How to start your own Summer Camp!

I made an Instructable on starting a summer camp!

time to sleep!

(update: Instructables is featuring it on their home page right now. That’s neat!)

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments

a healthy environment for children is a healthy environment for adults.

or Adults need to make mistakes, too

A few weeks ago we ran April vacation week camp. The camp had 30 – 35 kids on a given day and ran really smoothly. We finally made liquid nitrogen ice cream (!): Peanut Butter Orange ice cream tasted surprisingly good.

In the middle of the week, I was describing camp to a visitor we had — a friend of a friend and also a kindergarten teacher. I found myself remarking that the more I ran camp, the simpler it seemed: we provide a bunch of fun and creative activities and materials and then let kids do what they want to with them, be it take part in our offered activities, make up their own projects with our materials, or play. The more I’ve seen this model work, the simpler it all feels to me, both in description and in execution.

I then brought up a point that I’ve known for a while but had never articulated: I think that camp is as healthy a place for children as it for adults, and the fact that adults loosen up at camp, relax, and let their creativity out to play is just as important as camp’s effects on children. This insight has stuck with me because while it’s quite apparent once stated — a good educational environment is a place that’s healthy for both children and adults — it’s one that I’ve never seen any educational theory take into deep consideration. A lot of effort, of course, is put into carefully crafting the child’s experience; but from what I’ve seen, not much is put into the adult’s.

One idea that is quickly realized in most theories of progressive education is that in order for children to become confident, creative thinkers, they need room to make mistakes. Kids need room to share what they’re thinking, try things out, and figure out for themselves what’s right and what’s not. Usually, this takes shape by taking issue with grades and tests — things that punish a child’s half-formed ideas or confusion instead of working with them.

Accepting this as reasonable, one of an adult’s key roles in a good educational environemnt should then be to inspire kids to be confident and creative through making mistakes and learning from them (and not fearing them.) If an adult is going to do this well, an adult has got to do all the same things themselves: they’ve got to feel secure in trying things out, see what’s working well and what’s not, and then revise whatever is that they’re doing. At the core of all of this is the simple idea that adults need to make mistakes, too.

Winding back to April vacation week, we finished the week with a field trip to George’s Island — one of Boston’s Harbor Islands. Ferries had yet to start running out to the islands for the summer, and we had to charter our own boat. This meant that when we got to George’s Island, we were the only people there: we were free to play on the beaches and in the forts by ourselves.

I figured that being by ourselves was a rare and excellent chance to play group games with the kids in the forts, some of which were nearly completely dark. I introduced the kids to a game I’d learend in Wales called Vampires. I’d learned it while visiting my brother and attending a conference his company was running on children’s play. As could be expected at such a conference, everyone stayed up late in the night playing kids’ games, and Vampires had been the clear favorite. The gist of it was that one person in the group was secretly a vampire, and people hid from him every round. The game had a mechanism for randomly assiging people to be by themselves or to be paired off with one other player, and the vampire could only bite if he found someone hiding by themselves or had been paired off with a human. After 10 or 15 minutes — once the game’s rules became intutive — it became an incredibly engrossing game. It was terrifying, energizing, and ridiculously addicitive.

On George’s Island, our first game had 6 children, ages 6 to 12. While we’d used dice in Wales to assign roles, we had none, so we used 2 coin tosses instead. The game sort of worked for the first fifteen minutes: the kids got the running and hiding bit, but the idea of assigning roles each round was over their heads, and took an awkwardly long amount of time. It still felt like the kids could get into it until we were joined by six more kids.

As the group grew, the game became too stilted between waiting for roles to be assigned each round, every 5 minutes or so, and explaining the rules to new players. In Wales, the game was richly atmospheric: you quickly became obsessed with how to walk as to not make a sound, how to stay perfectly still in the dark so that a vampire three feet away wouldn’t detect you. Here, the atmospheric hallmarks of the game were a six-year-old boy running around yelling “I’m the vampire! I’m the vampire!” and another girl, eight or so, “biting” everyone in sight, not having understood that she was supposed to keep her identity a secret. Littler kids ran around and yelled and older kids got grumpy that the rules weren’t being respected. The fun dissolved quickly and we decided to go get lunch.

I was really dissapointed that the game hadn’t gone well. I knew that some kids in that group would have loved the game had it gotten off the ground, and I started wondering why it hadn’t gone well. I asked a parent who had helped me run the game for his thoughts (mentioning that having played it succesfully with half-drunk adults in Wales, it hadn’t seemed so unreasonable to translate the game to kids…) We soon hit on the idea that with kids this young, expecting them to hold a secret in for half an hour was really hopeless. Their drive was to turn the game into one of running around, yelling, and being scary, and that’s probably what it should have been — some kind of simple variation on tag in the dark.

This all seemed really, really obvious to me when we finished talking about it. Between playing in rounds, keeping secrets, and assigning roles, the game was way too complicated for kids this age. While this was obvious to me after reflecting on why the game didn’t work, it hadn’t been two hours prior. As I continued to reflect on the game, I began to feel grateful for the chance to try it out. At the start of the game, I’d thought it’d be fun to play, and had the opportunity to go with my instincts and try the game out. When it hadn’t, I’d had the chance to reflect on what went wrong and understand what I could have done better. I didn’t have to fear judgement about what would happen if the game didn’t go well: I was able to try the game out whole-heartedly and learn from it whole-heartedly.

So, children need to make mistakes and adults need to make mistakes too. Thinking about how an adult should feel and what they should be doing in a good educational environment, is new and exciting for me. One of the first questions it’s brought me to is how do you make adults’ feel comfortable trusting their instincts and trying outnew things? Kids tend to have less barriers here than adults, and camp is an environment that really supports and encourages kids to seek out what they love doing and then try it. One really exciting question here is what would a similar environment look like for adults? What would camp for adults look like?

I’m going to stop for now, but will write more later on where I think this thoughts leads (particularly on the theme of “camp for adults.”)

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

The Art of Hands-on Science (Education Week: April 16, 2008.)

This is an article I wrote for Education Week, which was published on April 16, 2008.

—-

The Art of Hands-On Science

by Michael Nagle

Last school year, I ran a science club for 15 1st through 3rd graders in a Cambridge, Mass., public school’s after-school program. The kids were loud and full of energy, wound up from sitting at desks all day. We took computers apart, made sparks fly, and soldered together LED flashlights; they loved it.

Despite their enthusiasm, though, the students often got frustrated when it came to working with their hands. The simplest tasks I gave them to do-tasks I hadn’t anticipated needing to explain-would quickly frustrate them. This was particularly apparent on the day we made electromagnets.

The project consisted of first winding wire around a nail, producing a coil of wire, and then attaching the wire to a battery, making the nail magnetic. I gave the kids the materials, showed them an example, described the first step (wrap wire around the nail), and then told them to get started.

But they didn’t start winding. Instead, they waited for me to start their coils for them. I hadn’t expected that wrapping a wire around a nail would be difficult, and I encouraged them to try it on their own, helping each other, as I had helped them get started. After 20 minutes, one boy declared impatiently, “You still haven’t helped me!” All of his materials were sitting in front of him, untouched. Why, in such an informal and casual environment, hadn’t he tried anything on his own or asked any of his friends nearby to help him? Why did he instead wait for instruction that whole time?

Whatever the reason was-maybe the children hadn’t worked much with their hands, maybe they were afraid of messing up, or maybe they were unfamiliar with anything but step-by-step instruction-my young students didn’t know where to start.

This was another lesson learned – and question to ponder – in my quest to make science a more natural and engaging part of children’s lives.

In 2006, inspired by seeing how much kids love doing hands-on science and knowing how little of it they normally get to do, I started Camp Kaleidoscope -a hands-on science and art camp in Cambridge. Every morning, we counselors and the kids would hold a meeting and go over the day’s schedule. A typical day might include activities such as making masks, building rockets or robots, flying homemade kites, or programming video games and computer animations. Kids could choose which activities they wanted to do, propose additions to the schedule, make things on their own, or simply play. We gave them lots of cool and amazing things to do, and once they fell in love with something, we let them take off with it.

The most exciting (and educational) experiences have always been when kids make their own inventions. One day, for example, a group of them set out to make speedboats, harvesting yellow plastic boats from our staple of LEGOs, and fans from our take-apart computers. With some soldering instruction, and a discussion with a counselor about the merits of using 9 volts or 18 volts when the fan calls for 12, the kids were able to produce a working speedboat powered by the computer fans and complete with an on-off switch.

But they hit a major hitch along the way, and therein lies a story. Their first effort sank immediately because, perhaps inspired by how boats look in real life, they put the fan at the back of the boat. Once they reattached the fan to the middle of the boat, it floated.

Any similar, adult-led activity probably would have included instructions for placing the fan. But had these kids been busy simply following instructions, they might have missed the fact that the fan’s placement was essential to the boat’s staying afloat. As it was, they not only came to fully appreciate why their fan went in the middle of their boat, but also got a memorable lesson about center of mass and balancing weight.

A similar example occurred when a local inventor and a 6-year-old made a wall-climbing mechanical spider that could traverse our metal lockers. Using oval-shaped magnets as wheels, they hot-glued motors onto them, soldered on a switch, and attached a cardboard body. It worked! The spider stuck to the lockers and climbed up, over, and along the backs. It was proudly shown to everyone who came by the camp that week.

Later, when the inventor was away, two other children-a 10-year-old and an 11-year-old-wanted to make their own spider. They’d seen it, but didn’t know exactly how it was made. Trying to re-create the original process, they found they couldn’t figure out how to keep the body of the spider from dragging against the lockers. In their efforts to solve the problem, they attached LEGO blocks to the back of the body, so that the entire body wouldn’t drag.

This half-worked: Sometimes the spider climbed up the lockers very slowly, before falling off. Eventually, the two children had an epiphany: wheels! They realized that attaching wheels to the spider would be far better than using blocks, because then there would be much less surface area in contact with the locker, allowing the spider to climb more easily.

Again, I can imagine this project as one in which kids simply followed instructions. When told to attach wheels, they probably wouldn’t think twice about it. The real significance of the wheels-that they allow the spider to maintain contact with the locker while minimizing friction-would have been lost. By coming up with a design on their own, these kids understood much more deeply how wheels and friction work.

_____

What can we learn from these examples to stimulate deeper hands-on learning opportunities for children? Chiefly, that building and making projects is one of the best ways to truly understand, own, and master knowledge about scientific and engineering principles. In our calls for better science education, it is vital to create more experiences in which children feel empowered to take the initiative, build their own inventions, and learn from their mistakes, not fear them.

This last point-learning from, and not fearing, mistakes-may be the key to understanding what kept the enthusiastic young students in my after-school classroom from diving wholeheartedly into their projects. They were not confident or secure enough to take chances.

At the camp, by way of contrast, the kids engaged in lots of introductory activities and became comfortable with the skills they needed to make things on their own. They could then learn what they needed to know directly from the activity at hand, or from a friend, or, indirectly, by seeing an inspiring project that another camper had completed.

Kids become fearless when working on their own projects. Mistakes are no longer a sign of failure, but a challenge that they can throw themselves into solving. In sum, children have a wild enthusiasm for building, making, and bringing science to life. The trick to better science education is to engage and support this enthusiasm as much as we can.

Michael Nagle, a 2005 graduate of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has taught hands-on math and science to elementary-age children in a variety of settings. He is the founder and director of Camp Kaleidoscope , a summer science and arts camp for children, based in Cambridge, Mass.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

3 skills

I’ve been asking everyone the following question:

If you could learn any 3 skills, what would they be? This means not that they would be instantly transmitted to you, but rather that you’d be set up with the tools, experts, and general environment to facilitate learning these skills as best as possible.

Also, skills that are superpowers (like X-ray vision or the ability to fly) don’t count. For context, I’ve been thinking lately about ways to facilitate adult-to-adult teaching, and am curious about what skills people would find empowering to learn.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

The Kaleidoscope Center is opening!

Extra! Extra! Read all about it!

The Kaleidoscope Center is a new, alternative to school for kids ages 5 – 13 opening in September 2008. The center will be an environment where kids learn by doing and making! We believe that when kids are creatively engaged and part of a happy, empowering, and supportive community, their natural love of learning will take flight and their education will flourish.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

digging to the bottom of the sandbox: taking activities to their extremes

Today a child asked if I wanted to make something out of dominoes with him. I’d been thinking for a while now that a really fun activity would be try to make and something with all of the dominoes we have — there’s about 700 wooden dominoes, in a pretty hefty bin. He was totally psyched: “yeahhhh!”

I knew for a while that this suggestion of an activity — make something with _all_ the dominoes — would resonate really well and get things going. The building that came right after felt very inspired to me — what do you with all these dominoes? How do multiple people work together on the same structure? should we make one structure or multiple and join them via a chain of dominoes?

A few weeks ago something similar happened in the backyard. We were rolling snowballs, and someone suggested (I can’t remember if I seeded this or not) trying to make the snowball as big as possible. “Yeahhh!” Instantly enthralling. The snowball quickly got to be as big as the kids and needed all of them and an adult’s help to roll it. It turned into a fun puzzle two days later — the bottom of the 3′-diameter snowball had frozen to the ground, and now there was the question of how to free it. The kids experimented for a while with ways to dislodge it physically, and then decided on using boiling water to melt the ice. They never did see if that worked — by the time the water was ready, they were all ready to have lunch and do something else.

While it’s tempting to analyze why taking an ordinary activity to its extreme is so engrossing, it makes so much intuitive sense to me that I’m fine with just noting it for now. It certainly is a good thing to add to one’s bag of tricks of making up fun activities as you go. I’m personally reminded of the epic adventures I would take in kindergarten with other kids to dig to the bottom of the sandbox. The bottom of the sandbox! If we kept digging, we’d get to China! I saw a 6 year old doing this at camp a few years ago, and personally marvelled at what a universal desire it is to dig to the bottom of the sandbox.

(As I think about this more, I’m reminded of events like National Novel Writing Month — adult endeavors to do something amazing … in a month! All you need to do is get started! A lofty goal that only requires a simple action, repetition of the action, and a lot of focused, dedicated effort to achieve has a very innate appeal to it.)

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

the direction or driving force of a community (reflections on Feb. vacation week camp.)

This past week was Feb. vacation week for Camp Kaleidoscope. (!) We’d never run a spring break camp before, so it was a new experience for me. I had a blast! The week was full of the creative buzz and energy I described last post — the place was filled with a healthy, tangible vitality.

Running the camp this week came at an interesting point in my own recent thinking about education. I’ve been recently immersed in conversations about how a school should run for the past few months, as I’ve been working towards opening the Kaleidoscope School in September. I have been in particular focusing on the language of creating a new kind of school — one that moves away from defining the Kaleidoscope School merely in opposition to traditional schooling, and instead describes what I see as a healthy and wonderful developmental experience for children, independent of our current ideas of school. I’ve found in the past weeks that I at times feel lost amidst all of the rhetoric I’ve been thinking about and discussing — both from at times feeling unsure of my ideas when I can’t find the language to support my intuition, and also from occasionally feeling overwhelmed at the enormity of viewpoints that exist about all the various parts of childrens’ lives.

This past camp week was really invigorating for me — both in the physical sense of being around so much creative energy, but also as confirmation that my intuition for creating an environment for children feels firmly on track. The live energy at camp feels undeniably correct to me. This provides not only a healthy reminder for me to follow my own instincts, but also a goal to base further thinking around. What can we do, in setting up a community or environment, to foster and sustain this kind of energy?

One of the parameters of setting up a children’s environment is understanding how much independence to allow a child. Let’s look at the example of letting a child eat lunch on their own, when they feel hungry, instead of at a prescribed time. For a while I grappled with the question of how old a child should be — I’ve been working with a group of 5 and 6 year olds this past year who seemed unable to manage their own hunger (refusing to eat for the sheer pleasure of refusing and subsequently melting down by 2 pm.) I’ve also seen 10 year olds at camp be very appreciative of being in charge of when they could eat. The age difference made me wonder if there was a developmental point that kids hit in between there, where this became a managable responsibility.

We could look at letting a child share through a similar lens.When are kids able to share on their own? When they fight over objects, when do you step in to help? How much do you help? How does all of this connect to how old they are?

These sorts of questions have been bouncing around my head for a while. One can make a general argument for letting children be independent — letting a child experiment in their environment and learn from what happens — and for providing children with structures to anticipate these problems — recognizing that a child often does not have the experience needed to propose a sweeping change like daily lunchtime. This sort of thinking, the opposition I’d created between independence and structure, used to frazzle me when I tried to apply it to kids at different ages. Clearly, the amount of independence a child is comfortable with changes as they get older and as they learn. How do you account for this when you decide how to structure an environment?

What has become clear to me is that these questions of freedom and control should not be the central tenet of building a school or other children’s environment. What should be at the heart of it, instead, is an understanding of what the purpose is of bringing all of these people (in this case, mostly kids) together into one place. At camp — and in the future, at the Kaleidoscope School — the central goal is to engage people creatively, and to foster the learning that comes with doing and making things. This is the driving force of the school. I believe all of these other questions become much clearer in view of this.

It’s like having a destination to drive to. The mechanics of taking care of ourselves (like eating lunch) and sharing are all like learning how to drive. They are important, critical components of development, and important skills to master and to be able to do on one’s own. Still, knowing how to drive is, of course, meaningless without having a place to drive to. In the same way, being in a place and knowing how to share, knowing how to resolve conflict, and knowing how to take care of yourself are all vital skills, but only come to life when the community and its members have a broader purpose for being together — when these skills have a context or situation to be applied within.

Let’s look at how these ideas played out during this past week of camp. Figuring out how quiet (or loud) and area should be was simple to regulate, given the goal that all people should be able to work on a project when they want to. At camp’s first morning meeting, we established a group contract of rules. During this meeting we set up the rule “talk in a normal voice inside, but talk softly if someone asks you to.” From there, the guidline for noise was set by how much focus a group of kids needed. If they were working intently, it made sense for things to be quiet around them (and they could request it if needed.) If they were all playing loudly, and no one needed to concentrate, then noise was ok. The level of noise was not determined by a preset rule, but instead by the people in the area and the level of focus they wanted.

Sharing also gained a new context. Was the object being shared a tool — something that could be borrowed for a minute and given back — or a toy, to be played with indefinitely? As I reflect on what wasn’t being shared at camp well, I actually can’t come up with any concrete examples from the week (which certainly does’t mean they weren’t any.) The scarcest commodity was an expert’s time — I would frequently get 2 or 3 questions within a minute when walking into a room where projects were being built. Often I would offer to work on a child’s project if they would help a second child while I was tinkering with their project.

All of these various features — the mechanics of how to drive — become clearer with a direction to drive in. I was frequently surprised by how little trouble we had over the week with 20 kids, and more importantly, how quickly most conflicts healed. Part of where my earlier thinking went wrong was getting caught on the idea that I can simply create guidlines for scaling up kids’ autonomy based on their age rather than on what the situation dictates. The first step, then, is to think about the situation being created — in this case, to make clear what the school’s driving force or direction is. Given a clear direction, the mechanics of how to operate within the school become much clearer.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Buzzing creativity: yesterday’s MIT Museum workshop (moving away from a language of academics to a language of healthy child development)

Yesterday Camp Kaleidoscope had a workshop at the MIT Museum. It went really well — a lot of people turned out and it all ran quite happily and smoothly.

Initially I had planned to a number of flying projects — paper airplanes, propeller toys, and gliders made out of wood and file folders. The event had a lot of people (40ish at any one time) and I found that organizing that many activities at once felt too difficult. So we had a set-up for paper airplanes, where Terry (the inventor mentor!) showed kids things like how to attach balloons or rubber bands to their planes, and a set up for gliders, where a bunch of instructions and materials were left out.

We had hot glue guns out, which quickly turned into a creative art station. Families brought in machines to take apart — a request in my email that I had forgotten I made — so we quickly scared up some tools and got a take-apart station going. Parts from the take apart station would float over into the hot glue art station and get turned into big, sprawling art projects.

A half-hour into the workshop (which in its entirety was two hours, and families were free to come and go), I realized that I didn’t need to be manning any of the stations; everyone looked happily engaged and things were taking care of itself. I spent a while floating around the room, trying to guide families that had just arrived (we didn’t have anything up to indicate what was happening where) and also had a few conversations with new families, talking about how camped worked and how this event compared to camp.

I told parents that while camp was a little more structured — we held meetings in camp to make it clear what was happening where and when — the vibe you got at camp was the same as the vibe of this workshop. At the essence of both was a bunch of kids happily and energetically making stuff. I found myself constantly referring to the tangible energy in the air — a sort of creative electricity — and parents eagerly and quickly agreeing with me that they felt it too.

Later, talking to a friend on the phone, I described it as a “buzzing creativity” and found this phrase very apt. The idea of buzzing — something you can see or feel constantly — felt correct to describe the noise and sight of the workshop. There was clearly a lot going on, and you could see it, and you could hear it, and you could feel it. The sensation of it was at a level which to me was exciting, rather than overwhelming (energetic, rather than chaotic. I do imagine that the scene was chaotic for the first few minutes someone came in, until they figured out what was happening where and became part of the energetic creativity themselves.)

The idea of “buzzing creativity” also appeals to me as I’ve come to look for a language to describe what I want in a creative community of children, independent of the traditional academic and schooling language. I met with Bakhtiar Mikhak a few weeks ago, and he made the point that in creating the Kaleidoscope School (working name for now), it’s important to define oneself not in opposition to schooling, but rather in terms of what experiences will be provided and how they will impact a child’s development. He also said that it’s very easy to slip back into describing things in terms of school or not school, academic or not, rather than simply discussing what you hope to do for a child. I found his points quite sound and have taken them as guides in my own thinking about how to describe and frame the school.

Buzzing creativity seems like a good goal to me in a creative community. There is a clarity to it: lots of people (in this case children) are making things, they are engaged, happy, and the whole of it feels good.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment