Subject:
|
Re: learning by age bracket? (was.....
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.edu
|
Date:
|
Thu, 21 Sep 2000 17:25:19 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
6362 times
|
| |
|
|
Howdy,
Dan Parker wrote:
> ...what about learning wrt age ranges? Are there any generally-accepted,
> broadbased guidelines for learning approaches best suited for different ages?
Yes. About a billion of them. In theory, each state's curriculum standards reflect
this.
You might want to take a look at the National Association for the Education of
Young Children's
"Guidelines for Appropriate Curriculum Content and Assessment in Programs Serving
Children Ages 3
Through 8" (http://www.naeyc.org/about/position/pscuras.htm) Pitsco Dacta
maintains a list tying in
standards and some Lego activities at
(http://www.pitsco-legodacta.com//Standards/standards.htm)
( right now only California, New York and Conneticut are listed ).Of course Lego
themselves
label an age on all their products. (Check out their website). There are many
other resources
available online at the DOE and elsewhere ( for example, I utilize the Benchmarks
for Science Literacy
Project 2061...and I have been referencing New Hampshire's standards ).
> this could mean lesson length; scope; things to avoid; balancing lecture vs.
> lab, team vs. self activity, handson vs non-, etc.; competition vs. self-
> measured....
Easily the subject of many a thesis.
I have worked with students as young as 4 and as old as 18 (not counting adult
training). In the PCS Centers,
students had to be able to read ( usually making the cut at 5 or 6 ) to enter the
program. As a rule, we did not
break out students by age, but rather by interest and ability. Our program was
organized into a series of badges
similar to a boy scout badge system. If a student was interested in a topic, that
student would commit to finishing
so many projects to attain the badge. So, the old PCS Center curriculum was not so
much concerned with ages
as a wide range of projects that proved to be more rigorous as one progressed
through the system. The theory
was that students would select topics that were of interest to them, and work at
their natural pace on projects
appropriate to that individual. The instructor would act as a facilitator and a
mentor.
In my experience (which may not be applicable to your situation) I observed some
general patterns....
1) The general themes for younger age groups ( think 5-6) were: patterns,
following instructions, cooperative projects, and
architecture. First this follows many of the general goals of working with younger
ages (such as developing
pincher movement etc). It also guaranteed a level of success among these students.
These themes also provided
a skill set that can be built upon by older students.
2) The general themes for slightly older age groups (think 7-9) were: advanced
architecture projects, following
instructions, introduction to engineering concepts, and introduction to mathematic
concepts.
3) The general themes for the next age groups (think 10-13) were: advanced
engineering and mathematical concepts,
competitive activities, introduction to robotics, and asking the students to
develop personal projects.
4) The general themes for older age groups (think 13-) were: advanced engineering,
robotics and mathematical concepts,
competitive activities, and student personal projects. At this point, there was an
increased integration with other technologies
(such as rendering step-by-step plans, programming, and electronics). Older
students were asked to assist as
student instructors in the lab.
Cooperative activities are stressed all the way through the program...but younger
and older groups seemed to enjoy them
the most. For the youngest ages, building a city was a lot of fun. For the oldest
students, working on a complex project
such as the Mars Rover was a lot of fun.
None of this was in stone of course, but hopefully these observations will kick
off some discussion.
> We're also working with an established community
> service organization to develope a resource for their in-school youth
> programs. Target topics include leadership and teambuilding skills, science
> basics, a rudimentary exposure to business to name a few -- all mixed with
> some friendly competition and the fun of LEGObuilding. In all, the range of
> kids is from 4 years to highschool.
That is what I like about the Academy of Engineering program...it does all those
things. I just installed a lab
at the Rotary Boys and Girls Club in Seattle. If you are in the Seattle area, you
should drop them a line.
Richard
rwright@pcsedu.com
www.weirdrichard.com
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: learning by age bracket? (was.....
|
| Aside from the thread on gender and learning -- which I'm steering clear of -- what about learning wrt age ranges? Are there any generally-accepted, broadbased guidelines for learning approaches best suited for different ages? this could mean lesson (...) (24 years ago, 21-Sep-00, to lugnet.edu)
|
4 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
