I recently wrote several college recommendations for USM students in the House of Technology. Each letter reminded me of where the students began working with me almost four years ago and my conversations with them about what they liked to do and how it had the potential to shape their futures in ways that would add meaning, direction, and growth in their lives. I’m not sure those words meant a lot a few years ago; however, the students have matured, some more than others, and now understand what I meant when I asked them to be themselves and dare to imagine and dream about big things instead of letters on a report card. I’m not saying letters don’t matter because the system we use to enter college today requires strong grades, but I wanted the kids to think more about learning and less about letters and grades. Essentially, I gave them carte blanche to create a program with me that would help them learn and grow in ways that interested them. I knew their efforts would not be in isolation and that the critical skills they needed would accompany their efforts and desire to learn about technology.

Teachers, including me, want students to learn without dangling an abstract letter grade in front of them to earn in recognition that they have mastered something deemed worthy by an adult or system. Children are hard wired from birth to learn; they’re innately curious and want to figure things out as seen by the rapid progression of development from birth to kindergarten where play is the primary mode of learning. How do you emulate that kind of natural development with high school students? How do you make students the decision makers of their learning?

The House of Technology, a program that my students have created with a little help, is ungraded and involves solving messy and complicated problems, tinkering with computers, 3-D printers, drones, and electronics, and debating effective solutions with one another. This is not a neat process, but one that requires a flexible environment where noise and mess are inherent to the process. Sometimes there is no clearly defined solution and a problem has to be solved in ways that haven’t been delineated yet.  For example, a 3-d printer breaks and there is no part available on the market to repair it. What do you do? Can the part be designed in CAD software and made? How? These are everyday problems that the students face and are motivated to solve. It takes critical thinking to determine what is needed and how something can be achieved to be successful in this environment. Failure is part of the process, albeit frustrating, but necessary. Students document their failures, redesign elements of their projects, and test them again until they are successful. It takes many iterations sometimes to arrive at a successful solution, but the tenacity and skill set developed using this kind of process will pay off when obstacles appear in these students’ lives later. I’m counting on it anyway.

When projects come to fruition successfully students are excited to communicate their solutions and the process they used to find them. I think this is one of the only situations I have seen in which some of the students are excited about writing and publishing overall. The purpose behind the communication drives and encourages them to explain with detail and clarity, things that come from within the students and not an assignment that I will grade. Granted the students will get feedback from me on their efforts because I have to understand what they have done, but the greatest feedback they get on their problem solving and communication comes from their peers who are deciphering the puzzle solved and if there was another way to solve it more efficiently and at less expense.

Many times the problems being solved by students have led to areas of interest that have consistently grown into longterm projects. From building robots to apps to multi-rotor drones to fixed wing/multi-rotor drones, to desktop hydroponic gardens controlled by phones, the students have made tremendous gains in knowledge and skills. I didn’t plan their deep learning with a thorough syllabus, but by creating an environment where curiosity could be explored and supported as directed by the students. The process has truly added meaning, direction, and growth in their lives, the intended outcome that students have only begun to understand as seniors at USM. I will be most interested in talking with them throughout the years ahead as their curiosity, interests, and strengths lead them into fulfilling careers and joyful lives.