FAQ: Frequently Asked Questions
The formal planning for this Initiative began as early as 2013. As word of this project became increasingly public, we have fielded several questions regarding the would-be proposal. In fact, we are surprised by the level of excitement shared by others during this process; a snowballing momentum that exists among those who desire to see this happen in some way. As such, it has become necessary to address those questions most frequently asked. In an attempt to define our official stance and circumvent the rumor-mill, it is our hope that we might eliminate any ambiguity in our message.
Are you guys really asking for a multi-million dollar astronomy facility?
Yes. At first, we bristled at the thought. This whole thing began as a effort to have a small “roll-off roof” observatory to house current astronomy assets, something designed to improve accessibility to our existing astronomy tools. Doing so would allow some high school astronomy teachers (those who desire it) to enhance the education within their astronomy classes. Therefore, we were essentially asking for a tool, albeit a very powerful and important tool, to allow us to use our existing telescopes more efficiently.
At this level of implementation, everything could be funded almost entirely by private donations and grants. However, it would require the use of a small area of existing district property and the extension of the district’s infrastructure (power and technology) to service the observatory. Therefore, we had to approach the project with an official stance, through a tremendous amount of due diligence.
However, there are 3 reasons why our request had to grow...
Most importantly, the notion of “students doing contributory science” is fully-captured within our current plan, as well as the investment into the entirety of our student-base, not just high-schoolers or "GT" students. Additionally, at the completion of Phases 4 & 5, it provides educational access to the Mansfield community at large in a way no other programs can. In most cases, innovation does come at a price.
Does this proposed observatory (or observatories) require staff present for operation?
MAYBE. The layman’s understanding of a classical observatory is that it needs to be "attended to" each night, requiring staffing during operation. But with the technology of today, this is incorrect. Currently, observatory(ies) can function for long stretches of time completely unattended. Many such observatories are able to go months without needing a single intervention. Only routine maintenance done of a monthly, quarterly, or even a bi-yearly basis is required to keep them running. For this reason, periodic maintenance could be accomplished by qualified personnel during extra hours.
Thus, because the observatories are robotic in every sense. Most all issues that can arise are capable of being fixed through a networked connection off-site with periodic on-site maintenance.
But since this proposal includes phases for public access sites (Phases 4 & 5), such as a main Astronomy center for on-site learning, full educational implementation, and a mobile learning lab(s), then it most certainly would require permanent staffing. Not surprisingly, every facility that exists in Mansfield ISD requires some amount of on-site presence, even if it just is somebody to cut the grass.
But the important thing to understand is that this Initiative is not so much about facilities. Facilities sit unused without good programs...and it is the programs which require extra time. This is well beyond the capability of a typical, full-time high school teacher. Therefore, when you consider mobile labs, training of district personnel, special use of tools in the classroom, maintenance of facilities, and even the staffing of facilities in later phases then, absolutely, the district would need to create staffing to maximize implementation at fullest potential.
Can we skip steps in the project plan in order to see benefits sooner rather than later?
PERHAPS. Nothing really prevents all phases from being accomplished simultaneously, or slightly out of order. However, there are prerequisite steps which are required before subsequent steps can be finished. It should be said that following our timeline, as defined here, represents the best opportunity for success; the fastest way of getting the tools into the teachers’ (and students’) hands.
Rather than skipping steps, it becomes very important that all those associated with the project know the scope and sequence of these events. Careful orchestration of the project plan assures that delays are minimized; that one person does not have to wait on another to finish their task(s). Likewise, the number one way to accelerate this project is to have people working on it full-time. In a way, the biggest problem for the authors is being able create time “off the clock” in order to work on this proposal. While it is certainly labor of love for us in the planning phase, the full implementation of the project can be accelerated by allowing us to focus on it full-time.
What is the difference between a "robotic" or "automated" observatory and a traditional one?
Much of what can be accomplished in astronomy now can be done without being on-site in an actual, “real” observatory. With the internet, it becomes quite easy to remotely-control an observation session from some place other than the observatory itself, such as a classroom. With several telescopes having such capabilities, then a “virtual” network exists to serve those with the appropriate “permissions.”
The level of permissions, of course, would be given to those in the more advanced astronomy classes or by those who provide guided access through projects at the lower levels. For the younger classes, it is more likely that curriculum connections are made by utilizing either the real-time streaming video feeds made possible with the observatories “secondary” instruments or by tapping into data already taken and posted to a data server. This is accomplished primarily by the observatory to be built starting with Phase 2, as proposed. Thus, there would not be a public presence at the "robotic" observatory.
But what separates the later phases of this proposal is the need to have a physical presence with our astronomy program; a traditional, hands-on experience. This is where mobile labs (Phase 2/3), observing fields (Phase 4), and main Astronomy center (Phase 5) come into play. Not only does this provide a centralized point for students throughout the district to come, but it also connects people physically to the learning process.
Why not just build one observatory to handle both virtual and on-site astronomy visitors?
This issue with a single observatory providing both services is two-fold:
What are the authors’ primary concerns for this project?
Our primary concerns are the assumption by others that this is just another educational facility. We believe it is so much more than that.
Firstly, it should be stated that astronomy is in a core subject discipline (science), with connections also to physics, chemistry, and all other topics under the STEM umbrella...in all grades, K through 12. Fundamentally, this will influence every student in the district on a yearly basis (not to mention the community-at-large). Coupled with cutting-edge, but easily available technology, this makes an astronomy center much more vital than something like our district’s Agricultural Technology facility, as fine as it is.
Secondly, we cannot take a “cookie-cutter” approach to this project. There are very specific requirements from an astronomy standpoint. For example, it might be easiest to construct a building on flat land; however, there is a significant benefit from the astronomy-side to mount delicate instruments higher in the sky, above the surroundings. In fact, a 10-fold improvement in astronomy “seeing” (atmospheric stability) can be gained by raising a telescope 30 feet off of the surrounding ground. Likewise, cement or asphalt pavement is an enemy to astronomy, as they continue to radiate heat upward for hours even after the sun goes down. The effect this has on the telescopic views is dramatic. As such, great consideration must be placed to landscape design and parking lot locations. Thus, form most definitely follows function. This is one of those, “do it right, or don’t do it at all” kinds of projects.
Thirdly, bigger is not necessarily better. There is some latitude to be given here to make some of the facilities architecturally impressive (keeping with the MISD “look”), but it is not a necessity from a “doing astronomy” standpoint. The major questions regarding facility size (within this document) becomes more about accommodating people "on-site." If district leadership wants students to experience a “campus-type” of environment (as outlined in the later phases here) then space accommodations, technology, and staffing must exist to do that.
Will these observatories be available for public observing for on-site visitors?
YES & NO. The first 3 phases of the project consist of facilities that are non-public, such as the robotic observatory/mobile lab storage building. Phase 4 is designed to accommodate on-site guests for nighttime astronomy. Phase 5 would including a public-access Astronomy Center. Therefore, the amount of visitor interaction would depend on how much of the project gets built.
But generally speaking, the observatory designs are chosen with the capability for 100% robotic use. The end result is full automation, with access priorities given to on-site personnel for scientific data collection and to off-site users for remote access. However, all observatories will have “open house” days for special astronomical events, whereas the public will be able to enjoy the instrumentation in person, often configured for visual use. However, although the observatories will be used via Internet for the vast majority of the time , the technology does permits interested people to witness observatory activities via their browsers over an Internet connection.
What factors were involved in the design decisions for the observatories?
The following issues are considered as important for the project to succeed from the standpoint of design:
How does the project benefit the district as a whole from a technological standpoint?
Technology systems within the obseratories such as the "all-sky" camera and weather systems, not only provide for interlocks against failures and allow for unattended automation, but they are chosen to serve as a greater part of MISD. This technology would provide the district with the ability to place weather data/images on-line in real-time, and therefore provide visitors and on-line "guests" with sky knowledge and conditions prior to activities. This wealth of information will also provide MISD with weather trend/data, allowing for optimal use of the observatories for particular applications, not to mention cross-curricular opportunities in other science fields.
However, what this represents is more philosophical on the whole. Here, we differentiate between passive and active technologies. Using an iPad to learn is a passive process. Using an iPad to control other technologies for a particular purpose is an active use of technology. Our proposal introduces students to a whole new set of technological tools, where kids aren't just staring at a computer screen.
How do the mobile astronomy labs fit into the overall program?
The authors believe that astronomy is cool. Most people might disagree with that sentiment, at least at first. However, inevitably, once people (of any age) witness what the cosmos look like through a telescope, or see an image produced by such instruments in real-time, then their opinions ALWAYS change.
So many people go through life as a product of their urban lives, never once seeing through the light polluted skies to what is beyond them. Because of this, very few have ever seen the need to purchase a telescope, or even to drive to some place where astronomy is possible.
Because of this, there is a tremendous international outreach movement in Astronomy education, whereas people with scopes provide windows of opportunity to those who do not. This outreach component is critical for so many reasons.
As a STEM subject, astronomy suffers from many of the same kind of issues as other subjects in terms of student interest and involvement. In theory, the issue is often illustrated as a “pipeline,” where the goal is to get students inside the STEM pipeline, push them through it, and keep them within it until; ultimately, they enjoy a career inside a STEM-related field. Unfortunately, like many pipes, they leak. Colleges recognize this fact, since a vast number of students entering a university as a STEM-subject major often times do not finish their degree in that discipline, and research has shown that those who do graduate within STEM often times do not become employed into the STEM sector.
For universities, this occurs, in part, because their programs provide little incentive and interest to the students. In astronomy and physics, for example, most universities suffer from the same problems as K-12 education; namely, an experience that is NOT focused on discovery and one that lacks access to advanced learning tools. Additionally, when you considered how ill-prepared many students are in STEM disciplines PRIOR TO entering a university, which shows itself with poor fundamental knowledge in the maths and sciences, it's no doubt that those institutions are concerned about what is happening during the K-12 ages.
For MISD, it is important to get kids involved in STEM. This means that we need an outreach component to get kids into the pipeline, and then to provide them innovative, unique opportunities to keep them there. This is the way kids can value what they learn as opposed to just learning it intellectually. Then, once at the high school level, we can drive kids towards experiencing astronomy (as a STEM subject) that will solidify their love of the subject and drive them toward future aspirations in the astronomy, physics, or any other mathematics or technology field in which our programs make connections.
But more than that, TEA requires a minimum of lab time for students at all levels, as much as 80% in the K-1st level. The mobile astronomy labs will guarantee compliance there.
Additionally, the mobile astronomy labs gives MISD visibility in the public. Being available for public events as an outreach to the community not only gives them a chance to learn something new and exciting (proving that you are never too old to learn), and gives them an important glimpse into what MISD values; namely, innovative STEM education to their kids.
Within any build-out scenario of CAS initiative, the mobile labs come first. But it should also be stressed that we must provide follow-up opportunities for the students at the higher levels, else we run the risk of kids leaking out of the astronomy “pipeline.”
What happens if you guys leave Mansfield ISD?
I was always taught that I was expendable. I'm not so important that I cannot be replaced. But what we have discovered, in this case, is that this project is as much about what WE have to offer than anything else. Truly, this project does not get done if we are not here. Heck, it isn't even perceived!
That said, I believe this project, at some point, will carry on without Scott and me. I believe this for four reasons:
Are you guys really asking for a multi-million dollar astronomy facility?
Yes. At first, we bristled at the thought. This whole thing began as a effort to have a small “roll-off roof” observatory to house current astronomy assets, something designed to improve accessibility to our existing astronomy tools. Doing so would allow some high school astronomy teachers (those who desire it) to enhance the education within their astronomy classes. Therefore, we were essentially asking for a tool, albeit a very powerful and important tool, to allow us to use our existing telescopes more efficiently.
At this level of implementation, everything could be funded almost entirely by private donations and grants. However, it would require the use of a small area of existing district property and the extension of the district’s infrastructure (power and technology) to service the observatory. Therefore, we had to approach the project with an official stance, through a tremendous amount of due diligence.
However, there are 3 reasons why our request had to grow...
- Such tools are beyond the capabilities of typical Astronomy teachers. The concept of a small observatory is a rarity in K-12 education. There are a handful of districts and private schools in the NATION that actually have their own observatories, and even few that have one with the powerful automation made possible through Internet technologies. However, even these are practically limited by the lack of technical ability and actual lab experience by the classroom teacher. Even if there is ONE capable teacher who wants the project, a district the size of Mansfield would need to train several teachers to make the use of such tools equitable. And even if you could train everybody, the logistics of access rights, maintenance, technology programming, and delivery become huge hurdles to overcome. In truth, the "simple observatory model" would only work in a "one teacher- one classroom" implementation.
- Even a simple observatory requires a huge time commitment. The more the concept was developed, the more we realized that for a classroom teacher to innovate in education, the more time it requires. And it's not just the time for the implementation, but also for the training and research required to come to this point. Collectively, our background experience already provides us with the training and research needed to make the project possible. However, we simply do not have the time. Even with the most altruistic of spirits, we are willing to give until it hurts; however, it would be irresponsible of us to give until it hurts our families.
- The project is so cool that everybody wants to play. We have come to understand that we are not in this alone. Ownership is now such that people see greater potential than our initial, meager plans. While this Initiative now represents a substantial capital investment from the school district itself, it comes at significant gain of a full, district-wide, all-levels implementation; powerful cross-curricular and STEM implementation; mobile learning labs; and world-wide recognition for an innovative, “game-changing” facility and programs.
Most importantly, the notion of “students doing contributory science” is fully-captured within our current plan, as well as the investment into the entirety of our student-base, not just high-schoolers or "GT" students. Additionally, at the completion of Phases 4 & 5, it provides educational access to the Mansfield community at large in a way no other programs can. In most cases, innovation does come at a price.
Does this proposed observatory (or observatories) require staff present for operation?
MAYBE. The layman’s understanding of a classical observatory is that it needs to be "attended to" each night, requiring staffing during operation. But with the technology of today, this is incorrect. Currently, observatory(ies) can function for long stretches of time completely unattended. Many such observatories are able to go months without needing a single intervention. Only routine maintenance done of a monthly, quarterly, or even a bi-yearly basis is required to keep them running. For this reason, periodic maintenance could be accomplished by qualified personnel during extra hours.
Thus, because the observatories are robotic in every sense. Most all issues that can arise are capable of being fixed through a networked connection off-site with periodic on-site maintenance.
But since this proposal includes phases for public access sites (Phases 4 & 5), such as a main Astronomy center for on-site learning, full educational implementation, and a mobile learning lab(s), then it most certainly would require permanent staffing. Not surprisingly, every facility that exists in Mansfield ISD requires some amount of on-site presence, even if it just is somebody to cut the grass.
But the important thing to understand is that this Initiative is not so much about facilities. Facilities sit unused without good programs...and it is the programs which require extra time. This is well beyond the capability of a typical, full-time high school teacher. Therefore, when you consider mobile labs, training of district personnel, special use of tools in the classroom, maintenance of facilities, and even the staffing of facilities in later phases then, absolutely, the district would need to create staffing to maximize implementation at fullest potential.
Can we skip steps in the project plan in order to see benefits sooner rather than later?
PERHAPS. Nothing really prevents all phases from being accomplished simultaneously, or slightly out of order. However, there are prerequisite steps which are required before subsequent steps can be finished. It should be said that following our timeline, as defined here, represents the best opportunity for success; the fastest way of getting the tools into the teachers’ (and students’) hands.
Rather than skipping steps, it becomes very important that all those associated with the project know the scope and sequence of these events. Careful orchestration of the project plan assures that delays are minimized; that one person does not have to wait on another to finish their task(s). Likewise, the number one way to accelerate this project is to have people working on it full-time. In a way, the biggest problem for the authors is being able create time “off the clock” in order to work on this proposal. While it is certainly labor of love for us in the planning phase, the full implementation of the project can be accelerated by allowing us to focus on it full-time.
What is the difference between a "robotic" or "automated" observatory and a traditional one?
Much of what can be accomplished in astronomy now can be done without being on-site in an actual, “real” observatory. With the internet, it becomes quite easy to remotely-control an observation session from some place other than the observatory itself, such as a classroom. With several telescopes having such capabilities, then a “virtual” network exists to serve those with the appropriate “permissions.”
The level of permissions, of course, would be given to those in the more advanced astronomy classes or by those who provide guided access through projects at the lower levels. For the younger classes, it is more likely that curriculum connections are made by utilizing either the real-time streaming video feeds made possible with the observatories “secondary” instruments or by tapping into data already taken and posted to a data server. This is accomplished primarily by the observatory to be built starting with Phase 2, as proposed. Thus, there would not be a public presence at the "robotic" observatory.
But what separates the later phases of this proposal is the need to have a physical presence with our astronomy program; a traditional, hands-on experience. This is where mobile labs (Phase 2/3), observing fields (Phase 4), and main Astronomy center (Phase 5) come into play. Not only does this provide a centralized point for students throughout the district to come, but it also connects people physically to the learning process.
Why not just build one observatory to handle both virtual and on-site astronomy visitors?
This issue with a single observatory providing both services is two-fold:
- When an “activity” calls for a virtual connection to the observatory, it must receive priority so as to be timely to that activity. These requests are determined by a computerized prioritization “queue,” much like with the way a network printer has a server (“spooler”) full of print jobs. Thus, on-site visitors would not be allowed to experience an observatory in person because priority must be given to the virtual requests.
- In our robotic observatory, even with multiple instrument piers (as proposed in Phase 2), having on-site visitors trying to perform observations on one instrument pier setup while a neighboring pier setup is attempting to do a virtual request runs severe risk of contamination of that data. Thus, any observatory(ies) that permit on-site observations must be prioritized for such usage; hence, the need for multiple facilities should the district desire both virtual and on-site forms of usage.
What are the authors’ primary concerns for this project?
Our primary concerns are the assumption by others that this is just another educational facility. We believe it is so much more than that.
Firstly, it should be stated that astronomy is in a core subject discipline (science), with connections also to physics, chemistry, and all other topics under the STEM umbrella...in all grades, K through 12. Fundamentally, this will influence every student in the district on a yearly basis (not to mention the community-at-large). Coupled with cutting-edge, but easily available technology, this makes an astronomy center much more vital than something like our district’s Agricultural Technology facility, as fine as it is.
Secondly, we cannot take a “cookie-cutter” approach to this project. There are very specific requirements from an astronomy standpoint. For example, it might be easiest to construct a building on flat land; however, there is a significant benefit from the astronomy-side to mount delicate instruments higher in the sky, above the surroundings. In fact, a 10-fold improvement in astronomy “seeing” (atmospheric stability) can be gained by raising a telescope 30 feet off of the surrounding ground. Likewise, cement or asphalt pavement is an enemy to astronomy, as they continue to radiate heat upward for hours even after the sun goes down. The effect this has on the telescopic views is dramatic. As such, great consideration must be placed to landscape design and parking lot locations. Thus, form most definitely follows function. This is one of those, “do it right, or don’t do it at all” kinds of projects.
Thirdly, bigger is not necessarily better. There is some latitude to be given here to make some of the facilities architecturally impressive (keeping with the MISD “look”), but it is not a necessity from a “doing astronomy” standpoint. The major questions regarding facility size (within this document) becomes more about accommodating people "on-site." If district leadership wants students to experience a “campus-type” of environment (as outlined in the later phases here) then space accommodations, technology, and staffing must exist to do that.
Will these observatories be available for public observing for on-site visitors?
YES & NO. The first 3 phases of the project consist of facilities that are non-public, such as the robotic observatory/mobile lab storage building. Phase 4 is designed to accommodate on-site guests for nighttime astronomy. Phase 5 would including a public-access Astronomy Center. Therefore, the amount of visitor interaction would depend on how much of the project gets built.
But generally speaking, the observatory designs are chosen with the capability for 100% robotic use. The end result is full automation, with access priorities given to on-site personnel for scientific data collection and to off-site users for remote access. However, all observatories will have “open house” days for special astronomical events, whereas the public will be able to enjoy the instrumentation in person, often configured for visual use. However, although the observatories will be used via Internet for the vast majority of the time , the technology does permits interested people to witness observatory activities via their browsers over an Internet connection.
What factors were involved in the design decisions for the observatories?
The following issues are considered as important for the project to succeed from the standpoint of design:
- Priority must be given to accessibility and speed of our internet technology. Being able to remotely-control (via RDC connection) and transfer large files across the Internet is a requirement. A data server with full access rights must be granted at all times.
- Technology placed within the observatories themselves (where exposure to ambient climates exists), must be “industrial” or “rugged,” in nature. For example, control PCs at the instruments must be of the fan-less type, with solid-state drives and IP-65 rated weather-proof enclosures (or better). Similarly, lightning abatement (grounding of weather sensor and instrument masts) and surge suppression, must be addressed.
- Instrument piers must be on separate systems from the surrounding floor. This serves to dampen external vibrations to the sensitive instruments. As such, pier footings will need to be drilled deeper than the surround slabs, reaching below the area’s freeze line of approximately 42”.
- Although we are not on a mountain-top, elevation of the astronomy instruments away from ground level is still crucial. Negative local atmospheric effects vary inversely with pier height. Our personal experience, and those of others, shows that 90% of all adverse atmospheric effects happens within 30 feet of the ground. As such, locating an individual observatory atop a second floor structure and/or building on a raised pad (hill) is advantageous.
- Domed observatories are intended to house a single instrument pier, albeit with supreme protection from wind. A roll-off roof structure (where the roof rolls away to reveal the entire observatory area) provides less wind protection, but a larger number of instrument piers (with separate instruments for differing types of robotic observations). The roll-off roof design is far more practical and cost-effective, though a domed design is certainly more “classic” in appearance (more attractive) and more useful for sensitive scientific applications. A dome also provides more space for visual observations as compared to a roll-off roof observatory; it accommodates many more people from a space standpoint. The two-observatories proposed in Phase 5 are domed observatories. A 4-pier roll-off roof structure is proposed as our initial observatory within Phase 2.
How does the project benefit the district as a whole from a technological standpoint?
Technology systems within the obseratories such as the "all-sky" camera and weather systems, not only provide for interlocks against failures and allow for unattended automation, but they are chosen to serve as a greater part of MISD. This technology would provide the district with the ability to place weather data/images on-line in real-time, and therefore provide visitors and on-line "guests" with sky knowledge and conditions prior to activities. This wealth of information will also provide MISD with weather trend/data, allowing for optimal use of the observatories for particular applications, not to mention cross-curricular opportunities in other science fields.
However, what this represents is more philosophical on the whole. Here, we differentiate between passive and active technologies. Using an iPad to learn is a passive process. Using an iPad to control other technologies for a particular purpose is an active use of technology. Our proposal introduces students to a whole new set of technological tools, where kids aren't just staring at a computer screen.
How do the mobile astronomy labs fit into the overall program?
The authors believe that astronomy is cool. Most people might disagree with that sentiment, at least at first. However, inevitably, once people (of any age) witness what the cosmos look like through a telescope, or see an image produced by such instruments in real-time, then their opinions ALWAYS change.
So many people go through life as a product of their urban lives, never once seeing through the light polluted skies to what is beyond them. Because of this, very few have ever seen the need to purchase a telescope, or even to drive to some place where astronomy is possible.
Because of this, there is a tremendous international outreach movement in Astronomy education, whereas people with scopes provide windows of opportunity to those who do not. This outreach component is critical for so many reasons.
As a STEM subject, astronomy suffers from many of the same kind of issues as other subjects in terms of student interest and involvement. In theory, the issue is often illustrated as a “pipeline,” where the goal is to get students inside the STEM pipeline, push them through it, and keep them within it until; ultimately, they enjoy a career inside a STEM-related field. Unfortunately, like many pipes, they leak. Colleges recognize this fact, since a vast number of students entering a university as a STEM-subject major often times do not finish their degree in that discipline, and research has shown that those who do graduate within STEM often times do not become employed into the STEM sector.
For universities, this occurs, in part, because their programs provide little incentive and interest to the students. In astronomy and physics, for example, most universities suffer from the same problems as K-12 education; namely, an experience that is NOT focused on discovery and one that lacks access to advanced learning tools. Additionally, when you considered how ill-prepared many students are in STEM disciplines PRIOR TO entering a university, which shows itself with poor fundamental knowledge in the maths and sciences, it's no doubt that those institutions are concerned about what is happening during the K-12 ages.
For MISD, it is important to get kids involved in STEM. This means that we need an outreach component to get kids into the pipeline, and then to provide them innovative, unique opportunities to keep them there. This is the way kids can value what they learn as opposed to just learning it intellectually. Then, once at the high school level, we can drive kids towards experiencing astronomy (as a STEM subject) that will solidify their love of the subject and drive them toward future aspirations in the astronomy, physics, or any other mathematics or technology field in which our programs make connections.
But more than that, TEA requires a minimum of lab time for students at all levels, as much as 80% in the K-1st level. The mobile astronomy labs will guarantee compliance there.
Additionally, the mobile astronomy labs gives MISD visibility in the public. Being available for public events as an outreach to the community not only gives them a chance to learn something new and exciting (proving that you are never too old to learn), and gives them an important glimpse into what MISD values; namely, innovative STEM education to their kids.
Within any build-out scenario of CAS initiative, the mobile labs come first. But it should also be stressed that we must provide follow-up opportunities for the students at the higher levels, else we run the risk of kids leaking out of the astronomy “pipeline.”
What happens if you guys leave Mansfield ISD?
I was always taught that I was expendable. I'm not so important that I cannot be replaced. But what we have discovered, in this case, is that this project is as much about what WE have to offer than anything else. Truly, this project does not get done if we are not here. Heck, it isn't even perceived!
That said, I believe this project, at some point, will carry on without Scott and me. I believe this for four reasons:
- Vision is contagious - We recognize "vision" as the driving force behind our initiative. Although trying to merge industry with education is nothing truly new, what is new is finding somebody well-versed enough in both areas to know exactly how to do it. Whereas that seems to make us indispensable, once the implementation is done and our vision has been properly communicated, then we know that the program can move on without us.
- We are teaching our replacements - A unique aspect of our initiative is that we will be producing a quality of student that everybody would love to hire. If we produce students who will go on to have careers in STEM fields, then we should not be surprised when our own district turns around and gives them jobs several years later.
- Our model becomes the standard - We view our initiative as one of global change, a model for how technology-based astronomy education should be done. As a result, I see new roles for qualified people all over the world to join similar programs near them. I also see the opportunity for many of those people to fill in gaps as we need them at MISD.
- We work ourselves into obsolescence - Robots are cool; that is, until one takes your job. Then, not so much! One of the key aspects of what we wish to accomplish in the MISD CAS initiative is that the nature of an autonomous, completely hands-off observatory program is that, once implemented, the people doing the implementation are no longer needed. Now, as educators with a vision, there is a need to remain involved in all aspects. But as a technician? In a way, those are a dime a dozen.