Teaching is one of the most challenging professions in the world. Since the advent of interactive technologies, the challenge of holding a student’s attention has become exponentially more difficult. Students live in a world of instant everything. Multi-tasking is the accepted norm in their world. All of their experiences are fast moving and highly interactive…that is until they step in to a classroom.
This is a monumentally challenging environment for any teacher, but it is particularly daunting for STEM teachers. The Pythagorean Theorem was never particularly exciting. In the current environment, imparting an abstract geometry concept to students who have no idea of how that information could ever be useful to them is nearly impossible. And anything that requires rote memorization in the Google era is almost completely incomprehensible to students.
Departments of Public Instruction have responded to poor student STEM outcomes with a call for teaching them with more rigor. They are clinging to traditional methods of instruction as if they were the result of divine revalation. If the outcomes are poor, it must be the teacher’s fault is the erroneous conclusion.
Industry CEOs tell us that having a working knowledge of STEM is critically important since 80% of the jobs being created require the ability to apply STEM knowledge. The challenge is to convince students that STEM knowledge is important and useful.
All of the data available tells us that the vast majority of students begin avoiding STEM subjects in middle school. They act like you have invited them into a plague infested room. An article from US News and World Report does an excellent job of summarizing the challenge:
“Children at birth are natural scientists, engineers, and problem-solvers. They consider the world around them and try to make sense of it the best way they know how: touching, tasting, building, dismantling, creating, discovering, and exploring. For kids, this isn’t education. It’s fun!
Yet, research documents that by the time students reach fourth grade, a third of boys and girls have lost an interest in science. By eighth grade, almost 50 percent have lost interest or deemed it irrelevant to their education or future plans. At this point in the K–12 system, the STEM pipeline has narrowed to half. That means millions of students have tuned out or lack the confidence to believe they can do science.”
US News and World Report “STEM is Elementary”
That caused me to look around and see if I could find anyone who is having great success engaging students in STEM subjects. I am a business guy who is not constrained by the way we have always done things. My experiences developing new consumer products for some of the largest companies in the world taught me that solutions to problems and unmet needs are usually “hiding” in plain sight.
As I looked for STEM engagement successes, I discovered a guy who is a serial inventor, Dean Kamen. Dean saw this problem and decided to find a way to sneak up on kids and get them to love science and math without students realizing that is what is happening. He formed a non-profit called FIRST (For Inspiration and Recognition in Science and Technology). When kids hear the name they associate it with coming in first in a competition…which suited Dean’s purpose. Dean’s concept was simple. He created a robotics challenge for teams of students to solve. It involved creating a series of tasks for the robot to complete and giving teams of students 2 ½ minutes to complete as many of the tasks as they could.
It was pure marketing genius. The idea of competitive robotics turned out to be as addictive as video games. During the past 20 years when student proficiencies and interest in STEM were declining rapidly, Dean engaged 250,000 kids from kindergarten through 12th grade in 54 countries around the world. They have grown to the point that they held the World Championship FIRST Robotics competition in the 70,000 seat football stadium that is home to the St. Louis Rams. The Black Eyed Peas were the half-time entertainment. It is important to know that the 250,000 kids chose to be on these teams themselves.
It begs the question of how FIRST enjoys success when school systems across the country struggle. The answer is simple. Students are leading the discovery and development process. The robotics competition has over 50,000 possible solutions only a few of which result in exceptional outcomes.
Student teams have 6 weeks to develop their strategy, design, build, program and test their robot before they enter competition. During that process they are immersed in the engineering design process (although they have no idea that is what they are doing) and they must draw on everything they have ever learned to build a competitive robot.
The students must apply math, geometry, physics, engineering, computer programming, and science in order to have a competitive robot. Students suddenly see the usefulness of what they have been taught. In addition to building a robot, every team must complete a research project. Every year the theme is different. It might be something as broad as food safety. They are to carve out a problem or opportunity and explain how they would solve it. At the end of the six weeks the 10 members of the middle school teams present to 3 panels of judges…only the team members…no coaches allowed. They must present: robot design strategy, how they functioned as a team and their research project. When they complete the judging, they begin the robotics competition.
I ran the North Carolina FIRST Lego League State Championship in 2008. It was held in the Greensboro Coliseum on a bitter cold Saturday morning. There were 80 teams in the competition. The kids lined up an hour before the doors opened with their costumes, robots, computers and research projects. That afternoon we had about 700 kids in the robotics competition in front of 3,000 spectators. If you closed your eyes, you would have thought you were at the state basketball tournament.
The only issue that I saw as I looked around at the kids was that it was only attracting the 5 to 7 percent of white middle class boys that you would expect to get. That made me wonder what if it was in an environment with more diversity. My partner Joe Kronner and I have since worked with several school systems and put the program in all of their elementary and middle schools. The demographics of the students matched the demographics of the county. We attracted females and minorities.
At about that time we were retained by a regional economic development group to identify world-class STEM schools from across the country. The mission was to identify effective models and adapt them to a 13 county region to create a strategic business recruiting advantage.
We identified and studied 34 schools and school systems that represented that they had an innovative STEM education strategy. Of the 34 studied, 32 had outcomes consistent with the national averages. Two organizations studied had exceptional outcomes. Their students were 5 to 7 times more likely to pursue STEM studies in college. One of the two, High Tech High in San Diego, had 240 of the top colleges and universities recruiting deep into their graduating class. When we studied their instructional design they shared two commonalities. Neither placed exceptional emphasis on STEM studies and they both used a Student Led Discovery instructional model.
The robotics program and the two school systems succeeded in engaging and exciting students about STEM studies. The three programs also produce students that exhibit 21st Century Job Skills.
Why does Student Led Discovery work?
Studies have shown that students are more likely to remember information that has meaning to them versus information that is just given to them. If students are actively engaged in their learning, they are more likely to retain the information. This is why students seem to crave instructional design models that are interactive. They thrive on being problem solvers and innovators. Solving problems that cause them to apply what they have learned or make them seek out knowledge to succeed result in greater engagement and knowledge retention. It is like having a hook to hang the information on. Traditional lecture models do not provide a framework that causes the student to retain the information. They are asked to comprehend abstract concepts with little in the way of frame of reference for how that knowledge is useful.
When they want/need information to complete the design of their robot, they seldom forget it. It was critically useful information. Teachers reported anecdotally that student who in the past had little success in the classroom became immersed in the robotics program. They were startled to see that participation in those programs seemed to be a key that unlocked the student’s interest in what was presented in the classroom.
The teachers also observed that student led discovery seemed to work for many different learning styles. One parent tearfully told us at a County-Wide Robotics Tournament that their child who was diagnosed with serious learning disabilities thrived being on the robotics team. They saw their child having significant learning achievement that had never been possible before.
The Classroom Environment
When Joe and I visited High Tech High in San Diego, we met with Laura McBain, Director of Policy and Research, prior to touring the school. Laura told us most classrooms had 60 students being team-taught by two teachers. We were told to expect that the students would be working in small teams on projects that typically span 4 or more subjects. As I tried to picture a huge classroom with 60 students working in teams, my mind could only conjure up chaos. As we entered the classroom, I was startled by the quiet and thought at first it must be a study hall. The students were working quietly in their teams on various aspects of their project. As I watched 5 adults wander around the classroom, I was surprised that few of the students noticed the visitors because they were so intent on what they were doing. I watched the students interact. They listened intently to the reports from their teammates and then discuss the implication of what was learned on their project. I was beginning to suspect that I had been setup. The odds of finding 60 tenth grade students being this respectful to each other were infinitesimally small. I was told to feel free to ask questions. I asked them to tell me about how their team functioned. They began to share their prior experiences with teams and the importance of selecting teammates with complementary skills and knowledge. I was astounded by their grasp of team dynamics and their ability to interact with adults in such a mature fashion.
I knew going in that their instructional design model used Project Based Learning, an iteration of Student Led Discovery. I could not visualize what that meant. I was startled by what I saw. Joe and I were in search of a world-class model for STEM Education that we could use as a beginning point for creating world-class STEM education in the Piedmont of North Carolina. While one of the High Tech High schools had a STEM theme, Laura confided that they really did not put that much more emphasis on STEM than in their other school. She then shocked us by saying that 30% to 40% of their graduates major in STEM fields in college. As she described it, “STEM subjects are the only thing they can find that scratches their itch to be problem solvers.”
Student Led Discovery models seem to consistently cause intense engagement with the subject matter that does not seem to occur in the traditional lecture model. At High Tech High they blend the two models depending on the students’ needs.
I don’t pretend to know how much student led discovery needs to be a part of the mix. I am convinced that it is possible to bring the excitement and engagement of the robotics competition in to classrooms and that it will change student outcomes for the better.
Research on Student Led Discovery
Most of the quantitative research on iterations of Student Led Discovery has focused on paired comparison tests of test and control subjects performance on end of grade standardized tests. The students involved in Student Led Discovery models generally have been at parity with their peers involved in traditional lecture models.
Several medical schools were early explorers in Student Led Discovery models and performed paired comparison tests. The outcome performance on standardized tests was parity or slightly better. Dr. Ann Lambros, who recently retired as Assistant Dean for Education at Wake Forest University School of Medicine, provided a critical insight into Student Led Discovery models. “The students who were in the test group were immersed in Problem Based Learning instruction. While their test performance was parity, their behavior in the clinic was far superior. They took more initiative and were better able to apply the knowledge that they acquired.”
One important area that no one has investigated is the ability of Student Led Discovery models’ to cause students to develop a passion for learning STEM subjects. The graduates from High Tech High and New Tech High are 4 to 7 times more likely to choose to major/study STEM subjects in college.
Students involved in Student Led Discovery models including afterschool STEM teams like robotics tend to exhibit 21st Century Job Skills. They are developing the critical skills that over 100 CEOs told us were difficult to find in prospective employees.
The last but critically important part of the equation is the teacher reaction to being involved in Student Led Discovery models. Our first inkling of the answer came very early in our journey. We met two middle school science teachers. One coached a FIRST Lego League team and the other coached a Team America Rocketry Challenge. Over coffee one afternoon Andy Kraft said, “I am not sure why, but I know that my students learn more about science during those afterschool teams than I am ever able to impart in the classroom. George Eckart echoed Andy’s observation.
During our tours of Student Led Discovery schools we had the opportunity to interview 36 teachers. We asked all of them if they had the opportunity to move to a school that used the traditional instructional model would they want to move back? Every single teacher replied without hesitation that they did not want to return to a traditional model. They were all quick to say the evolution from a lecture based instructional model to being a facilitator in a Student Led Discovery model was a very steep 18 month learning curve. On several occasions teachers volunteered that the Student Led Discovery models brought joy and fulfillment to teaching that was new and exciting.
Student Led Discovery models all share:
- The ability to cause students to discover the usefulness of STEM knowledge and that results in significantly above average incidence of students majoring in STEM fields in college.
- Business leaders who interact with students from Student Led Discovery models are amazed at the students’ maturity, ability to interact with adults, and they exhibit job critical soft skills (21st Century Job Skills).
- Afterschool STEM teams like robotics have the ability to excite and engage a broad spectrum of students from across a broad spectrum of demographics. Robotics programs in particular seem to have the same addictive quality as video games. Students are challenged to develop highly complex strategic plans with regard to game strategy and then design and build a robot that can implement their strategy. In the process they must apply math, physics, geometry, computer programming to optimize their robot’s performance. They are also challenged to research and present a research project that proposes a solution to a critical real world problem. Then they are tasked with presenting their findings to panels of judges composed of CEOs, School Superintendents, Chamber of Commerce Presidents without the aid and support of their coach.
- Ability to reignite the passion that teachers had when they started their careers!
We have much to learn about the various Student Led Discovery models including Problem Base Learning, Project Based Learning, Interdisciplinary Project Based Learning and Inquiry Based Learning. What we do know is that students in the models (properly implemented [with effective professional development and leadership support]) generally perform as well as their peers on standardized tests. There appears to be little risk of incorporating Student Led Discovery into the mix. While it does not contribute to exceptional standardized test outcomes, there are many other benefit areas that are critically important.
America’s prosperity is directly attributable to our ability to innovate. We desperately need to produce generations of innovators and problem solvers if we are to continue to prosper as a nation. Student Led Discovery models appear to hold an important key to making that dream a reality.
Leave a Reply