LESSONS LEARNED
THE BASIC PREMISE
Building an airplane, even from a very complete kit, is no small task. It is important that the scope of the undertaking be fully discussed and understood by the participants. The educators underestimated the extent of their participation, and the overall effort required, to build the Kitfox. The EAA volunteers, although more knowledgeable of the scope of the task, did not foresee the hands-on student instruction role that was required of them.
The Palmdale Learning Plaza, a public school within the Palmdale School District, established two aviation-based classes in 1993. One class was oriented toward the technical aspects of aeronautics, while the second class was oriented toward vocational, hands-on learning. The Kitfox program was conceived for the second, vocationally-oriented class. The original concept was that the airplane could be completed within one, or possibly two years, with 7th and 8th grade students doing most of the work under teacher supervision. Normal class work would continue to be taught but would contain an aviation flavor in the curricula.
Several members of EAA Chapter 49 volunteered to provide guidance to the teachers and some classroom lectures, as well as monthly reviews of the construction progress. Although we recognized the educational value of a relatively short project, we felt that building an airplane was not consistent with that goal. We expressed doubts to the school officials that the project could be completed in two years, and suggested that the same students might continue with the project into high school. Transferring a major project from a middle school to a high school was apparently not politically viable so the school officials decided they would finish the project within the middle school.
In retrospect the school officials underestimated the amount of time that would be required to complete the project, and the EAA volunteers overestimated the capabilities of the teachers and students to accomplish the step-by-step construction tasks. In light of these misconceptions, the EAA participants grossly underestimated the amount of volunteer time that would be required of them to complete the project.
KIT SELECTION
There are many aircraft construction kits on the market. Kit selection is an important factor, both with regard to the tools and equipment required, and to the type of construction methods that will be learned by the students. The Kitfox was a good choice for this project from the standpoint of ease of construction, but the instructions (which were not reviewed ahead of time) were inadequate for both the teachers and the students, and the construction time was too long. The poor quality of the instructions and lack of drawings was at least partly responsible for the loss of interest by the teachers.
For school children, the kit should be one which can be completed with simple hand tools. The kit should be of the "quick-build" variety to shorten the construction time as much as possible. The EAA members were asked to recommend some aircraft kits that would be appropriate for the project. The Kitfox was high on that list even though none of the members had built one. The Kitfox kit offered several advantages; the welding was all done, all parts were packaged, labeled and of good aircraft-quality, and there were no difficult assemblies. If resale is intended, the popularity of the design must also be considered. Factory support was adequate, although it was used infrequently.
DISPOSITION OF THE AIRPLANE
Most kit-built airplanes are constructed by individuals who intend to own and fly the airplane upon its completion. For a school project, the first decision is whether to build the aircraft to even BE airworthy. The final disposition of the airplane (sell, display, or donate) also affects the construction philosophy. The team's decision to fly the Kitfox inspired the students to work to high standards.
From the beginning, the EAA volunteers advised that the Kitfox be constructed so that it would be airworthy. We hoped to instill a sense of responsibility in the students if they knew that the airplane might really fly some day. (This was not a decision to actually FLY, only a decision to BUILD it to be airworthy.) There were a few parts that needed to be remade, but most of the students reacted favorably to the "build it right" philosophy.
It is highly recommended that this decision to "fly" or "not fly" be made at the beginning of any similar school project. A decision on the final disposition of the airplane can be deferred until later, but needs to be made before final assembly and painting. This will allow a future buyer to influence the paint scheme, potential options for added fuel, etc. as well as the possibility of picking up the Repairman's certificate. The school may decide to retain the aircraft as a symbol of their accomplishment, and display it in some form within the community (as was the case with our Kitfox).
AGE/ABILITY OF STUDENTS, SUPERVISION REQUIREMENTS
The mental and physical capabilities of 7th and 8th grade students to perform the tasks associated with building an aircraft were strongly questioned by the EAA volunteers at the start of the project. Middle school students did have the physical coordination to perform the tasks, but needed constant supervision. Carrying the project over into high school as construction progressed (rather than bringing in new middle school students) would probably have resulted in better understanding by the students.
The 7th and 8th graders had good hand-eye coordination, but their attention span was quite short. In general the girls had a longer attention span than boys, and also listened to instructions better. There was a noticeable difference in ability between the 7th graders and the 8th graders. At this age level every task required constant one-on-one supervision. This meant that the work accomplished during any one session was dictated by the number of EAA volunteers present. Even 3 students per volunteer were too many, since the two students not doing the work tended to socialize or wander off. The best mix was two students per EAA volunteer, with a swap every half hour or so, bringing in two new students. Strong teacher discipline to maintain order helped, but was the exception rather than the rule.
The decision to retain the project within the middle school, and to conduct work during class hours allowed a large number of kids to participate in the project. However, many were really not interested. They viewed the project as a giant field trip and an opportunity to avoid class work.
The continuous stream of new students was discouraging to EAA volunteers. Every "track" change (about every 3 months) brought a requirement to re-teach how to drill holes, how to use equipment, safety, etc. It also meant a new assessment of which students were interested and which ones were goof-offs.
It is estimated that construction time with 7th and 8th graders was about three times longer than what could have been done with only the EAA volunteers present.(In other words, three EAA volunteers could have EACH built a Kitfox in the time that it took to help the kids build ONE.)
Many of the final tasks (the fun stuff for the EAA people), could not be done effectively by the students. (Fitting the canopy, fitting and mounting the cowl, wiring and instrument panel work, cutting and fitting brake lines, etc.) The students helped, but the requirements of the tasks were beyond 7th and 8th grade comprehension. Evening sessions, where some of the older students continued to participate beyond 8th grade, were worthwhile. The older students could teach the younger kids how to do the basic tasks, like drill holes. The older students (9th grade or higher) were not treated as part of the "class project" by the teachers, however, so they really didn't fit in. Most of them dropped out even though they were interested in the project.
We have concluded that 7th and 8th graders are really too young to build a complete airplane. The project takes too long. The average student can't be expected to maintain enthusiasm during this rapidly changing phase of their lives. Eighth graders are NOT too young to BEGIN an airplane project however, if they could be allowed to continue the participation into their high school years. It is probably inappropriate to try to include a large percentage of students from a public school. Only those few who are truly inspired to follow an aviation career would likely have the motivation to complete the project. The number of participating students should begin at a fairly small number, (about eight 7th or 8th graders) and then be allowed to build to about 16 during the course of construction. This would allow the older students to provide the instruction on basics for the younger students, and also allow the older, experienced students to accomplish work on their own, given only a simple task assignment. This would also allow a much stronger participation by the students in the latter phase of the assembly and checkout since the mature students would have extensive knowledge of the airplane.
Instruction in building and flying radio control model airplanes would have been more appropriate project for 7th and 8th graders. A model could be completed in 2 to 4 months and students could participate in the entire process including the first flight. Interested students could continue with the hobby on their own.
ROLE OF TEACHERS
Teachers must play a key role in a project of this type, especially if the work is to be done during school hours. The participating teachers should either be already knowledgeable about aircraft construction, or be highly motivated and offered the opportunity to learn outside of the classroom sessions.
There was a general lack of interest by the participating teachers in learning how to build an airplane, at least partly due to the poor quality of the kit instructions. During the first year there were parallel classroom sessions on aviation, such as principals of flight, terminology, model-building, etc. Student participation and understanding of the Kitfox project were much better during this time. School administrators eliminated these classroom sessions from the curricula after the first year. For the remainder of the project the teachers never read the instructions or tried to prepare themselves, or the students, for the next work session. In fairness to the teachers, they were never given any relief from their normal classroom duties. Nearly all of their classroom time was spent teaching those kids that were NOT participating in the Kitfox project, leaving all student instruction and construction activities solely to the EAA volunteers. The Kitfox construction project was really an extra-curricular activity conducted during classroom hours. At least one teacher was required to be present whenever the kids were working on the airplane. This put additional time demands on the teachers for the after-hours sessions. The teacher's presence was usually as class policeman rather than actually helping with the project. There was a large turnover of teachers, principals and students over the three years of the project. Each time there was a change the EAA volunteers seemed to pick up a larger portion of the responsibilities.
Parallel classroom activities are essential to the success of an airplane construction project. The lessons can be taught within the normal math and science teaching guidelines, but can use aviation as the conduit to real world applications.
ROLE OF EAA VOLUNTEERS
This project would not have succeeded without the heavy participation of the EAA volunteers. Most of the volunteers were retired which allowed them to participate during the normal school day. The direct one-on-one student instruction by the EAA volunteers was not anticipated. This led to serious concerns about liability.
EAA volunteers dedicated many, many more hours than originally expected. This was due to two factors:
The direct hands-on instruction of the students by the EAA volunteers, during class time, was a concern to us from the standpoint of liability. We were expecting only to advise the teachers, and occasionally give short class lectures on procedures and safety. Since the teachers didn't have the time, and made little effort, to understand and supervise the project, the EAA volunteers stepped in to keep the project alive. Luckily we had NO injuries or complaints, and the parent participation was very positive, but from the liability standpoint, we were obviously at risk.
For any school aircraft construction project we recommend several teacher-only work sessions at the beginning, and periodically throughout the construction, so that teachers know and understand what tasks are being undertaken. If the volunteers are expected to provide direct student instruction, explore the liability aspects with a lawyer. If possible, try to keep a teacher between the volunteers and the students.
ROLE OF PARENTS
Working parents could not participate in the daily classroom work sessions but were invited to attend and help out during the evening sessions. This participation was helpful to all concerned and should be encouraged for a project of this type.
Parent involvement was always positive. They all seemed to feel that the project was a positive experience for their kids and wanted to help make it happen. Evening building sessions facilitated active participation, or just observation, by parents and older students. Having a construction site at the local Mall DID stimulate parent participation, and also promoted the project within the community.
SITE MANAGEMENT
An aircraft kit is composed of many labeled parts. Construction requires the use of a variety of special tools and fixtures which will be used over an extended time period. A secure work area and control over the parts and tools is essential to avoid losing or misusing the equipment. Although several methods were tried, the parts and tools were never properly organized. An assigned site manager responsible for parts and tools would have saved a great deal of time throughout this project.
The Kitfox was constructed at a special classroom site at the Palmdale Mall. We started out with a representative buy of normal hand tools to begin the project. When the project moved to the Mall there were other activities in the same room. The Mall site did not have a full-time attendant. The teacher whose class was using the facility was in charge during their class time. Sorting and locating both tools and airplane parts was a continuing problem. We tried several methods for storing and cataloging parts, including some large storage bin racks that were obtained from Northrop. Without a custodian, and with no on-site supervision or continuity within the school, order was lost fairly rapidly. The only folks that realized that order was required were the EAA volunteers, so they tried to clean up and restore order after each work session. Without a tool custodian, many of these tools were soon damaged, misplaced, stolen or otherwise not available when needed. Each EAA volunteer began bringing a small tool box of his own. This allowed the work to get done, but each volunteer had to insure that he gathered up his tools after each session. We also tried to insist that the students perform the cleanup before departing, but that never really caught on with either the teachers or students.
Selection of a construction site needs to be given some serious thought at the beginning of a project of this type. Adequate ventilation, temperature control, electric power, long-term availability, etc. must be considered. The Mall site had both positive and negative value; it allowed active viewing and positive support from the community, but it served as a distraction to the students, especially during the evening sessions.
We recommend that a project and building site custodian be assigned from within the school, to be present at ALL work sessions and be responsible for the cataloging and location of both airplane parts and tools. This person needs to have school-assigned authority for discipline (like a librarian or shop teacher). This might be done by having a tool "chip" program where the tools would be issued by a "chip" and turned in after each class ends. This is something that many aircraft companies do. That makes each student or worker responsible for the tool that is issued to him/her. This way they feel the responsibility of taking care of it and turning it in.
SUMMARY
A student aircraft construction project, such as the Kitfox, is too complex for the middle school age group. Construction progress is too slow to maintain their interest. The cost vs benefit aspects of the project were very poor. Although a few students obviously sparked and benefited from the hands-on construction activities, the cost, in both dollars and time, was far too high compared with the overall benefit to participating students. A radio controlled model airplane project could have accomplished most of the same objectives over a much shorter time period and with much lower cost.
For a school aircraft construction project, make sure there are a sufficient number of teachers, and administrators who are REALLY interested enough to carry the project through. Conduct some meetings and serious briefings of the participating teachers BEFORE making a final decision. If there are no teachers who either already know about airplanes, or want to know, don't start. Insure that the teachers and administrators recognize that the project will take several years to complete, and force them to prepare a firm plan on how to continue the project to completion. Insure that participating students have some parallel classroom instruction on aviation terminology, parts of an airplane, principals of flight, safety in the workplace, etc.
Organization was one of the main factors that was lacking, from the following viewpoints:
The main thing that needs to be considered before taking on this type of project is the amount of perseverance required to complete the project. It requires many hours of dedicated thought, supervision, and some experience in teaching skills and public relations with both children and adults.