[I&D]
HOME		 [I&D]
INTRO		 [I&D]
INDEX		 [I&D]
MODULES		 [I&D]
RESOURCES		 [I&D]
EDUCATION		 [I&D]
COMMENTS

Invention & Design:
Students to Inventors

Profile of the Students

The 32 students (sixteen females, fourteen males, twenty-five per cent from underrepresented groups) selected to participate in this program were chosen from a pool of students applying to the University of Virginia Summer Enrichment Program (SEP) who indicated that the course on invention and design was their first or second choice among all of the SEP course offerings. The 32 participants were selected from the initial pool of applicants based on standardized test scores, teacher recommendations, several student essays, and a stated interest in science. A decision was made during the admissions process to not restrict participation to students with extensive scientific and/or mathematical backgrounds. The rationale behind this decision was that students with strengths and interests in a variety of areas can contribute during the invention process, and that removing students with, for example, strong linguistic skills but no extracurricular, scientific experiences would detract from the quality of each group. Furthermore, it was hoped that this course would inspire students who might not otherwise have studied science or engineering by accenting the importance of diverse skills in technological problem-solving. Most students attended school in Virginia, although two students lived in nearby states, and roughly half had attended SEP during previous summers. The students were ethnically diverse and exhibited a wide range of interests (e.g., science, mathematics, literature, art), and most were from families of mid- to high-socioeconomic status. Of the original 32 students, two chose not to attend SEP. One alternate was assigned to the course, and one student was recruited from another class (this student did not list the course as her first or second choice). During the second session, two students fell ill, one at the beginning of the course and one after the telephone unit, leaving the 30 students who completed the entire course. Both active learning modules required that students be placed in groups, and that every effort be made to balance student interests, learning styles [a link will appear here], gender and ethnicity. The goal was to teach students the value of diversity. For example, the telephone project required students to build, sketch, write and present. Obviously, parts of this labor could be divided: a student with good hands-on skills could supervise the building, another who was a good writer could do the same with the patent, and a visual artist could prepare posters and sketches. All would have to work closely together, however. The experience of working in groups emerged as one of the greatest challenges of the course, and one of the greatest advantages of the modules.