, 9Course Organization and StructureWhether the course is one semester or two will significantly impact how the course isorganized, the content that can be covered, and the scope of the design project.According to a recent survey conducted by John Wiley based on a response from 50departments, US chemical engineering departments are split down the middle – half teachone design course, and half teach a two-semester design sequence.10Instructors have several challenges related to the structure and organization of the course.Departments who teach one design course must be very selective and choose whichcontent is most important for its graduates. Design projects for a one-semester offeringmight be best structured as multiple smaller problems that
the best ways for practicing chemical engineers to learn new areas needed in their jobs? Area 3- Learning Systems. What teaching methods are best for teaching a diverse student body specific chemical engineering material such as separation processes? What is the best way to teach chemical engineering design? How should chemical engineering laboratories be structured to maximize student learning? How do we allocate the resources in a chemical engineering department to optimize the learning of undergraduate and graduate students? What is the best culture in a chemical engineering department to help students learn? How much help is optimum to maximize the learning of chemical
best practices to usein an online classroom. The first step is to choose a delivery method of the content in the courses.From research, it is seen that a majority of students are able to adapt to learning from onlinevideo lectures when synchronous with the recordings posted for future review [24]. At RowanUniversity, Zoom™ and Canvas LMS™ (Learning Management System) is chosen to be theonline platform to conform with the online teaching standards and the ease of use of theseprograms [25]. Now that the online platforms have been chosen, research is done on how toeffectively teach in an online setting. To have a successful online learning environment theinstructor must have an increased time commitment and virtual presence, include more time
problems. This wasachieved by using a variety of active learning and pedagogical techniques such as, annotatedtextbook readings of current journal publications, oral presentations highlighting the balancebetween nature and technology, laboratory demonstrations, and a semester-long group projectmotivated by student interest in nature and chemical engineering.In this paper, the opportunities and challenges associated with developing a new course in anemerging multidisciplinary research area will be addressed. In addition, suggestions for bestpractices in course development will be provided for instructors who seek to develop similar newresearch-based elective courses.BackgroundIn 2014, a new graduate-level course intended for Master’s students on
those devices used as prototypes for lab activities in subsequent years. Some projectshave also nucleated MS and PhD dissertation research 15, 16, 17 and have involved theinterdisciplinary faculty team as co-advisors or committee members. Some of this research wentbeyond campus to a DOE National Lab.The course content is delivered in five concurrent streams:Faculty led lectures – Classroom lectures are delivered by the faculty on content that includes:fabrication, relevant semiconductor fundamentals, micro-fluidics (both pressure driven andelectro hydrodynamic), diffusion, reaction and mixing in micro-flows, and mechanics of micro-scale structures.Faculty or guest led case studies – Case studies in the design and analysis of devices have
instrumentation.Kyle Joe Branch, University of Utah Kyle Branch is a second-year graduate student at the University of Utah Department of Chemical Engi- neering. He has helped develop and teach the described freshman laboratory course. His main research interest is in engineering education, focusing on the creation and analysis of interactive simulations for undergraduate chemical engineering courses. Page 26.1337.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Results & Lessons Learned from a Chemical Engineering Freshman Design LaboratoryAbstractA
AC 2008-1024: KIDS BIRTHDAY PARTIES: “HAVING FUN AND LEARNINGENGINEERING”Gerardine Botte, Ohio University Gerardine G. Botte: Dr. Botte is an Associate Professor at the Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering Department at Ohio University and the Director of the Electrochemical Engineering Research Laboratory (EERL) at Ohio. She received her B.S. from Universidad de Carabobo (Venezuela), and her M.E. and Ph.D. from University of South Carolina. She worked for three years as a Process Engineering in a Petrochemical Complex (PEQUIVEN, filial of PDVSA. Venezuela) before going to graduate school. Dr. Botte applies chemical engineering principles for the analysis of electrochemical systems. She has
Professor of Engineering Education at Purdue University. Her research focuses what factors influence diverse students to choose engineering and stay in engineering through their careers and how different experiences within the practice and culture of engineering fos- ter or hinder belongingness and identity development. Dr. Godwin graduated from Clemson University with a B.S. in Chemical Engineering and Ph.D. in Engineering and Science Education. Her research earned her a National Science Foundation CAREER Award focused on characterizing latent diversity, which includes diverse attitudes, mindsets, and approaches to learning, to understand engineering stu- dents’ identity development. She has won several awards for her
. (1962) and Ph.D. (1967) degrees in Chemical Engineering from the University of Alberta, Edmonton. Dr. Svrcek’s teaching and research interests centre on process control and design. He is a registered professional engineer in Alberta and Ontario and is actively involved in research with industry. Page 12.581.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2007 Effective Teaching and Learning in Chemical Process Engineering Design1. IntroductionBefore the age of electronic calculators, mainframe or personal computers, engineers coulddesign many of the structures and
learning techniques, the first year chemical engineering students have a uniqueopportunity to see their STEM topics come to life in an active learning environment withpractical engineering applications.The use of project-based learning and the closely associated problem-based learning as vehiclesfor improving learning across a spectrum of learning styles has a long and well-documentedhistory in both K-121-3 and in higher education4-7. While there are distinct differences associatedwith these instructional approaches, a blending of these two pedagogies best describes theevolution of the Analysis learning environment.Project-based learning opportunities include: Students engaging in research, design and development activities directed toward
devicessuch as cell phones, tablets, and computers to assist in finding course-related information.While homework problems from textbooks are designed to allow engineering students to practiceproblem solving, easy accessibility of solution manual has created an issue [14, 22]. Besides beingan issue of academic integrity, copying solutions rather than putting effort into learning courseconcepts and developing problem-solving skills could inhibit success [14]. In fact, problem-solving skills has been identified as a major concern for students learning MEB [19].YouTube pedagogy has students actively creating new course content, which falls under the guiseof research-based best practices commonly called active learning [23-25]. The YouTube
, and summarize the purpose of each communication. After sharing, each group rewrites all three e-mails together.Active learning activities were developed by the instructor. Impromptu speeches are a commonlyused form of practicing oral presentation skills, which provided the basis for the oral presentationskills activities. The basic format of an impromptu speech was modified to focus on specificareas of need identified in earlier teaching experience (instructional assistant for the graduate Page 26.1496.9level research communication course). Writing activities were developed from student feedback;students reported desiring an increased
world's attention and concern as scientistsand engineers struggled to contain the oil and protect the Gulf Coast. An earlier generation watched inhorror as the Exxon Valdez oil disaster unfolded and people rushed to rescue Alaskan wildlife. Thesetwo events can seem overwhelming and hopeless to young people, but knowledge can give a sense ofhope. This curriculum unit is targeted for upper elementary and middle school students.In the process of doing engineering design, students will be introduced to important elements ofengineering: criteria for success, constraints, budgets, and trade-offs. They also have an opportunity topropose and test possible solutions to a practical problem, to improve their design, and to share theirfindings with others
design, facilitation and evaluation. Dr. Bodnar’s research interests relate to the incorporation of active learning techniques in undergraduate classes (problem based learning, games and simulations, etc.) as well as integration of innovation and entrepreneurship into the Chemical and Petroleum Engineering as well as broader engineering curricu- lum. In addition, she is actively engaged in the development of a variety of informal science education approaches with the goal of exciting and teaching K-12 students about regenerative medicine and its potential.Dr. Renee M Clark, University of Pittsburgh Dr. Renee Clark serves as the Director of Assessment for the Swanson School of Engineering at the University of
innovations. Similarly the 1970’s and 80’s produced abody of research focused on teacher’s concerns and viewpoints, which has had a similarly lowimmediate impact on educational practice. The article suggests that the educational research lacks thesocio-political ‘authority’ to bring about systematic reform. Regardless of the reason it is clear thatresearch in the field of education has not produced a history of usefulness for educators.Our particular situation is complicated further in that we have a long time scale, one semester per year,and low numbers, 12-30 students per year. This has made it difficult to conduct true rigorous controlledexperiments. Additionally our assessments have been performed on extra-credit assignments where
module.Many simulation tools have been developed to promote active learning of chemicalengineering22-25. A study has shown that students can be engaged learners through the usesimulations if the simulations are designed with learning as the primary goal and if they are easyto navigate and use26. We sought to build on these principles and best practices of previoussimulation tools by designing a simulation that allows the users to manipulate intuitive variablesand observe the dynamic impacts of pharmaceuticals on the human body. The learning objectiveof the module is to introduce open-ended engineering design and problem solving through apharmaceutical application of chemical engineering. Our goal for the module is to give studentsexposure to
Paper ID #30488First Impressions: Engaging First-Year Undergraduates in ChemicalEngineering DesignTommy George, Harvard University Tommy George is a graduate student at the John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences at Harvard University. He is currently working towards a PhD in Engineering Science with a research focus in renewable energy storage, and he graduated from Tufts University with a B.S. in Chemical Engineering. Tommy worked with the Tufts Center for Engineering Education and Outreach throughout his undergraduate studies, developing ongoing interest in the design of engaging engineering learning
: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00832.x.[2] “Graduate Attributes,” Engineers Canada. https://engineerscanada.ca/sites/default/files/Graduate-Attributes.pdf (accessed Mar. 10, 2020).[3] “Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs, 2019 – 2020 | ABET.” https://www.abet.org/accreditation/accreditation-criteria/criteria-for-accrediting-engineering- programs-2019-2020/ (accessed Mar. 10, 2020).[4] B. Frank, D. Strong, and R. Sellens, “The professional spine: Creation of a four-year engineering design and practice sequence,” Proc. Can. Eng. Educ. Assoc., 2011.[5] W. Clark, D. DiBiasio, and A. Dixon, “A project-based, spiral curriculum for introductory courses in ChE: Part 1. curriculum design,” Chem. Eng. Educ., vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 222
experience in infectious disease and epidemiology, providing crucial exposure to the broader context of engineering problems and their subsequent solutions. These diverse experiences and a growing passion for improving engineering edu- cation prompted Dr. Miskio˘glu to change her career path and become a scholar of engineering education. As an educator, she is committed to challenging her students to uncover new perspectives and dig deeper into the context of the societal problems engineering is intended to solve. As a scholar, she seeks to not only contribute original theoretical research to the field, but work to bridge the theory-to-practice gap in engineering education by serving as an ambassador for empirically
at MSU, including Pro- cess Control, Transport Phenomena, Reactor Design, Engineering Materials, Thermodynamics, both Unit Operations Laboratories and graduate courses in Advanced Thermodynamics, Transport Phenomena and Chemical Kinetics. He performs research in the areas of catalysis, fuel cells and nanocomposite materials.Dr. Larry Everett Pearson, Mississippi State University Page 23.468.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2013 Efficient and Effective Instruction in Process Simulation across the Chemical Engineering CurriculumAbstractOne
AC 2007-80: TEACHING OPERABILITY IN UNDERGRADUATE CHEMICALENGINEERING DESIGN EDUCATIONThomas Marlin, McMaster University Department of Chemical Engineering McMaster University Hamilton, Ontario, Canada Tom Marlin joined the Department of Chemical Engineering at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, as NSERC Research Professor in Industrial Process Control in 1988. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Massachusetts in 1972; then, he practiced engineering for 15 years in the chemical and petroleum industries. In 1987, he served as the Visiting Fellow, for the Warren Centre Study located at the University of Sydney, Australia. During the one-year project, a
experience, for example in high school math andphysics, is a better predictor for success on a first-year fluid mechanics midterm than is theexposure to online learning materials such as practice problems (via the LMS) or online reviewvideos. This suggests that prior performance (e.g., grades) and not just experience may be amongthe best predictors available. Finally, the data have confirmed that student performance on amidterm exam is most significantly impacted by whether students attend classes regularly andfor the full duration of the class, and whether they have access to the book—although it does notseem to matter much if that access is to a digital copy or to a printed copy.In conclusion, it is clear that more study is required to elucidate
Engineering Ed- ucation for research contributions. He was awarded the Excellence in Teaching by the Newark College of Engineering. Prior to joining NJIT, Dr. Loney, a licensed professional engineer, practiced engineering at Foster Wheeler, M.W. Kellogg Company, Oxirane Chemical Company, and Exxon Chemical Company.Dr. Ali Pilehvari P.E., Texas A&M University, KingsvilleMichael J. Elsass, University of Dayton Michael Elsass is a Lecturer in the Chemical Engineering Department at the University of Dayton. He received his B.Ch.E in chemical engineering from the University of Dayton and his M.S. and Ph.D. in chemical engineering from The Ohio State University. He then served two years as a psot-doctoral researcher at both
notbe required to taste anything prepared in or for class. Counsel also required that the classavoid working with raw meats. Students signing up for the course provided a signedrelease recognizing that they would be expected to handle and prepare food in this courseand to disclose any allergies or religious / cultural food prohibitions. In practice, this wasseldom a problem.Course Design and StructureThe complex nature of the subject matter combined with the relative ease of connectingthe material to ‘real world’ experiences and the instructor’s desire to makeexperimentation a significant portion of the course suggested a problem-based learningformat could be a successful pedagogical approach (26). The course is therefore brokeninto six
learning experiences and students designing to learn.Dr. Abhaya K. Datye, University of New Mexico Abhaya Datye has been on the faculty at the University of New Mexico after receiving his PhD in Chem- ical Engineering at the University of Michigan in 1984. He is presently Chair of the department and Distinguished Regents Professor of Chemical & Biological Engineering. From 1994-2014 he served as Director of the Center for Microengineered Materials, a strategic research center at UNM that reports to the Vice President for Research. He is also the founding director of the graduate interdisciplinary program in Nanoscience and Microsystems, the first program at UNM to span three schools and colleges and the Anderson
the capstone laboratory course orsenior design or at best, both. Therefore, those of us that graduated prior to the introduction ofthe ABET Engineering Criteria 2000 1 would likely have received no formal teamwork trainingduring our academic studies. With the introduction of the accreditation requirement by ABET,which states that, “Engineering programs must demonstrate that their graduates have an ability tofunction on multi-disciplinary teams.” the academic community has taken teamwork somewhatmore seriously. The “multi-disciplinary” requirement aside, demonstrating that our students“have an ability to function on teams,” is a daunting challenge on its own. Furthermore, insurveys conducted by the author, student responses reveal that many
. 4. Silverstein, David L., Vigeant, Margot, Visco, Donald, Woods, Donald, “How We Teach: Freshman Introduction to Chemical Engineering”, Proceedings of the 2010 Annual Meeting of the American Society for Engineering Education, 2010. 5. Silverstein, David L., Vigeant, Margot, “How We Teach: Kinetics and Reactor Design”, Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Meeting of the American Society for Engineering Education, 2011. Page 25.703.13Appendix A. Print version of online survey. Page 25.703.14UK College of Engineering Surveys - AIChE Best Practices in Teaching 2011 http
session.As mentioned briefly the panelists in this panel are representative of different positions withinthe academic environment as well as diverse administrative responsibilities. Represented on thepanel are a lecturer, assistant professor, associate professor, professor of practice and two fullprofessors. The administrative responsibilities of the panelists vary with their institution butinclude assistant chair to the department, undergraduate advising, graduate student advising,assisting with University Strategic Planning and Budget, Associate Dean for UndergraduateEducation and Interim Dean of the College of Engineering. The institutions that wererepresented by the panelists selected included four R1 research institutions with the other
effect on student learningexperience in PD&C at Rowan University.The Undergraduate Process Dynamics and Control CourseThe Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (ABET) stipulates that chemicalengineering graduates are able to “design, analyze, and control physical, chemical, andbiological processes” [1, emphasis added]. These processes are intrinsically dynamic, in the sense thattheir variables are constantly changing with time; yet in most chemical engineering programs,the first and only course that focuses on dynamic behavior is PD&C. In this single course,students are required to develop a wide range of knowledge, abilities, and skills (KAS) coveringboth dynamics and control, such as those defined by Edgar et al. and
different cultureswhich impacted women’s participation. Although all engineering disciplines exhibited amasculine culture, chemical engineering had a less “macho” culture that allowed for differentforms of masculinity and was more welcoming to women. The author also suggests that womenmight be drawn to this major because “a reliance on prior practical knowledge or tinkeringexperience did not seem as essential.”Lyon 11 studied 19 women engineering students at a research university for a year. During thatyear, women were asked participate in interviews and focus groups, to be observed, and to keepa journal of their feelings about being in the major. Students were all undergraduates, first yearthrough senior, and three were chemical engineering majors