Outcomes
At the end of the year, the three teachers jointly developed an evaluation of the project, which showed that all of the original teaching aims were achieved. "We felt the project was very successful," says Michael. "Students had a great day and went back to school pumped which had a very positive effect on the then Year 10's. We felt it was important to keep the fun aspect in the day. We couldn't see any reason for major changes and the students were definitely able to get merits and excellences in their NCEA assessment. At both schools, motivating students was not a problem."
Almost all students produced a successful end product. For example, only two out of Steve's class of 24 not completing (one left school and the other left Technology).The outcomes achieved were of generally very high quality. "There was real quality in the design. Students had thought hard about their projects – a lot more than we realised at the time. A lot of the luges were similar in some ways, but then they were very different in others."
The unit demanded students take ownership of what they were doing, and this engagement was the key to its success. Students were hooked from the outset, says Lawrence. "They looked at it, saw its potential, and that was it."
Michael concurs: "It wasn't hard to drive them on. They spent time debating the merits of their designs and weaknesses in other students designs."
"The essence of the brief was getting the luge onto the track and getting down safely – and having an enjoyable day, says Steve. "I was really worried they were all going to get 'dusted' after the first trip down the track, especially if they touched the concrete strip. But they didn't – they ground and skidded along, and made all sorts of noises, but most of them were still racing at the end of the day. By about 2 o'clock we might have had about six luges broken – six out of 40. There were a lot of repairs that went on in the pits all day – adjusting trucks to get lighter steering or heavier steering and changing wheels.
"And they did all that on their own all day, because we were doing the timing and taking photographs. From half-past nine when we arrived until half-past two when we left we didn't have to talk to one student – they were just up and down, up and down all day. They were totally engrossed in what they were doing and didn't have time to muck around. We thought that by noon they might have been sick of it, but even those who broke their luges were still involved, trading bits and pieces with others. I took a tool box with me, with lots of bits and pieces, and that was well used."
Michael says he was amazed on race day to see how similar the luges were but, at the same time, how different they were as well."The Morrinsville boys made their own steering units, while the St John's boys modified skateboard trucks."
Steve admits being surprised at just how well the luges worked on the track, especially since the fastest luge over the 250-metre course was clocked at 37km/h. "It goes right back to all the research that was done and how well they'd made their design decisions."
Students took a large measure of responsibility for race-day organisation. "We'd covered safety, so we were pretty well organised when we got there. Students had to identify the safety equipment they were going to wear and they brought all their own safety equipment with them."
The structure of the unit contributed a lot to its success. While allowing for a lot of individual creativity, it required students to work within well-defined parameters, and this allowed the unit to be controlled and managed with a very light touch.
Steve has always been a fan of students pursuing their own projects. "That's the way to motivate students, because they love the freedom of owning their project. "But with growing class sizes at St John's, this freedom is a luxury that he can no longer afford. "We can't physically do that any more, with the amount of kids that we've now got and the number of classes."
The luge unit offers a happy compromise between freedom of choice and ease of management. Students have the freedom to operate within well-defined parameters. "Generally there were a lot of similarities between projects because of world governing rules, but there were lots of differences because of the individual input that was allowed. So it's a good example of a teacher setting up the development structure so that students have enough structure to know what was expected, but enough freedom to 'impose their own personality' on it."
The unit encouraged students to access knowledge essential to their development work. Steve was unconcerned that a lot of information in student folders came straight off the internet: "...that's fine if they show how they've used it."
The unit was structured so that it need not be demanding in money terms. Many of the boys cannibalised old skateboards for components. Others bought $25 skateboards from the Warehouse.
Working with another teacher at another school was interesting and it worked out well, Steve says. Seeing how other teachers approached things had a positive impact on the individual teaching strategies used. "Sometimes you can be a bit narrow-minded operating on your own, but when you've got other teachers feeding into the same project that can really help develop your thinking. "
