Hi Katie!

The CT integration is definitely a work in progress. We’re doing this research as both forward-design and backwards-design. In other words, trying to work in themes of decomposition, pattern recognition, pattern generalization, abstraction, and algorithm design into the making activities; at the same time, we will observe kids doing the activities and will try to identify where we can amplify the CT skills. Some of these activities are “stepping stones” to CT, but the idea is to keep CT as the end goal.
As for teacher priorities, initially we were thinking of putting together these long, intensive projects, which would lead to CT, but it’s difficult to translate that into a classroom where a teacher sees the students for 50 minutes at a time. So, probably a lot of shorter more varied projects would be more useful to them.

Very interesting!

I’d love to hear additional thoughts from anyone on the benefits and costs of longer, intensive projects versus shorter, more flexible ones. I can definitely see why shorter projects would be more useful, but does shortening the projects make integration harder to achieve?

I, too, would like to hear from others on this. We want to be realistic as to what can happen in a classroom, with its shorter periods in the school day and with the responsibilities of addressing a variety of content. However, we don’t want to lose the focus needed to get the learning objectives we want.

Hi Irene!

Yes, we’re doing this with HS, as they are the ones that have the most contact with physics material. The biggest challenge with the project is keeping all of the plates spinning. To make activities that would work in an informal learning space as well as in a classroom, that incorporates concepts of physics as well as CT, that retains cultural relevance for the students is really, really hard!

I applaud you for attempting it! I was also wondering if there were examples of CT, modeling and simulation in Physics that would interest HS students. Have you tried sharing information on the LIGO project or does that seem so far removed from MakerSpaces or classrooms?

I had never heard of LIGO before your comment. Cool! But yeah, it might be hard to tie it in with making activities. We were interested in modeling and simulation, but to create a good model, you need understanding of some programming concepts and a language, which few of our students will have, and just using a model (as you know) doesn’t count. In just a two week program, I doubt we’ll be able to develop enough physics learning + programming knowledge to make that happen. But if you have ideas, please let me know!

Hi Sue,
The Center for College Access and Success at NEIU has the largest GEAR UP grant in the country, so we are in a lot of high schools in Chicago. As long as the student is a GEAR UP high school student, they can be part of the program. We don’t want to filter for skill level, etc., because we need the spectrum of ability to create a good formative assessment. We are recruiting now.

Bootstrap is awesome! I had no idea they were looking into physics. I will contact Emmanuel asap! Thanks so much.

Hi Jill! Great question! The student consultants that are featured in the video had to be in high school, complete an application, and conduct a phone interview. We were interested in their understanding of making, their identities as learners, and their ability to work in a group setting. They’ve met with us 9 times, 3 hours each, over the span of 3 1/2 months, giving input on projects/prompts, testing them out with us, and giving us feedback on what engages them. They have, on occasion, had homework, writing about appropriate activities and blogging about our project.

Thanks Roxana. You are probably collecting information about why they chose to participate, right? Really interesting work!

We have! The answers run the gamut from wanting to improve CS/physics education, to liking makerspaces and hands-on activities, to wanting more experience working with a variety of people.