|
|
| |
I try to keep to around not more than 5 children per mindstorms kit
(or per RCX if using Dacta), and not more than 8-10 per instructor.
Usually - once you get above about 8, it is good to have a couple of
other adults around to keep peace, so the main instructor can actually
teach and do group demonstrations. This also means the other adults
can help stuck children a bit.
Danny
On 7/3/05, Elizabeth Mabrey <emabrey@storming-robots.com> wrote:
> Hi Robo Educators,
>
> I would like to gather some opinions from the educators out there who teach
> their middle school classes using the LEGO MINDSTORMS + Robolab:
> 1) What is a reasonable class size in 2 to 3 hours session?
> 2) How about summer camp configuration? Since the summer classes runs 5
> hours a day, it involves additional science projects for an hour.
> Therefore, they really spend approx. 4 hours on robotics activities. I
> currently plan to have 12 middle school kids in the class with one adult
> instructor. Will this sound reasonable?
>
> Please advise!
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------
> Best Regards,
> Elizabeth Mabrey
>
>
> --
> MIME ATTACHMENTS DISCARDED:
>
> 1. Content-Type: text/html;
> charset="us-ascii"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> Content-Length: 2246
--
http://orionrobots.co.uk - Build Robots
Online Castle Building RPG -
http://www.darkthrone.com/recruit.dt?uid=V30311I30328J30379X30379E30260X30277
|
|
| |
Hi Robo Educators,
I would like to gather some opinions from the educators out there who teach
their middle school classes using the LEGO MINDSTORMS + Robolab:
1) What is a reasonable class size in 2 to 3 hours session?
2) How about summer camp configuration? Since the summer classes runs 5
hours a day, it involves additional science projects for an hour.
Therefore, they really spend approx. 4 hours on robotics activities. I
currently plan to have 12 middle school kids in the class with one adult
instructor. Will this sound reasonable?
Please advise!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
Best Regards,
Elizabeth Mabrey
--
MIME ATTACHMENTS DISCARDED:
1. Content-Type: text/html;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Length: 2246
|
|
| |
In lugnet.robotics.rcx, Michael Obenland wrote:
| |
| |
The starter kit is $300, which is a 50% pricier...
|
Sure, but it seems of not much value regarding programming. The
informations on the vex site are sparse and not easy to decipher, but I
think you will have to:
- pay aditional $99 for somethink called easyC, that is more or less nqc
- or pay some bucks for a genuine c compiler from microchip.com.
|
I think you’re paying not for the compiler, but for the “programmer” (a sort of
serial adapter with an integrated PIC that massages the data somehow). But
either way, yes, it’s an extra $100 to program the thing. And without the
ability to program it, it *is* pretty useless, so this thing is basically twice
the cost of Mindstorms.
But, it’s a lot more than twice the functionality. And of course, it’s only
twice the cost if you get only one -- if you get more than one, you still need
only one programmer, which brings the cost back down a bit.
I hear rumors of a new RCX coming... hopefully it will be closer to Vex in
functionality.
Best,
– Joe
|
|
| |
Hi Joe,
Their website seemingly offers a lot of other gadgets. However, I have
serious doubt about the programming platform though. Or, perhaps I have
not found much about the programming language which can interface with it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
Elizabeth Mabrey
> -----Original Message-----
> From: news-gateway@lugnet.com
> [mailto:news-gateway@lugnet.com] On Behalf Of Joe Strout
> Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 5:19 PM
> To: lugnet.robotics.rcx@lugnet.com; lugnet.robotics.edu@lugnet.com
> Subject: Re: vex robotics kit
>
> In lugnet.robotics.rcx, Elizabeth Mabrey wrote:
>
> > I wonder if anyone has had a chance to use the new VEX • robotic kit by radio
> > shack. I am trying to collect the info to evaluate this • product vs LEGO
> > RIS + robolab in terms of educational values.
>
> I haven't used it, but I thank you for pointing it out. (For
> others, the link is <http://www.vexrobotics.com/>.)
>
> I hate to say it, but this looks like it rather blows the
> socks off of standard LEGO robotics. The starter kit is
> $300, which is a 50% pricier, but comes with some really cool
> features out of the box that are very difficult or impossible
> to add to Mindstorms at all. For example, a radio
> transmitter and receiver, that lets you interact with your
> robot by remote control (in addition to its autonomous
> control via the programmable microcontroller).
>
> Additional parts are nicely available and well-priced, too --
> for example, $20 for a servo kit, $50 for a radio crystal set
> that enables four different frequencies, $13 for an extra set
> of gears (duplicating all the gears in the starter kit, plus
> two more), and $50 for a battery charger that can charge
> robot and transmitter batteries at the same time.
>
> The major drawback, of course, is that the dang thing isn't
> based on LEGO, so it's going to be a PITA to build and
> comparatively limited in the physical structures you can
> make. Looks surprisingly fun anyway, though.
>
> I found a review of the VEX system that may be useful:
> <http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/ZDM/story?id=817378>
>
> I haven't been able to find much detail about the
> microcontroller, except that it contains "dozens of ports for
> sensor plugs and jumpers." It's not clear exactly what that
> means, though. Nor can I find any information about how it
> is programmed -- apparently it comes with a preset program
> you can tweak in small ways via jumpers, but they also claim
> it's "programmable."
>
> I hope this gives some inspiration to both the engineers and
> the marketing guys at LEGO... I feel like LEGO robotics is
> falling behind, and has some catching up to do.
>
> Best,¬
> - Joe
>
|
|
|
