i.lab for Design + Making

[patrickbenfield]

Tinkering with Conductive TurtleArt

Sometimes cool projects happen by accident.

A colleague at work needed conductive material for a present he was making but because of its complex design, it wasn’t practical to use conductive paint or ink. So that led us to some specialty 3D printing filament from Proto-pasta.  

Since I had heard that composite material was tricky to work with and could be rough on the printer’s nozzle, we decided to start with a sample coil before investing in the full size (and more expensive) spool.

Embarrassing side note: it didn’t occur to me until the filament arrived that was going to be in a loose coil and not on a spool! After multiple (and hilarious) attempts, we were able to wind it onto an empty, full-size spool. Of course, I found this loose filament spool design much later and might try it next time.

We were both surprised to find that it was super easy to work with and after some initial experiments to dial in the settings, were able to successfully print the design on the first try. And fortunately for me, a lot of leftover filament.

Pen Down. Forward 100. Right 90. Pen Up.

Here at Magellan International School,  we’re big fans of TurtleArt, a block coding descendant of the LOGO programming language for creating amazing works of art simply by moving a virtual “turtle.”

There are countless possibilities for not only creating digital art, but also going “from bits to atoms” by exporting images to digital fabrication tools, like vinyl and laser cutters. For more on this and other cool ideas, check out the work of Erin Riley and Josh Burker.

So it seemed a perfect time to play with some ideas that could potentially be integrated into the units of inquiry of various grade levels as well as in the i.lab for Design + Making, the school’s constructionist learning lab (ie makerspace).

One thing that immediately came to mind was to make an interactive object by combining 3D TurtleArt objects with a Touch Board from Bare Conductive. With this board, it’s a relatively easy process to create sounds that are triggered by touch capacitive sensors. To test out this idea, I made a simple procedure that generates a spiffy looking geometric image.

Although it worked, the lines were too thin and narrow for the project, but a fun and unintended result of the shape was that it had cool “slinky” effect. The second attempt with a thicker lines worked out much better and led to yet another idea: using the slinky effect of the spiral shape to make a small, interactive sculpture garden of TurtleArt designs. Maybe this will wind up in classrooms next year!

Revisiting Old Projects

Needless to say, I’m glad to have stumbled into this material and can’t wait to see how this makes its way into student experiences. Also, while writing this post, I been able to revisit an unfinished project from earlier this year: a wall installation with a “Magellan Maker” version of the IB Learner Profiles that when triggered, plays recording of our students. It was originally going to made out chip board coated with conductive paint, but it was too flimsy -- the 3D printed ones are much better.

[patrickbenfield]

Samba Schools and LOGO Environments:Papert’s Influence on the Culture of School Makerspaces

The closer the world comes to realizing his vision, the less his work is cited.      - Paulo Blikstein

Thinking About Papert Thinking About Making

In the wake of the passing of Seymour Papert, there’s been a tremendous outpouring of tributes from his contemporaries, protégés, friends, and colleagues. While it feels presumptuous to add my own thoughts, recent experiences at education conferences have inspired this reflection.

In the rush to incorporate making in classrooms, schools are overlooking that the environment created for children to learn in is just as much an “object to think with” as the tools they are using. My hope is that by emphasizing the social context of Papert’s LOGO environments, which can be considered proto-makerspaces, we can help sustain this renewed interest in transforming education.

The samba school, although not “exportable”….represents a set of attributes a learning environment should and could have. Learning is not separate from reality….novice is not separated from expert, and the experts are also learning. - Mindstorms

Programming the Child

While it’s been exciting to see the rising in awareness of maker education at conferences, workshops, and seminars across the state, the popularity seems to focus around the idea of having a makerspace and on equipment, rather than the learning theory that makes having one worthwhile.

For instance, the average, bite-size conference workshop usually features a few staple “maker” activities, like quick design challenges, tinkering with electronics, and so on. However, while they do generate a lot of excitement, there’s often little attention given to how they’re relevant beyond being engaging and “hands-on.”

This leaves teachers enthusiastic but ill equipped to meaningfully integrate these concepts into their practice, especially in the prevailing school culture of compliance, high stakes testing, and so called “teacher accountability.” What results then is the impression that making is something that can be simply added into existing curriculum, rather than a powerful mode of learning that may not even be compatible with their campus’s pedagogical approach.

The LOGO environment is like the samba school also in the fact that the flow of ideas and even of instructions is not a one-way street. - Mindstorms

The Educational Automobile 

In Mindstorms, one of Papert’s central questions is whether or not we can make the transition from the current, institutionalized learning model to a radical new approach, in much the same way that there was a conceptual “leap” from the horse-drawn carriage to automobiles. If, like in the example above, we only concentrate only on the relatively easy ways to bring making into schools, we run the risk of just adding chrome fenders to the “educational carriage” we’re trying to reimagine. One way to avoid this is to consistently highlight some of the fundamental ideas that Papert shared through the course of his research, including:

Teaching - involves providing relevant materials for students to build their own intellectual structures.

Activities - are largely interest and user driven, rather than based on a set syllabus.

Interactions - are dynamic and of high quality; both novice and student can learn from one another.

Learning -  is deeply embedded in a rich variety of activities that encourage discovery.

Knowledge - is a source of power and used for highly personalized purposes.

Although establishing the connection between Papert’s theories and makerspaces may be more time consuming than say, plugging a banana into a Makey Makey, it could help bridge the gap between workshop and classroom that teachers are experiencing. This does not mean that they are passive in the process, however. Success, Papert argues, is dependent upon the active participation of “educational innovators.”

Powerful new social forms must have their roots in the culture, not be the creatures of bureaucrats. - Mindstorms

The Educator Must Be An Anthropologist

Part of the success of the Maker Movement is that it can reflect the values and interests of the community. One can easily see how the “cultural roots” of Silicon Valley, for instance, shaped the prevalent idea of what defines making: electronics, programming, engineering, digital fabrication, and so on.

It’s no wonder then, that when teachers simply transplant activities rooted in a particular culture - like making a scribble machine - without considering its context, it may not achieve the learning outcome they were expecting when tried in the classroom.

However, this doesn't mean that this type of activity has no value. On the contrary, innovative teachers are empowered to use the cultural trends of their own communities as a vehicle for these concepts. This notion of teacher as anthropologist can be seen in the work of Dr. Nettrice Gaskins and Leah Buechley and their efforts to redefine what it means to be a maker. Rather than limiting educators, cultural responsiveness instead can make things like laser cutting, scribble machines, and programming both more inclusive and relevant.

This also implies that there is no perfect model from which to duplicate. Even Papert admits that although Brazilian samba schools mirror some of the “mathetic” principles (referenced in the quotes throughout this piece) he was developing, it was not a one-to-one correspondence. The samba school was simply a reflection of a specific cultural condition, as were his own LOGO environments. While this does pose a challenge for those who are committed to creating maker environments, it also empowers us to develop our own bridge from theory to practice.

Artificially Maintained Oases

It’s remarkable that decades later, makerspaces, like the LOGO environments that preceded them, are often isolated areas that often contradict the very culture of the school they’re in. Although Papert accurately predicted that one day, a “computational samba school” of some type would “catch,” I don’t think even he realized the degree to which such sophisticated technology would be readily available for students. My sense is that there may be an alternative paradox regarding Papert’s vision: the more his ideas are embraced by teachers, the less we’ll care about where it happens.

Resources:

[1]Blikstein, P. You cannot think about thinking without thinking about what Seymour Papert would think. Seymour Papert Panel IDC Conference

[2]Papert, S. Mindstorms: children, computers, and powerful ideas 

[patrickbenfield]

From Bauhaus to Schoolhouse: A Look Back

“Tell lots of different stories!” -Leah Buechley 

Introduction Here we are, a little over a year into the implementation of a maker education initiative and with the construction of a makerspace (the d. lab for Making) almost finished,  so now seems like a great time reflect on and write about this incredible journey. What follows is a giant summary of my experiences from the last school year, based on work I submitted for the 2015 FabLearn Conference.

I’ll be using the Bauhaus to Schoolhouse series to highlight the guiding principles, influences, constraints, and challenges that affected the shape and trajectory of STEAM by Design during the 2014-2015 school year. The posts that follow will focus on a few of the specific points mentioned here, plus cover current events, setbacks, and other happenings on campus as we move forward.

Background St. Gabriel’s is an independent PreK - 8 school in Austin, Texas. We’re currently in the midst of a profound, systemic transformation as a result of the interplay of several dynamics. First, as an independent school, guided not by a parish priest but by a board of parents and community members, it’s afforded a certain degree of freedom, flexibility, and resources not usually found in comparable settings. We’re also inspired by the cultural mélange found in Austin, a growing center of technology, arts, and entrepreneurism accented by a unique mix of a counterculture spirit and vibrant Latino roots. This provides fertile ground for SXSWedu, a Mini Maker Faire, and museums like the Thinkery to take root. These features, combined with recent increases in enrollment, personnel and funding have created the space and opportunity to make the transition from traditional educational practices to a more progressive, constructivist approach. 

Recent Changes In 2012, St. Gabriel’s began the first phase of this process by conducting a technology audit, with the goal of empowering students through the integration of a mix of mobile devices, including tablets and laptops. The success of this initial effort culminated into its current phase, which includes the eventual construction of a dedicated fabrication lab. During the 2014 - 2015 school year, I was brought on board by the school to support STEM education and integrate this makerspace into both the curriculum and campus culture. 

Form Follows Fairness In the May of 2014, I was approached at our local Mini Maker Faire by St. Gabriel’s to incorporate STEM learning across the curriculum. Fresh from teaching in the public school system, I was elated by the prospect of being a force for positive change in education and at the same time overwhelmed by the magnitude of the task.

From my own experiences with other local STEM programs, the tendency was to limit student access to tools and concepts, like programming, fabrication, and robotics, by offering them only through electives or in after school clubs. Similarly for younger students, exposure to these topics was typically limited to infrequent visits to a computer lab with little practical application within their own classrooms, much less their personal lives. As I began to adjust to working for an independent school, I was determined to honor the diverse experiences of each of our own students while also providing access to equipment to those who lacked access to the same level of resources.

With these ideas in mind, one my earliest decisions was to make an effort to strike the right balance between the objective, analytical nature of STEM subjects with the more personal, creative aesthetics inherent in making, by explicitly integrating the arts into learning and adopting STEAM as our stance. In this way, topics like robotics, poetry, programming and weaving were of equal merit. It also seem like this would provide natural points of entry into various domains of making for even our youngest students since art is a highly relatable, universal experience.

Inspiration for the actual program framework came from the curriculum model of the Bauhaus (see above). Developed by Walter Gropius, its purpose was to foster learning through direct experiences with a variety of materials and establish a set of common proficiencies during a basic course with the goal of facilitating interdisciplinary collaboration amongst its students.

After several iterations, a workable model (see above) took shape which helped to visualize the basic format for STEAM by Design. Loosely following the Bauhaus concept, within grades K - 4, represented by the outer ring, the focus is on establishing a disposition for making through material exploration. During grades 5 - 7, the focus shifts to applying design concepts to inquiry based, content related projects. By 8th grade, the central circle, students create a master work as part of a culminating experience.

Instantiation It’s important to note that the creation of this program was not a linear process, nor was its implementation. These were happening simultaneously during the course of the school year, both within and as a response to the existing schedules, resources, and mindsets that characterized the campus at the time. 

Although, as mentioned earlier, there were plans for a makerspace, construction had not yet begun at the start of the year, which meant that all making and fabrication occurred in the classrooms. Similarly, since the program was still under development and constructivist learning was an unfamiliar topic within our faculty, I took advantage of every opportunity to introduce this approach to teachers and students alike. From tinkering with paper circuits and simple robots, to rapid prototyping with cardboard and embedding Arduino LilyPads (see below) into collaborative works of art, it was thrilling to see the notion of “challenging our mind, engaging our hearts, and using our hands” [2], begin to take shape.

Equally exhilarating was the initial experience with using design-thinking as a vehicle for service learning and social justice. Through an arrangement made with an organization called Level Up Village, we were able to partner with NicaPhoto, a school located in a rural, impoverished area of Nicaragua. During the course of the semester, students from both campuses collaborated with one another to create 3D printed, solar powered devices that would offer a safe and reliable light source for NicaPhoto students (see below). 

Using the Hasso Plattner Institute design-thinking model as a starting point for this project, St. Gabriel’s students began to develop a deep understanding of the lives and circumstances of their distant NicaPhoto partners. Through regular video conferencing, exchanging ideas online and working their way together through the iterative process, the quality and care that they took in their interactions as well as their inventions was readily apparent.

This was a year marked by unexpected challenges and occasional setbacks punctuated by periods of success and optimism. Although the lack of a dedicated fabrication lab seemed at first to be an enormous obstacle, it compelled us to find creative ways to exploit the limited time and space available, and necessitated the integration of making within classrooms across the campus. While I was effectively granted carte blanche over the creation of the program, the lack of a consistent, dedicated time with teachers significantly hindered progress during implementation. 

Fortunately, the campus is still evolving culturally, and school administrators, seeing the value and potential of not only making, but also around the areas of teacher empowerment and social-emotional learning, have increased the number and length of common planning times for the upcoming school year. With this in place, we will be able to shift from the ad hoc instances of making that defined this initial implementation to a more coordinated and deliberate approach. 

As St. Gabriel’s continues this journey of change and growth, there are bound to be further obstacles, but also more opportunities to restore constructivism as the norm, not the outlier, in education.

References:

[1] Buechley, L. (2014, June). Thinking about making [Video file]. Retrieved from https:/vimeo.com/110616469.

[2] Cadwell, L. (1997). Bringing reggio emilia home: An innovative approach to early childhood education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

[3] Gaskin, N. (2014, August 29). Recontextualizing the makerspace: Culturally responsive education. Retrieved from https://netarthud.wordpress.com/2014/08/29/recontextualizing-the-makerspace-culturally-responsive-education/.

[4] Gropius, W. (1992). The theory and organization of the bauhaus. In C. Harrison & P. Wood (Eds.), Art in theory, 1900 – 1990: An anthology of changing ideas (pp. 338- 342). Oxford, England: Blackwell Publishing.

[5] Itten, J. (1975). Design and form: The basic course at the bauhaus and later. London, England: Thames and Hudson.

[6] Zellner, P., & Martin, T. (2014, October). Integrating computing as a material in design education. Presented at the FabLearn Conference on Creativity and Fabrication, Stanford, CA.

[patrickbenfield]

The Games of My Childhood:  Let’s Geek Out

“Something very personal happened, and one cannot assume that it would be repeated for other children in exactly the same form.”

-Seymour Papert, Mindstorms

This weekend I had the opportunity to share some makered lesson ideas during a workshop for the Texas STEM Teacher Circle, a group of local educators who meet regularly to explore and develop innovative teaching practices. When it was done and we began sharing the moments that stood out for us during this “makerpalooza,” one of the most compelling ideas that came up was the importance of passion.

When we give ourselves permission to display our own enthusiasm in front of students, we’re sending them powerful messages:  it’s OK to be intensely interested in something (an important piece of the maker mindset) and learning is more than just recalling content. 

With that in mind, I want to take a moment to share my own story of how embracing my own nerdiness helped renew my passion for teaching, which (thankfully) lead me to St. Gabriel’s. Personally, I’d love to hear the stories of how other educators discovered the Maker Movement and brought it into the school setting. Who knows, maybe students will read our stories and be inspired to geek out...

Twisty Little Passages For the last year, I’ve felt a bit like Chauncey Gardiner,  in that a series of improbable events have lead me to the amazing opportunity to develop a maker program for St. Gabriel’s. So, before the d.lab for Making opens (more on that later) and things get really busy, here’s how it all went down….

After years of teaching I thought of myself as something of a hot shot, but that all changed when I checked my inbox at the beginning of the fall semester of 2013.

It was one of those work emails that I usually just deleted, a forward of a forward, from someone off campus, but the title, What Most Schools Don't Teach caught my attention. It's old news now, but in case you missed out, it’s from Code.org and promotes the value of learning computer programming.  

Seeing the incredible workplaces and perks from those companies and contrasting it with teaching, to put in bluntly, was initially depressing and demotivating. Up to that point I felt perfectly content with my career, but now it felt like it was maybe time for a change. For a couple of months I seriously considered changing careers and even interviewed with a local tech start-up. Luckily, that didn’t work out and instead I decided to search within for inspiration.

Pick Up Lamp So for several days, without really having a clear plan in mind, I went on a Silicon Valley-esque vision quest. I wanted to pin down what really motivated me as a kid and bring some of that magic I saw in the Code.org movie back into the classroom.

Unlike the “cool” kids who owned an NES console or even a Macintosh Classic, my family had 286 IBM knockoff.  If I wanted to play a game, it wasn’t as simple as just slapping in a game cartridge. I had to tinker for hours, learning how the BIOS worked, editing system files, and typing a seemingly endless series of MS-DOS commands just to manage the precious, precious RAM needed by graphics heavy games. And this was fun! I learned the inner workings of computers and the effort made actually getting a game to work that much sweeter.  Occasionally I would even open the PC up to install or replace components, like video cards and disk drives. (Compare that to today’s devices that are designed to discourage this kind of curiosity.)

When I needed a break from the effort of getting Access and Origin games to run, I’d play text adventures like Star Trek: The Promethean Prophecy, which relied on good storytelling and challenging puzzles rather than graphics to entertain. Similarly, my friends and I would sometime ditch the computer altogether and instead play pencil and paper style role-playing games, like Robotech and TMNT and Other Strangeness. We would gather around, create, and get lost in elaborately detailed, imaginary worlds in much the same way that kids today connect with massively multiplayer online (MMO) games.  

Growing up, these things were just the fabric of my childhood, nothing overtly exceptional. But when viewed through pedagogical lens,  suddenly these experiences became significant. Don’t get me wrong, I had other interests, like music and running, but gaming was my way of making sense of the world.  Through it I explored the interaction of hardware and software, experienced rich storytelling, and forged friendships through shared creation.  And then it hit me:  this was the inspiration I was searching for, my own “Proteus of machines” that could “appeal to a thousand tastes.”

XYZZY The rest of the school year was a whirlwind of ideas and renewed energy.  We began using class novels as a jumping off point for our own class role-playing game, creating our own characters and continuing the story in our own way. Some of the students branched out to create a shared space within Minecraft based on our adventures, while others really like the retro novelty of text adventures  and began to create their own, complete with “feelies” that they hand made in class.  

There’s a lot I’m leaving out, of course, but a central theme that began to emerge that I struggled to make sense of, since this was new territory for me: as the projects students worked on became more complex, students naturally gravitated to their own interests (research, storyboarding, writing, crafting, programming, and so on) to complete them.  I was so excited by what was happening, but I struggled to find the right words to capture it.

But then I came across Adam Savage’s Why We Make speech, and everything we were trying to do immediately made sense.  The whole idea that there was a worldwide community of Makers out there was so thrilling that I felt compelled to be a part of it, and by May, had exhibited my own project at the 2014 Austin Mini Maker Faire. As it turns out, there was a staff member from St. Gabriel’s there, looking for someone to help create a maker ed program….

REFERENCES:

[1] Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York, NY: Basic Books.

[patrickbenfield]

From Bauhaus to Schoolhouse: Creating a Maker Ed Program

Part 1 - A Very Brief Introduction

This is the start of my attempt to gradually assemble the countless bits and pieces of experiences that have accumulated during the last school year into something of a coherent narrative that captures the process of creating STEAM by Design, a MakerEd program I’m developing for St. Gabriel’s Catholic School in Austin, Texas.

Too much happened in the 2014 - 2015 school year to fit neatly into one entry, so this is just the start of an ongoing, regular piece that I’ll break up into smaller installments. Some will cover key discoveries or milestones that affected the trajectory of the program, while others will  focus on specific components, like planning and scheduling.

Starting from my early attempts at integrating making into the classroom when I was a public school teacher, to being hired by St. Gabriel’s,  to the present as the construction of the school’s makerspace nears completion, my hope is to provide some useful insights for other educators or schools who may be contemplating their own entry into Maker Ed.

More soon...

[patrickbenfield]

An Argument for STEAM as the Trojan Horse for….”Making” (part 1)

"Is an artist-teacher a mere professional who balances a career--or does the duality of making and teaching art merit a more profound investigation?" - G. J.Daichendt

STEM and STEAM, a Wee History Story

While the current focus on STEM, much like Making, has gained greater public attention in the past several years, it too is really not a new phenomenon. Rather, its the resurgence of a familiar national anxiety, a fear that the US may somehow falter and be usurped by foreign powers as the result of a "innovation gap."

Cold War Coders

In 1958, years before we “stopped worrying and learned to love the bomb,” the National Defense Education Act (NDEA) was signed into law. During this tumultuous period of increase competition with the Soviet Union, there was growing concern within the U.S. that its science and math education were lagging behind, a feeling not helped by radio signals being sent by Sputnik-1.

At the same time,  with the growing integration of computer systems in both industry and defense, the lion’s share of mathematicians-cum-programmers were funneled into those areas, leaving precious few left to actually teach new students and thereby replenish the ranks.

In response to these dual concerns, the NDEA pumped over a billion additional dollars into universities and classrooms ”to meet critical national needs” and for a time, there was renewed enthusiasm for the sciences.

STEM Takes Root

Decades later, just as the US strategic landscape was significantly altered, so too was its educational focus.  Despite the best efforts of progressive education advocates, the combined effects of systemic defunding of public schools, the rise of standardized testing, and the focus on teacher “accountability” took a heavy toll on the school system. Not surprisingly, there was a shortage of students graduatiwith an interest--or even the aptitude--to pursue the sciences.

This deficit trickled up to all areas of the economy, so so much so that in 2007 the National Academy of Sciences published Rising Above the Gathering Storm, which similar to the NDEA, outlined some actions that could be taken by the federal government, and again linking national education policies with national security needs.  In response the this and other studies, Congress took action and signed the America COMPETES Act into law that same year, which ushered in the current STEM phenomenon.  

It should be noted that, as resources and talent were redirected towards all thinksg STEM, the emphasis on linking school accountability to high-stake testing was also on the rise. In the face of these two competing pressures, the fine arts, at least in public schools, were left to wither on the vine. Not surprisingly, when the National Academy of Science revisited this topic, the finding suggest that the situation had worsened.

The STEAM Also Rises

I first heard the addition of the (A)rts into STEM when I was still a classroom teacher and just discovering the Maker Movement. Integrating art with the sciences was a thrilling and radical idea at the time, which resonated with me because of my background as a musician--I am from Austin, Texas, after all. Further, the notion that the creative impulse was the same, not only for the arts, but in any act of creation, (ie engineering, programming, fabrication, mathematics) just made sense and captured the essence of what I had been trying to accomplish in my own classroom.Globally, integrating the arts with STEM has a long and rich history. I’m thinking of the Renaissance masters who combined these topics, the Bauhaus movement, and the Dutch museum panelists from this year’s FabLearn. So for me and for the other teachers who recognized that STEM alone wasn't the answer, the inclusion of the arts, along with the sciences,  was simple a way rebalance the equation.

Which leads us back to the question of do we make for making sake because of its inherent value, or are we trying to provide job skills necessary for the next generation of innovators?

Coming Soon: 

Armed with the history of the term STE(A)M…Lets start talking

  Works Cited

1. Augustine, N., Barrett, C., Cassel, G., Grasmick, N., Holliday, C., Jackson, S., et al. (2005). Rising above the gathering storm. National Academies Press, Washington, DC

2. Augustine, N. R., Barrett, C., Cassell, G., Grasmick, N., Holliday, C., & Jackson, S. (2010). Rising above the gathering storm, revisited: Rapidly approaching category 5. Washington, DC: National Academy of  Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine.

3. Congress, U. (1958). National Defense Education Act. Public Law, 85-864.

4. Congress, U. (2007). America Competes Act. Public Law, 110-69.

5. Daichendt, G. J. (2010). Artist-teacher: A philosophy for creating and teaching. Intellect Books.

6. Dugger Jr, W. E. (2010). Evolution of STEM in the United States. 6th Biennial International Conference on Technology Education Research in Australia

7. Flemming, A. S. (1960). The philosophy and objectives of the National Defense Education Act. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 327(1), 132-138.

8. Smørdal, O., Nesnass, R., Pierroux, P., & Sem, I. (2014) Snøkult: Designing a multitouch table for co-composition in an educational setting.

[patrickbenfield]

[patrickbenfield]

Schools Shift from STEM to STEAM

3D printers, sophisticated software and other technologies are helping many schools incorporate the arts into their STEM curricula.

[patrickbenfield]

Innovation and the Maker Movement

One of the core ideas of the Maker Movement is finding the new within the known and harnessing this knowledge to create something unique and perhaps even unexpected, which is at the very core of what it means to "be innovative."

-Patrick Benfield

Dale Dougherty's Maker Mindset essay succinctly explains this notion:

... the origin of the Maker Movement is found in something quite personal: what I might call “experimental play.” When I started Make magazine, I recognized that makers were enthusiasts who played with technology to learn about it. A new technology presented an invitation to play, and makers regard this kind of play as highly satisfying. Makers give it a try; they take things apart; and they try to do things that even the manufacturer did not think of doing. Whether it is figuring out what you can do with a 3D printer or an autonomous drone aircraft, makers are exploring what these things can do and they are learning as well. Out of that process emerge new ideas, which may lead to real-world applications or new business ventures. Making is a source of innovation.

[patrickbenfield]

Building STEAM: Incorporating Depth & Complexity

Image credit: byrdseed.com

The creation of a successful, fully functioning and Maker program, with its roots in STEAM certainly doesn’t happen over night. Rather, it requires clear goals, deliberate planning, and support from the school and its comunity of teachers, learners, and parents.

One way to begin the transition to this model is by incorporating the dimensions of Depth & Complexity, a system developed by Dr. Sandra Kaplan that provides a framework for exploring the connections between disciplines by looking below the surface of facts and investigating generalizations, principles, and universal concepts.

The end result of using this system is the “de-siloing” of the subject areas; eschewing the proverbial wide and shallow approach to content in favor of a rich, deep understanding of topics and their interelationships. In short, a solid foundation for incorporating STEAM.

While this may seem a daunting task, this is something most teachers are naturally doing through good teaching, only without the formal use of these elements.  The introduction of these icons simple assures that these strategies are used consistently and they also provide a common vocabulary between classes and across grade levels.

- Patrick Benfield

The icons:

The content imperatives:

[patrickbenfield]

What Would a Maker Program Look Like at SGCS?

Aspirational Vision

My long term goal is to create an environment and culture that fosters the maker mindset (mentioned in an earlier post) and allow opportunities for students to apply this not only for school related projects, but to also for innovation, self expression and in service of their community.   

STEAM Connection The permeation of science, technology, engineering, arts, and math into all aspects of the curriculum, from project based learning, to daily activities is underlying process of making, rather than the ultimate goal.  Or as Susan Riley of Edutopia describes it,

"Think of STEAM as teaching through integrated network hubs where information is curated, shared, explored and molded into new ways of seeing and being through collaborative risk taking and creativity. This means that students are using the skills and processes learned in science, technology, engineering, the arts and mathematics to think deeply, ask non-Googleable questions and solve problems."

The Big Picture

The following overview is the result of the interplay between the goals of this endeavor and the underlying philosophy of maker culture and addresses both the specific locations where these would occur as well as the types of activities that would be undertaken.

Use of Physical Spaces

In keeping with the decentralized roots of making mentioned previously, there is not one dedicated area where these activities will occur; instead, there is a certain degree of fluidity in the use of space. Depending on the needs, nature, and progress of a work, a combination of the following areas could all be accessed for use. For example, using the planned new construction as a point of reference, a student may begin create a bracelet in art (first floor) then decide that they would like to embed a circuit within it (third floor) and use later it for a theater production (second floor).

Third Floor: Hackerspace (see note) The terms “makerspace” and “hackerspace” are essentially synonymous, however, the latter focuses more on the technology end of the making continuum, including programming, microcontrollers, robotics, and fabrication. This is where the majority of “high tech” tools and equipment would be used and housed.

*Note: The word “hacker” is often misrepresented and sensationalized by the media. In reality, it was coined by the members of MIT’s Tech Model Railroad Club (who, during the early days of mainframe computing, developed ingenious methods for automating their rail systems) and refers one who “applies ingenuity to create a clever result.”

Second Floor: Drama From constructing sets to costume design and music production, the theater area would be a natural place to apply and master a variety of skills.

First Floor: Library The library would be an additional venue for making with an additional focus on literary connections, researching skills and other lessons, as well as community outreach.

First Floor: Art Room Projects that require a certain material, like clay, fabrics, paper, paints and other media would utilize this space for their creative needs.

First Floor: Outdoor Shared Space This area would a multi-purpose area for activities that require more ventilation or powered tools like drill presses and cutting tools.  It would also double as the storage location for this larger equipment.

Campus: Classrooms These would be mini-maker spaces in their own right, equipped with the resources that would make the most sense for the age/grade level for students to quick prototype their ideas.

Knowledge would be shared between student groups, not just within a grade level, but vertically as well so there would be a continuity of experience to draw upon. For example, if a third grader is working on a writing piece and wants to 3D print a character they've created, but don't have the expertise yet, they could seek advice from a fifth grader.

Campus: Hallways Various accumulated creations from students, faculty, and the community would adorn the various open spaces of the campus, which serve to spark ideas and imaginations, spur questions, generate interest, and so forth. Using the SGS Twitter feed displays, various “makered” projects would be a part of the social media outreach.

-Patrick Benfield

Image Credit: Thinglink

[patrickbenfield]

What is MaKey MaKey and Why It's Important

                                                What Is It?

MaKey MaKey is a project by two students at MIT Media Lab (the same outfit that created Scratch programming) that allows students, teachers, parent and anyone else to transform everyday objects into an orginal invention. 

It's name derives from the combination of make and key and is a desceptively simple idea: a circuit board that connects to computers via a cable. However, this board "tricks" the computer into thinking that whatever is connected to this board via alligator clips (as long as it's conductive) is a keyboard/arrow key command or mouse click.

                                           Why Is It Important?

This "invention kit for everyone" is exactly that: a deceptively simple tool that meets its users at their skill level, from the novice who is just "messing around" to the programming expert who can combine it with coding to control servos, sensors, and software to create spectacular results.

However it's used, those who create with it take away many lessons, from the iterative process (ie failing and learning from it), design, and problem solving and hopefully inspiration to explore the world further.

                           Applicaton: The "MaKey Makey Orchestra"

The video below demonstrates our initial explorations with the kit. The students were tasked to form small groups and create playable instruments as well as create three separate, original songs that could be combined into a single cohesive piece. 

Anyone who happened to walk in while this was underway would likely have thought that the students were having way too much fun to be learning anything; it was messy, chaotic and at times the room was filled with a cacophony of keyboard notes and wry laughter. However, while this was happening, students were applying the fundamentals of experimental design and reviewing the principles of electronics in a creative way.

                                               What's Next?

After the Developers Academy students finish their upcoming Future City project, we'll be revisiting MaKey MaKey, this time "complexifying" it by reprogramming it using Arduino.

-Patrick Benfield

[patrickbenfield]

MaKey MaKey Orchestra v1.0

[patrickbenfield]

"I see making as a gateway to engineering and science. When I talk to engineers and scientists, I can ask them, what fascinated you as a kid? And someone said, well, you know, I used to take refrigerators apart."

[patrickbenfield]

STEM is incredibly valuable, but if we want the best innovators we must teach the arts

"We're obsessed with teaching kids math and science, but they'll never be great innovators without art class."

[patrickbenfield]

Congressional STEAM Caucus 2-14-13

[patrickbenfield]

STEAM Adds The Arts Into STEM

"The idea behind STEAM – science, technology, engineering, arts and math – is to find ways to integrate the “A” into all class subjects, believing the fusion of arts and science gives students an edge to create and innovate.

It’s more a philosophy than a specific curriculum, emphasizing connections across subject areas and teaching kids to take what they’ve learned in one classroom and apply it in another."