Just been listening to Eben Upton discussing how he came up with Raspberry Pi (good programme, worth a listen): www.bbc.co.uk/.../b09ly60f Took me back to my university years ('79-'82) when many of my cohort were playing with Sinclair micros etc, and I was thinking about why it never appealed to me. I think it's because while I do, obviously, find the development of new technology fascinating, what interests me is its ability to solve problems - whereas many of my colleagues were interested in the pure challenge of getting these piles of vaguely connected circuit boards to just work! Now, I believe it's a Good Thing that there are young people who are fascinated with technology for its own sake, this is how the Microsofts and Apples of this world developed. But I do wonder if we focus enough in STEM education on the ability of technology to solve problems, and develop an interest in its possibilities from that direction? Two reasons: I suggest it will attract more people into the fold, and increase the general understanding of the value (actual and potential) of technology, A good development and implementation team needs a wide range of skills (c.f. Belbin team roles), I suggest this approach would help us flesh out these teams with people who are able to form the link between the potential of technology and the needs of society (or the customer depending on your focus ). (Also, it is often suggested that there is a sex bias here: boys tending to be more interested in just building things (and blowing them up!), girls tending to be more interested in why they're doing it. Personally I think this is, if anything, a gender issue rather than a sex issue and hence is terribly complicated - possibly best just to accept that different approaches appeal to different people?) What are people's experience here? Do you think we explain enough what technology is for, and inspire young people to use it solve problems? Or - if we do we get too carried away with bells and whistles - is that maybe the right approach at a young age? Any good stories? I'm very happy to admit that my big inspiration (in hindsight) was watching Thunderbirds as a very young child! I still have a little Thunderbird 2 on my desk to inspire me. Oh, and don't worry, I will still (much to the amusement of my family) sit with a huge smile on my face looking at a very elegent piece of engineering for its own sake. But it's got to be really elegent! Cheers, Andy

This discussion is locked.

You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

STEM Education - should it focus on technology itself, or on using technology to solve problems?

Just been listening to Eben Upton discussing how he came up with Raspberry Pi (good programme, worth a listen):

www.bbc.co.uk/.../b09ly60f

Took me back to my university years ('79-'82) when many of my cohort were playing with Sinclair micros etc, and I was thinking about why it never appealed to me. I think it's because while I do, obviously, find the development of new technology fascinating, what interests me is its ability to solve problems - whereas many of my colleagues were interested in the pure challenge of getting these piles of vaguely connected circuit boards to just work!

Now, I believe it's a Good Thing that there are young people who are fascinated with technology for its own sake, this is how the Microsofts and Apples of this world developed. But I do wonder if we focus enough in STEM education on the ability of technology to solve problems, and develop an interest in its possibilities from that direction? Two reasons:

I suggest it will attract more people into the fold, and increase the general understanding of the value (actual and potential) of technology,

A good development and implementation team needs a wide range of skills (c.f. Belbin team roles), I suggest this approach would help us flesh out these teams with people who are able to form the link between the potential of technology and the needs of society (or the customer depending on your focus ).

(Also, it is often suggested that there is a sex bias here: boys tending to be more interested in just building things (and blowing them up!), girls tending to be more interested in why they're doing it. Personally I think this is, if anything, a gender issue rather than a sex issue and hence is terribly complicated - possibly best just to accept that different approaches appeal to different people?)

What are people's experience here? Do you think we explain enough what technology is for, and inspire young people to use it solve problems? Or - if we do we get too carried away with bells and whistles - is that maybe the right approach at a young age? Any good stories?

I'm very happy to admit that my big inspiration (in hindsight) was watching Thunderbirds as a very young child! I still have a little Thunderbird 2 on my desk to inspire me. Oh, and don't worry, I will still (much to the amusement of my family) sit with a huge smile on my face looking at a very elegent piece of engineering for its own sake. But it's got to be really elegent!

Cheers,

Andy

Parents

0 Andy Millar over 6 years ago

Oh I absolutely 100% agree, I had that thought mulling over in my head as I wrote my original post. In the past I've helped GCSE & BTEC D&T students with their projects, where they've chosen their own projects, and I've seen them get very frustrated when they have a brilliant idea of a problem to solve, but don't have the "know-how" to do it. I'm really thinking that it's a case sometimes of shifting the emphasis of why we're introducing STEM, without necessarily changing too much about how we introduce it. And somehow getting over the idea - and confidence - that you can learn how to solve a problem once you've decided to solve it.

It's interesting that I find this much easier in the 9-11 year old age group, they can be great fun to work with as they pick up the "what's the problem we're trying to solve" very quickly and tend to be very happy to simply experiment with the technology until they solve it. There's something about teenage years (or secondary education) that seems to loose that impetus of experimental and investigative problem solving.

I half remember some research a few years back about there being two types of people that went into medicine, those who were fascinated by how the human body worked, and those who wanted to make people better. It was suggested that the recruitment of doctors had very much focused on the former, whereas actually the latter made much better doctors. But actually I suspect the medical profession as a whole needs both types, it's just that the first type should be kept well away from stressed patients! (There's an interesting, and well documented, issue regarding surgeons who get addicted to surgery for its own sake - and of course we see the same thing with engineers who get addicted to adding more and more features to their designs!)

Meanwhile, why did Brains never redesign the magnetic grabs on Thunderbird Two to stop them dropping things? Even if each grab was at the limit of its power he could have added more of them. (This always bothered me as a 6 year old.) Still, he did do pretty well to single handedly design and build all those machines by the age of 25 It is implied that Tintin helped.

Cheers, Andy
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel

Reply

0 Andy Millar over 6 years ago

Oh I absolutely 100% agree, I had that thought mulling over in my head as I wrote my original post. In the past I've helped GCSE & BTEC D&T students with their projects, where they've chosen their own projects, and I've seen them get very frustrated when they have a brilliant idea of a problem to solve, but don't have the "know-how" to do it. I'm really thinking that it's a case sometimes of shifting the emphasis of why we're introducing STEM, without necessarily changing too much about how we introduce it. And somehow getting over the idea - and confidence - that you can learn how to solve a problem once you've decided to solve it.

It's interesting that I find this much easier in the 9-11 year old age group, they can be great fun to work with as they pick up the "what's the problem we're trying to solve" very quickly and tend to be very happy to simply experiment with the technology until they solve it. There's something about teenage years (or secondary education) that seems to loose that impetus of experimental and investigative problem solving.

I half remember some research a few years back about there being two types of people that went into medicine, those who were fascinated by how the human body worked, and those who wanted to make people better. It was suggested that the recruitment of doctors had very much focused on the former, whereas actually the latter made much better doctors. But actually I suspect the medical profession as a whole needs both types, it's just that the first type should be kept well away from stressed patients! (There's an interesting, and well documented, issue regarding surgeons who get addicted to surgery for its own sake - and of course we see the same thing with engineers who get addicted to adding more and more features to their designs!)

Meanwhile, why did Brains never redesign the magnetic grabs on Thunderbird Two to stop them dropping things? Even if each grab was at the limit of its power he could have added more of them. (This always bothered me as a 6 year old.) Still, he did do pretty well to single handedly design and build all those machines by the age of 25 It is implied that Tintin helped.

Cheers, Andy
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel

Children

No Data

STEM Education - should it focus on technology itself, or on using technology to solve problems?

Join us to get the best from IET EngX.

Community Rules & Guidelines