11/11/2012

Compared to pre-existing methods, the snap system requires toys

I am an electrical engineer and have an electronics workbench at home. I know the minimum age for this set is 8, but the parts looked no more complicated than the puzzles my 2 year old and 4 year old put together, so I bought it so we would at least have it on hand as soon as they are ready. They are already really interested in it because it's pretty and can make music, turn on a light, and spin a motor. It has other things they can't appreciate yet like a single digit display, ammeter, microphone with recorder, and electromagnet.

Compared to pre-existing methods, the snap system requires more time, attention, and thinking power in the geometry of this method of wiring than understanding the electronic parts and how they interact. Even with the most efficent design, there can be 2 or 3 times more snap pieces for wiring than than the number of electronics parts. In the "classical" spring and cardboard toy electronics set, there is about one wire per part. In a simple electronic's enthusiasts breadboard, there are about 1/3 as many wires as parts. The snapping and unsnapping is harder than the old spring system (which admittably has a lot cheaper look and feel). With this system, you can't run a wire diagonally or across other parts and sometimes you have to use button-like pieces to raise and lower the "wires" to match up with the parts. The classical system allows diagonal wiring of any length (not fixed to 1 to 4 integer units of length) and across parts.

The hardest conceptual part with this system is figuring out how to place the parts in order to make wiring possible. In the classical system, there is no searching for parts or deciding where to place them. This allows more time and attention to be placed on the electronics. Sometimes the classical method might detract from understanding because of the parts not being placed ideally for conceptual understanding. The classical system can do serious electronics whereas this is 75% a gemoetrical puzzle, which children love. I am afraid parents are rating this based on a false impression of how much electronics the children are learning: the time and excitement is more about a geometrical puzzle, which has value that is different from electronics. Based on the extraordinarily good reviews, I had much higher hopes for the product. I will probably keep the product around, but I do not expect to use it to teach them electronics.

I have a solution to my complaints that maybe I could take the time to implement: solder durable wires to the snap buttons, and fix all the pieces in place on a wooden board. There would be about 3 times fewer parts to snap in place for any circuit in the booklets, and I could be assured of better understanding if they can convert the booklets' diagrams to wiring necessary for a fixed-part board. Being able to revisualize wiring is important in electronics. Placed on a hinge to fold, it would occupy less space than the box this comes in, and there would not be the chore of putting all the parts back in the plastic slots when finished playing.

I gave it three stars instead of two because the colors and snap system really make it appealing to my youngsters. This might be a little unfair since if it comes down to using it verses not using any other system at all, then maybe it deserves 4 stars. The equivalent parts on my workbench (breadboard, jumpers, and parts) should be as easy to understand and put together for an 8 year old and they're a lot less expensive, but I don't know if it would be as appealing to the 6 to 9 year old range. Judging by my 4 year old, I would be impressed by any 5 year old able to "get" 30% of what's included. Many 6 year olds should benefit from it, and it would be only a year or two more if they don't. bgmicro, mpja, and allelectronics are good places for older budding enthusiasts to begin for ideas on what to get.

More :


No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.