Build a Scribbling Machine

I packed up the car and left for college with a “state-of-the-art” typewriter in 1987.  It had auto correct and that was innovation. I grew up in a time without cell phones, email or readily accessible computers and I carried a set of encyclopedias to college with me.  Since that day, leaving for college, I feel like I’ve spent most of my time playing “catch up” as digital technology, innovation, and computerization have been whizzing ahead at a break neck speeds. The landscape has changed from one where information was dispensed by librarians and teachers; to a world where information is accessible-- right at our fingertips. The world has changed rapidly, yet many classrooms remain steeped in traditional educational practices and look the same as they did in 1987. This is where there is space for tinkering, connected learning, and creative design to enter schools to bridge this gap.

Last week I spent some time in the MILL making a scribbling/dancing machine. Everything about this project was new to me, I’ve never worked with circuits or the making of small machines. This project follows Constructionist traditions of Seymour Papert.  Like Papert, Resnick and Silverman (2005) both believe, “the best learning experiences for most people, come when they are actively engaged in designing and creating things, especially things that are meaningful to them or others around them.”  I gave my best shot at “learning by designing” (Resnick & Silverman) and came up with this creation called the Ducky Scribbler.

My approach to designing and developing the Ducky Scribbler was slow.  I needed time to understand what a scribbler was.  I began by watching a sample video to get ideas.  This helped me visualize the creation I was charged with designing.  I wanted to see other peoples’ ideas, so I sat back and observed a bit.  Through observing, I  noticed that there were different types of motors that I could choose from.  When I connected my motor to the battery, it was slow and quiet.  Ceci, who was beside me, had a very loud and fast motor.  I decided to figure out what made them different.  First, I thought it was the battery and that my battery was not fully charged, thus making my motor slower.  After some exploration with Ceci’s battery, I realized that it wasn’t the battery at all, but the motor.  This “feedback” helped me understand the phenomena.  Then, I closely examined the two motors and found some differences, then I set out to find another motor. 

I found the most complicated looking motor and switched out my old one for the bigger more intricate one.  Returning to my seat, I tried it out and realized that I needed to add something to the motor to give it traction.  It had an axle with prongs  that needed tires or something to push it along. I tried to wrap the prongs in pipe cleaners, these seemed too slippery, so I took them off and Iset out to find something different.   I came across some little wooden beads and taped them onto the axel with duct tape.  They were like the bumpy nubs on heavily tractioned mountain bike tires. With a few minor adjustments, they seemed to work to give traction to create acceleration. I was on my way to a scribbling machine. I was undergoing the process called tinkering as defined by Wilkinson & Petrich (2014);

“Fooling around directly with phenomena, tools, and materials. It’s thinking with your hands and learning through doing. It’s slowing down and getting curious about the mechanics and mysteries of the everyday stuff around you. It’s whimsical, enjoyable, and fraught with dead ends, frustrating, and ultimately about inquiry. It’s also about making something, but for us, that thing reveals itself to you as you go. Because when you tinker, you’re not following a step-by-step set of directions that leads to a tidy end result. Instead, you’re questioning your assumptions about the way something works, and you’re investigating it on your own terms. You’re giving yourself permission to fiddle with this and dabble with that. And chances are, you’re also blowing your own mind.”(p.14)

Wilkinson and Petrich (2014) discuss the tenants of tinkering and my favorite advice that they offer has to do with the process of trial and error.  This process is new to those of us that grew up trying to memorize solutions and rules and thought that failure and errors were bad. Wilkinson and Petrich advise that tinkerers should, “Treat each of the problems that arise as a problem to play with—rather than a problem to solve—and practice working through times of frustration without judging yourself. You’ll find that you develop an astonishing capacity for new understandings.” (p. 15)  This principle helped me to be more playful in my approach to learning.  What a wonderful gift this invitation and permission is to children in learning situations. 

Once I had the motor working, I decided to put it on the yogurt cup and see if I could make it work.  I first taped it down but then realized quickly that I couldn’t adjust the height of the “wheels” if they were taped.  I saw others using rubber bands to attach pieces and decided to try that.  I found that part of my own design process was social and involved watching what other people did with their materials.  I did some comparison as I watched other designs emerge. This observation led to adjustments that afforded more opportunity to adjust the markers and motor to ensure that they were level.  Another successful fail and rework.

Basically in the process of learning to make a new artifact, I sought support through youtube, observation of others, social interactions, tinkering, and tinkering more.  Being playful in this approach helped me.  I had fun making and tinkering. We must move this work into classrooms and allow students to experience the fun of learning. 

In rethinking schools and learning, I think its critical that educators focus on finding ways to approach learning that don’t reify one way to “do school”.  Schooling that offers multiple access points through connected learning and constructionist activities, will provide students who may consider themselves, or who may be positioned as failing, another way to success. Turkle (2007) writes about evocative objects in a way that is consistent with this notion of multiple access points to learning.  She says that when we focus on objects, “physicians and philosophers, psychologists and designers, artists and engineers are able to find common ground in everyday experience.  This common ground found through design, creativity, objects and concrete learning seems to be what is missing in school.

Resnick, M., & Silverman, B. (2005). Some Reflections on Designing Constructinon Kits for Kids. Proceedings of Interaction Design and Children conference, Boulder, CO.

Turkle, S. (2007). “Evocative Objects: Things We Think With.” Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Wilkinson, K., & Petrich, M., (2014). The Art of Tinkering.