PQK FAQ

PQK Lab is an inquiry-based STEM workshop. It trains problem framing, question design, evidence habits, knowledge models, inquiry builds, and showcase communication. The name is the sequence: problems, questions, knowledge. It is not a contest mill and not a place that sells finished posters.

Students who want to investigate a real setting, families who want to understand project value without taking over the build, schools that need inquiry clubs rather than craft hours, inquiry mentors who want a shared critique language, and partners who can offer a student-scale challenge brief.

A researchable question can be embarrassed by evidence the team can actually gather in the time and tools available. It has a setting, an observable friction, and a possible measurement, trial, or structured observation. Slogans about the planet are not automatically researchable.

By separating a complaint, a wish, and a problem. Students locate a setting, describe the friction in a sentence a stranger could observe, name constraints, and resist inflating the story. Only then do they write question variants.

No. An inquiry build can be a protocol, a measurement plan, a data story, a redesigned process, or a physical prototype. The build must test a knowledge model. Glue is not a substitute for evidence.

Dates, locations, units, photographs or counts, failed trials, and notes about what was not measured. The log should be inspectable by a visiting teacher in a short sitting. Memory is not evidence.

A working picture of causes, constraints, and uncertainties. It is drawn or written so it can be revised after the next trial. A model that cannot survive a rival explanation is still a guess, even if the poster is handsome.

Yes, as communication of knowledge already built. The showcase track does not start with board layout. It starts by asking which claim the evidence can carry. Judges' questions are treated as a gift to the trail, not as a threat to the aesthetic.

Yes, if the club is willing to keep notebooks, run critiques, and accept smaller local problems. PQK modules are designed for clubs and enrichment units. They fail if the only deadline is a display evening with no intermediate evidence review.

They ask for the trail. They do not redesign the prototype in the student's absence. They prefer an ugly honest log to a parent-built machine. Critique language stays on problem, question, evidence, model, build, and communication.

Protect time and transportation, ask the student to explain the problem without slides, and refuse to become the builder of record. Families can help gather access to a setting when it is safe and permitted. They should not write the knowledge claims.

No. Beginners can frame a cafeteria problem. Advanced teams can still fail if they skip evidence. The lab levels the work by the quality of the question and the inspectability of the log, not by the prestige of the topic noun.

By checkpointing artifacts: problem canvas, question variants, log pages, model revisions, build notes. A call without a file is not a checkpoint. Remote work is possible when the trail is shared.

No. This site does not invent awards tables, tuition, or quoted praise. PQK publishes methods, curriculum, and standards. Verified facts can be added later by the operating entity.

Read the apply page and send a contact note that includes a setting, a first-pass problem, any question already tried, tools on hand, and time. Do not lead with a desired prize. Lead with a place in the world.

Ghost-built projects, evidence that cannot be shown, questions that cannot be tested with the available tools, and communication that outruns the log. The lab would rather keep a team in problem framing than send them to a showcase unprepared.

By naming roles against the trail: who noticed, who measured, who modeled, who built, who communicated. Credit follows work in the file. A name on a board without a corresponding log page is a problem to repair.

A smaller question than the team started with, an evidence log another student can read, a knowledge model that changed after a miss, and a communication piece that admits uncertainty. That is a complete inquiry even if no ribbon is attached.