Robotics in the Curriculum: One School's Journey
In the spring of 2002, the assistant superintendent of schools in the district for which I work asked me if it would be possible to develop a robotics program at the high school. Like most teachers, I was a bit reluctant to reply in the affirmative as I knew that this would mean more work, no time and no guarantee of success. What I failed to recognize was the TRUE reality and scope of what that simple question would involve. You see, I am a licensed Industrial Arts Teacher, a woodworking and small engine repair type, tasked to working in the dusty and grimy shop off in the corner of the school. I loved my job. Enrollment was very high in the courses I taught and life was good. But change was in the air. We were about to build a new high school and the traditional shop curriculum was not going to be offered any more.
So begins the journey of Robotics at Ashland High School.
I needed a plan. What did I need to launch Robotics classes at the high school level? Well, the answer is pretty straight forward: Development time, hardware, software, curriculum, training, and STUDENTS. The time; well there is never enough. I had about one school year to pull all the pieces together. The assistant superintendent provided me with some curriculum development money (25 hours worth) that summer and the rest I did as I could.
Hardware was easy, almost immediately it became apparent that there was only one way to go with hardware and software for an introductory robotics course, Lego. It is very rugged, reusable, and easy to work with and students are familiar with it. The software is user friendly and pretty stable.
Curriculum was another issue. In 2002, there was very little standards-based high school curriculum available. Most of what did exist supported specific hardware and was not easily adapted. Plus, it was not tied to any frameworks whatsoever. This was a huge problem as this course was not being developed to simply allow students to play with Lego, but so they could learn about engineering and computer programming. I was attempting to build a course that followed the MA Technology/Engineering Frameworks. In the end, two academic institutions; the National Robotics Center at Carnegie Mellon University (www-education.rec.ri.cmu.edu); and the Center for Engineering Education and Outreach at Tufts University (http://www.ceeo.tufts.edu) provided some solutions to these problems. The CEEO website provided appropriate grade level activities and the Robotics Academy had an interactive software package to assist in teaching the students how to use the software as well as plans to build simple robots. Not a perfect solution, but considering the criteria and constraints the best solution for Ashland.
In September 2002, a flyer from UMass/Lowell showed up in my mailbox. It invited teachers to attend a one day workshop to learn how to use robotics in the classroom. I was still looking for professional development opportunities as well as how to structure a Robotics 2 course and UMass/Lowell seemed like a good place to start. In a lecture hall with about 30 other teachers, I found myself listening to Dr. Holly Yanco discuss the various methods of using robotics to excite students about STEM (science, technology, engineering and math). I learned a bit about different hardware choices and learned that RCX’s could be programmed with a C-based programming language. Most importantly, I learned that UMass/Lowell held a robotic competition for middle and high schools in early spring. The competition, Botball (http://www.botball.org), immediately interested me as it had the potential to solve a number of my unresolved issues. Botball provided some professional development, easily reusable hardware, which would supplement the classroom (Lego, processors and sensors) and free software. In addition, the educational philosophy of Botball was EXACTLY what I was looking for. Students had to work in teams to solve an open ended design challenge with finite materials and time and as a culminating activity, they participate in a competition to showcase their solutions. I went back to AHS all fired up, explained what I had seen to the administration; asked the assistant superintendent for $2200.00, which she willingly provided; and recruited 8 students for our first robotics club. This club was the pilot for the first robotics curriculum at Ashland.
In the six years since our first experience, Robotics has continued to grow at AHS. The students have the opportunity to take an introductory course using Robolab® and the RCX, and an advanced course using a syntax-based programming language and more advanced hardware. Both courses are tied to the MA Technology/Engineering Frameworks and are very popular. The club has done nothing but grow. We have fielded as many as 3 teams a year in The New England Botball tournament and traveled to the international competition. The kids have attained terrific levels of success and suffered serious setbacks. A vast majority of my students have gone on to further their education in a STEM discipline. The club has provided all of the replacement parts and most of the hardware for the day curriculum and it has ensured that I, as the teacher, continue to reflect on my teaching practice. We have been self-funded, raising money through donations and scholarships.
At Ashland High School, Robotics is the means, not the end. While it has proven to be an excellent student motivator, it is a tool to be used just like a table saw or computer. Students must know how to use the hardware as well as how to do some basic programming; but they must also understand how to apply what they know in order to solve problems. This is very difficult for them as they all start out asking me what I am expecting for a solution. When I tell them a challenge has multiple solutions and that I don’t know how they might solve it, they get quite apprehensive. They know how to balance equations, and find the slope of a line, but they have rarely, if ever, had to apply their knowledge to build something. This also required a leap of faith by me as the teacher. It is difficult to become a facilitator and not actively teach the kids “how”. I often tell students that we will learn together. We are not always successful. But success and failure isn’t measured simply by the end product. If a group fails to solve a given problem, they do not necessarily fail. Conversely, if a group solves a problem, they don’t automatically get an “A”. There are criteria and constraints they must prove they met while solving the problem in order to attain that “A”.
Robotics as a course of study requires support by all members of the learning community. The administration and parents have to see educational value; students must be willing to work hard while enjoying the classes; and teachers have to ensure the courses provide legitimate educational benefits that are sustainable. Like all teaching, the work is difficult but tremendously rewarding. In Ashland it has paid off.
Chis Beaton
| tour request | contact irobot | privacy policy | terms & conditions |  |