Invention & Design:
Dodge Evaluation Results

Overall, students provided very positive feedback with respect to the course. Students rated the interest and challenge level of each unit on a scale from 1 (not interesting, not challenging) to 5 (very interesting, very challenging). As the data in Table 1 suggest, students found the course to be very interesting and challenging.

Table 1

Interest and Challenge Level of Each Unit
__________________________________________

                     Telephone Unit  Solar Energy Unit
                     ______________  ________________ 
                
Session                  X       SD      X      SD
____________________________________________

First	
	Interest	4.38	.89     4.50    .73
	Challenge	4.38	.72     4.31    .60

Second
	Interest	4.43    .65 	4.50    .65
	Challenge	4.36	.75     3.64    .75
____________________________________________

Of the 30 students who participated in the course, 25 students felt that the course exceeded their expectations in almost every area, 1 believed that the course did not meet her expectations ("I expected to have more instructional time and guidance"), 3 thought the solar unit met their expectations more than the telephone unit ("I thought the whole course would be more like the solar project, not rebuilding the phone"), and 1 student did not express an opinion. Representative quotes from students who felt the course met or exceeded their expectations include:

I really liked [the course] and the relaxed approach to inventing; learned a lot, especially about working in a group.

I have gained a greater knowledge and understanding of the process of invention.

This sure met my expectations because we strained to work hard and work together toward one goal.

Yes, [this met my expectations] because we learned a lot about group work, deadlines, and keeping things moving.

Yes, [the course] was more than I had expected. It was fun and challenging.

[The course] went beyond my expectations. I did not think I would get nearly this much out of three weeks. I learned more in these three weeks then I learned all year in science class.

The course passed my expectations. It was inspiring -- I plan on doing more in this field.

I found [the course] to be challenging and very interesting. The hands-on learning gave you a personal experience with inventing and learning in general.

I expected [the course] to be very challenging, and it certainly was.

Yes, because we worked in teams. I learned to work better in groups. I loved the building!!

Both the project director and the teacher also felt that the course was an overall success. In the words of the teacher:

As a pilot course for 9-11 grade gifted, the course was a great success. As a Summer Enrichment Program course, it was different ... in that it was not just a fun course, but one that students commented upon as being one of the most challenging that they had experienced. It provided for and expanded upon most of the goals for gifted curricula and offerings. It presented students with an experience that was both enjoyable and frustrating. Hopefully, it provided an experience that will have long term benefit, especially in the realm of working with others.

Evaluation Questions

Although many of the evaluation questions overlap, an attempt has been made to summarize applicable data and provide practical suggestions for each question.

Summary

At this point, the course should be considered a success, since it surpassed the expectations of nearly everyone involved, including the students, teacher, and project director. However, the following steps are necessary in order to "keep the ball rolling":

• Find additional ways to improve the reflection element of the course. Although this project was more successful in this respect than most hands-on science and engineering programs, this area still needs improvement. Perhaps more emphasis should be put on student reflection in the individual journals.
• Develop a method for introducing students to the role of approaches to learning and problem-solving through the use of Gardner's Multiple Intelligences Theory. Obviously, this would have educational applications and implications beyond the scope of the course and invention and design education, but this perspective would certainly benefit students who are about to work together intensively.
• Improve the environmental module: Students came up with clever designs and built working prototypes, but their products (e.g., solar cars, boats) were not too original, and the students did not adequately consider the environmental costs and benefits of such technologies, especially ethical implications.
  This scenario might be complemented by one involving a wilderness area being slowly destroyed by acid rain (e.g., the Adirondacks?) or a city (Los Angeles) whose air can no longer be breathed. The ultimate goal would be to produce 'environmentally literate' students who had more than an intellectual awareness of environmental issues--they would have hands-on experience with tackling environmental problems.
• Begin dissemination efforts by revising and packaging course materials. Distribution of drafts of these materials at conferences in the next several months will allow the project director to determine an audience for the program (e.g., high school science teacher, gifted program coordinator, honors seminar leader) and what these audiences believe the strongest points of the program to be.
• Continued development of a quantitative scale to measure students' attitudes toward invention and design. Doing so will allow the collection of both complex quantitative and qualitative data that can be used to investigate further the success of the course.

References