Are you ready to challenge the way you think about labs?
The old recipe sounded something like this:
Read the instructions
Follow the instructions
Write your answers on the bottom of the instructions
Fortunately, most of us have moved way past this model. You design experiments that stretch the understanding of the students, you create scenarios that allow the students design portions of the lab, you invite students to think more deeply about the analysis. So I developed a class whose primary learning objectives were accomplished through the most underutilized science teaching method:
Prototyping.
And this was the stimulus for me to design a class that broke away (and I mean AWAY) from this model. I called the class Environmental Solutions. Here is the outline of the course. Industry professionals come into class to share about a particular environmental problem. I had the Bureau of Land Management bring their fire crew in to explain the troubles with wildland-urban interface fire. I had a Boise State ornithologist come to explain the troubles with invasive bird species and the effect on nesting. I had dairy professionals come to explain the environmental impacts of dairies.
Once the students had a basic framework of the problem, their assignment was simple. Solve the problem. And what assignments did they have to do? None. What tests were coming? None. The students were free of ME, and the only audience they cared about were the professionals. Because at the end of the unit, the pros come back to class and we participate in a Shark Tank. The prototype that garnered the most support from the judges gets the highest grade. It's capitalism in the classroom. Let me break down the steps.
1. Brainstorming: Each session starts with brainstorming. I help them walk through some different methods to get ideas on paper. Then we take our brainstorms to small groups. At the group level we try to poke holes in the brainstorm ideas. Those holes could be it already exists, it doesn't solve the problem, you can't engineer it, nobody will buy it, it would be too expensive. No ideas are removed from the brainstorm, rather the challenges to each idea or identified. Every solution will have friction. If there was no friction to the creation of the solution, it would already exist.
2. Prototyping Protocol: After deciding on the solution they will chase, the students work through the prototyping protocol. This allows students to be crystal clear on the applications and outcomes of the prototype. It allows them to connect the features and benefits to these desired outcomes. It forces them to frame the project to identify the financial, engineering, or building challenges. It causes them to brainstorm ideas of how to solve these issues. I had a group designing stand-up paddleboard fins made from recycled plastic. But they didn't have a mold. So they had to identify that challenge and then solve it. Which they did by 3-D printing a model and making a negative mold in concrete (which I still find remnants of in my lab). They identified their limitations and overcame them.
3. Build the Prototype: Each group must produce a functional, testable prototype. Most of us have assigned a Rube-Goldberg device at some point. Kids spend hours trying to keep the dominoes from falling to early so that the "clock" runs long enough. Developing a prototype of a new and functional product is a Rube on steroids! There are all sorts of issues that get in the way. And what happens when an issue arises? They have to solve it. Not for me. For the professionals. And there are REAL issues with the crazy ideas that teenagers come up with. Like the group that was developing a fire-proof shrub fertilizer. They didn't know about the hydrolytic effects of certain salts. That if they apply a salt to a surface, which then combines with water, that pH can change. And you know what? Plant like specific pH! So during the prototyping process, they created, taught, and solved the problem.
4. Test the Prototype: Every group must produce real, quantifiable, repeatable data to demonstrate to the judges that the prototype quantifiably does what it says. I had a group of "slackers" develop fire-proof paint. Mostly, they wanted to try to light things on fire. But they developed an experiment where Bunsen burners were focused on siding painted with regular paint and then with their paint. They times how long it took to burn through. They measured the mass of wood burned. The qualitatively compared the surfaces. All of a sudden, they weren't slackers any more. By the way, their fireproof paint REALLY worked. All of the data proved it.
5. Explain the Results: Not every test is a good one. I had girls make compost tea utilizing cow manure with pillow cases in their garage (I can almost see the parents rolling their eyes to this day). They wanted to make a super fertilizer. They did. 10,000 times as strong in nitrates as commercial stuff! So they would have to water down their solution so as not to burn their crops. Did they have to redo their protoype? No way! They did their job, build the prototype, tested it and have to explain the implications of the results. That is science.
6. Sell Their Idea: It is nerve-wracking stepping into the Shark Tank. High school kids pitching ideas that they created in their high school class and garage to PHd's and CEOs. They sweat! And they create! They have to learn to develop marketing as part of their pitch. They learn about advertising messaging. They learn to create logos. They learn public speaking. And then they have to step up and perform. There was one of my best students that had attempted to develop an algae-additive to cow feed that would reduce methane production. He had grown the algae. He had made in vitro cow stomachs. He used a methane detector to determine the effectiveness...and all his data looked bad. Actually adding his algae to cow feed increased methane production. So instead of walking up with his tail between his legs, he pivoted. Maybe his additive could go into methane biodigesters! He stood in front of the President of Dairy West and sold his idea. At the end of the presentation the president asked if he had any contact with a PHd student in California. He hadn't. Because there was a scientist in California working on the exact same project! A high school student in Idaho worked his way into the same line of thinking that the best thinkers were following.
My challenge to you, teacher, is to think about your labs. Do your labs allow the type of thinking and growth that a prototyping system would? Do your students find as much investment in your labs? Are there ways that you could incorporate prototyping into your class?
You don't have to throw away all your labs and rewrite an entire curriculum (which was a lot of work, by the way). But you do need to consider,
How could prototyping change the way I think about lab?
댓글