.png)
In this exciting project, we're connecting the B4 CPU to WiFi to remote program a B4. The project teaches students the foundations of web-based networking and involves WiFi, a simple web server, a web client and the interfacing between the various components and the B4.
In the end, students can upload a small program as a String to a Web Server, which interfaces with the B4 CPU that then runs the program.
Install the B4 Arduino Library and download the project code from: https://www.digital-technologies.institute/downloads
Shopping list:
1x B4 Computer Processor Kit
1x Arduino Uno
1x Wifi Shield for Arduino Uno
4x Jumper wires (male-male)
Female header pins
Suitable for students in the years 7/8 and 9/10. A small amount of soldering is required.
Australian Curriculum: Digital Technologies content descriptors addressed:
ACTDIK023, ACTDIK024, ACTDIP027, ACTDIP029, ACTDIP030, ACTDIP031
ACTDIK034, ACTDIP038), ACTDIP040
The video below provides the detailed step-by step instructions for this project.
Michael describes the process of creating pinball machines with his year 10 students at St. Francis College
Creating a pinball machine with our St Francis students was a brilliant idea upon conception at the start of the year when planning. We could see all of the possibilities for learning for the students: electronics, creativity, woodwork, laser cutting and engraving, and 3D printing. And we knew it would take some time and effort to get it off the ground. Little did we know!
The students loved the idea of making a pinball machine.
We started off by showing videos on some of the best pinball machines ever made and how typical pinball machines and parts work. Because of the cost, size and time projected we asked the students to work in groups of three. They were so eager that we had students fighting over who would take it home, or they were working out rotations of who would have it at home and for how long.
To get a better understanding of the mechanics of a pinball machine we set a research task for students to investigate appropriate ways to make the flippers and ball shooter work. This was a steep learning curve that required much scaffolding, as it appeared that the generation of students we were teaching didn’t do what we did as kids in pulling things apart to see how they worked, and the students growing up in an age where nearly everything is computerised there was little understanding or curiosity in working out how these parts work or could work.
Above: pinball ball launcher, designed by Jason.
Then came the planning stage for making the pinball machines. Our students got a real buzz out of the possibilities in what they could create, including various themes and the different ways to decorate and make the pinball machine interesting to play. All while this was happening, Jason, our workshop teacher aid, was working out how to make working flippers and a ball shooter while I investigated how to get some sort of scoring system. I quickly discovered that this was over my head and I needed help in trying to find a solution. I went online looking for existing solutions but couldn’t find anything that suited. I posted to groups, contacted engineers and even tried Airtasker to find someone who could come up with a solution. I didn’t have a hard budget but knew that this project, or at least the scoring component (which I felt was pivotal to making the pinball machine appealing to the students in an age of computer games, and provided the element of competition, which I felt is what made pinball machines enjoyable to play) was dead in the water unless I could find a reasonably cheap solution. The engineers and other people I contacted either didn’t really understand what I was trying to achieve or what they were proposing was too expensive to be making 6 machines per class. Then I remembered Karsten Schulz, the instructor I met in November the previous year in a Digital Technology PD. A guy who knew a lot of stuff about a lot of things. I thought that he’d be able to at least point me in the right direction. In true Karsten style, he asked a few questions and then came up with a solution. A life saver and for only $35 per scoring unit!
Left: The scoring unit. Adapted from the B4 CPU Kit.
Right: The scoring unit within the casing (3D designed in TinkerCad) attached to a display board.
We got into the workshop once we thought we were ready to start making. Our students followed shortly after me and Jason’s prototype. As this was new territory for us and we’d not found much done before us, the students worked closely behind us. Then came the problems. Our biggest problem was the flippers. The ball shooter worked brilliantly, but the flippers, which had worked fine in prototype, weren't going to plan for the students and ended up being too problematic to be feasible as the design stood. Jason and I spent hours trying to solve problems, with one solution leading to another problem. This was also crucial to the success of the project, and without working flippers the project was doomed. We did however come to a working solution which enabled the flippers to work without having to totally re-engineer the flipper system. Lock-tite was our friend and savour! No sooner had we found the solution I woke during the night at about 3am with a new and improved flipper system – all 3D printed and created in TinkerCad. All set for next year! I haven’t mentioned it before, but TinkerCad is brilliant for creating the scoring case and modifying parts. A great resource for all schools, and the bonus is its absolutely free!
Above: my 3D designed scoring case for the pinball machine.
The next major problem we came across were the switches for activating the scoring. We had bought a few micro switches, but at about $4 a pop we thought we would go a cheaper option. Plus we thought we would make some bumpers (that look like mushrooms) that activate a score by completing the circuit when hit by the ball. These worked well in testing, but we soon found out that our testing conditions didn’t quite replicate the environment they were getting installed into. Jason started pulling his hair out at this stage as he’s spent a lot of time making several of these in preparation, and before he came up with his solution at about 3am the next night had pulled all of them apart. The phrase “sleep on it” never rang more true.
Above: One of Jason’s scoring bumper switches.
Finally we created working pinball machines. As good as they are we know that they will be even better next year. As much of a headache this project has caused us at times it has been a great project and one we’ve been excited about in the possibilities of what can be done. The problem solving has been great overall and the sort of thing that tinkerers and hobbyists would love. As for Jason and I we are looking forward to what we can create with the kids next year in Pinball Machine project, version 2.0.
Above: Two of the completed pinball machines minus the ball catchers.
Jason: Just recently, I have become the father of a child who has chosen to leave school at this late stage in Year 11. Our son has anxiety, and while he tried his best, it is clear that school is not for him at this stage. At home, he has been teaching himself countries using an interactive mapping system.
He might pick Europe and start choosing countries, and at the end, there is feedback on his % of correctness and what time limit this was achieved. What struck me about this is how intuitively he has approached this program like a Neural Network.
He starts with say 40 – 50% accuracy then he would keep repeating until he can get every country now with 95 - 100% accuracy. There is no emotion about getting the countries wrong, each time he plays he builds an extra few countries to his knowledge base, maybe set up some mnemonics until there comes a point where he gets 95 - 100% accuracy in a region - exactly like Machine Learning. Then he works on the time improvement.
My first thought was 'Why can't he apply himself like this to school subjects?' and the answer seems to be that for whatever reason, he has a fear of getting incorrect answers and low grades and only has one chance to pass exams.
Machine Learning Approach
Could there be an approach where the Machine Learning format is followed? It doesn't matter what the first attempt is, but it is graded and fed back to show where the student is at. Then they have as many attempts as needed to reach a milestone and continue until they have achieved the outcome.
The key here is that the students have to learn not to feel emotionally deflated by a low score; they know they need to repeat and make adjustments to achieve a result. At present (assignments aside), you get one attempt at an exam for ten weeks worth of content.
Weekly Assessment
Could we review the 'read, memorise, repeat' exam model to reflect the current times? Maybe an alternative to exams is that every week there is an online test for competency to understand the week's topics and these all have a 10% weighting each week adding up to 100% weighting for the term. No more frantic revision week and exam blocks.
If you get below say 70% in any week you have to retry before you can even access the second week's assessment. You have as many attempts as needed to achieve a week's competency. This could also help early on in the piece to determine students who aren't cut out for that particular subject. Let's look at this idea in detail:
Cumulative Approach
Week 1: 10 questions online platform that requires a 70% pass rate - students can have more attempts if they want to record a higher mark, overall mark is diluted by the amount of attempts.
Week 2: The 10 questions from week one are asked again as a 'password' access to week 2 material to revise. Then week 2 answers are recorded as a grade.
Week 3: 10 random questions between week 1 and 2 (bias towards week 2) are asked again as password access to week 3 questions. Week 3 answers are recorded as a grade.
Week 4: 10 random questions from week 1 to 3 (bias towards later weeks) are asked to access week 4 questions and so on.
Flaws
There are some flaws which would need to be ironed out. How do we determine 'A grade' students? Perhaps there is recognition for how many attempts there are for those that score 95% or higher on their first attempt or first few attempts.
Another problem could be the people that don't do any work and only do the weekly assessment until they pass. One solution could be that part of the grading is from the teachers observations of class effort.
Some students might screenshot the answers on attempt one - a solution could be that the answers to the incorrect answers are not shown - students will have to research to find the answers.
Constructive Discomfort
I (Karsten) recently heard the term 'constructive discomfort' and that describes that the learning environment should be constructive, but just enough challenging to give a bit of discomfort for the learner to keep going. In a neural network, the back-propagation learning process adds this discomfort. And then the ANN does another round or learning. It will stop when the discomfort has fallen below a pre-set threshold. In my experience, most self-directed learners are like this. They are immensely curious, but generally not satisfied. When children are young learners (pupils), their teachers often have to add the discomfort to get going. But as they become more self-directed learners (students), they can judge whether they need to keep going. As a mature learner, I have come to appreciate the lingering dissatisfaction in the back of my mind as an engine that keeps my learning going. The psychology of the discomfort should be encouraging, but not to lead the students to believe they have already mastered the topic. It is a fine line. But repetition is key to all of this because every repetition cycle extends one's understanding. Repetition is key to learning, but that's not the same as rote learning. However, I have to come to appreciate that my mind has automated many of the mundane tasks of timetables, definitions and equations, so I have them instantly available when I do things. This means I do not need to switch contexts (to do a Google search) when I work. By deeply engraining key knowledge into the deep layers of my brain, it can focus on higher-order thinking.
Conclusion
Machine learning is rapidly changing the world we live in, with computers being able to do some things faster and more efficiently than humans can. Could we also take from Machine Learning the approach itself, and apply it to where it could be demonstrated as an improvement over existing pedagogy?
Going back to the mapping game, if my (Jason's) son had only one chance to get 90% or higher, there would be fear of non-achievement, and he would not engage with the task. Could it be better to let people have as many repetitions of learning outcomes of school assessment as they need?
As with any rethinking of an existing paradigm, there are hurdles to overcome and some areas that are not as effective as the existing model. Our hope in contributing to this blog is to start some conversations and rethinking of how things could be done differently.
About the authors
Jason Vearing is a content creator for Digital Technologies Hub and is also working with Dr Jordan Nguyen on an eye controlled communication device for people affected by ALS.
Dr. Karsten Schulz is the chief nerd at the Digital technologies Institute and father of seven children. He is the creator of the MyComputerbrain AI and the B4 4-bit educational CPU.
