Why no PWD books for kids?

[tgrimstead]

In doing research for the PWD on the web and books, I've noticed a common theme. There are no books or websites that are made FOR kids. You know, the little guys who most races are for. I know some will say that the concepts and science behind building a good derby car is to much for a 7, 8, 9, or 10 year old to understand. As a home-schooler ( yes, I'm one of those!) I think not. A lot of books we have explain science facts and theories very well, on terms even my 6 year old understands. The Magic School Bus is a great example of those types of books. So with all those books out there that seem to just regurgitate the same information for the parents, why not a fun interactive book for the child? Include activities and experiments they can do to demonstrate physics principals. Kids are smart, but most are like a light bulb . When something interests them the bulb flashes on and they consume the information and radiate knowledge. If it is not of interest I'm afraid the bulb stays off and you get blank stares or answers like "because it makes it go faster." We need to make PWD fun for kids, not just the building, but the information itself.
I've started in the direction of a book for kids with the assistance of my wife and children. It probably will just end up as a free pamphlet for the Pack. (which if given to the parent would be thrown away or never read.) But I'm gonna make an attempt to get the knowledge in to the hands of the ones who need it, the kids.
Your Thoughts?

[tgrimstead]

Some pages I've done so far.

[Scubersteve]

I think that is an excellent idea. The more little projects and experiments the better. Most kids get more out of doing something instead of reading something.

I remember as a kid finding my mom's old set of "Young Peoples Science Encyclopedias" from the 1960's. They are filled with brightly colored illustrations and lots of fun experiments from making an incubator for chicken eggs to a basic electrolysis apparratus and the classic lemon battery. Those books appealled to me because I wanted to build something that did something.

I am all for introducing kids to physics as early as possible. PWD provides them a great opportunity to exercise their minds by trying to pair solid technical aspects with cool asthetics. It will be interesting to see what you come up with.

[*5 J's*]

awesome tgrimstead - I have always had a hard time finding info at the appropraite level for the scouts. In a couple of weeks I will be holding a class with our scouts on the "physics" of pinewood derby.

Can I use these pages for my class? If you make any more pleae post. If anybody else has something that they could add to this thread it would be WELL used.

In addition to explaining the basics - I plan on demonstarting as well. Talk a little - demonstate a little. Tomorrow I am building some cars to illustrate the principles - weight/no weight, weight in front/weight in rear, straight axles/haphazard axles, rough axles/smooth axles,lube/no lube.

[tgrimstead]

I'm currently on the construction portion, gonna try and finish it today. Will include some word searches, color / activity pages etc. I will try to put it as a download. You are absolutely welcome in using it as a resource!
- Tim

[Darin McGrew]

You might want someone to proofread your pages. Two things I noticed without really studying the whole page:

"Other factors that effect a pine derby car."
Should be "affect" rather than "effect".

"They may weigh the same, but the lead has more mass and takes up less space."
Should be "higher density" rather than "more mass"

It's a lot harder to write for kids than it is to write for adults. And since the goal of the derby is adult-child interaction, if you write so the adult understands it, then the adult can explain it to the kids.

When I presented a 45-minute "derby speed" class to the kids in our Sunday school classes last summer, I focused on energy as well. I think that's the easiest way to think about derby speed issues, rather than worrying about force and acceleration and all that. I used the image of a pitcher full of holes, leaking water. You want to keep as much water in it as possible, for as long as possible, so you have to plug the big holes first. I also had tried to make it as "hands on" as possible, with frequent demonstrations that showed what I was talking about. Still, there's far too much information for a 45-minute class. I was barely able to cover basic principles.

[FatSebastian]

I think the draft looks great and is an admirable attempt at filling that particular niche. I would love to see the finished version and try it out next time I have the chance, if you make it available as a resource for others.

You might want someone to proofread your pages.

Also, "Potential energy is what is possible from an object not in moving."

It's a lot harder to write for kids than it is to write for adults. And since the goal of the derby is adult-child interaction, if you write so the adult understands it, then the adult can explain it to the kids.

I agree with Darin. The market for a kid's book will be less than that for an adult book (adults, after all, have the money to buy books ). I have bought a pamphlet or two that were aimed at kids (either that, or very uneducated adults ); IMO they were not very good, partly because the authors really didn't fully understand the physics they were trying to explain. Not everyone is trained in science, (experimental) physics, and/or engineering; one should really understanding something before teaching it, especially to children. (Example: I remember as a child my mother pointing up to the Pleiades and telling me it was the Little Dipper. It was little, it looked like a dipper to her, and she had heard of the Little Dipper, so she just assumed...)

I also had tried to make it as "hands on" as possible, with frequent demonstrations that showed what I was talking about.

Again I agree that kids are especially aided by interactive demonstrations as ScuberSteve noted, which you don't really get out of a book.

[tgrimstead]

Thanks for the feedback, all criticism is appreciated and is helpful. Ive included these experiments for a hands on application for the kids. I used these with my kids and they seemed receptive of the info. This part has been my biggest concern. Thanks for the tip on the pitcher of water! I like that analogy for energy. Yes my "Editor" wifey has yet to fine tune it all






Is there a better way to demonstrate these concepts?

[tgrimstead]

Pages in progress. I think I may do step-by-step photos with my kids for the construction, sanding, polishing, painting, etc.

[Darin McGrew]

I used the experiment with two balls in my class. The ball with the "head start" has less PE at the ramp, less KE on the level, and thus less speed on the level. But be careful teaching about making the CM "higher". What you really want is to have it higher on the ramp, or towards the rear of the car. Moving the CM higher on the car (further from the ramp) actually reduces your PE, and also causes stability problems (higher rotational inertia, causing more energy loss when the car hits bumps in the track).

[Darin McGrew]

I also had a couple other experiments. To demonstrate air resistance, I took two balloons--one inflated and one not inflated--and dropped them. It's clear the uninflated balloon falls faster. But to make it more relevant to a derby, you need to attach 5oz weights to each balloon. The uninflated balloon still falls faster, but the difference isn't as great.

To demonstrate the advantage of concentrating the mass of the car, you can attach weights to the ends of a stick and have them rotate it like a twirling baton. Then move the weights closer to the middle and rotate it again. It should be easier (less energy) to rotate when the weights are closer to the middle. A variation on this would be to use two balls of equal mass, but one with the mass concentrated at the center and the other with the mass distributed.

[tgrimstead]

Thanks for the tips Darin.

[Stan Pope]

One of the problems is writing technical material for youngsters is choosing vocabulary that at most only gently stretches their understanding. When I tried to write for them in the the early 90's, I found that I frequently used words that really strained their understanding.

My second problem was using simple sentence structure and keeping sentence length to somewhere around 13 words or less. That was also tough for me to accomplish.

[whodathunkit]

I tend to agree with all of you (even Stan)
Keeping and useing technical material for the youngster's vocabulary is a good idea
Like his word (Dog Trot)
:A steady trot like that of a Dog.
r a roofed passage between two parts of a structure.
r a structure,or space created between the two buildings.

If the top of the tire leans outward camber is positive,if it leans inward it is negative camber.
Positive Toe, or toe, is the front of the wheel pointing towards the centerline of the vehicle.
Negative Toe, or toe out, is the front of the wheel pointing away from centerline of the vehicle.

If you have a positive or negative pressured room.
:Air must flow into the room to be negative,and out of the room to be positive.

If your Teaching material is good the learning experience will be positive.
But if it's not so good (so to speek) the learning experience will be negative.

We were all Born not knowing and trying to accomplish learning in some way or another.
Whether it be from books/teachers/computers/ or tools!