1. CELINA INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL ROBOTICS Val Pittsenbarger & Eric Dwenger 227 Portland St. Celina, OH 45822

2. YEAR 1 2001  E-mail from Wright-Patterson Educational Outreach Center asking for an interest in field testing robotics for competition.  Val expressed interest and was accepted into program.  Grant was written by Wright-Patterson Education Outreach Center to American Mechanical Engineers Society for $200. This money allowed us to purchase our first LEGO Mindstorms Kit.  Presented idea to ISCO (parent organization) and purchased 4 more kits and one laptop computer to be used at competition.  First year in the classroom – Val did alone.  17 students per group  Determined not enough hands-on  May – Practice competition for Ohio to get started in FIRST program. TOTALS: 5 Kits& 1 Laptop

4. YEAR 2 2002  Received grant from Ohio Space Consortium for $1,000 to purchase 4 more kits, registration fees to competition, official mats and parts for competition, and accessory packs.  Allowed us to compete in first FIRST LEGO League competition.  Held a building in-service to train any interested staff who might want to incorporate robotics into their classroom.  5 out of 6 clusters chose to participate in program.  ALL students, regardless of academic or ability level, were included in program  10 students per group TOTALS:9 Kits& 3 Laptops

6. YEAR 3 2003  Received grant from American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics for $100. Combined this amount with money from ISCO (parent organization) to purchase one more kit.  ALL six Clusters participated in the school program. Again, ALL students participated  9 students per group; a little more manageable. TOTAL:10 Kits & 3 Laptops

7. YEAR 4 2004  Received a Jenning’s grant for $3,000.  Allowed us to pay for registration for 2 teams, transportation, 8 new kits, 2 tackle boxes and lots of extra parts.  Summer of ’04, former student donated a kit.  All 6 clusters, again, participated in the school- wide program.  5 or less students per group TOTALS:18 Kits & 6 Laptops

8. WHAT WE DO…5 TH GRADE  Download Software - Security?  Divide classrooms into teams (roughly 4-5)  All students are included  Explain Student Jobs  Jobs are changed every day!  Manager  Builder  Programmer  Recorder  Begin Training Missions - self-directed  Build and program  Roverbot  Acrobot  Inventorbot  End of every session, groups present their robot to everyone else  If time, there is a small challenge (i.e. push pop cans out of circle)

9. WHAT WE DO…6 TH GRADE  Download software.  Divide students into teams by academic level, so that each team is diverse.  Review of Training Missions  Give them challenge – usually a modification of FIRST challenge.  Cluster competition on Friday.

10. TEACHER SURVEY  The time spent doing Robotics was worthwhile.  Students used Science skills during this project.  Students used Math skills during this project.  I believe this project will help students pass the Sixth Grade Proficiency Test.  Most students were actively involved in the project.  This project allowed students to use all learning modalities.  I think projects like this would encourage students to take challenging classes in the future.  This project has improved my attitude towards math/science instruction.  The students met the grade level objective (5 th built specific robots; 6 th met the group challenge).

11. STUDENT SURVEY 6 TH GRADE  My group designed a robot for a specific purpose. Yes95% No5%  Testing the robot was important. Very 85% Somewhat14% Not 1%  Helped me see that robots can be used in factories. To do all jobs18% To do some jobs81% To do no jobs1%  Keeping records was important. Very79% Somewhat19% Not2% Much more involved67% A little more involved13% Less involved7%  Being in smaller groups this year allowed me to be.

12.  Robotics helped me see that robots can solve people’s problems. STUDENT SURVEY 5 TH GRADE Always6% Sometimes92% Never2%  Changing our design caused new problems. Often32% Sometimes53% Never15%  Keeping good records is important. Very78% Somewhat20% Not2%  Became interested in careers related to robotics or computers. Very57% Somewhat40% Not2%

13. BOTH GROUPS WERE ASKED… How much did you enjoy robotics? Very Much77% A Little21% Not At All2%

14. GRANT INFO  Main objective – Description of project.  Include benchmarks and standards the project relates to. GRANT OPPORTUNITIES http://www.osgc.org/Grants.html http://calspace.ucsd.edu/spacegrant/webmap/sg_homepages.html http://www.usfirst.org/robotics/grants.htm http://www.nsta.org/programs/tapestry/ http://www.rmhc.com/grant/index.html http://www.aiaa.org/content.cfm?pageid=216

15. TO KEEP IT GOING!  Train new teachers  Be available for questions and support  Have batteries on hand  Have kits organized, and  LOTS and LOTS and LOTS and LOTS of extra parts!