UDL in MOXI and in IWS/capstone curricula - Sam S.

Reading about Universal Design for Learning both in basic learning activities described in "Right From the Start" and "Providing New Access" brought up both new and old considerations in the space and activities here at MOXI.

UD seems to be present in some aspects of MOXI's architecture, and lacking somewhat in others. There are several physical barriers throughout the space, such as stairs (with one slower elevator), a few chokepoints in an otherwise open layout, and some doors and thresholds that are harder to cross. However, I think that the layout of the museum overall does fairly well with universal design. Most of the exhibits are accessible to a very wide range of visitors, and are appropriately spaced. Most also have multiple learning outcomes and participatory avenues to allow most visitors to engage with the exhibit with few limitations. The multiple pathways for learning at MOXI's exhibits definitely relates to the concept stressed in "Right From the Start" that learning tools and curricula should be designed with flexibility and generality in goals, and be equipped for adaptation to specific needs. I think that the majority of MOXI's attractions adhere to that standard.

I had never explicitly heard of UDL before the last class and talk with Rachel Lambert. However, I have been grappling with its concepts in developing my IWS activity. I started out my concept of a rope-making handicraft in a very prescribed and limited way, which would have created high-level learning outcomes for a "core group" of learners I had in mind -- those with higher motor skills, background in quantitative thinking, and interest in prolonged engagement with physics. The core group that I was envisioning is a small minority of MOXI's visitors. I was ignoring the learning possibilities that others in the IWS could get from the basic concept of my activity, without the distraction or barriers that my original idea inevitably introduced. I've since made my activity more fundamental and accessible.

I'll also have to keep the principles of UDL in mind as I develop my capstone project. Hopefully, I will be teaching UCSB and other local scientists in some of the concepts of informal science education so they can showcase their research and disciplines at MOXI. Not only will I have to change their mindset in terms of pedagogy and facilitation, but also the accessibility interactive activity designs. UDL will be crucial to keep in mind in making their science engaging for all audience.

-Sam S.

Universal Design by Kevin

I love UDL because it cuts through all of my ideas about what school/education should be.  The Providing New Access article says, “once you understand the true purpose for learning, you can use various means, media, scaffolds, and supports to help students reach the goal without undermining the challenge and the learning.”  Well then what is the true purpose?  It’s not about acquiring a specific set of knowledge or skills - what a core curriculum seeks to do.  Shouldn’t it be about empowering learners to set their own goals, widening understanding, practice, and providing safe spaces to test and experiment?

It’s easy for me to fall back into the trap of status quo by thinking that it would be too hard to accommodate everyone in one curriculum.  My time in classrooms has shown me first hand the challenges of mainstreaming.  I need to remind myself that UDL is not about squishing accommodations into a curriculum, but exactly the opposite. It’s about designing flexibility into the learning objective foundations and language of any curriculum.  The ideas of UDL come full circle by proposing that rather than using general assessment, we should be monitoring “individual progress.”  It reminds me of growth mindset.  Of course students fall into fixed mindsets when they fall short or exceed the learning objectives of a core curriculum.  

I also really appreciate the idea “that learners considered to be within a group are at least as diverse along various dimensions affecting learning as are learners considered to be in different groups (Rose & Meyer, 2002).”  I thought of a different analogy: it’s like designing a shoe to fit most people’s foot size. A core curriculum is like making a big shoe that most people can fit their foot in, but actually truly fits only a few people.  Whereas a universally designed shoe would be adjustable.

Right from the Start reinforces the idea that universal access needs to include multiple engagement pathways.  In addition to something being simply accessable, it’s important that it is personally engaging.  “In keeping with UDL principles, the teacher can present concepts in multiple ways, offer children multiple means of expression, and provide a variety of options for engagement with learning (Hitchcock et al., 2002).”  Since it’s impossible to predict the multitudes of ways that people might like to engage with ideas, it seems crucially important to flexibility/possibility/imagination directly into the curriculum.  If people don’t connect with something, they won’t care about using/developing it.  Learning needs to be relevant.  This makes me think about what we do when things are hard (i.e. when they are just outside the zone of proximal development).  Maybe it’s impossible for a student to see how some content will eventually be engaging or useful to them.  What’s the relationship between UDL and motivation?  If things are made more universally accessable, do students still need a push in the right direction or does motivation become more inherent?

UDL: Reflections on the Readings/IW Project [Samantha Brown]

This week’s reading was helpful for reflecting on the curriculum development assignment for the Innovation Workshop (IW).

Creating curriculums that are accessible for guests of varying educational needs seems like a straightforward concept, however requires careful consideration. There are many points made in the article “Providing New Access to the General Curriculum” on the types of materials, methods, and assessment that are helpful for constructing an accessible learning experience. But the driving point is that a more accessible curriculum benefits all students across the board.

I found this concept very intriguing:
“To stay interested and committed to the task at hand, students also need an appropriate balance of challenge and support. Vygotsky describes the ideal balance point as where the goal is just beyond reach but achievable with effort, what he calls the ‘zone of proximal development (ZPD)’ (Vygotsky, 1978)” (p. 13). Essentially, guided activities, modeling behavior, and conceptual representations help establish just enough of a pathway for engagement. 

I’m thinking of ways to make the activity I’m doing for the IW project more accessible, as well as applying the information I’m gathering from articles and videos into my design process. I decided to reduce the scope of the puzzle making activity from my original proposition after getting feedback about it being too extensive. This has been the most difficult part; one item was purchased from my original list so I had to rely on my imagination rather than pre-constructed templates and familiar activities. The feedback forced me to revisit my activity, and I’m grateful because I came up with some original DIY ideas for which I purchased materials from a local store. 

I only had the riddle book to prototype with and that was not helpful. The process of constructing curriculum was almost inaccessible to me, but it was also a problem-solving task representative of one of the activity's learning goal (so I hope this turns out okay in the end!). 

Universal Design for Learning

After reading the articles on Universal Design for learning, I started thinking about camps and how these strategies should be incorporated when developing curriculum for camps. Since we don't have prior knowledge on many of the campers coming into this space, we need to design curriculum with clear goals, flexible methods and materials and embedded assessments as suggested in the article in order to have a space where all of the campers were able to access and participate in the general curriculum. I think MOXI summer camps are an area where this can easily be incorporated due to access in technology as well as materials.

Last summer during a very busy cardboard creations week with first and second graders, a mother approached me and told me that her son, one of the campers, was struggling at camp with the activities and his creations. We began brainstorming ways in which we could support her son and make him feel more comfortable and successful in the camp environment. We ended up coming to the conclusion that cutting cardboard was really difficult for him because the cardboard snips were made for right handed individuals and he was left handed. Being right handed, that was something I didn't think could be limiting to a camper until that situation occurred.

Throughout the articles they continued to stress the importance of clear goals and understanding and broadening goals. I think that is important because there are many different ways to reach a goal, allowing the use of various means to reach that goal creates a more inclusive environment. In curriculum development I think stepping back and asking yourself what do I really want the individuals to get out of this activity when developing a goal is important. Once a broad goal is established, think about all the different ways that goal can be achieved. Even if the curriculum is already developed, stepping back and thinking about all of the other means of achieving the goal will help create a more inclusive curriculum overall. In addition, trying the activity using different medium as well as presenting the activity with different medium will benefit the individuals engaging in the activity.

Universal Design for Learning- Juliana

Usually when I think of the word accessibility, I think of physical access. However, after the discussion with Rachel and reading these articles, it is clear that accessibility goes way beyond that. I liked the example that was given in the article “Providing New Access to the General Curriculum,” where the authors discussed the curb cut. Curb cuts were originally designed specifically for people in wheelchairs, however they ended up being useful to pretty much anyone using the sidewalk. It makes sense that things should be designed in a way that is universal to everyone using it. This applies to learning as well- everyone has to go to school and learn, so the curriculum should be designed in a way that works for everyone.

Universal design for learning is especially applicable to MOXI and the Innovation Workshop, as we have guests of all different ages and abilities coming in every day. I think that the current activity in the workshop, Digital Drawing, does a really good job of using UDL, as there is a wide range of drawing tools for guests to use, while some may be easier or more difficult to use depending on ability level. I am doing my best to incorporate UDL into my workshop activity as well- digital pixel art. I realize that young children may have trouble using the laptops to create their pixel art digitally, which is why I am providing graph paper and colored pencils to hopefully make the activity more accessible to a larger audience. While the end goal will still be the same, to learn about pixel art, the curriculum is still universal as there will be alternative ways for engaging.

Universal Design Readings - Destiny

These reading and the talk from Rachel on Tuesday was very eye opening. I have never heard of Universal Design before this week and it seems very important in all aspects of everyone's life, with disabilities or not. When all aspects of a place can be made accessible to ALL people in a comfortable way like the yellow ramp at the gym it allows for positive interaction. I feel that if a person in a wheelchair would have to use an add-on ramp I would feel uncomfortable using it as well because I could use the normal stairs. If there was solely a ramp that was made for all people to get to one place.

I also noticed in the "Right From the Start" reading, I was thinking a lot of the Innovation Workshop at MOXI. We want the curriculum in there to be accessible for all abilities and levels. This can be hard because our audience covers babies that are a few months old to older people. All these guests have all different backgrounds, experiences and talents no matter their ages. Having designed activities kind of limit who can actually engage.

To continue that, the readings say, "Educators should select materials that align with UDL principles and should remember that children must have multiple ways to accomplish a goal or learn a skill." Thinking of our audience being a much wider range than a teacher with a room of 25 first graders all working on practicing using scissors. I would love to see how a week or month would go if we just had open tinkering. Have all materials be accessible with no theme or limit so that all guests can decide what they want to use or make based on their individual levels. This could mean that the infants have access to paper, tape and coloring materials and the six to eight year olds are working on a project with wires, screw drivers, and pliers. An adult could be crafting jewelry or trinkets out of recycled materials. All the materials could be universally available. I understand that this is impractical with cost of materials and organization but it would be an ideal way to get everyone of all levels to interact in their own talents and try new processes.

I also think this is important because even though the new cozy corner is to create a welcoming and relaxed vibe it also creates a segregation. From what I have observed it has cause parents to be less involved in their kids interaction while being on their phones or even sleeping on the couch. Also, little infants and toddlers, specifically in this digital creativity month, are separated to be in the corner because the materials and processes aren't as accessible to their levels. I also noticed that the little ones that are put in the corner still seem interested in what the older kids are doing even though the parents are just trying to keep them in the corner. I can just see it becoming a problem if it does not develop into a part of curriculum soon.

Signage in IWS

 Signage at the Stop Motion Station

Original sign:










Woman and boy came over and looked at station, read sign and took a picture of the station - did not interact with the app.

Man and two kids came, man read the sign and told kids to draw a picture on the white board, took multiple photos, drew a new unrelated picture and took more photos on iPad.

Man and girl came over, man read the sign, girl drew a picture on small white board while the man guided the girl through the app, making big changes to her drawing as she went along. Man then asked girl if he could make a movie and he did one with smaller changes.

Second Sign:











Third Sign:

Man and girl came over, wrote "AOIFE" and began taking pictures without looking at the signs. They then erased the sign and the Man looked at the video and two signs above the white board but did not continue to engage with the station.


I found during my observations that people would read the original stop motion sign in the workshop however it did not provide enough information on the method of making a stop motion film. During previous observation in the workshop, people would read the sign, draw a picture on the white board, take a photograph and then either draw a new, unrelated picture or would be done. I thought this might be due to the text "design your world on the white board" with no instruction on the idea that stop motion involves change over time in order to create a product. Because of this, I decided to change the sign to demonstrate a simple stop motion creation through pictures. I designed a sign with simple instructions and frames demonstrating how guests frames may look for their stop motion film. Unfortunately nobody interacted with the exhibit while that sign was up. My last idea for signage was to incorporate both the original stop motion sign and the example frame sign. I suspected that just having the example frame sign would not provide enough information on the stop motion activity therefore I incorporated both signs with the through that with an example, guests would be more likely to create a successful stop motion film. Unfortunately I was only able to observe one interaction during this trial.

In addition to signage, I made observations regarding the stop motion films playing on the tv next to the stop motion station. I thought that these films would be great inspiration for guests when creating their own film however I was only able to observe one individual watching the video.

One of the challenges I encountered during this activity was the number of guests interacting with the station. I had guests interact with the station while the original sign was up but only one interaction with the modified signs simply because it was slow in the workshop and the people that did come in were focused on the drawing activity.

Accessibility at MOXI 2/19 - Angela

1. How can MOXI better serve people with physical and developmental disabilities?

2. How can we best study and develop ways to engage people with disabilities? 

Simple add-ons could be added to current exhibits in order to make them accessible such as adding different levels of access to the light bright pegs so that people who cannot reach the ground are still able to build on light bright. In addition, when building future exhibits, making sure that the exhibits are build with different bodies in mind making them inclusive for everyone.

I think one of the best ways to study and develop ways to engage people with disabilities at MOXI is for people to interact with the museum and give feedback on their experience. In addition, I think the exercise of going to all of the exhibits and thinking about different disabilities and limitations could be a beneficial exercise in order to develop a better understanding of how people interact with the space and how we can make interactions better through Sparking and modifying the space. However I think this activity would be more beneficial with more training on different disabilities.

When Samantha was talking about adding audio to BiTiRi, I started listening to the track much more closely similar to how Ron was. I was listening to all the different component from when the cars stop, to their change in velocity/when they left the track to when the car hits the end and finishes. 

I think overall having more training on different types of disabilities and what those might look like in a setting similar to MOXI would to beneficial to MOXI staff. In addition, having groups come in and having those interactions first hand could benefit staff on how to better serve people with disabilities.

Signage Observations

Methods

I set up a sign at the Makey Makey and then sat at the center table where I wrote observations on my laptop.  I positioned myself so that I could follow the guests gaze. I wanted to see if they were looking at the signage while being able to hear any conversation.  All ages are approximate. I left the “Circuitry Station” sign on the wall above and to the right of the Makey Makey. My signs were all placed right in the center of the activity.

Observations

Sign One - Pictograph

• Boy 9, looks back and forth between sign and materials. Starts touching the materials, then moves to the computer.  Clicks around on computer as mom and little brother approach. Mom walks away after a few seconds, but little brother continues to watch for another minute until they both leave.

• Man 20s, stops a few feet away.  Looks at sign with hands in pockets.  Scans set up and walks away.

• Girl 4, sits on chair and touches materials, then leaves
• Mom approaches and reads “Circuitry Station” sign out loud.  Dad interrupts, “Oh this is the program I was talking about.”  Boy 10, sits. Dad looks at materials and starts explaining. “So this is like your power, and these will be your controls.  You gotta put your finger here.” The boy starts touching the materials and makes the program move. Boy says, “I’m gonna try doing that again.”  Mom watches silently. Dad manipulates Scratch. Dad asks for help from Spark, “How would we get a blank canvas?” Spark shows them how by clicking computer and says, “So you can test out what each of these does. What happens when you touch the cd?  Are cds conductive?” Spark walks away. Dad says, “So you can see if these things are conductive.” Dad sets up a plastic spoon. Mom points at stop motion and whispers in the boy’s ear. Boy says, “I wanna try it.” They walk away, dad still looking at Makey Makey.
• Girl, 7 walks up and says, “What is this?”  Clicks on the computer. Mom comes and sits next to the daughter.  She tries clicking the keyboard a few times and then looks away.

Sign Two - “Getting Started with Makey Makey and Scratch”

• Mom aproaches and points at MM.  While pointing she says, “Circuits”.  As daughter approaches she starts reading aloud from sign, Trying to sound out, “Mackey... macky makey - look a circuit board.”  Mom starts reading directions aloud, “Plug in to computer, which it is...“ She closes the web browser, girl walks away as she tries to go to Scratch again.
• Girl 12, approaches with her eyes on screen.  She unlugs and plugs the makey makey then taps on the materials.  Walks away. 10 seconds.

• Mom stops, looks at the screen, sign, materials.  Scans over them three times, then walks away. 5 seconds.

• Boy 12, sits at computer.  Navigates to Super Mario Brothers on Scratch like he’s done it before.  Starts playing the game with keyboard. Ignores MM. Mom comes up behind and says, “Oh awesome.” She walks away. Boy loses and walks away.  Another boy 11 approaches, looking at game, and then starts touching materials. He starts experimenting with touching the MM, makes the sprite move and die.  He says, “Oh!” Realizing the MM controls the computer. He plays with board for several minutes, unplugging and clipping different materials. A third boy sits and starts playing the game with the keyboard.  The second boy keeps playing with the materials without looking at the screen. Nobody looks at the sign during whole interaction
• Mom approaches and frowns.  Walks away.

Sign Three - “How it Works”

• Dad approaches with son, 5.  Dad reads the sign aloud as the son plays with materials.
• Boy approaches 9 with grandma.  The laptop is closed. He points and says, “I know this.”  Then he turns and walks away, while saying, “There’s different options.”
• Two sisters walk in 10 and 12, walk up to MM.  One says, “How do we do this?” Spark interrupts and says, “Welcome…”
• Mom stops and leans on the table, reads the whole sign.  Then leaves.
• Dad approaches with daughter 7, observes MM for a few seconds and then says, “I don’t think this is…”  Then he guides the daughter away.
• Couple in their 20s approaches.  Girl sits and says, “Oh this is programming.”  She picks up a piece of tinfoil and starts reading sign.  The guy walks away. Girl starts clicking on sprites in Scratch.  Guy comes back and sits. He looks at sign but doesn’t seem to read.  He starts pressing materials. They realize that the MM can move the sprites.  “It’s making it move.” They keep touching, but have trouble making the sprite move intentionally.  “This one is space, so….” The sign is right in front of them but they don’t look to it for information. The girl takes the lead in developing a system to figure out which one is which.  She says, “Ah that’s cool.” Then goes back to using the keyboard. “How do you change the color?”

Simple Analysis

Most people spent less than a minute at the Makey Makey, regardless of which sign was up.  Interactions would generally end after some brief touching of materials. Maybe because they didn’t get an immediate response.  Maybe because the set up is intimidating. Adults spent a little longer on the signs that required more reading, but only enough time to read - not more time interacting.  The group that spent the most time was guided by the mom reading the sign and the dad who seemed to have prior experience. The parents directed the activity in this interaction.  Ultimately, the signs seemed to have no corollary effect on time spent or depth of complexity achieved.

It also seemed like there were a lot of visual distractions that made the signage an afterthought.  Most people either approached the materials or the computer screen. I noticed that kids would beeline to the screen.  Maybe they had a experience with Scratch or are just attracted to screens. They would also just start touching the materials.  Few seemed to use the signage for help or direction. The signs were most obviously attended to by adults who would go to them with intentionality, often reading them aloud.

Challenges

It was hard to tell whether the signage was having any impact at all.  It would be interesting to put the MM away in between each use, which would probably direct the user to follow directions on a sign if they were out.  I could then compare this to how people approached the MM with no signage.

It was also such a small sample.  Obviously, it would be nice to do a more in-depth study with video and interviews.  I wonder what this kind of informal study has on me as an observer. I felt like I was falling into my own confirmation bias.  For example, I predicted that adults would stay to read the wordier signs and that’s what I saw. Maybe if I left the signs up longer and looked more closely, I would find something surprising.

IWS Signage Observations

11x17 Signs

• These new larger signs seem to attract the attention of adult guests and the simple instructions may be helping the parents to assist the children.  
• The signage was used by one adult to indicate the title of the ozobots but not read further as the children seemed familiar with them. From talking to children it seems that the ozobots are in several of the local schools. 
• The uniform easy the read signs made the the room and the activities seem more professional and put together then the chalk signs. The signs are placed on the walls and windows above the activity. 

Chalk signs

• Unfortunately, I did not get to see many guests use my signs as the workshop was not busy. 
• The signs that I made only included the title of the activity and where placed on the table. 
• The group that I observed using the chalk signs was a couple at the stop-motion table. They seemed to read the sign and explore the app to create their own movie. 
• For ozobots a group of guests read the sign and reached out for help to successfully drive the bots. 
• If the purpose of the signage is to create an independent experience this may not be the best course. 

Signage on the Activity

• Conducted later during busier times. 
• These tests included Destiny writing directions for the ozobots on the table top and writing "make a movie" on the large white board with stop motion. Both seemed to engage quests and encourage them to draw on the surface. 
• I observed guests attempting to use the border that Destiny had drawn as a track and it seemed a great way to sample a track. 

Furniture Arrangement and Behavior [Samantha Brown]

Angela, Stephanie, and I mutually decided to explore the idea of moving furniture at the Roll-It Wall. We moved two pieces of furniture: the peg crate closest to the terrace and one of the ladders.

Certain behavior occurs regardless of the presence of the crate and ladder. Guests remove and add pegs, release balls down the tracks, as well as attempt to get a peg as high up on the wall using their own heights (sometimes kids mistake the wall for a rockclimbing mechanism).

After the preliminary 15 minutes of observation, we commenced collecting data for furniture rearrangement. 

1:25 p.m. Trial 1 | Moved peg crate to underneath wall signage (on the right side of terrace door).

1:40 p.m. Trial 2 | Moved ladder toward wall peg crate was moved to (on the right side of terrace door, but to the left of the crate).

1:42 p.m. A couple of kids notice the crate without moving the ladder or taking out/putting in pegs.

1:47 p.m. A kid with glasses struggles to move the ladder back against the Roll-It-Wall.

     The kid with glasses successfully moves the ladder to the benefit of other kids.

1:50 p.m. Trial 3 | Moved peg crate up directly against Roll-It-Wall (left side of terrace door).

     A couple of younger guests take out and put pegs in the crate.

2:00 p.m. We end our observation.

There are a couple of implications for the effects furniture rearrangement seems to have on guest engagement. Furniture arrangement can affect behavior, as certain furniture (i.e. the ladder at Roll-It-Wall) is quintessential for a specific learning experience. Thus, guests will move furniture to where it's needed if it's missing. 

I was inspired to think of other furniture arrangement possibilities at MOXI, and I wonder what moving the two tables at KEVA and the one table by the terrace into a large KEVA communal table would look like. Would it function the same as when the KEVA tables are lined up in the bridge, would having one big dining-looking area force people to build at KEVA rather than isolate themselves, and could it lead to new structures being built?

MUS Outreach Reflection [Samantha Brown]

The outreach at Montecito Union School (MUS) was a helpful classroom experience. 

It was an example setting, a computer lab with plenty of space and scientific resources for students to utilize, and enthusiastic students who were familiar with an activity that required their full attention. 

Observations that were helpful during the facilitation process:

One of the teachers (from the first group) used the slow-motion video recorder on an Ipad to show her students how their pennyships descended.

Engaged teachers made keeping the students focused much easier. I really appreciated when teachers assisted in monitoring students behaviors.

The script was really dynamic as well as the activity and both made engaging students easy.

The creative element allowed for free-flowing ideas and challenges to occur without feeling unachievable for students.

Additional points of reflections during the facilitation process:

Cooperation was hard to achieve among students, which seems counterintuitive due to the fact that kids engage each other at places like the playground.

Curious what this would look like in an underfurnished classroom setting, in other words in a different type of classroom setting like a library.

Repetition made the flow of the activity more natural with each class group. 

I appreciated the switch in the third iteration for the last class, because it became apparent that students had individualistic tendencies which leaned toward standing out from their counterparts. 

IWS Observations - Danielle Tisdale

For our assignment, I observed the Ozobots on Monday February 18th.

The three different signs I used were:

• No sign 
• Two signs at either end of the table that just said Ozobots!
• Two signs at either end of the table that said: "Ozobots codes, What do they do?" with six listed code examples on each sign. I labeled the codes with numbers but did not specify what they did.

I chose these types of signs because when I got to the workshop, the sign for the Ozobots had disappeared, and I thought it would be interesting to observe the space with a lack of signage. Since the sign was gone, I decided to test out a basic version of the sign on the chalkboards. For my last version of the sign, I wanted to give guests a bit of a challenge and see if they could determine what the different codes did without any explanation. 

• No sign (2:45-3:15)
• Most guests were younger kids who would go up to the table unprompted and begin drawing. Sometimes they would have the ozobot follow the lines, but a lot of them didn't see or notice the ozobots. The kids that went to the table seemed to be mostly interested in drawing pictures or writing their names and if they tested the bots, would ignore them when they couldn't follow the inconsistent lines. There were one or two kids who tried to design a track for the ozobot to follow and tested it out a number of times. There was only one set of parents that spent time with their two kids at ozobots without the sign, and they interacted with the bots and their kids the way I had expected them to. The dad was drawing a multicolored path without codes for the bot to follow on  separate sheet of paper and not paying attention to his kids, and the mom would coach one kid on how to write her name and then help her other kid fix the lines he'd drawn so the robot would follow them. The mom was very hands on and would take the pen from her kids occasionally while the dad was spending all of his time drawing his intricate path for the bot. 
• There was one kid that Matthew had to save from falling off of the table when he went to grab the ozobots!
• I think the complete lack of signage was a mixed success, a lot of kids were drawn in by the available pens and just began experimenting on their own, but a lot of them didn't use the bots either.  I think with the lack of signage, adults thought the table was just for kids to scribble on.
• The two Ozobots! chalk signs (3:15-3:50)
• Something I noticed with the two signs was that less kids walked up to the table on their own and more parents noticed the signs and directed their kids over there. The behavior of the kids that ended up at the table was similar to when there was no signage, but the behavior of the adults was very different. There were two adults at separate times that came in without kids and just began drawing and testing out the ozobots, which didn't happen when there was no sign. There were a few kids and parents who recognized what Ozobots were and played with them for a few minutes before they lost interest. One of the parents that joined her kid in playing with the bots began explaining that ozobots had code, and she walked him through it but never took his pen from him to do it herself, she just explained it to him and then grabbed her own pen and bot and started testing out different color codes. 
• I think this sign was most successful for adults but least successful for kids, I think some of the kids saw signs and didn't want to engage with the ozobots until their parents showed them what it was. The adults seemed to like the sign, it drew their attention to the bots without pressuring them to do something specific with the bots.
• The signs with code examples asking guests what the codes do (3:50-4:30)
• The guests that interacted with these signs up were the most engaged out of all the guests, but less guests approached the ozobots with these versions of the signs. There were a few families that spent at least 15 minutes at the ozobots, and one that spent 20 minutes there while these signs were up. The parents were very engaged with the ozobots and with their kids and worked together. Only one mom tried to do the codes for her son, but soon just let him draw (he was about five and only wanted to draw) and then began testing codes for herself. There was this one mother and daughter pair that spent so long at the ozobots and figured out what the codes did and discussed them, and then figured out that the codes can also work backwards. They tried many iterations of their tracks, and then incorporated four or five codes into their final track and were excited to get the bot to read the codes both ways. 
• This sign was the most successful for continuing engagement, but least for drawing guests in.