Ins and Outs of Elementary Engineering

I'm working on getting a little more organized for substitutes and such. I have started a document that gives general guidelines for different materials in the lab and classroom management techniques. My classroom setup is that of a specialist. I see 22 classes each week, 1st - 5th grades for one hour and kindergarten for a half an hour. There are four classes each of kindergarten through 3rd grade with a maximum of 24 students in each class. There are three classes each of 4th and 5th grades with a maximum of 32 students in each class. At each grade level there are approximately 96 students. This poses challenges for project storage and managing materials that are shared at a grade level and between grade levels.  Below is the link to the live document as I create it. Feel free to take a look and also check back for updates and improvements.

Elementary Engineering Notes

Global Conference on Educational Robotics

It was a busy summer with professional opportunities. So busy, that it has taken almost three months to have time to share. The first two weeks of the new school year are behind me. As usual, I will be making changes based on the new information on instructional practices I have learned throughout the summer. One big change is moving my robotics instructions for fourth and fifth grade students, as well as my after school groups, towards the Junior Botball robot (https://www.juniorbotballchallenge.org/).

I have tried and used various robotics platforms during elementary engineering instruction, after school groups, and makerspace. LEGO robotics, WeDo and Mindstorms, have been the predominant robotics used. These are fantastic because they come with a variety of curriculum and are easy to start using whether experienced with robotics or not. Other robotics formats include Cubit and Edison. All of these platforms have pros and cons. The Cubit robot is a platform that allows students to see the inner components of the robot and demystifies the hardware components. Edison robots are easy to use and do not require any formal programming since the robot can scan programmed bar-codes to program the robot for specific tasks. In fact, these robots were used to hold a school-wide sumobot challenge because students of all ages could program the robots either using the bar-codes or drag and drop. In fact, all of the robots, LEGO, Cubit, and Edison, use a drag and drop programming platform. Junior Botball is the first robotics platform I have experienced that is designed for students from kindergarten through high school and requires the students to program in C++ or Python.

Junior Botball does not use a drag and drop interface but instead teaches the students a programming language. I was able to see students as young as first grade programming at the Global Conference on Educational Robotics (GCER). The competition portion of GCER (http://new.gcer.net/) had different divisions including elementary, middle school/high school, and adult. In addition to the competition, GCER held various sessions for coaches and students. The sessions included how to implement Junior Botball, programming and engineering instruction, and much more. The overall feel of GCER was that of a learning experience. This was one of the best aspects of competing in the Junior Botball division at GCER. The students worked to complete individual challenges rather than competing against another team. This approach helped to build friendships between the different teams and allow students to work towards their personal bests. So, not only were elementary students' fingers flying over the keyboards programming in C++ or Python, but participants were also placed in a low stress situation of learning that could be as competitive as students wanted. This was a refreshing experience compared to other student competitions I have participated in as a coach. I look forward to growing my Junior Botball group and school and seeing students walk away from the program with an actual programming language in their tool kit rather than just a drag and drop experience.

First FLL Meeting

We had our first FLL meeting this week.  It was fantastic to have time for a meeting to just organize the team, set goals and rules for team participation, and get to know each other.  The team will be working through NXT programming tutorials for the next few weeks to improve their programming skills for the upcoming missions in August.

The team consists of three incoming fourth graders, four incoming fifth graders, one incoming sixth grader, and one incoming seventh grader.  Six of our nine team members made up our first FLL team last year.  I consider last season a success since they all returned.  I am excited to see the team grow, in part, so the workload isn't as heavy for each team member.  It looks to be a great season.

Idaho TECH Challenge

Our school participated in the NASA sponsored Idaho TECH Challenge competition this spring.  It was a fantastic experience for the students.  I would recommend it to any group.  LEGO Technics are used to design a Mars Rover.  The rover competes in weight, speed, hill climb, rock collection, and a blind driving test.  Teams are also evaluated on their lab notebooks, team poster, and presentation.  It was a lot to complete with a team of only three fourth grade students, but I think we will have a bigger team next year.  Fun! Fun! Fun!

http://ed.isu.edu/Idaho_TECH/index.shtml

First-time First LEGO League (FLL) Coach

There was a change of plans for coaching an FLL team over the summer.  Therefore, our school was not going to have a team.  I had been interested in coaching a team, but the teams had previously been led by parents.  I had never participated in FLL in any way.  However, I felt this was a fantastic opportunity to get my feet wet and provide students with the opportunity to do the same.

In years past, FLL participation had only been available to the middle level students at our K-8 school.  As the K-5 engineering teacher, I opened it up to students in 4th through 8th grades.  I did not send the signups home for all students but advertised on the school announcements for students to "apply" to be on the team.  The application process involved submitting information, in any format, about why the students wanted to be on the team, how they would be able to make the time commitment, and what made them a good team member.  I received six applications and was impressed with them all.  One of the applications that really made me reflect on why I was crazy enough to start a FLL team in October, before the mid-December competition, involved a student telling me he wanted to learn to be a better group member.  That was very powerful for me and very motivational as a coach.  

If you have not participated in FLL before, you may not realize that many teams begin in the spring around May or so.  They work through the summer and have ample time for the various aspects of the competition.  I did not realize this and it is a good thing since I probably would have thought the challenge before the team impossible or too daunting.  However, I am very proud of what the team produced in a matter of eight weeks with a novice coach.

It took some time to register as a team and order the field setup kit for the robotics game.  This gave us time to work on the project and begin preparing a poster for the team's implementation of the Core Values.  Once the field setup kit arrived, the team built the various components for the missions in the robotics game.  Once we analyzed the different missions, the team built robot models that they thought could handle the majority of the missions.  They voted on the best design based on performance on turns and stability.  The chosen design was then modified to include an arm needed for some of the missions.  They did get a little carried away making modifications to the design for the arm addition.  Also, the original arm was more complex than we had time for given that the team was building the robot two weeks before the December competition.  I did encourage them to look for a more simplistic arm design so that they could start programming.  I truly believe in the FLL values that the coach is simply a mentor and facilitator.  I helped by providing to-do lists, and assisting with the group dynamics.  They had approximately two weeks to program and had difficulty with the first mission they had decided on.  In retrospect, I probably should have had them move on to another mission as recommended in the coaching manual.  The team practiced their presentations and running the robot prior in the days prior to the competition with the team parents.  This also gave me the opportunity to organize lunches, snacks, and the responsibilities for the materials arriving at the competition.

The competition was a fantastic experience!  It reminded me of times in the past when my own children had competed in Future Cities and National History Day events.  Although the organizers made the robotics competitions very fun with the help of an announcer, I felt the most valuable part was the presentations and interactions with the judges.  The judges were fantastic in asking good questions and interacting with the students.  For many of the team members, this was one of the most challenging aspects of the competition.  The event was so fantastic that I found myself planning for next year.  Normally, after an involved time commitment such as this, I might have been second guessing whether there would be a next year.  Nevertheless, I am planning to start a team in spring of 2015, and I recommend to all who have the funding to participate.

http://www.firstlegoleague.org/challenge/thechallenge