspirations

Kate Colechin opened the session by offering insights from her work training careers practitioners and supporting young people in schools. Speaking from both a higher‑education and school‑engagement perspective, she highlighted how central sustainability has become to contemporary careers work.

Kate shared that, within UWE Bristol’s postgraduate careers guidance programme, sustainability and the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are embedded across modules, shaping how future advisors support both young and old to think critically about the environmental impacts of work, and to recognise that “every job is a green job”. Her reflections on working with school pupils were particularly resonant: young people, she noted, are increasingly worried about AI, future employment, and the state of the planet – and they respond powerfully to opportunities that spark curiosity and broaden their sense of what is possible.

A key takeaway was the importance of early career‑related learning in primary school, especially as research shows that children’s assumptions about jobs often solidify between the ages of 7 and 17. Challenging stereotypes, expanding horizons, and linking learning to real‑world sustainability issues can shape dispositions that stay with children throughout their lives.

Whole‑school climate education and the power of place

From a practitioner’s standpoint, Mark Whittaker shared the work underway across Northern Star Academies Trust to embed sustainability in curriculum, culture, and community. His school’s context added important nuance to discussions about equity, engagement, and what climate education looks like in practice.

Mark described how participation in the CAPE (Climate Adaptation Pathways in Education) programme had been transformative for both him and his staff, helping them articulate the “why” of climate education and recognise the need to thread sustainability throughout the curriculum rather than bolt it on. His examples of outdoor learning, river‑themed curriculum design, and farm twinning illustrated how powerful experiential learning can be for building ecological awareness and student wellbeing.

He also emphasised the challenges: staff confidence, parental perceptions, and political sensitivities around climate issues. Yet his school’s work shows how partnerships – with RHS, the National Education Nature Park, and particularly Jamie’s Farm – can offer life‑changing experiences for children who may have limited access to green spaces.

Shared threads and looking ahead

Across both presentations, a clear message emerged: climate education is not a single subject, but a holistic endeavour. Whether helping young people imagine future green careers or enabling primary pupils to build connections with their local environments, the work must begin early, be embedded meaningfully, and involve whole communities.

CCPERN remains committed to cultivating these conversations, sharing practice, and supporting educators and researchers navigating this shifting landscape. We look forward to continuing this momentum at our next meeting on 25 March 2026, when we will explore international data on environmental education with Professor Jennie Golding from UCL and hear from Green Schools about their work across England.

Interested in joining CCPERN? Please get in touch with Verity Jones (verity6.jones@uwe.ac.uk).

Reading for pleasure, public libraries, and voices at the margins

Author Education and Childhood Research Group | Posted on

By Dr Anish Harrison and Professor Alpesh Maisuria

In November 2025, we submitted written evidence to the House of Commons Education Select Committee inquiry into “Reading for Pleasure”. The inquiry comes at a critical time with national data showing that children’s enjoyment of reading is now at its lowest level since records began in 2005 (NLT, 2025).

The Committee’s review sits alongside the Government’s announcement of 2026 as the National Year of Reading, led by the Department for Education and the National Literacy Trust. Framed as a chance to “kickstart a reading revolution”, the initiative recognises that reading for pleasure matters, not only for attainment, but for wellbeing, confidence and personal satisfaction. However, unless we listen to the experiences of children and families who are least engaged in reading, these ambitions risk falling short of being realised.

From thesis to Select Committee evidence

Our submission draws on doctoral research by Dr Anish Harrison, Voices at the margins: An exploration of the perceptions of ‘vulnerable’ children, their families’ and library professionals regarding reading for pleasure and public libraries. This was Anish’s EdD submission, taking a case-study approach and framed from a critical ecological perspective.  

The research explores how children and families from different demographics, including Children Looked After, children from diverse backgrounds and those in areas of high deprivation experience reading for pleasure.  It also examines the role of public libraries within this context, critically exploring its socio-historical formation and current situation that includes being a critical mechanism for reading to take place.

The study worked with children, parents and library professionals, including early years children, primary-aged readers, and young people in care. The data generated clearly highlighted that reading for pleasure is not an individualised, uniform, and silent activity. It is social, playful, emotional and deeply shaped by environment and opportunities.

One child put it simply:

“I like reading… I just want a book that I like, like comics and that …  not boring old smelly books.”

Their words challenge narrow ideas of what counts as reading, and whose preferences are valued.

Real world reading for pleasure

Across the research, children described enjoyment when they had choice and agency, but in the context of several factors: choosing and having access to a range of materials, reading with others, having inviting spaces to read and engaging with texts that reflected their interests and identities. Reading often happened alongside play, including Lego world-building, role play, and digital media.

The research found that public libraries played a crucial role in making this possible. For many families, they provided a free, welcoming “third space” beyond home and school, where reading was not assessed, timed, or in any way pressured – simply joyful. Libraries enabled shared reading, supported parents who lacked confidence, and gave children access to a wider range of books and formats than were available at home. 

An ecological model was created through the data, which reflected children’s reading for pleasure needs:

However, significant barriers were also identified. Parents spoke about time-poverty, long-working hours, and uncertainty about how to support reading. Some assumed reading was ‘something [that the] school does’ but at the same time, participants noted that school practices undermined enjoyment. For older children, reading was associated with pressure rather than pleasure.

Importantly, structural inequalities were present in what was seen as ‘legitimate reading’. These barriers prohibited the growth of children’s identity as readers, creating significant barriers to enjoying reading for pleasure.

Libraries under pressure

At the same time as reading for pleasure declining, public libraries have faced sustained budgetary cuts. Reduced opening hours, loss of professional staff, and fewer children’s activities have made access increasingly uneven. Library staff told us of high demand for story times and reading-related events, but diminishing capacity to deliver them.

Despite this, public libraries remain places of belonging. When these spaces were informal, well-designed and social, families felt welcome and reading for pleasure flourished. Conversely, where they were large, formal, or understaffed, some participants in the study felt excluded by the coldness.

Why reading for pleasure matters now

The evidence is clear: reading for pleasure supports who children grow as human beings. In the research, it created joy, connection, self-understanding, meaning-making, and confidence in lives shaped by scarcity and pressure. The opportunity to submit to the Education Select Committee was timely and ensured the thesis could have the potential for real-world impact. 

Our evidence-informed submission to the Select Committee makes five key recommendations:

  1. sustained investment in public libraries;
  2. recognising libraries as strategic partners in literacy policy;
  3. actively promoting library services during the National Year of Reading;
  4. adopting minimum service standards; and
  5. broadening definitions of reading for pleasure to reflect children’s reading realities.

If the National Year of Reading is to succeed, it must start by listening to voices at the margins. Public libraries are not a nostalgic extra, they are essential infrastructures for equity, enjoyment, and flourishing.

A matter of Art in the Primary Curriculum

Author Education and Childhood Research Group | Posted on

By Dr Claire Osborne, Senior Lecturer in Education

The Labour government’s ‘Curriculum and Assessment Review’ (2025) is now out of consultation. As government ministers reflect on the implications for education policy and fulfil their quest to build a “world class curriculum for all”, I want to take a moment to reflect on the future of art learning and teaching across primary education in England.

Art is a serious matter. It involves the development of authentic knowledge and skills such as learning how to master a range of art and design techniques including drawing, painting, and sculpture to knowing about great artists, architects, and designers in history (DfE, 2013). Moreover, studying art at primary level involves having the opportunity to experiment with different kinds of materials and art tools creatively; this could include how to work with charcoal to create light and shade or mastering a range of craft tools to design and make a clay pot. Engaging in the processes and practices of art not only ignites the imagination but can also develop children’s critical thinking skills (see Tambling and Bacon, 2023, p.13); skills which are much needed by industry to support economic growth. The ability to think critically and independently is especially important today as we witness a rise in AI reliance for educational purposes which may potentially impact on people’s cognitive activity and problem-solving skills (see Kosmyna, 2025).

However, due to enduring knowledge hierarchies, as previously identified by Eisner (2002), the teaching and learning of art and visual cultural knowledge can often be sidelined or undervalued in today’s primary school curriculum (see Cooper, 2018; Tambling and Bacon, 2023; APPG, 2023). My own research also suggests that in some cases, children’s engagement with art processes and practices can sometimes be seen as a treat when the “important” schoolwork has been done (Osborne, 2025). This can reinforce an idea that the creative arts and cultural learning experiences are ‘nice to have’ rather than essential elements to the school curriculum (see CLA, 2017).  More still, when arts-based disciplines are taught in primary schools, some teachers reportedly lack sufficient time and resources to plan high quality learning experiences where the development of arts knowledge and skills are at the forefront of curriculum planning (see Cooper, 2018).

Yet despite recent government and Ofsted pronouncements around the importance of children’s access to a broad, balanced, and knowledge rich curriculum, the decline in art teaching and learning, remains an ongoing concern. In many ways the “problem” (my inverted commas) can be attributed to  a succession of central government policy making decisions over the past 30 years which have shifted the role of primary teaching and learning towards standardisation, accountability, and a focus on measuring ‘useful knowledge’ (see Ball, 2017; Nsead, 2016; Biesta, 2010) rather than offering state educated children a more holistic schooling experience (see APPG, 2023; Tambling and Bacon, 2023). However, a lack of access to art in the primary years not only limits children’s exposure to a well-rounded primary education but may restrict, what Aristotle (2018) advocated in his ninth book on Metaphysics, children’s ‘potentiality’ thus raising issues around social equity and personal fulfilment. For some children, engaging with art also serves as a cathartic experience and therefore plays a much-needed role in any school curriculum in supporting children’s general well-being (see CLA, 2018). Yet, although great things are happening in some schools where the arts are supported well by leadership teams with sufficient funding (Osborne, 2025), we still find ourselves in a position where fostering human creativity and children’s self-expression are not always high on the agenda in every state funded school in England whilst the teaching and learning of essential art knowledge and skills can be undermined as generalist teachers are increasingly deskilled or lacking in confidence (see APPG, 2023, p.10; Tambling and Bacon, 2023; Osborne 2025).

To reverse this situation, art needs to be reestablished as a serious and challenging intellectual endeavour within primary education whilst maintaining the creative freedom and enjoyment it can provide for some children. As such, all children need sufficient time in the school week to experiment freely with art materials and processes whilst critically engaging with visual cultural knowledge which can inspire and challenge children’s thinking. Such rich learning experiences can complement other types of learning and subject disciplines across the curriculum and enhance children’s critical thinking skills. Moreover, schools are active sites of learning which can cultivate new knowledge in the field. This includes knowing about a diverse range of contemporary artists, craft makers, and designers who often act as social commentators on our human condition whilst still dedicating lesson time to appreciating and critiquing some of the more familiar traditional artists and art forms widely displayed in public galleries.

However, teachers need real time, space, and investment to be and become knowledgeable others who are confident, well-trained professionals, who are constantly learning from and with children about art processes and practices which foster creativity, self-expression, criticality and original thought. Moreover, teachers need time to be and become inquisitive researchers at the forefront of curriculum reform who promote the value of both ‘powerful knowledge’ (Young, 2008) and ‘purposeful’ knowledge and skills within their localised contexts. But this can only be achieved if reinforced by top-down education policy reform. This may in turn help to reprioritise the place of art within initial teacher education (ITE) whilst influencing school leadership teams in providing ongoing support for teacher’s continuing professional development (CPD) when in role.

Time and resource will always be a challenge despite recent talk about supporting teachers’ professional autonomy over curriculum planning and design (DfE, 2025).  Hence, as we witness the implementation of the Labour government’s recent Curriculum and Assessment Review (DfE, 2025), I would argue more needs to be done, to ensure the power of arts and visual cultural knowledge and skills remains firmly on the agenda in primary education. Moreover, every child attending a state funded primary school in England should have the opportunity to engage in high-quality art learning and creative exploration facilitated by well-trained and knowledgeable teachers who can adapt learning to reflect their local contexts. This is especially pressing today as we consider the growing influence of artificial intelligence (AI) on many facets of school planning and teaching, and the potential impact this may have on learning at every level and in every subject.  As the decline in localise planning continues and there is a growing demand for time saving ready made plans, the question is, how will the tool of AI impact on creative innovation and original thought? What creative possibilities will AI bring to the primary classroom and how can AI be used well to support children’s artistic engagement and authentic learning?

In the years ahead, AI will certainly shape the future of education; and in many ways, AI and the rise in Edtech could address the marginalisation of art in some schools by freeing up teachers to focus more time on providing children with memorable learning experiences rather than being overburdened with administrative tasks. Moreover, AI may provide teachers with better access to generalised artistic knowledge and skills to inform their curriculum planning and innovation thus responding to how learners learn. Nevertheless, AI is only a tool — it cannot replace teacher’s professional knowledge or professional autonomy or address ongoing issues around subject hierarchies. Furthermore, an over reliance on AI for planning, learning or teaching may inhibit both teachers and children’s critical thinking skills and decision-making processes. These are interesting times for primary education especially in terms of the purpose and philosophy of education. As we look to the future, educationists and policy makers will need to think carefully and mindfully about how AI is used as a supportive planning aid whilst considering how teachers can provide children with greater access to authentic, meaningful, and enjoyable art lessons, where everyone can fulfil their creative potential and engage with a “world class curriculum”. Giving children more access to the creative arts during their primary education may also counteract any notions around a potential decline in human cognitive functioning due to AI reliance by enabling us to continue to think for ourselves, both critically and creatively.

References

Children’s literature, anti-racism, and educational impact: ‘Difference in Primary Schools’ resource

Author Education and Childhood Research Group | Posted on

By Dr Verity Jones, Associate Professor in Education

On 23 September 2025, Lambeth Palace hosted the launch of the Difference in Primary Schools resource—an ambitious and timely initiative that uses children’s film, songs and literature to support meaningful conversations about race, identity, and belonging in primary education.

Developed by the Difference programme, the resource is freely available to schools and educators across the UK, offering a suite of lessons that foreground empathy, critical thinking, and inclusive practice from early years through to transition into Key Stage 3.

As the team leader for the RESPECT project, I was particularly proud that the transition lesson draws directly on If Racism Vanished for a Day – a book developed through our project. Co-created with children from Bristol schools, the text and illustrations invite readers to imagine a world without racism.

The integration of our book demonstrates how academic research can shape real-world practice, particularly in the context of anti-racism education. It also highlights the power of literature as a pedagogical tool: not only to foster understanding, but to catalyse change.

As schools begin to adopt the Difference in Primary Schools resource, the reach and relevance of RESPECT’s work continues to grow – supporting educators in creating classrooms where every child feels seen, heard, and valued.

Difference in primary schools resource

Where has all the creativity gone?

Author Education and Childhood Research Group | Posted on

By Ros Steward, Senior Lecturer in Education, UWE Bristol

Art has been acknowledged (Hewlett & Unsworth in Driscoll, Lambirth & Roden, 2012; Herne et al, 2009) as becoming marginalised in the primary national curriculum even prior to the current iteration (DfE, 2013), due in part to the timetabling of Foundation subjects being increasingly reduced as the focus on the core subjects, particularly Maths and English as a result of the Government’s focus on standardised testing in these subjects, has increased.

This has been seen to impact upon the integrity of many of the foundation subjects, but in particular the arts. The reduction of art and design at KS4 (no longer being a statutory subject) has also had an impact upon the teaching and learning in Primary teaching and learning, with the debate ensuing around the importance of the arts in general and the necessity for them in the 21st Century.

Added to this, there is an issue where future teachers are being trained to teach Foundation subjects, (the allocation of time with training programmes mirroring that of school based curricula), including art, for which they have little affinity due to a variety of reasons including their personal perception of ability and subject knowledge. Indeed, many have the perception that art has little value as a subject other than being an minor adjunct to other areas of learning in education, suggesting that art as a force for creative and innovative thinking, the opportunity for imagination to flourish and the understanding of how artists over time have expressed their view of the world, may well be increasingly diminishing within our classrooms. Robinson (2006) expressed:  “We are educating people out of their creativity” and there might well be some truth in his assertions with the current political climate and assessment driven agenda.

The National Society for Education in Art and Design (NSEAD) stated only this year that ‘Art and design is popular, but it is complacent to say it is thriving – children are getting less art and design’ in their written response to the Curriculum and Assessment Review (DfE, 2025), followed by a further report by Thomson et al (2025), both reflecting what our Primary trainees are reporting to us- they see little or no art being taught in schools during their placements. So is it an issue with the pedagogical focus currently seen in ITE generally or specifically here at UWE Bristol? And can it be addressed?

Since teaching on an Initial Teacher Education programme at UWE, I have reflected on how art is taught in Primary education. I realised that, although I believed I was fostering creativity by teaching discrete skills and art knowledge, the structured and directive approach may have limited children’s creative expression and confidence. Conversations with trainees about their own experiences highlighted that this method might have contributed to the negative perceptions of art that many held, particularly during Key Stage 2.

This is not a new concern; previous research (Gatt & Karpinnen, 2014; Gibson, 2003; Russell-Bowie, 2004; 2012) has similarly found that student teachers’ perceptions of art are shaped by their own schooling experiences. These perceptions are often left unchallenged during initial teacher education, largely due to the prioritisation of core subjects. My own small-scale research supports these findings: qualitative data from an online questionnaire revealed that many students held preconceived views about the value of art and design in Primary education, often linked to low confidence stemming from limited personal skills or subject knowledge. Rokeach (1970) cited in Smith (1971) defines attitude as:

An attitude is a relatively enduring organisation of beliefs around an object or situation, predisposing one to respond in some preferential manner. An attitude is relatively enduring because it can be learned, it can be unlearned. Because it is learned, it can be taught.’

                                                                                                (Smith, 1971:82)

A key factor in developing a new approach was the allocation of sufficient timetabled sessions within the Foundation modules at UWE Bristol. Year 1 undergraduates received five 3-hour sessions focused on art and design, allowing for both skill development across various media (including photography) and the nurturing of creativity. The PGCE programme offered a comparable amount of time. In Year 2, undergraduates engaged with a module on integrating art into cross-curricular themes and could choose an art specialism that further explored how art and design could be embedded meaningfully across the Primary curriculum.

As a result of my research and reflection, I adapted my planning to allow for more open-ended outcomes from an initial stimulus, aiming to encourage students to develop original ideas collaboratively or individually, based on their existing skills. This approach did not eliminate the discrete teaching of skills, which remains essential—particularly since many teacher trainees, especially in EYFS and Primary education, have had little formal art education beyond GCSE or A level. Many trainees recalled enjoying art in early childhood, when exploration was encouraged, but later lost interest due to comparisons with peers. This aligns with Lowenfeld’s (1947) stages of artistic development: during the ‘Dawning Realism’ stage (7–9 years), children become more self-critical, and by the ‘Pseudo-Naturalistic’ stage (10–13 years), they evaluate their success based on realism, often resulting in frustration. In many Primary settings, children are still directed toward uniform outcomes, increasing the potential for comparison. Conversations with trainees revealed that teacher attitudes and feedback often contributed to diminished confidence—for example, work not being displayed or comments suggesting they weren’t good enough. As previously noted this issue is longstanding, but I believed it could be positively addressed through thoughtful preparation for practice. Shifting trainees’ negative perceptions toward enthusiasm became my central aim.

To begin adapting my approach, I reviewed a Year 6 unit I had previously taught for several years based on the QCA scheme of work ‘People in Action’ (DfEE/QCA, 2000). At the time, I believed the children had made progress—developing subject knowledge of artists like Duchamp and Chagall, and improving skills such as drawing and proportion. However, further reflection and research highlighted significant limitations in the way the unit was delivered. Although initial activities encouraged open dialogue and imaginative thinking through unprompted discussion of artworks, the creative potential was ultimately constrained. Children were shown examples of prior outcomes, told what medium to use (chalk pastel), and guided through a set sequence to produce work ‘in the style of’ a specific artist. This predetermined outcome left little room for genuine creativity, resulting in near-identical pieces. As Hickman (2010) noted, such an approach prioritises product over process. To reverse this, greater flexibility in media, scale, and open-ended outcomes, aligned with models of creative thinking like Bloom’s Taxonomy and the SOLO taxonomy, might foster deeper engagement and original thinking.

Teaching itself is a ‘creative act’…and relies continuously on chance meetings of idea and materials, curiosity, flexibility and adventurous thinking”

(Barnes : 2007:137)

To further develop this new pedagogical approach, I revisited the QCA unit ‘Take a Seat’, but this time handed over the entire creative process to the trainees to help build their confidence and reduce self-criticism. After sharing my previous experience and the limitations I had identified, I invited the trainees to interpret the unit title independently, without further guidance. This encouraged a broad range of ideas to emerge. Working in groups, trainees planned their own direction, documented their thinking and adaptations, and experimented with different materials and techniques. While some discrete skill teaching was necessary—for example, when using unfamiliar materials like modroc or working with clay—the main emphasis was on exploration, discovery, and peer-supported learning, consistent with Bruner’s (1960, 1968) constructivist approach and findings by Dismore et al. (2008). The open-ended nature of the task allowed for an unexpectedly wide range of outcomes, including both 2D and 3D works. Trainees utilised diverse media—ICT (posters, videos, presentations), clay, wire, modroc, found materials, drawings, and paintings—demonstrating increased creativity, autonomy, and collaborative learning.

The reflections from the trainees were extremely encouraging and confirmed that by enabling them to explore different ideas and build upon their strengths and learn new skills, the majority had become far more confident in their own abilities as artists. It was clear that this approach had stimulated their creativity in unexpected ways, and in turn their attitude had become far more enthused for a subject previously viewed negatively. This in turn prompted many of them to try out this approach of teaching art in their own practice with positive results.

In recent years, the focus within Initial Teacher Education (ITE) has shifted once again toward the core subjects, with all year groups receiving dedicated input in English, maths, and science, while coverage of Foundation subjects, such as art and design, has notably declined. This narrowing of focus reflects the concerns raised by Susan Ogier (2022) who critiques the dominance of accountability measures that limit children’s access to a truly broad and enriching education, essential for preparing them for a creative and technological future. This is mirrored at UWE; Year 1 students now receive just one lecture and three 2-hour sessions in art and design, focused only on basic skills, with little to no opportunity for extended or applied creative learning. The Year 2 art specialism has been removed, and art is now taught within a cross-curricular module in a hierarchical format (Barnes, 2015), limiting deeper engagement with the subject. As Eisner (1972) argued, the arts uniquely enrich human experience and perception, particularly through aesthetic understanding—a contribution no other field can replicate. Without meaningful opportunities for participation in art and design, we risk depriving future generations of these vital humanising experiences.

So, where do we go from here? To offset the limited opportunities within current ITE training, some colleagues and I are planning to deliver regular twilight continuing professional development meetings, incorporating practical workshops, for our Partnership colleagues and also Year 2 and 3 trainees, where we can discuss how we can better deliver creative teaching and encourage teaching of creativity across the Arts for all Primary children, encouraging them to reflect on the theoretical aspects of discrete and cross curricular models, developing their own practical subject knowledge to enhance their confidence and suggesting how the shift from product driven teaching to process, enabling children to investigate and explore possibilities, will enable a vibrant community where successes can be celebrated and shared. It will be interesting to monitor how this is received by our Primary teaching colleagues, and our trainees, and study whether any appreciable impact can be identified on how the Arts are delivered in our Partnership schools in the future.

References

Barnes, J. (2007, 2nd ed). Cross-Curricular Learning 3-14. London: Sage

Barnes, J. (2015) Cross-Curricular Learning 3-14. London: Sage

Bloom, B. S.; Engelhart, M. D.; Furst, E. J.; Hill, W. H.; Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. New York: David McKay Company.

Bruner, J. (1960) The Process of Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press

Bruner, J. (1968) Towards a Theory of Instruction. New York: Norton

DfE (2025) Curriculum and Assessment Review: interim report https://www.gov.uk/government/news/curriculum-and-assessment-review-publishes-interim-findings

DfEE/QCA, (2000) Art and design scheme of work  https://www.qca.org.uk/232.html

Dismore, P., Barnes, J. and Scoffham, S. (2008) Space to Reflect. London: Creative Partnerships

Driscoll, P., Lambirth, A. and Roden, J. (eds) (2012) The Primary Curriculum- a creative approach. London: Sage

Eisner, E. (1972). Educating Artistic Vision. New York: MacMillan

Gatt, I & Karppinen, S (2014) An Enquiry into Primary Student Teachers’ Confidence, Feelings and Attitudes towards Teaching Arts and Crafts in Finland and Malta during Initial Teacher Training. International Journal of Art & Design Education 33.1

Gibson, R. (2003) Learning to be an art educator: student teachers’ attitudes to art and art education, International Journal of Art & Design Education, Vol. 22, No.1, pp. 111–20

Herne, S., Cox, S., Watts, R. (eds) (2009) Readings in Primary Art Education, Intellect Books

Hickman, R. (2010, 2nd ed.). Why We Make Art – and why it is taught. Bristol: Intellect

Lowenfeld, V. (1947) Creative and Mental Growth. New York: Macmillan Co.

NSEAD (2025) Curriculum and Assessment Review – NSEAD response and analysis  https://www.nsead.org/files/79b22a9c45f173a4ef2d2a8941248165.pdf

Ogier, S. (2022) A Broad and Balanced Curriculum in Primary Schools London: Sage

Robinson (2006) Do Schools kill Creativity? TED talk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRnToFZQQP4

Russell-Bowie, D. (2004). Arts education: Are the problems the same across five countries?

Preservice teachers’ perceptions of the problems to teaching arts education in primary schools in five countries. Paper presented at the Australian Association for Research in Education, Melbourne

Russell-Bowie, D. (2012) Developing preservice primary teachers’ confidence and competence in arts education using principles of authentic learning, Australian Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 37, No. 1 Article 4

Smith, A. N. (1971) The importance of attitude in foreign language learning. Modern language journal. 55 (2), pp. 83-88.

Thomson, P., Hall, C., Maloy, L. (2025) The RAPS Project: Researching the Arts in Primary Schools  The University of Nottingham https://artsprimary.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/raps-final-feb-2025–4.pdf

Crafting change: How craft is empowering children for a sustainable future

Author Education and Childhood Research Group | Posted on

By Dr Verity Jones

In the face of escalating ecological and social crises, education must evolve to equip the next generation with the tools to imagine and enact a more sustainable and just world. In our new paper published in the International Journal of Social Pedagogy, we explore how eco-craftivism – the fusion of ecological awareness and craft-based activism- can serve as a powerful pedagogical tool in primary education.

Conducted with 120 pupils aged 8 to 9 in two UK primary schools, our research investigates how creative, hands-on learning can foster eco-social pedagogy (ESP). ESP expands traditional social pedagogy by integrating ecological consciousness with social justice, emphasizing the interconnectedness of people, planet, and the material world.

We call to for a de-bordering of solidarities: to move beyond human-to-human empathy and include solidarity with the environment and non-human “things.” This form of solidarity, with human-made objects, is crucial in cultivating sustainable behaviours. Craft and craftivism are powerful tools for building creative relationships with things in ways that build solidarities with those things, but also serve as gateways to holistic solidarities with the environment and human others. By engaging with recycled materials like copper wire, cardboard, and old socks, we explore how pupils developed material literacies – an understanding of the origins, value, and lifecycle of everyday items. This awareness, in turn, sparked deeper ecological and social insights.

The project’s workshops – where children crafted bracelets, puzzles, and sock puppets – were more than just craft lessons. They were immersive experiences that connected students emotionally and intellectually to the climate crisis. Pupils expressed joy in creating, pride in reusing materials, and a newfound sense of agency. One student reflected:

“It’s like doing something for the planet but also doing something that you can use.”

This dual purpose – personal enjoyment and environmental impact – embodies the essence of eco-craftivism.

Teachers, too, reported a shift in perspective. Inspired by the workshops, they reconsidered their own classroom practices, opting to use more sustainable materials and integrate environmental storytelling into lessons. The study highlights how craft-making can transform both teaching and learning, making abstract issues like climate change tangible and emotionally resonant.

Importantly, the research also addresses the emotional toll of climate education. Many children initially expressed fear and helplessness. However, through creative engagement, these emotions often shifted toward hope and empowerment. Crafting became a medium for emotional expression and resilience, helping students process complex feelings in a constructive way.

This study is a vital contribution to the growing field of climate education. It demonstrates that eco-craftivism is not just about making things – it’s about making meaning. By fostering solidarity with people, nature, and objects, it cultivates a holistic understanding of sustainability that is both intellectually rigorous and emotionally grounded.

As we seek innovative ways to prepare young learners for the challenges ahead, this research offers a compelling model. Eco-craftivism shows that with the right tools – scissors, thread, and a bit of imagination – children can begin to stitch together a better future.

The full reference of this new article is:

Mulholland, J., Jones, V., Pawson, C. and Harrison, L. (2025). De-bordering solidarities: using eco-craftivism as an eco-social pedagogy in primary education. International Journal of Social Pedagogy, 14(1): 8.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.14324/111.444.ijsp.2025.v14.x.008.

Back to top

Follow this blog

Get every new post delivered right to your inbox.