Engineering in the Classroom:A Low-Tech, Local Approach

By Meredith Knight. Claire Huttlinger, Bree Carlson,and Christine Cunningham

Each group took a vastly

different approach to the

problem.

A group in an integrated science class watches as Elis Martinezworks on a special device they developed to help special educationstudents learn vocabulary and communication skills. The studentshelping to hold the device are Luis Crucetts, 14 {left) and JonathanPerez, 15, both ninth-graders. Marilyn Sanbria (right) a teacher'shelper, aids in the experiment at Holyoke High School.

When one mentions the word engineering, mostpeople think immediately of high-tech itemssuch as computers, or large-scale projects such asbridges, buildings, and roads. While these products

represent the products of etigineering, there are clearchallenges to having students work directly on any of theseprojects in the context of a science classroom. As a ninthgrade physical science teacher at an urban high school witha high dropout rate and few resources, the possibility ofincluding engineering in my classroom seemed even lesslikely. However, after participating in a summer workshopon engineering, I found a way to introduce and engage mystudents in engineering design in a local and low-tech way.In this project, my ninth grade science students interviewedand observed the special education classes at Holyoke HighSchool, then designed and constructed Assistive Technologydevices for the special education classrooms out of everydaymaterials. Not only did my students learn about engineeringdesign, they also learned a great deal about science,teamwork, and how to use what they learned to help otherpeople.

Holyoke is located in central Massachusetts, just north ofthe city of Springfield. The demographics of Holyoke HighSchool reflect the population of Holyoke; over 50% of thestudents are non-native English speakers, with a majority ofthese students coming from Puerto Rico. The high school hasfew resources; as a ninth grade physical science teacher, I wasteaching science in an English classroom, with slanted desksattached to the chairs. I did not have access to a sink or to asupply closet and had to carry all of my science materials ona cart.

Despite these obstacles, I am always looking for ways toengage my students. In the summer of 2003,1 participatedin a summer professional development workshop at TuftsUniversity called the "Pre-Coilege Engineering for Teachers"

1 8 • THE TECHNOLOGY TEACHER • October 2006

(PCET) workshop. The workshop was designed to introducescience, math, and technology teachers to engineering andengineering design in order to help teachers meet the newcurricular frameworks in Massachusetts that include a"Technology/Engineering" component.

The main focus of the PCET project was to familiarizeteachers with the etagineering design process. It did this byfocusing workshop activities on two main themes: watertreatment and assistive technology. The United StatesGovernment defines an assistive technology as an "item,piece of equipment, or product system... that is used toincrease, maintain, or improve functional capabilities ofindividuals with disabilities." (29 U.S.C. Sec 2202 [2])Assistive technologies can be commercially manitfactured"high-tech" items, such as electronic hearing aids andmotorized wheelchairs, or homemade "low-tech" items,such as customized pencil grips or booster seats. During thePCET workshop, we learned about and tried different "low-tech" design projects that we could use in our classrooms.The group visited the Assistive Technology Lab at PerkinsSchool for the Blind. 1 was impressed with how the director,Molly Campbell, and the volunteers used everyday materialssuch as corrugated cardboard, clay, paint, glue, tape, andinexpensive items to create custotn-designed chairs, games,and other helpful items for the Perkins students.

At the end of the PCET workshop, each teacher was askedto create an "engineering design project" to implementduring the subsequent school year. Teachers were givensupport in the form of $200 to purchase project materialsand the assistance of a PCET fellow, an engineering graduatestudent from a university who could help in the classroom.Bree Carlson, a graduate student from the University ofMassachusetts in Amherst, worked with me during theworkshop and the school year. i

We decided to introduce our students to the fundamentalsof engineering design by asking them to create an "assistivetechnology" device. The project requirements were simple:We asked students to design and build a device that wouldhelp the special education students in our school. HolyokeHigh has a large population of severely physically impairedstudents who attend class in two basement "SpecialEducation" classrooms. Not surprisingly, the SpecialEducation teachers often complain that these studentsare too isolated from mainstream students. Part of ourproject would allow my ninth grade students to visit theseclassrooms and learn more about the needs of the specialeducation teachers, para-professionals, and students.

We had three main goals for this project. Our primarygoal was to increase our students' understanding ofengineeritig and the eight-step engineering design processin the Massachusetts Science and Technology Frameworks.Another itiiportant goal for this project was to introduce our"mainstream" students to the "unseen" portion of the school'spopulation—the students in the contained special educationclassroom. Finally, we wanted to introduce our students tothe ideals of good citizenship.

During the first year, we incorporated this project intothree classes but only engaged a small subset (fewer thanfive) of students in each class. Students' names were chosenrandomly out of a hat. Since I was uncertain how the projectwould be received, students with behavior problems werenot allowed to participate in the lottery. The groups wouldwoik on the project periodically throughout the course of theyear with Bree, while the other students in the class wouldlearn more about engineering by discussing issues such asthe challenges of building a Mars rover and designing a moreuseful backpack.

The project was primarily "inquiry-based" in that it was astudent-driven project. After students were given the initialparameters of the project, they were primarily responsiblefor choosing how they would address the problem. Bree, thePCET fellow, facilitated the process and tried to keep thegroups on task. The eight-step engineering design processthat my students followed is shown in Figure 1.

The first and second steps of the engineering design processare to identify the problem and research possible solutions.In order to identify the needs of the special educationstudents, Bree escorted my science students to the basementrooms to interview the special education teachers, aides,and their peers with disabilities, and to observe the typesof games and activities that were currently being used inthe Special Education classroom. Even though they neverleft the school building, these students collected firsthanddata that they would use to develop their project. Thestudents returned to the science classroom marveling attheir interactions with the "basement kids." As the projectproceeded, students expressed thoughts on how thispopulation could be better served by the school. Theywere suddenly concerned about a group they had onlyogled previously.

The third and fourth steps of the engineering design processare to develop many possible solutions and tben select onesolution. The physical science students discussed their ideaswith their peers and with Bree and determined which of

1 9 • THE TECHNOLOGY TEACHER • October 2006

step 1:

Identify

the Problem

Step 8:

Redesign

Step 2:

Research

the Problem

Step 7:

Share

the Solution

PCETPre-College

Engineering forTeachers

step 3:

Develop

Possible

Solutions

Step 6:

Test/Evaluate

the Solution

Step 4:

Select a

SolutionStep 5:

Construct a

Prototype

Figure 1: The Engineering Design Process

their ideas were feasible as group projects. Each group tooka vastly different approach to the problem: The first groupdecided to create a talking educational cube, the secondgroup decided to create a memory game, and the thirddecided to create a communication board. The success ofour students in completing their projects correspondedto the difficulty of the project. Tlie first group wanted tobuild a cube that would be a talking word bank, but didnot consider that a word bank requires a programmablecomputer chip. Although many of the students hadexperience with electronic toys, they had never previouslythought about how one might be put together. Tlie groupbecame more frustrated as the project continued, andeventually abandoned the project. The second group alsonever completed their project, due to their overly simpledesign. Instead of feeling challenged by the "MemoryChallenge Game" and being compelled to complete it, theylost interest and abandoned the project. The third group,however, found the right balance between designing a project

that was challenging, but not overly so, and was able todivide the tasks so that each student could be fully engagedthroughout the entire process. The "communication device"was designed to help students with limited vocal abilitycommunicate with other students and the teachers andpara-professionals in the classroom. This was an importantlesson to me as a science teacher; inquiry-based lessonsneed to be well matched to the abilities of the studentsparticipating in them.

After deciding on the project, the students proceeded toconstruct a prototype (Step 5). The students started thisstep by creating drawings of the activity board. Even thisseemingly simple step took a great deal of time to complete,as Bree and 1 reminded the students that this "paper" designhad to be translated into an actual device. Bree helpedgather the materials for the project, including going to theSalvation Army to purchase a few electronic toys to takeapart so the students could see how they worked. Bree also

2 0 • THE TECHNOLOGY TEACHER • October 2006

supervised the creationofthe project. Thestudents designed theboard using simplecircuits, lights andswitches, duct tape, and"triple ply" corrugatedcardboard (cardboard

" glued together to

make it sturdy, described in Campbell's book CreativeConstructions).

After the students completed their device and tested it intheir classroom (Step 6), they took it to the special educationclassroom to share it with the students and teachers(Step 7). This experience is an example of "real-lifeassessment," In which the students' work was being evaluatedby the actual audience for which it was created. The studentswere able to observe their design in use and redesign parts oftheir device before completing the project (Step 8).

The resulting design was a 60 cm by 60 cm box with aseries of pictures, a column of words describing what theuser might need (such as "snack" or "bathroom"), and acorresponding switch that would power a light next to thepicture. Although communication boards are availablefor purchase, they are expensive {a few hundred dollars)and are easily broken. The design the students created wasinexpensive and could be fixed by the students if it wasbroken, since they knew how it worked (DeForge 2(X)4).

The classroom time spent completing the project wasextensive, but valuable. The project solidified and extendedstudents' knowledge of circuits as they figured out howto create a light next to a picture when the correspondingswitch was turned. They learned how to create a sturdystructure for the device that could withstand everyday wear.They learned the importance of planning and staying withinthe PCET materials budget. They learned the challengesof working in a team with their peers, from decidingwhich project idea to work with to the frustration of failedattempts. They recognized the importance of workingwith other experts like the paraprofessionals and specialeducation teachers, trying out "crazy" ideas, and failing andtrying again. They also learned that they could do somethingin school to help other people. "Why do we need to knowthis?" was replaced by "How does that work?" and "Why nottry it like this?"

I continue to do this project with my students year after year,instead of merely observing the special education students.

my students have started to interact with them socially. Somestudents eat lunch with the special education students, andfriendships have developed.

One ofthe greatest challenges for a teacher at HolyokeHigh School is to convince students that knowledge is animportant tool that is useful and meaningful in their lives.There is no better way to teach this lesson than to givestudents a concrete goal rather than an abstract assignment.By tackling a local problem in a low-tech way, my studentsgaitied a better understanding of science, of engineeringdesign, and of their peers of all abilities. S

ReferencesCampbell, M. & Truesdell, A., 2000. Creative constructions:

Technologies that make adaptive design accessible,affordable, inclusive and /tin. Cambridge MA: PerkinsSchool for the Blind.

DeForge, I. May 23, 2004. "Students build device fordisabled." Sunday Republican, Sectioti C, p. 1.

Miaoulis, I. 2001. "Introducing engineering into the K-12learning environments," Environmental Engineering37(4), 2001, p. 7-10.

Meredith Knight is a research associate at theCenter for Engineering Educational Outreach(CEEO) at Tufts University. She is the programmanager for the Pre-College Engineering/orTeachers (PCET) Program. She can he reached viaemail at Meredith.knight@tujis.edu.

Claire Huttiinger is a former ninth grade teacherwho now teaches eighth grade in Holyoke, MA. Shegraduated from the University of Massachusetts atAmherst and Smith.

Bree Carlson received her MS in EnvironmentalEngineering in September of 2006 from theUniversity of Massachusetts at Amherst.

Christine Cunningham is the Vice President forResearch at the Museum of Science in Boston andis also the Principal htvestigator for the Pre-CollegeEngineering for Teachers Program and the TuftsEngineering the Next Step (TENS) GK-12 Program.

2 1 • THE TECHNOLOGY TEACHER • October 2006