Bloom’s apply or analysis levels (2 and 3), androughly correspond with a “B” in the course. Level 3 (black squares) are the most complicatedtasks corresponding to Bloom’s levels 4-6 and an “A” level of understanding for the course.This scheme is clearly explained to students when they are given the review sheets, emphasizingthat understanding a topic is not black and white, but incremental, and that it is difficult to tackle Page 26.132.10higher-level objectives without first understanding the basics. • Define heterogeneous nucleation. • Define contact angle (aka, wetting angle). o Calculate the wetting angle based on relative
. BocaRaton: Taylor & Francis.4. Bridgwater, A., Meier, D., & Radlein, D. (1999). An overview of fast pyrolysis of biomass. OrganicGeochemistry, 30(12), 1479–1493-1479–1493.5. Van Wie, B., Thiessen, D., Golter, P., & Brown, G. (2012). Adoption of a Non-Lecture Pedagogy in Chemical Page 26.1288.11Engineering: Insights Gained from Observing an Adopter. Journal of STEM Education, 13(5), 52-61.6.Abdul, B., Van Wie, B., Babauta, J., Golter, P., Brown, G., Bako, R., Olaofe, O. (2011). Addressing StudentLearning Barriers in Developing Nations with a Novel Hands-on Active Pedagogy and Miniaturized IndustrialProcess Equipment: The
-291.4. Brown, S., et al., Effectiveness of an interactive learning environment utilizing a physical model. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Pracice, 2014. 140(3).5. DiBiasio, D. and J.E. Groccia. Active and Cooperative Learning in an Introductory Chemical Engineering Course. in Frontiers in Education. 1995.6. Bligh, D.A., What's the Use of Lecture. Vol. 1st. 2000, New York, NY: Jossey-Bass.7. Abdul, B., et al., Miniature Industrial Process Equipment to Address Student Learning Barriers in Developing Nations: The Case of Nigeria. International Journal of Engineering Education, 2011. 27(1): p. 1-19.8. Abdul, B., et al., Addressing Student Learning Barriers in Developing
. Fraction of correct answers on individual questions on the diagnostic quiz, pre (blue)and post (red).Table 1. Final survey questions and percent of students providing each answer. Question a b c d e1. If you were to do only only one physical 3 physical more than 3this again, would physical simulations experiment experiments physical experimentsyou rather run: experiments and many and many and fewer simulations simulations
Paper ID #11183Preliminary Evaluation of a Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU)Program: A Methodology for Examining Student OutcomesD. Jake Follmer, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park D. Jake Follmer is a doctoral candidate in educational psychology at The Pennsylvania State University. His interests are in issues related to learning, assessment, and program evaluation.Dr. Sarah E Zappe, Pennsylvania State University, University ParkDr. Esther W Gomez, Pennsylvania State University, University Park Dr. Esther Gomez is an assistant professor in the Departments of Chemical and Biomedical Engineering at the
85 89 88Bragging Points Earned, Average n/a n/a 51 59Weighted Bragging Points Earned n/a n/a 88 92Curve Given 1.5 1.0 0 0Earned A before curve 1 ( 4%) 7 (28%) 18 (50%) 11 (32%)Earned B before curve 24 (96%) 12 (48%) 18 (50%) 23 (68%)Earned C before curve 0 ( 0%) 6 (24%) 0 ( 0%) 0 ( 0%)Earned A w/ curve or Bragging Pts 8 (32%) 8 (32%) 19 (53%) 12 (35%)Earned B
Paper ID #12614Results & Lessons Learned from a Chemical Engineering Freshman DesignLaboratoryProf. Anthony Edward Butterfield, University of Utah Anthony Butterfield is an Assistant Professor (Lecturing) in the Chemical Engineering Department of the University of Utah. He received his B. S. and Ph. D. from the University of Utah and a M. S. from the University of California, San Diego. His teaching responsibilities include the senior unit operations laboratory and freshman design laboratory. His research interests focus on undergraduate education, targeted drug delivery, photobioreactor design, and
Paper ID #12706Assessments of Ultra-Low-Cost Venturi Nozzle in Undergraduate Engineer-ing ClassesMr. ARSHAN NAZEMPOUR, Washington State University Arshan Nazempour completed his undergraduate study at University of Tehran in Tehran, Iran in Chemical Engineering. Currently, he is a PhD student in Chemical Engineering at Washington State University and working under Professor Van Wie’s supervision on two projects, synergistic influences of oscillating pressure and growth factor on chondrogenesis in a novel centrifugal bioreactor and hands-on learning solution for students.Dr. Paul B Golter, Washington State University
.________ Engineering plays an important role in the everyday production of chocolate.________ This chocolate project is not engineering; it is a waste of my time. Page 26.827.11MULTIPLE CHOICE: 1. A Life Cycle Assessment is: a. A tool that shows the chemistry behind common products b. A guide to how to properly recycle c. An assessment on the environmental impacts of a certain product d. A guide to making new products from recycled plastics 2. Sustainability as it relates to engineering can be defined as: a. Reducing the waste that a manufacturing process produces b. Making sure that a process will be mechanically
relationships can be included.In summary, their formalism consists of the following relationships†: GDF = M×N + MFlows + NRates (2.a) GSC = MStreamConstraints + NBalances + RRR (2.b) PSC = F + C + NR + NOC (2.c) from which DF=GDF-(GSC+PSC) (2.d)where M is the number of streams, N is the number of molecular species in the systems, MFlows isthe number of stream
administrative duty of the instructor. Thus, the evolution of course structure has steadilymoved from lecture intensive with graded homeworks to incrementally broader adoption of thestudent-led example exercises with the final iteration including a flipped classroom. Discussions will focus primarily on the present course structure, with contextualizationsand justifications for activity optimizations based upon experiences in the three prior years.Students receive daily guide to accompany each lecture that includes a) an updated outline of thecourse topics completed and forthcoming, b) a list of suggested homework problems that are notcollected or graded, and c) three to four test your knowledge questions. The test your knowledgequestions from the
Paper ID #13185Making practical experience: Teaching thermodynamics, ethics and sustain-able development with PBL at a bioenergy plantDr. Darinka del Carmen Ramirez, ITESM (Tecnol´ogico de Monterrey) Ph. D. Darinka Ram´ırez is a professor at the Chemical Engineering department of ITESM (Tecnol´ogico de Monterrey), Campus Monterrey, Mexico. She has a B. S. in biochemical engineering at IT La Paz, M. S. in chemical engineering at Tecnol´ogico de Monterrey, and Ph. D. in Educational Innovation also at Tecnol´ogico de Monterrey. She teaches mainly Material Balances, Energy Balances and Thermodynamics to undergraduate students
was compared to those who had not.Between the pre survey and the post-HW survey, the students attended lectures on Rankinecycles with modifications and did two homework assignments with problems on Rankine cycleswith modifications. Attendance was required, and the lectures were fairly traditional with a dailygroup quiz to break up the lecture material. Between the post-HW survey and the post-projectsurvey, the only student interaction with the material was through their design team work on theproject. The design project (Appendix B) was a group project with teams formed by the Page 26.1655.3professor using Team-Maker5 with similar schedules
Paper ID #11522Comparing Pedagogical Strategies for Inquiry-Based Learning Tasks in aFlipped ClassroomDr. Milo Koretsky, Oregon State University Milo Koretsky is a Professor of Chemical Engineering at Oregon State University. He received his B.S. and M.S. degrees from UC San Diego and his Ph.D. from UC Berkeley, all in Chemical Engineering. He currently has research activity in areas related engineering education and is interested in integrating technology into effective educational practices and in promoting the use of higher-level cognitive skills in engineering problem solving. His research interests particularly
level. Thereafter gender diversity increases to 17.7% at the faculty level. Therefore, thebottleneck for gender diversity in chemical engineering education appears to be correlated to thedoctoral level. Based on this data, we believe it is vital for the chemical engineering communityto take efforts to recruit and retain higher number of women students in doctoral programs. (a) (b)(c) (d)Figure 1. Gender Diversity within the Chemical Engineering Field. (a) Chemical EngineeringDivision membership (total of 536 members); (b) Engineering Faculty; (c) Engineering DoctoralStudents; (d) Engineering Baccleaurate Students.Even with some favorable diversity in
paragraphbased on questions that prompted them to think about: what they thought they learned, how theylearned, what was their inspiration to learn, and how reflective writing helped them through theprocess. We then evaluated the quality of reflection paragraphs and looked into any relationshipswith course grades. We found a statistically significant correlation between this quality and finalcourse grades5. For the spring of 2013, we continued the promotion of metacognition in chemicalprocess control and safety, another undergraduate chemical engineering core course using amodified assignment. Students were given one technical problem and then assigned the followingfour activities each week: a) solve the problem, b) personalize the problem, c) integrate
tocomplete optional tasks that are designed to encourage them to improve their experimental dataand analysis (relating to ABET objective B) and to promote their exploration of the broaderimpacts of the experiments they are performing (relating to ABET objectives H and I).Completing these tasks would increase a students’ team’s total of common, uncommon, and/orrare points, depending on the specific task completed. These points allow students to berewarded for performing these extra tasks, but the rewards are not grade points, which does notdiminish the importance of required coursework. A summary of these tasks and the pointsawarded is shown in Table 1. Note that some tasks award two types of points. This designchoice was made thinking that it would
other recent course surveys.5The survey was conducted online using Qualtrics software hosted by Bucknell University. Emailinvitations were sent in late Spring 2014 to all department chairs requesting participation fromthe faculty members who teach courses in the transport phenomena sequence. Similarly, follow-up email invitations were sent in late Summer 2014.A total of 86 unique survey replies were obtained from 72 instructors from 59 differentinstitutions. Some institutions had multiple responses due to multiple faculty members teachingcourses in their transport related sequence. A list of all replying institutions can be found inAppendix B. All replies were from institutions within the United States except one from Lagos(Lagos State
Paper ID #11636What should every graduating chemical engineer know about process safetyand how can we make sure that they do?Dr. W. David Harding, University of New Haven W. David Harding is a Professor of Chemical Engineering and Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs and Accreditation in the Tagliatela College of Engineering (TCoE) at University of New Haven. He has more than twenty years of academic experience after spending nine years in chemical manufacturing and envi- ronmental consulting. He has been an active participant in the Multidisciplinary Engineering Foundation Spiral Curriculum (MEFSC) efforts in TCoE and the
Paper ID #11135Are Your Students Getting the Most out of the Process Simulator?Dr. Joseph A. Shaeiwitz, Auburn University Joe Shaeiwitz is a Visiting Professor of Chemical Engineering at Auburn University and an Emeritus Pro- fessor at West Virginia University. He is a co-author of ”Analysis, Synthesis, and Design of Chemical Processes,” 4th ed., published by Prentice Hall. Joe is active in ASEE, AIChE, and ABET. He co-chaired the 2012 ASEE CHE Division Summer School, is currently vice-chair of the AIChE Education and Ac- creditation Committee, has been an ABET program evaluator for over 20 years, and helps train new ABET
aggregate report of the profiles for students in two different sections with separateinstructors.Figure 3. Learning styles profiles for (A) Spring 2013 and (B) Spring 2014 material balancesstudents. Among students with a preference, active, sensing, visual, and sequential areconsistently predominant in the population, except in Spring 2014 where there is a nearly equalnumber of active and reflective students.In three particular instances, we observed a statistically significant difference (α = 0.05) instudent performance on an exam problem with respect to learning style. These instances occurredin the sensing/intuitive dimension (intuitors had lower scores), visual/verbal dimension (verballearners had lower scores), and the sequential/global
direction from the inside of the electrode to the outsideand the K+ gradient is in the opposite direction. After 10 min of calibration the di-ISE systemwill reach the Na+ and K+ ion concentration/electrical equilibrium resting potential as is for a Page 26.837.4living neuron before stimulation [11].Fig. 3 B shows how the sensor will react when the K+ ionophore side is blocked by a screw-actuated flexible cover. Blockade of the K+ flux allows fewer K+ ions to flow through themembrane than Na+ ions, i.e., only those carried by the low K+ selective NaX will cross on theNaX side. Hence, the voltage will change and move towards the Na+ equilibrium
answers toParts (a) and (c) of the question described in Figure 2 when they begin trying to explain theirrespective answers in Parts (b) and (d). This self-critique of the student’s conceptions (andmisconceptions) would seem to represent learning at the highest levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy13.3. MethodsConcept Quizzes were incorporated into two courses: an introductory material and energybalances course (CHE 205) and a transport phenomena course focusing on fluid mechanics andheat transfer (CHE 311). Concept Quizzes were given to students as a typical typed questionsheet and lasted 10 minutes of class time. When giving a Concept Quiz to students, the instructoralso projected the quiz content onto a screen in the classroom, read the questions to the
Paper ID #11954Integrating Multi-scale Approaches and Innovation into Product and ProcessDesign in Chemical Engineering CurriculaProf. Watson L. Vargas, Department of Chemical Engineering, Universidad de los Andes Dr. Watson L. Vargas is Assistant Professor at the Chemical Engineering Department, Universidad de los Andes. He was educated at Universidad de America (Bogot´a, Colombia), Colombia National University (Bogot´a, Colombia) and University of Pittsburgh (Pittsburgh, PA). He has worked at Colombia National University, Nueva Granada Military University and University of Pittsburgh. He is a member of the American
Section 1 (taught by the first author) receivedslightly higher grades on the exams/quizzes in the class. At the conclusion of the class the Page 26.243.11average grade for the students in Section 1 was a B-, compared to a C+ for the students inSection 2. More importantly the percentage of students failing to receive a C or higher inTable 2: Grade Comparison between Sections Section 1 Section 2 Quiz Grade 2.8 2.8 Hour Exam Grade 2.3 2.2 Final Grade
Paper ID #13244Preparation of Biology Review and Virtual Experiment/Training Videos toEnhance Learning in Biochemical Engineering CoursesDr. Jacob James Elmer, Villanova University Dr. Elmer earned dual B.S. degrees in Biology and Chemical Engineering from the University of Mis- souri Rolla in 2003 and obtained a PhD in Chemical Engineering from Ohio State University in 2007. After a short posdoc at Arizona State University and some adjunct teaching at Grand Canyon University, he secured an Assistant Professorship at Villanova University in the Chemical Engineering department. He currently teaches heat transfer and several
. simulationReferences1. Beaulieu, J. R. A dynamic, interactive approach to learning engineering and mathematics. (2012).2. Wieman, C. E., Adams, W. K. & Perkins, K. K. PhET: simulations that enhance learning. Science. 322, 682–683 (2008).3. Wieman, C. E. & Perkins, K. K. A powerful tool for teaching science. Nat. Phys. 2, 290–292 (2006).4. Bodemer, D., Ploetzner, R., Feuerlein, I. & Spada, H. The active integration of information during learning withdynamic and interactive visualisations. Learn. Instr. 14, 325–341 (2004).5. Van der Meij, J. & de Jong, T. Supporting students’ learning with multiple representations in a dynamicsimulation-based learning environment. Learn. Instr. 16, 199–212 (2006).6. Kadiyala, M. & Crynes, B. L. A review of
Paper ID #13875Technical and Professional Communication for Chemical EngineersElif Miskioglu, The Ohio State University Elif Miskioglu graduated from Iowa State with a B.S. in Chemical Engineering and minor in Genetics. She is currently a PhD candidate at The Ohio State University, where she is studying learning styles in the chemical engineering undergraduate student population. Page 26.1496.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2015 Technical and Professional
engineering. Theengineering overview is divided into four sections (each half of a 15 week semester). Thefirst section is general to all students, and establishes some basic vocabulary andengineering concepts(1). The next two sections, the students select from eight different“mini-projects” on topics such as Artificial Kidney Design(2), Biomass Conversion toFuels and Absorption of Wastewater Contaminants. These “mini- projects” are project-based multi-disciplinary design experiences. The goal is to introduce some basicengineering concepts, as well as guide the students to which type of engineering theyprefer to study(3, 4) . The final section of the course is then a discipline specificintroductory course. Each department has
Paper ID #13771An approach to strengthening compliance with ABET safety criteriaDr. Troy J. Vogel, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Dr. Troy J. Vogel is a lecturer in the Department of Chemical & Biomolecular Engineering at the Uni- versity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He primarily teaches Chemical Process Design, a senior level course. In addition to formal teaching, Dr. Vogel acts as the advisor for the Illinois Chapter of AIChE and AIChE’s Chem-ECar Competition. Dr. Vogel also plays an active role in various summer camps fostering a desire to learn science and engineering in all of today’s youth.Dr