What Skills Do Science Teachers Have?

Probably very little, besides knowing some math. Science and machining/shop class are different beasts.

The great part of shop class though, is once you walk them through the operation of, and safety around the machines, it's time to start making some stuff!

You could have them each write a short description of what they know about shop tools, etc., and what they hope to get out of the class. This would give you a general idea.

Sorry to hear about your illness. I hope you are on the mend.

I have to agree with Mark. Day 1- find out what they know and don't know. This critique, will at least give you a base-line idea what they're strong points and weakness are. In the same process, you could probably find a TA in the group to assist you. Glad to see you back. Just don't let this class set you up for another H/A. DJ

there may be a range of skills. Have to start @ the beginning. But be prepared to move forwardd fast. hope everything else is fine.

Hi,

Welcome back. I wondered what happened to you. I hope you are well.

Science teachers are now 40 years younger than we are and have no concept of mechanical things.

I'd show them some videos of a lathe making something like a center punch. You'd have tool grinding, cut off, turning a taper, facing and knurling all in one session.

Then, herd them into the shop and start.

I agree that they'll have a range of knowledge about using the tools, but I also think they'll grasp the basic techniques quickly. So I recommend you teach the basics, and be sure to cover the do's and dont's thoroughly (like clearing the chips when using a drill press so the drill bit doesn't jam -- a lesson I learned the hard way) then move on to more advanced tips and tricks.

I also strongly recommend you teach the basics of creating and reading design drawings. For someone not familiar with drawings it's easy to create the mirror image of what you intended to draw, or create an impossible drawing.

Finally, keep in mind what they will do with these skills. Will they be building parts for lab experiments, home tools, furniture, or ...?

I shot you a GA because we cannot afford to lose these skills...................period.

If we do, we are done!

I love your turn right "wrong sign". Strange how someone is just missing from the "usual" suspects and we don't notice. Glad to see you back.......... By the way, has anyone heard what ever happen to "sparkstation"...... just askin'

I think most of your science teachers will have only limited experience with hand and simple power tools. But there is something to learn about even the simplest tools. How they work, why they work, the difference between good tools and poor tools, their limitations and a few others. Don't hesitate to respect any skills or knowledge they may bring into the training. Give them plenty of room to learn by doing.

I'd make up a list of 20-30 basic tools, both hand and power. Then I'd create a one or two page syllabus for each. I'd keep the safety warnings low key and limited to essentials Further down the line I'd add some training about the materials that might be used to make things, wood, metals, plastics, glass, ceramics, soft materials, tapes,films, ropes and cables. I'd also get into various methods of fastening and the tools and materials used. Another subject area is hot work, alcohol lamps, propane torches, soldering, brazing, welding, glass blowing, ovens, hot plates, boiling liquids, fume handling. Still another is useful chemicals in the shop. And another is practical electrical work in the shop both low voltage and high voltage. Then there is the subject of measuring tools in the shop.

And the best part. You don't have to do all this yourself. Enlist your friends and resources on CR-4 to help you. Each week you could cover a new topic and collect material including diagrams for one of your subjects that you can edit into a working syllabus. A lot of us are certain to get into it.

Enuff said at this point. What can we do with this? .......... Ed Weldon

I suggest you begin by teaching speeds and feeds for cutting different materials. There is nothing more discouraging for an amateur than trying to cut with dull tools and nothing that can dull a tool faster than the use of excessive speed. I'm sure you know that Fox side by sides and Indian motorcycles are highly collectible. I wouldn't let inexperienced people practice on them. There are plenty of inexpensive foreign guns and motorcycles to learn on.

I'm with welderman. I suspect they may be more interested in how a drill bit melts with friction. How feed AND speed prevent this. Why we use different cutting tools, HSS, Carbide and carbon steel. In short get into the maths and physics behind the stuff we learnt.

I am quite sure they don't want to be machinists, they want to be science teachers so they can buy the stuff machinists make.

agreed! safety MUST be priority one, two AND three....

From a college prep. perspective, science teachers, particularly k-12, know VERY LITTLE science. In fact those with teaching degrees typically don't get a whole lot of academics at all. College instructors are a different story. but I'm not sure there would be a lot of interest among many educators in machining/shop classes. I am also sorry to hear of your illness, that would explain why you've been rather quiet for a while. Hope you are doing much better.

Make sure the E-stops work well & are brightly colored

there will need to be some absolutely no exception rules

never leave the key in a chuck unattended

never set up a machine that's powered up

and never wear long hair/jewelry/baggy clothing.. you know typical shop safety rules....

My question is this a course for units towards graduation? If so why would any university spend the units teaching science teachers how to use basic shop tools instead of science? Shouldn't they learn this hobby related stuff on their own time, much like everyone else except industrial engineers do?

Isn't it bad enough that they dumb down the science classes for those who plan to teach and offer a different degree for science majors who plan to teach than those who plan to "do". Hopefully this course would not be used to replace some of the units in math, chemistry or physics that these teachers should have to take to graduate. Though that might explain why the US performs so poorly in science and math. If the teachers don't know/understand it, how can they teach it to the students.

Angular momentum added to a downward spiral. Just what we need. How about some constructive comments on the original topic? ..........EW

It is constructive, i.e. spend students time and money wisely towards their intended educational purpose.

RCE - Go back and read the OP. The course is for the science teachers, not the high school students.

I'm reading between the lines here; but it seems to me that the purpose of the course is to enable the teachers to create teaching aids and actual demonstrations as well as an understanding of practical examples of subjects they are presenting to the students. There is also a respect factor when the teacher shows the students what can be done in the real world with a knowledge of practical physics on which the vast majority of human construction activity is based.

Yes shop safety is important. But the biggest safety issue in this project will be TVP45's ability to judge each one of the teachers in his program with respect to just how safe they will be in the shop. Presenting them with a 6 page dissertation on the 38 (or was it 41) safety rules for the drill press before they ever see the actual tool may make lawyers happy but is largely ineffective and will only serve to reduce teacher participation in the "shop skills" program.

Basic shop safety rules are simple. #1 -- Pay full attention to every thing you do and move you make in the shop until you train your body to do the right thing automatically. Then still keep watching. Same as learning to drive a car or fly an airplane. #2 -- Protect your eyes, hands, head, feet and lungs in that order. Here's how: yadda, yadda, yadda..... #3 -- Learn the most efficient use as well as the likely mistakes for each tool or process you use. Some of the learning will be by making mistakes. Avoid the expensive and dangerous mistakes. See rule #1. #4 -- If you don't know where to start do some research first. Or ask someone who knows. #5 -- Learn where the "OFF" control is on every machine you use. #6 -- Learn proper care and maintenance of tools. A damaged or worn tool is much more likely to hurt you or ruin your work. (I love to recall my discovery of Starrett hack saw blades)

Ed Weldon

Ed, I understand his point. money spent teaching teachers skills that are not applicable to their jobs is money that could have been spent educating students.

Oh maybe I should have been clearer spend college students time and money wisely towards their intended educational purpose. I believe it is a fine idea to teach them to use tools, as long as it isn't used to replace units towards graduation in actual science coursework (it would probably be a even better idea to have them actually just take additional science course work, becoming more proficient and closing the breach between those who receive BS degrees in science and those who receive BA degrees in teaching science, but science and math proficiency in public school teaching does not seem to be consistent with the current trend in the US). If the option was calculus (or linear algebra or quantum mechanics) or how to use shop tools, I would suggest a science teacher should probably be required to take the calculus since it is directly relevent to their discipline. (Now an industrial engineer might be better served taking the shop class instead of say quantum mechanics.)

Plus the other thing I realized is how disturbing it is that they make a distinction between a class for science majors and one for science majors with a secondary teaching specialization. Is that university trying to somehow indicate that those planning to teach high school science should be expected to be less qualified and thus require a lesser education in the discipline?

I WOULD SAY START OUT WITH PROPER SPEEDS AND FEED CALCULATIONS, THEN SHOW THEM HOW TO CREATE A THREADED PART. KNOWING THOSE TWO THINGS SOMEONE CAN DO MOST THINGS ON A MILL AND LATHE. IT TEACHES BASIC OPERATION. THEN,OF COURSE SAFETY WOULD BE IN THERE AS WELL. OTHER THAN THAT KNOWING WHAT TOOL OR INSERT FOR WHAT MATERIAL OR JOB IS ABOUT ALL SOMEONE NEEDS TO KNOW TO GET STARTED. MACHINING IS LIKE MOST THINGS, THE MORE YOU DO IT THE BETTER YOU GET.

DON'T YOU THINK THAT TEACHING WHAT EACH MACHINE TOOL IS USED FOR AND WHAT THE RESULT PRODUCT WOULD BE BEFORE KNOWING HOW TO CUT A THREAD? DO THESE PEOPLE KNOW WHAT A LATHE IS? COME ON! HAVE THEY EVER SEEN A DRILL BIT, A CUTTING TOOL? I BET YOU THAT SOME OF THIS PEOPLE HAVE NEVER EVEN USED A PLAIN DRILL MOTOR. MACHINES COME WITH MANNUALS. SHOULDN'T YOU START THERE???

I DID MACHINING FOR YEARS AND THAT IS HOW I LEARNED. YOUR AVERAGE PERSON DOES NOT READ THE MANUEL. I HAVE TAKEN MANY CLASSES AND THEY DO NOT HAVE MANUEL ANYWHERE TO BE FOUND. THE BASIC OPERATION FOR MOST LATHES AND MILLS ARE THE SAME.

Average or not average, you have to start somewhere before even letting these people near the machines. And "Manuals" do help when you do not know what you are looking at. I know, I have learned and taken some classes, on welding, machining and assembly just by demonstration, but remember no soul is the same! Some of us are more mechanicaly inclined than the Average person? Technology today is more advanced and I am sure there are downloadable manuals on line, even video demonstrations that can be used for this purpose? Sorry about trying to correct you on how to spell "Manuals" ? no bad feeling intended. Manuel is the guy next door! Sorry, hahahaha!...couldn't help!

Most metal working machines I work on do not have operation manuals on-line for free. Some parts vendors will have a break down of the machine on the web so they can sell parts but that is about it. Manuals can cost around $100.00 and up per copy. Others such as our wire EDM require a set of manuals for operation and repair that cost a few hundred each. The classes we teach here at the university do not include using the machine manual. We do however use a picture of the machine with each part of the machine labeled. The student is later tested on what the component is and what it does. We have done pretty well over the years with this approach. Surface grinders, Bridgeport mills, and lathes are fairly simple machines in the respect the learning curve is not very steep for the basics. Experience and instruction on right triangle trig to calculate tapers and hole circles is not covered in the manual.

"How to run a Lathe" the wonderful classic instruction manual by South Bend is readily available these days at easy prices. I just got 22 hits on an ebay search (the above 5 words). Also available free on line as a pdf you'll find an old US Army south bend lathe manual with is a different government pub showing all kind of exploded drawings and parts lists of various South Bend lathes. This is a nice to have item for a South Bend lathe owner.

Ed Weldon

Hi Ed,

There are exceptions to what I said and I misunderstood what you meant by manual. I took it as the owners / service manual. You are right as there are books on how to use the machines available for a few bucks. We cover this in a hands on demo. First we show them how the machine works and what handles do what. Then we set up a part in the mill vise, lathe chuck, etc. and make a few cuts while talking about what to watch out for and reinforce the feeds / speeds and safety lecture. Then each student takes a turn while the others watch them. Everyone must do this before they are allowed to run a machine. They get the most laughs at the surface grinder. Turning two handwheels takes some getting used to. About the time they get across the block going one way then they have to turn one of the handles backwards to get back to the other side of the block.

Best regards,

-Bob-

I am sorry also. Most of the drawings i do at work are with the cap lock on. I was being lazy

Gentlemen, can we try to avoid SHOUTING? I am deaf in one ear, but I can read just fine.

Sorry! I was just following suite. Sorry about your ears Sir, did not mean to. !

TVP45 - I think I may be confused as to the purpose of the training program you are considering. Is this to be a part of the formal curriculum at a college whose purpose is to educate students in an education degree program?

Or is it to provide supplemental training for teachers working at teaching science in another as yet undefined institution of learning (Secondary school, private or public, junior college or something else)? If this case can you be specific about just what you contact, the "department chair" wants to accomplish?

This latter was my assumption. But apparently I am debating with members who assumed the former. We want to help. Are you up to joining the discussion today or are you still a bit under the weather? ..............Ed

I apologize for not being more specific about the goals. In this area, many high schools have shop facilities of some sort. The goal is for science teachers, particularly in Physics, to be able to use those shop facilities to (primarily) fix or sometimes build lab equipment. It is a one credit course; it doesn't replace any essential course. It may be part of an undergraduate program or as part of the summer Master's program. Students in mainstream science or technology programs might take it if they have an elective credit open.

At least that's my take. The truth is that I don't know all the justification; otherwise I'd know why we're not giving them any electrical training. But, this is a start.

Yeah, I'm big on safety. Hair off the collar. No sleeves below the elbows. Cotton clothing only. No jewelry. Safety glasses. Aprons. Full shoes. Hearing protectors. Any others?

Boy, that is useful. Thanks!

This is off-topic, but before we write off science teachers as a group, I gotta tell you what I saw yesterday. I went for a short hike along a scenic creek on the Greater Allegheny Trail. As I entered the trail, I saw, sitting beside a bench, about thirty pair of disreputable-looking, muddy, well-worn rubber Wellies. I couldn't make any sense of that till I was coming back and ran into two dozen kids, maybe 9 to 12 years old, standing in the creek, all wearing the boots, turning over rocks, scooping helgamites with what might have been Mom's tea strainer, putting critters in jars and holding them up to an identifying paper. Turns out they were from the local middle school (a poor district). The teachers AND PARENTS bring them out for a day when they can. They actually see and handle live things rather than virtual images. They get lunch, exercise, a lot of fun, and a pretty good lesson. The Wellies are apparently donated by parents (farm area), so the only cost is the use of the buses. One of the neighbors even brought out a beehive and let the kids taste real honey.

I understand that it may be elective to non teaching majors, but lets be honest, as a former science major I can tell you department heads and advisors will not allow science majors to take courses intended for teaching majors except as totally wasteful elective units outside of science and mathematics (rather than say auto repair or other) and then they'd still frown on it. So it is very unlikely that as you stated "mainstream science" major would partake.

So it is not clear, are they increasing the credit requirements for science teachers to graduate to include this course or is it elective outside of the science/math curriculum. I could see actually increasing the units requirement for teaching major to include 1 extra unit, it is miniscule and they are generally already at the minimum units required to receive a State approved BA degree anyways. 1 extra unit would not kill them, and while not directly relevent to science teaching, it could be indirectly relevent as stated elsewhere. However, if it is not a elective outside of science and math, and they do not propose to increase the unit requirement for science teaching majors, then what would they replace in the science/math curriculum that is non-essential to teaching science and math? Plus isn't the course work you are discussing usually part of a typical high school electives curriculum. So the other question arises, why count what is essentially a remedial course from high school to college students as part of their curriculum?

I dunno. As I said, the Chairperson (and the Dean) are blackmailing me into this. My only real goal is to play with that lathe. If they "force" me to teach a course in cupcake decorating, I'll do it.

As I said earlier, it may be that some of the students will be teachers returning for their summer Masters. But, I'm not a curriculum guy. I'm just an old engineer who loves his "toys".

This reminds me of my college physics classes, taught by a Prof Richard Gearhardt at the U of Washington (1971-2), and backed up by a lab tech who set up the demonstrations. Best set of classes I ever had.

The science teachers may be good at basic classroom theory, and readily able to deal with math aspects, but lacking in hands-on "trades" experience. This could be a fascinating class, with more opportunities than can easily be worked in. I hope it can be an ongoing project, because at first there may be some experimentation. Some things will work well, and others might not; but repetition will allow for finer tuning. (And give you a better handle on the capabilities you will be working with.)

Best wishes with this, and I hope we can hear progress reports, and maybe contribute some ideas.

I've heard good things about Washington. You had Arnold Arons there, I think? And Lillian McDermott? I don't know much about McDermott, but I've worn out Aron's book on concepts.

Wow! yes, now that you mention it I'm starting to remember my physics and shop classes I really liked that. Never realized that using a drill motor or calibrating a spark plug was part of science or physics because we learned those things from our Dads, brothers or friends even before we took those classes. Good old days! Too bad for young people nowadays, they do not have the ego or interest in learning how things are made. Technology has made it easy for them to not care. If something breaks or gets old, they would not to fix it. They will just trash it and get a new one. In our time we had to learn how to make things last and fix because we could not afford new ones.

Hmm, this would seem to be a contradictory observation to what a variety of industries, in particul the auto industries, were complaining just a few years ago, probably in part to explain for bail oout money justifications, as to one of the reasons for their declining performance, which is that they are manufacturing products with such a much extended life expectancy that they do not have sufficient turnover in new product sales (or basically the more modern products are so improved that they can not sell them frequently enough to make profits). Maybe products just do not require the same degree of O&M during their longert operational mean life expectancies. Also, many of the things you discuss can not be handled simply in your home garage any more, as the calibratons are all electronic now and dependent on feedback from a variety of sensors that did not exist 20 or 30 years ago. I would challenge you to go into you garage at home and conduct a complete tune up on a modern car.

RCE -- I fear you are still living in an age that is passing. Automobiles are ridiculously complex. What makes you think that there will be such a great future market for automobiles that cost more than an average worker's yearly salary? Henry Ford understood that.

If automotive propulsion technology can level off we should be able to look forward to some standardization in control systems. I see the future generations of OBD code readers being able to do the same diagnosis that only the dealers can offer now. There will be a real demand for products that never need to see "professional" service at prices people can afford. Many types of products have a long way to go before they will meet that objective via pure reliability. They will require occasional service and hungry people will demand that service be low in cost.

Look around you....Things are gradually getting tougher for everybody. Tomorrow's losers will be the city kids whose primary skills consist of texting and opening food containers. Big brother in a computer chip is losing popular support. We have a growing desire to control our own lives and destinies.

Ed Weldon

When it comes to ODBII tomorrow is here

http://www.obdpros.com/

you can get the trouble codes, you may even be able to reset them

the information to make sense of the information may cost you money

alldata has done a good job of locking up the service bulletin market online

you can usually find a user group who knows about many of the issues

there is always a trade off

do you have more time or more money, which dictates how you solve problems

Garthh - Thanks for the link. I'm beginning to see myself getting a laptop and setting up for wireless connectivity for just this sort of "on the road" capability. I've had an OBDII reader in my truck for several years ever since it left me sitting by the roadside for an inexplicable reason. It is as comforting as my AAA card with a tow truck on the other end of the communication link.

I want more electronic and mechanical reliability in my life and less incomprehensible complexity. Our world is getting ever more turbulent. We need as much help dealing with that as we can get. It starts with gaining the control that comes from knowledge. And education is at the very foundation. "Science", in all its forms is about the reality of how the world works. Not myth and supposition; reality. Educating ourselves and our kids in these matters is crucial. And education brings confidence and a sense of some control over one's life.

TVP45's project is indeed a worthwhile and noble effort. .....Ed Weldon

So there will be even less O&M cost, and the life expectancies were apparently so increased that product turnover rates weren't supporting the industry as I stated before, that just means less money into O&M and less frequent purchases of new cars, which is what they were complaining about already. So you are really predicting a worse condition developing. How does the reduction in electronics impact being able to change your own spark plugs or do shop related activities from the past. The loser will be the guys whose skill set involves changing spark plugs and doing tune ups like they did in the 1960s, without any understanding of the complexities of modern systems. Slowly the technology is leaving them behind and they are pining for the days when they had shop in high school where they would build their own cars in a shop from scratch with a pile of mechanical parts. If you look at the comment prior to mine that is exactly what you are seeing. Things are now made (way more efficiently and precisely) by automated machines. So his antiquated perception of a shop class in modern terms would be more along the lines of a room with computers in it where they learn to import and link CAD drawings for the automation to use. so an underrtstanding of how to use modern computer interface systems would be a more valuable asset than knowing how to build a older style of automobile by hand, which would be illegal to drive by then.

I'm going put my 2¢ in here. It's my feeling that, there are basically 3 types of people, (1)Those who are "Book Smart". (2)Those who are the "Low life Losers", who have common sense and can change spark plugs. And, (3)Those who have the "common sense to take what they have learned from the books and can apply it to what they are working on". But, you have to be able to understand the basic concept before you can apply or convey it. When you strip away all the Hi-Tech computers from an internal combustion engine, you are left with, just a simple internal combustion engine, a concept that's been around 100 years. The only reason you have Hi-Tech computers on board modern vehicles today, is to control fuel. And programmable fuel controls has been around as long as the internal combustion engines have. I was probably reprogramming my fuel controls,(carburetors), before you were born. In 1965, the Master Mechanic I did my apprenticeship under, had a '53 Ford with a flat head V8, and he used a Campbell's soup can for a carburetor and got 50 mpg back then. And, no he did not have a Hi-Tech computer controlling it either!

I found that there is nothing worse or frustrating, than to have a " Book Smart" Instructor, that has no idea what they are teaching, sure they can tell you all the theory behind the subject, but can't explain for example, why a piston ring has a .003-.004" end gap or why a distributor, with "points", has to have a condenser(capacitor) in the system. Or why a nail-set punch has a concave face, a center punch is pointed and a drift punch is tapered with a squared face. I've had times when I've asked an Instructor a question, only have them tell me, "they don't know", "that's just what the book says". Like it was the word of "God". Life is not based upon theories and hypothesise. And when you get down to the simple basics, your Hi-Tech computers are nothing more than a bunch of glorified switches that can only understand 10∞, nothing else, and when you keep that in the back of your mind, even your Hi-tech computers are quite simple! And you can not just slap a Hi-Tech computer on a car and expect it to take off and run the engine with out programming it first. And you can't program it unless you know and understand the simple concept of how an internal combustion engine operates and which parameter's that need to be set. One of my strongest assets is troubleshooting, I am not intimidated by Hi-Tech computers, that's because, I have the simple concept of how it's suppose to work.

Are some systems over engineered, probably. Should Instructors/Professors have a concept and understanding of what they are teaching? Most definitely! And it should be mandatory that they have "hands-on" lab and or shop time in the subjects that they want to teach.

Book learning will only take you so far, before you have to get your hands dirty. I, myself, judge a person's intelligence by their ability use use common sense and simple basic understanding of the subject and not just what the book says.

Books and computers are a lot a like, their accuracy is only as good as what was put into them, so at times, you get only ∞$h¡t for results. The bottom line is, you can not control or convey something, if you do not understand the how's and whys, of the subject, if it's in chemistry, physic's or life in general. DJ

I will not doubt that someone will consider this out of topic, but the answer to your response is yes, you are right when talking about new technology. Things are made a whole lot different than when I was young. I am talking like you say 30 or 40 years ago. There are some things that I can still do to our modern cars, I can replace plugs & wires, do brakes, oil change, replace battery, replace alternator or water pump and a lot more as some of these things have not changed much. That's what I was trying to imply. Sure I would not mess with the computer brain or some electronic settings. Maybe if I had the proper equipment, but then this equipment would cost me more than just taking the car to repair shop.

As far as a student is concerned ,he will have some interest in specific subjects.But the teacher should have best experience to find out the interest of the student.I was student in technical school during 1972-75.With fitter trade for last 2 years.In the first year we undergone 2 months training in smithy ,foundry, sheet metal,wood workshop and wiring in all week 1day.The physics and chemistry classes were in the class cum lab.so that all science points with experiment was learnt.I was leader in machine drawing in diploma class.My point is that a teacher must have a functional lab in science and technology.I am teaching students interested in science with basic experiments so that students are eager to learn more .Examples are showing work when heat is applied , are using sterling work practice making hand made paper.,effect of magnet and DC supply.,water lens and heat focusing.,moving cup of water using air cusion.,carburation using narrow air stream for burning heavy oil in bluish colour,.making pulp from agricultural waste.preparation of bio fuel after removing glycerine.making cement using CAOH and paddy husk burnt.Many technical and other examples are there depending upon the interest of the particepants.SO that a scientific in sight willbe gained.My technical education was most interesting .So that I am continuing in the field.

Thanks for all the helpful comments. I'll ask more as I get this developed. I wish somebody had put these folks in shop class in the 5th grade (When I'm King of the World, every kid will take shop in 5th, electronics in 6th, cooking in 7th, and auto repair in 8th ), but we got to live with what we are not what we should be.