Let $S \subset {\Bbb R}^3$ be a (sufficiently) smooth surface, and let $\sigma (t)$, $\tau(t)$ be two smooth curves in $S$. Suppose $\sigma(t)$ and $\tau(t)$ both pass through the point $p \in S$; without loss of generality we can take $\sigma(0) = \tau(0) = p$. Since $\sigma(t)$ and $\tau(t)$ are also curves in $\Bbb R^3$, their tangent vector fields $\sigma'(t)$, $\tau'(t)$ lie in $T \Bbb R^3$, the tangent bundle of $\Bbb R^3$. As such, we can take the inner product of $\sigma'(t)$ and $\tau'(t)$ at any point such as $p$ through which they both pass by exploiting the Euclidean inner product structure $\langle \cdot, \cdot \rangle_{\Bbb R^3}$, viz. by taking for example $\langle \sigma'(0), \tau'(0) \rangle_{\Bbb R^3}$; we can also obtain the magnitudes of these tangent vectors for any value of $t$ in a similar fashion, by taking e.g. $\Vert \sigma'(t) \Vert_{\Bbb R^3} = \sqrt{\langle \sigma'(t), \sigma'(t) \rangle_{\Bbb R^3}}$ with the analogous expression holding for $\tau(t)$. And, having the norms of these tangent vectors, we can in principle compute the lenths if curve segments such as $\sigma(t)$, $t_1 \le t_2$, via the formula
$l(\sigma, t_1, t_2) = \int_{t_1}^{t_2} \Vert \sigma'(t) \Vert_{\Bbb R^3} dt; \tag{1}$
and again, the corresponding formula holds for $\tau(t)$. All these quantities are defined with reference to $\Bbb R^3$, since the all invoke $\langle \cdot, \cdot \rangle_{\Bbb R^3}$ in their definitions, and indeed yield geometrical information about $\sigma(t)$, $\tau(t)$ which in no way requires knowledge of the surface $S$; we merely exploit the fact that $\sigma(t)$, $\tau(t)$ are curves in the ambient space $\Bbb R^3$.
On the other hand, we may also define a tensor field $I: TS \times TS \to \Bbb R$ by taking
$I(\sigma'(0), \tau'(0)) = \langle \sigma'(0), \tau'(0) \rangle_{\Bbb R^3} \tag{2}$
for tangent vectors $\sigma'(0), \tau'(0) \in T_pS$, allowing $p$ to vary over $S$ and adjusting $\sigma(t)$, $\tau(t)$ accordingly so that we always have $\sigma(0) = \tau(0) = p$ while the curves remain in $S$. Such a construction allows the definition of $I$ to be extended to all of $TS$. Once $I$ has been so defined, admittedly in terms of $\langle \cdot, \cdot \rangle_{\Bbb R^3}$, it may be viewed as a tensor field on $S$ without further reference to $\Bbb R^3$; all metric properties of $S$ may now be defined solely in terms of $I$: we have
$\Vert \sigma'(0) \Vert_S = \sqrt{I(\sigma'(0), \sigma'(0))}, \tag{3}$
$l(\sigma, t_1, t_2) = \int_{t_1}^{t_2} \Vert \sigma'(t) \Vert_S dt, \tag{4}$
and we can define an inner product on $TS$ via
$\langle \sigma'(0), \tau'(0) \rangle_S = I(\sigma'(0), \tau'(0)). \tag{5}$
We may now consider $I$ as a structure defined on $TS$ alone. Doing so, we obtain all metric properties of $S$ without need to again refer to $\Bbb R^3$.
Hope this helps. Cheerio,
and as always,
Fiat Lux!!!
Intuitively, the first fundamental form tells you how to compute the distances along the paths within the surface (it is just a Riemannian metric of the surface thought as a standalone manifold, that is if we forget about the embedding/immersion). This explains why it is also called the intrinsic metric.
The second fundamental form describes how "curved" the embedding is, in other words, how the surface is located in the ambient space. It is a kind of derivative of the unit normal along the surface or, equivalently, the rate of change of the tangent planes, taken in various directions within the surface. Alternatively, it is called the shape tensor (it has a close relation to the shape, or Weingarten, operator), and is an extrinsic quantity in the sense that it depends on the embedding.
The Bonnet theorem (see a discussion here) ensures that (under certain conditions) these two fundamental form uniquely characterize the surface (locally), that is we can "integrate" them to a piece of surface in the space uniquely up to a rigid motion of the space.
The bottom line is that the Ist and IInd fundamental forms are as good as a complete set of local invariants of a surface, and thus they are extremely useful and important in differential geometry.
Remark 1. With regards to the coefficients, the comments have fully addressed this question: they are just components of these tensors in a coordinate patch.
Remark 2. The Christoffel symbols is a coordinate way to represent the invariant differentiation of vector (and all tensor) fields along the surface that arises from the given structures. In our case we have the usual (standard, Euclidean) metric in the ambient space and the Levi-Civita connection of this metric is just the usual (flat, Euclidean) derivative (just partial derivatives of the component in the standard coordinates). This (ambient) connection has its own Christoffel symbols but in our setting they all are zero, so it is customary not to mention them. Taking a vector field tangential to the surface we can try to differentiate it with this ambient derivative but for this to work we need to extend this vector field off the surface. The result of the differentiation will certainly depend on the extension but the tangential part of this result turns out to be independent of extensions when restricted to the surface. This way we obtain the covariant derivative (of tangential vector, tensor, ... fields) in the surface, and the Christoffel symbols that you may have met are the "components" of this covariant derivative (the Levi-Civita connection of the first fundamental form).
Best Answer
The first fundamental form is identically the same as a Riemannian metric. Although your text seems to treat $\mathbf I$ as a quadratic form — taking an input of a single tangent vector, most of us define it as a bilinear form — that is, taking a pair of tangent vectors $v,w$ as input. We would write $\mathbf I(v,v)$ where you're writing $\mathbf I(v)$. At any rate, for a submanifold of $\Bbb R^n$, the induced Riemannian metric comes about just as you understand for surfaces in $\Bbb R^3$.