Classrooms Where Odds and Ends Are the Textbook

Manassas Embraces Engineering Projects

Spaghetti, crumpled cereal boxes and other household goods have become teaching tools in some Manassas classrooms as educators deviate from traditional methods and seek innovative ways to challenge students in the 21st century.

"In the 20th century, it was all about memorizing content, but today it's not just about that. It's about being able to integrate other skills like critical thinking, communication and technology skills," Ken Kay, president ... Full Story »

Posted by Kristin Gorski
Tags Help
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Kristin Gorski - Feb 6, 2009 - 6:48 AM PST
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Edited by: Dale Penn - Feb 6, 2009 - 11:26 AM PST
Derek Hawkins
3.3
by Derek Hawkins - Feb. 9, 2009

This shows that the teachers clearly approve of the hands-on style of instruction and testing, but doesn't tell us whether it has actually proved more effective.

See Full Review » (11 answers)
Dale Penn
3.1
by Dale Penn - Feb. 9, 2009

I'm left wondering if there are any studies supporting these projects as educational tools. Intuitively, this seems to make sense, but the article is mum to the matter.

Back to the future - we did all of the projects mentioned in this piece when I was in 4th grade, in an under-funded rural school in the 1960's. 21st Century?!

Several teachers said students had a hard time writing down the problems they encountered and working in groups. More »

See Full Review » (13 answers)
Kristin Gorski
3.5
by Kristin Gorski - Feb. 9, 2009

An encouraging look at once district's attempt to incorporate hands-on engineering activities into the elementary classroom. More context and input from outside sources are needed to round out the piece.

On Monday, about a dozen Manassas teachers presented to their peers an array of hands-on “engineering” projects they did with kindergarten through eighth-grade ... More »

See Full Review » (14 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

3.3

Average
from 3 reviews (30% confidence)
Quality
3.2
Facts
4.0
Fairness
3.3
Information
3.3
Sourcing
2.7
Style
3.7
Context
3.0
Depth
2.7
Enterprise
2.7
Popularity
3.4
Recommendation
3.3
Credibility
3.7
# Reviews
1.5
# Views
5.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!