The argument against turn-key, out of the box engineering curricula

I should preface this post by saying that all of the pre-made engineering curricula out there are excellent; they were all put together with educators and engineers, subject matter and teaching experts from around the country. If you can afford to implement any of them, I suggest you do it. I have the Amatrol system, which I inherited when I came here. However, I'm going to make the case that these are unnecessary if you have the right mindset, dedicated teachers, and a few good ideas.

The first point I would like to make is against the necessity of the off-the-shelf curricula. Before any of these curricula existed, engineering still was taught. The Brooklyn Bridge, Empire State Building, and Transcontinental Railroad were still designed, built, and are performing admirably. I do agree, however, with the strides that the curricula have made to get engineering education in to the middle and elementary grades, but I disagree with the fact that they are motivating more students to study engineering. As the population has grown in the last fifty or so years, the number of students pursuing engineering majors per capita has actually decreased in the last 20 years. I think that the introduction of these plug-in curricula was a reaction to this trend, not a proactive step for the future.

The next point is concerning the cost. As with many other areas of education, prices for textbooks and other curriculum materials are quite high, and many schools find that they have teachers and students that would benefit from a technology program only to find out that they cannot afford to implement it in their schools. This is especially true with engineering and technology curricula, which is comprised of multiple trainers and electronic components, all needing their own computers. This argument lends itself to a haves vs. have nots issue. Schools in lower-income areas (both rural and urban) do not have access to the necessary funding. Any student should have access to an solid pre-engineering foundation.

One other problem that I have seen with engineering curricula, although I understand that it has a place, is what I call the "whiz-bang" effect. The whiz-bang effect happens when you take a group of students and teach them only the fun things: rockets, bridges, catapults, etc. without engaging them in the behind-the-scenes math and physics that makes them work, or the effects of those different technologies on societies. It's easy to fall into this trap, as I've done myself. It's easy to teach students when they are doing something they enjoy. But sometimes, as a teacher, you need to make sure the students understand the reasons they are doing what they are doing. The turn-key curricula are getting better in this regard, but it takes a strong teacher to actually put it to practice in the classroom. I've seen more than a few teachers just "skip" the math parts because "It's just so hard to get the students to do it." This also present problems down the road. Students sometimes think that engineering is all fun and projects. When they get to college and have to explore engineering design to its full depth, they hate it and want to quit. They didn't know what was coming.

Teachers can make up for a lack of specialized equipment by using their imaginations. Almost any object can be used to teach engineering principles. All objects have material properties, and can be combined to build structures, apparatuses, testing equipment, and other things. I'm talking about any objects: paper, pencils, paper clips, rubber bands, and other things you have laying around your classroom. This also helps with the cost issue. Like I said before, I have a bridge-testing machine, but I prefer to just put the bridge between two tables and hang weights from it.

As I wrote at the beginning of this post, I don't want to turn anyone off of using a pre-built curriculum if you can afford it; I just want it to be known that you shouldn't feel discouraged if you can't. It just takes a little more work.

Of course, we're used to a little extra work. That's why we're teachers.

TTFN

Website Review: www.jets.org

(review as of 12/17/2008)

Description (from site):

"JETS is a national non-profit educational organization dedicated to promoting engineering and technology careers to our nation's young people. Since 1950, JETS academic competitions, educational activities, and career guidance resources have been exciting students about careers in engineering and technology."

JETS, or Junior Engineering Technical Society, is a great website with quite a few resources for students, teachers, and parents. I, in fact, make liberal use of JETS practice problems in my classes. They have monthly and weekly problem sets, mostly (if not all) for the high school level. The problem sets do an excellent job of applying math and critical thinking skills to real-world type problems. The problems come in .pdf format with the answers attached, so you'll have to figure out a way to remove them if you are using them for a test or quiz. The practice problems also prepare students for the TEAMS competition sponsored by JETS. TEAMS is national academic competition challenging students to apply math and science to solve real-world engineering scenarios.

Also for teachers, JETS sponsors the National Engineering Design Challenge, an engineering design competition that allows students to explore, research, design, and build a working prototype to empower individuals with disabilities to succeed in the work force. These make great science-fair type projects.

For parents and students, there is a great newsletter that comes out monthly which spotlights different kinds of engineers. Well worth the read, and you can sign up to have it automatically emailed to you each month. There is also JETS Explore, which allows students to take a look at different engineering fields, as well as some real-life jobs and the engineers that have them. There is also a tool, called JETS Assess, which allows students to answer a series of questions, create a job profile, and generate a list of the engineering careers that best suit them. The bad news is that a complete profile report will cost you $12.95. You can also buy a set of assessment materials for a class.

All in all, http://www.jets.org/ is a great website for students, parents, and teachers alike that are interested in learning about and teaching about engineering. Highly Recommended!

TTFN

I'm proud of my students, are you proud of yours?

This is about a third of my seniors. On Monday we went to BAE Systems here in Jacksonville, which is a manufacturer of law enforcement and forensic supplies. I always worry a little about taking my students out in public, but they continue to surprise me. The hosts at BAE were raving about how intelligent and well-spoken our students were. They also agreed to be a business partner.

I wonder, as I look out at my senior class, how many of them would be going to college if they did not enter into our program. I'm sure a lot of them still would, but because of us and what we do, they all will. I've seen the change in them, especially this year. We had an interview workshop that required them to dress up. Most of them grumbled at first, but I found out that they enjoyed the attention the other students gave them. They voted to have "Dress for Success" Thursdays every week.

I guess that's why we do it.

TTFN

Engineering on the cheap...doing it with Paper!

Of all of the common materials that can be used to teach hands-on engineering concepts, probably the most flexible (no pun intended) and easily available is ordinary computer paper. One of our most successful projects is the Paper Bridge, a task that involves having the students construct a bridge out of the previously mentioned paper. This is the way I do it:

I give the students a short lesson on bridges, after which I give them a little time to come up with a bridge design. The students typically will pick a truss-type bridge, usually because the other two types (Suspension and Arch) do not lend themselves well to paper construction. The key here, depending on the level of student, is to introduce the idea of criteria and constraints. If I was teaching this to 3rd graders, I may not limit their materials, I may only tell them the length of the span they have to cross. When I teach this to 10th and 11th graders, I will typically impose very tight constraints and criteria. In class right now, for instance, my 10th graders are working on a 60cm bridge, using only 10 sheets of paper and masking tape. I've done it with seniors where I've given them 5 sheets of paper, 25cm of tape, and had them build bridges that were 60cm in span as well as 10cm x 10cm in height and width. That takes some thinking.

I also have the students do a presentation about their bridges, as well as a similar bridge somewhere in the world. Again, based on the level of your students you could stop there, or go as far as analyzing the economic impacts to a city if a particular bridge was not there. This could be an in-class discussion, or homework, etc.

The possibilities are almost limitless. We have paper towers, paper testing to investigate material properties, and we can even do papier-mache to look at composite materials (a papier-mache column with spaghetti reinforcements is especially impressive if you do it right.) The US Army Corps of Engineers also has a really good e-book about using manila file folders to construct bridge beams at http://bridgecontest.usma.edu/...

...Which segues me into my next point. The previous project is the no-tech version. You can make it low-tech if you have a couple of computers by using the West Point Bridge Designer software. It's free, so you don't have to worry about coming up with any funding. It is a good tool for kids check the stability of their bridges before they build them, and also where the tension and compression is (you could go into beam buckling and tension equations if you want to, but it is probably best left to high school teachers.) It also runs on just about any computer, from Win98 on up.

The high-tech option is left to those teachers which buy or already have a bridge-testing apparatus (I actually have one, but I prefer to just put the bridge between two tables and hang cupfulls of penies from it.) You can measure the force vs. deflection, and graph it and look at the flexibility of different types of bridges.

Hope you can put this to good use. I'll have some worksheets up in the near future.

TTFN

Facilities and Demographics Disclaimer

OK, maybe the title is a bit much, but I just wanted to let anyone reading this blog (which, so far has a readership of zero as far as I can tell) a little about the school I teach at, and why the things I'm spouting off about will work in just about any school.

First, about facilities. I've been to visit other schools with brand new lab facilities, or remodeled 2,000 square foot auto shops. While those types of facilities made me jealous, I had to think as to the reason I was there. I was the one telling those teachers how things should be done. They had the great facilities, but I was the one that was making engineering work in my school.

My school was built in 1926. I have a classroom and a half, and only because someone in the past knocked down the wall between my room and the office next door. I have four tables and 28 chairs, and some lab benches with about 15 computers on them. No Internet. But it works, and if it works here, it'll work almost anywhere.

A quick note about demographics: Jacksonville is a large, urban school district, the 13th largest in the country (or thereabouts.) Our students are 63% black, and the rest a mix of white, Asian, and Hispanic. 43% of our students get free lunch. And Florida, in the land of paradise, is 50th in public school spending out of our 50 states. And we make it work.

So again, I'm just trying to quash any excuses about why this or that won't work. We need to get engineering concepts integrated into our schools from the bottom up. Whatever it takes.

(shoot, I'll probably use this as the intro to the book!)

TTFN

Engineering Education Book Info

As I said in the introductory post to the blog, I am getting ready to write a book. I've already started to put things together, so I'll share a little about it:

Title: How YOU can Teach Engineering with NOTHING*

*except this book and common classroom supplies

Subtitle: A guide to teaching engineering concepts in any school, any grade, anywhere!

The key to this whole project is that the book will be applicable to any grade level. I've come up with something called "The Ladder." For each engineering concept, the activities and projects are organized by ability level and depth of knowledge. Kindergarten level activities would begin at the bottom of the ladder, with 12th grade type activities at the top. Teachers could then begin at the bottom of the ladder if they wish, or anywhere on the ladder.

I would recommend beginning one grade level below where the teacher thinks the class is, and work up the ladder. The grade below activities serve as a 'refresher' for the students, as well as bringing up to speed any students that may be a little behind. The teachers can then work up the ladder as far as they are willing to take their classes. The only limiter will be some of the advanced concepts in terms of math. I fully expect, however, for a teacher to move their class at least one grade level above them on the ladder, possibly two. So a fourth grade teacher may do a few activities on the third grade rung, complete the fourth grade rung, and do few activities on the fifth and sixth grade rungs. I wouldn't expect fourth graders to get up to doing seventh grade level work, but you never know. The advancement is built in for gifted students and those who just work a little quicker. If the book gets too big, which it might, I'll break it down into single-grade workbooks as well as multi grade editions, like K-3, 4-6, 7-9 and 10-12 or something similar. I might also break it up vertically, so you might have a K-12 book about civil engineering for example.

The other key is implementation. In the present economic climate, budgets are tight. I also know that levels of support vary from region to region, or even school to school in a district. To combat this, and to make good on my sub-title, each activity will come in three flavors: No-tech (using just the book and common classroom supplies), Low-tech (using the supplies above plus free computer software, nonstandard materials, etc) and High-tech, which might need other software and one computer per two students. I want to strees that the concepts that will be learned are the same; I'm not creating haves and have nots. Just because you don't have computers in your classroom doesn't mean your students won't learn just as much as those who do.

I'm also going to try to correlate each standard with science and math standards, as well as social studies as applicable. That way principals can feel at ease that you are teaching the standards, and not just goofing off building cool projects. I know that each state has different standards, so I may put in general concept keywords and the teacher may have to do their own correlation. I'll try to make it as painless as possible. I will definitely be correlating them with the ITEA Technology Literacy Standards. Many states have already correlated these with math and science standards. I hope yours is one of them.

In the future I'll be posting sample projects, Ladders, and book chapters. Please let me know what you think. I appreciate the criticism, constructive or otherwise.

I hope I've taken away any excuses about why you can't teach engineering in your classroom and motivate more kids to enter into engineering careers. This country needs more of them. It's up to you.

TTFN

The Purpose of TeachTron in Engineering Education

So...What is TeachTron?

TeachTron is my humble attempt to let teachers anywhere learn from my triumphs and mistakes trying to teach Engineering to high school students. The benefit for all of my readers will be that I'll be posting everything that I've done so far, as wel as a report on how well it worked and what things I'll need to change for next time. I will also be trying out some things for the first time, and reporting on them real-time as my students are working on them. I'm also gearing up to write a book, so I'm throwing ideas around here to see how people react to them and what the interest level might be.

Why am I doing this? As an engineer, I need to share the things I have learned. People often ask me "If you are an Engineer, why don't you do engineering and work for a company? You'd make more money!" My response to this is that the United States is lagging behind the rest of the world when it comes to science, engineering, and technology. We need more engineers than we produce every year. If I practice engineering, I am just one engineer. However, if I teach, I have the potential to motivate hundreds, if not thousands of students to enter into careers in math, science, and especially engineering.

Thanks for reading.

TTFN (Teaching Technology For Now)