material and that the pace of the course was too fast. Half ofthe syllabus was eliminated. Only the content listed previously was covered. Concepts likegames, social network integration, online storage and maps were eliminated. Additionally, thestructure of the course was changed. Instead of two or three days of lecture where severalconcepts were introduced followed by a homework assignment, students were introduced to oneor two concepts before being tasked with implementing the concept themselves. On the first dayof lecture, students were given a demonstration and code walk through. As the instructorexplained the concept and typed each line of code, students took notes and copied code andcomments. On the second day of lecture, students and
plan for activities. Throughout the academic year, the teacher referred to the arrival ofmaterials that never showed up. There were several reasons for this including a leadershiptransition at the school, lags in procurement and challenges in communication. Toovercome this hurdle, we ‘dusted off’ some older robotics materials from the HS closet towork with throughout the academic year. For the UMD curriculum, the program model was tested. At the service site, 1-2UMD students worked with a team of 3-4 HS students to design, build and program arobot. The course met once per week on Thursdays from 3:30 – 4:45 at the end of theschool day. Following the service visit, UMD students completed an online discussionlog of their activities
during the project 4. Value the importance of being a contributing member of the communityProject TimelineTable 1 shows an example of the modified course schedule, with the activities related to the finalproject on the first column. One lab activity was eliminated and the rest were scheduled earlier inthe semester to allow students to work exclusively on this project during the last 6 weeks. Week Final Project Task Other Topics and Activities 1 • Introduction to the final project • Syllabus discussion • Introduction to measurements 2
theirproject with their normal course work. For one particular student, the prompts were not includedon any syllabus or course contract and therefore not important enough to be bothered with. Infact, from these team visits, it was observed that the one team which had included the reflectiveprompts in their course contract had regular responses. The final observation made was that theteams were recording how their designs were changing through technical reports and evenonline blogs. Access to all these records to use for data collection was given. The quality ofthese reports varied from student to student, but they mainly dealt with technical andprofessional aspects of the project, outlining travel agenda, constraints, and specifications.Some students