STEM education "distasteful" ?
Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)
Posts: 23,514
I recently finished reading A Mind at Play by Jimmy Soni and Rob Goodman. It's a very insightful and entertaining read about the life of Claude Shannon, the father of information theory. I highly recommend it.
Throughout the book, Shannon's playfulness is emphasized. He built a chess computer and a juggling robot (with the face of W.C. Fields). He was adept himself at juggling while riding a unicycle. But I was stopped in my tracks when I encountered this passage:
Wow. The authors have obviously not encountered a course based upon Parallax robots à la NIkosG and other inspired robotics teachers. But in more general terms, are we depriving our students of a more liberal education on the altar of national competitiveness? I was very lucky to have attended a small liberal arts college. Even though I majored in Physics, I was also steeped in arts and literature. (I still struggle with NYTimes crossword clues regarding the Greek classics and Shakespeare plays, however.) I hope today's STEM students have the same opportunities -- but I wonder ...
Thoughts?
-Phil
Throughout the book, Shannon's playfulness is emphasized. He built a chess computer and a juggling robot (with the face of W.C. Fields). He was adept himself at juggling while riding a unicycle. But I was stopped in my tracks when I encountered this passage:
"... He had a flair for the dramatic and the artistic; we see it in the flaming trumpet, Theseus the mouse, a flagpole hand-carved out of an oversize tree on his property; the juggling clowns he built to exacting specifications. Shannon's admirers are just as quick to compare him to M.C. Escher or Lewis Carroll as they are to put him in the company of Albert Einstein or Isaac Newton. He turned arid and technical sciences into vast and captivating puzzles, the solving of which was play of the adult kind. ...
"In one sense, it may be impossible to draw anything from this. Shannon's enjoyment seems sui generis. But perhaps his example can still remind us of the vast room for lightness in fields usually discussed in sober tones. These days it's rare to talk about math and science as opportunities to revel in discovery. We speak, instead, of their practical benefits -- to society, the economy, our prospects for employment. STEM courses are the means to job security, not joy. Studying them becomes the academic equivalent of eating your vegetables -- something valuable, and state sanctioned, but vaguely distasteful"
"In one sense, it may be impossible to draw anything from this. Shannon's enjoyment seems sui generis. But perhaps his example can still remind us of the vast room for lightness in fields usually discussed in sober tones. These days it's rare to talk about math and science as opportunities to revel in discovery. We speak, instead, of their practical benefits -- to society, the economy, our prospects for employment. STEM courses are the means to job security, not joy. Studying them becomes the academic equivalent of eating your vegetables -- something valuable, and state sanctioned, but vaguely distasteful"
Wow. The authors have obviously not encountered a course based upon Parallax robots à la NIkosG and other inspired robotics teachers. But in more general terms, are we depriving our students of a more liberal education on the altar of national competitiveness? I was very lucky to have attended a small liberal arts college. Even though I majored in Physics, I was also steeped in arts and literature. (I still struggle with NYTimes crossword clues regarding the Greek classics and Shakespeare plays, however.) I hope today's STEM students have the same opportunities -- but I wonder ...
Thoughts?
-Phil
Comments
Wrong. I've been getting cozy with some of the nice folks at Wowwee. Terrific company, they made Robosapien and lots of great robots since then. They have a nice balancing robot, MiP. Alkaline batteries, smart phone, does some tricks. Several years old, still sells well. https://www.amazon.com/WowWee-MiP-Toy-Robot-White/dp/B00KMSOIGM
After MiP, they introduced Coder MiP the STEM-based Toy Robot. Does everything MiP does and much more. Bigger box. Transparent housing. Programmable. Includes LiPo battery (original uses alkaline). Includes optional giant snap-on off-road wheels. Includes massive clear teeter-totter ramp the robot can climb and BALANCE on top of! Better in every way!
They didn't sell. I grabbed one when Best Buy clearanced them for $25. Glaring STEM failure? Dunno. I'm baffled. Wowwee is baffled too.
https://www.amazon.com/WowWee-Coder-STEM-based-Robot-Transparent/dp/B01FSTNQZS
I have a friend who teaches English at the local high school. He suggests that I'm not "lyrical" enough. It' s a criticism that I take to heart when confronted by his vast knowledge of, and passion for, literature. It makes me wonder if there's a way to integrate liberal arts themes into the STEM curriculum. I took a stab at this when I required my students to read Longitude by Dava Sobel. This was part of a course on navigation and time-keeping, resulting in the students building weight-driven pendulum clocks. But that's still technical non-fiction reading -- not lyrical.
I hate to admit this here but, frankly, I'm sick of robots. That's probably one of the main reasons -- second to having to make a living -- that I haven't taught robotics in a couple years. I'm still entranced by GPS-guided ASVs, since they have a role in environmental monitoring. But bi-wheeled, obstacle-avoiding, line-following floor crawlers? Meh. That fascination has run its course. And I doubt that I'd ever be able to project false enthusiasm for that to a classroom full of teenagers again.
But suggest a curriculum that combines STEM with art, literature, and just unfettered play and I might -- might -- consider returning to the classroom, once I've got my retirement secured.
-Phil
I grew up with building toys (tinker toys, lego, erector, etc.) and also things like hotwheels/matchbox and slot car tracks and HO trains when I was a little older. Things the fuel imagination and creativity. Then I got into computers and my desire to create and puzzle solve was endlessly fueled and I self taught and was self motivated to learn everything. Oh, and my house is filled with lego sets still, all over the place.
I think we need to stop trying to force STEM into toys and games. Let them just be toys and games, if they happen to spark some STEM like learning, then great. Just don't market it that way, or you won't sell as many.
The place for neat STEM "toys" is schools, like what parallax is doing.
In comparison, when I'm playing with software or hardware, I rarely think of it in STEM terms. Much of my formative programming experience has come from play. In order to achieve something I wanted to achieve, I just happened to also learn some engineering, science, and math. That learning was also a means to an end, but it was for an immediate benefit.
This brings to mind the oft quoted Montessori saying "let the child lead." In other words, the child will learn what she needs to learn when she has a need to learn it. In that same way, many (all?) of us on the forum have a love for STEM because we play.
I looked at the amazon link to the Coder with the intention to buy. But I saw that it required a device that had BluetoothLE and that earlier tablets/phones would not work. I have 2 android tablets (classic bluetooth) that I use with my activitybots and the sparkfun radios that fit the XBEE connector. Since I don't care to get a 3rd tablet right now, I passed on the Coder. Also a number of the reviews were not very complementary.
While it is nice that a tech toy uses the latest wiz bangs, it also limits the potential customers.
Speaking of "joy/no-joy", in high school and college, I can say that I had many no-joy courses - foreign languages, English composition, some math courses (more the teacher than the subject). But when I took chemistry and physics (and later engineering), I experienced "joy" and could't wait to get to classes. So different strokes.
I thought that the purpose of STEM was to expose children to those subjects and demonstrate problem solving and that they could "make" tech, not just consume it. Math was all abstract & the kids could reasonably say that there was no reason to learn it. In Maryland, before STEM the class day was filling up with courses that politicians wanted that would lead no where, and there was maybe one science course each year, many times taught by a teacher who did not really understand the subject using books that were written by people who did not understand the subject. (Book word problem exercises like "a car is going 20 miles per hour. The destination is 60 Km distant. How long with the car take to get there?" With the answer in the book: 3 hours -- I explained to the teacher that the answer was wrong because it didn't take units into account. I was told that was not the point of the exercise, and the answer was correct.)
But if a child has no interest in the subject (as I had none with foreign language, or performing arts), expose the student to an elementary course, but they shouldn't continue with more advanced courses unless they enjoy it. Looking forward to a career in a field that they hate isn't going to result in anything good for them or society.
Tom
I have an article on some of the robots I've looked at here:
https://www.kinvert.com/stem-gifts-for-kids-educational-toys/
it's mostly a living never to be complete rough draft.
Anyway, we teach exclusively with ActivityBot and Cozmo. The important distinction is that we use Python for Cozmo while the couple companies that are looking at starting with Cozmo are looking at their graphical language.
I think we're doing a good job of keeping STEM fun. Over 80% of students sign back up. We're growing fast. It is possible.
Part of it is there are a few of us who know well enough to use products like the ActivityBot while others are apparently googling "how to teach STEM" and going almost exclusively with Lego, Minecraft, Scratch, and occasionally Dot and Dash, OzoBot, Sphero. Only Lego has sensors, loops, conditionals.
In my high school years I had awful history teachers. Made the subject a complete snore. A few years later I bought some books about various time periods that interested me, and I found the treatment of the subject didn't have to be abysmally obtuse. I discovered I liked history. I learned more in a few months than four years of upper school.
With STEM now in the mainstream there is a greater chance of witnessing educator burnout/indifference/detachment, but that doesn't mean it's endemic to the subject. The right teacher/school/curriculum can change that.
What is this ugly term "STEM" anyway? If I understand correctly it's "Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics."
How is that a new academic field? There was always science, engineering and maths in school.
Back in school in the 1970's we had a nicely equipped metal shop with industrial strength lathes, mills and so on. We had a "science lab" where we learned Newtonian mechanics, the basics of electromagnetism and all kind of chemistry. We had a biology lab for all that messy stuff. Mathematics was there as well of course. They all had their own teachers. I think that covers STEM.
Looking back now I'm amazed that our little village school in the middle of nowhere with no money was so well kitted out. I thought it was a dump at the time...
Admittedly STEM might mean some kind of idea about integrating all that science, technology, engineering and maths somehow. Rather than being standalone subjects as they were. And admittedly "technology" was not really a thing at the time and has surged ahead. But basics are essential.
Cynically I might say that STEM is a plan to put back what has been missing for ages whilst at the same time only employing one teacher to do it all.
It's a mess out there, as you noted. Lots of STEM learning toys with nowhere to go. It's the latest business frontier!
I've been to over a thousand campuses in the last 20 years. I'd love to put my thoughts in writing, but have no time to do that because I need to get myself down to SoCal to visit more campuses!
Maybe there's a wave of honesty and shake-downs ahead of us.
http://www.thetechedvocate.org/time-hold-edtech-companies-accountable/
Ken Gracey
I just got back from the HS robotics class, where I was called upon to help out for the day with a robot claw the kids are adding to the robot arms they're building. (They're duplicating the design I adapted a couple years ago for the Towers of Hanoi demo, but with the new Servo360s and Blockly.) Anyway, the class now has two Epilog laser cutters for about 15 kids, and they're busy all the time. Combined with teaching the kids RhinoCAD, the lasers are an amazing outlet for the students' creativity. And that's where the "A" comes in to play in "STEAM." Knowing that if you can draw it, you can make it is incredibly empowering.
-Phil
I was just seeking out enjoyable things to do. If someone had said "learn X, it's a good career move with good job prospects", I would either have ignored it, or followed it without passion into a life of misery.
BTW I had the same experience with history as Gordon. And geography and everything else.. I love all of it, but that happened *after* I left school.
God forbid that anyone spends years studying, and paying to study, something they are not passionately curious about in the hopes that that is the road to a good job and money. At least after a general high school education. Especially universities should not be trade schools.
In that respect I do find all this emphasis and selling of the STEM idea distasteful.
It's how to teach, not what to teach. Obviously each discipline is centuries old. "This term is typically used when addressing education policy and curriculum choices in schools."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science,_technology,_engineering,_and_mathematics
There are many examples where education tries to adapt to new teaching concepts. Were you familiar with New Math? It was still math, but a different way of teaching about it. Learn more here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Math
Of course I did not appreciate any of that at the time. I'd never been 13 in school before, how would I know what was "new". It was all interesting anyway. I have no idea what effect New Math had on me. I do recall the maths teachers complaining about it at the time though.
Looking back I think it kind of destoys mathematics as a subject in school. Kind of like claiming that an education in computing is all about Excel and never starting from ideas about how a computer works or came to be.
Again I have the question, is school supposed to be a place to impart knowledge and kindle curiosity in kids. Or is it supposed to be a trade school to get them into work somehow?
-Phil
After a student pays $40,000 a year for a 4 year science or engineering degree, they should be able to be hired to do actual technical work under the tutoring of senior personnel (including logically being able to make 4 out of 2 + 2). In the 1980's/90's I had hired a number of high quality BS grads who then went to grad school part time and earned their advanced degrees, and who's work became internationally respected. Unfortunately, as time went on up to 2002 when I changed jobs, the transcripts of student applicants became heavy with fluff courses (e.g. party planning 202 - with a grade of A) while technical courses became fewer and earned more C's, but the fluffs kept their Grade Point Averages above B. Even the classic liberal arts courses became fewer and had lower grades as the opportunities to fulfill graduation requirements with fluff increased.
It got so bad that during one recruiting period, HR prohibited potential supervisors from requesting applicant transcripts. I responded by only hiring MS or PhD grads who had done full technical thesis/dissertations that I read and discussed with them during their interview.
Tom
The environment can't support successive generations of intelligent consumers, because they buy houses, land, cars, etc..
The environment can only support service personnel living in inner city boxes.
No highly educated and skilled person will have living in a box.,,, i would hope,,,
So, simply don't emphasize intellectual skills,,,
Emphasize service, and you have your server who lives in the 300sq ft box in the city, and is happy to do so.
Just be happy the food/service is somewhat warm, and dosen't kill you within 2 hours. (beyond that.. not sure)
Don't complain, we all can't have mansions with 5 1/2 guage railroads in our backyards.
A service only economy will continue to make goods prohibitively expensive so you can't even have a n scale set in your basement either.
(what basement, oh 300sq ft remember, no room also!!!)
I got mad finger pointing skills man, you should see how fast I can play angry birds......and ring up your order...
This site has some stuff if you want stem..
https://www.teachersource.com/
Magnet "film", micro magnets, ferrofluid, graphite, nitol wire, areogel, Star Coaster, Super Size Wave Spring, Robotic Arm Kit, 3D Standing Wave Machine, and don't forget your Erlenmeyer Mug.
...
Ya know, all the stuff you find at our service sector big box stores like walfart. lol
Don't you DARE think about doing some combination of said items that are NOT on said STEM list.
Matter a fact, lets make all those items illegal.
Then I bet you people in the inner city will be making aerogel ferrofluid nitol wire, do whatchamacallit, things.
And we can't have people making do whatchamacallit, things, because they will inevitibly end up snorting, shooting(it or themselves up) with it (or some combinations there of....
I mean. I think the whole angle is, if its not safe as milk, its not worth teaching.
And if its not safe, or worth teaching, then logically you make it illegal?
This is not referring to anything at all, just the general idea of xenophobia out of control.
And it's been further expanded to include Reading in many places. Or wRiting. Go figure.
Yes, STREAM.
A bit like my "SPARKLING" puzzle in verse. Now you have to add a letter and still have a real word. Barring STREAMS (perhaps sociology?) I think we're done.
Reading: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/rob-furman/stem-needs-updated-to-str_b_5461814.html
wRiting(?): https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/imagine/201103/stem-steam-stream-writing-essential-component-science-education
"STREAM", unbelievable.
We are not done yet. When I was a kid we did not have "STEM", we had the three Rs: Readin', Ritin' and Rithmetic.
Except in my school there was a couple of hours per week dedicated to "Religious Knowledge". So we had four R's.
Now, if I can take the liberty of introducing a phonetic spelling in a heavy Scottish accent we have:
STRRRREAMS
And lo, we are back to education as it was in the 1970's !
Oh @Heater., you got me, I spilled my drink and have to clean my keyboard...
Mike
"Taught to the tune of a hickory stick."
Fortunately, those days were long past when I was in school, but paddlin' was still a thing:
-Phil
It's an expression that has been around for since forever. I had to check, Wikipedia can trace it back over a thousand years:
There is an earlier reference to "reading, writing, and arithmetic" in St Augustine of Hippo's Confessions (c. 397-401)
I thought I was being a bit original in introducing the Four Rs. But no, wikipedia has that covered as well:
In the United States, during the 17th century, the curriculum in the common (elementary) schools of the New England colonies was summed up as the "four Rs" - Reading, 'Riting, "Rithmetic", and Religion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_three_Rs
@Phil,
No hickory sticks in my school days. But a caning was still a thing. Kids were getting caned in Britain til 1987.
So many schools now just have CNC machines behind bullet-proof glass or show videos of chemistry experiments rather than letting the students do them, how is that inspiring? In the bad old days days, the teachers were allowed to shout at you, hit your poor work with a cold-chisel, chuck it in the 'waste' skip and make you stay until you had done it properly! Equally, many schools held after-school clubs for go-kart making or a school hovercraft, but that was down to a 'good' teacher.
My previous employer used to run STEM events - basically patronising hands-off displays of equipment or pcbs that could be linked to flash an LED, etc., This was accompanied by a mascot - basically a graduate in a furry suit - who went around high-fiving the school children. The people who designed / built it / tested the equipment were kept well away.
As a child I was inspired by:
The Great Egg Race
The Secret Life of Machines,
The Computer Programme, and
Micro mouse
The Open University
None of the presenters would be allowed anywhere near the camera these days. Too old. Too Boring. Too male.
That said, I may be a pessimistic old fart, but do I know that Lego™ robotics and electric vehicle competitions are thriving and programmes like Bamzooki enthuse lots of children. Also, as someone working in Aerospace / Defence, I have to comment that the majority of graduates taken on are young ladies and <controversial comment> they are better than the chaps</controversial comment>.
Never heard of "Bamzooki". Sadly Antie Beeb tells me:
Sorry, CBBC games and videos can only be played if you are in the UK.
Which is odd because at the bottom of the page it says "BBC Worldwide".
I also loved the Open University as a young teenager. On weekends I would be up bright and early in the morning to watch Professor Mike Pentz's physics lectures. He was anything but boring mind. A great character.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/obituaryprofessor-mike-pentz-1621848.html
Or some hairy guys talking about computers or electronics or maths.
And then there is this: https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x24gwgc
The rockets we made were based on the designs in that book and were a 48 inch x1.875 ind inside diameter steel tube with machined nozzles and nosecones. We also made 24 inch versions (same diameter) for preliminary firings.
The year before I joined, the club had very successful launches at the annual high school event at the Army artillery range in Virginia using powdered Zn and S. But the year I joined the club wanted to use hot cast Zn & S grains (approx 26 lbs for each 48 inch rockets) to try to reach higher altitudes. A few months were spent developing the method to safely melt the Zn & S mix and to cast it around a center mandrel (it would have to be center burn grain) getting uniform blending and high density without any voids that could cause the rocket to explode. Safe methods (obviously no open flames or direct contact with heating elements) for melting were important since we were doing this in the chem lab and the ignition temperature was not that much higher than the sulfur melting point (once ignited the ZN & S could not be extinguished easily and produces vast amounts of dense ZnS "smoke" -- don't try this anyplace). We ended up casting a number of short cylinders (each with a hole along the centerline), that we would load into the rocket when we were read to launch.
My job was to manufacture the ignition system for the solid fuel. Powdered fuel just required a black powder squib that the Army provided that flashed and lit the end of the powder charge. Since the solid fuel required ignition all along the central hole, that wouldn't work. We ended up using a NICROME heating element stretched to the full length of the combustion chamber, soldered to the ignition leads and coated with the molten rocket fuel. We first tested one after school in an unpaved area near the school parking lot. A few weeks later we tested a fuel cylinder with a short igniter to make sure that both would work. (I wonder how that would go over today).
When it was time for the event, we mounted 6 rockets to the outside luggage rack of the station wagon and drove down the New Jersey Turnpike (I also wonder how that would work out today). The fuel grains were carried inside the cars wrapped in cushions to protect them from vibrations and pot holes.
We got to the Army base and had a successful launch. The most noticeable difference between the powdered fuel and solid fuel rockets was the burn time. The powder rockets leave in a great blast of smoke and then disappear as they climb from the initial impulse. The solid fuel rockets continued burning as they passed through the clouds. Our club received the highest altitude (measured by the Army) award that year.
That experience of setting goals, planning methods and tests, failing and recovering, and finally succeeding was one of the main reasons I went into engineering. I doubt that any school system would allow any of that type of learning experience today. I don't know if just watching videos of stuff (just seems like an episode of MythBusters) would have inspired me enough.
Tom
While I didn't enjoy learning in school I love it now. Somewhere along the way a switch got flipped. What you have to do is flip that switch and the kids will do the rest. They have to want it and until you figure out how to engage them and make them want to learn you'll just be going through the motions.
Having said that, the budget for 'going through the motions' is quite large.
Packing a couple of hundred teenagers into a school and expecting them learn anything never did sound like a good idea to me.
Sandy