MITx: 11.

132x Design and Development of Educational Technology

Week 1 - Everything Old is New Again
Assignment 1.1: Ed Tech Then and Now
Eugenio Jacobo Hernndez Valdelamar
October, 2014.
INTRODUCTION
One of the statements of the course that too m! attention inmediatl! "as#
$... educational technologies often change ho" "e access content%% maing it easier, chea&er,
or faster to get our hands on information. 'ut it can also change the &rocedure of learning, often
enabling us to do things "e couldn(t other"ise, or changing the "a! "e &ractice and learn ne"
sills. )nd &rett! much e*er! technolog! falls into one, or both, of these categories.$
+or the assignment , choose t"o &rinting technologies# the $old$ 2- digital &rinting and the .-
&rinting.
PART 1: CURRENT TECHNOLOGY: 3D PRINTING.
/hange access to content# 0E1
/hange &rocedure of learning# 0E1
.- &rinting is a form of manufacturing technolog! "here ob2ects are created using three%
dimensional files and .- &rinters. Ob2ects are created b! la!ing do"n or building u& la!ers of
material
1
.
1 htt&#33en."ii&edia.org3"ii34rinting5.-6&rinting
1
What do you think are some of this technologys goals?
7he main goals of .- &rinting are
2
#
Manuacturing com!le"ity is ree. ,n traditional manufacturing, the more com&licated an ob2ect(s
sha&e, the more it costs to mae. On a .- &rinter, com&le8it! costs the same as sim&licit!.
#ariety is ree. ) single .- &rinter can mae man! sha&es. 9ie a human artisan, a .- &rinter can
fabricate a different sha&e each time. 7raditional manufacturing machines are much less *ersatile
and can onl! mae things in a limited s&ectrum of sha&es.
No assem$ly re%uired. .- &rinting forms interloced &arts. '! maing ob2ects in la!ers, a .-
&rinter could &rint a door and attached interlocing hinges at the same time, no assembl! re:uired.
&ero lead time. ) .- &rinter can &rint on demand "hen an ob2ect is needed.
&ero skill manuacturing. 7raditional artisans train as a&&rentices for !ears to gain the sills the!
needed. ) .- &rinter gets most of its guidance from a design file. 7o mae an ob2ect of e:ual
com&le8it!, a .- &rinter re:uires less o&erator sill than does an in2ection molding machine.
'om!act( !orta$le manuacturing. 4er *olume of &roduction s&ace, a .- &rinter has more
manufacturing ca&acit! than a traditional manufacturing machine.
)ess waste $y-!roduct. .- &rinters that "or in metal create less "aste b!%&roduct than do
traditional metal manufacturing techni:ues.
*ninite shades o materials. /ombining different ra" materials into a single &roduct is difficult
using toda!(s manufacturing machines. )s multi%material .- &rinting de*elo&s, "e "ill gain the
ca&acit! to blend and mi8 different ra" materials.
+recise !hysical re!lication. 1canning technolog! and .- &rinting "ill together introduce high
resolution sha&eshifting bet"een the &h!sical and digital "orlds.
)nd the $sci%fi lie$ goals
,
#
-io!rinting# .d &rinted idne!s, li*ing sin grafts, ad*anced &rosthetics, dental im&lants. 7he high%
end &otential for .d &rinting in the medical field could be earth shattering.
.mall -atch Manuacturing# ;hat this effecti*el! means is that the barrier of entr! for someone
"anting to tae a &roduct to maret "ill be significantl! lo"er. ;ould be sellers "ill no longer need
to order tens of thousands of units to mae a &roduct feasible, maing it that much easier for !ou or
, to tae a ris.
+rinta$le /ood# 7he great &romise here lies in the &ossibilit! that "e could one da! artificiall!
s!nthesize &roducts that are either e8&ensi*e to &roduce or rare. 7he other real &romise here is the
&otential for healthier food &roducts, customized based on the indi*idual nutritional needs of a
2 7he 7en 4rinci&les of .- 4rinting htt&#33.d.about.com3od3Other%<esources3t&37he%7en%4rinci&les%Of%.d%4rinting%
'!%Hod%9i&son%and%=elba%>urman.htm
. 9ong term &romises of .d &rinting htt&#33.d.about.com3od3.d%Electronics3t&39ong%term%4romises%Of%.d%
4rinting.htm
2
consumer.
0*12O!en .ource 3evolution# 1o the great &romise here, and indeed one of the greatest &romises
of .- &rinting in general is the o&en%sourcing of?"ell?e*er!thing.
What does the user do when s/he uses the technology?
7hese de*ices offer the uni:ue ca&abilit! and o&&ortunit! of &roducing real artifacts from a model.
,n real life an industrial designer must "or in a secth and then in a detailed model @ma!be .-A,
but it "as com&licated to get an inmediate result from it, and manufacture a &rotot!&e could be
costl!. Bo" its &osible to create the &arts of something and assemble it not onl! at a fraction of a
cost but a fraction of time.
Does the technology direct the learner toward a specific goal or is it more open-ended?
, thin is o&en%ended, because the learner can create almost e*er!thing that can be imagine and
dra".
How does it seek to engage and/or motivate the learner?
,n one of the *ideos there(s a e! statement from Vigot!(s social constructi*ism# $!ou can learn
an!thing at an! stage$. 1o imagine &eo&le "ho "ant to mae something to sell, &eo&le "ho need
something to "or @e8. a toolA or in a more e8treme scenario# imagine !ou need ho" to &roduce
!our clothes and foodC no oo"ledge, no satisfactors. ,n short, at first entre&renurshi& "ill &re*ail,
but in the long term it "ill be a social must sill @at least as a userA.
How might the learner learn from it?
On first instance, a &erson that "ant to be in*ol*ed in the design and manufactoring &rocess, must
learn mae .- models and to o&erate and mantain the de*ice. +rom there, the learner can mae
models and &rotot!&es to sho" an idea, a conce&t or to re&licate something e8isting.
) &erson b! itself can follo" and recreate -,0 &ro2ects, and share its results. 4eo&le "ith more
no"ledge in a &articular to&ic, can generate models that others can use or modif!, so communities
of $crafters$ "ill raise.
.
PART 2: EARLIER TECHNOLOGY: 3D PAPERCRAFT
/hange access to content# 0E1
/hange &rocedure of learning# 0E1
)fter designing an ob2ect using /)- soft"are, a lot of &eo&le "ould lie to o"n a &h!sical co&! of
"hat the! created. ;ith .- &a&ercraft @&a&er modelA !ou can ha*e !our designs turned in to
&rintable 2- nets "hich can easil! be folded in to a &h!sical .- model
4
.
7his technolog! in*ol*es#
>no"ledge of .- modeling "ith a /)-%lie tool
>no"ledge on .- files formats.
Dse of a soft"are utilit! ca&able of unfolding a .- model into flatten unfold 2- &art
@4e&aura
E
A.
2- digital &rinting of the unfold 2- images.
Who was/is its intended primary audience?
Entusiasta that "ant their .- digital models become real, or &eo&le "ho "ant to build e8otic figures
or costumes.
What were/are its goals?
7he main goal is to &ro*ide a chea& alternati*e for .- &rotot!&ing.
ased on your personal e!periences with it" did the technology meet its goals? Why or why not?
7he technolog! is a chea& *iable "a! to &roduce .- models "ith &a&erC that(s a good alternati*e for
4 7urn !our designs into &a&er models htt&#33""".creati*eblo:.com3.d3turn%!our%designs%into%&a&er%models%
.1410F4G
E 4e&aura htt&#33""".tamasoft.co.2&3&e&aura%en3
4
those "ho can(t &a! for a .- &rinter or don(t ha*e an! so&histicate &rotot!&ing e:ui&ment.
Did it have other potentially unintentional effects #either positive or negative$?
, thin this is a little lie origami @2a&anese &a&er folding artA. 7o build a model re:uires &acience
and manual de8terit!.
E
PART 3 - COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
Technology 4ardware
re%uired
.otware
re%uired
+rinter
materials
+rinter results
re%uire more
work5
.- &rinting .- &rinter /)- 4lastic, metal BO
.- &a&ercraft 2- &rinter /)-,
con*ertion
utilit!,
Dnfolding
soft"are
4a&er 0E1. =odel
must be
assembled
manuall!.
%re their approaches similar or divergent?
)&&roaches are similar# both generate .- models, but &a&ercraft is onl! for &rotot!&ing.
&ick one aspect of the e!perience across 'oth technologies and contrast them(
.- &a&ercraft re:uires manual crafting of the model to get the final &roduct. .- &rinting deli*ers
the &roduct inmediatl!.
How do they compare? Did you find one more engaging? )ore thought-provoking? )ore
memora'le? )ore playful or structured? )ore motivating?
'oth re:uire lots of "or in the .- modeling &hase, but after that it de&ends of !our needs. +or
ids, &a&ercraft is an e8cellent "a! to de*elo& coordination, concentration, de8terit!, &atience and
&ersistance.
.- &rinting o&ens a "hole ne" "orld of &ossibilities is !ou "ant to assemble a com&le8 machine,
lie a cloc.
'oth technologies are in*itation to &h!sicall! create things, and re:uires imagination, creati*it!,
talent, lots of "or and &assion.
Why do you think this is the case for you? *s it likely the case for other users as well?
7o mae a .- model is not a sim&le tas. Ho"e*er, to ha*e the chance of mae it come true is ...
magicH
9ots of &eo&le are in*ol*ed in these technologies no", and communities around the "orld share
their e8&erience on these &ro2ects.
What other differences or similarities struck you a'out these tools?
;ell, cost is a sensiti*e difference, but in the near future this "on(t be a sto&&er.
I