Tag Archives: 3D Printing

3D Printing in Schools – A Fad or Here to Stay?

It’s back to the future, all over again. The trend in schools to create Maker Labs, complete with 3D printers, laser cutters, etc., is exciting, but really not that different than traditional shop classes. Of course, modern tools are now infused with technology, but there’s another difference that may be even more critical to the success of Maker Labs: software.

In order to create something from scratch and then 3D print it, students must learn how to use a 3D modeling software program. These programs are difficult, to say the least. Even an entry level product like Tinkercad requires that you think in 3D, on a 2D screen. The ability to mentally rotate a 3D object varies widely from person to person. Plus, it takes practice to think about subtracting space from a 3D object (which is why sculpting and woodcarving are difficult). Finally, designing objects to be water-tight and with surfaces and support structures that allow for actual 3D printing is challenging.

3dmodelclass

In other words, it simply isn’t enough to teach students how to use a 3D printer. We also have to provide 3D modeling software that is easily mastered and additional educational software that directly supports curriculum objectives. Let’s face it, students love 3D printing, and that enthusiasm needs to be harnessed to achieve specific learning outcomes.

What if we create educational software that allows students to simulate different options for their 3D project, prior to printing it out? Through this process, students can test out their assumptions and learn from their mistakes, without wasting valuable filament and print time. Legacy Interactive (my company) is working on a 3D printed microscope that does exactly that.

Legacy’s unique simulation software allows students to make limited changes to a 3D model, and get accurate feedback, prior to printing. Students arrive at a correct solution, through a trial and error process informed by the relevant math. Here’s how it works:

  1. Students can vary the length of the microscope’s body tube; there are 3 different settings to choose from.
  2. Students can vary the placement of 4 different lenses, vary the orientation of the lenses (convex VS concave), and vary the distance between the lenses.  
  3. There is an optimum relationship between the length of the body tube and the placement and orientation of each lens, that is determined by algebraic equations provided in the student worksheets. Included in the teacher materials is information about the science of optics, convergent and divergent lenses, magnification, focal length, etc.
  4. Students try out different solutions and get appropriate feedback from the program, e.g., “your microscope is out of focus.” They may try many permutations and combinations of options before resorting to solving the problem with the given math formulas.
  5. There are numerous correct solutions; when the student has arrived at one, the program tells them that they can proceed to the next phase or to print, if the project is now complete.

We believe that this is truly an educational process, where students learn the required curriculum content exactly when they need it, to solve a real-world problem. This process makes learning relevant, timely, open-ended (with multiple solutions) and engaging. Best of all, you have a real working microscope to show for your efforts!

If 3D printing is going to be successful in schools, the trick isn’t just in making user-friendly 3D printers; it’s about enabling project based learning tied to specific curriculum objectives. We believe simulation software, combined with easy-to-modify 3D models, is the key to success.

Spatial Ability, Testosterone, and STEM

Takeaway: Women have more difficulty with spatial tasks, which may impact their interest in STEM fields, but AR/VR and 3D printing are coming to the rescue!

It is a well-known fact that men consistently outperform women on spatial reasoning in IQ tests, specifically the Mental Rotations Task (MRT). I shudder when I see the images below from the MRT, with instructions to “select all of the shapes that are exactly the same as the first object in different positions.” Do you know the answer? Fast forward to the end if you’re curious.

Mental Rotation Task

What happens when you take home that Ikea cabinet and try to assemble it? It doesn’t take long before I am speed dialing taskrabbit!  According to recent research, men are more likely to be able to assemble furniture without any instructions. With instructions, however, there was no significant difference between men and women and their ability to assemble furniture. Consistent with your experience? It is with mine.

As you might guess, both biological and social factors can explain the gender difference in spatial ability. One of my favorite studies reported that women perform significantly better on the Mental Rotations Task when given a shot of testosterone. (Sorry, I prefer my poor map reading skills to that!) The gender difference is even found in infants, which also suggests a biological underpinning.

As far as social explanations, look no further than Legos and other building blocks. Until a few years ago, the only Lego products available were designed for typical boy fantasies such as spaceships and forts. Not surprisingly, our two sons loved spending weekends with their dad building out an expansive airport while our two daughters would have nothing to do with it. From infancy, boys are given toys to take apart and reassemble, while girls are given dolls and animals. Fortunately, construction-based toys geared toward girls are becoming more popular with the release of products like Lego Friends and GoldieBlox.

GoldieBlox

So why should we care about the continuing spatial gender gap?  Spatial ability is positively associated with performance in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) tasks. This means that women may underperform in STEM compared to their male counterparts as a result of their spatial abilities, and this performance difference can affect the number of women who become interested in STEM and ultimately succeed in STEM fields.

The good news is that some types of spatial training can be effective in eliminating the gender gap. Researchers have found improvements in mental rotation ability in girls (and boys with low initial performance) after 3D training in Virtual Reality. This means that the integration of Augmented and Virtual Reality into STEM education may provide the optimal environment for girls to succeed with spatial tasks. Similarly, practice with 3D models in “Maker Labs” in schools may encourage girls to practice and improve their 2D to 3D translation skills in a highly motivating, real world context. They build objects in a 3D graphics program on their computer, then print them out in a 3D printer.

There is more at stake than ever before; spatial ability is critical to many 21st century design and STEM related careers.  Childhood toys and new technologies can be exploited to help minimize the differences between students in their spatial abilities, and hence encourage interest in STEM fields, regardless of gender.

Answer: Both A and C are rotated versions of the first object!