May/June - Vol 69, No 8 - International Technology and Engineering ...

DESIGN ASSESSMENT: CONSUMER REPORTS STYLE • INCORPORATING ANIMATION CONCEPTS AND PRINCIPLES IN STEM EDUCATION
Technology
TEACHER
T h e V o i c e o f T e c h n o l o g y E d u c a t i o n
the
May/June 2010
Volume 69 • Number 8
2010 Charlotte Conference Photos
Also:
Dancing Around My Technology
Classroom Box
2010 Professional Recognition Awards
2010 Charlotte Conference Photos
www.iteea.org

I choose Mastercam because:
“Any person who has mastered solid design and CNC programming has
invested years to be truly productive. Mastercam for SolidWorks has reduced
that time line by 50%. It is the perfect marriage of technologies.”
– Dave Zamora, Program Director, Production Technology
Gateway Community College, Phoenix, Arizona
Get the best of both worlds today! Contact our Educational Division:
www.MCforSW.com | (800) ASK-MCAM
Mastercam is a registered trademark of CNC Software, Inc. SolidWorks is a registered trademark of DS SolidWorks Corporation. All rights reserved.

Software, Curriculum and Hardware
VEX ® ROBOTICS for the CLASSROOM
VEX Classroom Bundles were developed specifically for use with Carnegie Mellon Robotics Academy VEX Curriculum.
More Powerful. More Intuitive. More ROBOTC.
ROBOTC ® 2.0
Navigate to www.ROBOTC.net and upgrade to the
best software for hobby and educational robots.
ROBOTC 2.0
• NEW Support for VEX Cortex
• NEW Support for IFI VEX ® (VEXnet compatible)
• NEW Tabbed Programming Interface
• NEW Improved Help Systems
• NEW More Sample Programs (100+)
• Updated Motors & Sensors Configurator
• Updated Basic, Expert & Super User Modes
• Updated Multitasking Capabilities
• Built-in Real Time Program Debugger
• CMU Robotics Academy Training Aids
• Free Web Forums & Learning Resources
• VEX Robotics Competition Approved
• Updated User & Competition Features
FREE 30 Day Test Drive avaiable at www.robotc.net
FREE!
ROBOTC
30-Day Test Drive
www.robotc.net
NEW VEX Cortex Features...!
• 10x faster than the original VEX controller
• Utilize advanced sensors and the new VEX
LCD screen
• Connect “smarter” motors and more of them
• Compatible with all existing VEX hardware
• Wireless ROBOTC programming and
debugging with integrated VEXnet
• VEXnet eliminates the need for
Transmitter Crystals
www.robomatter.com
VEX HARDWARE
• Classroom Bundles
• Pneumatics
• Sensors
• Electronics
• Actuators
412.963.7310

Contents
May/June • VOL. 69 • NO. 8
38
2010 Charlotte Conference Photos
Photo credits: Katie de la Paz and Bill Van Loo.
Departments
Web News
1
STEM News
2
3 Calendar
5 Resources
in Technology
17
Classroom
Challenge
12
20
26
29
32
Features
Design Assessment: Consumer Reports Style
The activity presented in this article will allow students to hone their skills in identifying
design constraints and criteria, learn through study of existing designs, and experience
engineering design techniques for optimization.
Todd Kelley
Incorporating Animation Concepts and Principles in STEM Education
Discusses how, in recent years, animation has ventured into the education realm to help
students visualize a variety of complex processes.
Henry L. (Hal) Harrison, III and Laura J. Hummell
Dancing Around My Technology Classroom Box (My Second RET Lab)
How one teacher in Tennessee used creativity to bring the knowledge gained from his
second Research Experience for Teachers home to his classroom.
Terry Carter
TTT Index – 2009-2010
2010 Professional Recognition Awards
Publisher, Kendall N. Starkweather, DTE
Editor-In-Chief, Kathleen B. de la Paz
Editor, Kathie F. Cluff
ITEEA Board of Directors
Gary Wynn, DTE, President
Ed Denton, DTE, Past President
Thomas Bell, DTE, President-Elect
Joanne Trombley, Director, Region I
Randy McGriff, Director, Region II
Mike Neden, DTE, Director, Region III
Steven Shumway, Director, Region IV
Greg Kane, Director, ITEEA-CS
Richard Seymour, Director, CTTE
Andrew Klenke, Director, TECA
Marlene Scott, Director, TECC
Kendall N. Starkweather, DTE, CAE,
Executive Director
ITEEA is an affiliate of the American Association
for the Advancement of Science.
The Technology Teacher, ISSN: 0746-3537,
is published eight times a year (September
through June with combined December/January
and May/June issues) by the International
Technology and Engineering Educators
Association, 1914 Association Drive, Suite 201,
Reston, VA 20191. Subscriptions are included
in member dues. U.S. Library and nonmember
subscriptions are $90; $100 outside the U.S.
Single copies are $10.00 for members; $11.00
for nonmembers, plus shipping and handling.
The Technology Teacher is listed in the Educational
Index and the Current Index to Journal in
Education. Volumes are available on Microfiche
from University Microfilm, P.O. Box 1346, Ann
Arbor, MI 48106.
Advertising Sales:
ITEEA Publications Department
703-860-2100
Fax: 703-860-0353
Subscription Claims
All subscription claims must be made within 60
days of the first day of the month appearing on
the cover of the journal. For combined issues,
claims will be honored within 60 days from
the first day of the last month on the cover.
Because of repeated delivery problems outside
the continental United States, journals will
be shipped only at the customer’s risk. ITEEA
will ship the subscription copy but assumes no
responsibility thereafter.
Change of Address
Send change of address notification promptly.
Provide old mailing label and new address.
Include zip + 4 code. Allow six weeks for
change.
Postmaster
Send address change to: The Technology
Teacher, Address Change, ITEEA, 1914
Association Drive, Suite 201, Reston, VA
20191-1539. Periodicals postage paid at
Herndon, VA and additional mailing offices.
Email: kdelapaz@iteea.org
World Wide Web: www.iteea.org

On the
ITEEA Website:
Now Available on the ITEEA Website:
Get Ready for Minneapolis!
ITEEA’s 73rd Annual Conference
Minneapolis, MN
March 24-26, 2011
Submit your request for time off early, so you know you’ll have a substitute.
Apply for funding and get approved well in advance. Find funding tips at
www.iteea.org/Conference/funding.htm. Talk to your colleagues and put
Minneapolis on the schedule for March 24-26, 2011: www.minneapolis.org/.
Look forward to this exciting professional development experience all summer
long. Check the website for conference information as it develops at
www.iteaconnect.org/Conference/conferenceguide.htm
Better yet, apply to present in Minneapolis. The deadline is June 15, 2010.
It’s online and it’s easy: Application to Present - www.iteea.org/Conference/
apptopresent.htm.
Minneapolis Conference Theme – Preparing the
STEM Workforce: The Next Generation
Strands:
The 21st Century Workforce
New Basics
Sustainable Workforce and Environment
Technology
TEACHER
T h e V o i c e o f T e c h n o l o g y E d u c a t i o n
the
Editorial Review Board
Chairperson
Thomas R. Loveland
St. Petersburg College
Chris Anderson
Gateway Regional High
School/TCNJ
Steve Anderson
Nikolay Middle School, WI
Gerald Day
University of Maryland Eastern
Shore
Laura Erli
Classroom Teacher, IN
Kara Harris
Indiana State University
Hal Harrison
Clemson University
Marie Hoepfl
Appalachian State University
Laura Hummell
California University of PA
Oben Jones
East Naples Middle School, FL
Petros Katsioloudis
Old Dominion University
Odeese Khalil
California University of PA
Tony Korwin, DTE
Public Education
Department, NM
Linda Markert
SUNY at Oswego
Randy McGriff
Kesling Middle School, IN
Doug Miller
MO Department of Elementary
and Secondary Education
Steve Parrott
Illinois State Board of
Education
Mary Annette Rose
Ball State University
Terrie Rust
Oasis Elementary School, AZ
Bart Smoot
Delmar Middle and High
Schools, DE
Andy Stephenson, DTE
Southside Technical Center,
KY
Jerianne Taylor
Appalachian State University
Ken Zushma
Heritage Middle School, NJ
Editorial Policy
As the only national and international association dedicated
solely to the development and improvement of technology
education, ITEEA seeks to provide an open forum for the
free exchange of relevant ideas relating to technology and
engineering education.
Materials appearing in the journal, including
advertising, are expressions of the authors and do not
necessarily reflect the official policy or the opinion of the
association, its officers, or the ITEEA Headquarters staff.
Referee Policy
All professional articles in The Technology Teacher are
refereed, with the exception of selected association
activities and reports, and invited articles. Refereed articles
are reviewed and approved by the Editorial Board before
publication in The Technology Teacher. Articles with bylines
will be identified as either refereed or invited unless written
by ITEEA officers on association activities or policies.
To Submit Articles
www.iteea.org
All articles should be sent directly to the Editor-in-Chief,
International Technology and Engineering Educators
Association, 1914 Association Drive, Suite 201, Reston, VA
20191-1539.
Please submit articles and photographs via email to
kdelapaz@iteea.org. Maximum length for manuscripts is
eight pages. Manuscripts should be prepared following the
style specified in the Publications Manual of the American
Psychological Association, Sixth Edition.
Editorial guidelines and review policies are available
by writing directly to ITEEA or by visiting www.iteea.org/
Publications/Submissionguidelines.htm. Contents copyright
© 2010 by the International Technology and Engineering
Educators Association, Inc., 703-860-2100.
1 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

STEM News
Presenter Deadline Approaching for ITEEA 2011
Minneapolis Conference
ITEEA’s 73rd Annual Conference, Preparing the STEM
Workforce: The Next Generation, will be held March
24-26, 2011 in Minneapolis, MN. What better way to
participate in an event addressing this timely subject than to
offer a presentation to your fellow professionals in the field.
Presentations should address one of the following strands:
• The 21st Century Workforce – Describe the major
characteristics of our future workplace. What STEM
teaching and learning concepts are key in such a
workforce? What will an effective program feature for
students in terms of knowledge learned and expected
outcomes? What will the global workforce look like in
the future?
• New Basics – What new content and concepts will be
important in technology and engineering courses of the
future? What will be the new technical skills and how
will they be tied to all STEM subjects? What current
basics will fade? Describe the new courses of the future.
How will STEM teaching and learning change as a
result of the new basics?
• Sustainable Workforce and Environment – How
will the sustainable workforce and environment blend
together in the future? What new technologies and
concepts will join such areas of interest as energy,
resource utilization, manufacturing, and more as a
major focus of STEM education? What educational
policies need to be adjusted to create strong STEM
sustainable educators for all?
Visit www.iteea.org/Conference/apptopresent.htm for
additional information and the online application. The
presenter application deadline for ITEEA’s Minneapolis
conference is June 15, 2010.
2014 NAEP Technology and Engineering Literacy
Assessment/Framework/Specifications
The title and year change for the NAEP framework/
assessment/specifications was recently approved by the
Governing Board at their quarterly meeting. While the title
change was expected based on the recommendations from
the committees and the outreach feedback, the year change
was necessitated by the time that will be needed to develop
computer-based items for this innovative assessment. The
Board was not eager to push the probe back to 2014, but
they want to make sure that the item development process
is not compromised.
The Board also unanimously voted to approve the
framework. You can download the most recent version of
the framework at the project website (www.naeptech2012.
org, which will gradually reflect the new title and year
throughout, and eventually have a new url: www.naeptech.
org). The Board is reviewing an initial draft of the test
specifications, which is available to download. Final Board
action on the specifications and background variables is
expected at the May Governing Board meeting. The Board
is also expected at that time to make a decision on the grade
level for the 2014 probe.
Take Part in a National Survey
Concord Evaluation Group (www.concordevaluation.com)
(formerly Veridian inSight) and WGBH are conducting
a short national survey. The study is part of an ongoing
effort to evaluate the Engineer Your Life initiative (www.
engineeryourlife.org), a program designed to help young
women explore new and exciting career options.
The survey takes about 20 minutes to complete. Your
responses are completely anonymous and will be kept
private. Each month one person who completes the survey
will be randomly choosen to win $100!
To respond to the survey, please visit the appropriate link
below. And please share this survey with others!
• If you are an engineer, visit: www.surveygizmo.
com/s/235089/engineer-survey-year-3
• If you are a female high school student, visit: www.
surveygizmo.com/s/235087/student-survey-year-3
• If you are a guidance counselor or teacher, visit: www.
surveygizmo.com/s/235088/counselor-survey-year-3
Thank you for your help!
NASA Gives Teens Their “Space” With New Website
NASA’s Science Mission Directorate has launched
Mission:Science, a new website created specifically for
teenagers. Through Mission:Science, teens can access
current NASA spacecraft data for school science projects,
conduct real experiments with NASA scientists, and
locate space-related summer internships. Mission:Science
showcases NASA’s educational science resources and
encourages students to study and pursue careers in science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics. While NASA
provides a vast amount of online STEM information for
students of all ages, Mission:Science boosts the content
2 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

STEM Calendar
available for this age group. The site also features social
networking tools, links to enter science contests or
participate in a family science night, information about
college research programs, and an array of NASA images,
animation, videos, and podcasts. Visit Mission:Science at
http://missionscience.nasa.gov.
Questions about the Mission:Science website should be
emailed to missionscience@lists.hq.nasa.gov.
Calendar
May 13, 2010 The Connecticut Technology Education
Association (CTEA) annual spring conference will be held
at Central Connecticut State University Student Center in
New Britain, CT. Conference information, registration, and
payment can be found at www.cteaweb.org/Events_files/
conferences_files/springconference.htm.
May 13-14, 2010 Save the dates for the New Jersey
Technology Education Association (NJTEA) 2010 Spring
Conference and Expo, which will be held at the Dolce
Seaview in Galloway, NJ (www.dolce-seaview-hotel.com/).
This beautiful venue is located just seven miles from
Atlantic City and minutes from the Smithville Shops (www.
smithvillenj.com/). The event will include workshops,
educational tours, recreational events, and more set
throughout the weekend. Conference registration is open,
and additional information is available at www.NJTEA.org.
June 15, 2010 Presenter application deadline for
ITEEA’s 73rd Annual Conference, Preparing the STEM
Workforce: The Next Generation, to be held March 24-26,
2011 in Minneapolis, MN. Presentations should address one
of the following strands:
• The 21st Century Workforce – Describe the major
characteristics of our future workplace. What STEM
teaching and learning concepts are key in such a
workforce? What will an effective program feature for
students in terms of knowledge learned and expected
outcomes? What will the global workforce look like in
the future?
• New Basics – What new content and concepts will be
important in technology and engineering courses of the
future? What will be the new technical skills and how
will they be tied to all STEM subjects? What current
basics will fade? Describe the new courses of the future.
How will STEM teaching and learning change as a
result of the new basics?
• Sustainable Workforce and Environment – How
will the sustainable workforce and environment blend
together in the future? What new technologies and
concepts will join such areas of interest as energy,
resource utilization, manufacturing, and more as a
major focus of STEM education? What educational
policies need to be adjusted to create strong STEM
sustainable educators for all?
Visit www.iteea.org/Conference/apptopresent.htm for
additional information and the online application.
June 17-21, 2010 Technological Learning & Thinking:
Culture, Design, Sustainability, Human Ingenuity—an
international conference sponsored by The University of
British Columbia and The University of Western Ontario,
Faculties of Education, in conjunction with the Canadian
Commission for UNESCO—will take place in Vancouver,
British Columbia. The conference organizing committee
invites papers that address various dimensions or problems
of technological learning and thinking. Scholarship is
welcome from across the disciplines including Complexity
Science, Design, Engineering, Environmental Studies,
Education, History, Indigenous Studies, Philosophy,
Psychology, and Sociology of Technology, and STS. The
conference is designed to inspire conversation between
the learning and teaching of technology and the cultural,
environmental, and social study of technology. Learn more
about it at http://learningcommons.net.
June 28-29, 2010 A National WomenTech Educators
Workshop will be presented in Emeryville, CA, just across
the bay from San Francisco. Join Donna Milgram, Executive
Director of the Institute for Women in Technology, Trades
& Science (IWITTS), for a two-day National WomenTech
Educators Train-the-Trainer Workshop. Learn best
practices for how to recruit and retain women and girls in
the technology classroom and how to teach these strategies
to others. The workshop is suited for technology instructors,
school administrators, counselors, school-to-career, techprep,
and equity coordinators. Visit http://www.iwitts.com/
workshop for details.
June 28-July 2, 2010 Baltimore, MD is the site for
the 32nd Annual National TSA (Technology Student
Association) Conference, TSA, Tomorrow’s Leaders. TSA
members throughout the nation all agree that for them,
the highlight of the school year is unquestionably the
annual national conference. The TSA national conference is
packed with competitive events and challenging activities
that foster personal growth and leadership development.
Visit www.tsaweb.org/2010-National-Conference to
view a conference slide show and access competition and
accommodation information.
3 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

STEM Calendar
August 8-11, 2010 The New York State STEM
Education Collaborative will present its 2010 Summer
Institute, STEM: Links to the Future, at State University
of New York at Oswego in Oswego, NY. The conference
is coordinated by STANYS, NYSTEA, ASEE, NYSSPE,
and AMTNYS—professional organizations representing
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics
in New York State—and hosted by SUNY/Oswego’s
Department of Technology and School of Education.
Visit www.nysstemeducation.org/2010Institute.html for
complete information.
November 11-12, 2010 The 68th Annual Four State
Regional Technology Conference, 21st Century Technology
Showcase, will take place at Pittsburg State University/
Kansas Technology Center. For information, contact 620-
235-4365 or Kylie Westervelt at kwesterv@pittstate.edu.
List your State/Province Association Conference in
TTT and STEM Connections (ITEEA’s electronic
newsletter). Submit conference title, date(s), location,
and contact information (at least two months prior to
journal publication date) to kcluff@iteea.org.
Call for Manuscripts
The Technology Teacher is seeking manuscripts for a themed issue tentatively
scheduled for the March 2011 issue. The theme, tied to the upcoming ITEEA
conference in Minneapolis, is:
PREPARING THE STEM WORKFORCE: THE NEXT GENERATION
Reinventing the wheel: design and pRoblem solving • alteRnative eneRgy team challenge foR teacheRs
February 2010
Technology
Volume 69 • Number 5
TEACHER
T h e V o i c e o f T e c h n o l o g y E d u c a t i o n
the
Renewable
Energy Technology
Also:
• ITEA Resource Preview
• Charlotte Exhibitors
The deadline for manuscript submission is September 1,
2010. The Technology Teacher is especially interested
in receiving submissions from classroom teachers and
hopes to have an incentive program in place before the
September 1 deadline.
Please direct submissions and questions to:
kdelapaz@iteea.org
Submission guidelines are available at:
www.iteea.org/Publications/WritingForTTT.pdf
www.iteaconnect.org
4 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

Resources in Technology
Understanding Materials
By Petros J. Katsioloudis
Before selecting a material
for different applications, it
is essential to understand the
characteristics of the material.
At first, materials consisted of wood, stone, ceramic clays,
and meteoric metals and ores, simply shaped into useful
objects. Later, copper metallurgy was developed in Asia
Minor, followed by the Iron Age promoted by the Romans
for their military and civil needs (Thornton, 1985). From the
Roman times to today, materials have undergone continuing
evolution, with considerable improvement. Today’s
engineered materials are commonly divided into categories
based on their physical and chemical characteristics.
Included in those categories are: (a) metals, (b) ceramics,
(c) polymers, and (d) composites.
Metals
Almost everything people have ever done has involved
materials (Jacobs & Kilduff, 1985). Historical evidence
indicates that “engineered materials” have been
available and utilized for the benefit of humankind
since the Neolithic period, beginning about 10,000 BC
(Thornton, 1985). Some of these materials have been
in existence for thousands of years. Perhaps this is best
expressed by the following passage from the first book of the
Old Testament:
And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick,
and burn them thoroughly. And they had brick for
stone, and slime had they for mortar (Genesis XI, 3).
Most of us are familiar with metals in a general way because
of exposure to them through day-to-day use. Metals can
usually be distinguished from other categories by some
of their more obvious traits, such as reflectivity of light,
thermal conductivity, electrical conductivity, hardness,
toughness, and modulus of elasticity. Metals are large
collections of millions of crystals composed of different
types of atoms held together (Jacobs & Kilduff, 1985).
Ceramics
The term “ceramic” is derived from the Greek word
“keramos,” which literally means earth. Ceramics are defined
as hard, brittle compounds of metallic and nonmetallic
elements that have high melting temperatures and are
chemically inert (Helsel & Liu, 2008). The advantages of
ceramics over other materials are noticeable. These include
high melting temperatures, high hardness, high modulus of
elasticity, high compressive strength, and low electrical and
thermal conductivity.
5 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

Polymers
“Poly” means many, and “mer” stands for monomer or unit
(Helsel & Liu, 2008). The process of linking monomers
together is known as polymerization, where polymers are
being produced or plastics created that have properties
different from the corresponding monomers. For industrial
applications, there are two basic types of plastics;
thermoplastics and thermosets. The main difference
between the two types is that thermoplastics are polymers
that soften when heated and regain their form when cooled,
where thermosets can pass through only one heat cycle.
Composites
By definition, a composite is a material consisting of two
or more integrated materials (Jacobs & Kilduff, 1985). One
of the first composites was created several thousand years
ago when our ancestors mixed clay and straw together to
make bricks (Duvall and Hills, 2008). The main reason we
create composites is to rectify weakness possessed by each
constituent when it exists alone; composites are designed
to serve special applications and meet certain criteria.
Some of the most familiar composites include fiberglass
and plywood.
main physical properties used to classify metals are: weight,
color, conductivity (electrical and thermal), and reaction
of the material when exposed to heat. When comparing
two different metals such as aluminum and lead, the
difference between the materials is noticeable; for example,
lead is denser and has a tighter molecular structure than
aluminum. The color of the metal is also a good indicator
for some metals. The bright color of gold and platinum, for
example, differs from the color found in stainless steel.
Materials Testing
Before selecting a material for different applications, it is
essential to understand the characteristics of the material.
One way to identify material properties is by testing.
Different types of materials testing include Rockwell
and Brinell hardness testing, compression testing, shear
testing, modulus of elasticity, and tensile testing. As a part
of the materials process course offered at Old Dominion
University, most types of materials testing are being
conducted using the Vega Universal Testing Machine. A
brief description of the tests and procedures follows.
Atomic Structure of Materials
An atom is the smallest particle of an element that possesses
the physical and chemical properties of that element (Helsel
& Liu, 2008). The average diameter of an atom is only about
10 -10 of a meter (Jacobs & Kilduff, 1985) and it takes more
than 106 atoms edge-to-edge to make the thickness of this
page. Atoms consist of a nucleus and surrounding orbits
that contain electrons. The nucleus is the densest part of
the atom and consists of neutrons and protons. A proton is
a particle of matter that carries a positive electrical charge
equivalent to the negative charge of the electron. Depending
on the amount of electrons existing on the outside shell of
an atom, we can determine the physical stage of the material
and whether it is gas, liquid, or solid. For example if we have
only a few electrons on the valence shell (outside shell) we
will most likely have a material in a solid stage, since the
existing energy will be divided among the few electrons.
With more electrons present, the constant energy is divided
by a larger number, and therefore the bonding energy
between the electrons is weaker, which means we will have a
material in a liquid or gas stage.
Physical and Chemical Properties
Each material has unique physical properties that
distinguish it from others (Duvall and Hills, 2008). The four
Figure 1. Knowing something about the properties of materials
enables students to design products in an intelligent manner that
maximizes the use of materials and learning experience. A universal
testing machine plays an important role in testing the properties
of materials and assisting the student in learning about materials.
Tensile Testing
A testing machine used for a tensile test must be able to
apply a tension load and measure the load and elongation of
that piece. The tensile tester is most commonly a universal
testing machine, which is used to pull the specimen in
tension until it breaks. A tensile test is performed to
6 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

determine the following mechanical properties: (a) ultimate
tensile strength, (b) modulus of elasticity, (c) ductility,
(d) proportional limit, (e) yield strength, and (f) fracture
strength (Degarmo & Kohser, 1984).
Ductility is a measure of a material’s ability to deform
plastically without fracture. The two most common
methods of ductility measurement are: (a) percent
elongation, determined by setting a gauge length (usually
2”) on a specimen prior to loading and (b) after tensile
failure, measuring the final distance of these gauge marks
(Vega Enterprises Inc, 1975). A percent elongation value is
then calculated.
Elongation (%) = Final Length – Original Length * 100
Original Length
Percent area reduction is calculated by putting the two
ends of the fractured specimen together and measuring the
diameter at the break. Calculate the area at the break at this
point of fracture. This final area is then compared with the
original area of the specimen, and a percent reduction in
area is then calculated.
% Reduction in Area = Original Area – Final Area * 100
Original Area
Ultimate Tensile Strength or tensile strength is the
maximum tensile load divided by the original specimen
cross sectional area. It is one of the most important
properties determined by tensile testing.
Ultimate Tensile Strength (psi) = Maximum Load (lbs)
Original Area (in 2 )
Procedure:
a) Measure and record the original diameter of the
specimen(s) and record on your data sheet. Calculate
the original cross-sectional area.
b) Using the center punch, carefully mark the gauge length
on the specimen.
c) Place the specimen in the anvil of the center punch,
making sure that the specimen is centered. Strike the
arm lightly to ensure that the marks do not go too deep.
d) Select the proper grips for specimens and the Universal
testing machine. Specimens must be threaded into
the grips at at least two diameters (for the 3/8” tensile
specimens used on the Universal testing machine this
would be .3/4”) to prevent thread stripping.
e) Apply the load slowly.
f) Observe the specimen, record the maximum load, and
continue loading until failure is reached. Record the
breaking load, which must be observed from the load
dial at the instant of fracture.
Figure 2. The instructor and student are getting the equipment
ready for testing the tensile strength of a materials specimen.
Standard-sized materials are used for testing, enabling the student
to analyze data that is collected. Credit: Author.
Compression Testing
A compression test is the opposite of a tension test, with
respect to loading direction. It is often confirmed that
materials behave the same in tension and compression, and
that is true for most ductile materials. However, there are
some materials that are very weak in tension and extremely
strong in compression (Degarmo & Kohser, 1984).
Concrete, wood, and cast iron are materials that are mostly
tested in compression.
Using the Universal testing machine, a compression test
is most commonly performed. The compression space is
the lower portion of the machine. Prior to the yield point,
tension and compression results are similar. The major
7 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

difference with the compression test as compared to the
tensile test is that the specimen compresses or the area
increases after the yield point is reached. For some ductile
materials, the specimen will compress until a flat slug is
reached (Degarmo & Kohser, 1984). Brittle materials will
fail suddenly after their ultimate strength is exceeded. These
brittle materials have much greater compression strength
than tensile strength. That is why these materials are mostly
tested in compression. A compression test is performed to
determine the following mechanical properties: (a) ultimate
compressive strength (brittle materials), (b) modulus
of elasticity, (c) proportion limit, and (d) yield strength
(Degarmo & Kohser, 1984). Ultimate compressive strength
is the maximum compressive load divided by the original
specimen cross sectional area.
Ultimate Compressive Strength = Maximum Load (lbs)
Original Area (in 2 )
Procedure:
a) Attach compression test plates in the lower platen on
the Universal testing machine.
b) Place the raising block on the lower compression plate.
c) Using the dial calipers, measure the diameter of the gray
cast-iron specimen.
d) Place the gray cast-iron specimen on the raising
block. Make sure that the specimen is centered on the
machine. Gradually apply the load and observe the
specimen. Record the maximum load that the specimen
resists. Continue to apply the load and observe until the
specimen fails.
e) Calculate the area of the specimen. Use this area
and the maximum load to calculate the compressive
strength.
Modulus of Elasticity
Another important mechanical property to study is the
modulus of elasticity. From a tensile test, if we plot the
stress versus strain curve, we find a straight-line portion
of the curve at lower values of stress and strain. This linear
portion of the curve represents the elastic portion of the
material’s response to a mechanical load. The material in
this linear portion obeys Hook’s Law, which states that
stress is proportional to strain. The proportionality constant
is known as Young’s Modulus or the modulus of elasticity
(Degarmo & Kohser, 1984).
The practical application of the modulus of elasticity is that,
for similar designs with different materials under identical
loading and cross sectional area but having different values
of modulus of elasticity, the materials will demonstrate
different stiffness. Stiffer materials will deflect less than
Figure 3. Here the student is getting the equipment ready for a
compression test of a material. Brittle materials will fail suddenly
after their ultimate strength is exceeded. These brittle materials
have much greater compression strength than tensile strength.
That is why these materials are mostly tested in compression.
Credit: Author.
materials having lower values of stiffness. The modulus
of elasticity values will give a relative measure of stiffness
for different engineering materials. For example, we may
compare the modulus of elasticity for steel and aluminum,
the steel having a modulus of 30,000,000 psi and aluminum
10,000,000 psi (Vega Enterprises Inc, 1975). These relative
values and their implied stiffness would indicate that the
aluminum would defect approximately three times that of
the steel for the same mechanical loading.
The values for the modulus of elasticity remain nearly
constant regardless of the processing methods or heattreating
methods. Carbon content and alloying methods
for steel have negligible effects on the modulus of elasticity
values for steel. This laboratory activity is designed to
demonstrate the correlation between textbook values for the
modulus of elasticity and the practical effects of stiffness.
8 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

Procedure:
a) Attach the center loading cylinder under the upper
platen in the compression section of the Universal
testing machine.
b) Mount the transverse bar on the lower platen and place
the steel support cylinders for 12-inch centers.
c) Place one of the test bars on the lower support cylinders
and position the gauge block under the center of the
bar.
d) Slowly apply the load until the bar defects just enough
to contact the gauge block. As you apply the load, slowly
move this gauge block until interference is detected.
e) Record the load at the point of interference.
f) Rotate the bar 180 degrees and repeat the procedure.
Average the values and record.
load reached and any bending present at this maximum
load. After the specimen has failed, continue loading
until the sheared slug has passed into the relieved area
in the lower portion of the shear testing fixture.
g) Remove the shear fixture from the universal testing
machine (UTM).
h) Remove the sheared slug from the fixture by sliding the
center plate sideways.
i) Perform a second shear test on the remaining portion
of the shear specimen. Repeat this process for the other
shear specimen.
j) Record the appropriate data and calculate the required
information.
Shear Strength
Applications such as rivets, crank pins, and wooden blocks
are subject to shearing forces. Shear stress results when
two parallel forces act in opposite directions that tend to
produce a sliding of one part with respect to the other part
of the body (Degarmo & Kohser, 1984). Fasteners such as
bolts, rivets, and pins are some practical objects subjected
to shear stress. Additionally, cutting actions such as punches
produce shear stress.
Shear testing results are not as precise as tension and
compression testing because of the additional introduction
of friction and bending forces in the testing process. Shear
tests on flat stock are often done in single or double shear,
whereas round stock is mostly tested in double shear. In
double shear tests, the applicable area is twice the area of
the cross sections.
Procedure as described in the testing machine’s lab manual:
a) Attach one hardened plate to the upper platen in the
compression space on the universal testing machine,
and place the other hardened plate on the lower platen.
b) Measure and record the diameter of each of the shear
specimens.
c) Insert the specimen in the appropriate holes in the
shear test fixture. Do not center the specimen in the
shear test fixture, but allow one end to slightly project
a short distance to allow for a second test of the
specimen.
d) Before testing, mark the position of the punch relative
to the holder to allow for observation of bending during
the shear testing.
e) Position the shear testing fixture between the hardened
steel plates on the universal testing machine.
f) Gradually apply the load and observe the maximum
Figure 4. Getting the equipment ready for shear testing. Shear
testing results are not as precise as tension and compression testing
because of the additional introduction of friction and bending
forces in the testing process. Fasteners such as bolts, rivets, and
screws are typically associated with shear stresses. Credit: Author.
Brinell Hardness Test
There are several methods used to determine hardness.
Rockwell and Brinell are two of the most common forms
of hardness testing (Degarmo & Kohser, 1984). Rockwell
hardness testing is generally used on harder steels and
9 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

samples where the Brinell hardness test leaves too large an
impression on the specimen to be practical (Degarmo &
Kohser, 1984).
The Brinell testing machine is relatively simple. The large
indenter averages out load variations in the specimen, and
it can be used on relatively rough surfaces. However, it does
leave rather large indentations in the test specimens. The
large Brinell indenter will not make a significant impression
in hard materials, so the test is not useful beyond the
Rockwell C-60 range. The thickness of the specimen
being tested should be about 10 times the depth of the
indentation for best accuracy. This prevents the test from
being conducted on thin materials. In practice, good values
may be obtained if there is no visible effect on the back of
the specimen.
A close correlation between the Rockwell and Brinell
hardness numbers has been developed for steel, and
conversion charts are available for changing from one to the
other. A close correlation has been found to exist between
the Brinell number and the tensile strength of steel. This is
extremely important, for a fast hardness test may often be
used in place of a tensile strength test.
Procedure:
a) Place the indenter in position under the upper platen of
the universal testing machine.
b) Place a hardened block or pad on the lower platen.
Select a specimen of adequate thickness and with a flat
smooth face; position it under the indenter.
c) Adjust the machine to bring the penetrator nearly into
contact with the specimen.
d) Carefully adjust the gauge pointer to zero.
e) Gradually apply the load until 3000 kg is reached, taking
care not to exceed.
f) Hold at that load for 15 seconds, and release the load.
g) Remove the specimen and read the specimen diameter
with a Brinell microscope or a suitable magnifying
reader with a scale graduated in millimeters.
h) Measure the diameter in two directions at right angles
to each other, and record them in a table.
i) Calculate the average diameter of the two readings and
look up and record the BHN corresponding to these
diameters.
j) Use Brinell values table to determine the Brinell number
for a given diameter depression that was created using a
3000 kg load.
k) For very soft materials or materials that create a
depression with a diameter of 3 5.9 mm, use a 500 kg load
(1020 pounds) and table 9-2 for the Brinell numbers.
Rockwell Hardness Test
The majority of Rockwell hardness systems use a direct
readout machine determining the hardness number based
upon the depth of penetration of either a diamond point or
a steel ball (Degarmo & Kohser, 1984). If the penetration is
deep, it indicates a material having a low Rockwell hardness
number. However, if the penetration is low, it indicates a
material having a high Rockwell hardness number.
The Rockwell hardness number is based upon the difference
in the depth to which a penetrator is driven by a definite
light or “minor” load and a definite heavy or “major” load.
The ball penetrators are chucks that are made to hold 1/16"
or 1/8" diameter hardened steel balls. Also available are 1/4"
and 1/2" ball penetrators for the testing of softer materials.
There are two types of anvils that are used on the Rockwell
hardness testers. The flat faceplate models are used for
flat specimens. The “V” type anvils hold round specimens
firmly. Test blocks or calibration blocks are flat steel or brass
blocks, that have been tested and marked with the scale
and Rockwell number. They should be used to check the
accuracy and calibration of the tester frequently.
Procedure:
a) Flat specimens should be clean, smooth, and free from
scale.
b) The shape should be such that the specimen rests firmly
on the anvil. Cylindrical specimens should be clean,
smooth, and free from scale.
c) Use the correction chart for corrective addition to
Rockwell numbers for cylindrical specimens.
d) Using the “B” Scale: Use a 1/16" diameter steel ball
penetrator. Major load: 100 Kg, Minor load: 10 Kg.
Use for copper alloys, soft steels, aluminum alloys, and
malleable iron. Do not use on hardened steel. Using the
“E” Scale: Use a 1/8" diameter steel ball penetrator.
e) Major load: 100 kg; Minor load: 10 kg. Use for cast iron,
aluminum, magnesium alloys, and bearing materials.
Do not use on hardened steel.
Impact Testing
Impact is defined as the resistance of a material to rapidly
applied loads. Toughness is a property, which is capacity
of a material to resist fracture when subjected to impact
(Degarmo & Kohser, 1984). Two basic types of impact
testing have evolved: (1) bending, which includes Charpy
and Izod tests, and (2) tension impact tests (Degarmo &
Kohser, 1984). Bending tests are most common, and they
use notched specimens that are supported as beams. In the
Charpy impact test, the specimen is supported as a simple
beam with the load applied at the center. In the Izod test, the
specimen is supported as a cantilever beam. Using notched
10 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

specimens, the specimen is fractured at the notch. Stress is
concentrated, and even soft materials fail as brittle fractures.
Bending tests allow the ranking of various materials and
their resistance to impact loading. Additionally, temperature
may be varied to evaluate impact fracture resistance as a
function of temperature. Both Charpy and Izod impact
testing utilize a swinging pendulum to apply the load.
The tensile impact test avoids many of the pitfalls of the
notched Charpy and Izod bending tests. The behavior of
ductile materials can be studied without the use of notched
specimens. Pendulum, drop-weights, and flywheels can be
used to apply the tensile impact load.
Procedure:
a) Setting the Pointer:
• Before you start a test, check the “zero” of the
pointer. The impact tester is calibrated for friction
and wind loss; therefore, it should read zero after a
free swing. The following procedure should be used
to check the zero:
• Raise the safety latch and place the operating
lever in the latch position.
• By hand, lift the pendulum counterclockwise
until the latch clicks. The first click is the lower
release position. Further raising the pendulum
places it in the upper release position.
• Insert the dowel, designed to prevent
accidental application of the brake, into the
hole in the head of the machine.
• Set the pointer to the maximum value of the
range for your test. Ranges and pendulum
positions are illustrated on the dial. Make sure
that no one is in the path of the pendulum.
• Move the control lever to the release position.
When the pendulum has started to swing
back, remove the dowel and push the control
lever to the brake position. If the pointer
reads zero, you are ready for your test. If not,
loosen the screw that holds the pusher arm,
turn the arm to produce a zero reading, and
tighten the screw.
• Repeat until the free swing reads zero.
Summary
As we look at the new inventions and innovations in the
technology of materials, we can see that, through the years,
they are becoming more technologically complex. We see
examples such as the space shuttle panels, where ceramic
composites are applied to the surface of the spacecraft to
absorb and release high amounts of heat. However, the
main goal of composites—to generate materials with unique
characteristics to be utilized on special applications—
remains the same, and their importance to industry will
remain vital.
References
Degarmo, B. & Kohser, M. (1984). Material and processes in
manufacturing. Wiley: New York.
DuVall, B. J. & Hillis, R. D. (2008). Manufacturing processes.
Tinley Park, Illinois: The Goodheart-Willcox Company,
Inc.
Helsel, D. L. & Liu, P. P. (2008). Industrial materials. Tinley
Park, Illinois: The Goodheart-Willcox Company, Inc.
Thornton, A. P. (1985). Fundamentals of engineering
materials. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall,
Inc.
Jacobs, A. J. & Kilduff, F. T. (1985). Engineering materials
technology. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall,
Inc.
Vega Enterprises, Inc. (1975). Materials testing laboratory
manual. Decatur, IL: Author.
Petros J. Katsioloudis, Ph.D. is
Ambassador to Cyprus for the International
Technology and Engineering Educators
Association. He is an assistant professor
in the Department of STEM Education
and Professional Studies at Old Dominion
University at Norfolk, Virginia. He can be reached via email
at pkatsiol@odu.edu.
Ad Index
CNC...................................................................C2
Engineering byDesign.................................... 31
Goodheart-Willcox Publisher...................... 19
intelitek............................................................. 37
Kelvin................................................................ 28
Kidwind............................................................C4
Carnegie Mellon Robotics............................ 37
Valley City State University.......................... 25
Carnegie Mellon Robotics..........................C2a
Technology Education Concepts...............C2a
11 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

Design Assessment:
Consumer Reports Style
By Todd R. Kelley
One way to encourage students
to consider these bigger impacts
of technology is to first allow
them to assess the personal
impacts of everyday technology.
Introduction
Novices to the design process often struggle at first to
understand the various stages of design. Learning to design
is a process not easily mastered, and therefore requires
multiple levels of exposure to the design process. It is
helpful if teachers are able to implement various entry-level
design assignments such as reverse-engineering activities.
Students will likely develop the ability to tackle larger design
and problem-solving projects the more they are exposed
to small, design-based activities that require them to learn
how to engage in just a few stages of the design process.
The following article will feature a design assessment-based
activity requiring students to assess an existing technology
using a Consumer Reports-style approach.
Rationale
Petroski (1998) has indicated that novice designers need
to be exposed to multiple design examples as a way to
begin learning the essential elements necessary in the
design process. Petroski (1996) also suggested studying
the design of common everyday artifacts such as a GEM
paper clip, the zipper, and aluminum can as presented in
the book Invention by Design: How Engineers Get From
Thought to Thing. Clearly, technology students who need
to understand the design process would benefit from
assessing an existing technology product. The Standards for
Technological Literacy: Content for the Study of Technology
(STL) document (ITEA [ITEEA], 2000/2002/2007) states:
“To become literate in the design process requires acquiring
the cognitive and procedural knowledge needed to create a
design, in addition to familiarity with the process by which a
design will be carried out to make a product or system”
(p. 90). Additionally, the STL document goes on to state
that professional engineers engaging in the design process
first begin by setting out to identify and address design
criteria as they work under specific constraints. Engineers
need to first identify the crucial design criteria and the
specific constraints embedded within the design problem.
Hill (2006) suggests that technology students struggle to
identify design constraints and criteria before they enter the
idea selection stage of the design process. Similarly, leaders
12 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

in technology education have indicated that K-12 designbased
instruction often neglected cognitive processes that
are important to the engineering design process: the analysis
and optimization stages of the design process (Hailey, et al.,
2005; Hill, 2006; Gattie & Wicklein, 2007).
McCade (2000) identified that technology assessment is
one of three forms of technical problem solving. He also
indicates that most technology education practitioners
agree that technology assessment is a critical skill but is
often difficult to implement in the classroom. McCade
suggests that students be guided by a systematic approach
to inquiry that can develop critical thinking skills. McCade
(2000) provides a strong rationale for technology assessment
when he writes: “Wise producers and consumers of
technology must be capable of the type of critical thinking
necessary to see beyond shallow, short-term considerations
and select the most appropriate technologies” (p. 9). He
provides technology assessment topics that require students
to consider the broader impact of technology on society,
individuals, and the environment.
However, a case can be made that one way to encourage
students to consider these bigger impacts of technology
is to first allow students to assess the personal impacts
of everyday technology. A technology education teacher
can encourage students to consider the broader impact
of the technology by asking challenging questions such
as, “Is there a way this product can be properly disposed
of when it is no longer useful?” or “Can this product be
harmful to humans or the environment if used incorrectly?”
Technology students, when given an opportunity to
participate in a Consumer Reports-style activity, can begin to
develop and hone these important cognitive skills within the
engineering design process, and through that process will be
developing their design knowledge base and building their
design capabilities.
Often it appears that students quickly engage in the ideageneration
(brainstorming) stage of the design process and,
in most cases, are motivated to participate in this stage
(Harding, 1995). Likewise, the prototype or model-building
stage of the design process is a highly motivating activity
for students. Typically, the technology education teacher
struggles to keep students from jumping past the other
stages of the design process so that they can begin building
(Welch & Lim, 2000). Any technology education teacher
who has taught design to middle and high school students
has struggled to get students to properly plan and design
before they begin to build. What doesn’t come naturally to
students is learning how to consider the multiple facets of
the early stages of the design process that are so critical to
the later stages and, thus, are also important to the success
or failure of the designed artifact. Students often lack the
ability to accurately identify the constraints and criteria
embedded within that problem, and therefore may lack the
ability to design effective solutions.
Consumer Reports Style
Consumer Reports is a publication featuring assessments of
many of the popular products we purchase and use every
day. Consumers Union (CU) publishes Consumer Reports
and is an independent and nonprofit organization whose
mission is to work for a fair, just, and safe marketplace
for all consumers and to empower consumers to protect
themselves (consumerreports.org). The Consumers Union
organization was founded in 1936 in response to an increase
in mass media marketing that left consumers with a lack
of reliable sources of product information that made it
difficult to determine hype from fact. Most individuals have
consulted a Consumer Reports magazine issue from time to
time before purchasing a new technology. Consumer Reports
assesses many appliances, cars, tools, and other products
in its National Testing and Research Center in Yonkers,
NY. The testing center is the largest nonprofit educational
and consumer product-testing center in the world where
the testing of various brands of products takes place.
Consumers Union researchers assess the various models of
a product to determine which product is the best value, the
most effective, or some other criterion. Using a Consumer
Reports-style assignment for assessing a technology product
provides students with an opportunity to determine the
appropriate constraints and criteria to consider when
assessing a chosen product.
Classroom Example
The following technology activity can address STL
technological literacy Standards 8, 9, 10, and 13.
A Consumer Reports-style assignment might require
students to assess a backpack. Most students use some type
of bag or backpack to carry their books and belongings
to and from school, so this product is one with which
students can easily identify, making it an ideal product
to have students assess. The assessment report would
require that a group of students (two or three students
per group) collect three new or like-new different models
of the same product. In this case: a backpack. Next, the
students will need to begin to examine the product and
collect some product details (take measurements, i.e., linear
measurements, weight, etc.) in order to provide a technical,
detailed description of each model of the product. Third, the
students will identify and list any unique features about the
product model. For the backpack example, students might
list special compartments to hold specific devices such as
13 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

an MP3 player or specially designed comfort features such
as extra padding, unique shape in the straps, or a lumbar
support. Without the students realizing it, they have begun
to identify the various constraints and criteria embedded
within the product design. This unique outcome of the
activity is similar to reverse-engineering activities that allow
an individual to benefit from learning design through the
study of existing design solutions.
Next, the students will need to develop a nondestructive
test to help assess the effectiveness of the various product
models. In the backpack example, students could load
the various backpack models with books or weights and
then have each team member carry the load as they walk
around the school. Each team member will take notes of the
comfort level of the backpack and any other observations
they had as they tested the pack. The group should
reassemble and compare notes and provide a performance
summary for each model.
Now that the students have begun to identify specific
design features (design criteria) and have taken detailed
measurements and identified cost, manufacturing
requirements, and constraints of the product, these design
elements will be used to determine which product model
provides the optimal solution. The optimization stage of
the engineering design process is a systematic process that
uses design constraints and criteria to allow the designer to
locate the optimal solution, another often neglected stage
of the engineering design process in K-12 design-based
instruction (Kelley, 2010). Using the Consumer Reportsstyle
assignment, technology education teachers can help
students learn how to use a systematic process to select the
optimal solution.
Using a Decision Matrix
One optimization technique that uses a systematic
approach to determine the most ideal design selection
is the decision matrix. The decision matrix allows the
designer to assign weights to constraints and criteria as a
way to systematically locate the optimum design solution.
Each student team would need to identify and list the most
essential design criteria and constraints for the product
they are assessing. For the backpack problem, students
might identify the design criteria as comfort, durability,
esthetics, and functionality. The product design constraint
may be identified as cost and size. The student team would
next need to conduct a group discussion and rank and list
these constraints and criteria in ascending order from most
important to least important. Next, the student group would
need to determine the percentage (weight) of importance
for each of the constraints and criteria identified.
Testing of the backpack designs may help the students
determine that comfort is one very important criterion,
but if the backpack will not carry all their belongings
(functionality) then the product would not be as useful, so
functionality might emerge as the top criterion. The student
team can then create a decision matrix table to be used to
assess the various models they are evaluating. See Table
1 for a sample decision matrix for the backpack example.
Finally, the team must calculate the mean score for each
Criteria Weight (%) Product #1 Product #2 Product #3
Functionality 30
Comfort 25
Esthetics 15
Durability 10
150
5
90
3
120
4
75
3
75
3
125
5
60
4
75
5
45
3
20
2
30
3
40
4
Constraints
Cost 10
Size 10
30
3
40
5
10
1
30
3
30
3
30
3
Total 100 365 340 370
Table 1. Adapted from Edie et al. (1998, p. 117). Rating scale based upon Likert style using 5= excellent; 4 = very good; 3=good; 2= fair; 1=
poor. Shaded triangles contain totals of Weight x Rankings.
14 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

product category and total the results to determine which
product is the best overall design based upon the group’s
identified criteria. Each student will prepare a final report
presenting his or her findings and conclusions.
Class Presentation
After the student groups have conducted their testing and
product analysis, each group will compile its results into a
technical report to turn in for assessment by the instructor.
Furthermore, each group will prepare a report for the entire
class to share the results of the group’s analysis. A classroom
presentation of their analysis will help students synthesize
their learning and help develop communication skills.
In Summary
Often technology education teachers are guilty of being like
their students, preferring to have students build prototypes
and make artifacts instead of assigning a nonbuilding
activity. However, providing students with class activities
that help them build their capacity to effectively design is
essential. The activity presented in this article will allow
students to hone their skills in identifying design constraints
and criteria, learn through study of existing designs, and
experience engineering design techniques for optimization
(decision matrix). These are all essential skills for building
their capacity to tackle larger design activities.
Assessment Report Sample
Name _ ________________________________________
Group Member _________________________________
Group Member _________________________________
1. Technical product information
Provide all necessary technical information about
the model being assessed. This information includes
a physical description (size, shape, color, capacity,
etc); technical description (for electronics—energy
capacity, etc), special feature descriptions (unique
capabilities of the product model). Include a picture
of each model.
a. Model and Brand #1 description:
b. Model and Brand #2 description:
c. Model and Brand #3 description:
2. Measurements of products
Conduct all possible measurements (length,
width, height, weight) of the various models and
record below.
a. Model and Brand #1 measurements:
b. Model and Brand #2 measurements:
c. Model and Brand #3 measurements:
3. Unique features of products
List of the unique features of each product model.
Does the model have different features than the
other models?
a. Model and Brand #1 unique features:
b. Model and Brand #2 unique features:
c. Model and Brand #3 unique features:
4. Limitations of products
List any limitations of each model being studied. Are
there any missing features from the product model?
Does the model have limited abilities from other
model designs?
a. Model and Brand #1 limitations:
b. Model and Brand #2 limitations:
c. Model and Brand #3 limitations:
5. Cost of each product model
When recording the cost of each model, try to list
the standard cost instead of providing a bargain sale
amount.
a. Model and Brand #1 total cost:
b. Model and Brand #2 total cost:
c. Model and Brand #3 total cost:
6. Testing each product model
Now that you have carefully studied each model, put
each one to the test. Develop a nondestructive test
for the product. For example: if you were testing a
backpack, you could load the backpack with textbooks
and have each group member walk around the
school running track to test it for its comfort and
effectiveness to carry your belongings.
Assessment Report continued on page 16
15 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

Assessment Report continued from page 15
Test description: Provide a detailed description of the
test your group developed. Provide pictures and take
notes of the results and observations for each model.
a. Model and Brand #1 test results:
b. Model and Brand #2 test results:
c. Model and Brand #3 test results:
7. Constraints and Criteria identified from testing
List several design constraints or design criteria that
were revealed through your testing. For example,
if testing a backpack with weights: comfort might
emerge as a design criteria, and capacity (size limits)
might emerge as a constraint.
a. List of design criteria identified from testing:
b. List of design constraints identified from
testing:
8. List all other design constraints and design criteria
Review the results from your report items 1-5 on
the three models. What other design criteria and
constraints have been identified? Please list below:
a. List of design criteria:
b. List design constraints:
9. Each group member must rank each of the
constraints and criteria identified. List the constraints
in ascending order, from most important to least
important. Compare your results with the rest of the
group. Discuss and determine the top five design
constraints and criteria for the group. Discuss the
value or weight of each of the five constraints and
criteria; see Table 1 for an example. Now create your
decision matrix like the sample in Table 1. Each
group member should print out the decision matrix
and fill it out using his/her own individual rankings,
then return to the group and fill out a group decision
matrix that contains the mean scores of the group for
each category for each product model to determine
which model is ranked the highest. Again, see Table 1
for a sample.
10. Provide a summary of your report
Your group should discuss the results of the decision
matrix. Please provide a summary of your results,
including general observations and specific discoveries
encountered through this activity.
References
Consumers Union. (2009). Consumer Reports history.
Retrieved from http://consumerreports.org
Eide, A. R., Jenison, R. D., Marshaw, L. H., & Northrup, L.
(2001). Engineering fundamentals and problem solving
(4th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Gattie, D. K. & Wicklein, R. C. (2007). Curricular value
and instructional needs for infusing engineering design
into K-12 technology education. Journal of Technology
Education, 19(1), 6-18.
Hailey, C. E., Erickson, T., Becker, K., & Thomas, T.
(2005). National center for engineering and technology
education. The Technology Teacher, 64(5), 23-26.
Harding, R. (1995). Professional designers in primary
schools: How successful are they at teaching children
design skills? Design and Technology Teaching, 28(1), 19-
21.
Hill, R. B. (2006). New perspectives: Technology teacher
education and engineering design. Journal of Industrial
Teacher Education, 43(3), 45-63.
International Technology Education Association.
(2000/2002/2007) Standards for technological literacy:
Content for the study of technology. Reston, VA: Author.
Kelley, T. R. (2010). Optimization, an important stage of
engineering design. The Technology Teacher, 69(5), 18-23.
McCade, J. (2000). Problem solving: Much more than just
design. Journal of Technology Education, 2(1) pp. 1-10.
Petroski, H. (1998, October). Polishing the GEM: A firstyear
design project. Journal of Engineering Education, pp.
313-324.
Petroski, H. (1996). Invention by design: How engineers get
from thought to thing. Cambridge: Harvard University
Press.
Welch, M. & Lim, H. (2000). The strategic thinking of novice
designers: Discontinuity between theory and practice.
The Journal of Technology Studies, 26(2).
This is a refereed article.
Todd R. Kelley is an assistant professor
in the College of Technology at Purdue
University, West Lafayette, IN. He can be
reached at trkelley@purdue.edu.
16 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

Classroom Challenge
Designing a Shopping System
for Senior Citizens
By Harry T. Roman
This project should give the
students a real-world feel for
what it means to directly interact
with customers.
Introduction
It is all about serving the customer. That is how capitalism
plays out. It finds a market need and then creates a product
or service to address that need. Well, here is one near
and dear to our country. The Baby Boomer generation,
all 76 million, will be retiring soon. Eventually, some may
find it very hard to move about and do their routine food
shopping. The challenge for your creative students is to
develop a shopping system whereby seniors may somehow
communicate with the store and then have their orders
fulfilled and delivered directly to their homes.
Getting Started
Probably the first potential solution that will come to a
student’s mind is to simply send in an email asking for the
Eventually, the Baby Boomer generation may find it hard to move
about and do their routine food shopping.
products needed by the senior citizen. Or perhaps students
might suggest accessing the store’s website and clicking
on the needed products . . . pretty much how we currently
shop from store catalogs—to buy books, or clothes, etc.
However, keep in mind that many seniors do not have
computers, nor do they possess the computer-savvy skills of
younger generations.
17 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

The Design
So now your students have a grasp of the problem and what
customers might be expecting. It would appear that the
design phase is next . . . but hold on a minute there . . .
because there might just be someone else your students
should talk to. Yes, that’s right, the people who own and
operate the grocery store. You wouldn’t want to design or
specify a system to support the senior citizens’ needs if it
could not be done economically by the grocery store. This
system must be workable and practical.
Students’ first potential solutions will probably involve the use of
email.
Since the marketplace rules in a capitalist society, the
students are going to benefit enormously from actually
talking to some Baby Boomers or current seniors to get an
idea of what sort of system could be developed. Seniors can
be family members, neighbors, or friends; but it is important
for the students to conduct personal interviews—so very
like what happens in the real world.
Once these real interviews are conducted, the students and/
or student teams should meet to discuss among themselves
what they heard and learned about what their customers
would like from such a system. A very helpful device used by
many engineers and product developers is a flow diagram—
used to illustrate how the potential new product or service
will work. This diagram will illustrate in step-wise fashion
how a senior would contact the store and get the entire
process of order fulfillment underway. Judging from the
range of computer literacy among seniors, it may be that
the communication mode may have to be multimodal to
accommodate a variety of inputs.
It may be wise to provide your students with a little history
lesson and explain that about sixty or eighty years ago,
folks routinely telephoned their orders in to local grocery
stores, and delivery boys on bicycles were employed to
deliver groceries to customers, especially in small suburban
and rural towns. Local merchants knew the products their
customers desired and kept track of their purchases. In a
way, this design challenge harks back to those times, with
perhaps a chance to make it high tech.
Perhaps a manager from a grocery store could be invited in to talk
to the class.
Perhaps a manager from a grocery store could be invited
in to talk to the class about how such large stores are now
operated and how they might be modified to accommodate
senior citizens who communicate from home. Perhaps they
already have been thinking about this, or have a simple
system already in place that could be built upon? Here are
some of the questions that your students might consider.
It is not a complete list of questions, but a list that can get
them aimed in the right direction.
• In what ways can a senior communicate with your store
. . . telephone, letter, email, Internet shopping, other?
• Which method of communication is preferred and
why?
• What might a service like this cost the senior citizen?
• Does cost for the service depend upon the form of
communication with the store, size of the order, and
distance to customer?
• Would customers like to have their orders remembered
for automatic fulfillment every week or so?
• Might discounts be offered if orders are centralized to,
say, senior citizen housing centers?
18 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

• How would the orders be actually fulfilled, bagged, and
delivered?
• How might prevention of spoilage or melting of frozen
and perishable goods be accomplished?
• Has this grocery store or chain ever done this type
of service before; and what were the good and bad
experiences?
• What might be a reasonable time for seniors to wait for
their order to be delivered?
• What might be the preferred payment upon delivery, or
prior to it?
As you might imagine, the “devil is in the details” for a
system like this. You want it to have a human touch, yet be
high tech enough to keep costs minimal.
Maybe your students can come up with some interesting
ideas, like robot clerks to roam the aisles to fulfill the order?
Robots are already being used in hospitals to deliver supplies
and such to different floors. Has anyone experimented with
using robots to work in grocery stores? Are there robots
that could be adapted? Perhaps all off-site orders are filled
at night when big stores restock and kept refrigerated until
delivery the next morning?
affect their operations, delivery times, and cost to provide
the service?
This project should give the students a real-world feel for
what it means to directly interact with customers. Make
sure they use plenty of diagrams and pictures to make their
discussions and final reports easy to follow. This activity
should also be useful in building communication skills as
well; and in the real world, that is very important.
Harry T. Roman recently retired from
his engineering job and is the author of
a variety of new technology education
books. He can be reached via email at
htroman49@aol.com.
Q: What Do YOU Need
to Succeed
in Today’s High-Tech
Classroom?
A: Everything YOU Need Is at
GOODHEART-WILLCOX!
Might refrigerated trucks be used to keep frozen and spoiling
products fresh?
Might refrigerated trucks be used to keep frozen and
spoiling products fresh and then to deliver multiple orders
all at once, without risk to the perishables?
Can anything be learned from other delivery services like
laundry/cleaning, pizzas, fast foods, and such?
Some of the large catalog companies accept telephone
orders as well as Internet shoppers. Can they be asked to
comment upon how different modes of communication
In print, on CD, or online, G-W products
give YOU the tools to succeed in today’s
high-tech classroom!
Goodheart-Willcox Publisher
800.323.0440 • www.g-w.com
19 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

Incorporating Animation Concepts
and Principles in STEM Education
By Henry L. (Hal) Harrison, III and Laura J. Hummell
Since animated characters have
become significant components
of entertainment and
advertising, using them in the
classroom can become another
tool for reaching students who
have visual and kinesthetic
learning styles.
Figure 1. Illustration of a Zoetrope and its operation.
http://library.thinkquest.org/C0118600/zoetrope.jpg
Introduction
Animation is the rapid display of a sequence of static
images that creates the illusion of movement. This optical
illusion is often called perception of motion, persistence of
vision, illusion of motion, or short-range apparent motion
(Anderson & Anderson, 1993). The phenomenon occurs
when the eye is exposed to rapidly changing still images,
with each image being changed slightly to mimic real
motion. While the viewer’s brain processes each of these
slightly changed images, the images appear to the person
to become motions that are fluid and consistent. For shortrange
apparent motion to occur, modern theatrical films and
animations run at 24 frames per second.
Animation has a long and varied history beginning with
Paleolithic cave art in which ancient humans drew paintings
of animals with multiple sets of legs in dynamic positions
that sought to convey animal movement (Thomas, 1958).
Around 1510, Leonardo da Vinci was among the first
to study body movement and other anatomical studies
20 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

through the use of similar detailed drawings illustrating
muscle extension and contraction. William George Horner
constructed the first zoetrope in 1834, which was among
the first devices to create an image of a moving picture
(Freeman, 2005). The persistence of vision phenomena is
easily understood by using a zoetrope. Figure 1 depicts an
illustration of a zoetrope and its operation. Almost 50 years
later, John Barns Linnet patented the flip book, which used
a set of sequential pictures to create the illusion of motion
in which people could use their hands to flip through the
different images.
Since the early 1900s, animation has gained acceptance in
the television and film industries. Animation techniques,
such as celluloid and stop-motion, were among the first
animation techniques incorporated into motion pictures.
In stop-motion animation, physical objects are used instead
of people, and objects are photographed, moved slightly,
and then photographed again. This process is repeated
throughout the entire scene to create an animation sequence
with photographs instead of drawings (Johnston & Thomas,
1981). One of the first examples of stop-motion animation
was used as a special effect in the 1933 film King Kong.
Stop-motion is also the animation technique used in clay
animations, better known as “claymations.” Although stopmotion
animation is still used today, traditional animation
or celluloid (cel) animation was the process used for most
animated films in the twentieth century. In cel animation,
individual characters are hand drawn and then copied onto
transparent plastic-type sheets made of celluloid or cellulose
actetate called cels (Johnston & Thomas, 1981). Once the
images are copied to the cels, the images are painted to
further define the character, and the completed cels are
photographed onto motion picture film against painted
backgrounds. This animation technique gave rise to some
of the most prominent animated characters in the twentieth
century including Mickey Mouse, Pinocchio, Donald Duck,
Mighty Mouse, and countless others.
The 1990s and early 2000s have seen the advent of computer
graphic imagery (CGI), resulting in a new animation
style and radical changes in techniques. The use of CGI
has created opportunities for animation enthusiasts to
produce their own animations without the need for the
highly specialized equipment once required of traditional
animation. Two-dimensional and three-dimensional
computer animations have greatly impacted the animation
industry. The flexibility and ease of use of the different
animation software packages allow users of all experience
levels to design and generate animations. Although
computer-assisted animation had been used years before,
when it was released in 1995, Toy Story was the first
completely computer-generated movie. Since that time,
animation studios such as Pixar, DreamWorks, Paramount,
and many others have created famous characters like
Shrek, Buzz Lightyear, Nemo, Sulley from Monsters, INC,
and Manfred, Sid, and Diego from Ice Age, and many more
(Lenburg, 2008).
In recent years, animation has ventured into the education
realm to help students visualize a variety of complex
processes (Lowe, 2008, p. 49). Because of the interaction
inherent in animated models, learning materials are
incorporating more and more animations into their content.
Lowe (2008) notes, however, that these animations are not
necessarily superior to static graphics, and that animated
graphics can even hinder students’ understanding of the
concepts being conveyed in the animation due to the
complexity and realism some animations include (pp. 49-
50). It should be noted that the complexity and realism of
animations that may hinder students’ ability to understand
the concepts/principles being conveyed in the animation
could help to be alleviated if the animations included
some type of user control. User-controllable animations
include functions such as: presentation rate control,
directional control, and scene continuity control (p. 49). It
is encouraging to note that with these control attributes,
research has shown (e.g., Gonzalez, 1996) that animations
convey concepts/principles better than their static
counterparts, although the extent is currently unknown.
More research is needed in this phenomenon.
Connecting Animation to the Standards
All types of animations apply drawing, layout, measurement,
timing, teamwork, and other various skills and techniques.
These include incorporating goals, objectives, techniques,
and skills from drama, art, graphic communications,
computer applications, and technology education.
Specifically, using animation projects, design briefs, and
units in technology education courses can address Standard
17 of Standards for Technological Literacy: Content for the
Study of Technology (STL) (ITEA [ITEEA], 2000/2002/2007).
“Students will develop an understanding of and be
able to select and use information and communication
technologies” (p. 166).
Using Animation Technologies in Technology
Education
Animation can enrich students’ mastery of diverse subject
matter. Through various lessons and units, educators and
students can use simple animation techniques to create
visual, animated representations of numerous concepts.
Animation has helped students solidify their understanding
21 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

of abstract ideas. The three major types of animation
we have used in technology education and graphic
communication classes include hand-drawn animation,
model animation, and computer-generated animation.
Hand-drawn animation is typically comprised of a series
of drawings, compiled and filmed to give the illusion of
movement (White, 1998). Animated characters are drawn
and developed to have distinct personalities and exaggerated
physical characteristics (Bancroft & Keane, 2006). Then
each drawing makes up one frame of film that, when sped
up, creates movement like that in Disney’s Snow White
and the Seven Dwarves (Johnston & Thomas, 1981; White,
1998). Model animation uses 3-D figures called puppets
or models made of clay (claymation) like those featured
in the California raisins or Wallace and Gromit cartoons.
Finally, we used computer animation, which uses animation
software to create and copy individual frames. Animation
software programs, such as Alice or Anim8or, are known for
their usability. CGI characters like the M&Ms in the candy
commercials have become unique and omnipresent parts of
the entertainment and advertising industries.
Discussion of Different Projects
Flipbook – Elementary and Middle School
• Cut 10 4 ¼” x 5 ½” pages
• Draw an initial character or use stencils on the first
page
• Put that initial drawing on window or light board
• Lay another sheet on top of the first
• Copy the drawing, making slight changes in position to
mimic movement
• Continue doing this until you complete the plot, or
story line
• Staple the pages together so that they may be flipped
easily
Cel Animation – Elementary and Middle School
• Cut overhead transparencies into strips
• Have students divide strips into sections
• Have students draw plot sequence using characters and
setting
• Then, run the strip on an overhead projector through
a 3” x 3” “viewer” cut out of dark colored construction
paper or cardstock
Beginner Computer Animation – Elementary and Middle
School
• Holiday Traditions Animations
• Students use PowerPoint or other presentation
slideshow software and animated gifs (downloadable
clip art) that are already available
• They tell how their families celebrate different holidays
using animation and narration as the storytelling
medium
Intermediate Hand-Drawn Computer Animation –
Elementary and Middle School
• Students draw a picture in Paint
• They copy and paste the picture into a PowerPoint slide
• They go back to Paint and change the picture slightly
and repeat the process
Catapult Animation (done in MS Paint and PowerPoint) visually
explained how in medieval times when castles were under siege,
the outside forces would storm the castles using catapults.
Intermediate Computer Model Animation – Elementary,
Middle, and High School
• Use Lego people, LEGOs, K’Nex, dolls, puppets, or
other easily manipulated models and materials
• Set up the background and characters
• Take a photo using a digital camera
• Reposition the model (puppet, LEGOs, dolls)
• Continue repositioning and moving the models and
changing backgrounds
• Download one photo per slide into PowerPoint to
create numerous frames
• Click through or create transitions to simulate the
movement of models from frame to frame
Advanced Claymation – Middle and High School
• Use modeling clay or other moldable materials
• Take photos using the digital camera and then adjust
the clay model/character
22 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

• Set up the background and characters
• Take a photo using the digital camera
• Reposition the model (clay figures)
• Continue repositioning and moving the models and
changing backgrounds
• Download one photo per slide into PowerPoint to create
numerous frames
• Click through or create transitions to simulate the
movement of models from frame to frame
• Download the one photo per slide into PowerPoint,
Moviemaker, or iMovie to create numerous frames
• Advance through to mimic movement of models
Additional advanced animation projects may consist
of computer-based animation programs, ranging from
Carnegie Mellon University’s free Alice program (www.alice.
org/) to software suites that may be purchased. 3D static
graphics like SolidWorks, Inventor, and Pro Engineer, which
incorporate two-dimensional and three-dimensional design
suites, also allow users to develop products in both static
and dynamic environments. Students can create animated
gifs or other moving images using Javascript and other
computer software and input devices.
Animation Packages and Resources
There are a variety of computer-assisted drawing and
animation software packages available for students to create
and develop both static and dynamic graphics. In order to
properly select a graphics software package, it is important
to understand how graphics and animations are categorized.
Wiebe (2000) developed a model for scientific and technical
graphic communication that helps to determine which type
of software package should be used for graphic creation.
This model is shown in Figure 2. As shown in this model,
the four primary types of graphics include: two-dimensional
static, two-dimensional dynamic, three-dimensional static,
and three-dimensional dynamic. As shown in his model,
Wiebe relates each graphic type in its own direction similar
to that of a compass. Static graphics refer to those graphics
that do not move, whereas dynamic graphics are types of
animations. Additionally, 2-D graphics encompass just
length and width, whereas 3-D graphics include length,
width, and depth. The area between each quadrant and
between each direction helps to determine which software
package could be used in respect to the corresponding
directions. It should also be noted that the complexity of the
Scientific and Technical
Graphic Communication Model
Figure 2. Scientific and Technical Graphic Communication Model.
Graphics Type
Available Software Packages
2D Static
Autodesk AutoCad
Nemetschek VectorWorks
Adobe Illustrator
Microsoft Paint
Microsoft PowerPoint
2D Dynamic Adobe Flash
SWiSH
Ulead GIFAnimator
Microsoft PowerPoint
Animo 6.0
CelAction2C
Toon Boom Studio
3D Static
SolidWorks
Autodesk Inventor
Nemetschek VectorWorks
Google SketchUp
Rhinoceros
3D Dynamic Rhinoceros
SolidWorks
Newtek Lightwave
Autodesk 3D Studio Max
Ulead Cool3D
Alice 3.0
Figure 3. A sample of software packages developed for their
respective graphics type.
23 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

graphics design begin with 2-D static and progress to 2-D
dynamic, then 3-D static, with 3-D dynamic being the most
complex graphics type. Figure 3 gives examples of different
software packages that can be used with their respective
graphics type. Some of the software packages listed can be
used for both 2-D and 3-D drawing as well as static and
dynamic graphics. Figure 4 gives an example of each of the
four graphics types.
Courtesy Walt Disney Company
2D Static
Courtesy homestarrunner.com
2D Dynamic (moving)
Summary
Since animated characters have become significant
components of entertainment and advertising, using them in
the classroom can become another tool for reaching students
who have visual and kinesthetic learning styles. Students
can relate concepts that they see daily to their learning
process. Using animation and teaming skills allows students
to experience information and communication technologies
in a way that is both engaging and educational. Students
learn to work in teams and solve a multitude of problems
through the creation of animations. Animation is just one
more tool that can be used to emphasize and understand
the importance of planning and teamwork in creating
solutions to information and communication challenges.
Animation can be used to engage learners of all ages in a
wide variety of educational environments. Students can use
these techniques to better delineate, communicate, and share
their ideas in numerous subjects. In addition, the techniques
learned while creating animations foster creative thinking
and improve students’ planning and interpersonal skills.
Animation Creation Design Brief
Objectives
The students will be able to (TSWBAT):
• Research various types of animation
• Plan an animation using a plan of work, storyboard,
and script
• Work as a part of a team
• Use various communication technologies to complete a
storyboard and animation
Anticipatory Set/Focus
Animation is the rapid display of a sequence of static images
that create the illusion of movement. The animation process
has undergone amazing changes since the introduction
of digital imagery and computer hardware and software.
Animated characters are an integral part of life as a
consumer in this computer age. Have you ever seen a
cartoon on TV or the World Wide Web that you thought
was entertaining or educational? What are your favorite
cartoon characters?
Courtesy sourceforge.net
3D Static
Figure 4. Examples of the different graphics types.
Courtesy DreamWorks SKG
3D Dynamic (moving)
Introduction
You have recently been hired at a public television station.
Imagine that you and several classmates are part of an
animation team at the station. You are expected to research,
design, and create an episode of a new animated TV show
that is called Animation Creation Station. Your animation
must be educational and entertaining for a group of
students your age or younger. You have some decisions to
make with your partners. Who is your audience? Who are
your characters? What type of animation do you want to
use? How much time will it take to plan and create your
animation? What lesson do you want to teach? What
materials do you need? What’s your budget?
Challenge
Create an educational or entertaining animation miniepisode,
5-10 minutes long, that incorporates the proper use
of a storyboard, script, animated characters, digital imagery,
computer software, and hardware.
Materials
Materials will vary depending on the level of the students
and computer software/hardware available.
Related Resources
• Alice Project – www.alice.org/
• Animation from ThinkQuest at http://library
thinkquest.org/22316/home.html and http://library
thinkquest.org/25398/Claymation.html
• Animateclay Tutorials – www.animateclay.com/
• www.district30.k12.il.us/claymation/
• www.district30.k12.il.us/SummerSchool03/video/
index.htm
• Anim8or, free software – www.anim8or.com/main/
index.html
24 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

• Toon Boom – www.toonboom.com/
• Swish Zone (Flash animations) – www.swishzone.com/
index.php
• Claymation Station – http://library.thinkquest.
org/22316/home.html
• Designing an Animation Design Brief – http://teched.
vt.edu/gcc/HTML/Curriculum/GAERFactivities/
Animation.pdf
• Using Animation in Education – www.bergen.org/
AAST/ComputerAnimation/App_Education.html
• Wikipedia Educational Animation – http://
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Educational_animation
• G. Scott Owen Introduction to Computer Animation –
www.siggraph.org/education/materials/HyperGraph/
animation/anim_intro.htm
• Animation Station Unit Word List, Flashcards,
Matching, Concentration, and Word Search – www.
quia.com/jg/1249123.html
• Animation Station Unit Test Review Hangman Game –
www.quia.com/hm/367809.html
• Animation Station Unit Test Review Rags to Riches
Game – www.quia.com/rr/288214.html
• Animation Unit Online Test – www.quia.com/
quiz/1194462.html
References
Anderson, J. & Anderson, B. (1993). The myth of persistence
of vision revisited. Journal of Film and Video, 45(1),
(Spring 1993), 3-12.
Bancroft, T. & Keane, G. (2006). Creating characters with
personality: For film, TV, animation, video games, and
graphic novels. Watson-Guptill. ISBN 0823023494.
Freeman, J. (2005). History of motion pictures: Excerpt from
the Encyclopedia of Science, Technology, and Society.
Retrieved from www.rohan.sdsu.edu/~mfreeman/
images/History%20of%20motion%20pictures%20.pdf
Gonzalez, C. (1996). Does animation in user interfaces
improve decision making? Proceedings of the SIGCHI
Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
Vancouver: British Columbia, Canada.
International Technology Education Association (ITEA).
(2000/2002/2007). Standards for technological literacy:
Content for the study of technology. Reston, VA: Author.
Johnston, O. & Thomas, F. (1981). The illusion of life: Disney
animation. New York, NY: Walt Disney Productions.
Lenburg, J. (2008). The encyclopedia of animated characters,
(3rd ed.). New York, NY: Infobase Publishing.
Lowe, R. (2008). Learning from animation: Where to look,
when to look. In R. Lowe., & W. Schnotz (Eds.), Learning
with animation: Research implications for design (pp. 49-
91). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Thomas, B. (1958). The art of animation. New York: The
Golden Press.
White, Tony (1998). The animator’s workbook: Step-by-step
techniques of drawn animation. Watson-Guptill. ISBN
0823002292. Retrieved from www.amazon.com/gp/
reader/0823002292/ref=sib_dp_pt#reader-link
Wiebe, E. N. (2000). Scientific and technical graphic
communication model. Retrieved from http://courses.
ncsu.edu/ted536/common/STGC-Model.pdf
•Completely Online
•Based on the STL
•Hands-on Activities
Henry L. (Hal) Harrison, III, Ph.D.
is a visiting assistant professor in the
Department of Teacher Education at
Clemson University. He can be reached at
hlh@clemson.edu.
Laura Johnson Hummell, Ed.D. is an
assistant professor in the Department of
Applied Engineering and Technology at
California University of Pennsylvania. She
can be reached at hummell@calu.edu.
This is a refereed article.
•Designed for Certification
•Master of Education
•BS in Education
Online Masters & Bachelors
Technology Education Programs
MORE INFORMATION
http://teched.vcsu.edu
teched@vcsu.edu
800-532-8641 Ext 37444
25 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

Dancing Around My Technology
Classroom Box
(My Second RET Lab)
By Terry Carter
I knew this would provide me
the meaningful professional
development I needed to ignite
my passion for teaching.
Figure 1. Lab-On-A-Chip technologies like this one are used for
dielectrophoresis as well as other microfluidic separation.
It was early June. School had only been out for one
week, and I was sitting with a mixture of anxiety
and anticipation in my slow-moving, rush-hourinhibited
car. The lab I had been assigned for my
RET (Research Experience for Teachers) at Vanderbilt
University was going to be new and different from the
one I had previously experienced (see “Stepping Outside
My Technology Classroom Box,” The Technology Teacher,
November, 2008). However, I knew this would provide
me the meaningful professional development I needed to
ignite my passion for teaching.
This summer I was assigned to the Microfluidics and Labon-a-chip
laboratory to help research dielectrophoresis.
As this is an emerging technology, there was not a lot of
information to research. The best commercial example I had
found for this area was the lab-on-a-chip that NASA was
currently using to check for bacteria in the Space Station.
Through my research, I read what my graduate-student
teammate, Barboros, (now Dr. Cetin) was doing but had
only managed to get more questions than answers. Having
been through the process already, I knew not to panic
because things would become clearer as the weeks passed.
Our first few days were comprised of meeting the new
RET participants and an outline of the Legacy Cycle from
Dr. Stacy Klein-Gardner (yes, she had married since we
last met). We used another of her modules that focused
26 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

models of different microfluidic concepts that ranged
from the pressures on particles as they flowed through
micro-channels to the wind effects caused by the wings
of a fly. Although I felt like I was swimming in molasses,
understanding the explanations of their research left the
sweetest taste! I knew I was going to enjoy this research
experience as much as the last!
From the third day forward, Barboros and I spent most of
our time fabricating the lab-on-a-chip devices and testing
them in the lab (see “Fabrication of a Lab On a Chip” at
www.youtube.com). Working with the PDMS proved to
be frustrating at times, but we managed to get enough of
the devices to conduct our dielectrophoresis experiments.
Figure 2. A miniature troll test drives one of the student-built
vehicles.
on swimming to go through the cycle of brainstorming,
multiple perspectives, researching and revising, testing our
mettle, and going public. Having used the Legacy Cycle
in my classroom with my “Protecting the Mummified
Troll” unit (found at www.teachengineering.com), I was
familiar with its effectiveness at addressing STEM as well as
engaging students to become active learners.
Since I knew we would be expected to create another
module based on our research experience, I felt a twinge of
apprehension when I thought about my new lab placement.
How was I going to incorporate this technology, primarily
located in research facilities, into my curriculum? Would
I have enough knowledge as a result of this experience
to create a related module? I took a deep breath and
remembered to have faith in the process because it would
somehow work.
The first day in the lab, Barboros briefed me on
dielectrophoresis and lab-on-a-chip devices. From his
explanation I came to understand that dielectrophoresis
is basically taking an uncharged particle and moving it
through micro-channels using an applied electrical charge
(see video at www.youtube.com under “Dielectrophoresis
Explained”). He told me electrophoresis is commonly
used for particle separation (i.e., white/red blood cells,
DNA, etc.) but it usually has to be completed in a lab, with
expenses for time and money. With dielectrophoresis using
lab-on-a-chip technology, the particle could be separated
and counted in a local area more quickly with less cost. This
was beginning to get exciting!
The next day, he introduced me to his mentor, Dr.
Haoxing Luo, and the rest of the graduate students in our
area. Dr. Luo and the crew were creating mathematical
Figure 3. A common sight in the microfluidics lab, researchers
use microscopes and cameras to see particles flowing through the
micro-channels.
Before I knew it, the time had quickly passed, and it was
time to return to the other RETs to create a module for
our classroom.
Obviously, my module would not involve the students
actually working with SU-8 or PDMS. So, how could I relate
this experience in a way for the students to become actually
engaged? What technologies would be similar in concept?
Then, I heard it. Was he talking to me? No, he was talking
to someone else, but no one was there. Was he crazy? He
did not sound like a raving lunatic. He turned his head and
voilà! He was using a bluetooth headset and talking a mile
a minute. This encounter reminded me that most of the
micro-technologies in our world are merely miniaturized
versions of previously invented ideas.
27 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

Since I was going to use the module in my seventh grade
technology class (Inventions and Innovations), I decided
to continue the use of my miniature trolls. The module
challenged the students to create a transportation system
that would enable the trolls to travel throughout our
school’s classrooms. The students researched different
types of micro-technologies and their humble beginnings.
Most students decided on a slot-car style of transportation
that would allow the trolls to travel using electric motors.
Using a standard slot-car chassis, motor, and track, the
students used a 3-D CAD program to design their vehicles.
Their designs were transformed to actual prototypes using
modeling clay and a vacuum former. Finally, the students
tested their creations based on safety and performance.
curriculum for my students. Who knows what this
next summer will bring? Maybe it will be a module that
integrates GPS and historical cartography. Maybe it will be
a module that allows students to design their own city or
town using modern or historical architectural motifs. Who
knows? I do know that summer experiences can be both
refreshing for me and exciting for my students.
Terry Carter is a teacher at Hawkins
Middle School in Hendersonville, TN. He
can be reached via email at terry.carter@
sumnerschools.org.
With my RET at Vanderbilt complete, I have applied for
other NSF (National Science Foundation) opportunities
that will afford me new experiences to bring back exciting
STEM RESOURCES FOR SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING AND MATH
Check Out Our Latest Exciting Products
for Robotics and other Curriculums
online at www.kelvin.com!
®
NEW!
NEW!
SUMO Wrestler ®
This activity incorporates Math, Engineering, Designing, Goals,
Tools, Electronics, Teamwork, Scientific Application, Problem-
Solving and Innovation. Students plan, build and test battling
robots to compete in classroom or school-sponsored contests.
THE LOWEST PRICES ON ROBOTIC KITS!
AS LOW AS $44.50 PER KIT!
Kre8 ®
Brainy-Motor
Build Your Own ®
Smart Robot! Easy to
program and download
from your computer. Gr. 4-12.
Moves and
Senses
Autonomously!
CONSTRUCTION SYSTEM
We carry a wide variety of products including: comprehensive activities, labs, software, hardware, kits,
building materials (wood, foam, metal, plastic), electronics components, tools and much more!
FIND OUR LATEST BIG CATALOG ONLINE AT WWW.KELVIN.COM
28 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

TTT Index — 2009-2010
ARTICLE INDEX
2010 Charlotte Conference Photos, May/
June 2010, pp. 38-39.
2010 Directory of ITEEA Institutional and
Museum Members, April 2010, pp.
31-33.
2010 Leaders to Watch, March 2010, pp.
31-33.
2010 Professional Recognition Awards,
May/June 2010, pp. 32-33.
Addressing Mathematics Literacy Through
Technology, Innovation, Design, and
Engineering, September 2009, pp. 19-
22.
Beyond Smash and Crash: Gender-Friendly
Tech Ed, October 2009, pp. 16-21.
Breaking Boundaries and Sparking
Enthusiasm With TSA, December/
January 2010, pp. 11-16.
Charlotte Conference Exhibitors, February
2010, pp. 35-38.
Constructing an Engineering Model for
Raising an Egyptian Obelisk, September
2009, pp. 14-18.
Contemplate Doctoral Study, November
2009, pp. 25-30.
Creative Classroom, The: The Role of
Space and Place Toward Facilitating
Creativity, December/January 2010, pp.
28-34.
Dancing Around my Technology
Classroom Box (My Second RET Lab),
May/June 2010, pp. 26-28.
Data, Data Everywhere! November 2009,
pp. 20-24.
Design Assessment: Consumer Reports
Style, May/June 2010, pp. 12-16.
Designing Technology Activities that
Teach Mathematics, December/January
2010, pp. 21-27.
Different Angle for Teaching Math, A,
April 2010, pp. 26-28.
Editorial: The Year of Social Networking,
September 2009, p. 6.
Exploring Alternative Fuels in Middle
Schools, April 2010, pp. 20-25.
Exploring Hydrogen Fuel Cell Technology,
March 2010, pp. 20-24.
Extending Engineering Education to K-12,
April 2010, pp. 14-19.
How to Start a STEM Team, October 2009,
pp. 27-29.
Incorporating Animation Concepts and
Principles in STEM Education, May/
June 2010, pp. 20-25.
Internationalizing Technology: Teaching
with Blogs and Bananas, October 2009,
pp. 22-26.
ITEA Financial Report – Fiscal 2009,
February 2010, p. 17.
On Excellence—Illustrated Through Four
Exemplars, September 2009, pp. 23-27.
Optimization, an Important Stage of
Engineering Design, February 2010, pp.
18-23.
President’s Message: Building
Opportunities to Transform a
Profession, March 2010, pp. 28-30.
Project-Based, STEM-Integrated
Alternative Energy Team Challenge for
Teachers, A, February 2010, pp. 29-34.
Reinventing the Wheel: Design and
Problem Solving, February 2010, pp.
13-17.
Renewable Energy Technology, February
2010, pp. 24-28.
Safety and Liability in the New Technology
Laboratory, November 2009, pp. 31-36.
Students Engineer Eco-Smart
Transportation! September 2009, pp.
32-33.
Systems and Global Engineering Project,
The, March 2010, pp. 25-27.
Technology Education Teacher Supply and
Demand—A Critical Situation, October
2009, pp. 30-36.
TTT Index – 2009-2010, May-June 2010,
pp. 29-30.
TTT Statement of Ownership,
Management, and Circulation,
February 2010, p. 28.
What is Green? March 2010, pp. 5-10.
CLASSROOM CHALLENGE
Designing a Shopping System for Senior
Citizens, May/June 2010, pp. 17-19.
Developing a Watershed Challenge,
February 2010, pp. 10-12.
Dynamic Greenhouse Challenge, The,
March 2010, pp. 17-19.
Electric Vehicle Challenge, The,
December/January 2010, pp. 35-37.
Old Railroad Right-of-Way Challenge, The,
September 2009, pp. 11-13.
Quality of Drinking Water, October 2009,
pp. 13-15.
Radio-Controlled Car Challenge, A, April
2010, pp. 11-13.
Technology Education and the Arts,
November 2009, pp. 12-14.
RESOURCES IN TECHNOLOGY
Boards on the Move: Surfboards,
Skateboards, Snowboards, and
Kiteboards, November 2009, pp. 7-11.
Green Ships: Keeping Oceans Blue,
February 2010, pp. 5-9.
Organ Harvesting and Transplants, April
2010, pp. 5-10.
Place to Stay, A, March 2010, pp. 11-16.
Producing Nuclear Power, December/
January 2010, pp. 5-10.
29 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

Technologies and Techniques: Green
Circuit Practices, October 2009, pp.
7-12.
Transportation of the Future:
Understanding Port Logistics,
September 2009, pp. 7-10.
Understanding Materials, May/June 2010,
pp. 5-11.
SPACE PLACE
Make a Pinhole Camera, November 2009,
pp. 15-19.
AUTHOR INDEX
Baskette, Kimberly G. & Ritz, John
M., DTE; Organ Harvesting and
Transplants, April 2010.
Beck, Charles R.; Constructing an
Engineering Model for Raising an
Egyptian Obelisk, September 2009.
Bellamy, John S. & Mativo, John M.; A
Different Angle for Teaching Math,
April 2010.
Blasetti, Sean M.; Reinventing the Wheel:
Design and Problem Solving, February
2010.
Brus, David & Hotek, Doug; Exploring
Hydrogen Fuel Cell Technology, March
2010.
Busby, Joe R., DTE, Ernst, Jeremy V.,
& Varnado, Terri E.; Data, Data
Everywhere! November 2009.
Carter, Terry; Dancing Around my
Technology Classroom Box (My Second
RET Lab), May/June 2010.
Childress, Vincent W.; Producing Nuclear
Power, December/January 2010.
Daugherty, Michael K. & Carter, Vinson
R.; Renewable Energy Technology,
February 2010.
Davey, Sandy, Smith, Walter S., & Merrill,
Chris; Internationalizing Technology:
Teaching with Blogs and Bananas,
October 2009.
Deal, Walter F; A Place to Stay, March
2010.
Deal, Walter F.; Technologies and
Techniques: Green Circuit Practices,
October 2009.
de la Paz, Katie; Editorial: The Year of
Social Networking, September 2009.
Donley, John F. & Stewardson, Gary A.;
Exploring Alternative Fuels in Middle
Schools, April 2010.
Felix, Allison, & Harris, John; A Project-
Based, STEM-Integrated Alternative
Energy Team Challenge for Teachers,
February 2010.
Fisher, Diane K. & Novati, Alexander,
Make a Pinhole Camera, November
2009.
Flowers, Jim & Lazaros, Edward J.;
Contemplate Doctoral Study,
November 2009.
Haney, W. J., III; Safety and Liability in
the New Technology Laboratory,
November 2009.
Harms, Henry, Janosz, David A., Jr., &
Maietta, Steve; The Systems and Global
Engineering Project, March 2010.
Harrison, Henry L. (Hal) III & Hummell,
Laura J.; Incorporating Animation
Concepts and Principles in STEM
Education, May/June 2010.
Hess, Timothy R.; Breaking Boundaries
and Sparking Enthusiasm With TSA,
December/January 2010.
Hughes, Bill; How to Start a STEM Team,
October 2009.
Katsioloudis, Petros; Green Ships: Keeping
Oceans Blue, February 2010.
Katsioloudis, Petros; Transportation of the
Future: Understanding Port Logistics,
September 2009.
Katsioloudis, Petros; Understanding
Materials, May/June 2010.
Kelley, Todd R.; Design Assessment:
Consumer Reports Style, May/June
2010.
Kelley, Todd R.; Optimization, an
Important Stage of Engineering Design,
February 2010.
Lewis, Theodore (Ted); On Excellence—
Illustrated Through Four Exemplars,
September 2009.
Litowitz, Len S., DTE; Addressing
Mathematics Literacy Through
Technology, Innovation, Design, and
Engineering, September 2009.
McCarthy, Ray; Beyond Smash and Crash:
Gender-Friendly Tech Ed, October
2009.
Moye, Johnny J; Technology Education
Teacher Supply and Demand—A
Critical Situation, October 2009.
Moye, Johnny J & Ritz, John M. DTE;
Boards on the Move: Surfboards,
Skateboards, Snowboards, and
Kiteboards, November 2009.
Nugent, Gwen, Kunz, Gina, Rilett, Larry, &
Jones, Elizabeth; Extending Engineering
Education to K-12, April 2010.
Pokrandt, Rachel; What is Green? March
2010.
Roman, Harry T.; Designing a Shopping
System for Senior Citizens, May/June
2010.
Roman, Harry T.; Developing a Watershed
Challenge, February 2010.
Roman, Harry T.; The Dynamic
Greenhouse Challenge, March 2010.
Roman, Harry T.; The Electric Vehicle
Challenge, December/January 2010.
Roman, Harry T.; The Old Railroad Rightof-Way
Challenge, September 2009.
Roman, Harry T.; Quality of Drinking
Water, October 2009.
Roman, Harry T.; A Radio-Controlled Car
Challenge, April 2010.
Roman, Harry T.; Technology Education
and the Arts, November 2009.
Silk, Eli M., Higashi, Ross, Shoop, Robin,
& Schunn, Christian D.; Designing
Technology Activities that Teach
Mathematics, December/January 2010.
Warner, Scott A. & Myers, Kerri L.; The
Creative Classroom: The Role of
Space and Place Toward Facilitation
Creativity, December/January 2010.
Wynn, Gary, DTE; President’s Message:
Building Opportunities to Transform a
Profession, March 2010.
30 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

Don’t you have enough to do already?
Engineering byDesign is the only comprehensive
K–12 Solution for Science, Technology, Engineering,
and Mathematics (STEM).
Call us today, and cross that item off your list.
Learn how we can help you achieve your program goals today!
Visit www.engineeringbydesign.org, email ebd@iteea.org,
or call Barry Burke at 301-482-1929.
States’ Career Clusters Initiative, 2006
www.careerclusters.org
31 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

2010 Professional Recognition Awards
Special Recognition Awards
Academy of Fellows........................................... Marc J. de Vries
Award of Distinction............................................. Gerald F. Day
Special Recognition Award........................... Ronald G. Barker
Lockette/Monroe
Humanitarian Award............................ Richard D. Seymour
Prakken Professional
Cooperation Award.................................................. Thea Sahr
Wilkinson Meritorious
Service Award...................................................... David Janosz
Outstanding Sales
Representative Award............................ Beryl McKinnerney
Outstanding Affiliate Representatives
N. Creighton Alexander, DTE – Georgia
Ken Amos – Indiana
Darrell Andelin – Utah
Stephen Andrews – South Carolina
Mohamad Barbarji – Virginia
Jared Bitting – Pennsylvania
James Boe – North Dakota
Phil Cardon – Michigan
Dan Caron, DTE – New Hampshire
Vinson Carter – Arkansas
Thomas V. Cummings – Florida
Rich Davis – Illinois
Joel Ellinghuysen – Minnesota
Gus Goodwin – Maine
Nancye L. Hart – North Carolina
Tony Korwin, DTE – Colorado
Diane McLaughlin – Alaska
Steve McNaught – Missouri
Ben Nuebel – Colorado
Lauren Olson – Mississippi
Terrie Rust – Arizona
John Vaglia – Tennessee
Greg Wilson – Ohio
Kenneth Zushma – New Jersey
Distinguished Technology Educators
Jeffrey W. Bush
Anthony F. Gilberti
Charles H. Goodwin
James Novotny
Scholarships and Grants
Maley/FTE Teacher Scholarship.................. Molly Ritz Knack
PITSCO/Hearlihy FTE Grant........................Rodney Ragsdale
Greer/FTE Grant..............................................Benjamin Kinsey
FTE Undergraduate Scholarship.....................Jennifer Jenkins
Litherland/FTE Undergraduate
Scholarship.......................................................Megan Jackson
Maley Outstanding Graduate Student Citation
Drew H. Abney, Illinois State University
P. Scott Bevins, Old Dominion University
Scott. F. Farmer, Millersville University of Pennsylvania
Frank Fierstein, University of Maryland Eastern Shore
Paul G. Rotstein, State University of New York Oswego
21st Century Fellows
Nathan Mentzer, National Center for Engineering and
Technology Education
David W. White, Florida A&M University
Josh Brown, Illinois State University
Wendy A. Ku, Simsbury High School
David Stricker, University of Wisconsin-Stout
Laura J. Hummell, California University of Pennsylvania
Jennifer A. (Jenny) Lee, Old Dominion University
Program Excellence Award Recipients
Alaska................................................Goldenview Middle School
Arizona.................................................Oasis Elementary School
Colorado.................................................... Russell Middle School
District of Columbia..................British School of Washington
Georgia...................................................Freedom Middle School
Georgia.......................................................... Tucker High School
Illinois..................................................Streamwood High School
Indiana...............................................Fishers Junior High School
Indiana..........................................................Goshen High School
Kentucky...................................... East Jessamine Middle School
Kentucky......................................Calloway County High School
Maryland.............................................Clarksville Middle School
Maryland............................................ Severna Park High School
Minnesota............................................ Oak View Middle School
Missouri.........................................................Aurora High School
Missouri.........................................................Odessa High School
Mississippi.................................... Batesville Junior High School
North Dakota.....................Hatton-Northwood Public Schools
New Jersey............................... Red Bank Regional High School
New Jersey......................... Montgomery Upper Middle School
New Jersey...................................William Annin Middle School
North Carolina................................... East Forsyth High School
Ohio........................................Colonial Hills Elementary School
Ohio........................................................... Louisville High School
Oklahoma........... Tulsa Public Schools/Carver Middle School
Pennsylvania....................................Lower Merion High School
Pennsylvania........................ Boyertown Area Junior High East
& West Centers
Rhode Island........................................... Smithfield High School
South Dakota.....................................Todd County High School
South Dakota.............................................. South Middle School
Texas.................................................Flower Mound High School
Texas......................................................... Hudson Middle School
Utah............................................................. San Juan High School
Utah............................................. Bonneville Junior High School
Virginia.............................................West Potomac High School
Virginia................................. John Wayland Elementary School
Washington............................................ Eckstein Middle School
Wisconsin............................................... Manawa Middle School
Wisconsin............................................... McFarland High School
32 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

Teacher Excellence Award Recipients
Marc A. Finer – Centennial, CO
Gwen J. Block – Chamblee, GA
Kimberly L. Burgess – La Grange, GA
David Heath – Idaho Falls, ID
William Merchantz – Frankfort, IL
Dan Ginther – New Palestine, IN
Erica Ruckman – Georgetown, IN
Steve Allman – Van Horne, IA
Warren Brown – Des Moines, IA
Staci Davis – Lexington, KY
Jeffrey Shaffer – Eddyville, KY
Michael Tedeschi – Baltimore, MD
William Weber – Towson, MD
Joe Nuzzo – Ypsilanti, MI
Brad Jans – Long Lake, MN
Jim Walker – Madison, MS
Venera Gattonini – Newmarket, NH
Nick Beykirch – Basking Ridge, NJ
Daniel Muller – Sussex, NJ
Nancye Hart – Huntersville, NC
Andrew Rohwedder – Richardton, ND
Chris Buster – Carnegie, OK
Ben McCoy – London, OH
Dan Sansuchat – Granville, OH
Steven Drake – Slatington, PA
Albert Edward Hine – Broomall, PA
Michael Comley – Lake Jackson, TX
Al Quear – Fort Worth, TX
Walter Jones – St. George, UT
Andy Swapp – Milford, UT
Cindy Jones – Midlothian, VA
Amy Krellwitz – Burke, VA
Michael Martin – Falls Church, VA
Dan Jones – Portage, WI
TECA COMPETITIVE EVENT RESULTS
TECA Technology Challenge
1. Ball State University
2. University of Wyoming/Casper College
3. Fitchburg State College
Teaching Lesson Contest
1. SUNY Oswego
2. Fort Hays State University
3. Brigham Young University
Manufacturing Contest
1. California University of Pennsylvania
Robotics Contest
1. California University of Pennsylvania
Technologies Transportation Contest
1. California University of Pennsylvania
2. St. Petersburg College
3. University of Wisconsin-Stout
Problem-Solving Contest
1. Fitchburg State University
2. SUNY Oswego
3. St. Petersburg College
TECA Communication Contest
1. Illinois State University
2. California University of Pennsylvania
3. SUNY Oswego
33 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

Now Available from ITEEA!
Facilities Planning Guide
While not all technology education laboratories will look exactly the same, there are certain
laboratory requirements that should be included in any technology education laboratory
design. These designated areas are defined in this standards-based ITEEA Facilities Planning
Guide and provide logical and specific guidelines for designing and implementing a standards-based
laboratory in your local school, no matter what the size.
While the primary focus of this guide is on the senior high school laboratory requirements,
the elements and recommendations are appropriate and relevant to any middle school-level
laboratory and should be incorporated in any laboratory design.
Some of the topics covered in the Guide:
• Curriculum Considerations
• “Center of Applied Learning” Sample Floor Plan
• “Center of Applied Learning” Facility Criteria
• Laboratory Design Considerations:
• Class Size/Laboratory Size/Laboratory Design
• Lighting/Aesthetics/Decor
• Safety
• Security/Noise Control
• Environment Control/Utilities
• Furnishings/Special Needs Considerations
• Laboratory Cost Considerations
• Technology Education Vendors List
• Laboratory Design Model Programs
International Technology and Engineering Educators Association
Centers of Applied Learning
Integrated Applications in
Science, Technology,
Engineering, and Mathematics
Facilities
Planning
Guide
Technology Education
Facility Standards
(P244CD) $18.00 / Members $15.00
Order today!
Print and complete the downloadable order form
(www.iteea.org/Publications/pubsorder.pdf)
and fax it to 703-860-0353
or call 703-860-2100
34 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

You are invited to explore the power and promise of a STEM education!
The Overlooked STEM Imperatives: Technology and Engineering, K–12 Education
Take this opportunity to gain a better understanding of the need for
STEM education and its critical role in creating a technologically literate
society. The rationale for the “T” and “E” has been specifically
addressed in order to gain support for these subjects as part of the
overall STEM effort.
Chapters cover the following topics:
• Background and History of the STEM Movement
• The Power and Promise of a STEM Education: Thriving in a
Complex Technological World
• The “T” and “E” in STEM
• The Contributions of Science and Mathematics to STEM
Education: A View from Beyond the Disciplines of Technology and
Engineering
• Technology and Engineering Program s in Action
• Basic Resources in Support of STEM Education
• A Call to Action
This publication addresses the point that the superiority of a country as a leader in technology is a desired
quality and that the ability of an educational system to produce individuals with these abilities is
also a desired quality. Providing support for a meaningful STEM education is critical in order to perpetuate
a thriving society, contribute in a meaningful way towards building our own future, and provide students
with a need to achieve.
Viewpoints are given by leaders in the field, including
• Gerhard Salinger, National Science Foundation
• Karen Zuga, The Ohio State University
• William Havice, Clemson University
• Michael K. Daugherty, University of Arkansas
• Sharon Brusic, Millersville University of Pennsylvania
• William F. McComas and Kim K. McComas, University of Arkansas
• Kendall N. Starkweather, DTE, International Technology and Engineering Educators Association
• Krista Jones, Bellevue Elementary School, Bellevue, ID
• Brian Lien, Princeton High School, Cincinnati, OH
• Lemuel “Chip” Miller, DTE, Cody High School, Cody, WY
• Marlene C. Scott, J. B. Watkins Elementary School, Chesterfield, VA
• Gary Wynn, DTE, Greenfield-Central High School, Greenfield, IN
• Tom Zerr, Pittsburg Community Middle School, Pittsburg, KS
You are invited to explore the power and promise of a STEM (science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics) education through this publication, but more importantly, to seek to understand the importance
of ensuring that the “T” and “E” are equal partners within STEM to adequately prepare the next
generation workforce as well as valued contributors to our communities and society.
NEW from ITEEA. Electronic publication.
P240CD. $15.00/Members $13.00
Call 703-860-2100 to order.
www.iteea.org
35 • The Technology Teacher • May/June 2010

NEW Courses Available from ITEEA!
Scientific & Technical Visualization I and II
Scientific & Technical Visualization I and II are 36-week courses focused on the principles, concepts,
and use of complex graphic and visualization tools as applied to the study of science and
technology. Students use complex 2D graphics, 3D animation, editing, and image analysis tools
to better understand, illustrate, explain, and present technical, mathematical, and/or scientific
concepts and principles. Emphasis is placed on the use of computer-enhanced images to generate
both conceptual and data-driven models, data-driven charts, and animations. Science,
math, and visual design concepts are reinforced throughout each course.
Scientific & Technical
Visualization I
Scientific & Technical
Visualization II
Engineering byDesign
A d v a n c i n g Te c h n o l o g i c a l L i t e r a c y
A S t a n d a r d s - B a s e d P r o g r a m S e r i e s
InternatIonal technology educatIon assocIatIon
steM±center for teachIng & learnIng
Engineering byDesign
A d v a n c i n g Te c h n o l o g i c a l L i t e r a c y
A S t a n d a r d s - B a s e d P r o g r a m S e r i e s
InternatIonal technology educatIon assocIatIon
steM±center for teachIng & learnIng
ITEA
1914 Association Drive
Suite 201
Reston, VA 20191-1539
This publication was made possible by the ITEA-steM±ctl Consortium.
For more information contact the
International Technology Education Association
steM±center for teachIng & learnIng.
t e l : (703) 860-2100
f a x : (703) 860-0353
w w w . i t e a c o n n e c t . o r g
ITEA
1914 Association Drive
Suite 201
Reston, VA 20191-1539
This publication was made possible by the ITEA-steM±ctl Consortium.
For more information contact the
International Technology Education Association
steM±center for teachIng & learnIng.
t e l : (703) 860-2100
f a x : (703) 860-0353
w w w . i t e a c o n n e c t . o r g
Scientific & Technical Visualization 1 Topics:
• Leadership Development
• History and Impact of Scientific &
Technical Visualization
• Visualization Tools
• Data Visualization
• Static and Dynamic VIsualization
(P242CD) $26.00 / Members $21.00
Electronic Publication
Scientific & Technical Visualization 2 Topics:
• Leadership Development
• Advanced Tools of Visualization
• Advanced Principles of Visualization
• Advanced Static and Dynamic
Visualization
• Advanced Scientific Visualization
• Preparation for the Future
(P243CD) $26.00 / Members $21.00
Electronic Publication
Order today!
Print and complete the downloadable order form
(www.iteea.org/Publications/puborder.pdf)
and fax to 703-860-0353
or call 703-860-2100

Robotics Teacher Training
Carnegie Mellon Robotics Academy
Learn how to use LEGO, TETRIX, VEX, Cortex or Arduino Robots with ROBOTC and NXT-G programming
software to excite your students about science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.
ITEEA Special!
Register by May 15 and receive a 10% discount.
• 5 days of hands-on training from world experts at Carnegie Mellon
• Training with LEGO/TETRIX/VEX/Cortex and Arduino robots
• Learn how to use Carnegie Mellon training materials to teach STEM
• Certificate of Completion to apply for Continuing Education hours
• Detailed mapping of the robotics curriculum with national standards
• Hosted at Carnegie Mellon’s National Robotics Engineering Center
• Training is designed for teachers with absolutely no knowledge of robotics!
• Pittsburgh area attractions and entertainment
Online Training Also Available!
www.education.rec.ri.cmu.edu
For more information visit us online: www.education.rec.ri.cmu.edu
or email Robin Shoop: rshoop@cmu.edu
Classes Fill Fast!
Reservations are on a
first-come, first-serve basis.
TUITION
$790 course registration fee includes: onsite training and
use of Robotic Academy’s computers, robot kits, curriculum
and programming software during the week. You do not
need to purchase any hardware or software for this course.
LOCATION
National Robotics Engineering Center (NREC), part of the
Carnegie Mellon University Robotics Institute, a worldrenowned
robotics research and commercialization center.
DATES & SCHEDULE
Classes begin June 28 and run through August 26. Each
course is 5 days; Monday - Thursday, 9:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m.
and Friday 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 noon. Lunch is provided
Monday - Thursday. Other meals, transportation and
lodging are not included. Please visit our website for more
details. www.education.rec.ri.cmu.edu
LODGING
We have arranged discounted pricing at the Shadyside
Inn, the Inn is located in a beautiful section of Pittsburgh,
provides a daily shuttle back and forth to training, and is
where most teachers stay for the week. Please visit our
website for more details. www.education.rec.ri.cmu.edu
Call Now For Reservations!
412.963.7317
Ten 40th Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15201
CURRICULUM • PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT • SOFTWARE
www.education.rec.ri.cmu.edu
Robotics EnginEERing and automation
Technology
Engineering
Applied Mathematics
Robotics
Advanced Manufacturing
Mechatronics
“
I have just finished my first trimester of Robotics Engineering in
LearnMate. It was the most sustained fun, entertainment and
education in my 42 years of teaching. Kids came to class early and during
their lunches just to get started on something they want to do!”
Roger Wills , Mayor of Belding, Michigan
Robotics Teacher & Coach, Belding High School
EbD’s Robotics PathwayExtension!
Robotics Engineering and Automation
is EngineeringbyDesign’s New Robotics
PathwayExtension - the result of ITEEA’s
new STEM Partnership with intelitek! A
two-year robotics course for science,
technology, engineering and math
programs, Robotics Engineering and
Automation provides superior resources for both students
and instructors, including award-winning hardware, teacher-friendly
lesson guides and the most flexible curriculum delivery available.
When combined with the power of LearnMate, intelitek’s e-learning
management system, Robotics Engineering and Automation delivers:
• standards-based curriculum
• relevant activities
• classroom management
• real-time reporting on STEM standards
• formative, summative and common assessments
• sustainable program support and professional development
To learn more, call intelitek at 1-800-221-2763 or ITEEA at (703) 860-2100
www.intelitek.com
35-AD10-TT05_EbD.indd 1
4/1/2010 10:28:25 AM

The 2010-2011 ITEEA Board of Directors.
Thursday’s International Luncheon.
Volunteer/attendee Brian Lien gets a surprise visit from
Astronaut Lee Morin – and Flat Stanley!
Paxton/Patterson’s Roger Davis presents the
Program Excellence Award to an attendee from
Stone Mountain, Georgia.
Friday keynote speaker, Astronaut
Lee Morin, captivates the crowd.
(Photo credit: Bill Van Loo)
Joanne Trombley and Martha Smith get
acquainted at the Welcome Reception/
Networking Event.
2010 ITEEA Program Excellence Award winners.

Program Excellence General Session speaker,
Dr. John Warner, made a big impression
on his audience regarding the importance
and relevance of Green Chemistry.
An unforgettable invitation to ITEEA/Minneapolis in 2011.
The Tech Fest was a great opportunity to share ideas.
(Photo credit: Bill Van Loo)
Supervisors Mike Fitzgerald, DTE (Indiana) and Bill Bertrand
(Pennsylvania) reignite their friendly rivalry at the
Welcome Reception/Networking Event.
2010 ITEEA Teacher Excellence Award winners.
Outgoing Review Board Chair Jerry Day presents TTT
author awards.
Thursday keynote speaker John Warner shares a
moment with PTC’s John Stuart. (Photo credit: Bill
Van Loo)

Clean Energy Technology & Training
Solar Panels
Wind Turbines
robust
adaptable
affordable
Hydrogen Fuel Cells
Curriculum
www.kidwind.org • 877.917.0079