Announcing: The Invent To Learn Guide to 3D Printing in the Classroom: Recipes for Success

We are proud to announce the publication of The Invent To Learn Guide to 3D Printing in the Classroom: Recipes for Success

by David Thornburg, Norma Thornburg, and Sara Armstrong

3DP_3DThis book is an essential guide for educators interested in bringing the amazing world of 3D printing to their classrooms.  Learn about the exciting technology, powerful new design software, and even advice for purchasing your first 3D printer.

The real power of the book comes from a variety of teacher-tested step-by-step classroom projects. Eighteen fun and challenging projects explore science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, along with forays into the visual arts and design AND are connected to Common Core and the Next Generation Science Standards.

The Invent To Learn Guide to 3D Printing in the Classroom is written in an engaging style by authors with decades of educational technology experience.

Buy today at Amazon.com (Print or Kindle)!

Be a part of FabLearn 2014!

Screen Shot 2014-06-06 at 11.44.58 AMIf you are an educator incorporating “making” in your classroom, or just thinking about it, consider attending FabLearn 2014 this Fall. Held on the beautiful Stanford campus, it’s an opportunity to see the FabLab in action, and meet other like-minded educators from around the world.

I’m the “social media” co-chair of FabLearn 2014 and that means you’ll be hearing a lot more from me about this conference!

Conference website

But don’t just come and listen – share your ideas, projects, and talent with everyone! The deadline has been extended for contributions – all ideas welcome!

Submissions website (new deadline: June 14, 2014)

FabLearn 2014 invites submissions for its fourth annual conference, to be held on October 25-26, 2014 at Stanford University. FabLearn is a venue for educators, policy-makers, students, designers, researchers, and makers to present, discuss, and learn about digital fabrication in education, the “makers” culture, and hands-on, constructionist learning. We are seeking submissions for contributors to our Workshops, Student Showcase Panel, Educator Panel, Research Panel (Full paper), Poster Session (Short paper), and Demo Session.

I have been to this conference for two years in a row now, and it’s really a place to learn new things and have the kinds of conversations with amazing people who are doing amazing things around the world!

Making and the Common Core

I get asked a lot about how making and tinkering can be integrated into classes in light of the Common Core. I think there are good answers to this, but it involves seeing the Common Core as something more than it is being portrayed in the media and in schools.

Simply, there are three parts to the Common Core – the overarching goals, the standards, and the assessments. I’m not going to go into great detail about each of these, but here is what I see happening in a lot of schools in each of these areas.

Assessment – Tremendous effort is being put into getting students ready to take the assessments and preparing the technology infrastructure to administer the tests.

Standards – New standards are driving changes to curriculum, but mostly in a rearrangement or rebranding of existing curriculum and classes.

Overarching goals – Very little is being done to address the goals of changing how and what we teach students by making it more relevant, more experiential, and requiring deeper dives instead of “covering” too many topics.

This is the problem I’m seeing – that assessment is the tail wagging the dog and taking the focus (not to mention money and time) away from changing classrooms for the better. So when we talk about how “making” can align with Common Core, it requires schools and districts to refocus on those overarching goals, and away from how many computers you need to run the tests.  Unfortunately this is a conversation that is not taking place in many educational organizations.

The Top Ten Things Maker Educators Know

I recently gave the closing keynote at the Maker Possibilities Day hosted by the Maker Education Organization and sponsored by Intel. It was interesting, because I knew that most of the attendees were already implementing making in various classrooms and informal educational settings. So I couldn’t do my regular keynote where I introduce the Maker Movement to educators and show examples of how technologies like 3D printing, robotics, wearable computing, programming, and more can be used to transform learning. This audience was well beyond that!

So I created a new talk – “The Top Ten Things Maker Educators Know” as a David Letterman style top ten list.

#10 – Just do it.
You know you can’t wait for the perfect space, budget, bandwidth, software, version. Waiting won’t make it better. Try things and then try again. Let your students help you and learn alongside them. We ask our students to take risks, make mistakes, and reach for the stars – we have to do the same.

#9 – Making things is good – computers make good things better.
We know we have to hold ourselves to higher standards and constantly push to make the “making” experiences intellectually challenging. We have to be brave enough to push ourselves to use these tools that didn’t exist when we went to school. In our book we identify three game changers – fabrication, physical computing (including robotics, wearables, e-textiles, and more), and programming.

The game changer is the computer and the computation. Alan Kay said, “the computer is an instrument whose music is ideas.”

The act of making is not good enough to claim it is always educational. I love arts and crafts, but we can’t claim that any making belongs in schools unless we can really prove that the experiences are rich and academically relevant. I didn’t say “traditional” – but…

We can be rigorous. We can add measurement, precision, context, connections to curriculum, history, and anything else you can think of.  My co-author, Gary Stager reminds us that “And then…” is a good stance to take when you think about student projects. If you are making instruments… “and then?”… can you make music? And then, can you write it down so others can play your songs? If you make a car, can you make it go fast, and then… can you make a sensor that measures that speed? And then… Can you prove that your measurements are correct? We can’t be satisfied saying, “oh, kids learn how to solve problems, or they learn to persevere (even if that’s true and wonderful) — it’s not enough. The computer is the key to pushing that envelope, as a design partner and engine of your ideas.

#8 – You can’t hurry love. Or learning.
Maker educators know it takes time. Time to learn. Time to do the job right. Time to take a break and ponder. Time to make mistakes and try try again. We want kids to learn how to dive deep into interesting tasks and then we ring a bell every 42 minutes.

I know this is SO hard. We have schedules. The bell rings, the calendar turns, grades are due. How do you make sure “things get done” – well, maybe we have to relax a little about that. Find ways to give kids the time to step back like a painter who takes the time to look at their unfinished work and think about their next brushstroke. To reduce the stress and chaos of the classroom. To move towards longer, richer projects and away from “if it’s Tuesday it must be exponents” approach to subjects.

Those of you in informal, non-graded programs have more flexibility. But even so, it’s so easy to fall into the quiz-on-Friday trap just because we are used to learning equaling “school”.

I know this is a big ask. For most schools, the bell and bus schedule are written in stone and come down from the heavens…And yes, for some of you, the ones who will be hardest to convince will be the kids — they know the game of school – when is it due? How many pages?

Which brings me to #7….

#7 – Educate everyone.
Of course I mean the students, if you are changing to longer projects tell them. Tell them why. They will whine and howl and the parents will come in and question your qualifications – or sanity … but – you need to be able to articulate why learning isn’t about timed multiplication tests or spelling bees. That’s what days like this are for – to help you concretize what you believe about learning. That you aren’t the only teacher trying to do this. To listen to someone else’s elevator pitch for their makerspace dream. Look around at your new support system.

Stay in touch – hashtag MAKERED

Days like this are to remind you that we DO know a lot about how people learn. (not that you can tell from a lot of what we do in schools)

We KNOW that knowledge is a consequence of experience. That working with your head, heart, and hands cements that knowledge better than memorizing. That being engaged in meaningful work is the ONLY way that people learn.

We wrote several chapters in our book about “making the case” for making in the classroom – with research, stories, resources. Some of you have told me today that our book helped you. I’m thankful and immensely gratified when I hear this.

But you are the way it’s going to happen. You have to constantly reach out to parents, your students, your colleagues, your administrators and leadership teams, your funders, your neighbors, the guy on the bus talking about “these kids today…”. You can educate everyone about what you see and how this changes kids lives. You can share your stories. How rich learning opportunities are important for ALL kids, and that they need them EVERY day, not “after the tests” or “after they master the basics”.

If public education means anything, it’s a way to democratize access to expertise and experience. Poor kids needs MORE experiences, MORE connections to the real world, MORE opportunities to touch the future with amazing tools like 3D printers. Instead we are told that “those kids” need to master basics and learn how to behave before they get “enrichment”. And whose kids are “those kids” – yeah, we know which ones they are. Not the kids of the politicians making these speeches. They need to be educated too.

And yes, this is a tough job.. educating the whole world, maybe impossible. But we have to do it anyway.

#6 – STEM for all.
But while we educate, we have to be careful about jumping on the bandwagon of STEM jobs. Sure there are kids who will be scientists, mathematicians, programmers, or engineers, but that’s not the reason to teach STEM in an engaging and exciting way. It’s good – but it’s not good enough to just pluck out another few kids who might get that plum STEM job.

No, I believe that we owe it to ALL kids to construct experiences that help them see science as a detective story, engineering as a way to solve their own problems or the world’s problems, and math as a way to make sense of the world. With the tools and technology we have today we don’t have to just teach “about” these things, students can BE mathematicians, BE historians, BE engineers and BE software developers. This can happen now if we tackle making STEM subjects interesting and accessible – not just to fill some economic balance sheet, or crush other countries – but as a human right. That our democracy and the future of the world depends on an informed, educated community –every adult, every child.

So yeah, I get it. It’s a buzzword and there is funding for STEM. Get the money! But let’s make sure that what we create is fundamentally aimed at reaching every child – not just the usual suspects, not just a lucky few. That might be difficult – to change people’s minds that only SOME kids need to know science, only SOME kids need to learn programming. Maybe even impossible – I know, but we have to do it anyway. 

#5 – Balance. all kinds – Gender, problem solving styles, artistic interest, ages.
I’m a girl, I’m an engineer – do I care about girls in STEM? Of course I do. I worry that courses and careers are more difficult for females for a wide variety of reasons. We know them – the culture, tradition, economics…Just yesterday I saw ANOTHER study about how teachers respond to boys questions with longer answers than girls. I worry that research about the effects of stereotype threat aren’t taken seriously. That maker spaces often look like places where girls WONT be welcome. And yes, the Maker Movement has more than its share of bro-grammer testosterone.

But then again, when I look around Maker Faires I see lots to cheer for. I see heroes of Maker Movement of all ages, from veteran wood workers to Super-awesome Sylvia, a 12 year old girl – being celebrated and respected. I see so much art and whimsy incorporated into techie projects. I see respect for different points of view, for different ways to see the world, different ways to solve problems.

But in school, we only respect one way – the analytical, linear problem solving approach. Seymour Papert, father of educational technology said there are two ways to solve problems: Analytical and bricolage. Bricolage is a French word meaning tinkering. But it also has a connection to the Maker Movement – in French, it has a connotation of reuse and artistry in your tinkering.

Analytical styles have long been seen as more “academic” – the linear, step-by-step approach is taught and reinforced in school, especially in higher grades. We push abstractions on students at younger and younger ages and call it rigor. And yet, there is another way. Bricolage, or tinkering is often how real science happens. I know as an engineer there were many more times we tinkered our way to success rather than planned it.

Real scientists make mistakes, ponder, have a cup of tea, argue with each other, and sometimes have happy accidents.  Bricolage is the way designers work as well, the real process of design, and I believe a natural progression from the play of childhood to a more reasoned and directed approach, but still a non-linear and iterative way to solve problems.

Sherry Turkle showed in her groundbreaking work that these two styles are associated with gender. That bricolage – an intuitive, creative problem-solving style, what she called “soft mastery” is often discounted as being immature or naïve. You can see that these adjectives appear to describe a more “feminine” style.

Of course I’m not saying that all boys solve problems one way, and all girls the other – most people use a combination of styles.

We used to literally tie left-handed kids hands behind their backs and force them to write with their right hands. We know now, that that causes serious learning problems, stuttering, life-long consequences.

I think we are still figuratively tying students hands behind their backs by insisting they all solve problems in preferred “analytical” ways, ignoring not only the fact that we are hurting them, but also that analytical isn’t even the way real designers and engineers work.

When we discount people’s problem solving styles we communicate to them that they aren’t “smart” – and millions of people are being convinced every day that they aren’t smart. That their ideas aren’t welcome. It’s not true, and it’s a shame and a waste.

We have to find ways to honor all problem-solving styles, to allow people to master knowledge in their own way. This is harder than everyone doing problem 12 on page 47 on the same day at the same time. Teaching in a way that supports multiple learning paths and styles is harder to do, maybe impossible to scale – and yet we have to do it anyway.

# 4 – This doesn’t just happen.
People say things about technology like, Oh the kids are so smart they will figure this stuff out by themselves. Old fuddy duddies should just step aside… Or – we’ll just let the kids mess around and discover things.

Personally, I never use the term “discovery learning” it’s too easy to mock. “oh the kids will wander barefoot through the field with flowers in their uncombed hair and lo and behold — the Pythagorean Theorem! oh please. That’s not going to happen. It’s up to caring, trained people who are experts in their subjects AND in the art of teaching who can create situations where running into big ideas, powerful ideas is inevitable. Deliberately prepared, yet open learning experiences that are rich and valuable. This doesn’t just happen. It takes skill, passion, and sometimes years of experience working with children.

It’s an art to listen for that teachable moment and then know what to do next, ask the question that unlocks a door that THEY can walk through, offer the right book or the right tool, or just leave them alone sometimes. It’s an art to gather the right materials, ones that have a low threshold and a high ceiling, and challenge kids to push past their comfort zones. Teachers and leaders are the key to making education better and the key to incorporating the power of the Maker Movement, of infusing the power of technology into our schools and learning spaces.

#3 – Engaged and empowered is an outcome of doing meaningful work.
People say technology is so engaging to kids. I think they get it wrong. Maker educators know there is more to it than bells and whistles.

Kids are engaged by doing important work – work that is challenging in a way they find interesting. Mastering something difficult and important in the eyes of the world, like technology is engaging. If you can then share your expertise, so much the better.

This is a cycle of citizenship – of belonging to a community that gives you value and values you. We often talk about “digital citizenship” when we really just mean telling the kids the rules and how they will be punished if they mess up. But a learning community is a two-way street.

When you give someone responsibility, and they step up, they build trust in themselves and trust in their ability to do the next difficult thing. They engage in learning. They become empowered because they did something powerful. You can’t teach empowerment or do empowerment TO kids. It’s an outcome of doing meaningful work – meaningful to yourself and to others.

And by the way, you can’t have empowered students without empowered teachers. Script reading robot teachers will not empower students. We have to fight against the devaluation of teachers, and the devaluation of kids as cogs in some corporate education machine. We can do this, we can change minds, even if it’s hard -even if it seems impossible. We just have to do it anyway. 

#2 – Making is about making sense of the world not making stuff.
Maker educators know that making isn’t about a shopping list or a special room, it’s about allowing people to reach their full potential as makers of meaning. Humans naturally seek meaning in their lives. Every kid wants to change the world – we can give them the tools and the maker “get it done” ethos that makes it possible.

We know the world is full of big problems that need solving. Our kids need to believe they can change the world. Not in magical superhero ways, but ways that are real. We need them to believe they can solve problems – and even when it seems impossible – we need them to do it anyway.

#1 – You (and your kids) are the right people.
You knew this was coming. But…. maybe you doubt that you are the right person to show others the way forward. That someone else should speak up, someone else should lead the way.

There is a problem-solving technique called “open-space technology” that has a motto that I love. It’s “the people in the room are the right people.” I think it applies to everything. Every classroom, every learning space has the right kids to tackle making things, important things, things that no one has ever thought of before. Even when those kids are disempowered and disengaged. Even when no one expects anything from them. They still are the right kids. Amazing kids, extraordinary kids. You’ve seen them, you know them.

And we have the power, the people in this room, to change education, to change the way we value children in this society. To respect and honor EVERY child’s potential to be a maker of meaning, and a maker of a better world.

And yes, we know it’s a tough job, and yes, it may seem impossible, but we are the right people … so we have to do it anyway.

New from CMK Press – The Invent To Learn Guide to 3D Printing in the Classroom

Coming June 2014 – The Invent To Learn Guide to 3D Printing in the Classroom: Recipes for Success

by David Thornburg, Norma Thornburg, and Sara Armstrong

This book is an essential guide for educators interested in bringing the amazing world of 3D printing to their classrooms.  Learn about the exciting technology, powerful new design software, and even advice for purchasing your first 3D printer.

The real power of the book comes from a variety of teacher-tested step-by-step classroom projects. Eighteen fun and challenging projects explore science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, along with forays into the visual arts and design.

The Invent To Learn Guide to 3D Printing in the Classroom is written in an engaging style by authors with decades of educational technology experience.

 Subscribe to our mailing list for the announcement!

The Maker Movement Conquers the Classroom – THE Journal

The Maker Movement Conquers the Classroom

“Whether it’s a paper airplane or a robot that walks, kids have always wanted to create functional objects with their own two hands. These days, many educators are channeling that natural urge to build with help from the wider “maker movement,” which has spawned maker faires and dedicated “maker spaces” in classrooms and media centers around the country. Pam Moran, superintendent of the Albemarle County Public Schools in Virginia, contends that American classrooms of the past regularly fueled this type of creativity, and now is the time to bring back that spirit of innovation. “I see the maker movement as being a reconnect, both inside schools, as well as in communities, to redevelop the idea that we are creative individuals,” Moran said. “We are analytical problem-solvers, and we are people who, in working with our hands and minds, are able to create and construct. We are makers by nature.”

The article has some great examples of what’s going in real schools, and we contributed as well:

“While cutting-edge technology can help engage students, Gary Stager, coauthor (with Sylvia Martinez) of Invent to Learn: Making, Tinkering and Engineering in the Classroompointed out that maker projects don’t require schools to buy expensive machines. “We see teachers and students working with traditional materials combined with new materials — even cardboard construction,” he said.

Martinez added, “There are new conductive materials, conductive tapes where you can paint a picture that actually does something, such as lighting up. These materials draw people in in ways they don’t expect. One person might be interested in building a robot, but another might be interested in building a glove with a sensor on it.””

Check out the rest of the article, The Maker Movement Conquers the Classroom online or in the April 2014 issue of THE Journal.

FabLearn Fellows 2014

I’m pleased to announce that I’ll be formally working with the first cadre of FabLearn Fellows as a mentor and advisor.

This program is a part of a NSF-sponsored project entitled “Infusing Learning Sciences Research into Digital Fabrication in Education and the Makers’ Movement.” The 2014 FabLearn Fellows cohort is a diverse group of 18 educators and makers. They represent eight states and five countries, and work with a wide range of ages at schools, museums, universities and non-profits. They have agreed to contribute to high-impact research and outreach to answer the following questions:

  • How can we generate an open-source set of constructionist curricular materials well-adapted for Makerspaces and FabLabs in educational settings?
  • How are teachers adapting their own curriculum in face of these new “making” technologies, and how can they be better supported? What challenges do teachers face when trying to adopt project-based, constructionist, digital fabrication activities in their classrooms and after-school programs?
  • How are schools approaching teacher development, parental/community involvement, and issues around traditional assessment?

I’m excited to help support the FabLearn Fellows. I believe that too often, researchers and practitioners in education are isolated from one another. As a result, we lose incredible opportunities to learn and share.

I’ll be sharing more as time goes on!

Measuring Making

One of the most common questions people ask me is “How do we measure the success of our maker program?” We cover this in our book, Invent To Learn: Making, Tinkering, and Engineering in the Classroom. However, I think there are more details that I can help with.

This is different than assessing student learning in specific subjects. I touched on assessment of maker projects in this blog post and hope to talk more about this soon. But what I’m going to talk about in this post is how to show that your program as a whole is a success.

First of all, you need to think about “success” – this is more difficult than it looks! In many cases, maker education initiatives are trying to go beyond test scores and grades into areas that are more difficult to quantify. You may be interested in increasing student empowerment, self-efficacy, interest in STEM, attitudes, or  problem-solving. So how do you do that?

Measuring affective changes in students is possible. Lots of people think that you can’t measure or quantify these kinds of things but you can. I believe it’s best to approach it both qualitatively and quantitatively.

Quantitative evaluation can be done with validated instruments and surveys you may be able to find and reuse. You may have to do a bit of research to narrow down exactly what you want to measure. For example, if you are looking for improvements in attitude, I did a quick Google search and came up with these this and  this. (I’m not recommending these, you need to find ones that best match your goals.) There have been many recent surveys about youth attitudes towards technology, STEM, and school in general. I would also look for “self-efficacy” surveys, and surveys that your district or state may already be using that ask students about their attitudes towards school, interest in STEM, etc.

Why bother doing this? If you use the same survey (or just take a few questions) that others use, you can compare your results with them. It’s powerful to be able to say, “The national data says x% of students in grade 8 are interested in STEM careers, but in our school, it’s risen from x% to y% in the year since we’ve implemented our maker program.”

However, I think it is even more powerful to create your own data. Ask people (parents, students, teachers, administrators) what they think about any program you run and use Likert scales to get data from their answers. Do pre/post surveys. Don’t be afraid to ask questions like “How do you feel your capacity to solve problems has changed?” or “Have you seen an increase in your child’s interest in science?”  Make the data you want to tell the story you want.

Finally,  make sure you are asking your participants and stakeholders to show and tell you what success looks like. Capture your stakeholders (all of them, especially students) on video as much as possible. Ask the same questions over and over again and you will have a compelling and powerful case. Take photos, videos, and screenshots not just of the finished projects, but the process. Combine quantitative data with documentation of projects, personal stories, anecdotes, and evidence of success. This will build your case better than data alone or stories alone.

But you must start NOW! Don’t wait to collect data, do surveys, and take video. Decide NOW what you think this picture of success looks like and start collecting the evidence. This blog post covers a workshop process that will help you decide what to ask and how to create those types of data stories.

With data, video, photos, events, and anecdotes, you can paint a complete and compelling picture of the success of your Maker educational initiative.

What if… those helpful instructions aren’t so helpful

My last post linked to a video showing Dr. Paulo Blikstein of Stanford University showcasing the research going on in his department regarding how making becomes learning.

The next question is what to do when faced with early research? Do we just wait until the research is done? Or maybe even validated with other studies?

I don’t believe this.

I want to know, “What if these early findings are true? Would it change my practice? What would it look like in my classroom or school?”

Let’s just take one of the research questions being asked – Do detailed instructions help or hinder student understanding? What is the difference between a learner who is given step-by-step instructions vs. being given time to explore a new technology? It is often assumed that the way to learn something new is to follow explicit directions for a couple of tries, and then eventually do it on your own.

The early research is showing, however, that students who are given explicit instructions do NOT move to not needing those instructions. They stay “stuck” in a habit of depending on  instructions.

Uh oh. As someone who works with teachers learning new technology, what should I do? Should I hide my handouts? Make them less explicit? I don’t know, but I’m sure thinking about it.

Maybe you are thinking about this with your students. Why not do a little experiment? If you give students detailed instructions “just to get them started” on early project work – why not see what happens if you skip the tutorials and hide the handouts? After some early confusion (where you will have to refrain from jumping in with the rescue) you may see new patterns emerging.

I know I’m not waiting around for the perfect research to happen. I want to find out the “what if…” sooner rather than later.