New Talk; New Methods

I spent about 3 hours yesterday working on a presentation explaining why we should teach engineering to young students.  I am trying to make my presentations more like TED talks with big ideas and lots of visuals.  It is still hard for me to get away totally from the Powerpoint bullets, which more than anything, remind me what to say.  But I am using the presenter notes feature of Keynote to help and using lots of visuals: movies, photos of kids and their Lego robotics creations, and scans of student work.  I have 2 one day workshops coming up (one on BeeBots and one on BeeBots, WeDo, and NXT all together, which should be interesting), a short talk on robotics for kids for our district convocation, and an hour long presentation for a tech conference in the fall.

Posted in Robotics, Technology | Leave a comment

Fear and Learning

Aidan is spending lots of time in the water.  A few weeks ago, we were swimming at Beaver Lake in Ware, Massachusetts and were out on a dock.  I have expected for sometime that he would be close to jumping in the water by himself.  Up to this point, I hold both his hands and swing him into the water.  We do this at the Conway Pool (really a pond) where I can stand and he is up higher on a dock.  At Beaver Lake, he was afraid to jump right in from the (level to the water) dock.

I thought of tossing him in because I thought there was a good chance he would really like it and that it would help him to jump in by himself.  However, when I suggested it, he got upset and made it clear that he did NOT want me to do that.  But gently lowering him into the water and holding onto him until he was fully “in” was not moving him forward in his water play.  After considering throwing him anyway for a while, I thought, “Is there something in between?”  So I suggested lifting him and dropping him into the water from low to higher distance.  After and initial resistance, I dropped him in and he loved it and asked for more.  “I want to do that again, Dad.”  That’s one of his favorite expressions associated with learning and play along with, “Watch me!”

Well, I dropped him from different heights trying to push the height as much as I could.  We had very fun time.  He was still not ready to jump in though.

Yesterday, before we went to his grandfather’s pool, I suggested that he might be ready to jump in all by himself today. Sure enough, he was ready this week.  He was very proud of himself and even jumped in the deep end.  I will have to get some video of this.  The whole thing reminded me of Vigotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development, which suggests that kids always have an zone of where they can go next in their learning and that it is best to push it but not too much.

Posted in Child Development | Leave a comment

Social Media and Blogging

It’s getting complicated!  Now that I am using Twitter, Google+, and FaceBook and have work and home identities, I want to be able to automatically share new blog entries (I have work and home blogs too) without duplicating too much.  I set up my WordPress blogs with a little widget that has TW, G+, and FB buttons.  The TW and FB ones work great but don’t go to work and home identities.  The G+ one does not seem to work.  I use Networking Blogs on FaceBook too but that now is creating duplicates so I need to take that out I guess.  Anyone have a nice clean solution?

 

Posted in Tech | Leave a comment

Fairy House Engineering

I was thinking today about Fairy Houses, also known as Gnome Homes, when I saw a bunch of them at my son’s YMCA camp.  We also see these at the elementary school where I work.  I wonder if these fill a need for engineering/building that is not fulfilled at school.  We also typically see these more of an interest for girls, which is interesting.  In any case, another great way to explore engineering!

Photo from http://www.fairyhouses.com/

Photo of a typical Fairy House

Posted in Child Development | Leave a comment

Research Directions; Which Way To Go?

I plan on continuing to implement and document the PK-6 Elementary Engineering Curriculum I have been developing.  That is clear.  What is less clear is the direction to go with my associated research.

Many intriguing possible areas have come up but I will need to focus on a couple of them.

  1. How does interest and engagement is robotics relate to the creative play/fantasy play we see in children?  How does this relate to the work of Erikson, Gardner (Multiple Intelligences), Vigotsky, and Piaget?
  2. Is there a clear developmental progression in creative play/building/engineering interest/development of PK-6 children?
  3. Why is robotics so engaging, especially to students that either need more challenges or (generally) boys who have learning or attention issues but are very successful with hands on building projects.  How does this fit in with the Activated Learner research from the Moore Foundation?

I am thinking that due to my own limited resources, I may wish to track a small number of children starting from PK or K and with the use of video of their work and video and written interview and reflections, develop some case studies of children’s engineering development over 7 or 8 years.  I will also pursue grants and collaborations that support this work.  I would love to get some feedback on which of the 3 areas above would be most helpful in your own work.

 

 

Posted in Child Development, Research, Robotics | 5 Comments

What Do The Student Quotes Mean?

I received this analysis of the student robotics quotes from graduate student Lama Jaber.  I found it to be an excellent summary.  Here it is.

 

First, at an affective level, the robotic experience seems to be
triggering very good feelings, coming both from it being a fun
experience, an empowering and challenging experience, and an
opportunity to feel a  sense of achievement (I did it!) and ownership
which seems really rewarding to these kids, and finally as something
that is different from the rest of the school work (it is interesting
that this was pretty prevalent in kids’ responses)

Second, on an epistemological sense in terms of how one gets to know
something or gets to learn in robotics, their experiences seem to
promote a view of learning as figuring things out, relying on one’s
efforts rather than on an outside authority (book, or teacher…),
integrating skills and knowledge from various domains such as math
science, and writing (though this was maybe mentioned only twice, I
found it pretty powerful!), also an appreciation of persistence and
failure as a central and desirable aspect of learning: failure as an
opportunity for a new way of thinking and opening up to new
perspectives.

Posted in Child Development, Research, Robotics | Leave a comment

Effects of a Less Than Optimal Project

Sixth graders did an engineering challenge this year to create the fastest robot they could that could also go around an obstacle placed anywhere and continue along its path.  For this year’s sixth grade students, it was their first year of robotics.  In subsequent years, students will have more and more experience with robotics coming into sixth grade.  I created a survey with 4 parts.

  1. Define Robot (short answer)
  2. Define Engineering (short answer)
  3. I want to be an engineer or scientist when I am older
  4. I like using computers and other technology.

Students answered the last 2 questions using a Likert Scale (Strongly Agree, Agree, Neither Agree or Disagree, Disagree, and Strongly Disagree.)

Being the first year, I did not get this project quite right and it was not optimal (needed more time and/or a simpler challenge). What I found was that there was about same number of kids whose interest in engineering was increased as decreased.  What is significant was that this one project did cause some movement in attitudes.  In contract, interest in technology was virtually unchanged by the project.  I expect to see more positive movement with a better challenge and I also expect that children with much more experience in engineering than these students, who only have 1 year, will be more resilient to temporary frustrations.  We may also find that the more we expose young children to early engineering, even with the best projects, they may find it to be their thing (or not) sooner.

When I asked this year’s sixth graders after the survey about their responses, they said:

  • they felt frustrated because they could not finish,
  • that engineering was too hard (based on this),
  • that engineering was fun but that they would not want to do it full time, that they liked the projects but had stronger interests besides engineering.

It will be interesting to see what happens next year.  I am going to simplify the challenge and also the kids next year will come in with a year of robotics experience.  I also had to give the survey right after the project finished (or not), so next year, I will let some time pass regardless of the my perceived success of the project.

Posted in Robotics, Teaching, Technology | Leave a comment

Kids Engineer Debuts

This is the new home of all blog entries related to work, which will focus on elementary robotics and technology. You can find all my dog training, nature, spirit, and other materials at http://www.jheffernan.com/

Posted in Robotics | Leave a comment

Creative Play and How It Relates to Robotics Education

At the suggestion of a doctoral student I met at a robotics conference, I did a series of interviews with some of my elementary robotics students.  I started a program this year that consists of robotics projects at every grade level from preschool to grade 6.  Additionally, there are open ended engineering challenges, based on robotics, at grades K, 2, 4, and 6.  These consist of challenges like building your own burglar alarm or carnival ride instead of the standard projects where they build a design from the book.

The kids repeatedly said that the projects were fun (this was mentioned some 24 times with the next most common being that they liked that it was hands-on, which was mentioned 13 times.  When I asked them why it was fun, they said because it was hands on or that that it was satisfying at the end or that it was different. I say the same things in my and grant applications:  hands on is better, fun, a good way to learn, etc.

But I was left feeling that I was not getting at the core idea of why it was fun for them.

At the same time, I was editing some videos of my son Aidan.  I try and create a DVD made up of movie clips and a slideshow every 6 months.  Aidan, my wife Dawn, and I love to watch them periodically.  I am fascinated to both see how Aidan has changed and how he stayed the same.

Here’s a clip of my son Aidan playing with some Lego blocks.  I have always loved this creative, dramatic play that he does with blocks.  He also does this type of play in the bath.

I have been thinking that I will miss this when it stops and was assuming it was just something all kids do and all kids grow out of.

But I was out running one day with my dogs and it hit me, that the fun the older kids are having with robotics has a connection to the creative play my son and presumably all kids do.

In kid’s creative play, they create – with blocks or other toys – their own microworlds that they have absolute control over.  The building seem to be in service to or a prelude to the dramatic, creative play that follows.  This dramatic play has characters, plots, and many, many sound effects!  As I watch children PK-6 work with robots, I see aspects of this creative play, especially in open ended challenges where they can build their own design.  I see some of that fade, at least explicitly, over time.  However, I did see, even in this year’s sixth grade class, some Lego characters attached to cars in different ways.

Then, when out a run one day, it hit me that robotics taps into the creative play younger kids do.  Robotics is creative play for older kids.

How much do we tap into this at school?  Not very much!  Students were clear that one of the reasons that robotics was so fun was that it was different, not something they usually do, and where they get to build, and get to do things without teacher help or following directions.  Aren’t those reasons some of the key features of creative play?

I think we tap into some of the creative play instinct in creative writing and art, which tend to be more attractive to girls, speaking very generally.  But very few teachers tap into the (typically boy) activities of blocks and/or Legos.  I always had a take apart center in my third grade classroom, where students could take apart electronics gear and old typewriters.  This attracted many boys, especially those with learning disabilities (LD) and/or attention deficit disorder (ADD).  We have seen the same thing with elementary robotics, where many boys with LD or ADD that do lots of Legos at home can really shine and be stars and helpers in their classrooms where they usually struggle.

I think we are missing many boys in elementary school by not tapping into this creative play instinct.  Somehow, corporations are not missing this point however, by creating and selling billions of dollars of action figures and other toys that do tap into creative play, sometimes in ways that are not as constructive as they could be.  We are not tapping into this at schools, if anything we are actively repressing it.

This Ted Talk by Ali Carr-Chellman does a great job of laying out some of the reasons elementary schools are failing boys.

A teacher I work with has always wondered why games we do such as My Make Believe Castle, SimTown, and SimCity are so popular with kids.  Again, I believe these “god” games, where the player controls their own microworld, tap into the creative play instinct that is so strong in toddlers and preschoolers.

Even though this insight answered many questions for me (and is theory and not proven), many more emerged.

How does this creative play instinct evolve over time?  Are there developmental milestones ala Piaget that are similar for creative play/building/engineering?

How does it fit into Multiple Intelligence Theory?  MI Theory does not seem to have a corresponding intelligence for the creative play/building/engineering that I am talking about.

How does it fit into our aboriginal roots?  Have children always built and played with things in some way?  How has this evolved over time and what survival value did it have originally?

Why do preschoolers and toddlers, who do everything – music, dance, drama, humor, sports, art, language, building, social, nature, spirit – eventually stop doing everything?  Are they forming their identity and self selecting things that correspond to their natural talents and interests?  Are we culturally selecting certain aspects of personality, with only those with very strong inclinations, able to keep those going?  What are the effects of schools valuing some of these over others?

Does the relative lack of engineering and building experiences in elementary schools narrow the pool of students have may had inclinations towards engineering?  By the time they are exposed to engineering in high school (if at all), is it too late?

 

 

Posted in Child Development, Robotics, Teaching | Leave a comment

Quotes From Elementary Robotics Students

Here are some key quotes from the robotics interviews I conducted with students this year.  I will discuss them later.  Enjoy.  There are some great quotes that show what this robotics experience is like from the student’s point of view.

What Robotics Is Like And How It Is Different Than Other School Work

It’s more fun to actually be building something.  If you took a class in robots and just learned about things, if the teacher just drilled information into your head, it would not be as fun as building and experiencing it to learn.    Grade 6 Girl 2

Absolutely  [different from other schoolwork.] It’s [robotics] more interactive because mostly what we are doing in school is paperwork.  With this you get to experiment, instead of just doing something, like math, you got a question, you figure it out.  With this you can like, change it up, experiment.  Grade 6 Boy 1

 

Most people can’t really try and engineer a robot, try and play with it, and make sure it works but we had the chance to do it.  Grade 5 Girls Team 1

 

I didn’t think you would use all that math and science to build that robot.  Grade 6 Girl 2

 

It was very interesting that we got to build a real, live robot.  I never imagined I would build a robot.  It was really cool.  Grade 5 Boy 1

 

It’s more fun [than usual schoolwork.]  It’s a lot different – sometimes mathematical.  You have to think in a different way.  This would make this would make this happen.  Each step is connected.  Grade 4 Boy Team 2

It’s fun because it allows you to challenge yourself in a different way, than just your mind, because you have to be able to figure out how things go together because that’s physical memory.  Grade 6 Boy 1

 

You can actually do something, not just watch someone else do it.  Grade 5 Girls Team 1

 

It’s fun and different in a different way.  I just think it is more fun.  The way you think.  Easier is some ways, harder in some ways. The way you think is more fun to think that way than the other way.  Grade 4 Boy Team 2

 

I do prefer doing Mindstorms or WeDo over just building because I really like programming.  You can think more about what would make something happen if you add gears or other stuff.  Once I make it be able to do something, it’s really satisfying to see things move. It feels good.  It’s cool that you get something to move and that it’s moving because [before] it was just a pile of Legos.  It’s satisfies you once you done with it.  Grade 4 Boy Team 2

 

I really liked it because it was different, not something that you do everyday with a normal subject, something you look forward to, not something that you do everyday like math and science.  You get to work with your hands a lot.  Grade 6 Girl 1

 

Robots are something that you don’t learn on a board, you kind of learn by doing it with your hands.  You look at it and observe it more.  Grade 6 Girl 1

It’s more exciting.  It’s special.  Grade 6 Girl 1

I would like to do it longer.  Grade 6 Girl 1

I am really glad that we do have them [robots] at this school.  We have a lot of cool technology stuff that we do here.  I mean, starting younger with computers you get to learn to use the different computers and you get to…  We can program stuff.    You got to try to put [things] together.  Grade 6 Girl 1

I like building.  I never do Legos but it was fun  to figure out how to build them and figure it out on your own without a lot of teaching.  Grade 6 Girl 2

It was just fun to try and figure out something.  It was hard but it was really fun.  Grade 6 Girl 2

 

This is more fun.  I learn faster on Lego than other subjects.  I find it more interesting.  I can get involved in it really easily.  Grade 6 Boy 1

I learned that you need to use a lot of different skills, from writing to most of the different subjects like math for the programming and other subjects too. Grade 6 Boy 1

 

Robots aren’t usually something you see around.  These are really simple ones.  When you think about robots, you think about R2D2, movies, and stuff.  They aren’t real but these are.  Grade 5 Girls Team 1

It’s different because you don’t usually engineer things in school.  It is more hands on than the rest of our school work.  [Hand’s on] is more fun and, in certain places, it makes it easier to learn.  Grade 5 Girls Team 1

I like doing Legos without directions because you can’t put things in the wrong spot.  Grade 5 Boy 1

Other schoolwork is more like writing and papers.  [Robotics] is more interactive, hands-on so I like that.  We don’t do it that often so it’s more fun than sitting and doing paper. Grade 4 Girl 1

I like doing the “not following the program” more because you get to make it up.  Grade 4 Girl 1

It’s fun to see what they [robots] do.   Grade 4 Boy 2

I like [open ended challenges] because everyone’s are different and I like having to get new ideas.  Grade 4 Girl 2

I could do it [WeDo] without having to ask grownups all the time and not follow directions.  Grade 4 Boy Team 2

 

My other schoolwork I could not do all day.  Grade 4 Boy Team 2

 

I am learning how to program and other things about the computer in a really fun way. Grade 4 Boy Team 2

 

Building freehand, you’re learning you get to decide what it’s going to do and what it will be like.   Grade 4 Boy Team 2

 

On the Engineering Design Process

 

It was hard so it made us jump up and down when it finally worked.  Grade 5 Girls Team 1

We don’t usually build things.  It’s just fun building things and getting things to work and then it does something good at the end.  You feel good about what you made.  Grade 6 Boy 2

It teaches us to keep trying.  Even if you fail, you can succeed if you keep trying.  Grade 6 Boy 1

 

It’s also about working together to make these crazy, awesome things.   Grade 6 Boy 2

It was pretty fun trying to figure out how some of the pieces of the robot work. Trying to figure out how to make things work.  Nothing usually works the first time.  You usually have to try a few times to get something to work.  I really liked the robots.  It’s fun.  Grade 6 Boy 2

I really liked the way we did it.  We started with the basics at the beginning and moved up to harder stuff and then did the challenge.  Grade 6 Boy 2

Be patient, everything is not going to work the first time.  You just have to keep changing it until it works.  Grade 6 Boy 2

Tiny little things can make big differences.  Grade 6 Girl 1

Don’t copy other people.  Try to do it on your own because you learn more on your own.  Grade 6 Girl 2

Watch your mistakes and how you can improve on them.  Grade 6 Boy 1

You may get frustrated at certain points.  Don’t give up when things aren’t working out.  Grade 5 Girls Team 1

On the paper, we drew out the three different plans.  We thought over which would do the best and which one had the best chance to catch the burglar.  I’m not a big planner but it was good to get your ideas out on paper and see what the different ways were.  Grade 4 Girl 1

It was a challenge to make up my own program.  Grade 4 Girl 1

Posted in Child Development, Research, Robotics, Teaching | 2 Comments