Children's Engineering Convention

I went to the Children’s Engineering Convention not knowing what to expect.  A few initial observations: 

·         This was a national convention, with people from all over the U.S., it has doubled in size in the past two years.

·         Mainly elementary teachers attended, this means that the convention on engineering was 85% female, which seemed a bit odd to me, but, it figures.

·         Both sessions I attended started out making a  big distinction between science and technology.  My reaction was—Who cares?  But, the feeling seems to be that teachers must come to appreciate this distinction if they are going to be convinced that engineering and technology need to be included in their instruction.

I had expected to get a blog post per session out of this—giving me eight or so posts by the end of the conference.  However, I was called home suddenly and unexpectedly when we had a little family emergency.  Therefore, I expect this will be the only post directly related to the convention. 

 

You’ve heard a lot about STEM—Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics.    You might get the impression that a big emphasis is being placed there. International  standards for engineering have been developed, and there are SOLs for Technology.  However, these standards are not tested on the SOL tests, and that means they are typically ignored by teachers.  The convention seems to have been birthed to address this problem.

The term “design brief” was new to me, but perhaps it is already moving into the “buzz word” category.  During the process of becoming certified in technology integration, I stopped using the 1970s term “simulation” and upgraded to the latest jargon-- “PBL” meaning project- or problem-based learning.   In PBL, if the simulation requires engineering to arrive at a solution, then the correct terminology for the assignment itself is “design brief.”  The teachers brief the junior engineers on what it is they have to design.   

To explain this further let me tell you about a session I attended in which the session participants simulated being part of an engineering team.  The facilitator read  us an abridged version of the book The Boy Who Harnessed the Wind (English SOL—reading comprehension).  We were informed that we were to build a windmill which was to be a freestanding 60 cm (or more) in height and would withstand the “wind” from a hair dryer.  Our materials included a sheet of paper, 12’ of masking tape, 2 straws, 4 craft sticks (popsicle sticks) and  a small  container of Play dough, and, most importantly, a pinwheel.  For tools we were given a pair of scissors, a ruler and a meter stick. 

The challenge, evaluation criteria, materials and tools are referred to as the “design brief”.  We were then to follow the “technology design loop” or the “design process”—state the problem, brainstorm a solution, create the solution we thought was best, test our solution, and evaluate our solution.    The measuring addresses math SOLs, writing up our experience addresses additional Language Arts SOLs, and plenty of science SOLs are addressed, such as 3.11, investigating renewable sources of energy.  

The assignment clearly brought out the engineer in each of us, our group had a great time solving this problem—yes, I’m pleased to say that our windmill met the height criteria and withstood the wind—not all the groups could say that.  I have always felt that the “Unit Study” approach is the best approach to teaching.  Students from different grade levels could work on this project together if need be.  Again, math, science,  technology, engineering, English, and literature were all involved.  Come to think of it, the story of the boy who harnessed the wind also involves social studies.   What a great way to stir up some enthusiasm for subjects students might otherwise think of as boring.  

I return from the convention with a changed point of view.  Prior to attending I figured I was going because I was asked to go, but, it really didn’t concern me too much, it doesn’t involve computers and computers are my job, right?  Now, I see the value of this type of assignment and figure that if my job description doesn’t  include engineering, well, it should.  During the next couple of weeks I’ve decided to do a good job of something that I had been halfhearted about—probe ware.  ACPS has purchased probe ware—equipment for measuring temperature, light, impact, and I don’t know what all-but, I intend to find out.  You will probably see future posts on my findings, and perhaps I’ll be volunteering to come into your class and demonstrate the use of some of this probe-ware of which you may be only vaguely aware now.   Hands on investigation—I’m inspired now.