Slashdot Mirror
Why Kids Should Be Building Rockets Instead of Taking Tests
An anonymous reader writes "MAKE Magazine founder Dale Dougherty has an article in Slate about how educators are missing the punchline when it comes to getting kids interested in learning. He describes a recent visit he made to a middle school: 'The science lab was empty, as were the library and the playground. It was not a school holiday: It was a state-mandated STAR testing day. The school was in an academic lockdown. This is what the American public school looks like in 2012, driven by obsessive adherence to standardized testing. The fate of children, their schools, and their teachers are based on these school test scores.' Dougherty's preference would be to more tightly integrate basic engineering projects into the science curriculum. 'I see the power of engaging kids in science and technology through the practices of making and hands-on experiences, through tinkering and taking things apart. Schools seem to have forgotten that students learn best when they are engaged; in fact, the biggest problem in schools is boredom. Students sit passively, expected to absorb all the content that is thrown at them without much context. The context that's missing is the real world."
They're doing exactly what they've been told to do by the system that politics has created. To fix our schools, you need to keep congress's nose out of the process, return responsibility to the individual states and local boards of education.
I was fascinated by all things science as a little kid. Doing, enjoying, fantasizing. I craved books for kids about science, electronics kits and chemistry sets - these were what I enjoyed. And toy robots. Then I got to junior high school and started formal science classes. Awful. Hated chemistry. Math was painful. Only physics became vaguely interesting. I did a BS, but school nearly ruined that path.
There are good teachers that don't teach to the test. Unfortunately, because of the high-stakes testing which can determine pay raises and personnel decisions, this is typically on non-core subjects. My physics (which does have a STARR test now) teacher was great. We rarely used the textbook but we measured the speed of sound and used a lot of hands on physics demonstrations. This is a good article. I'm hoping to begin teaching science, math or computer science next year. Maybe I can be part of the change.
My third grader informed me one day that "science is boring". You could have hit my in the nuts with a hammer and it would have hurt me less. I inquired more and found out that he is reading a lot of stuff and he just doesn't find it exciting.
First, I got ahold of a few interesting science videos dealing with astronomy and robotics. He was intrigued. On a trip to Disney I took him on a behind the scenes tour at their greenhouses where he got to talk to a Botanist and learn more. And I"ve found a few other opportunities to get him involved in some hands on science.
I'll be damned if I let school choke out his love for learning. He's border-line gifted if not gifted (I'm Triple Nine) and it would be a shame if he limited his options because of school...
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
Right. Give fucking Homeland Security something else to go after...
It may be a suboptimal result but it is at least a demonstrable result.
People like to whine about rote learning and facts, but before you start applying "more sophisticated thinking" you have to have a solid grasp of the facts.
You have to have something that can be measured.
Clearly this idea scares a lot of people.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Virtually useless, until someone invents a standardized student.
Education will suffer until the Powers-That-Be realize not every person learns the same way.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
You Sir, should watch 5 dangerous things kids should do:
http://www.ted.com/talks/gever_tulley_on_5_dangerous_things_for_kids.html
The next year they shot off rockets, one hit a car at a local dealership and damaged it, and that was the end of rockets in school.
In these times, I'm afraid the lawyers won't let them...
"The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
I love the idea of home schooling, but after serious investigation, it is not something that would work for us. My wife isn't really cut out for it, and I'm cut out for making a nice income. Believe it or not my kids are in private school but with a switch to a higher-income city we'll switch to their public schools.
I love teaching, so I spend probably ten hours a week with my kids directly on academics and because I'm a nerd even when I am playing , education comes out.
What we really need are more nerds and less politicians in charge of our education system...
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
You have to have something that can be measured.
Oh, you mean like English proficiency and whether or not students have coincidentally picked up the exact same misguided oversimplifications presented in the test questions?
As far as I know, accurately measuring intelligence and/or the potential for academic success are both open problems in psychology and neurobiology.
.: Semper Absurda
That's what an elementary school teacher calls timed tests for math (give students 10 minutes to finish arithmetic test). She promoted math is more than just doing calculations (add, subtract, multiply, divide), she liked to have students do hands-on stuff like filling different shaped containers with beans (not cooked of course) to illustrate proportions. However, hands-on kinds of stuff is hard to measure with a number saying how well (or poor) student performance. So the admins always want timed-tests ("drill and kill!").
mfwright@batnet.com
We had a similar discussion with my son's middle school science teacher. We asked why there wasn't more hands on activities. He said that he would like to do more but that getting the materials can be expensive; preparing a lab takes a lot more time than preparing a lecture, and a great deal of time is spent policing the kids to make sure they are doing what they are supposed to do. Further, he was limited to things that could be started and completed within an hour.
The previous science teacher was much better about preparing hands on stuff, but she got burnt out and quit after a few years.
If you really want to teach science in a manor that would engage kids, you need some exceptional teachers. Short of that, building some flexibility into the schedule might help. Give science teachers more prep time. Instead of having science 5 days a week for 50 minutes at a shot, make it four days with one of the days being longer for lab time.
To fix our schools, you need to keep congress's nose out of the process, return responsibility to the individual states and local boards of education.
Would you also eliminate federal funding and let states and localities pay for their own schools? Unless you do, the feds are going to put conditions on what they're paying for, and justifiably so. Personally I'd like to see the feds out of many areas, including education, since their participation comes with a lot of strings.
I had a rocket blow up in my face before.
IT WAS AWESOME!!!!
The shrapnel was worth it.
Step-dad made a rocket out of a used CO2 cartridge that has its nozzle enlarged and then filled it with match heads. That does create a nice easy safe rocket, the problem happened with he decided to make it a little more powerful by adding gunpowder.
It was a fun little time waster.
Don't know something? Look it up. Still don't know? Then ask.
I've never had an Estes rocket blow up by accident.
They are safe as houses.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
My mom hit at least three of those with me at an early age. I just love the saying "Don't childproof the world, worldproof the child"
We seem to be raising generations of ever-less-capable people by trying to childproof the world
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Home schooling is for parents who's religious views are so extreme that they cannot integrate with normal society.
What you're doing is called parenting. Well done. The people complaining here are expecting too much from schools. It's not there to take over your responsibility as a parent. But it's par for the course on Slashdot to expect government to solve all our problems (and then complain about it more when it tries).
:wq
Because the schools are too afraid the parents will sue them if someone breaks an arm horsing around or gets a splinter on the jungle gym.
I agree whole heartedly that our school's lack of hands on learning is screwing our kids education. But the system also won't let them be kids for fear of some helicopter parent suing when little Joey something childish and gets himself hurt. It wouldn't surprise me if some teachers are too afraid to do experiments in class for fear of a child doing something lawsuit worthy.
Lastly: exercise helps people think and be happy and lets the children vent some much needed energy in order to be able to concentrate. In my opinion, the school system sets children up for failure.
Well, then, when you have kids - remove them from public education system and get them to launch some rockets for MIT. I'm sure it won't at all lead to them living in your basement well into their 40s.
I was home schooled until college. I got into college, BTW with the aid of some 3D paper models I included with my submission, a real world architectural example of a Buckminster Fuller dome...
I did not end up in my parents basement, and was far better socially adjusted when I entered college than the poor fools who had gone to high-school. What makes you think socializing only with other kids prepares you for socializing with adults?
I was also accustomed to choosing what I wanted to study and being self-directed in learning.
There should be more tests, and they should be hard enough for kids to fail, and be afraid of repercussions of failing
Which will never happen in public schools as long as it would also illuminate teachers failing to teach.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Home schooling is for parents who's religious views are so extreme that they cannot integrate with normal society.
What a shame such bigotry and ignorance has become so prevalent, and appears at all on Slashdot...
There is a whole wing of homschooling entirely unrelated to religion. Look up "John Holt".
When I was home schooled (up until college) I also went to many group events with a number of kids who were home schooled by parents who were very religious. That did not stop them from learning anything at all. They all grew up normal and well educated - better educated and more self-confident than the kids who went to public school.
Frankly from what I saw how religious your parents are has no relation at all to how religious the kids are. Some of the kids from non-relgious parents ended up being very religious, some of the kids from religious parents eventually dropped religion altogether.
Every person finds their own path.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
You already stretched the imagination when you imagined the rocket blowing up. Do you know how much work it takes to get the fuel in a commercial Estes model rocket engine to blow up? They're designed for maximum safety.
You sort of have the right idea, in that you should teach them in phases. You might start out with a demonstration to capture their interest: the teacher launches a rocket. Then, you teach them some theory - just enough for them to be successful. Then you have a construction phase, where you build models, and perhaps wind tunnel test them. Then you teach them range safety, just before taking them outside again for the launch.
The most important thing to teach them is that range safety is #1, and is not negotiable. Anyone violating it will be escorted away, no second chance to fire their rocket, and enforce that rule like iron, parents' whining be damned. As the adult, you'd be the range safety officer, and you'd always maintain the launch keys in your possession. Do those simple steps and it is not only far safer than gym class, but a fun experience they'll remember.
The most dangerous part? Asking parents to pay for the kits. Teachers don't have a lot of spare money for stuff like this, and bulk educational packets of rockets cost about $50 per 12 rockets. Multiply by 36 students per each overcrowded class, and you have to come up with $150 per class. About half your students will be from households where their parent(s) can't afford a $5 kit, so you need to find a beneficiary or you'll be paying that $75 out of your own pocket. If you go asking for money too often, the parents will likely complain to the principal and you'll find you're risking your job by just trying to be good at it.
John
If you are one of the idiots that think our country is going Marxist or the Obama is a Marxist you are not worth talking to. You are part of the problem because, apparently, you are fine with redefining words to mean whatever you want them to mean.
Hint: when corporations can purchase laws, that is about as far from Marxism as you can get.
Now...a rocket blowing up is not "little" by any stretch of the imagination. And usually it doesn't provide a second chance (the event)....kids should be allowed to do more things, but unfortunately rocket building is not one of them.
You, sir, are a fine example of what is wrong with America. You know not what you are speaking of, and consequently, you are filled with fear because of what you don't know.
At 13, I blew up a model rocket engine in my face. Guess what? I'm still here (23 years later). No scars. No permanent damage. No missing appendages. I'm FINE, albeit I have a bit more respect for warning labels and for not doing stupid things that I frikken' KNOW are stupid, and yes, I knew what I was doing when I blew up the engine that it was a Really Dumb Idea (the engine wouldn't ignite, so I ground it up into a powder and tried to light it with a match -- kids don't try this at home!). I flew rockets from about age eight (with my dad doing most of the work) through college (solo) with not a single injury other than the above incident. In fact, I've carried on the tradition with my own kids now that I'm a dad myself; I'm currently building a twin-engine D-size rocket to boost an Arduino, which I'll be using to measure air temperature, air pressure and acceleration. I've had far more injuries due to riding a bicycle than I have had flying rockets -- do you therefore want to ban bicycles, too?
There's a reason they call that science: rocket science.
Ummm...because it's science, and involves rockets? What NASA or Space-X does *is* really hard, because they are dealing with very, very large, very, very powerful and very, very complex machines, which have to fly very precise trajectories. An A- through C-size model rocket is many, many orders of magnitude less complex and less dangerous, particularly if you don't try to DIY your engines. Building and flying such a rocket is well within the capabilities of a jr. high school student; designing and building such a rocket is well within the capabilities of a high school student with a little supervision from a high school science teacher.
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
He may not have the best delivery, but his point is valid. It's analogous to paper MCSE's (or CCNA's or whatever other acronym you want to use). When all you teach is how to recognize the best answer on a multiple guess test, you are doing your students a disservice.
I'd rather see who can actually apply the theory in a real-world situation (configure this PC as part of the domain, turn up a 10M port rate-limited to 5M on VLAN 42, calculate the center-of-gravity of this rocket and tell me if it will be stable or unstable if the center of pressure is located three and a half inches from the bottom of the body tube, etc.).
MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
Every so often we get articles on Slashdot where some Engineer/IT guy/Progammer thinks he knows best and recommends adding more "nerd stuff" like LInux or model rockets or RPG's in education. Then all of Slashdot hops on the "Wow, I loved model rockets....this is a great idea" bandwagon.
Most kids, aren't nerds. And while we might love to see our pet hobbies in schools. a la "All kids should learn Python!", this is no different from a concert Pianist saying "all kids should study piano because it makes them smarter"
And lets not forget class differences...model rockets is one of those usual upper middle class son of an engineer" hobbies we see so many Slashdotters have. It's like all those articles where Slashdotters reminisce about their C64's and they don't even realize that most people "didn't" have a home computer in the 80's. Even the consoles of that time had less household penetration of today.
So no, turning every school into a Slashdotters affluent suburban school with rocketry and computer clubs, isn't the solution, even if they mean well.
Home schooling is for parents who's religious views are so extreme that they cannot integrate with normal society.
No, homeschooling is for parents who care about their child's education. We homeschool, and belong to several homeschooling groups. I'd say about 1/2 of the families we know do it for religious reasons. Christians being the largest group, and Muslim being the second largest. We know some Hindi homeschoolers, can't think of any Bhuddists off-hand. The other half of the families homeschool because they don't feel the other options are good for their child. The public schools are not very challenging. The private schools around here are kill-them-with-homework factories that leave no time to build rockets and robots and take music and gymnastics lessons.
So there is some actual real-world data for you, based on several hundred homeschool families and dozens of school choices. You're spouting off without either data or experience.
In our case, we homeschool in order to find the point of optimal challenge. My daughter doesn't need a mountain of homework to 'get it', and she needs to be challenged in order not to get bored out of her nut. At 13, she took the AP Chem this spring. That's her third AP exam. She is probably going to jump into the third quarter of freshmen engineering calculus this fall at a local university. There are simply no local schools that would have let her accelerate enough to keep her sanity.
study-experiment-test-learn applies to the way we teach just as much as it applies to the way we learn. Fully agree, it's not very accurate, but imperfect does not mean useless and it's the only practical measure we have. Of course people who failed to commit the scientific method to memory through rote learning may disagree.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Launches at Moffett Field are limited to G engines with a max altitude of 1000 feet with a limit of 350 people on the field at a time. That's not even one single high school grade level worth of students for most San Jose/Bay Area high schools. If they want to get away from those limits (M class, 15,000 foot ceiling), then they have to go all the way out to Snow Ranch, which is East of Stockton, about 130 miles out of town and only in the fall.
There's basically no other place you can launch in the Bay Area.
I do think, however, that the author of the article drank the Fleming VARK model kinesthetic learning koolaide http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_styles#Fleming.27s_VAK.2FVARK_model, and maybe needs to back up a bit.
-- Terry
Adding: The economy runs on debt. So, in order to grow the economy, you have to grow debt
This is entirely false, and a dangerous propaganda meme. The economy grows natually as a result of technological advancement. If no one is inflating any bubbles, economic growth is a pretty straightforward measure of technological growth.
Technology makes life better. You wouldn't think that would be a controversial statement on /. of all places, but we seem to be crawling with Luddites these days.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.